Jump to content

Worst Special Effects on TV and in Movies


DJM
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 70
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

There was a CGI dying deer in A Cure For Wellness that had to be seen to be believed.

I was just going to nominate that myself, shocking stuff. Makes you wonder what they spend the $40m budget on.

 

CGI is an odd thing. Things like Jurassic Park still look acceptable even though it's nearly 25 years old and the technology has advanced since. It's like Eddie Izzard's 'cool circle' we're it's gone beyond the point of looking lifelike that it has right back into shit territory

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

 

There was a CGI dying deer in A Cure For Wellness that had to be seen to be believed.

I was just going to nominate that myself, shocking stuff. Makes you wonder what they spend the $40m budget on.

 

CGI is an odd thing. Things like Jurassic Park still look acceptable even though it's nearly 25 years old and the technology has advanced since. It's like Eddie Izzard's 'cool circle' we're it's gone beyond the point of looking lifelike that it has right back into shit territory

 

It's not that. Jurassic Park is a masterpiece. They used the CGI so carefully and hid its weaknesses so well. And then CGI got cheap and ubiquitous and everyone went all-in on it and there was some collective Emperor's New Clothes shit that society apparently all silently agreed on at some point that we would just pretend CGI doesn't look like shit anymore.

 

I was just trying to pick the worst thing (visually) about the Star Wars prequels but it's all so terrible I couldn't decide. So I'll pick something completly different - Tony's mum in the Sopranos. Obviously I know the actress died and they didn't have much choice. But it was certainly still shit CGI, not helped of course by the fact that they had to use pre-existing recorded bits of dialogue.

Edited by Chest Rockwell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Awards Moderator

I was listening to a Kathleen Kennedy interview last week and she was talking about the CGI in Jurassic Park - according to her, they used CGI on far fewer shots than everybody assumes, only using it when they absolutely had to. I think that's part of it. The more a film relies on CGI the worse it seems to age. 

 

I'm with you on not being able to pick the worst effect in the Star Wars prequels - as soon as I think of one, five more come to mind! The fact he even CG'd the Jedi's robes because the real things didn't flow the way he wanted them says it all.

 

Oh! I've got one. This piece of film-ruining shit:

 

The-Hobbit5-Orc.jpg

 

People like to pile on The Hobbit films but CG Org Baddie was by FAR the worst thing about them for me. He's aggressively awful. Takes you right out of the film so you spend time thinking how the same guys that did Helm's Deep and Gollum did something this bad so many years later. I bet it looks even worse five years on too. I wish they'd just piled a load of makeup on a Kiwi bloke like in Lord of the Rings. 

Edited by HarmonicGenerator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

The Hobbit films are a great example of relying wholly on shitty CG rather than using it to fill a lot of the cracks, like the original trilogy. Rubber hobbits falling hundreds of storeys and just going "oof!" when they land like in the Beano, and expecting the audience to give a shit about any of the peril they get into. That bit where Legolas jumps up the falling staircase might as well have been done in mspaint.

 

What is it about Hollywood and terrible deer? Plenty of mentions in this thread already, but there's also the horrendous deer in Knowing and I Am Legend.

Edited by Astro Hollywood
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

There's a few great documentaries about ILM talking about Jurassic Park and Dennis Muren says that the reason it still stands up is because they wouldn't do it unless it was perfect and spent years creating the technology to make it look good. Literally years of work for 5 minutes of CGI dinosaurs ( and 15 minutes of dinosaurs in total). Now people just get lazy and CGI anything they can. CGI blood, fire, gunshots. All done out of laziness.

Compare Indiana Jones and the stupid crystal skull and its CG monkeys and car chases to raiders / last crusade and see which one holds up better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

All of the CGI in Van Helsing is piss poor but the bit at the end where whatever Kate Beckinsdale's character is called appears as a face in the clouds is so buttock clenchingly piss poor that you'd have to have a heart of stone not to laugh out loud.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Awards Moderator

There's a few great documentaries about ILM talking about Jurassic Park and Dennis Muren says that the reason it still stands up is because they wouldn't do it unless it was perfect and spent years creating the technology to make it look good. Literally years of work for 5 minutes of CGI dinosaurs ( and 15 minutes of dinosaurs in total). Now people just get lazy and CGI anything they can. CGI blood, fire, gunshots. All done out of laziness.

Compare Indiana Jones and the stupid crystal skull and its CG monkeys and car chases to raiders / last crusade and see which one holds up better.

Crystal Skull's a great shout for completely unnecessary CG. That gopher at the very beginning being the prime example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

A dummy gets thrown down a cliff, banging all the way down (in close up), in one of Lucio Fulci films that actually looks like a shop dummy. It looks absolutely terrible. It's amazing somebody signed that off as a great idea.

 

Last James Bond film with Pierce Brosnan "Die Another Day" had an absolute ton of bad CGI shots.

Edited by bAzTNM#1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

Have you seen some of those movies by that company Asylum Films? They've got some pretty shonky effects in them. Likewise those made for TV SyFy channel movies like Sharknado & Lavalantula. The Matrix Sequels are guilty of coasting on the reputation of the original as well. The first one looks amazing, but it's like they rushed the second and third ones out because the original did better than they expected and the effects suffered as a result.

Edited by jazzygeofferz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...