|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Dec 26, 2018 19:50:54 GMT
...that scene where Dick Jones falls from the skyscraper looks so bad, why did his arms suddenly grow 10 feet long?:
I know special FX were more limited back then, but surely there could have been a way to fix this
|
|
|
|
Post by Popeye Doyle on Dec 26, 2018 20:02:48 GMT
Yeah, it looks goofy as hell. I always liked the make-up effects to appear like Peter Weller had his face grafted onto a cyborg.
|
|
|
|
Post by ck100 on Dec 26, 2018 20:07:53 GMT
It only adds to the humor and charm of the film.
|
|
|
|
Post by darkreviewer2013 on Dec 26, 2018 20:26:29 GMT
It was 1987. Dated effects are to be expected. Part of the era's charm.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Dec 26, 2018 22:34:08 GMT
The walker bot, Ed what’s his name, has aged badly especially in the final fight sequence. Jerky Stop motion seemingly sloppily executed.
The fall is a nitpick, never noticed that arm thing.
Anyway one of the absolute classics for me, more so than terminator
|
|
|
|
Post by James on Dec 26, 2018 22:58:15 GMT
It’s pretty lame but it’s shrugged off to the side.
|
|
|
|
Post by petrolino on Dec 27, 2018 2:10:37 GMT
That was the style of bigtime, high rise fall back then, that superimposition technique. You see it in 'Die Hard, probably right through to 'Cliffhanger'.
|
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Dec 27, 2018 3:12:36 GMT
That was the style of bigtime, high rise fall back then, that superimposition technique. You see it in 'Die Hard, probably right through to 'Cliffhanger'. That's the problem, I'm rewatching the Gruber death scene from "Die Hard", they both came out around the same time, and it looks way better, so there's no excuse. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2018 4:22:36 GMT
That was the style of bigtime, high rise fall back then, that superimposition technique. You see it in 'Die Hard, probably right through to 'Cliffhanger'. That's the problem, I'm rewatching the Gruber death scene from "Die Hard", they both came out around the same time, and it looks way better, so there's no excuse. Agreed. Apparently they used a puppet for Robocop instead of screening an actual drop using an actor with cables like they did in Die Hard. I think Robocop can get away with it because it was tongue-in-cheek to begin with but it is jarring nonetheless. Fun fact about Die Hard is that when they filmed the fall, they told Rickman they would count to ten and then drop him. But they intentionally dropped him ahead of the count so his reaction is legitimate. |
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Dec 27, 2018 4:36:22 GMT
I never noticed until now. Thanks. Thanks a lot.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2018 4:53:53 GMT
I never noticed until now. Thanks. Thanks a lot. You never noticed the Stretch Armstrong effect? I noticed it at the too young age I watched it at. It looks completely unnatural. It doesn't take a thing away from the movie though. I think the uncanny nature of some of the effects have made it age more favorably since it works to juxtapose against the grittier, realistic effects which does a good job of hammering in the already present satire on a "meta" level, so to speak. |
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Dec 27, 2018 4:59:32 GMT
Ronny Cox kept the puppet.
It is really bad.
The puppet of Christopher Lloyd from Star Trek 3 was much more realistic.
Some of Ed-209's animation was pretty sophisticated like in the tower fight they added pre-cgi motion blur to his legs.
|
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Dec 27, 2018 5:04:22 GMT
I never noticed until now. Thanks. Thanks a lot. You never noticed the Stretch Armstrong effect? I noticed it at the too young age I watched it at. It looks completely unnatural. It doesn't take a thing away from the movie though. I think the uncanny nature of some of the effects have made it age more favorably since it works to juxtapose against the grittier, realistic effects which does a good job of hammering in the already present satire on a "meta" level, so to speak. Not really because I thought all of it looked like special effects. The robot was horrible stop motion and they were driving around in Ford Tempos. A one second shot of a dude falling out a window barely registers. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2018 5:07:51 GMT
You never noticed the Stretch Armstrong effect? I noticed it at the too young age I watched it at. It looks completely unnatural. It doesn't take a thing away from the movie though. I think the uncanny nature of some of the effects have made it age more favorably since it works to juxtapose against the grittier, realistic effects which does a good job of hammering in the already present satire on a "meta" level, so to speak. Not really because I thought all of it looked like special effects. The robot was horrible stop motion and they were driving around in Ford Tempos. A one second shot of a dude falling out a window barely registers. That makes sense. What happens immediately before and after is more important in the film and resonant, anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by them1ghtyhumph on Dec 27, 2018 5:49:38 GMT
I like Robocop II better.
|
|
|
|
Post by anthonyrocks on Dec 27, 2018 15:22:45 GMT
...that scene where Dick Jones falls from the skyscraper looks so bad, why did his arms suddenly grow 10 feet long?:
I know special FX were more limited back then, but surely there could have been a way to fix this
Who Cares! It was such a Good Movie overall that I am willing to forgive 1 bad moment in it. |
|
|
|
Post by Catman on Dec 27, 2018 17:09:33 GMT
That's what they get for using Gumby as a stunt double.
|
|
