Let me ask you all a question mostly about the Stampede scene I just want to know what are your thoughts about the scene I recently rewatch that clip and honestly the first time I saw it on Tv it was a tense scene but looking at it now what you all think?
shareI probably need to watch this film again (can't believe it's over 10 years old) but I imagine the stampede scene has effects that haven't aged well. I caught a little of this film on Syfy channel not long ago and some of the effects looked dated. I still like this movie though.
RIP
Paul Gray
1972-2010
I haven't seen it in years myself and not that it is a bad movie far from it it's just looking at the stampede scene yes the effects didn't aged too good plus it is honestly one of the most How should I put it? It would never work, I mean having Jack Black's character running around with a camera on his shoulder trying to avoid a herd of Brontosaurus and little meat eating dinosaurs it just one scene I find hard to believe with that. but again King Kong isn't a bad movie far from it
share[deleted]
Now I normally try to be fair to artists on movies like if it was animation or they use CGI in a movie to give them a break because I know thats hard work and not a easy job as the old saying goes "If it was easy everyone would do it" and not that the stampede scene is awful no no it's not just some of the CGI is decent the Wilhelm scream still amazing to me how it is use more often then a real actor's scream but never the less the stampede scene was tense but just some of the effects didn't age too well but still a good scene
shareThe whole scene should be redone. it goes on too long and the cgi needs finishing off.
the V Rex scene should be redone too as it's over the top.
Walking on water is like finding a non fake female profile on a dating site...a miracle!
For me, it's the worst scene in the movie. I can't watch it without being distracted by the horrible CGI. It's just shameful for a movie of this scale (and budget). I saw somebody on here say it looked "dated" and would probably look better if it was made today. I don't believe that is accurate. There were plenty of other movies made at or before 2005 with much better CGI.
share"I can't watch it without being distracted by the horrible CGI"
The CGI isn't horrible, especially not in comparison to some of the really atrocious CG films.
That particular scene is pretty badly done, especially when you take into account the budget, production company (WETA) and studio behind it.
share"That particular scene is pretty badly done, especially when you take into account the budget, production company (WETA) and studio behind it."
Not really. I didn't see any issues with regards to lighting, rendering or clipping.
It was way too long and dragged out. It completely detracted from the movie and eventually just gets silly.
shareI think the CGI is far above average in terms of design, attention to detail, lighting and choreopgraphy. Even if there is some blur and perhaps the detail level (polygons etc) could be a little bit higher now.
However it is a very silly scene, and I think that is all there is to it. I can live with it. It's all over the top there, it's supposed to be part of the fun and "dread".
I found this actually paralleled somewhat nicely with the city scenes, and might be seen as a balance to give one really the feeling of "another world" and hidden depths (Heart of Darkness), as it were...