The special effects look like they are from the late 1980s / early 90s
not very impressive.
shareIt's a 1989 film afterall.
shareCompared to any of the crappy marvel or other comic book movies in the past few years, the special effects look pretty damn good.
they were good enough to win an Oscar and are far better than any other special effects movie released in 1989
shareMost of the effects from that era look better than the majority of CGI and green-screen that is used today.
The Abyss looks leagues better visually than most of today's digital films. Moreover, today's cheaper films look better than the more expensive ones. This is because the sets and locations are used to tell the story, and decorated beautifully. In the larger productions, everything looks polished and smooth and synthetic, and the film hardly engrosses as a result..
I'm not a control freak, I just like things my way
You could have checked the year of release literally right by the title before looking like a fool.
shareThe special effects look like they are from the late 1980s / early 90s
Very astute observation...
Why do they give out letter jackets to marching band? It's not a sport! We all know it!
Obviously the CGI can’t compare to what is possible today but it was cutting edge in 1989. Besides the truly impressive stuff isn’t the CGI it was all the practical work that they did actually underwater.
shareIs the CGI that "water tentacle" bit ?
if so i dont see how that could be done any better today.
especially seeing as the thing being portrayed is a physical impossibility that never exists in the real world - how can we say how realistic it is?
Yes, the water tentacle was CGI. I think it looks better today than the morphing effects in T2.
sharehave you seen the new wonka movie trailer?
now THAT looks fake AF
LOL. "hay guis, the sPeCiAl FX look like they are frum 1989, they kind a sUck"
share