I am totally amazed at the question.........
"what are you talking about?"
You don't understand the concept that the FX actually stunk in 1989?
'All movies back then are bad compared to modern FX'
No, I too, saw TFF in theaters and the FX were a GIANT step back from TSFS, TWOK & TVH. Let alone the star Wars movies Aliens etc.
Many, many reviews commented on how horrible the FX were compared to contemporary movies (not movies 19 years in the future
Shatner & Bennett hated the FX and said they were not what they expected or were promised by the company.
I'm not saying the quality of the FX can make a good movie worthless or a bad movie great, but by any objective standard they are BAD. VERY BAD.
I thought you guys were criticizing from Today's point of view. I've been re-watching old 80's movies and they just all suck in terms of effects, that's why I started this debate. My memory of watching them for the first time was that the effects were good. Hell, that scene in the Terminator where Arnold cuts his eye out and slices up his arm was down-right unwatchable to me back then (very graphic
). Now, it's a joke.
Some people just see more problems with effects than others. Hell, some people think Nemesis has bad effects. I, for one, can't understand why.
If the FX were good, then they would not have been an issue as much as they were in some of the reviews of the time...INSURRECTION and NEMESIS just look to flat with their CGI. I'll take the FX of WRATH OF KHAN/THE MOTION PICTURE, even with their flaws, over the flat CGI of the last two TNG movies...