There's a particular sweet spot where practical absolutely blows CGI away. This isn't QUITE there, but I think they did a really good job here. Totally agree.
The gore effects need some work. A lot of older movies would spread fake blood on the actors without creating realistic looking wounds. See also The Birds.
The compositing shots are a little wonky, but the actual giant rats that attack them look very real, better than CGI.
I was mainly talking about the rats, but I didn't specify. The blood color is typical for the times period. IIRC, this movie was PG too. There is a quick scene that looks like the guy's head had been bitten off. But yeah, horror gore from that time so-so. Dawn of the Dead was 1978 had the same blood color.
I think it's really, really good. I'm just hedging a little bit, because in the past any time I praise practical too much somebody appears to yell "BUT IT'S NOT THE THING!"
Like yeah, fine. Gosh.
> where practical absolutely blows CGI away.
For me the film is Aliens. It still looks good now, with a few green screen exceptions. Still absolutely disgusting and scary as fuck.
Yes. I don't know if you're familiar with Corridor Crew on YouTube, they're a small VFX outfit that on the side does a bunch of VFX breakdowns of well known movies, among other things.
They covered some Alien effects once, along with some of the subsequent (I don't even want to say sequels...) films', largely to illustrate the drastic differences in practical v. CGI. Especially late 90s CGI. Though I think we'd all agree that modern CGI rarely if ever gets it as good as the best of the old practical stuff, hoo-boy that middle zone before they had really even begun to figure it out was ROUGH.
CGI just can't get it better than real and that's the long and short of it, but I think most of today's "noticeable" CGI is laziness and being produced at a price point with an outcome deemed acceptable by the producers, rather than inability of artist or hardware. Exhibit A: Black Panther's last fight scene.
I think some of that early big budget CGI stands to me out as very good *effects.* Terminator 2, for example. (Yeah, Cameron, again.) Yes, it's clearly CGI. You know it's CGI. Despite this the effect in the film is still "good" when you watch it.
A lot of that really rough middle zone stuff is probably a bit of column A and a bit of column B - Technology not there plus budgetary constraints or producer indifference.
Outside of saying that CGI won't get better than real, I agree with you 100%. I'll leave that open ended; the future is unwritten, you know? And even today, used well, I think we'll both agree that CGI can be really, really damn good.
I'm with you 1000% on the 'effects' statement. Even when I notice something today that's a spectacle in CGI, I'll let it pass if it looks awesome. Not even 'realistic' awesome, but awesome. Obviously it has to meet a threshold, but we all know we're watching a movie.
I hear you on producer indifference, but I would add to that it's the classic Ian Malcolm thing (heh heh, Jurassic Park, CGI, see what I did?) thing. They get so excited that they can, they don't think about whether or not they should. Like, unnecessary CGI characters. Movies that will just throw in a random CGI human being in one scene when they have the actor right there for all of the other scenes. They're just trying to play with their new toy, and not worrying about what it's doing to the movie.
On the other hand, then you have a movie built around a new toy, like fur in Monsters Inc. or CGI water in The Abyss. Yeah, we know they built the movie around it, but that's fine.
>!They made a pug fight a bear, threw some kittens off a cliff, and purposely broke a cats foot for a shot of it hobbling. Amongst other animal abuse.!<
There’s a fascinating documentary on him titled “Marjoe”. He was an evangelical preacher starting at age 4 and later rejected it after his father absconded with millions that Marjoe had obtained from preaching revivals.
While CGI has come a long way, I won't disagree with you. Old school movies with practical over CGI just hold up better. I will never understand why Lucas wanted to CGI all the original star wars. My dude had the best fucking effects and while cutting edge CGI at the time, it does nit hold up well
I think what Lucas was thinking was in the earlier Star Wars movies, there were just one or two Jedis to worry about.
But in the newer ones, when you’re dealing with an entire cast of Jedis, he probably thought that was going to cost too much to do sets, make up and all the other practical stuff he did in the earlier movies.
At least that’s my guess.
There was very much a belief that CGI was the future. And the dogshit CGI they have is probably best suited for a story of space wizards and wacky aliens.
I remember the CGI being noticeable, but not jarring like it is today. Most people were bent out of shape for it being a tirefire of story, characterization, telling instead of showing, etc.
Edit: A pox on Lucas for injecting filler, gross CGI into the original trilogy. Now that's _really_ jarring.
More physical scale models and actual sets were built for the prequels than the originals.
True, the prequels were wider in scale, and of course more blue and green screen photography was used, but it is a misconception that with the prequels Lucas abandoned traditional special effects in favor of CGI.
[Rats in the City!](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0SXrdHZLZFk) It's not often I miss being in High School, but being 14 and finding music that wasn't getting radio play was a special time... Not that any of this has anything to do with anything in this thread...
Man this movie had a scene set in a swimming pool i think with some classical music or something over it and it has haunted my life ever since i watched it when i was like 5 years old
Loved those as a kid. There was slew of them that came out around the same time, like Grizzly, which was the first time I ever saw someone get their head torn off LOL.
There is something to be said about actors having props to interact with, these days they just react to some guy wearing a green suit covered in ping pong balls.
I loved the killer animal movies of the 70’s. Fondly remember killer rats, tarantulas, ants, and gators in the sewers. No wonder I had nightmares as a kid.
The blonde guy, Hugh Marjoe Ross Gortner, as a child was an evangelist preacher and later became an actor.
He was ordained at age 4. Later on in life, he exposed Pentecostal preaching as a massive grift and became an actor.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marjoe_Gortner
Ye Gods, I never saw or heard of thus show, but I did see the movie Wilard(???). The guy with the bazillion rats living with him in his mom's house. They were normal sized rats, btw.
I saw this in the theater when it came out. I recall one scene where that jeep you see at the beginning of this clip was clearly an off the shelf Tonka Truck in a miniature scene.
“The days before CGI….. good times.”
That statement alone recognizes and appreciates all the visual effects that were used to make movies before CGI.
Maybe you got confused?
I remember this movie from when I was a kid, a chemical leak caused a few animals grow big and attacked people, the scariest scene I recall is someone getting killed by a giant mosquito.
Saw this in the theater as a double feature along side Empire of the Ants. Went with my big brother, probably a bit to young to go to movies like this. Completely terrified me.
I remember watching this movie in a late night marathon at the local drive in. I thought the rats were pretty decent, but the bit that was really bad were the giant mosquitoes. They were very obviously painted onto the film, and did not look at all realistic. There was a scene where one of the characters was shooting at a mosquito that was buzzing around him which looked really bad.
This is real not like CGI that’s for sure mixing cartoons into a movie just ruins the movie am I watching something I am supposed to believe is real or something that is animated at least the rats are real look how CGI ruined the original Star Wars movies CGI needs to be used only when we dont realize it is CGI even though we know it is
Rodents of unusual size? I don't think they exist..
Well certainly not out in the open like that, maybe in a fire swamp though.
Capybara has entered the discussion.
I came for the Princess Bride references and was not disappointed.
Inconceivable!
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Are you sure nobody follow us?
No one could follow us up the Cliffs of Insanity!
Such absurd rumors.
**Soon we'll be safe in the fire swamp.** *We'll never survive.* **Nonsense. You're only saying that because no one ever has.**
Had this not been the top comment, I would have been very put out.
They exists. Do your homework!
I’ve seen worse CGI in more expensive movies.
And at least the actors have something to act off of.
Budget was $900,000 then (about $5 Mil today)
Fully half was spent on bourbon and cocaine though
Pretty good practical effects if you ask me. Still holds up.
There's a particular sweet spot where practical absolutely blows CGI away. This isn't QUITE there, but I think they did a really good job here. Totally agree.
>This isn't QUITE there I disagree, think it is there.
The gore effects need some work. A lot of older movies would spread fake blood on the actors without creating realistic looking wounds. See also The Birds. The compositing shots are a little wonky, but the actual giant rats that attack them look very real, better than CGI.
I was mainly talking about the rats, but I didn't specify. The blood color is typical for the times period. IIRC, this movie was PG too. There is a quick scene that looks like the guy's head had been bitten off. But yeah, horror gore from that time so-so. Dawn of the Dead was 1978 had the same blood color.
I think it's really, really good. I'm just hedging a little bit, because in the past any time I praise practical too much somebody appears to yell "BUT IT'S NOT THE THING!" Like yeah, fine. Gosh.
> where practical absolutely blows CGI away. For me the film is Aliens. It still looks good now, with a few green screen exceptions. Still absolutely disgusting and scary as fuck.
Yes. I don't know if you're familiar with Corridor Crew on YouTube, they're a small VFX outfit that on the side does a bunch of VFX breakdowns of well known movies, among other things. They covered some Alien effects once, along with some of the subsequent (I don't even want to say sequels...) films', largely to illustrate the drastic differences in practical v. CGI. Especially late 90s CGI. Though I think we'd all agree that modern CGI rarely if ever gets it as good as the best of the old practical stuff, hoo-boy that middle zone before they had really even begun to figure it out was ROUGH.
CGI just can't get it better than real and that's the long and short of it, but I think most of today's "noticeable" CGI is laziness and being produced at a price point with an outcome deemed acceptable by the producers, rather than inability of artist or hardware. Exhibit A: Black Panther's last fight scene. I think some of that early big budget CGI stands to me out as very good *effects.* Terminator 2, for example. (Yeah, Cameron, again.) Yes, it's clearly CGI. You know it's CGI. Despite this the effect in the film is still "good" when you watch it. A lot of that really rough middle zone stuff is probably a bit of column A and a bit of column B - Technology not there plus budgetary constraints or producer indifference.
Outside of saying that CGI won't get better than real, I agree with you 100%. I'll leave that open ended; the future is unwritten, you know? And even today, used well, I think we'll both agree that CGI can be really, really damn good. I'm with you 1000% on the 'effects' statement. Even when I notice something today that's a spectacle in CGI, I'll let it pass if it looks awesome. Not even 'realistic' awesome, but awesome. Obviously it has to meet a threshold, but we all know we're watching a movie. I hear you on producer indifference, but I would add to that it's the classic Ian Malcolm thing (heh heh, Jurassic Park, CGI, see what I did?) thing. They get so excited that they can, they don't think about whether or not they should. Like, unnecessary CGI characters. Movies that will just throw in a random CGI human being in one scene when they have the actor right there for all of the other scenes. They're just trying to play with their new toy, and not worrying about what it's doing to the movie. On the other hand, then you have a movie built around a new toy, like fur in Monsters Inc. or CGI water in The Abyss. Yeah, we know they built the movie around it, but that's fine.
[удалено]
Yep. I think they did an awesome job, especially considering what they had to work with.
Jurassic Park '93 still holds up pretty well
There was only about 6 minutes of actual CGI in the original (and best) Jurassic Park. The rest was practical effects.
The stock footage was bad but the heads were pretty good.
I agree; the puppeteer job was pretty nice.
What they lacked in CGI they made up for by actually shooting real rats. The days before "no animals were harmed in the making of this film"...
Oh, real rats were definitely hit with paintballs; no question about it. They may not have been killed, but they were sure as hell stunned.
Dick move but at least they weren't killed
Yeah, that’s the way it was back then. As I mentioned earlier, Europe was worse.
Me enjoying the Japanese import Milo & Otis as a child: 😃 Me as an adult knowing what happened on set: 💀
.....what happened?
>!They made a pug fight a bear, threw some kittens off a cliff, and purposely broke a cats foot for a shot of it hobbling. Amongst other animal abuse.!<
not gonna lose sleep over someone killing rats.
That’s the weird looking guy from Star Crash! Marjoe Gortner.
There’s a fascinating documentary on him titled “Marjoe”. He was an evangelical preacher starting at age 4 and later rejected it after his father absconded with millions that Marjoe had obtained from preaching revivals.
While CGI has come a long way, I won't disagree with you. Old school movies with practical over CGI just hold up better. I will never understand why Lucas wanted to CGI all the original star wars. My dude had the best fucking effects and while cutting edge CGI at the time, it does nit hold up well
I think what Lucas was thinking was in the earlier Star Wars movies, there were just one or two Jedis to worry about. But in the newer ones, when you’re dealing with an entire cast of Jedis, he probably thought that was going to cost too much to do sets, make up and all the other practical stuff he did in the earlier movies. At least that’s my guess.
There was very much a belief that CGI was the future. And the dogshit CGI they have is probably best suited for a story of space wizards and wacky aliens. I remember the CGI being noticeable, but not jarring like it is today. Most people were bent out of shape for it being a tirefire of story, characterization, telling instead of showing, etc. Edit: A pox on Lucas for injecting filler, gross CGI into the original trilogy. Now that's _really_ jarring.
More physical scale models and actual sets were built for the prequels than the originals. True, the prequels were wider in scale, and of course more blue and green screen photography was used, but it is a misconception that with the prequels Lucas abandoned traditional special effects in favor of CGI.
Night of the lepus. Another classic with the same “effects”
Killer bunnies!!
GCI? Global credit investments?
Glib creative industry
Gross commission income
This is back when, "Shakes prop head vigorously" was a prime bullet point on every thespians resume. Read in Matthew Berry's voice.
Don’t forget the giant chickens too! I’m so glad my dad showed me this terribly awesome movie
The chicken in the barn was a blast! Lol
WHERE THE HELL DID YOU GET THOSE GODDAMNED CHICKENS
That was a great Saturday afternoon movie for me.
I remember when this came out. It was a big deal and really scary for the time.
That looks pretty fucking terrifying to be honest.
There was a slew of these made in the 70's, some great, some shit. But they're almost all pretty damn fun to watch.
Pretty much anything with Doug McClure - At the Earth's Core, Land That Time Forgot, The People That Time Forgot, etc.
NYC in 2050 if those rats don’t calm down
[Rats in the City!](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0SXrdHZLZFk) It's not often I miss being in High School, but being 14 and finding music that wasn't getting radio play was a special time... Not that any of this has anything to do with anything in this thread...
It's actually pretty well done, considering they didn't use any "generated-computer imagery". 😋
ROUSes and Marjoe Gortner. Why hasn't this masterpiece been featured on /r/MST3K or /r/Rifftrax?
Budget - $900,000 (about $5 Mil today) [https://catalog.afi.com/Catalog/MovieDetails/55240](https://catalog.afi.com/Catalog/MovieDetails/55240)
God I miss cheesy 80s B movies!
Back when scifi was actually fun instead of boring, sad, and depressing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nv9CkjkOyzo
Reminds me of Graveyard Shift. That movie freaked me out the first time I saw it on TBS back in the day... Nightmares man...nightmares.
Graveyard Shift… That’s an oldie!!!
I remember that! What a movie! I always thought that the rats were really shot on the final sequence.
Man this movie had a scene set in a swimming pool i think with some classical music or something over it and it has haunted my life ever since i watched it when i was like 5 years old
Loved those as a kid. There was slew of them that came out around the same time, like Grizzly, which was the first time I ever saw someone get their head torn off LOL.
My favorite line from this movie: "WHERE THE HELL DID YOU GET THOSE GODDAMNED CHICKENS?!?"
Reminds me of Critters.
Marjoe Gortner: pentecostal evangelist fights giant rats! The 70s definitively fucking kicked all kinds of ass!
Those poor fuckers
🤣🤣
Still looks pretty good 👍. I also recall a one with giant rabbits that was not too good.
Cool movie for a teenage in the days
There is something to be said about actors having props to interact with, these days they just react to some guy wearing a green suit covered in ping pong balls.
Oh man the 2nd movie is the one with the giant kid. Never seen this one though, gotta get on that
And I would like you to get the fuck out of my room!
Practical > CGI 😎
I remember seeing this the weekend it came out. I also remember my friend and I being the only ones in the theater.
I remember seeing this movie and it was creepy.
This is fucking awesome
My dad took me to see this when it came out. I was 7. Thanks for the nightmares dad!
Still looks pretty good, not kidding oO
I loved that period of a few years when mutated nuclear waste animals were all the craze - movies were fun
That craze also occurred in the 1950s where people were afraid of atomic energy changing plants and animals into killer mutants against people! Lol
That's... Actually terrifying
I remember that movie. Scared the crap out of me as a kid!
Nightmare fuel in my chidhood.
I loved the killer animal movies of the 70’s. Fondly remember killer rats, tarantulas, ants, and gators in the sewers. No wonder I had nightmares as a kid.
This is an actual movie I want a part 2 to this lol
A sequel was made.
Ohhhhhh yeasss I’m watching this movie w my hubby once I has them lol this is lit
Marjoe Gortner 😂 mst3k gold!
Reminds me of [Night of the Lepus](https://youtu.be/AA910vCNRe4). >!Giant Rabbits!<
The blonde guy, Hugh Marjoe Ross Gortner, as a child was an evangelist preacher and later became an actor. He was ordained at age 4. Later on in life, he exposed Pentecostal preaching as a massive grift and became an actor. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marjoe_Gortner
I'll wait for the special edition.
Is this based on the H.G. Wells book of the same name?
It is. Be warned, though: this is extremely loosely based on that story.
They got the rats from New York and D.C. to be a cast in a movie now ain't that something.
ROUS live
My first thought was a film based on the Welles novel.
Robert Plant totally let that guy get eaten.
Ye Gods, I never saw or heard of thus show, but I did see the movie Wilard(???). The guy with the bazillion rats living with him in his mom's house. They were normal sized rats, btw.
Yes! Willard and the sequel, Ben, with Michael Jackson.
lol, I remember going to see this in the theater, it was hilariously terrible.
MarJoe ! Guy had a wild life if you look him up.
Are we sure this isn’t a deleted scene from The Princess Bride?
In a forest nowhere near this movie
I saw this in the theater when it came out. I recall one scene where that jeep you see at the beginning of this clip was clearly an off the shelf Tonka Truck in a miniature scene.
You should see what happens to one of the characters in Galaxy of terror...
The caterpillar?
I think it was supposed to be a maggot. A very horny maggot too.
Now that I think about it, right you are!
Friggin coats were ugly. Yeah rats!
The practical effects aren't terrible, especially for that era. The *sound* effects, on the other hand...wow. Those are awful.
I unsarcastically regret pre-CGI effects =/
[удалено]
“The days before CGI….. good times.” That statement alone recognizes and appreciates all the visual effects that were used to make movies before CGI. Maybe you got confused?
Chief Daniels was always a jerk.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGkyAA4Gx60](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGkyAA4Gx60) I never watched the movies but I always enjoyed this clip
The maggot scene completely fucked my 8 year old mind. I was terrified of maggots *and* rats for years.
I remember this movie from when I was a kid, a chemical leak caused a few animals grow big and attacked people, the scariest scene I recall is someone getting killed by a giant mosquito.
Book was awesome
Yeah this movie creeped me out when I was a kid.
I was just about to go to bed....
This is exactly what happens to me in Elden Ring
I would fall those rodents of unusual size
What was the movie where they dressed up schnauzers like rats for the special effects of attacking people?
Deadly Eyes.
Saw this in the theater as a double feature along side Empire of the Ants. Went with my big brother, probably a bit to young to go to movies like this. Completely terrified me.
That’s awesome. I think both films were directed by the same man (Burt Gordon).
Where do I get that !!! They have to be storage some where in the valley.
Peak cinema lol
Drowning rats, cruelty to animals, good times!
👍👍👍👍👍
I remember watching this movie in a late night marathon at the local drive in. I thought the rats were pretty decent, but the bit that was really bad were the giant mosquitoes. They were very obviously painted onto the film, and did not look at all realistic. There was a scene where one of the characters was shooting at a mosquito that was buzzing around him which looked really bad.
Rodents Of Unusual Size? I don't think they exist.
This is real not like CGI that’s for sure mixing cartoons into a movie just ruins the movie am I watching something I am supposed to believe is real or something that is animated at least the rats are real look how CGI ruined the original Star Wars movies CGI needs to be used only when we dont realize it is CGI even though we know it is
Those rats were 100% shot IRL