visualeffects

posts about #visualeffects more →
100 Years of Visual Effects From Kong To Tron, And On
Secrets Of The CGI In Cloverfield
Monkeybone Hatred Reigns in "Meet the Creators" Panel for "Journey to the Center of the Earth"
Sunshine Should Be Burning Up the Oscars

Your version of Internet Explorer is not supported. Please upgrade to the most recent version in order to view comments.

Dsmvwl Admin Promote to frontpage Approve user Ban user ×

Evil Tortie's Mom: R.O.A.C.H.
08/31/09

In reply to 100 Years of Visual Effects From Kong To Tron, And On
That silent version of Ten Commandments was pretty impressive. And w00t for Harryhausen.
Reply

Eriamjh
08/31/09

In reply to 100 Years of Visual Effects From Kong To Tron, And On
Shame on them for using pics from the 1997 Star Wars SEs (ships flying away from and death star exploding).

A vote for 2001, but its special effects are pretty boring.
Reply

Evil Tortie's Mom: R.O.A.C.H. promoted this comment Eriamjh was starred Eriamjh was unstarred

Dug
08/31/09

In reply to 100 Years of Visual Effects From Kong To Tron, And On
The sad thing now is how the public seems able to tolerate CGI crap.

The latest Star Trek film has a number of scenes that are pure garbage (the Enterprise under construction plates, just for starters) but no one even seems to care.

There are still times you cant beat an excellent matte painting, or even a guy in a rubber suit. Incredibly bad Hulk anyone?
Reply

Evil Tortie's Mom: R.O.A.C.H. promoted this comment Dug was starred Dug was unstarred

sicboi
08/31/09

In reply to 100 Years of Visual Effects From Kong To Tron, And On
I liked it for the inclusion of Jurassic Park... remembering the anticipation of seeing the dinos for the first time in the movie plus all the hype that went before it, all that was forgotten in the sense of wonder as the first reveal moment came about with that saurapod. It definitely made you feel as if you were right there along with the characters witnessing something historical for the first time...
Reply

Evil Tortie's Mom: R.O.A.C.H. promoted this comment sicboi was starred sicboi was unstarred

Evil Tortie's Mom: R.O.A.C.H.
08/31/09

@sicboi: It made me remember vividly how I felt when I saw it first. The whole theater gasped.
Reply

TheAlmanac
08/31/09

In reply to 100 Years of Visual Effects From Kong To Tron, And On
I'll buck the trend by appreciating something surprising they did include: a clip from The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles, which did quite a lot of pioneering work on "invisible" CGI effects like the one shown in this montage, with a television budget.

It's rare to see any behind-the-scenes clips from the series (the DVD's lack any :/), so I'm impressed they got a hold of that at all...
Reply

Evil Tortie's Mom: R.O.A.C.H. promoted this comment TheAlmanac was starred TheAlmanac was unstarred

dorkhero
08/31/09

In reply to 100 Years of Visual Effects From Kong To Tron, And On
Nice, but one glaring omission kills it: The big gap between Mary Popins and Star Wars where 2001 should be. The effects at the time for 2001 were light years beyond anything that had been done previously. Many of those who worked on 2001 later worked on Star Wars, which in many was an equal to 2001 in effects, but did not exceed it. (I’m talking about the original 1977 release and not the CGI violation Lucas did later.) Compare the effects in 2001 to any of the George Pal scifi films (Conquest of Space comes to mind) and you can understand the massive technical leap that 2001 made. It’s kind of like the huge leap in effects made with computer graphics in films like Abyss, T2, and Jurassic Park. (And no, Tron and Last Starfighter are too crude to count.)
Reply

twDarkflame promoted this comment dorkhero was starred dorkhero was unstarred

twDarkflame
08/31/09

@dorkhero: Star Wars made extensive use of motion controlled cameras for the first time, and that's why it deserves its place as revolutionary (and yes, exceeding 2001).

Rather then moving the model, they were moving the camera to make the model move. Not totaly new, but certainly it proved how vital the techique was and revolutionised cinema.
2001 was, of course, still very much deserveing of its place in effects history.

"(And no, Tron and Last Starfighter are too crude to count.)"

By that argument, Halo is a more important video game then Pong.
Reply

twDarkflame was starred twDarkflame was unstarred

goldfarb
08/31/09

@dorkhero: describing Tron and Last Starfighter as "too crude to count" is ridiculous for two reasons:
1 - wrath of Kahn is more important than both
2 - Tron and Last Starfighter (and Kahn) represent GIGANTIC leaps in computer graphics.
Reply

goldfarb was starred goldfarb was unstarred

dorkhero
08/31/09

@goldfarb: The early CGI effects in Wrath of Khan, Tron, and Last Starfighter were impressive for their time, but they still looked like inserted animations (See Mary Popins and Rodger Rabbit). I consider the great leap in CGI to have been when it reached the point that you didn't realize you are seeing CGI. When you can create something that looks like it is really there as opposed to something that was drawn on a computer. Jurassic Park is the big stand out here.
Reply

dorkhero was starred dorkhero was unstarred

dorkhero
08/31/09

@twDarkflame: I always hated Pong. I'd consider the Atari 2600 port of Pac Man to be more important than Pong (as an example of what not to do).
Reply

dorkhero was starred dorkhero was unstarred

goldfarb
08/31/09

@dorkhero: what makes Wrath of Kahn so important (beyond the technical - which is huge) is that the animation exists perfectly within the film - Dr. Marcus says, something like, "in this computer simulation..." and then we see the computer simulation...so really, the VFX are perfectly integrated into the 'reality' of the film.
Reply

goldfarb was starred goldfarb was unstarred

goldfarb
08/31/09

In reply to 100 Years of Visual Effects From Kong To Tron, And On
everyone blabs on about what movies are missing from this...but no one seems to care that it was make for a specific purpose and that it wasn't made to show an example of every VFX film ever made or even every VFX film in which something significant was done...
if that was the case then the exclusion of The Matrix is the least of it's problems.

sheesh.
Reply

goldfarb was starred goldfarb was unstarred

Andrew Liptak
08/31/09

In reply to 100 Years of Visual Effects From Kong To Tron, And On
They also completely missed Lord of the Rings and their work with Gollum.
Reply

Andrew Liptak was starred Andrew Liptak was unstarred

burlybax
08/31/09

In reply to 100 Years of Visual Effects From Kong To Tron, And On
Gotta love that time period of the late 70's and 80's where they were so good a combining CGI and animatronics for such an organic effect. Now we know its fake..
Reply

Evil Tortie's Mom: R.O.A.C.H. promoted this comment burlybax was starred burlybax was unstarred

Impul5se
08/31/09

In reply to 100 Years of Visual Effects From Kong To Tron, And On
You know with all the CGI effects that are in movies now you forget just how well the old effects really still stand up to scrutiny. Jason and the argonauts still looks amazing! I'm definatly going to have to re-watch the thief of bagdad too
Reply

Impul5se was starred Impul5se was unstarred

MonkeyT
08/31/09

@Impul5se: Hell, those shots from Kong look amazing. We just gotta push for more old films on TV instead of cheap bermuda triangle specials.
Reply

Evil Tortie's Mom: R.O.A.C.H. promoted this comment MonkeyT was starred MonkeyT was unstarred

Earlier discussions Other discussions Show all discussions Show featured discussions only Start a new discussion