The Scorpion King bit was bad, but that bit with the guy running up and posing before shouting "No!" made it look like a parody rather than a legit movie.
Ben Parker it's not that big of a problem for a movie those years, but, in fact, you just don't want to notice all these blurry cgi effects for the lotr is too good.
Admittedly, all the CG in LotR stands out horribly. Even Gollum to an extent. But given the time of those movies, it's all pretty forgivable due to the quality of the films overall. And of course, the Balrog is CG perfection, as it is the type of thing CG was made for; LotR also did right by not CGing orcs, as New Line eventually goes on to do in the Hobbit.
They're argument for Return of the King couldn't possibly hold less water. The scene looks fine. They should have talked instead about the scene in "Battle of the Five Armies" where Legolas step-jumps up a bunch of falling stone blocks. That looked incredibly stupid.
As a CG artist I need to point something out, when you say"Bad computers", its not the computers fault, its the cg artists / people telling the computer what to do who are bad. #DontBlameComputersForBadCGIartists
I think he was joking. Anywho I'm going to link this just because I think it sort of relates to this comment. www.theonion.com/my-computer-totally-hates-me-vs-god-do-i-hate-that-b-1819594270
+Level 58 Death Knight Not even kidding the first thought I had in the theater when the scene came on was about how bad the CGI looked compared to the rest of the movie. I was 9.
Arrowless Knee I'm not passionate enough about the quality of the CGI in that scene to be in denial about it. I'd never even thought about it before seeing this video.
Many good points, but Return of the King was top quality CGI when it first came out way back. That Oscar was well deserved. But there are some other deserving titles on this list, to be sure. :)
TRON (modern version) i know its meant to be a video game film but all the characters are real except the main protagonist who has no emotion and looks plastic
+T Nich Are you talking about the beginning where they used CGI to make Jeff Bridges look young again? Because I didn't like that either. But everything else looked great to me!
He was so overly dramatic about it. Scorpion King gets stabbed. Pause. Brendan Frasier over the chasm. Pause. Imhotep kneels down. "NIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII!" It's not supposed to be a funny moment, but his timing made it SUPER hilarious!
One of the best scenes in the trilogy. The rendering and textures were awesome. And Weta's MASSIVE did the best possibly work on that time (after JP movies of course). The general Motion may be a little "blury&clumsy " but still the dynamic motion of the scene, for a 2002 production movie it is still, way more than perfect. I can't even believe that they are comparing LotR trilogy with all these shitty movies!
john suffer Absolutely right! If you referring to the Jurassic trilogy, the LotR one, was way better rendered. And yes, the Massive's production, and CGI used is yet better than most movies from nowadays. Amazing program! It was a masterpiece! And Tomily182 , the Hobbit trilogy has nothing to do with the LotR series. At all. If a 15yo production isn't an argument then there is no argument at all to argue for.
It had CGI but it was used with moderation like how it should be done. Instead today they have to overuse it so much that the only real thing left is the actors themselves and even they are often in some scenes replaced by CGI.
I strongly disagree with LoTR. Do you realise when this was made? It still looks pretty amazing. It's just that now we can do a lot better, but for the time it came out they did a flawless job. You're basically saying that the merit and quality of the work is down because we have more advanced technology now, which is unfair. Of course it deserved this oscar when it came out.
Yeah I feel like the age of the movie wasn't taken into account when he made this video. I mean return of the mummy, that was relatively good, definitely not the best, but not the best.
That and Legolas is supposed to be floaty, because he's an elf very light in his feet. In the Fellowship he is the only one walking ON the snow instead of through the snow.
LotR is from 2013(2003 *edited). They started the production in the end of 90's. The CGI wasn't bad for the time. Edited: I wrote the year wrong. RotK was released in december of 2003.
I wrote wrong. I was trying to say 2003, not 13. Was not from 2005 the movie was released in december of 2003. But they filmed the 3 movies in a row. The first one released in 2001. They spent more than 1 and a half year just filming. So the production of the movies started in the end of 90's. So the effects was not from 2004. Because the 3 movies uses the same tecnologies, and are very similar in visual aspects. It's an old movie already. The effects where good for his time.
Yep my error, it was 2003. Likely the effects are around 2001ish than. I concur it looked great for the time, that one scene hasn;t aged well but most of the movie still looks damn good. Where as the scene from the Bond film was laughed at even when it was in theatres
I'm a huge fan of the TV show Babylon 5 which was one of the first to use CGI, the space battles still look OK but damn do any interiors or other things with CGI look ghastly(it was from 1994-98)
DouglasEdward84 Yep, didn't not aged well at all. That scene is weird do watch now. Even the far takes from battles if you watch the bluray on a big TV, looks like a strategy game.
+Fury Josh bro starwars, 2001 a space odessy, jurrasic park, E.T all of came nearly 30. 40, 50 years ago its not about the technology but how you use does matter,, i loved every scene in the LOTR's movies except this,, i was shocked seeing this for the 1st time in theater n thought,, man wtfuck was this
Instead of Return of the King, why not try Battle of the Five Armies when Legolas jumped up the falling stones or some of the overhead shots of the Orc army during the battle?
Hands down the Scorpion King was laughable. When video game cinematic can blow it away you have a real problem. Matrix fight scene, totally. It looked like they screen captured a scene from the video game. I have to say the LOTR should get some credit. That is an extremely ambitious sequence and no other example came close to the complexity involved. And at least the textures blend and the pacing was rhythmic.
Okay, I hold the unpopular view that I actually liked The Mummy Returns (Adore Rachel Weisz, and Brendan Frasier, plus the kid's sassiness and John Hannah's one-liners just make me grin) but OH. MY. GOD. That Scorpion King was BEYOND terrible, even for a film made in the early 00s... it was just... urgh, I remember watching it as a 7 year old and even as a kid I was immediately pulled out of the film...
3:44 hahaha perfect absolutely perfect "WHAT are you SAYING Colonel? Is this a list of your 11 secret herbs and spices?" the British accent made it even better
The CGI in the first Matrix film looked better (in this example 4:04) because it wasn't CGI. They used a method that they called 'bullet time' where they shot the actors at every angle with multiple cameras surrounding them 360 degrees. In the following films they opted to do the same kind of shots entirely with CGI because it was more efficient and they could do more super natural things, didn't look as good though for sure.
The Graham Revell music and the titles were good too. IF they slowed down the jumping around a bit, it would help a great deal. However those skin tones in that outfit were gorgeous. And what's his face as her costar was worthy.
+fisharmor Do you want a cookie? No one cares if you didn't watch a movie, its your own problem. Let's not lie, you wrote that comment just to be able to bash the movie when someone gives you a different answer. Well my friend, i believe you came at the wrong place, because no one fucking cares.
They got around $250 mill to make the trilogy so it was big budget. I don't mind those segments with Legolas anyway as I fast-forward them as he's a prat anyway.
Standard these days, not so much back in '99 when they financed it. Probably only Titanic (and maybe Waterworld?) cost so much for one film back then I'd say.
MrFlaten92 What the fuck!? Those were HUGE movies about a classic, very famous tale that millions of people were waiting ages for! And a ton of the CGI in those movies was absolutely hilarious! They couldn't even make a decent, realistic looking light shine from Gandalf's staff! And that fuck'n Gollum, too!! He alone, killed the last 2 movies!! HAAHAAHAA!!!
ThePsychoBunny 44 Oh, they did! Absolutely! But, I'm just talking about the CGI special effects, not the story and great character creations. Those were great. However, a movie that was entirely terrible on all grounds, was the movie "Spawn"! look at so many idiots that actually loved that movie! Someone once told me that it was the greatest movie he ever saw - that it was even way better than the Batman movies! PAAHAAHAA!!! Spawn not only had some of the worst CGI I've ever seen in my life in the movies, but the story, the dialog, the acting and the lead actor were all a huge laugh after another! I place that movie somewhere in the middle of my list of the "top 20 worst movies I've ever seen in my entire life!"
+JakO prcek I always thought it looked horrible. There's also a scene in fellowship that looks pretty bad. The staircase collapsing in Moria that looked like a scene from Willow. The layering and effects were terrible. There are plenty of shots in movies as bad or worse. The difference that got RoTK onto here was as mentioned in the video: It had excellent CGI in so many other places and throughout the trilogy that this case really sticks out.
I don't see what is so bad about the Return of the King CGI effect. I've heard many talk about it but have never really thought it was so bad (especially compared to The Hobbit trilogy).
+Isaiah Lagerquist I'm wondering what the hell makes them think you can have a guy kill a 50 foot tall elephant and ride down its trunk and have it somehow not look slightly fake. This was in 2003 for fuck sake. Most of the CGI in return of the king was mixed in with live action so people who bitch can fuck off.
Mau Jo Just because the CGI was obvious doesn't mean it was bad. I can tell the difference between every single CGI and puppet dinosaur in every single Jurassic Park movie, but that doesn't make the CGI dinos poorly rendered.
After watching this video it has only proved to me that the LoTR trilogy still stands strong even with the sub-par CGI. And is still ,in my opinion, the best movies of all time.
Legolas? Elves are supposed to be extremely light and be crazy agile on their feet. Most of that shot is actually real. The super burly brawl is the last fight in revolutions, you are talking about the burly brawl and 99% of it cgi augmented reality based. Meaning you didn't notice the CGI most of the time. The only true pure cgi in it is when neo knocks mr smith up. Everything is just augmented reality with CGI.
Transformers 1 was realeased in 2007, and the still look amazing, and it wasnt just like a car crash, or a monster, the whole movie was about giant robots fighting each other in cities, and it looks really good
i think they were accusing these films of being lazy/cheap in their production. that's why they pointed out Jurassic Park from 1993, and how amazing and believable their cgi was, especially for the time. A lot of these movies had access to similar funding, so their final products are inexcusable
+Dalloz Cansing Even in the context of the movie itself that bit always cracks me up! Imhotep's resurrected so that he can once again have another stab at taking over the world. After all that build up only for the Scorpion King to get impaled with a spear, the guy just comes skidding to let us know how pissed off he is. NAAAAAAIIIIIIII!!!!
Thank you for giving every single clip a full on description instead of getting to the point. We really did need that instead of seeing the bad cgi(what we came here for) and i appreciate your attempts of wasting 5 minutes of my life. Thank you for making such good videos.
@@JLConawayII You cannot just make time🤦♀️ blame the Company that rushed them. You have to request more time to work on things and they can deny them that.
CGI got more seamless when programs like autodesk maya and adobe aftereffects became industry standard by about mid 2000's. This led to programs like houdini and blender which are popular today. CGI programs become outdated roughly every 5 years. Even Industrial Light and Magic, would produce terrible effects, because they were late to transition and stuck to an outdated program called XSI (Soft Image). Some studios would cut corners using sub standard packages like a program called Cinema 4dxl because high end cgi programs were not macintosh compatible yet, where as editors prefer to use mac's because it runs programs like final cut, pro tools, and avid.
In regards to the Last Airbender's CG, Appa was the only huge eye sore, but many other elements (pun intended) were quite passable. That movie just fails from the shit conceptual aspects, not CG rendering. Shyamalan deliberately messed it up. He skews the deliberate ethnic background of each culture (Fire Nation - Japanese, Earth Kingdom - Chinese, Water Tribes - Inuit/Siberian, Air Nomads - Tibetan), where in the film the Fire Nation are Indian, Earth Kingdom amazingly remains the same, Water Tribes are white people and Air Nomads are a white kid and an ambiguously Asian guy. He apparently had no concept of martial arts, which should use as little energy as possible to deliver as much impact as they can, where in this everyone has to do a full range of body motions to achieve a minor amount of bending; the show obviously portrays the body motions and element motions as being in sync. He asserts that fire benders only manipulate existing fire unless they're ridiculously powerful, it apparently takes four guys doing air tai chi to move a small rock, Katara's water orb is losing water while she moves it yet it never lessens in size, and Aang never actually does many of the simple airbending techniques in the show like exhaling himself up many feet into the air and softly floating back down. The CG guys did a good job with their part of the film, but it was ultimately left in the hands of an unimaginative moron like M. Night.
well to be fair, ROTK was only up against 2 other movies in the Visual Effects category. Given the movies that came out in 2003, ROTK had better visual effects than most movies in 2003. even if this one scene was barely out of place. of course it would will the oscar.
Why are people disliking this just because they can think of OTHER bad CGI effects? It's a top TEN, and probably one million worthy candidates for these ten spots. It was a good video, some bad CGI, effecient and quick entertainment and not a dragged out movie. I'm giving this a well deserved like, and thanking the uploader for entertaining me for a good seven and a half minute :)
+Penzig Because it is a TOP TEN, as in the worst of the worst, and some of these are actually good. You need to consider when they were made, 2003, while a lot of 2015 movies look worse.
+Penzig Because there's nothing wrong with 7 of 10 scenes, especially given a little context ( The Matrix had absolutely mind-blowingly good SFX in 1999 when it came out, I know, I was there. It's similar for a few others in this list, actually. LOTR had some of the best fight scenes of all time at the time. ) and the other 3 are obvious action B-movies with low SFX budgets.
+sCiphre I don't think you are getting the message from this video. Yes, LOTR has awesome effects, still to this day, and that is why that ONE scene with Legolas on the elephant made this list, because it was more or less crap compared to all the other awesomeness. And why even bring up the first Matrix movie? It wasn't mention here at all. Again, the CGI in the second Matrix movie - the one part they refer to in this video - is hella worse than the effects from the first movie, and probably part of why they brought it up here. Or do you have a hidden point here I'm not getting?
+Cristian Daniel I said it was a top 10 in my comment, but the video is in fact called "10 terrible CGI moments". Not top 10. Now, you are also failing to see that this video wasn't about finding the worst CGI compared to production year. It was big budget movies only, and it was also labeled "bad CGI MOMENTS". As you can see, they are pointing out crappy CGI MOMENTS from movies that are otherwise well made. Of course you'll find crappy CGI made movies from 2015, but then they are more or less crap all the way through. LOTR is amzingly well made, but then have that one scene that is so much worse than the rest. That is what this list is about. Sorry you didn't understand that.
Penzig Ok ok , i understand your point. I guess there is only one point, one option, one solution and apparently yours is the ultimate one. I , ALSO understand your opinion :) ty
+Hellscream900 Why? That scene is generally considered a to be a shitty use of cgi by pretty much a lot of film lovers. I thought it was pretty universally panned for being pretty crap cgi in a otherwise good film with good cgi. but hey, people will give a pass to anything as long as it is in a movie they like.
+TheBaconPig The scene that he showed was absolutely cringe worthy. I remember watching it as a kid and having the same feeling, just a very, very, terrible scene. It's the truth.
7:22 me and my friends always laugh at Imhotep photobombing Scorpion King's death scene. He wants to be part of the drama and just darts in from the far left doing his "NAAAAAI!" Hilarity gold mine.
Funny Quackers I don't understand why nobody talks about the female version of it. You can hear at the end of the song "cereal killer" from Red&Meth on Blackout. So many movies and series with it.
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, the first broom flying lesson, and a horrible CGI Neville Longbottom falling from that wall he hooked his cape onto... Just sad CGI...
*watches video with critical title* *blames video creator for being critical* 😂😂😂😂😂 *comments to criticize creator for being critical* 😂😂😂😂 I love you, RUclips.
+Shaggy2222 The very brief bit in FotR where he leaps off the cave troll always stood out to me as really bad, but after watching this, I'm not sure it was actually worse. It may have been, but RotK's was much longer.
I think it's more a problem of how exactly a super agile killing machine would look, leaping around on a 70 ft high, charging giant elephant, and where the point of view is, considering the PoV is super stable. No normal human could keep his centre of gravity stable and would fall off. So, being an Elf, with super reactions and super agility, he is going to look strange and rubbery compared to a human who could not do the feat in the first place.
No, the Matrix scene looked like shit at the time. I remember watching it and thinking "Good, this looks so fake" Which is weird, cause lots of the effect in the Matrix were much better.
Well many of these cgi shots did look bad for me even back when the movies were released, i remember being really shocked at that fight scene from Matrix Reloaded, shocked at how "rubbery" Neo suddenly looked, also the one in the mummy returns, i thought it was a joke back then aswell! Instantly noticeable on my rented VCR copy of the film.
I found the "zombies" in I am Legend real good : yes their skins are rubber-like, but it is part of the monster created. Like the Pale Man in Pan's Labyrinth.
+Loftty OG Why would you point out CGI flaws in movies that came out 1-2 DECADES ago. That's like saying we have made zero advancements in our CGI technology in twenty years. If the CGI at the time did not distract or remove the immersion you felt while watching the movie for the first time (the theater) then there shouldn't be anything to point out. Of all the ones mentioned, the only problem I had with any of the movies was the matrix one, as that horrid job on CGI did kill my immersion; the rest were practically spot-on for the dates when they came out. The CGI also becomes much more noticeable when you re-watch many of these movies in their new "HD" releases, since many of them were not formatted for TVs today (16:9/10 vs 4:3 and 480i vs 1080P+). Should we rate paintings the same way after we stretch their canvases out by hand? That's the problem I have with the reviews on this video myself and judging by the comments, many others feel the same way.
+Loftty OG Let's see... I'm only 3 minutes into the video and I've already disliked the video, simply because LOTR: RotK and I Am Legend had nothing wrong with the CGI IMO. Only someone actually looking for flaws in something would be able to spot these (or care about them) and people who do that aren't my kind of people, hence why I clicked dislike.
+Назар Ильдаров Although I haven't seen the movie yet, I thought the whole "redeeming" aspect of the movie was the good cgi. I also realize the movie probably cannot be redeemed.
Pausing after 54 seconds just to comment: that was a great introduction guys. Compared to the dry witless WatchMojo voiceovers... well there's no comparison. Great script, great clips, good incentive to keep watching.
+REALhacksDAILY Think about this. In the real world when you use a copy machine, the more you copy the same thing the more each iteration loses it's detail. The same would happen with Mr. Smith agents/clones.
+Tohtori Kumiankka I was just going to post this. He's not saying the films are bad (except maybe the Ring 2), he's saying those CG cutscenes were sloppy.
+Stephen Hogan Because the dinos were tasked with having to out Jack Black in a Jack Black movie and you don't try to out Jack Black in a Jack Black movie (and by "out Jack Black", I mean being fucking ridiculous).
I dispute the notion that "for the most part it all looks top notch." Most CGI in movies is dreadful. Especially anything organic like animals or aliens.
The Scorpion King bit was bad, but that bit with the guy running up and posing before shouting "No!" made it look like a parody rather than a legit movie.
Yeah, the cheese was real in that scene.
Somebody should edit that bit and insert a 'What are Thoooose' in that scene
Ariyan Chowdhury Well...... That's a bit old
bobtheduck he looks likes a dreamworks character from the early 2000s.
bobtheduck yeah I fucking lost it when that happened
Who Framed Roger Rabbit. the bunny never looked real. not one single scene.
+whitedevil2 It wasnt cgi anyway
+Austin Beene some people didnt get the joke
+Thaumablazer That was the joke.
lmao
+whitedevil2 God damn it now there's milk everywhere. I really shouldn't eat cereal and read comment sections. gg mate
I just can't help laughing at how when the scorpion King is stabbed he pulls himself into the frame to scream noooo
I've never realized that LOL
+ArdinVincent It's the pause that makes it so humorous
I KNOW RIGHT
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Right!?? Even as a kid I was laughing my ass off
as a 3D designer with 15 years old experience , don't compare old CGI with the one of Today
yassine hamouche could u mention some of your project ?
Stanley Kubrick disagrees with you, he died in 1999 BTW
Actually! so would Hitchcock
I agree with your statement. Regardless of whatever qualifications you may/may not have to make it.
Obvious
Jurassic Park
lol that legolas animation is still pretty good today, and was amazing ten years ago, so i think the oscar was well deserved :p
I've actually literally never noticed a problem in the Legolas one.
Ben Parker it's not that big of a problem for a movie those years, but, in fact, you just don't want to notice all these blurry cgi effects for the lotr is too good.
ATROX True, true
Admittedly, all the CG in LotR stands out horribly. Even Gollum to an extent. But given the time of those movies, it's all pretty forgivable due to the quality of the films overall. And of course, the Balrog is CG perfection, as it is the type of thing CG was made for; LotR also did right by not CGing orcs, as New Line eventually goes on to do in the Hobbit.
It's most noticeable when he slides down its trunk.
you have to compare the cgi quality to other films of that era, unless your technical enough to understand what was possible.
They're argument for Return of the King couldn't possibly hold less water. The scene looks fine.
They should have talked instead about the scene in "Battle of the Five Armies" where Legolas step-jumps up a bunch of falling stone blocks. That looked incredibly stupid.
how dare you put Return of the King in this list..
Kdream's Cosmos Same thing I said!
I think this dude wants to fight the whole LOTR fan base.
Not being a troll here, but return of the king has a lot of bad cgi going on.
wdenegri No not at all
wdenegri what are you talking about
That scorpion king guy's face looks like a Sims character's lol
"the stupid horrible turtles"
As a CG artist I need to point something out, when you say"Bad computers", its not the computers fault, its the cg artists / people telling the computer what to do who are bad.
#DontBlameComputersForBadCGIartists
IO Studios
Are there actually people who blame computers or CGI for bad CGI?
I think he was joking.
Anywho I'm going to link this just because I think it sort of relates to this comment.
www.theonion.com/my-computer-totally-hates-me-vs-god-do-i-hate-that-b-1819594270
I think he was being the most sarcastic way possible about it
he was just being sarcastic
He's joking, he's quoting a different movie
While I agree with most of this list, the Legolas scene looked absolutely fine back in 2003, and still looks passable today.
+Level 58 Death Knight Not even kidding the first thought I had in the theater when the scene came on was about how bad the CGI looked compared to the rest of the movie. I was 9.
+Level 58 Death Knight Yea man, I thought the same thing too...it was bad the first time I saw it. You're just in denial.
Arrowless Knee I'm not passionate enough about the quality of the CGI in that scene to be in denial about it. I'd never even thought about it before seeing this video.
Many good points, but Return of the King was top quality CGI when it first came out way back. That Oscar was well deserved.
But there are some other deserving titles on this list, to be sure. :)
The Last Airbender movie, just all of it
lol
TRON (modern version) i know its meant to be a video game film but all the characters are real except the main protagonist who has no emotion and looks plastic
+T Nich i respectfully disagree
+T Nich Are you talking about the beginning where they used CGI to make Jeff Bridges look young again? Because I didn't like that either. But everything else looked great to me!
+Julian Soler-Claudio actually CGI was decent and quite enjoyable. the actor ruined it all
7:23-7:25 A man needs a gif of this.
you need the sound too.
He was so overly dramatic about it. Scorpion King gets stabbed. Pause. Brendan Frasier over the chasm. Pause. Imhotep kneels down. "NIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII!" It's not supposed to be a funny moment, but his timing made it SUPER hilarious!
Like a theater scene :D
A man must get the gif himself.
Yes the world need this!
I disagree with some movies, especially the 10+ years old ones.
Paulo Lameiras ikr seems unfair
As Adam pointed out, Jurassic park still looks awesome. Jurassic Park is 30 years old.
@@tafua_a *25 years old
The lord of the rings one was fine I don't understand
Also considering the year it was produced. It blew every film out of the water in special effects. This guys comparing it to modern cgi. Clown
Watch that scene a few times in a row then tell us what you really think.
Lemme explain: It looks rubish and fake AF, the point of the vdeo is "for the money they cost they should got something much better"
@@antoniocenteno1483 its called context. For something produced in the early 2000s compared to other films of the era it was great .
@@mattybhoy6522 Yeah but it didn´t age very well you know, Look at Jurassic Park for example how good it looks today
I laughed out loud at that car crash in along came a spider
My favorite album!!!! Zep all day!!!!!!!
+Raidernick27 nah, Physical Graffiti is better
ɷ I Haveee Watchedddd This Movieee Leakeddd Version Heree : - t.co/RlKbv1hghK
Then you haven't saw car crush scene from In Time.
Are you serious mate?! Return of the King was a 2002 production movie, the CGI was years ahead. Sometimes it STILL is!
exactly!!!
Are you serious? This Legolas scene was punch in the face even in 2002! And they did it again in 2014, so year of production is not an argument.
One of the best scenes in the trilogy. The rendering and textures were awesome. And Weta's MASSIVE did the best possibly work on that time (after JP movies of course). The general Motion may be a little "blury&clumsy " but still the dynamic motion of the scene, for a 2002 production movie it is still, way more than perfect. I can't even believe that they are comparing LotR trilogy with all these shitty movies!
john suffer
Absolutely right! If you referring to the Jurassic trilogy, the LotR one, was way better rendered. And yes, the Massive's production, and CGI used is yet better than most movies from nowadays. Amazing program! It was a masterpiece! And Tomily182 , the Hobbit trilogy has nothing to do with the LotR series. At all. If a 15yo production isn't an argument then there is no argument at all to argue for.
Exactly, and I think the same for Matrix which was from the same year. Those films were SO ahead of their time.
Jurassic Park still looks so good because it WASN'T CGI, it was almost entirely practical effects.
It had CGI but it was used with moderation like how it should be done. Instead today they have to overuse it so much that the only real thing left is the actors themselves and even they are often in some scenes replaced by CGI.
+bloxyman22 That's not even what the video was indicating...
Blovl H
Am I not allowed to have a opinion of my own??
That Return of the King moment really isn't that bad, especially given how difficult that is to get right and that it was the early 2000s.
Why so much hate? this video is just pointing out bad CGI, which is just what it did.
+Jake Moresea (CrimDaz) This rubbish right here is exactly same list that WatchMojo made so much earlier.That is reason 4 h8.
I strongly disagree with LoTR. Do you realise when this was made? It still looks pretty amazing. It's just that now we can do a lot better, but for the time it came out they did a flawless job. You're basically saying that the merit and quality of the work is down because we have more advanced technology now, which is unfair.
Of course it deserved this oscar when it came out.
........*walks out the door*
+Justine H *stops and looks back over shoulder* hmph! *continues walking*
+daAmazin FatB0y sorry I ain't into roleplaying
Yeah I feel like the age of the movie wasn't taken into account when he made this video. I mean return of the mummy, that was relatively good, definitely not the best, but not the best.
That and Legolas is supposed to be floaty, because he's an elf very light in his feet. In the Fellowship he is the only one walking ON the snow instead of through the snow.
Hahaha, priceless, the way Imhotep kneels and screams in agony at the sight of such bad CGI from ILM is a fantastic touch of comedy.
Yeah, I love that movie, but what is the Wax-Man doing in my movie?
1:07 it's not the battle of Mina's tirith!!!!!broooonits the battle of pellanor fields get ur facts straight
LotR is from 2013(2003 *edited). They started the production in the end of 90's. The CGI wasn't bad for the time.
Edited: I wrote the year wrong. RotK was released in december of 2003.
Return of the King was from 2005, visual effects are usually one of the last things done so were likely completed in 2004ish.
I wrote wrong. I was trying to say 2003, not 13. Was not from 2005 the movie was released in december of 2003. But they filmed the 3 movies in a row. The first one released in 2001. They spent more than 1 and a half year just filming. So the production of the movies started in the end of 90's. So the effects was not from 2004. Because the 3 movies uses the same tecnologies, and are very similar in visual aspects. It's an old movie already. The effects where good for his time.
Yep my error, it was 2003. Likely the effects are around 2001ish than. I concur it looked great for the time, that one scene hasn;t aged well but most of the movie still looks damn good. Where as the scene from the Bond film was laughed at even when it was in theatres
I'm a huge fan of the TV show Babylon 5 which was one of the first to use CGI, the space battles still look OK but damn do any interiors or other things with CGI look ghastly(it was from 1994-98)
DouglasEdward84 Yep, didn't not aged well at all. That scene is weird do watch now. Even the far takes from battles if you watch the bluray on a big TV, looks like a strategy game.
People getting all butt hurt when the CGI truly did suck ass. He never said any of the movies were inherently bad, just some CGI sequences.
Return of the King released in 2003, looks fine for a 13 year old film.
+Fury Josh and _much_ better than the Hobbit movies.
+John Harvey That's cause Peter Jackson made the LOTR films out of his passion for the books, and The Hobbit films out of his passion for the profit.
+John Harvey Yea defo!
+Fury Josh bro starwars, 2001 a space odessy, jurrasic park, E.T all of came nearly 30. 40, 50 years ago
its not about the technology but how you use does matter,, i loved every scene in the LOTR's movies except this,, i was shocked seeing this for the 1st time in theater n thought,, man wtfuck was this
+VINOD KUMAR. S Have you been taking those drugs again vinod?
The end boss of Blade was pretty terrible.
haha every fight scene in blade :D
Instead of Return of the King, why not try Battle of the Five Armies when Legolas jumped up the falling stones or some of the overhead shots of the Orc army during the battle?
+Nathan Applegate Or practically any of the CGI in the hobbit films that are so "hyperrealistic" they look fake as fuck.
Hands down the Scorpion King was laughable. When video game cinematic can blow it away you have a real problem. Matrix fight scene, totally. It looked like they screen captured a scene from the video game. I have to say the LOTR should get some credit. That is an extremely ambitious sequence and no other example came close to the complexity involved. And at least the textures blend and the pacing was rhythmic.
Okay, I hold the unpopular view that I actually liked The Mummy Returns (Adore Rachel Weisz, and Brendan Frasier, plus the kid's sassiness and John Hannah's one-liners just make me grin) but OH. MY. GOD. That Scorpion King was BEYOND terrible, even for a film made in the early 00s... it was just... urgh, I remember watching it as a 7 year old and even as a kid I was immediately pulled out of the film...
I agree with you. I loved the movie, thought it was hilarious, but the CGI of the scorpion king was just hilariously awful.
That film had so many bad effects I even found them horrible while watching it on an horrible old tube tv.
I liked the mummy movies! Campy and corny yes... but still fun.
Yeah I was expecting this amazing reveal and then that's what we got instead.
The first one is a classic, the second one is a good film with bad effects, and the third one that they should've never made was straight trash.
3:44 hahaha perfect absolutely perfect "WHAT are you SAYING Colonel? Is this a list of your 11 secret herbs and spices?" the British accent made it even better
The CGI in the first Matrix film looked better (in this example 4:04) because it wasn't CGI. They used a method that they called 'bullet time' where they shot the actors at every angle with multiple cameras surrounding them 360 degrees. In the following films they opted to do the same kind of shots entirely with CGI because it was more efficient and they could do more super natural things, didn't look as good though for sure.
The only thing good from "Cat Woman" ,was Halle Berry in a Cat Woman costume
yep
+Brian Powers doesnt she herpes? i heard she did
+A Veteran I legit would take the herpes hit if it came from Halle Berry
The car should have flattened her then sped off and hired a team of lawyers to clear up the mess
The Graham Revell music and the titles were good too. IF they slowed down the jumping around a bit, it would help a great deal. However those skin tones in that outfit were gorgeous. And what's his face as her costar was worthy.
Come on THE RETURN OF THE KING that CGI wasn't bad.
Indeed.
+Viktor Polzer I wouldn't know, I never watched it because Fellowship was so bad that I tapped out for any other LOTR offerings, ever.
+fisharmor ...
+fisharmor Moron
+fisharmor Do you want a cookie? No one cares if you didn't watch a movie, its your own problem. Let's not lie, you wrote that comment just to be able to bash the movie when someone gives you a different answer. Well my friend, i believe you came at the wrong place, because no one fucking cares.
I wouldn't call Lord of the Rings a big budget movie. and the CGI wasn't that bad.
They got around $250 mill to make the trilogy so it was big budget. I don't mind those segments with Legolas anyway as I fast-forward them as he's a prat anyway.
Standard these days, not so much back in '99 when they financed it. Probably only Titanic (and maybe Waterworld?) cost so much for one film back then I'd say.
MrFlaten92
What the fuck!? Those were HUGE movies about a classic, very famous tale that millions of people were waiting ages for! And a ton of the CGI in those movies was absolutely hilarious! They couldn't even make a decent, realistic looking light shine from Gandalf's staff! And that fuck'n Gollum, too!! He alone, killed the last 2 movies!! HAAHAAHAA!!!
HowlingMoonCinemas what? The movies did so good lol
ThePsychoBunny 44
Oh, they did! Absolutely! But, I'm just talking about the CGI special effects, not the story and great character creations. Those were great. However, a movie that was entirely terrible on all grounds, was the movie "Spawn"! look at so many idiots that actually loved that movie! Someone once told me that it was the greatest movie he ever saw - that it was even way better than the Batman movies! PAAHAAHAA!!! Spawn not only had some of the worst CGI I've ever seen in my life in the movies, but the story, the dialog, the acting and the lead actor were all a huge laugh after another! I place that movie somewhere in the middle of my list of the "top 20 worst movies I've ever seen in my entire life!"
The lord of ring one is totally okay.
+Haider Ali Khichi he seems to forget that return of the king was filmed 13 years ago. I'd like to see him try to make a better cgi in 2003
+Haider Ali Khichi Yeah nothing seemed bad to me
That scene in return of the king was certainly not bad by the standards of the time
+JakO prcek
I didn't think so either. That one seems like nitpicking.
+JakO prcek I always thought it looked horrible. There's also a scene in fellowship that looks pretty bad. The staircase collapsing in Moria that looked like a scene from Willow. The layering and effects were terrible.
There are plenty of shots in movies as bad or worse. The difference that got RoTK onto here was as mentioned in the video: It had excellent CGI in so many other places and throughout the trilogy that this case really sticks out.
zemerick13 theres down right cringey CGI moments in the TLOTR...but as you mentioned its scenes like that. Not the one mentioned in the video
+JakO prcek I guess it is an old film now but at the time (I was 11) I was all over that film!! Still love it though!
I don't see what is so bad about the Return of the King CGI effect. I've heard many talk about it but have never really thought it was so bad (especially compared to The Hobbit trilogy).
+Isaiah Lagerquist I'm wondering what the hell makes them think you can have a guy kill a 50 foot tall elephant and ride down its trunk and have it somehow not look slightly fake. This was in 2003 for fuck sake. Most of the CGI in return of the king was mixed in with live action so people who bitch can fuck off.
"The director uses visual effects like a dog uses a gun; sometimes hilariously, often incorrectly, and occasionally to an utterly tragic effect." :D
How come you didn't mention the Star Wars prequels?!
+Mau Jo The CGI in those movies wasn't that bad. It's not the best, but it's not bad enough to get on the list.
+Mau Jo Because in that particular point in time it was acceptable
Whaaaaaaaat?!
Mau Jo
Just because the CGI was obvious doesn't mean it was bad. I can tell the difference between every single CGI and puppet dinosaur in every single Jurassic Park movie, but that doesn't make the CGI dinos poorly rendered.
+Mau Jo I know right I was waiting for that. The whole fucking films were a terrible CGI cluster fuck.
It was James Patterson that wrote Along Came a Spider, not Robert. Yeah, I'm that guy.
After watching this video it has only proved to me that the LoTR trilogy still stands strong even with the sub-par CGI. And is still ,in my opinion, the best movies of all time.
JustAGuy You'll wake up with a horse head in your bed talking like that.
You have superior taste.
Legolas? Elves are supposed to be extremely light and be crazy agile on their feet. Most of that shot is actually real. The super burly brawl is the last fight in revolutions, you are talking about the burly brawl and 99% of it cgi augmented reality based. Meaning you didn't notice the CGI most of the time. The only true pure cgi in it is when neo knocks mr smith up. Everything is just augmented reality with CGI.
Slam Jackson they still look like shit
Neo . . . knocked Agent Smith up?
Even for an Elf the elephant scene is too over the top. regardless of good or bad cgi.
X Men Origins: Wolverine - the bathroom scene.
yes!
+ghmongo Bang on. This tiny scene ruined the whole movie for me.
+Scott Newman Yeah, JUST that scene... -_-
+SixUK90 Well, I loved the movie. Had its flaws, but I would give it a 9/10.
+ghmongo thats when it turned into who framed roger rabbit
I'm a simple man. I hear Adam, I click like.
yup
+Pinhead Larry I hear Adam, I #Cancelwhatculturewrestlingnetwork
yeap
+JacobysFinest Why is everyone in love with Adam's voice. Don't get me wrong I am too, but why?
soonsims charisma and his dry sense of humor is infectious
Legolas isn't really floaty. Elves weigh pretty much nothing.
the snow scene in the fellowship of the ring. The Pass of Caradhras
The books
according to this, none of them had any "weight" whatsoever
Adam Farnham Elves are lightfooted and can defy gravity
Defying gravity? wtf is this? wicked ?
Where the heck is justice League
it wasn't out when this video was made.
maidmarian101 or homecoming
Wait
But most of theese films, were like from before 2005
Transformers 1 was realeased in 2007, and the still look amazing, and it wasnt just like a car crash, or a monster, the whole movie was about giant robots fighting each other in cities, and it looks really good
i think they were accusing these films of being lazy/cheap in their production. that's why they pointed out Jurassic Park from 1993, and how amazing and believable their cgi was, especially for the time. A lot of these movies had access to similar funding, so their final products are inexcusable
1/2 life
A space odyssey used mostly practical effects.
what says it shouldn't be? did you read the title?
but like 10 years after jurassic park
imhoteps dramatic run up and squat really sell that last one
OKaysional I love it so much. reminds me of a real bad overly dramatic play
Made me laugh pretty hard.
I just love how the bald guys come into the frame at 7:22
+Dalloz Cansing That was lols
+Dalloz Cansing Even in the context of the movie itself that bit always cracks me up! Imhotep's resurrected so that he can once again have another stab at taking over the world. After all that build up only for the Scorpion King to get impaled with a spear, the guy just comes skidding to let us know how pissed off he is. NAAAAAAIIIIIIII!!!!
Thank you for giving every single clip a full on description instead of getting to the point. We really did need that instead of seeing the bad cgi(what we came here for) and i appreciate your attempts of wasting 5 minutes of my life. Thank you for making such good videos.
why the hell does this have SOO many dislikes?! none of these examples are wrong
I just find the presenter annoying lol
+GheyForGames I asked myself the same question!
Because they like the scenes what they say are horribke
Horrible*
*I am Legend....nice try though...ps- that movie sucks huge balls
HOW DARE YOU INSULT LORD OF THE RINGS. EVERY FUCKIN SECOND OF THIS MOVIE IS PRICELESS !!!
+Michał Piskorski oh, come on, i love LOTR but you have to admit that that scene is a very bad in CGI
I love every moment of this movie, even the bad ones. This is what I call the true love
+Michał Piskorski mike preskoskies
yooka333 I can die, but after I will come back like Gandalf and put my magic stick up your haterarse
When you mentioned LOTR....I was like no no no no
The Mummy Returns' Rock monster was actually unfinished, ILM simply didn't have enough time to make it half decent before the film was released.
Maybe they should have made time, since it's their GODDAMN JOB
@@JLConawayII You cannot just make time🤦♀️ blame the Company that rushed them. You have to request more time to work on things and they can deny them that.
CGI got more seamless when programs like autodesk maya and adobe aftereffects became industry standard by about mid 2000's. This led to programs like houdini and blender which are popular today. CGI programs become outdated roughly every 5 years. Even Industrial Light and Magic, would produce terrible effects, because they were late to transition and stuck to an outdated program called XSI (Soft Image). Some studios would cut corners using sub standard packages like a program called Cinema 4dxl because high end cgi programs were not macintosh compatible yet, where as editors prefer to use mac's because it runs programs like final cut, pro tools, and avid.
Top 10 Wrestlers You Didn't Know Were CGI
Lol this killed me!
Omg the scorpion King actually looks like something from GTA IV
You forgot "Spawn" and "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull"!! There's also tons of others waiting to be made fun of too!! HAAHAAHAA!!!
1) It's James Patterson, not Robert Patterson
2)It's Lee Tamahori, not Tamahiro.
Come on, Adam lad
the last airbender, when a kid hangs from the leg of the big hairy thing...
EVERYTHING in The Last Airbender was awful. It could have made the entire list.
Marc Draco It was some ok vfx there, but 90% of the film was cg and 20% of this cg was ok cg.
there never was this movie you are talking about
Not Me m.imdb.com/title/tt0938283/ this is the movie....
In regards to the Last Airbender's CG, Appa was the only huge eye sore, but many other elements (pun intended) were quite passable.
That movie just fails from the shit conceptual aspects, not CG rendering.
Shyamalan deliberately messed it up. He skews the deliberate ethnic background of each culture (Fire Nation - Japanese, Earth Kingdom - Chinese, Water Tribes - Inuit/Siberian, Air Nomads - Tibetan), where in the film the Fire Nation are Indian, Earth Kingdom amazingly remains the same, Water Tribes are white people and Air Nomads are a white kid and an ambiguously Asian guy. He apparently had no concept of martial arts, which should use as little energy as possible to deliver as much impact as they can, where in this everyone has to do a full range of body motions to achieve a minor amount of bending; the show obviously portrays the body motions and element motions as being in sync.
He asserts that fire benders only manipulate existing fire unless they're ridiculously powerful, it apparently takes four guys doing air tai chi to move a small rock, Katara's water orb is losing water while she moves it yet it never lessens in size, and Aang never actually does many of the simple airbending techniques in the show like exhaling himself up many feet into the air and softly floating back down.
The CG guys did a good job with their part of the film, but it was ultimately left in the hands of an unimaginative moron like M. Night.
The only thing more absurd than these uses of CGI is the amount of dislikes. This analysis was detailed and spot on.
I swear to god literally everything about this video had me doubled over in tears lol
I died at 7:24 😂😂😂
3:21
IKR what even was that :')
so did the scorpion king
Same! xD Brilliant ending
well to be fair, ROTK was only up against 2 other movies in the Visual Effects category. Given the movies that came out in 2003, ROTK had better visual effects than most movies in 2003. even if this one scene was barely out of place. of course it would will the oscar.
Where is renesmee??
김준우 I was surprised that the twilight series wasn't on here. It had some of the cringiest CGI I've seen. Especially in the last 2 movies
That's not a movie, it's a stupid terribly long vine
The CG in Return of the King was amazing for 2003... The obvious green screen in the Mountain of Doom was worse, too.
Why are people disliking this just because they can think of OTHER bad CGI effects? It's a top TEN, and probably one million worthy candidates for these ten spots. It was a good video, some bad CGI, effecient and quick entertainment and not a dragged out movie. I'm giving this a well deserved like, and thanking the uploader for entertaining me for a good seven and a half minute :)
+Penzig Because it is a TOP TEN, as in the worst of the worst, and some of these are actually good. You need to consider when they were made, 2003, while a lot of 2015 movies look worse.
+Penzig Because there's nothing wrong with 7 of 10 scenes, especially given a little context ( The Matrix had absolutely mind-blowingly good SFX in 1999 when it came out, I know, I was there. It's similar for a few others in this list, actually. LOTR had some of the best fight scenes of all time at the time. ) and the other 3 are obvious action B-movies with low SFX budgets.
+sCiphre I don't think you are getting the message from this video. Yes, LOTR has awesome effects, still to this day, and that is why that ONE scene with Legolas on the elephant made this list, because it was more or less crap compared to all the other awesomeness. And why even bring up the first Matrix movie? It wasn't mention here at all. Again, the CGI in the second Matrix movie - the one part they refer to in this video - is hella worse than the effects from the first movie, and probably part of why they brought it up here. Or do you have a hidden point here I'm not getting?
+Cristian Daniel I said it was a top 10 in my comment, but the video is in fact called "10 terrible CGI moments". Not top 10. Now, you are also failing to see that this video wasn't about finding the worst CGI compared to production year. It was big budget movies only, and it was also labeled "bad CGI MOMENTS". As you can see, they are pointing out crappy CGI MOMENTS from movies that are otherwise well made. Of course you'll find crappy CGI made movies from 2015, but then they are more or less crap all the way through. LOTR is amzingly well made, but then have that one scene that is so much worse than the rest. That is what this list is about. Sorry you didn't understand that.
Penzig Ok ok , i understand your point. I guess there is only one point, one option, one solution and apparently yours is the ultimate one. I , ALSO understand your opinion :) ty
stopped watching and disliked after Return of the King
+TheBaconPig Exactly my reaction.
+Hellscream900
Why? That scene is generally considered a to be a shitty use of cgi by pretty much a lot of film lovers. I thought it was pretty universally panned for being pretty crap cgi in a otherwise good film with good cgi.
but hey, people will give a pass to anything as long as it is in a movie they like.
Why? He didn't insult or criticise the whole movie, just that one badly edited scene.
+TheBaconPig #triggered
+TheBaconPig The scene that he showed was absolutely cringe worthy. I remember watching it as a kid and having the same feeling, just a very, very, terrible scene. It's the truth.
7:22 me and my friends always laugh at Imhotep photobombing Scorpion King's death scene. He wants to be part of the drama and just darts in from the far left doing his "NAAAAAI!" Hilarity gold mine.
+WolfySnackrib666 ahahahah makes me laugh too
Ryonagana I'm surprised I can't find other comments poking fun at it! It's just so out there!!
I noticed the Legolas issue in lots of movies, but especially in Spiderman movies. When CGI human characters jump around it just looks uncanny.
I caught that Wilhelm scream at the beginning there.
Funny Quackers I didnt........BUT NOW I DID MUHAHAHAHAH
Private Baconn lol
Funny Quackers I don't understand why nobody talks about the female version of it. You can hear at the end of the song "cereal killer" from Red&Meth on Blackout. So many movies and series with it.
The elves in the barrel chase scene of The Hobbit... actually, most of The Hobbit.
Or any movie Peter Jackson did after the LOTR trilogy.
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, the first broom flying lesson, and a horrible CGI Neville Longbottom falling from that wall he hooked his cape onto... Just sad CGI...
+MrZaphaell What about the toilet troll?
*watches video with critical title*
*blames video creator for being critical*
😂😂😂😂😂
*comments to criticize creator for being critical*
😂😂😂😂
I love you, RUclips.
Lord of the Rings are the best films ever, I don't think the CGI was that bad on the Mumakil but I see where you're coming from.
"Bad computers", yes, because no humans had anything to do with the making of the CGI. Computers just made it. All by themselves.
+Stoney Lonsome "Are you really this thick"
Legolas in the Hobbit hopping on falling bridge stones was even worse.
The Lord Of The Rings movies were made in the late 90s, I would say that they have pretty good CGI for that time period.
No, you are being massively over critical of Legolas in return of the king.
+Simon Watts No, compared to the rest of the awesome cgi in LOTR, that scene was bad
+Shaggy2222 The very brief bit in FotR where he leaps off the cave troll always stood out to me as really bad, but after watching this, I'm not sure it was actually worse. It may have been, but RotK's was much longer.
I think it's more a problem of how exactly a super agile killing machine would look, leaping around on a 70 ft high, charging giant elephant, and where the point of view is, considering the PoV is super stable. No normal human could keep his centre of gravity stable and would fall off. So, being an Elf, with super reactions and super agility, he is going to look strange and rubbery compared to a human who could not do the feat in the first place.
Return of the King? NOPE. And never make fun will smith and his dog in I am Legend, I will fucking mad.
+Jack Troughton It was obvious he was trolling. "Like, obvious to the level of sad for anyone who didn't get it."
I think, for at least concerning the time they came out, Lord of the Rings and the especially the Matrix should be forgiven.
No, the Matrix scene looked like shit at the time. I remember watching it and thinking "Good, this looks so fake"
Which is weird, cause lots of the effect in the Matrix were much better.
lavorrin is absolutely right
I think that shatknado has better special effects that the scorpion king
Shatnado? Is that like, a William Shatner tornado?
Why did this get so many dislikes ??
Lord Of The Rings fans lol.
video and the name is not macthing.These movies are really old.Almost all of the movies were best in their times like king kong matrix and Lotr.
Well many of these cgi shots did look bad for me even back when the movies were released, i remember being really shocked at that fight scene from Matrix Reloaded, shocked at how "rubbery" Neo suddenly looked, also the one in the mummy returns, i thought it was a joke back then aswell! Instantly noticeable on my rented VCR copy of the film.
I found the "zombies" in I am Legend real good : yes their skins are rubber-like, but it is part of the monster created. Like the Pale Man in Pan's Labyrinth.
Oguzhan Those scenes in those three stuck out back at the time as well as now to me
Why all the dislikes? I thought the video was spot on. I guess there are more Scorpion King fans than I had first thought...
+Loftty OG Why would you point out CGI flaws in movies that came out 1-2 DECADES ago. That's like saying we have made zero advancements in our CGI technology in twenty years. If the CGI at the time did not distract or remove the immersion you felt while watching the movie for the first time (the theater) then there shouldn't be anything to point out. Of all the ones mentioned, the only problem I had with any of the movies was the matrix one, as that horrid job on CGI did kill my immersion; the rest were practically spot-on for the dates when they came out.
The CGI also becomes much more noticeable when you re-watch many of these movies in their new "HD" releases, since many of them were not formatted for TVs today (16:9/10 vs 4:3 and 480i vs 1080P+). Should we rate paintings the same way after we stretch their canvases out by hand? That's the problem I have with the reviews on this video myself and judging by the comments, many others feel the same way.
Return of the king fans actually
RubberusDuckus I think these flaws were obvious at time of release.
+Loftty OG Let's see... I'm only 3 minutes into the video and I've already disliked the video, simply because LOTR: RotK and I Am Legend had nothing wrong with the CGI IMO. Only someone actually looking for flaws in something would be able to spot these (or care about them) and people who do that aren't my kind of people, hence why I clicked dislike.
The whole Gods of Egypt movie should be here.
+Назар Ильдаров Although I haven't seen the movie yet, I thought the whole "redeeming" aspect of the movie was the good cgi. I also realize the movie probably cannot be redeemed.
I always thought they could have done a better job of some of the quiddich scenes in philosopher's stone
You really need to update this list. So many excellent examples of bad recently.
Pausing after 54 seconds just to comment: that was a great introduction guys. Compared to the dry witless WatchMojo voiceovers... well there's no comparison. Great script, great clips, good incentive to keep watching.
+Johannes Wiberg agreed
It's like WatchMojo if they had souls
The "NOOOO" at the end 😂
CGI in the matrix is allowed to be bad... It's literally happening in a computer....
+REALhacksDAILY Think about this. In the real world when you use a copy machine, the more you copy the same thing the more each iteration loses it's detail. The same would happen with Mr. Smith agents/clones.
That's a much cooler theory. I just thought the damn robots can't buy a decent gpu...
+il100374 Except that one of the advantages of digital media is that you can produce an exact copy of the data.
He didn't complain about the movies. He complained about the CGI. Stop hating.
+Tohtori Kumiankka I was just going to post this. He's not saying the films are bad (except maybe the Ring 2), he's saying those CG cutscenes were sloppy.
+Shmandalf Exactly!
***** I know right!
+Nullik Yeah! Definitely agree.
I never got how 200+ lb. Jack Black, with a heavy camera on his shoulder, could outrun several super-mutant dinosaurs.
+Stephen Hogan Crystal Meth... :-D
+Stephen Hogan Because the dinos were tasked with having to out Jack Black in a Jack Black movie and you don't try to out Jack Black in a Jack Black movie (and by "out Jack Black", I mean being fucking ridiculous).
+Chris Brown-DeMoreno (AGx)
That sequence went on much too long - and was just not believable.
I grew up long before CGI, monsters used to just be some guy in a rubber suit...
i know why so many dislikes...cause fanboys of these movies cant accept mistakes ._.+
i'm such a great sherluk
+sherluk homs No because these top 10 video channels are fucking crap. Every one, every time.
I dispute the notion that "for the most part it all looks top notch." Most CGI in movies is dreadful. Especially anything organic like animals or aliens.
+GBev2K16 cgi of humans is normally the worse because you recognise the flaws the most.
+GBev2K16 Whoa whoa whoa there... the aliens in Prometheus looked great.
*****
It also helps that they don't get much screen time (in good lighting) or just look so... alien, that we don't notice.
James Patterson, not Robert Patterson (Along Came a Spider)
When I watched the matrix 2 when it first came out, my brother and I couldn't stop laughing at the fight scene.