Seven Times Old School Effects Beat CGI in Horror/Sci-Fi Movies

 

In the realm of horror and science fiction, the battle between practical effects and computer-generated imagery (CGI) has raged for years. While CGI has undeniably opened up new possibilities for filmmakers, there's a timeless charm and visceral impact to practical effects that continue to reign supreme. Both are art forms and sadly, the old school practical effects artistry is on life support if not already brain-dead and just waiting for the plug to be pulled.

When it comes to horror and sci-fi movies, practical effects often have the edge. They can be more believable and immersive, and they can help to create a sense of unease and dread. CGI, on the other hand, can sometimes look fake and cartoonish, especially when it's not done well. Let's delve deeper into seven instances where old-school practical effects left a lasting mark, contrasting them with moments where CGI fell short in horror and sci-fi cinema.

1. "The Thing" (1982) vs. "The Thing" (2011): John Carpenter's "The Thing" is celebrated for its grotesque practical creature effects, designed by Rob Bottin. Each alien transformation Rob Bottin accomplishes, from the twisted dogs to the iconic head-spider, was painstakingly crafted. In the 2011 prequel, CGI was extensively used for the creature design, resulting in a less tangible and somewhat lackluster result by comparison. The effects in the John Carpenter remake (lest we forget the original 1951 classic "The Thing from Another World") were gritty and real whereas the CGI "prequel" was nightmarish but much less convincing as a believable transformation. For example, there were creatures that seem to defy gravity and physics - not something that is a drawback when actually dealing with gravity and physics.

2. "The Howling" (1981) vs. "Howl" (2015): Rick Baker with assistant Rob Botin) provided groundbreaking werewolf transformations in the original "The Howling" set a standard for lycanthropic horror. In front of the unflinching eye of the camera, we saw man become beast in horrific real-time. In contrast, "Howl" relied heavily on CGI for its wolfish horrors, losing not only the tactile terror that practical effects provided but creating a ludicrous approximation of a werewolf that was more akin to a Tom & Jerry episode.

3. "Creepshow" (1982) vs. "Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark" (2006): The original "Creepshow," a collaborative effort between George A. Romero and Stephen King, featured practical effects that gave each anthology tale its unique, tangible horror. Special effects guru Tom Savini pulled off some incredible practical effects for the film. In Guillermo del Toro's "Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark", the shift to CGI robbed the scares of their eerie charm, making the supernatural elements feel artificial and actually paled in comparison to the nightmarish illustrations by original book illustrator Stephen Gammell. 

4. "Jurassic Park" (1993) vs. "Jurassic World" (2015): Stan Winston's practical and animatronic dinosaurs in "Jurassic Park" were revolutionary, blending seamlessly with live-action. In "Jurassic World," while CGI allowed for more dynamic sequences, the creatures often felt less real and thrilling than their practical counterparts. The CGI is more believable in this franchise, and closer to the original than most of our comparisions, but there is just something more breathtaking about a life-size tyrannosaurus rex than its digital counterpart.

5. "An American Werewolf in London" (1981) vs. "The Wolfman" (2010): Yes, more lycanthropy. The 1981 classic featured astounding transformation sequences, with practical effects designed by Rick Baker, showcasing the painful and grotesque process of becoming a werewolf. In contrast, the CGI-heavy 2010 remake, "The Wolfman," couldn't replicate the same bone-chilling realism, opting for a more virtual approach and focused on pressing the technological envelope for the time. The result is a dated, obsolete movie for the 2010 Wolfman remake whereas An American Werewolf remains timeless.

6. "Poltergeist" (1982) vs. "Poltergeist" (2015):  Tobe Hooper’s original "Poltergeist" terrified audiences with practical ghostly apparitions and tangible horrors. In the 2015 remake, CGI-driven supernatural elements paled in comparison, losing the eeriness of the original to a digital canvas.

7. "Alien" (1979) vs. "Alien: Covenant" (2017): H.R. Giger's practical xenomorph design in Ridley Scott's "Alien" remains an iconic horror creation. Its CGI counterparts in the more recent "Alien: Covenant" lacked the visceral and tactile dread that practical effects conveyed, using pre-established Alien cannon to derive creatures that (while visually cool) really didn't break any new ground.

The landscape of horror and sci-fi cinema continues down its technology-driven path towards the event horizon. No matter what the future holds, however, practical effects continue to hold a special place in the annals of cinema history and fan appreciation. Their tactile, tangible nature provides a sense of realism and horror that CGI often struggles to replicate. While CGI has its merits, these examples remind us that the old-school methods of practical effects still have the power to send shivers down our spines and create enduring cinematic nightmares.