The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Crappy Film CGI is worse than any “AI slop”
| Peach ungodly fat ankles | 07/01/25 |
| Adventurous Shimmering Principal's Office | 07/01/25 |
| Peach ungodly fat ankles | 07/01/25 |
| Talented parlour windowlicker | 07/01/25 |
| Peach ungodly fat ankles | 07/01/25 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: July 1st, 2025 8:13 AM Author: Peach ungodly fat ankles (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5744889&forum_id=2)#49062617) |
Date: July 1st, 2025 8:37 AM Author: Adventurous Shimmering Principal's Office trying to watch something from early 2000s with bad CGI is ruinous. This is why practical effects are necessary. While the FX from 80s monster movies have definitely aged they are at least still watchable and appreciable for the craft that went into them. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5744889&forum_id=2)#49062648) |
 |
Date: July 1st, 2025 11:28 AM Author: Peach ungodly fat ankles Even Star Wars prequels looked kind of dodgy in some spots. Good CGI isn’t even that expensive. Westerners just suck at making things efficiently. District 9 looked impressive iirc and it had a lowish budget iirc. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5744889&forum_id=2)#49063141) |
|
Date: July 1st, 2025 8:44 AM Author: Talented parlour windowlicker James Bond surfing in die another day (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5744889&forum_id=2)#49062660) |
|
Date: July 1st, 2025 11:24 AM Author: Peach ungodly fat ankles Not even as bad as you’d think (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5744889&forum_id=2)#49063133) |