Waterworld: crap/ not crap

[A380]

Smokers !

 

[Nanker Phelge]

If, after watching Dennis Hopper in a film, I'm not slightly disturbed in a good way, then it's crap film.

Costner always play blank characters.

On the whole, if I were to end up in a post apocalyptic badmanland, this one would not be my choice.

 

[8ball]

The effects in total recall are amazing.

Recalling Total Recall

To celebrate 25 years since Total Recall, we talk to members of the Oscar-winning vfx team: Eric Brevig, Alex Funke and Tim McGovern.

www.fxguide.com

(Alex Funke also did the miniatures for the LOTR films)

Yeah, while some obv dated. I wouldn’t say nowadays it necessarily stands out as clearly a massive budget for the time.

I think a lot of that is because a lot of stuff they did became much easier not that long after, and looking back it’s easy to miss where things were at that point in time.

 

[T & P]

Yeah, while some obv dated. I wouldn’t say nowadays it necessarily stands out as clearly a massive budget for the time.

I think a lot of that is because a lot of stuff they did became much easier not that long after, and looking back it’s easy to miss where things were at that point in time.

As far as practical effects are concerned, there is no such thing as dated in my book

Well, there is of course, and my comment was somewhat tongue-in-cheek. But I still firmly believe that whereas they might be less realistic than CGI effects, practical effects age much, much better.

I guess it’s a subjective thing and partly derived from an appreciation of the art of puppetry and traditional craftsmanship, but anything less than ultra high budget blockbuster level CGI will almost invariably look not just a bit shit, but completely underwhelming and offputting a few years down the line.

Hell, even the Lucasfilm-quality CGI effects in the Star Wars 1990s prequels look aged and unremarkable, and best ignored or at least not a positive talking point. Whereas only a complete ignoramus could think that the practical effects and puppetry in the likes of Total Recall, The Thing, or The Terminator, are anything else than great even if (or perhaps because) they’re highly imperfect.

 

[T & P]

Annoyingly, I just thought of another crap/ not crap sci-fi film thread I’d rather asked peeps’ opinion on before this one, but it now seems frivolous to create another thread so soon after this one. So as we’ve already discussed other sci-fi movies here, here it goes.

I love, or at the very least rate, most of Spielberg’s work, so it’s with a heavy heart that I must declare A.I. Artificial Intelligence to be decisively crap in a binary crap/ not crap poll. And far less entertaining than Waterworld while we’re at it, special effects or not.

I suspect I will end up in the minority, so go ahead and let me have it.

 

[josef1878 2.0]

Every time I see this crock of shit pop up on ITV4 I have to watch at least 10 minutes again to confirm what I originally thought. It is beyond bad. No it's worse than that. The worst thing I have ever seen.

 

[Doodler]

Having Kevin Costner in the lead or Sting in any role in a film is like adding a single tiny piece of shit to a pound of mince, ruining everything by its mere presence.

 

[gosub]

Having Kevin Costner in the lead or Sting in any role in a film is like adding a single tiny piece of shit to a pound of mince, ruining everything by its mere presence.

Untouchables?

 

[Artaxerxes]

As far as practical effects are concerned, there is no such thing as dated in my book

Well, there is of course, and my comment was somewhat tongue-in-cheek. But I still firmly believe that whereas they might be less realistic than CGI effects, practical effects age much, much better.

I guess it’s a subjective thing and partly derived from an appreciation of the art of puppetry and traditional craftsmanship, but anything less than ultra high budget blockbuster level CGI will almost invariably look not just a bit shit, but completely underwhelming and offputting a few years down the line.

Hell, even the Lucasfilm-quality CGI effects in the Star Wars 1990s prequels look aged and unremarkable, and best ignored or at least not a positive talking point. Whereas only a complete ignoramus could think that the practical effects and puppetry in the likes of Total Recall, The Thing, or The Terminator, are anything else than great even if (or perhaps because) they’re highly imperfect.

CG is good now when it’s used to augment practical effects, to many films focussed on doing the impressive centrepieces with CG when it started to be used but it really came into its own when used to make practical effects better or assist making matte paintings or backgrounds better and generally making worlds more alive and bigger or hide things that destroy immersion.

 

[8ball]

CG is good now when it’s used to augment practical effects, to many films focussed on doing the impressive centrepieces with CG when it started to be used but it really came into its own when used to make practical effects better or assist making matte paintings or backgrounds better and generally making worlds more alive and bigger or hide things that destroy immersion.

Or, for example, to do something like the airport body scan in Total Recall, which was iirc very expensively animated at the time to look like CGI (which became way cheaper to create not that long after). Does look great tbf.

There was quite a long period of CGI spaceships that weren’t a patch on some of the older work with models. Picard’s Enterprise looks especially jaundiced nowadays.

 

[Chz]

Honestly, it's meh. But it's more towards crap than not crap so I voted accordingly. There's far, far worse out there.

And I don't think Sting ruined Dune.