CGI Candidates

Many great sf/fantasy films achieved wonders with special effects primitive by today's standards. Nowadays, with CGI, far smoother and more realistic effects can certainly be created. Is it a good idea to remake the old movies using new techniques? I say no, and argue that the original King Kong stands in relation to the new Peter Jackson version as the Sistine Ceiling does to the latest work of a grafitti artist. Others will certainly disagree.

However! Even I will admit that there are many old movies based on pretty good ideas, which are let down by the cheapness of their fx. Computer-assisted remakes of those films could do no harm, and might reveal hidden qualities in films currently shown for laughs in the wee small hours. The question is which?

Them, says Charlie.

I suggested The Mole People, which is a bit cheeky since I've never seen it. How about Flash Gordon, though?

Any other ideas most welcome.

Interesting, I just watched I Married A Monster From Outer Space this week. Despite the cheesy title it is a good film. It could be better perhaps with some new special effects. It really depended a lot of the strength of the actor, being able to portray a cold unemotional alien in the body of a human.

I am rather fond of the cheesy 50's horror/sci-fi movies. I will have to think on this for a bit.

Pretty much any film from the 50's that featured a giant creature, be it ants, spider, mantis, rabbits!! would benefit from superior CGI FX because the original's either had real creatures crudely super-imposed over the images on film (ie.Tarantula ..which becomes a laughable floppy puppet by the time Clint Eastwood arrives with the napalm and The Deadly Mantis are two that spring to mind) , or they have giant, unconvincing model creatures like the ants in Them!.

How about The Lost World? The 1960 version is pretty chronic in almost every department. Actually only the casting was really at fault, from Claude Rains to roping in back-projected lizards for the dinosaurs.

At all events I hope they do it quick, while Brian Blessed's still up to playing Challenger.

I just love are three sigs together. The guy from Reefer Madness is just priceless. :p And then Byron with the classic monsters is excellent. And I love W C Fields as Humpty Dumpty, that was pretty well done for 1933.

The original Frankenstein was really well done for an old monster movie.

I just love are three sigs together. The guy from Reefer Madness is just priceless. :p And then Byron with the classic monsters is excellent. And I love W C Fields as Humpty Dumpty, that was pretty well done for 1933.

The original Frankenstein was really well done for an old monster movie.

I always thought that the 'dis-embodied hand' FX in 'The Beast With Five Fingers' were pretty damned effective for 1946...

I always thought that the 'dis-embodied hand' FX in 'The Beast With Five Fingers' were pretty damned effective for 1946...

And that was even before he changed his name to Thing.

How about John Frankenheimer's Prophecy? The mutant bears from that film couldn't look much worse in CGI, I think.

I hope they never so much as cast a wayward eye toward Dragonslayer. Vermithrax, with her 1981 puppetish self, still holds up to and above modern monster movie fare.