Deckard
Super Freak
The OT - Classic, Timeless Cinema Genius.
The Prequels - Shoddy CGI Jumping off point for other effects riddled films in the future.
The Prequels - Shoddy CGI Jumping off point for other effects riddled films in the future.
George Lucas talks about Star Wars Prequel Haters
- Thread starter Bamboota
- Start date
Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:
But that's mostly what we got with The Phantom Menace as well. A more efficient way to showcase tech we'd already seen (which allowed them to do it on such a bigger scale). Wouldn't you agree that Jar Jar is just the CG Yuzzum or Sy Snootles from 1997's ROTJ:SE but with much more screen time? IIRC when John Knoll and the other ILM techs were crapping themselves in TPM's "The Beginning" documentary it wasn't because Lucas was asking them to show audiences CGI visuals they'd never seen before, but rather show it to them on such a scale without a 500 million dollar budget.
I recall some knowledgable FX gurus in 1999 mentioning the Visual Effects Oscar snub against TPM and how it was an injustice not because of Jar Jar and the Battle Droids but rather all the FX innovations you don't see (which some consider to be the best kind) like the combination of two separately filmed scenes into one shot (there's a seamless pan in the pod racer garage across multiple shots, no one would ever know that the scenes weren't originally choreographed to go together if the ILM team didn't spill the beans.)
With that note you probably won't be surprised that I agree with you that TPM absolutely trumps The Matrix in cinematic technical "importance." The Matrix is definitely a better told story than TPM but if you want to be cruel you can justifiably say that its little more than a glorified GAP commercial with guns. You don't need any further proof that "Bullet Time" was a passing gimmick than the FX of The Matrix's own sequels. Reloaded and Revolutions completely abandoned the technique in favor of all-digital versions of Bullet Time's famous "pan around slo-mo action" effect.
If you've seen The Phantom Menace and Coraline, you've already seen a version of everything Avatar can give you.
I don't doubt the Avatar technology will be widely adopted, but it's a filmmaking advance rather than a revolution for cinema, in my opinion. Of course, your mileage may vary.
And I'm not necessarily disagreeing with either of those two points. I will say that Avatar has the most amazing visuals I've ever seen in a movie bar none, but I'm not going to side in favor of how "revolutionary" it may be until I've digested more "behind the scenes" info and we see what the next few years bring us cinematically.
I just wanted to point out that I don't necessarily believe that TPM was more revolutionary per se. I think that what it brought to the FX table was an astonishing level of scale and volume and no doubt innovations in efficient spending to achieve said effects, but no single element really had the "wow" factor of other visual milestones (like the original Star Wars, the T-1000, Jurassic Park dinos, Gollum, Kong, or the Na'vi.)
The only thing "revolutionary" about AVATAR might be its overall ability to immerse you into its world. FX? No way. It doesn't even have the best fully CG characters of this past year.
DISTRICT 9's prawns are more photo-realistic than the Na'vi.
And so was Dr. Manhattan (who was also blue, so it can't be that
)
DISTRICT 9's prawns are more photo-realistic than the Na'vi.
And so was Dr. Manhattan (who was also blue, so it can't be that
)
devilof76
Super Freak
https://dictionary.reference.com/browse/aside
Definition eight. I'm sorry you didn't pay attention in school.
I am not sure someone in this thread has a firm grasp and what it is to have a little something I like to call "Reading Comprehension".
denryanj
Super Freak
One would be better off buying them and using them as frisbees, as they are unforgivably shoddy non-anamorphic knockoffs from an obsolete 1995 analog Laserdisc master, rather snidely tacked on as "extras" to the now-official SE DVD versions. They look like absolute crap by current digital standards, and will make one wonder why they were so blown away visually by the OT in the first place (which , I suspect, was George's intentional subterfuge all along). Until the unaltered originals are given a proper digital release(if at all), I doubt anyone will be shutting the F up any time soon.
Last edited:
hairlesswookiee
PALPATINE CRUSADER!!!!
Probably. He's written and produced a couple shows, published books, and starred in movies for quite a while now. He's not Brad Pitt notorious,but one should at least check some of his stuff out.
kl241
Super Freak
- Joined
- May 12, 2007
- Messages
- 8,527
- Reaction score
- 19
Actually, I really got into SW after seeing The Phantom Menace. Crazy, huh?
Sucks to be you.
DinoLast
Super Freak
I love the Prequels, but I thinks it's fine to hate them if you do, but if anybody thinks that I'm an idiot and I'm not a true fan because I should hate them.
Well those people can just get lost for all I care
Well those people can just get lost for all I care
devilof76
Super Freak
One of my favorite things about the original Star Wars films is that they were made in the late 70's/early 80's. They have the same cinematic quality as Rocky, Jaws, Alien, Blade Runner, The Godfather, and a thousand other amazing films that look like they were made in the 70's.
I was insulted when I found out that the unaltered movies were not getting cleaned up and given the highest quality transfers, but I bought them once they got cheap and they are my three favorite dvd's of all time. I always knew I loved how 70's movies looked, but I had no idea how much I loved it until I watched Star Wars on dvd for the first time.
denryanj
Super Freak
.
Agreed. But, what you are seeing on the original cut DVDs is not what the films were intended to look like, nor how they looked when they were exhibited theatrically(I'm old enough to have seen all three multiple times when they were released, and they looked 1000 x better than what is presented on those discs). Look at comparable DVD releases for the titles you mentioned like Rocky, Jaws, Alien, etc. All are clean, crisp, anamorphic prints, but still retain the "feel" of the period's cinematography. In comparison, the original trilogy discs look not much better than the widescreen VHS releases from 15 years ago. Plus, they are non-animorphic, which makes the image appear as a centered rectangle (surrounded by a wide black border on all sides) when viewing them on any widescreen or hd monitor.
.
Again, I agree with you in principle. It's better to have these versions of the original cuts than nothing at all, of course. However, certainly they deserve much better treatment, and it seems that it's only because of Lucas' stubborn insistance that the altered versions be considered the "correct" ones, that the original cuts are given such a shoddy toss-off.
I loved AOTC
devilof76
Super Freak
I wrote a not-so-friendly email to SWS.com when I cancelled my pre-order for them. But, there's no way I can sit through the special editions, so for now, they're more than good enough. I'd still rather watch these than VHS. Also, I don't have a good tv so I'm not missing as much as some.
Me too.
Similar threads
