Movies Top 5 - Part 1 - CGI That Has Not Aged Well.

techmojo (63)in #technology • 8 years ago

Tech Mojo is constantly exploring the realms of technology and after watching some older movies recently, a new category of top 5's was created.

Movies have been employing special effects since the dawn of the moving picture in the late 1800's. How that effect appears on screen will determine how good it is. In recent years special effects have been improving with the advent of Computer Generated Images (CGI), and at the time would of looked like a step into the future. After a time, that same effect starts to look horrible when compared to others from today or even others of the same era.

So here are 5 CGI effects that have not aged well at all.

5 – Lost in Space 1998.

This movie was based of the original 60's TV show. When it was released it looked like a massive visual improvement over the original with plenty of CGI. Today however, the Poorly rendered CGI used looks very obvious and horrible, especially the CGI creature/pet Blarp and the bad guy/spider thing at the end of the film, Dr Smith. The effect aged badly, similarly to that of the original TV show.
Image Source

4 – The Mummy Returns 2001.

This is an obvious choice, but when you think how much it actually cost to make the movie, a cool $98 million, it is surprising how well this film didn't age. Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson is a well known Wrestler, but this was his first big Hollywood movie to star in, and it is a wonder it didn't cost him his movie career. At the time the CGI was OK, but soon after people started to realize how bad the scorpion king actually looked compared to other action films of the time like Planet of the Apes, Final Fantasy Spirits Within, even Pearl Harbour.
Image Source

3 – Tron 1982

The early 80's was the golden age of gaming, Tron was released right in the middle of it. The film is now embedded in pop culture and when it was released, the on screen and CGI effects were unlike anything before it. As amazing as the film is, today the imagery looks like something from an old NES game, but you have to remember, the NES hadn't been released world wide yet, and it did take its cues from games of that era. But today for the uninitiated, it can be painful to watch when compared to the 2012 sequel.
Image Source

2 – The Lawnmower Man 1992.

Another film that has its own following, in 1992 the highlight of the film was its use of CGI, as cool as it looked, the novelty didn't last as it was one year before a photorealistic dinosaur in Jurassic park, after this, fans lost all interest, and when the sequel came out in 96, no one went to watch it and it lost over $12 million in lost revenue. Today the CGI just looks like a crazy screen saver for your computer, the story line is good enough and other films have used it in there films, but to much better effect.
Image Source

1 – Star Wars The Phantom Menace 1999.

When George Lucas announce that 3 prequel movies will be made, fans all over rejoiced at the possibility that there will be 3 more films that could rival the originals. Alas when the film was released, some fans were left disappointed at the slow pace and awkward scenes, but the kicker was Jar Jar Binks, a full CGI character that people today love to hate. Aside from Jar Jar looking out of place, the rest of the Gungans do as well along with various backgrounds as most of the film was filmed on green screen, nothing seemed to blend to well, there are a few redeeming qualities in the film however, but the CGI as a whole looks terrible when compared to today's Star Wars films like Rouge One and The Force Awakens. Why George, Why did you create Jar Jar you hateful bastard?
Image Source