# Old movie special effects that still hold up well **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [November 14, 2007, 3:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-movie-special-effects-that-still-hold-up-well/426329 "2007-11-14T03:42:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2007, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-movie-special-effects-that-still-hold-up-well/426329/41 "2007-11-14T19:04:49Z")
[_Godspell_](http://youtube.com/watch?v=FMWo7eHqhQU) closing seen here, corner-turning scene at 8:00. I once wrote to director David Greene, and he said that when filming those empty-looking Manhattan scenes, there would usually be crowds standing behind barricades just out of camera frame. ---
**Author:** ![awldune](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c77e96/32.png) [@awldune](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/awldune)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2007, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-movie-special-effects-that-still-hold-up-well/426329/42 "2007-11-14T19:13:48Z")
[QUOTE=LonesomePolecat] I can’t believe nobody’s mentioned Fritz Lang’s _Metropolis_, the original special effects extravaganza. The scene where the robot is transformed to look like Maria is absolutely stunning. [/QUOTE] This is what I came to mention. When I saw it a few years ago I was constantly thinking, “How did they DO that?!?” ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2007, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-movie-special-effects-that-still-hold-up-well/426329/43 "2007-11-14T19:18:22Z")
[_Metropolis_ transformation scene.](http://youtube.com/watch?v=k_uMj4MToe0) ---
**Author:** ![Rocketeer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rocketeer/32/4437_2.png) [@Rocketeer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rocketeer)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2007, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-movie-special-effects-that-still-hold-up-well/426329/44 "2007-11-14T19:30:46Z")
In _Werewolf of London_ (1935), the protagonist strides along a row of columns–and as he passes behind each column, he gets a bit more wolflike. Very simple, very clever, very effective. ---
**Author:** ![Don\_Draper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b2d939/32.png) [@Don\_Draper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Don_Draper)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2007, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-movie-special-effects-that-still-hold-up-well/426329/45 "2007-11-14T19:39:26Z")
[QUOTE=Walloon] I once wrote to director David Greene, and he said that when filming those empty-looking Manhattan scenes, there would usually be crowds standing behind barricades just out of camera frame. [/QUOTE] I’ve seen pictures of the filming of [Breakfast at Tiffany’s](http://imdb.com/title/tt0054698/), specifically the iconic scene of Audrey Hepburn at dawn, staring into the windows at Tiffany all alone…except for the crowds six-heads deep that extend for blocks in either diirection, behind barricades, just outside lens-view! And I just imagine the SFX that went into _28 Days Later_ (& _Weeks Later_ as well) to make central London look deserted! ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2007, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-movie-special-effects-that-still-hold-up-well/426329/46 "2007-11-14T19:47:44Z")
> [@](#): > > Godspell closing seen here, corner-turning scene at 8:00. > > I once wrote to director David Greene, and he said that when filming those empty-looking Manhattan scenes, there would usually be crowds standing behind barricades just out of camera frame. This is one of my favorites, because I love shots of Manhattan. I figured this is what they must have done (along with a lot of Suday shooting on Wall Street), simply because there’s no other way to do it. I particularly like the Times Square scene (shot upward to the Bulova Watch billboard, probably the only way anymore to get a deserted-looking Times Square, outside of building your own, or CGI) and the scene with John the Baptist/Judas in the swimming pool in the penthouse, which must have used carefully checked angles to avoid getting any street traffic. Not sure I’d call it “Special Effects”, though, except in the most liberal sense. > [@](#): > > In Werewolf of London (1935), the protagonist strides along a row of columns–and as he passes behind each column, he gets a bit more wolflike. Very simple, very clever, very effective. They did this one in an old Twilight Zone episode, too – the one with the Devil in captivity. A heck of a lot easier on the actor than having to hold still forever while Jack Pierce slowly builds up a full makeup job on you. ---
**Author:** ![Don\_Draper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b2d939/32.png) [@Don\_Draper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Don_Draper)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2007, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-movie-special-effects-that-still-hold-up-well/426329/47 "2007-11-14T20:06:06Z")
[QUOTE=CalMeacham] This is one of my favorites, because I love shots of Manhattan. I figured this is what they must have done (along with a lot of Suday shooting on Wall Street), simply because there’s no other way to do it. I particularly like the Times Square scene (shot upward to the Bulova Watch billboard, probably the only way anymore to get a deserted-looking Times Square, outside of building your own, or CGI) and the scene with John the Baptist/Judas in the swimming pool in the penthouse, which must have used carefully checked angles to avoid getting any street traffic. Not sure I’d call it “Special Effects”, though, except in the most liberal sense. [/QUOTE] I would call it a special effect because they are scenes specifically created by using a camera in such a way as to create an illusion, and cause something unreal to appear real. It may not be as flashy as a battle between X-wing fighters & rebel ships in outer space, but it IS a camera/film-related effect nonetheless, one that could not be generated in another medium such as live theater. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2007, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-movie-special-effects-that-still-hold-up-well/426329/48 "2007-11-14T20:27:58Z")
[QUOTE=Walloon] [_Metropolis_ transformation scene.](http://youtube.com/watch?v=k_uMj4MToe0) [/QUOTE] I forgot how amazing that scene is. That’s special effects as art. I came here to mention King Kong, and the “Jupiter and Beyond the Infinite” sequence in 2001, so I guess my work here is done. ---
**Author:** ![Ronald\_C.Semone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/cc9497/32.png) [@Ronald\_C.Semone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ronald_C.Semone)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2007, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-movie-special-effects-that-still-hold-up-well/426329/49 "2007-11-14T20:29:58Z")
The hurricane scene in Hurricane (1937) has never been bettered. ---
**Author:** ![H3Knuckles](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ba8739/32.png) [@H3Knuckles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/H3Knuckles)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2007, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-movie-special-effects-that-still-hold-up-well/426329/50 "2007-11-14T20:37:45Z")
[QUOTE=Siam Sam] _Return of the Jedi_ is an “old movie”? Pardon me while I go have a good cry. ☹ [/QUOTE] Oh come on! There’s a date of expiration on this stuff. :rolleyes: Yeesh, my mother and father saw it in theaters while she was pregnant (with me), and I’m turning **twenty-five** this Sunday! 😛 As to the OP: Count me as another one who thinks the original versions of the Star Wars trilogy’s spaceships (in spite of the unrealistic way they move) are still pretty damn impressive. I’d also throw in Jurassic Park if no one’s mentioned it. I saw it about a year back and was surprised how well the dinosaurs hold up. Generally speaking, CGI effects tend not to age that well, in my experience. ---
**Author:** ![H3Knuckles](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ba8739/32.png) [@H3Knuckles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/H3Knuckles)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2007, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-movie-special-effects-that-still-hold-up-well/426329/51 "2007-11-14T20:44:20Z")
[QUOTE=H3Knuckles] I’m turning **twenty-five** this Sunday! 😛 [/QUOTE] _laughs out loud at self_ :smack: Why, oh why do I keep adding a year to my age? I’ll be **twenty-four** this Sunday. I was born in '83. PS. Seriously, I’ve been doing that ever since I turned 22. I haven’t the foggiest idea _why_. ---
**Author:** ![chimera57](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/58f4c7/32.png) [@chimera57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chimera57)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2007, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-movie-special-effects-that-still-hold-up-well/426329/52 "2007-11-14T20:44:22Z")
> [@](#): > > The plane crashing into the mountain in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. Just pathetic. Agreed; the plane crash isn’t very good. But that movie has one of my all-time favorite special effects shots. There’s a long shot of Indy, Willie and Short Round emerging from a mine tunnel and finding themselves on a sheer cliff. This was done with a set and an ordinary matte painting … but the filmmakers added a slight rocking motion to give viewers the subliminal impression that the scene was filmed from a helicopter. Brilliant touch. ---
**Author:** ![shy\_guy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a6a055/32.png) [@shy\_guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/shy_guy)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2007, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-movie-special-effects-that-still-hold-up-well/426329/53 "2007-11-14T20:48:03Z")
[QUOTE=H3Knuckles] I’d also throw in Jurassic Park if no one’s mentioned it. I saw it about a year back and was surprised how well the dinosaurs hold up. Generally speaking, CGI effects tend not to age that well, in my experience. [/QUOTE] I actually thought the same thing when I watched the movie again about a year ago (having been _utterly obsessed with it_ when I was eight years old). The dinosaurs in that movie really do hold up quite well, when most CGI before that really, really doesn’t. The liquid metal Terminator from Terminator 2, for instance, isn’t _too bad_ because they were pretty clever in regard to how they used him. But there are some scenes that have him doing stuff that looks so goofy it takes me out of the movie. ---
**Author:** ![lissener](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lissener/32/6139_2.png) [@lissener](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lissener)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2007, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-movie-special-effects-that-still-hold-up-well/426329/54 "2007-11-14T23:39:22Z")
It’s funny, I’ve come to think of pre-digital special effects as part of the inherent cinematic quality that old movies have: it adds to their charm, reminds you that these are works of art, not samples from life, which would be boring. But Mizoguchi’s\* The Lady of Musashino\*, 1951, has a process scene which took my breath away with its realism. The story begins during WWII–probably one of the earliest Japanese films to depict the war. From the title estate, Musashino, we can see to the horizon, where the American airplanes are firebombing Tokyo. I tell you, there’s absolutely no visual clue to suggest that the scene wasn’t filmed during the actual bombing. I’ve never noticed such a seamless process shot it any old film. I don’t know whether it was miniatures, or rear projection, or double exposure, or what, but it was absolutely flawless. ---
**Author:** ![GuanoLad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guanolad/32/42_2.png) [@GuanoLad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GuanoLad)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2007, 12:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-movie-special-effects-that-still-hold-up-well/426329/55 "2007-11-15T00:03:30Z")
[QUOTE=RealityChuck] **King Kong** (the original) obviously. It’s still better than many current films. [/QUOTE] But its _special effects_ don’t hold up well, which is the point of this thread. There are very little stop motion or process shots that are worth their salt from any stage of cinema. ---
**Author:** ![Scissorjack](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c67d28/32.png) [@Scissorjack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scissorjack)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2007, 2:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-movie-special-effects-that-still-hold-up-well/426329/56 "2007-11-15T02:06:34Z")
The “computer” effects for “The Guide” in the old TV series of Hitchhikers Guide - the “babelfish” sequence in particular - are still breathtakingly good when you consider that there wasn’t a pixel in sight: they were all painstakingly hand-animated, right down to the scrolling lines of text, and yet the illusion that this was the screen display of a tiny electronic device {well, tiny for 1981} was absolutely perfect. It still knocks the “The Guide” from the recent movie version into a cocked hat. ---
**Author:** ![Siam\_Sam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d78d45/32.png) [@Siam\_Sam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Siam_Sam)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2007, 2:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-movie-special-effects-that-still-hold-up-well/426329/57 "2007-11-15T02:25:09Z")
[QUOTE=H3Knuckles] Yeesh, my mother and father saw it in theaters while she was pregnant (with me), and I’m turning **twenty-five** this Sunday! 😛 [/QUOTE] Well, Happy Birthday, ya little punk kid. (Grumble, grumble, grumble.) Myself, the special effects in \*Plan 9 from Outer Space \* continue to wow me. ---
**Author:** ![DocCathode](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/doccathode/32/18773_2.png) [@DocCathode](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DocCathode)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2007, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-movie-special-effects-that-still-hold-up-well/426329/58 "2007-11-15T02:47:22Z")
[QUOTE=OneCentStamp] Under “bad,” I’ll go with the monsters in **Clash of the Titans**. In a post-_Star Wars_ world, I don’t see how Ray Harryhausen got any work ever again, but sure enough, he did. And I don’t think he really improved in the decades between _Mighty Joe Young_ or _Jason and the Argonauts_ and _Clash_. Same herky-jerky, claymation-looking beasties. Weak. [/QUOTE] Your eyes must be blind to magic. Harryhausen’s Dynamotion had, and still has, magic. From this time forward, we meet only as enemies. ---
**Author:** ![Peter\_Morris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/peter_morris/32/359_2.png) [@Peter\_Morris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peter_Morris)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2007, 4:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-movie-special-effects-that-still-hold-up-well/426329/59 "2007-11-15T04:48:20Z")
Another vote for Metropolis, especially the shots of the city. It has never been bettered. It utterly destroys other big future city shots. I can even forgive the biplanes flying around the sky. ---
**Author:** ![Sublight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/439d5e/32.png) [@Sublight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sublight)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2007, 7:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-movie-special-effects-that-still-hold-up-well/426329/60 "2007-11-15T07:33:39Z")
[QUOTE=GuanoLad] But its _special effects_ don’t hold up well, which is the point of this thread. There are very little stop motion or process shots that are worth their salt from any stage of cinema. [/QUOTE] I don’t know about that, I’ve seen lots of movies that try to use gorillas, and until PJ’s remake, I don’t think I’ve seen one that managed to be more realistic than the original Kong. Most movie gorillas are absolutely pathetic. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-movie-special-effects-that-still-hold-up-well/426329.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/old-movie-special-effects-that-still-hold-up-well/426329.md?page=4)