Rate the Last Movie You Watched

[DeathBooger]

Originally Posted by Kyllian

Jurassic Park has been running on AMC tonight and my gf and I agreed that even modern CGI barely holds a candle to the nearly 20 year old effects and animatronics

That's not true. 90% of the CGI in films these days is done so well that you don't even know it's there. Most films are done in small studios and the entire environments are CGI, you just can't tell by looking at it.

[ambershee]

Also, the original Jurassic Park looks a bit plasticy now, you can see where there's a lack of refined shading in a lot of the dinos - I saw it in the cinema a couple of months ago and it was really obvious. Still looks pretty good though.

[xMurphyx]

The CGI dinos have always, even when I watched this as a kid, looked like they didn't belong into the scenery they're supposedly stomping through.
The animatronic dino heads looked fantastic, but the CGI was obvious. Good looking but obvious.

If we're talking early but perfect CGI I'd like to bring up Terminator 2. Aside from the floor-coming-alive scene it looked perfectly real and even that looked fairly good.
The CGI in The Mummy looked great as well.
Smaller special effects have been looking perfect even in TV shows as early as the first season of Buffy (I'm primarily thinking of the dusting effect when she stakes a vampire).

[NeoNite]

Originally Posted by Capt.Toilet

Clicked the link, saw the picture, and realized it was on the Syfy channel a while back. God I love these movies it almost makes me feel bad for watching them

The overacting ,especially from the outsider guy,was too much. Though, like I said, the Ogre scenes were kinda fun. It's just that when his face was in close-up it became imo comedy...

[IronMonkey]

Originally Posted by DeathBooger

That's not true. 90% of the CGI in films these days is done so well that you don't even know it's there.

Sadly, untrue. 90% of the CGI in films is done for coolness in preference to verisimilitude or even something as simple as entertainment or progressing the story.

/me fixes

90% of the CGI in Michael Bay films is done for coolness in preference to verisimilitude or even something as simple as entertainment or progressing the story.

[M.A.D.X.W]

Coolness? What does that even mean?
I'd imagine that Michale Bay thinks explosions are entertaining or something, not 'cool'.

Anyway Deathbooger is also talking about things like digital mattes etc.
CGI isn't all explosions. And you don't know it's there.

[SleepyHe4d]

Yeah, when I saw Toy Story 3, I could tell that at LEAST 50% of the movie was done with CGI. They went a little overboard with all the CGI they used in that film. Are their special effects crew not good enough or something?

Originally Posted by xMurphyx

If we're talking early but perfect CGI I'd like to bring up Terminator 2. Aside from the floor-coming-alive scene it looked perfectly real and even that looked fairly good.

Eh? The metal man was obvious CGI the whole time. Except for the parts where he wasn't CGI, since apparently only 6 minutes of him was pure CGI, and the other 9 minutes wasn't. >.>

So yeah, Jurassic park beats that out easy. Also in Jurassic Park, it wasn't really the quality of the CGI, but the attention to detail and how they filmed it and where they put it and mixing with animatronics to use the least amount possible and not using it in an obvious way.

[Mister_Prophet]

I tend to think of both T2 and Jurassic Park as dead even as the best CG effects I've seen in movie. Much of it has to do with how well the effects were integrated into the films and because of the fact that both films were exceptional thrillers made by two masters of the art at the peak of their talent. They also had the luxury of arriving in theaters at a time when those effects were still fresh and audiences were simply awed that such things could appear in a movie.

[Al]

Super 8 - 5.5/10

[KaL976]

Bronson. 9/10

Damn I love Tom Hardy.

[das_ben]

A month of movies: November. Now with more families depicted in movies not entirely suited for the whole family.

[Al]

The Pianist - 9/10

[Manticore]

Frequency-9/10

This is still one of my favourite film stories. I don't know how many times I've seen it now but the missus wanted to watch it. A great story with a lot of heart and suspense and an excellent cast.

[Zxanphorian]

Originally Posted by Manticore

Frequency-9/10

This is still one of my favourite film stories. I don't know how many times I've seen it now but the missus wanted to watch it. A great story with a lot of heart and suspense and an excellent cast.

Agreed. I like how most of Dennis Quaid's and Jim Caviezel's interactions in the film are through the ham radio in separate shots, and they are able to pull it off so believably.

[Zur]

Originally Posted by KaL976

Bronson. 9/10

Damn I love Tom Hardy.

Talking of Bronson they should make a decent remake of Death Wish.

[xMurphyx]

Now that Goldblum is dead and he can't play a goon anymore, what good would come from it?

[Capt.Toilet]

Originally Posted by xMurphyx

Was it really that bad? I was looking forward to it. I think the original is one of Carpenter's best movies, together with Escape from New York, and as horror films go it's one of my favorites too, together with Alien.

I didn't expect the new one to be better or even nearly as good as the original, but I kind of expected it to be interesting.

4/10 sounds horrible though.

4/10 is a tad bit too low IMO. For a movie that the director claimed was nearly all practical effects, the CGI seemed very overused and near cartoonish. The tension in Carpenters version is hardly felt but in a few scenes, it nearly feels like copy paste scene for scene which is why people call it a premake.

Though it sounds like I hated it, it does stay faithful to the original. It explains how split face came about, and the attention to detail is welcome. Example being the axe in the door, the dude with the split wrists, etc. Easily a 6/10 for me nearly bordering a 7. Oh and stick around during the credits for an awesome connection to the original.

[NeoNite]

Battle of los angeles: 0/10

Only watched 15 minutes of this moldy turd, but honestly I couldn't take more.

Acting: over the top, cardboard, all clichés included. Way beyond terrible. Either too many or total lack of emotions. Very, very bad.

Story: Probably a clone of iD4. But a lot worse.

Music: Extremely annoying. 15 minutes of supposedly tense action music. CONTINUOUSLY!!!

Special effects: Hah, that's a laugh. Could've been ok in some mediocre low budget 80s sci-fi movie. These days however...

Everything about this movie sucked. Yes, I've watched a mere fifteen minutes but it was obvious the rest of the movie would continue on this terrible course.

This was really bad. You know how some stinker movies are that bad, but because of this they can actually be funny? Exclude this one from that list.

[Lruce Bee]

Pirates of the Caribbean - On Stranger Tides - 7/10

Another strong outing from one of the greatest movie franchises in history, POTC-On Stranger Tides ticks all the right boxes and drifts along for a decent enough movie experience but I can't help feeling we've turned a corner with this latest outing and you can begin to see signs of fatigue with the characters and plot.

[xMurphyx]

Signs of fatigue? I thought that during PotC:AWE the plot was already on its back, gasping for air, its eyes popping out, in danger of swallowing its own tongue...