The CGI on The Scorpion King
lucks like Something from a ps2 game.
In One Word POOR!
but the rock is stil very good in this movie.
buy the way Southland Tales was a bad bad movie.
ya when i saw that i almost turned it off
MovieChat Forums > The Mummy Returns (2001) Discussion > The CGI on The Scorpion King
[deleted]
The CGI for the Mummy looks like crap as well, comparing it to the first movie in my opinion. I watched the first movie last week, and was watching this one earlier, and the first looked a lot more real.
shareHorrible cgi, it really ruins the ending. I would be embarrassed to have this in my film if I were director.
shareI totally agree. A lot of CGI strikes me that way though.
For each tree is known by its own fruit.
No kidding, that was so bad I almost laughed out loud...literally LOL. What happened? I have seen movies prior to this one and the effects were better than that.
sharethey've already said they ran outta time..which is why it doesn't look so well(duh)
though i think they should go back and finish it up..
Mmmm... I kinda did LOL. Pretty hard.
It looks entirely unrendered, which is unfortunate. At least dim the lighting so we could see less of that blobiness.
"I just love the way Keanu looks at me while he's kissing me." -Sandra Bullock
And ya know what really sucks, by 2001, they were getting pretty good at CGI.
2001 CGI Loaded Flicks:
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone
Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring
Pearl Harbor
Jurassic Park 3
Heck the CGI in 1999's Matrix and 2000's XMEN were great compared to The Mummy Returns.
I just think they wanted to cut the budget and pay some kid out of high school 10 Grand to design the Scorpion King.
Even if they ran out of time before they could perfect the scorpian kings CGI, they should have shown LESS of him so people couldn't see just how "incomplete" the design was..if the promotional advertisements werent already out, the studio should have pushed back the release date, because that was a key part of the movie, the whole movie focuses on the scorpian kings army.
I remember when this first came out, I was anticipating what the scorpian king would look like and there was a good amount of hype around the movie, then i saw him and i was truly dissapointed.
oh well, the rest of the movie was still good. First was the best though!
[deleted]
This is the one of the only things I didn't like about TMR. IMO they should have just had the Rock as a human like in the prologue, and not like some weird gigantic scorpion thing. I think it would've been a lot more realistic and exciting. Probably cheaper as well.
shareYou know what, I for one am not taken out of the film by the scorpion king. I actually think the visual effect is pretty good, for its time.
What I think happened is that it was just a few years ahead of its time. It was 2001 and yeah CGI effects were starting to really come out and look good, but to the best of my knowledge before this movie that had not really done a lot of human flesh. Nowaday they do, even though "every it seems can still tells it's fake"
You know, whatever I like the effect. If you really look at it, the scorpion part of the body looks really good, it's only the face really. I think that might be partially because, it is The Rock. Everyone knows what he looks like and what his face and skin looks like. So the animation seems a little off.
As for the other films of 2001 with visual effects.
Jurassic Park III...well I don't think the dinosaurs look as good in this one as they did in Jurassic Park or the Lost World.
Harry Potter I actually thought that movies effects were pretty bad and kinda stood out (the snake at the zoo- tho they got much better in COS)
LOTR- great effects, but they were not really animating a lot of human characters...they were a lot of creatures...they look right because I have no point of reference in the real world.
even later films to come all have a moment of two of just a bad visual effect-- Spider-Man 2 for me that first scene of spider-man swinging through NY with the pizza's looks horrible and that is the first shot of the movie...they get better after that, but its just things we filmgoers notice.
i don't know, I still think that they haven't quite got the human flesh tones quite right for CGI
I've got to disagree that the cgi was ok for the era. It was not ok. It was foul. It makes a series known for its good effects TANK.
Forget fixing the Star Wars IV-VI with "digital remastering".
Let's see what those three minutes of Scorpion King would look like if someone took the time to sand it down and clean up the edges.
Should have used a giant mechanical rig that was a scorpion legs thing and have the Rock sit on top of it. You'd have to pay him to act and it would cost a lot, but it'd be worth it.
shareFake scorpion legs and the real rock would have bee far better.
Those foolish enough to move from canada to america increase the average I.Q. of both countries
It wasn't good for its ERA. I remember seeing the movie in 2001 and still thinking it looked awfully fake...Not sure how they let this slip...
Furthermore, I remember a big hype from this movie was the fact The Rock was in it...I was dissappointed when I saw a CGI lookalike and not him.
Fact: 31.5% of IMDb users wanted Avatar to win Best Picture.
Fact: 31.5% of IMDb users are idiots.
I have to agree it was terrible CGI. I wonder if ILM was too busy on Pearl Harbor and Jurassic Park 3 at the time and had to neglect this movie.
share