Chefelf.com Night Life: New Technology = Crap Star Wars Movies - Chefelf.com Night Life

Jump to content

Star Wars Fan Convention

  • (2 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2

New Technology = Crap Star Wars Movies

#1 User is offline   Just your average movie goer Icon

  • -
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4,140
  • Joined: 10-April 04
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Country:Nothing Selected

Posted 19 May 2004 - 10:15 AM

We should all be grateful that we saw the original Star Wars trilogy at all.

I wish I could say (in light of the prequels), "Well, at least we'll always have the original trilogy." But that's not true... as Lucas won't release these movies on DVD in their original glory before their fuck-over - ah, make-over.. whatever.

The point of that last sentence is that we'll only have the original movies until the quality of our cassette tapes is all gone and then nobody will be able to see these movies again. (But you just keep on going, Lucas, old chum! :angry: )


However, we should be grateful that we even saw these movies in the first place - they are the result of a great miracle.

And the miracle is that Lucas made these films before he had the technology he always thought he needed. Whether through impatience or some other motive, he started his trilogy in the late 1970s and finished it in the early 1980s, a good decade before this new groovy CGI technology was available.

And that is very important. Because I believe that had Lucas had this technology at the time he made the original trilogy, he would have made the same mistakes he is making now.

The man is to CGI what a pyromaniac is to a box of matches - he is a mischievous, wicked little imp who does not know how to resist putting his hand in the cookie jar. He pulls all the cookies out trying to gobble them down - and he spills them all over the floor and at the end, we are left with a freakin' mess and he's standing there like a sulking child... with a stupid exp​ression (like this - huh.gif ) on his face, saying "Well, I really like cookies."

If he had CGI technology back then, you could probably say goodbye to the Mos Eisley cantina, you could say goodbye to almost all the human characters, you could probably even say goodbye to Chewbacca - as he would most surely be replaced by a CGI gungan with a phoney accent that's meant to be Jamacian but would understandably offend anyone from that island.

And you could probably say goodbye to every bit of detail and realism in the films.

If Lucas had CGI technology in 1977, we wouldn't even remember Star Wars now. And we certainly wouldn't be discussing any new movies because 20th Century Fox would have cut the funding a long time before Lucas got rich.

But we had the original trilogy once upon a time. And it was amazing.

Let's all be thankful for small mercies in life.
0

#2 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 19 May 2004 - 10:30 AM

I agree--CGI is a shiny new toy, and sfx-heavy filmmakers can't resist the draw. I don't understand how they can think it looks so neat when the rest of us correctly believe that it looks fake and cartoony, but I believe cost effectiveness probably plays in here.

Like all methods, CGI should be used sparingly if at all. Restraint is key. Just because this technology has become available, it doesn't mean that it needs to be used in EVERY situation. In fact, I am hard pressed to come up with any situation, outside of a cartoon, in which it would be welcome.

I was watching an old Harryhausen movie the other day, one of the ones with a mixture of claymation and humans. They look and move differently, and a claymation dinosaur, while an amazing artistic achievement, looks nothing like a real dinosaur. But it still looks more realistic than a freaking CGI dinosaur. With claymation, you can at least tell that there is some substance there; clay is real, even though it's not real dinosaur. CGI is quite clearly smoke and mirrors. There's no there there.

Some really amazing special effects have come from simple, basic things. The original trilogy is a great example of that. A low budget can be the best thing to happen to a movie--it makes the filmmakers and crew use their noggins, for one. It encourages hard work with basic materials, which is a combination that causes special effects--as well as most other aspects of creative work--to thrive.

Bring back the puppets!

(I think I've made a remarkably similar rant on another thread. I apologize if I made you listen to my opinions twice. Or perhaps I do not!)
0

#3 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 19 May 2004 - 01:32 PM

I agree with most of what you're saying, but I was nuts about Jurrasic Park when it came out. I thought the dinosaurs looked very real. that's why I repeat viewed 3 or 4 times at the local movie house. (well, that plus the new sen-surround was cool.) Like, when the cast are first greeted at the island by the brontos. that was Fabulous!

I thought Dragonheart was good. especially the flying underwater scenes. But with Jumanji, everyone was trying to create jungle animals so of course they looked fake (compared to what we know.) That's my point. Star Wars looks fake compared to our memory of what it's *supposed* to look like.

but I thought the JP1 dinos kicked ass, sorry.
0

#4 User is offline   Just your average movie goer Icon

  • -
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4,140
  • Joined: 10-April 04
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Country:Nothing Selected

Posted 19 May 2004 - 07:07 PM

But there were a few scenes when those CGI dinosaurs just really didn't work. The herd flocking, for instance - here's Sam Neil and some kids running on a field with some cartoon dinosaurs scribbled over the picture.
0

#5 Guest_Commoner_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 20 May 2004 - 12:15 AM

But with Jumanji, everyone was trying to create jungle animals so of course they looked fake (compared to what we know.) That's my point. Star Wars looks fake compared to our memory of what it's *supposed* to look like.

You know, you've got something there! I do think that is about the point when CGI REALLY started looking obvious and cartoony! How strange!

But there were a few scenes when those CGI dinosaurs just really didn't work. The herd flocking, for instance - here's Sam Neil and some kids running on a field with some cartoon dinosaurs scribbled over the picture.

I have to agree with you, that is a pretty fakey scene. The kids are craning their heads to look at the dinosaurs, but they never look where they are. In the defense of that scene, I think it is one of the first scenes to be done for that film. But, you're still right about it.

The best scenes in Jurassic Park are the T-Rex's intro scene and the chase scene. I think these are the best. The T-Rex taking down one of those herd dinosaurs (use to know their darn names), is one of the worst.

And, funny that claymation is mentioned, because those scenes that I like best with the T-Rex were animated by none other than Phil Tippet with little skeletal systems, similiar to the same skeletals used inside of claymation puppets and electrodes/sensors attached to the different joints.
0

#6 User is offline   Just your average movie goer Icon

  • -
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4,140
  • Joined: 10-April 04
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Country:Nothing Selected

Posted 20 May 2004 - 12:47 AM

And not only is claymation tangible and actually there, learning about it in a behind the scenes extra on a DVD is a hell of a lot more interesting than learning about how someone made an entire scene on their computer.
0

#7 User is offline   Just your average movie goer Icon

  • -
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4,140
  • Joined: 10-April 04
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Country:Nothing Selected

Posted 20 May 2004 - 08:19 AM

QUOTE
Some really amazing special effects have come from simple, basic things.


I was just thinking about your comment, Laura. And I remembered how in the Return of the Jedi space battle, they used somebody's shoe as one of the cruisers. And to this day, I have never really known for sure which one it is. My guess is that it's one of the Mon Calamari cruisers because they've got the approximate shape - but all the ships look so real so I don't know for certain.

Wherever that shoe was, it did a very good job of conveying a cruiser because even knowing what to look for, I still can't find it. Yet most CGIs immediately leap in your face.

I was also thinking about something I said in the Movie Posts - is that if you DON'T notice the special effects in a movie, then those special effects have done their job.

They are supposed to make everything appear real and convincing - NOT to leap out and go "Hey everyone! Look at me! I'm a special effect! Am I cool or what?"

George Lucas clearly does not understand this.
0

#8 User is offline   Supes Icon

  • Sunshine Superman
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,334
  • Joined: 30-October 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sydney, Australia
  • Country:Australia

Posted 20 May 2004 - 11:55 PM

QUOTE (Just your average movie goer @ May 20 2004, 08:19 AM)
They are supposed to make everything appear real and convincing - NOT to leap out and go "Hey everyone! Look at me! I'm a special effect! Am I cool or what?"

George Lucas clearly does not understand this.

I'm not so sure about this anymore. I have a bad feeling that if you were to do a line up of say, Marlon Brando, Harrison Ford, Pamela Anderson and Jar Jar Binks and asked Lucas to spot the CGI he'd have a whole mess of trouble in accomplishing the task.

I just don't think Lucas is able to see that the overuse of CGI is making things less real. He's had these images in his head for so long that when they are CGIed they are his reality.
Luminous beings are we... not this crude matter.
Yoda
0

#9 User is offline   Just your average movie goer Icon

  • -
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4,140
  • Joined: 10-April 04
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Country:Nothing Selected

Posted 21 May 2004 - 12:21 AM

Hmm... you may be right, Supes. Certainly when he is interviewed about the subject, he seems really convicted about these things looking real.

"They look real, dammit! They look more real than you or I!" - Lucas in a hissing fit.
0

#10 User is offline   Private Zod Icon

  • Mini Boss
  • PipPip
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 176
  • Joined: 18-March 04

Posted 21 May 2004 - 08:16 AM

One of my biggest complaints was the over-use of CGI. When I was a kid, I used to be fascinated by how a team of creative individuals would build sets and models and puppets to achieve their vision of another world. Bottom lie is you could not tell that there was a difference between what was real and what was not. Fast forward to the present trilogy and it slaps you in the face how obvious the CGI scenes are. And it takes away from what you are watching (along with terrible dialogue, wooden acting, boring/lazy direction).

Peter Jackson had it right when he did the Rings trilogy: Sets first, Models Second, when all else fails: CGI.
0

#11 User is offline   Just your average movie goer Icon

  • -
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4,140
  • Joined: 10-April 04
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Country:Nothing Selected

Posted 21 May 2004 - 10:21 AM

QUOTE
Sets first, Models Second, when all else fails: CGI.


That should be a rule that all directors live by.
0

#12 User is offline   Mike Mac from NYU Icon

  • Level Boss
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 472
  • Joined: 23-February 04

Posted 21 May 2004 - 11:10 AM

"The point of that last sentence is that we'll only have the original movies until the quality of our cassette tapes is all gone and then nobody will be able to see these movies again. (But you just keep on going, Lucas, old chum! )"


Haven't you gotten into the video capturing/ DVD-R technology yet, jyamg. wink.gif
I have the OT on digital now, that way it is preserved for generations to see. It's really easy all you need is a DVD-R recorder. Look into it.
0

#13 User is offline   Just your average movie goer Icon

  • -
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4,140
  • Joined: 10-April 04
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Country:Nothing Selected

Posted 21 May 2004 - 11:11 PM

It seems that I am way behind in the technology game - and now that I live in Seoul, I'm further behind still. Because they don't have all the electronics stores that we have in western countries. I have still yet to see a huge CD/DVD store. Scary.

However, I was very happy to hear that you've got the Original Trilogy preserved on digital. I've got the tapes for Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back at home in Australia - I hope they're okay. So maybe sometime down the track, I'll be able to preserve my own copies.

Perhaps one day, Lucas may lose the rights to his franchise for some reason (maybe by signing them over to us under duress perhaps cool.gif ). Then with your preserved digital copies, you could rake in millions by distributing the untainted original movies back into worldwide circulation.
0

#14 User is offline   Jordan Icon

  • Tummy Friend
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,161
  • Joined: 31-October 03
  • Location:Mars
  • Interests:I have none.
  • Country:Ethiopia

Posted 21 May 2004 - 11:51 PM

Don't worry, the movie market is already over-saturated with CG. When all the critics start talking about how played out it is, the industry will hear them out and back of the graphics department.

Movies will start to revolve around human beings again. And maybe, just maybe films like shrek, bug life, and all those other crappy CG kiddie movies will also be buried alive when doctors finally realize that staring at that much CG for that long of a period of time is damaging to peoples retinas.

I miss cartoons, I miss them a lot. I hate CG, it's so cold and over the top. I'll take my hand painted frames any day of the week.
Oh SMEG. What the smeggity smegs has smeggins done? He smeggin killed me. - Lister of Smeg, space bum
0

#15 User is offline   Just your average movie goer Icon

  • -
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4,140
  • Joined: 10-April 04
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Country:Nothing Selected

Posted 22 May 2004 - 08:03 AM

I actually enjoyed Shrek and A Bug's Life... but I miss good old-fashioned style cartoons as well.
0

  • (2 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2


Fast Reply

  • Decrease editor size
  • Increase editor size