Which 'older' CGI/ Visual FX still hold up really well today?

[thegoat]

Dinosaur (2000). It's a fascinating, unprecedented (and I think unreplicated) approach to making a CGI animated film. Not all of it works, but the real world environments and digital effects are often blended really well, and it's a beautifully shot movie.

Harry Potter 2 and 3, as well (and part 1, to an extent). The Quidditch and creature effects are very convincing (the werewolf does look dated, but the hippogriff scene is still a stunner). Those films did a great job of selling Rowling's universe.

[hamchuck1]

Some of the dragons in Reign of Fire still look amazing. Especially the fight at the end.

[Pondosinatra]

Anything where Stan Winston was involved.....

Real material trumps CGI every. single. time.

[Kryptonic]

Originally Posted by Pondosinatra

Anything where Stan Winston was involved.....

Real material trumps CGI every. single. time.

Only a Sith deals in absolutes!

[qb2333]

Blade Runner
Alien(s)
The Matrix
Original Star Wars Trilogy
T2

[thelwig14]

LOTR trilogy.

In 20 years, the Hobbit trilogy will be unwatchable.

[Kryptonic]

Originally Posted by thelwig14

LOTR trilogy.

In 20 years, the Hobbit trilogy will be unwatchable.

Why? It looks better from an effects standpoint than LOTR. LOTR has a lot of shots that have not held up all that well. On the whole, still magnificent, but The Hobbit is much more consistent.

[levcore]

Originally Posted by Pondosinatra

Anything where Stan Winston was involved.....

Real material trumps CGI every. single. time.

Point of thread missed quite spectacularly there.

[Pondosinatra]

Originally Posted by levcore

Point of thread missed quite spectacularly there.

I'd ask how you came to that wrong conclusion, but frankly I don't really care...

[Kevin Holly]

[Kevin Holly]

Scanners - head explosion.

The Thing '82 holds up well, too!

[Todd Tomorrow]

Originally Posted by Pondosinatra

Anything where Stan Winston was involved.....

Real material trumps CGI every. single. time.

Stan Winston has mostly worked in CGI for the last couple of decades, so not sure what your point is.

I recently watched Starship Troopers again and that still looks very good.

[swaseem]

-Invasion of the Body Snatchers '78 (all those closeup shots where the spores take root still is pretty cool)
-Deep Impact '98 (the entire tsunami scene still seems on par with any roland emmerich's movie)

[thelwig14]

Originally Posted by Kryptonic

Why? It looks better from an effects standpoint than LOTR. LOTR has a lot of shots that have not held up all that well. On the whole, still magnificent, but The Hobbit is much more consistent.

Jackson got lazy and did way too much cgi.

The LOTR trilogy is much more practical.

[Todd Tomorrow]

Originally Posted by swaseem

-Invasion of the Body Snatchers '78 (all those closeup shots where the spores take root still is pretty cool)
-Deep Impact '98 (the entire tsunami scene still seems on par with any roland emmerich's movie)

I watched Deep Impact again recently and though the tsunami hadn't dated very well at all. I still quite like the film, but not for the effects.

[Todd Tomorrow]

Originally Posted by thelwig14

Jackson got lazy and did way too much cgi.

The LOTR trilogy is much more practical.

The effects look fine. He didn't get 'lazy', CGI has just come along further. But people read that a lot more was done in CGI and they feel compelled to complain about it, because moaning about CGI is one of the Internets favourite past times. Some people watch with their preconceptions rather than with their eyes.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by NoFro

Despite the criticism the film gets for its use of CGI, I think there is a lot of stunning work in The Phantom Menace.

I haven't seen TPM on a big screen since its release but yeah, the effects do hold up very, very well. To the extent where people still have a hard time distinguishing the practical and digital effects.

Originally Posted by Kryptonic

An older one that I feel still holds up remarkably well is Close Encounters of the Third Kind. The ships and lights and opticals still look extremely impressive and natural.

I was blown away by this when it was released. Not exactly in the same way or to the same degree as Star Wars but it was very, very impressive. And I kind of expected to be a little let down when I watched the BD and was very pleasantly surprised at how well it held up.

And to follow the practical effects train of thought even farther back, I really can't believe how good the matte work is on Forbidden Planet. A lot of those effects are very good but pretty much scream '1950s' but some of the matte stuff is almost completely transparent.

[surfdude12]

Originally Posted by levcore

Of course Jurassic Park is the obvious one, and is always mentioned.

except that shot when Sam Neil is pointing in the background and says "that's...that's a dinosaur". for some reason that shot pailed in comparison to the rest of the film.

[Todd Tomorrow]

Originally Posted by surfdude12

except that shot when Sam Neil is pointing in the background and says "that's...that's a dinosaur". for some reason that shot pailed in comparison to the rest of the film.

That's true, that first dinosaur shot in bright daylight with the creature moving slowly didn't look quite right even at the time.

[esteban²]

When it comes to CGI, Jurassic Park and Terminator 2 still do surprisingly well.