'90s Sci-Fi Movies That Still Look Good Today

The 1990s were a transitional era in the history of visual effects. Computer animation had advanced to the point it could create "photorealistic" imagery — though the actual "realism" of the technology's implementation varied ... a lot. Given the advances in CGI in the following decades, one might reasonably expect effects-heavy science fiction films from the '90s to look dated, and there are many cases of bad effects contributing to some '90s movies that didn't age well.

But there are a number of sci-fi classics of the era that still look awesome today. There are lots of factors that go into why certain films age so well and others don't. While effects technology has changed a lot, the basic fundamentals of good filmmaking haven't; skilled direction, quality acting, beautiful cinematography, impressive set and costume design, and so on can more than compensate for the occasional bit of dated CGI.

For the five films highlighted here, the effects themselves still look good because the filmmakers knew how best to use what they had. By knowing where to use CGI and where to use old-school practical effects, in ways that highlight the strengths and hide the weaknesses of both mediums, these artists created worlds that, while no longer state of the art, still look as good if not better than a lot of blockbusters today.

When it hit theaters in 1991, "Terminator 2: Judgment Day" was the most expensive film ever made with a budget over $90 million — around 15 times what the first "Terminator" cost in 1984. All that money showed up on screen, with its groundbreaking special effects resulting in one of the best action movies of the '90s. Director James Cameron knows better than anyone how to make a blockbuster feel huge, and Sarah Connor's (Linda Hamilton) battle against the future in "Terminator 2" set a new standard and scope that every other sci-fi epic of the decade tried living up to.

Building on Cameron's previous innovations in computer animation with the water tentacle in "The Abyss," "Terminator 2" built its near-unstoppable villain, the liquid metal T-1000, by enhancing the chilling performance of actor Robert Patrick with elaborate prosthetic makeup effects and startling CGI transformations. The shiny, fluid designs of the T-1000's computer-generated forms played to the emerging technique's strengths while sidestepping its weaknesses. It doesn't matter if the machine's textures don't look completely realistic because the unreality is what's so creepy about it, sharply contrasting the grittier look of Arnold Schwarzenegger's now-heroic T-800.

Just two years after "Terminator 2," the wizards at Industrial Light and Magic advanced the art of digital effects yet again with the dinosaurs in "Jurassic Park." Making an inorganic robot look convincing in live-action was one thing; making viewers believe extinct beings had come back to life was another challenge entirely. And they completely nailed it — that first "Jurassic Park" still somehow feels more magically real than its many sequels, despite the continued advancements in CGI.

How did they make the "Jurassic Park" dinosaurs look so real? We can thank Steven Spielberg's "less is more" philosophy: just as keeping the shark offscreen for the first two acts of "Jaws" made it a better movie, "Jurassic" only needed 15 minutes of dinosaurs to be a success. This allowed the effects artists to prioritize quality over quantity. They alternated between techniques — nine minutes of practical animatronics and six minutes of computer animation — to effectively hide the seams of either style. In addition, the team aimed for scientific accuracy to the best understanding at the time, adding to the believability — something the sequels gradually abandoned. Beyond the effects themselves, Spielberg imbues his actors with a genuine sense of wonder and terror throughout, ultimately selling the dinosaurs as "real."

Does "The Fifth Element" still hold up as a movie? Your mileage may vary. Critics were already divided in 1997 over whether this futuristic action-adventure was the fun kind of ridiculous or the annoying kind. In addition, the film's passive treatment of female characters has faced feminist scrutiny — and the allegations and admissions of inappropriate behavior of director Luc Besson could reasonably have viewers who liked the film in the past reluctant to return to it.

Yet, despite its many problems, there's no denying that "The Fifth Element" still looks amazing. Working from designs by comic artists Jean "Moebius" Giraud and Jean-Claude Mézières, the film imagines the 23rd century as a retro dream of the future, filled with flying cars, ancient aliens, and endless skyscrapers. Miniatures give the settings weight and tactility, while matte paintings and CG enhancements keep things bustling with life and an impossible scope. The fabulously camp costumes by fashion designer Jean Paul Gaultier further enhance the comic book sensibility. When offered two hours of eye candy this scrumptious, we can't blame anyone who wants to turn their brain off for a bit and feast.

Another 1997 release that divided critics at the time, Paul Verhoeven's viciously satirical adaptation of Robert Heinlein's military sci-fi novel "Starship Troopers" has aged unusually well. 21st century viewers facing a barrage of equally scary and stupid fascist propaganda have an easier time getting the joke of the film than many did in the '90s.

It may be that the special effects in "Starship Troopers" were too good, potentially contributing to many missing the point at first glance. Antifascist parodies don't typically get over $50 million (half of an over $100 million budget) for their visual effects — that's a luxury more often afforded to unironically dumb action movies. Phil Tippett, who did stop-motion animation for Verhoeven's "Robocop" and supervised the CG team on "Jurassic Park," used his realistic understanding of animal behavior to lend believability to the film's enormous armies of arachnid aliens. The sheer spectacle of the effects accomplishments on "Starship Troopers" could be enjoyed as just an action movie, but thankfully, there's more going on than just that.

The Wachowski sisters' decision to make 1999 the peak of human civilization in the dystopian world of "The Matrix" went a long ways towards future-proofing the movie. All that hard rock, leather-goth fashion, and clunky computer technology has effortlessly transitioned from cutting-edge to retro-cool. You couldn't make the same movie today — which is exactly why it still holds up so well. Although some will argue that "The Matrix" sequels are better than many remember, that first film still blows minds and kicks butt as a groundbreaking classic of the sci-fi and action genres.

In terms of visual effects, the movie's most iconic innovation was "bullet time," a technique that creates the illusion of normal speed camera movement through slow-motion footage by splicing together footage from multiple cameras hidden from view via CGI. While the world outside The Matrix involves more extensive CG effects for the machine Sentinels, the work done inside The Matrix was subtler, punching up traditional action sequences with smaller elements of unreality. Much of why "The Matrix" looks so good today — and why it looks better than the most CG-heavy parts of the sequels — is because much of what you're seeing is real: The actors actually trained in martial arts, and the lobby shootout scene was done entirely with practical effects.