Chefelf.com Night Life: LotR vs. SW - Chefelf.com Night Life

Jump to content

Star Wars Fan Convention

  • (5 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Last »

LotR vs. SW

#1 User is offline   Kornbread Icon

  • New Cop
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 23
  • Joined: 01-November 03

Posted 01 November 2003 - 01:12 PM

Anyone else feel that the Lord of the Rings movies show the way the Star Wars prequels should have been done? Peter Jackon said, on record, that when recreating middle earth he objectives were to build "Real sets" first, miniatures second, and when all else fails, then use CGI. This then leads you to argueabley teh best produced trilogy ever (sorry, even better than SW original trilogy).

To give an idea of how warped Lucas is, when touring Scorsese's recreated 1800's NYC set, he looks around and says to Scorsese..."You know, you could have CGI'd this whole thing." Idiot.
0

#2 User is offline   Ninja Duck Icon

  • Cheer up, emo duck.
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Moderators
  • Posts: 1,912
  • Joined: 30-October 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Thrillsville
  • Country:United States

Posted 01 November 2003 - 11:45 PM

So you think the LotR trilogy is better than the original SW trilogy? Does that mean you've seen the whole thing?

And yes, Lucas probably could learn from LotR. He could afford to learn from a lot of things. He could have gotten someone else to read the script and tell him it sucks before he even began. He could have learned from the Back to the Future trilogy that a good first one does not mean the next ones will sell. (I speak in theory, of course, since I probably wasn't alive when those movies came out.)

I wonder if what I just wrote made any sense.
0

#3 User is offline   A Mighty Pirate Icon

  • Level Boss
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 253
  • Joined: 31-October 03

Posted 02 November 2003 - 02:08 AM

Nope.
Booze-fueled paragon of pointless cruelty and wanton sadism.
0

#4 User is offline   njamilla Icon

  • Level Boss
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 283
  • Joined: 02-November 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Washington, DC
  • Interests:Black belts: aikido, kendo, iaido, jodo. 1987 World Fencing Championships, World University Games participant. Writer: novelist, freelancer. Interestes: Renaissance, religious history, turtles.
  • Country:United States

Posted 02 November 2003 - 07:01 AM

I agree with you. I was watching ESB a couple weeks back and there's nothing like the stormtrooper pushing Han aside during the carbonite freezing scene.

There's something to be said for the atmosphere created by the set. In the actors it inspires a presence performance rather than pantomiming for invisible creatures and effects. Having something to react to -- a person -- in a real set allows the actor's performance to soar, instead of difficult "imaginary" acting. Even on empty theatre stages where there is little in terms of set, there's a whole process from beginning to end which draws the audience to the actor's performance. On a set, with its short takes, there's very little transition for an actor to move into their character role.

I hated the arena scene where the Jedi are killed. The Jedi didn't act like a fighting unit. They were shot individually and then pluncked down on screen somewhere. It was obvious they were slashing through the air.

They should've used "blue" people as stand-in opponents. They should've coordinated the fight in the arena. Watch Gladiator (which I'm not crazy about either) and you'll see there's a story in the way the men group together, as well as a sub-story of those who don't want to be part of the team -- they die. Sets, instead of green canvas "rooms", would've helped the extras in their movement and choreography.

And they should've created clone trooper uniforms for actors. For the SW fan film in which I was fight coordinator, we had up to a dozen stormtroopers. Their presence created a completely different atmosphere to what would've been an empty set.
Author: Sword Fighting in the Star Wars Universe.
0

#5 User is offline   Laura Icon

  • Brother Redcloud
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Moderators
  • Posts: 578
  • Joined: 30-October 03
  • Location:Boston
  • Interests:gnome habits
  • Country:United States

Posted 02 November 2003 - 04:21 PM

This is mainly in response to the first post.

I've had this conversation dozens of times. Lucas & the new Star Wars team use CGI as a crutch. It looks dumb and cartoony.

LOTR has wonderful special effects that hardly ever interfere with the narrative. You're rarely like, "Wow, that was great special effects." You're just like, "Yup, hobbits are tiny."

This is because LOTR has a fundamentally different philosophy, more similar to the special effects team of the original Star Wars or of the lovable Jim Henson films of the 80s. Before CG animation was a common practice, they used to use their imaginations and inventiveness. Like the older films, LOTR chooses from a variety of different techniques, from the high tech to the simple, selecting the best fit for the job. Just because you CAN do something with CG doesn't mean you SHOULD; it's ill-fitting and obvious for many tasks.

You may not think it's cool to use household object special effects when you have a gajillion dollar budget, but you know what, New SW guys? Sometimes it's the best thing to do.
0

#6 User is offline   Kornbread Icon

  • New Cop
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 23
  • Joined: 01-November 03

Posted 02 November 2003 - 06:27 PM

QUOTE (Ninja Duck @ Nov 1 2003, 11:45 PM)
So you think the LotR trilogy is better than the original SW trilogy? Does that mean you've seen the whole thing?

And yes, Lucas probably could learn from LotR. He could afford to learn from a lot of things. He could have gotten someone else to read the script and tell him it sucks before he even began. He could have learned from the Back to the Future trilogy that a good first one does not mean the next ones will sell. (I speak in theory, of course, since I probably wasn't alive when those movies came out.)

I wonder if what I just wrote made any sense.

No I have not seen the last LotR film. But after reading the book, reading the advance reviews, seeing the trailor and based upon the the previous films, I think that this trilogy will be better than the original SW trilogy. Many aspects of the original trilogy was based on the Rings. Lucas has often referred to Obi-Wan as the Gandalf of the series.

I actually think they are very similar in scope and production.
0

#7 User is offline   Chefelf Icon

  • LittleHorse Fan
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 4,528
  • Joined: 30-October 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York, NY
  • Country:United States

Posted 02 November 2003 - 09:04 PM

There is certainly a lot to be said for the way the LOTR movies were made. While I'm not the biggest LOTR fan I am able to appreciate the feeling you get from all of the locations they used in the actual filming. On the Two Towers DVD special features one of the actresses talks about how easy it was to look out into the beautiful New Zealand scenery as this sweeping shot was filmed. She discussed how she didn't really need to act at all since the scenery surrounding her was real, the wind was real... everything was real.

In the original Star Wars Films things were done on location. They filmed in the deserts of Tunisia, the forests of England and the Icy Polar regions of... well some polar place. In the new films you never get that sense of realism because you're too busy seeing how obviously everything was done in front of a green screen.

Half the time in the outdoor shot they didn't even bother blowing a fan on the characters! If you are outdoors there will be wind! Hair will be blown around! How could such a high profile movie miss such an obvious touch taht would have lended such an unmeasurable amount of realism to such cold and lifeless scenes?
See Chefelf in a Movie! -> The People vs. George Lucas

Buy the New LittleHorse CD, Strangers in the Valley!
CD Baby | iTunes | LittleHorse - Flight of the Bumblebee Video

Chefelf on: Twitter | friendfeed | Jaiku | Bitstrips | Muxtape | Mento | MySpace | Flickr | YouTube | LibraryThing
0

#8 User is offline   Kornbread Icon

  • New Cop
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 23
  • Joined: 01-November 03

Posted 02 November 2003 - 09:34 PM

There is a behind the scenes clip in Attack of the Clones where Natalie Portman is rehearsing the scene where she is going through the conveyor belt in the droid factory. She is going through this blue screen obstacle course where there are blue overhangs and stoops she has to jump over. After flubbing through it once or twice she looks bewildered at Lucas like "I have no clue what the hell am I doing?!"

There is a time and place for CGI. Lucas abused this technology so bad it is laughable. Scenes like Amidala and Anakin having a picnic in the fields were so badly done I still cringe. There are no beautiful waterfalls and scenery in EARTH that could have made shooting that insignificant scene that much better. Please.

Lucas is in a Michael Jackson-like world (minus the pedophilia and plastic surgery) where he is surrounded by yes-men who are afraid to offer rejection of ideas or criticism like he was the genius/innovator of 1983.
0

#9 User is offline   Vwing Icon

  • Soothsayer
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 657
  • Joined: 31-October 03

Posted 02 November 2003 - 09:40 PM

Yeah Lucas definitely has just settled on CGI, it's almost like he's just too cheap or lazy to do any real stuff. He's actually said himself that he uses CGI because it's cheaper. A man worth at least a quarter of a billion dollars said that. I mean he just loves money, even to the point where he's milking Episode III for all it's worth (Hyperspace, Clone Wars comics, books, and TV microseries, Clone Wars games, etc.). CGI is something for the most ambitious of creations (from Gollum to a humongous space battle), not for a diner. Not for the 4 legged owner of the diner. Not even for the long-necked Kaminoans, or the clone troopers. CGI should be a last resort when all real world things fail to give the impression you want, not something you base an entire movie on. Lucas in the prequels has been like "Oh that spot wasn't covered up, but don't worry, ILM will handle it in post-production" or "that fight sequence doesn't look to great but they'll create a digital fighter to make it look better", instead of just using it when it's absolutely necessary. CGI is a fabulous advance, but not in the way Lucas has been using it.
0

#10 User is offline   Chefelf Icon

  • LittleHorse Fan
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 4,528
  • Joined: 30-October 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York, NY
  • Country:United States

Posted 03 November 2003 - 12:53 PM

Sadly, Lucas is advancing CGI by his overuse. CGI will make advancements and will improve. Unfortunately all the botched experiments in using it are presented as the Star Wars prequel trilogy. Filmmakers will learn from his mistakes and CGI will become much more advanced because of it, however Star Wars certainly will not.
See Chefelf in a Movie! -> The People vs. George Lucas

Buy the New LittleHorse CD, Strangers in the Valley!
CD Baby | iTunes | LittleHorse - Flight of the Bumblebee Video

Chefelf on: Twitter | friendfeed | Jaiku | Bitstrips | Muxtape | Mento | MySpace | Flickr | YouTube | LibraryThing
0

#11 User is offline   civilian_number_two Icon

  • Canada's Next Top Model.
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Head Moderator
  • Posts: 3,382
  • Joined: 01-November 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:In Your Dreams
  • Interests:I like stuff.
  • Country:Canada

Posted 03 November 2003 - 10:24 PM

Hey,

I just saw the trailer for THE RETURN OF THE KING. Sure, we've all seen it online, but I was thrilled to watch in in a darkened theatre with the big screen and the big sound. I have to say, I feel an excitement about getting to see Jackson bring this one to a landing. I haven't had such a feeling of anticipation since I cut class in '83 to see JEDI on opening day (this was when "opening day" *meant* something). Now, of course, Jackson has had going for him that his entire story was mapped out from the beginning, and Lucas was hampered by a plot that has changed over the years according to his changing whim. So, yes, for having a consistent look, feel, and storyline, the LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy is the best trilogy of films ever made, and I am including STAR WARS and the SAMURAI trilogies when I say this. So, not bad for a guy with a background in cheesy horror. And I agree with the earlier post quoting Miranda Otto, that argues that a constructed set is better for the actors than a studio with a green screen. This should be obvious to anyone who's ever been on set. Long after the painstaking efforts at period authenticity he put into AMERICAN GRAFFITI, Lucas should have known better.

A theatre near me will be playing film prints of the special editions of FOTR and TT, followed by THE RETURN OF THE KING on Dec 16th. I don't know if this will be the only opportunity to see the extended editions in a theatre, but I'm definitely tempted, even though those versions of the films will add up to 692 minutes, not counting intermissions. Starting at 1:30pm, the shows will run probably to about 2:00am. And in a town where a first-run ticket can cost anywhere from $8 to $14, the admission cost of $51 for three movies is a bit daunting.

What do you alll think of that? Would you go to such a thing if it were playing in your town? Is it playing in your town? Are you planning to go? Have I gone to far here, talking so much about LOTR in a STAR WARS forum?

Mike M.
"I had a lot of different ideas. At one point, Luke, Leia and Ben were all going to be little people, and we did screen tests to see if we could do that." -George Lucas, in STAR WARS: the Annotated Screenplays (p197).
0

#12 User is offline   Despondent Icon

  • Think for yourself
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4,684
  • Joined: 31-October 03
  • Location:a long time ago
  • Interests:Laughter. Louis pups. Percussion. What binds us. Bicycling, Tennis.
  • Country:United States

Posted 04 November 2003 - 10:03 AM

I love the LotR movies, but in all respect, probably won't sit through the marathon. for our prequel fans; are you willing to sit through PM and AOTC prior to seeing Epijoke three?
0

#13 User is offline   Chefelf Icon

  • LittleHorse Fan
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 4,528
  • Joined: 30-October 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York, NY
  • Country:United States

Posted 04 November 2003 - 12:06 PM

A LOTR marathon is a bit much for me. Once I went to the Wang Center in Boston and saw the entire Star Wars trilogy in its entirety. That was pretty great but also very long. To think that a LOTR marathon would be more than three hours longer than that! Yikes!
See Chefelf in a Movie! -> The People vs. George Lucas

Buy the New LittleHorse CD, Strangers in the Valley!
CD Baby | iTunes | LittleHorse - Flight of the Bumblebee Video

Chefelf on: Twitter | friendfeed | Jaiku | Bitstrips | Muxtape | Mento | MySpace | Flickr | YouTube | LibraryThing
0

#14 User is offline   artoo1121 Icon

  • New Cop
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 12
  • Joined: 30-October 03

Posted 04 November 2003 - 05:45 PM

I am going to see the LOTR Trilogy Tuesday. I live in Dallas, but scalpers bought all of the tickets around here so my sister and I are going to Shreveport to see it. The tickets were only $25, though, not $51. Needless to say, I am very excited. biggrin.gif There is an hour or hour and a half break between the movies, so I don't think it will be that bad, and ROTK premieres at 10, so we get to see it 2 hours earlier than normal. Which isn't much, but still cool.
If I can wait 18 hours to see a crappy Episode 2, I can sit through all of the extended editions.
As for sitting through the first two Star Wars movie to see the third, I don't think there's any way in Hell I could do that. I was watching clips of Episode 2 in Wal-Mart in the electronic section when it came out on DVD, and that enraged me so much it's surprising they didn't have to call security to stop me from yelling obscenities at the screen. laugh.gif
0

#15 User is offline   Trouble Icon

  • New Cop
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 6
  • Joined: 04-November 03

Posted 04 November 2003 - 08:53 PM

QUOTE
What do you alll think of that? Would you go to such a thing if it were playing in your town? Is it playing in your town? Are you planning to go? Have I gone to far here, talking so much about LOTR in a STAR WARS forum
?

I would so go if it were playing back home. (I'm in China. I think I'm going to miss Return of the King in the main theaters, and have to check it out in the cheap theaters back home. On an unrelated note, Two Towers was playing in theaters until late July in Edmonton.)

As it is, we were planning on selling our souls or something and spending however long watching them on DVD at the end anyway. I haven't seen any of the special editions yet.

I've watched the original Star Wars Triology this way. Mostly as a kid. I don't think I've watched the special editions back to back yet. I occasionally think I'll kill a weekend and watch all six movies after the third one comes out... But we'll have to see.
0

  • (5 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Last »


Fast Reply

  • Decrease editor size
  • Increase editor size