Yet, several sci-fi gems from that era continue to captivate audiences with their visual brilliance. The enduring appeal of these films can be attributed to a combination of factors. While technology has progressed by leaps and bounds, the timeless principles of exceptional filmmaking remain unchanged. Elements like masterful direction, compelling performances, stunning cinematography, and meticulous set and costume design often compensate for CGI that might seem dated by today’s standards.

In examining five standout films, it becomes clear that the effects remain impressive because the creators skillfully utilized available resources. By strategically combining CGI with traditional practical effects, these filmmakers accentuated the strengths and minimized the shortcomings of both techniques. As a result, they crafted immersive worlds that, although not cutting-edge by current measures, retain a visual appeal that rivals, if not surpasses, many of today’s blockbusters.

Consider “Terminator 2: Judgment Day,” which premiered in 1991 as the most expensive film at the time, with a staggering budget exceeding $90 million—an astronomical figure compared to the original “Terminator” made in 1984. The film set a new benchmark for action-packed spectacles, thanks to its revolutionary special effects. James Cameron, the visionary director, demonstrated unparalleled skill in creating a blockbuster with grandiose scale. The gripping narrative of Sarah Connor (played by Linda Hamilton) battling a dystopian future established a benchmark that other sci-fi epics of the decade aspired to achieve.

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.