Badmovies.org Forum

I just randomly caught about 30 mins of TERMINATOR: GENYSIS the other day and was astounded at how awful some of the CGI was. particularly during a chase scene on a bridge. I mean comically bad. But why? big studios surely have more advanced technology available to them than any time before in movie history, and ridiculous budgets to work with,  yet I've seen 20+ year old films with way better CGI....(ironically TERMINATOR 2 for example).  baffling.

A lot of the CGI George Lucas added to the original trilogy has not aged well.

I AM LEGEND (2007). The zombies/vampires all looked exactly the same. Same clothes-same faces. Ugh. Like video game zombies. And the technology was available. This was a case of just plain LAZY.

They have more advanced technology today, but they use CG more often too. In T2 it was 1 character, a simulation of the Apocalypse. Today every shot has some element added by computers.

I don't like CGI. Gimme Ray Harryhausen and Jack Pierce and dummy's filled with cow guts. I like my movies raw. I don't like new movies. I'm a fossil.

The cgi blood in Machete was a little too apparent...

In the climactic battle scene of Blade 2, the CGI was horribly obvious.

Yeah CGI blood always seems obvious. Explosions never look quite right either. Even in films where I think overall the CGI is decent, HOT FUZZ for example.

I'm with Merchant I would prefer no CGI and manual fx all day long. I think a lot of movie watchers are thinking the same now as well. But I guess directors + producers think that just because CGI is available then it has to be used. It's become an industry standard.

I also HATE CGI.  Give me practical effects any day.  Even if they are badly done they still look better than CGI to me.

Yup!
oh-Welcome to the forum Beat Truck!  :thumbup:

so am i.

Growing up I always wanted to be a special effects designer, I loved guys like Rick Baker & Ray Harryhausen. F/X Murder By Illusion was one of my fave movies, but when CGI came along just as I was getting ready to leave school I couldn't get into that as much and eventually it put me off sticking with that as a career.

The CGI / motion capture turtles in the new TMNT films are awful: I preferred it when it was people in suits.  :twirl:

On the other hand, there are some CGI creations - Rocket Raccoon for one - which look great and believable.

Thanks for the welcome! :cheers:

I always thought the CGI Alien in Alien III was a nice try for it's day, but still painfully obvious.

The CGI in Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow was actually pretty good, just a shame it was a lousey movie...

Van Helsing is tops for big budget bad CGI. Fur: CGI's Nemesis (with a  few notable exceptions).

The pseudo-vampires from the Will Smith film, I AM LEGEND, were some of the worst CGI effects to ever be laid down on film as were the Rock version of the Scorpion King from the second MUMMY film..simple awful stuff. All that money invested and the thing looked so amateurish as to be done a grade school student.

Dammit! I'd forgotten about the end of The Mummy II and now it's back in my head. The disturbing thing is somebody (or somebodies) in some kind of position of authority saw that and thought, 'Yeah, sure that's good enough for release'.

"LOTR: Return of the King" had some pretty awful CGI, not least the march of the Undead- which looked liked warmed-up mushy pea soup.

Wasn't too keen on all those silly Agent Smiths Neo was "fighting" in "Matrix Reloaded" either.

still not seen any of the LOTR movies, or the Hobbit ones. (Martin Freeman cannot be anything except Tim ftom The Office in my head...)

The 1st all CG dino in Jurassic Park hasn't held up well. Something about the lighting; it looks unnatural.

The rest of the movie generally holds up well tho.

The excessive lighting is always a dead giveaway with some cgi-based films: the LOTR ones in particular were really poorly done; "I am legend", and of course "SW:A New Hope" also spring to mind.