In 20 years time, the CGI we see in today's films could be considered dated; all things considered, the CGI isn't all that bad for a 90's film. Jurassic Park holds up rather well and that came out in 93'. If you want some bad CGI, go watch something on the sci-fi channel; that is some shltty stuff right there.
Yea.. please don't beotch about a movie's CGI that started out looking GREAT for the time that still beats out syfy movies in 2014 and onward. This cost a lot of money and it showed. It also had excellent sound design.
1) I love Van Halen, to this day, so the song is still awesome for me. 2) The CGI is still believable. Is it perfect? No, but after 20 years it still looks great.
For me, the only thing that really dates the film is Melissa's cell phone. Still a great movie, IMO.
while the CGI is not perfect it still largely holds up 20 years later.
either way, it's not THAT bad as there are movies newer than this where the effects have dated more.
p.s. i just finished re-watching it just now on July 9th 2016. it's my #6 movie of 1996. i give it a 7/10 which makes it within my Top 218 movies in general. they don't make movies like this anymore, especially ones that still hold up well.
The skies seem too bright during the tornado scenes. I know they had to film in daylight but it seems there would not be bright sun during a tornado...?
With all this CGI and everything, I still find the tornado in "Wizard of Oz" a the best sfx twister ever.
That said, I could accept all the faults in this film if it had ended with Dorothy's launch (usually where I shut it off) without the hokum of those two surviving a direct hit by an F5 tornado.