[Gerhard]

Did anybody else hear them? I had to stop around the middle of the movie, I've never seen a guy (Lucas) so much in love for himself and his work. Not to mention the other guys who were there, who all seem very proud of their work (ended the CGI was good) but come on, they don't need to say its great effects, we have eyes, and they all are in love with Lucas for some reason. Particularly that Rick McCallum guy, I almost heard kissing noises on Lucas beard!

At least it was what I felt after hearing the director comments in the OT and the PT Movies.
And we can all thank God there was no CGI in the 80's, I can't imagine those timeless movies made as they are made today! As Lucas constantly points out "If it was today I would done this whole scene digitally" bla bla bla

Yes, they have great effects, but it also leaves the sense that they are artificial, with no heart and soul. And it does not need to be that way.

[Revan-47]

Gerhard spelled backwards is Drahreg. we all know what that means...hahahahahh....

[Darth Player]

Not to mention the other guys who were there, who all seem very proud of their work (ended the CGI was good) but come on, they don't need to say its great effects, we have eyes, and they all are in love with Lucas for some reason. Particularly that Rick McCallum guy, I almost heard kissing noises on Lucas beard!

McCallum and the others are the Mormon controllers to Lucas' Howard Hughes redux behavior, isolating himself first at the Skywalker Ranch and now the Presedio, occassionally letting him make a film and allow him to talk to the press all the while conspiring to kep him drugged up and isolated. Its the only explaination that makes sense, especially after viewing the changes to the OT and the whole of the PT.

[Zatoichi]

Maybe these were people who always denied the fact that the OOT was awsome and are trying to ruin it for everyone who ever loved Star Wars.

[Gerhard]

Gerhard spelled backwards is Drahreg. we all know what that means...hahahahahh....

I don't, care to explain?

[KurganX]

Did anybody else hear them? I had to stop around the middle of the movie, I've never seen a guy (Lucas) so much in love for himself and his work. Not to mention the other guys who were there, who all seem very proud of their work (ended the CGI was good) but come on, they don't need to say its great effects, we have eyes, and they all are in love with Lucas for some reason. Particularly that Rick McCallum guy, I almost heard kissing noises on Lucas beard!

At least it was what I felt after hearing the director comments in the OT and the PT Movies.
And we can all thank God there was no CGI in the 80's, I can't imagine those timeless movies made as they are made today! As Lucas constantly points out "If it was today I would done this whole scene digitally" bla bla bla

Yes, they have great effects, but it also leaves the sense that they are artificial, with no heart and soul. And it does not need to be that way.

Well they did have CGI in the 80's. Remember the movie TRON? Though I guess you could argue a lot of it was simply traditional animation, I swear at least some of it was created on computers.

Also we have the Captain Power tv show in 1987, but of course that's five years after ROTJ.

Anyway, if you thought the director's commentary for ROTS was bad, you should hear the ones for the OT and Episode II! They're pretty much dominated by Ben Burt talking about the sound.

This post has been edited by KurganX: 02 December 2005 - 06:50 AM

[barend]

wait what?

ROTS had a director?

[Dorothy]

I don't, care to explain?

I will. Revan has taken one too many blows to the head. And "blows to the head" spelled backwards is...

[Revan-47]

Nice one dorothy... high five!!!!

[jariten]

And we can all thank God there was no CGI in the 80's, I can't imagine those timeless movies made as they are made today!

yeah, except that the stuff they were doing at the Ranch in the late 70's is just the equivalent of what they're doing today. SW was as much dismissed as a brainless SFX flick then as it is now.

[barend]

what a pile of daehehtotswolb!

the level of innovation that went into creating the ships and sets not to mention creatures was phenominal. a few people brushed it off as kids movies (ewoks didn't help, and before you say it Jawas were cool), but for most part people where blown away...

The CGI of the PT brings nothing new to the table...

Lucas (crowned the king of CGI) had already been far surpassed by James Cameron's work and Alex Proyas in preceeding years...

which really comes against it, being so FX driven. Whereas th OT was story driven but burried under FX of the time... Which was great, because only after repeated viewings did many notice the story giving the illusion that it was rather deep...

the PT has nothing of the sort, just a bunch of uncomfortable actors in a trilogy many will be embarrased by when they're older.

the 70s and 80s was a great time of imalgimation between storytelling and innovative FX. People were still reliant upon story to make their movie for them, but now had all these tricks they could use to make it more real. Sci Fi and Fantasy stories that people wanted made into movie could now be made because they had the skill to make it happen, so movies like alien, connan, the terminator, etc. could all be made.

CGI and computer driven camera tricks, instead saw people writing movies just as an excuse to use the new and latest technique or effect.
'hollow man' 'godzilla' the PT...

when imagination was the limmit and FX were the task to visually create that image, it was truley a time of wonder.
Now, sadly, FX limmit the imagination. and people are using specific trendy FX in their films like worn out pick up lines.

[Gerhard]

yeah, except that the stuff they were doing at the Ranch in the late 70's is just the equivalent of what they're doing today. SW was as much dismissed as a brainless SFX flick then as it is now.

I don't Agree. What was done for Star Wars (Ep. 4) was a breakthrough on it's days. Nothing was put on screen with so much realism back then.

Now most movies are just an orgy of special effects, like BarEnd says, before the SFX helped telling the story, now the Story is an excuse to use SFX.

Sith may have great effects, but also does Harry Potter, Fantastic 4, War of the Worlds and every other fantasy blockbuster movie nowadays. Back then Star Wars was unique on it it's kind, story and super special effects.

Did you you see The Pianist? That had the most believable special effects I've ever seen, very well done. Of course it's a different kind of movie, but used like that the SFX is believable, in Sith they truly exaggerated giving it all a "fake" feeling I don't have in the OT.

[jariten]

no, im not buying it. to say that people didnt scoff at the originals both then and now is a mistake. critics are scared to to that now, because those early films have become too powerful.

and to argue that ILM hasnt been innovating SFX wise with the PT is madness. A lot of the stuff you take for granted these days is stuff that ILM invented. Back in the late 70s when cinema seemed dead there were zero SFX films, which is why SW stood out in that field, and why people were "blown away". Now theyre a dime a dozen. but if youre watching something you think looks good, theres a good chance its something ILM cooked up.

[Gerhard]

no, im not buying it. to say that people didnt scoff at the originals both then and now is a mistake. critics are scared to to that now, because those early films have become too powerful.

and to argue that ILM hasnt been innovating SFX wise with the PT is madness. A lot of the stuff you take for granted these days is stuff that ILM invented. Back in the late 70s when cinema seemed dead there were zero SFX films, which is why SW stood out in that field, and why people were "blown away". Now theyre a dime a dozen. but if youre watching something you think looks good, theres a good chance its something ILM cooked up.

I'm not at all against SFX or ILM at all, they do impressive things.
I just think that nowadays they are all very much worried with amazing special effects and the story is lost. The PT is an example of that, was it really necessary to show so much of the pod race? And in Sith they are overusing it, they build 1 (one) set! the rest was all CGI according to the DVD documentary, they even made the actors act against a blue screen and later on they added photographs to the blue screen, if they took the photographs, why didn't the actors act against the real thing where they took the photos? Is this movie a demo of what can be done using computers? Or is the Story part of a much bigger saga? that is what makes me feel sad for the PT, it just seems a big commercial for ILM then the beginning of the story of Eps. 4-6

Besides I don't see the PT SFX much different from the LOTR SFX, they are both excellent. But I can compare the SFX on SW 4 to the Flash Gordon Movie of the 80's (the one with Queen music) and the SW one is much more impressive.

Jurassic Park was the movie that made Lucas decide that he had the technology to do Episodes 1-3. But in Jurassic park (and Lost World) they actually build real scale mechanic T-Rex's and dinosaur legs which were used for close up shots, and it looks more believable, than having it all done on computers.

Spielberg Already announced (or I read somewhere) that Indy 4 will be done like in the old (80's) days, no overuse of CGI, I wonder what Lucas thinks about it.

That is way I gave the example of the Pianist, SFX well done and not overused can make you feel like, "OMG they really did throw a old man out of the window!". With Obi Vs Anakin fight my only thoughts were... "they did good job here, they took out the blue screen, very nice, ops the lava there seems a bit fake, humm that jump was CGI for sure"

Lucas once said that the SFX was there to help him tell a story, with the PT I feel the story was there so he can show what can be done now with SFX

This post has been edited by Gerhard: 08 December 2005 - 08:59 AM

[KurganX]

Oh yeah, and technically even 1977 Star Wars had CGI... remember the "mission briefing" and the Death Star plans? Ha! Vector graphics rock!


As for not using CG, I'm a little surprised. I figured they'd at least use the face-pasting technology to make it look like Harrison Ford and Sean Connery were doing stunts like the good old days when they were young, but then I haven't been following the new movie, perhaps they won't retain any of the old actors...

This post has been edited by KurganX: 08 December 2005 - 03:28 PM