Why does it feel like there was so much more money spent on the 1997 sequel (the lost world) compared to this? the CGI in the ''Lost world'' was incredible, the T Rex scenes were an astonishment for 1997. Jurassic world was released 18 years later yet looks like a downgrade. The CGI looks cheap. I just don't know what to say.
shareAs you do not know what to say, why did you say anything??
shareBecause he’s right. The CGI does look bad. Especially compared to the originals.
shareI dunno, I kind of like a lot of the CGI in this. There are a few spots, sure... but, I have to say that I love the Blue, Rex and Mosasaur vs. the Indominus Rex scene towards the end. That has been my favorite Jurassic Park/World moment. My other favorite is still the first time Alan Grant and company see dinosaurs for the first time in the original film.
shareI wonder if Disney owning ILM had anything to do with the lower quality of special effects?
Disney purchased Lucasfilm in 2012, which included ILM.
I think people that are overcriticising movies are either really spoiled or just want attention. No offense
shareI'm guessing there's so much CGI in more recent films that the animation becomes rushed and shared between different companies/departments thus lowering the quality.
The CGI is better in The Lost World probably because they had the best people working on it, and with more time to do it, thanks to CGI not being as universal back then.
It's like when you go to your favorite restaurant or takeaway and over time the quality decreases.