Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Article here about the upcoming ceremony being given by VES - the Visual Effects Society. It's not just about great FX; it's about what films were the most influencial on others.

http://www.animationmagazine.net/article/6848



For those who just want to see the list, here.

The VES 50

1. Star Wars (1977)
2. Blade Runner (1982)
3. 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)
3. The Matrix (1999)
5. Jurassic Park (1993)
6. Tron (1982)
7. King Kong (1933)
8. Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977)
9. Alien (1979)
10. The Abyss (1989)
11. The Empire Strikes Back (1980)
12. Metropolis (1927)
13. A Trip to the Moon (1902)
14. Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991)
15. The Wizard of Oz (1939)
16. Who Framed Roger Rabbit (1988)
17. Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)
18. Titanic (1997)
19. Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)
20. Jason and the Argonauts (1963)
20. E.T. the Extraterrestrial (1982)
22. Toy Story (1995)
23. Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest (2006)
24. The Ten Commandments (1956)
25. The War of the Worlds (1953)
25. Forrest Gump (1994)
25. Citizen Kane (1941)
25 The Seventh Voyage of Sinbad (1958)
25. 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea (1954)
30. The Terminator (1984)
31. Aliens (1986)
32. Mary Poppins (1964)
33. Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003)
34. Forbidden Planet (1956)
35. Babe (1995)
36. The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951)
36. Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002)
38. King Kong (2005)
39. Planet of the Apes (1968)
40. Fantastic Voyage (1966)
41. Jaws (1975)
41. Ghostbusters (1984)
43. Sin City (2005)
44. Superman: The Movie (1978)
45. Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937)
46. The Lost World (1925)

thats only 46

Pretty weird list. I never found 2001: A Space Odyssey to be much of a visual film. I love it, but not for the visual effects.

And I think Back to the Future belongs on the list.

The list order is based on groundbreaking and pioneering, rather than who's best.
The Phantom Menace should be on the list, for having the first CGI supporting character in Jar Jar. Love him or hate him, no one denies he didn't look as real as the living actors.

It's funny how Spielbergh has 5 movies in there.

What's so great about Pirates of the Caribbean 2 effects....its pretty much on par with any other big budget movie now.

Also, I can see Lord of Rings being on it, especially in the top 20...but what's so different between all three of them to warrent a place on the list.

Terminator 2 should of been higher in my opinion, switch them with Alien.

Originally posted by Wolfie
Pretty weird list. I never found 2001: A Space Odyssey to be much of a visual film. I love it, but not for the visual effects.

And I think Back to the Future belongs on the list. Well for its time with the effects it had, you got to admit, that was back when people put 110% into their work.

Wouldnt you say the effects it had were a few 5-8 years ahead of its time?

TPM despite its flaws should def be in that list

Originally posted by Smasandian

What's so great about Pirates of the Caribbean 2 effects....its pretty much on par with any other big budget movie now.

Pirates is on there because they created a revolutionary new way of creating CGI characters for Davy Jones and his crew. It was like how they did Gollum in LOTR but more complicated and with some more specific programming for each character.
For example, all of his face tentical things, were not animated seperatly, but was a modifyable program that did all the animation for the animators.
Actually very cool. Especially for a not so great movie.

Hmm.

Why is Sin City on the list?

I wouldnt know exactly...

But I have never seen a movie like that before and when I read the reviews, I remember them saying that it was the first time that process (whatever its called) was used.

Not sure how ground breaking forest gump was. I imagine the effects used in that movie could have been done fairly easily at the time if another movie had required someone to be super imposed in a video shaking nixons' hand.

List seems spot on to me though aside from the fact that spaceballs isnt on it

I dont know.

It's pretty nifty on how the incorprated Gump to all those very famous scenes.

At the time that came out, I would assume it was a tough thing to do.

who makes up these lists cause they clearly dont have a clue what they're talking about

no casshern
no final fantasy: spirits within
no saving private ryan

thats why these lists are never valid, you cant set the top films, There are too many out there.

Other than the end, 2001 might be short on bright lights and lasers, but for a film made in the 60s- when you still kinda expect strings and wobbly models- everything looks amazing. It's extremely high quality work.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Other than the end, 2001 might be short on bright lights and lasers, but for a film made in the 60s- when you still kinda expect strings and wobbly models- everything looks amazing. It's extremely high quality work.
spaz said that same damn thing about 2001.

Forrest Gump is on there for many reasons. First off, putting Tom Hanks in historical footage is MUCH harder than it sounds.
Also, there was an extensive use of green screening, and I know many techniques were developed specifically for that movie. They digitally removed the Sargent's Legs in every shot...

Sin City, was shot exclusively on Green Screen, There were no location shots.
And Come on, just WATCH the damn film, that one should be obvious. Its visually stnning.

2001 should be number 1. That film's effects are dazzling even by todays standards, for it's time, they were unparalleled.

terminator 2 judgement day has the most impressive effects for its day, i have studied this film in detail and it is flawless and the deleted scenes were even more impressive.

Originally posted by intelegent purp
terminator 2 judgement day has the most impressive effects for its day, i have studied this film in detail and it is flawless and the deleted scenes were even more impressive.

Thats because Cameron just makes NEW technology when he is directing a film. If theres a shot that he cant get because of some hinderance, he'll make a piece of technology to allow him to get the shot...the man is a technical genious...love him or ahte him

I was under the impression that ILM did the effects for T2.

Originally posted by Devil King
I was under the impression that ILM did the effects for T2.

Correct.

In fact, I'd wager ILM is responsible for the VFX of 3/4 movies on that list.



And yes, whoever said TPM should be on there is right.

Besides Jar Jar being the first truly CG character to interact seemlessly with humans, all of the digital environments and worlds were photo realistic.

Originally posted by Devil King
I was under the impression that ILM did the effects for T2.

under Camerons vision and direction. Watch the special features on T2 dvd, they say that it would not have been able to have been accomplished without Cameron. He also utilized much of his knowledge on titanic aswell. I guess there is a difference between knowing what you want to be made and actually making it, but few directors today have ambtion or gumption enough to Persue new technology for a single shot

I think Rage is right.

Look at the first Terminator, and Aliens. He does some pretty crazy shit with effects.

As an director, he is probalby one of the best, or thee best at doing technical film making in my opinion.

No Cannibal Holocaust?

I thought Pitch Black had brilliant effects, they were most impressive on the big screen. Especially when the planets were seen in the sky.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/c/c0/Pitch_Black_screenshot_3.jpg/800px-Pitch_Black_screenshot_3.jpg