Worst CGI / Special FX In a Major Release?

[Defshep]

I just saw Transporter 2. I was pretty psyched because I enjoyed the first one so much. Well, I was a little disappointed. The story was interesting enough (hey, these movies are about the action anyway!), if not a little contrived from last year's "Man On Fire". Okay, this is not really a review of the film, or the action. The fight sequences were great, but the car sequences involved ALOT of CGI! Yeah, the chase scenes are supposed to be over the top, ala 007. The problem is that the CGI was not done well - at all. It surprised me that so much was used, considering how "real time" the driving stunts were in the first. You really felt like these ridiculous feats were actually being performed before your eyes. You'd think with basically the same team working on this flick, the gritty feel would remain. Don't get me wrong, I did like the movie. I also realize they made it for around 32 million. But sometimes it's just better to have no special effects rather than have them poorly done. It just kinda took me out of the movie. Maybe I'm being too picky.
What's the worst FX you've seen in a major studio release?

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I have several really bad movies. As a lover of disaster movies, I thought I would be surely into a movie called Day of the Twister. Well, when I saw the movie, I regirgitated several of the last meals I had in the past two or three days watching this movie. Great concept, horrible CGI, horrible implimentation. Okay, let's not even talk about Escape from LA. Just disgusting, simple unpalatable, the humanitites ohhhhhh.......okay I am betta.

[RGA]

Agree - Escape from LA was terrible use of visuals. I have not seen worse myself. Though I also thought it was a pretty lousy movie as well.

[Defshep]

Yep, Escape from L.A. was another flick destroyed by poor computer graphics. If you don't have a Speilberg budget, don't plan sequences around visual effects you can't afford. Escape from New York was a great example on what can be accomplished on a limited budget. It makes you wonder what studio exec screens these cheeseball flicks and says, WOW! This is great! Cheap CGI has taken away a certain amount of creativity. My kids may chuckle at Clash of the Titans and Sinbad, but at least there was heart involved.

[twochannelsonly]

I hate it when Im in agreement with almost everyone here.

Escape from LA gets my vote too...and a honorable mention my most recent flop the Bill murray movie
The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou

[JSE]

I hate it when Im in agreement with almost everyone here.

Escape from LA gets my vote too...and a honorable mention my most recent flop the Bill murray movie
The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou

The Life Aqautic? The CGI was terrible on purpose. I thought the corny CGI was a great effect.

See, we disagree. Hopefully you feel better now!

JSE

[20to20K]

I had to painful displeasure of watching this dreadful movie while snow bound in a hotel while on business in Denver and the movie was not only terrible, but the effects were terrible as well. I later found out it was one of those card-carrying Sci-Fi geek club genres and now I'm wondering if the effects were bad on purpose. I guess that would disqualify it.

[Defshep]

Some of the CGI in Deep Blue Sea (killer sharks) was crude, but the flick moved so fast it didn't seem to matter. How about Anaconda? Along Came a Spider (Morgan Freeman) had a ridiculous scene involving a Corvette crashing off a bridge. I don't think I even made it through that whole movie...
Maybe it's time go back to using stunt drivers and guys in rubber monster suits.

[s dog]

I went and seen Stealth at the theater a while back and the fighter jets looked like they were made out of cardboard.

[Defshep]

Yeah, the previews kinda showed too much - as in excessive CGI. That's strange considering the semi-high profile cast and budget. We may like Playstation and Xbox, but we don't want our movies to look like video games!