The minotaur was far too unconvincing in terms of visual effects. Looked like something out of a computer game, not to mention the fact it's basically a giant bull not a minotaur. Wouldn't it be better if they made a man in a costume with maybe robotic legs or something? I mean, look at the monsters in star wars and aliens, totally convincing, no visuals.
shareBudget.
shareI disagree, the CGI was better than any TV/SciFi channel/low budget film I've seen. There was no fuzz around the edges, and they got the colouring correct, which is a major problem with live action blending.
I'm fed up of seeing dodgy massive creatures, shaky vampires, and badly matted CGI tentacles. They even got the motion blur right on this one. Check out Rock Monster if you want to see the normal CGI crap.
This beast actually looked OK!
Ditto. I've seen much worse on Sci-Fi!
Tho it is dark . . . know our flag . . . is still there.
I actually thought one of the few which didn't suck about 'Minotaur' was the special effects, which is suprising given it's lineage.
shareThere are worse special effects.
I'd rather be disemboweled with a toothbrush.