- rigid blue screen cinematography
- 85% CGI Effects vs 15% Practical Effects
Yep. Like TFA and R1 by the way…
Lucas way of filming is rigid (it has always been; the guy is an editor, not a director), not the tools he developed. The “back to practical” trend of TFA/R1 is a marketing joke. Most of Disney’s new movies are CGI/blue-green screens filmmaking with a few props on set just for marketing purposes… And practical effects of the PT are great (Trade federation actors for example).
Didn’t you know? It doesn’t matter that TFA’s story sucks because of the effects they used.
But the Prequels don’t get that pass because of the effects they used.
Also, cool X-Wing’s 'n OT fan-service stuff. A+
The hypocrisy among Star Wars fans isn’t glaring at all.
Effects aside, TFA’s story might not have been incredible (I’ll be the first to emphatically say that it was a real shame they wasted a whole movie more or less rehashing Star Wars), but at least it gave us characters we could care about. The Prequels featured some of the absolute worst writing and characters ever seen in the Star Wars franchise, EU included. This is probably the biggest issue with them if you ask around here.
Going back to effects, barring The Phantom Menace, actual, physical sets seemed so few and far between. Watching the Behind The Scenes stuff for the PT is usually just looking at a blue or green wall and floor with actors in front of it. At least TFA and RO seem to have had a lot more physical sets and locations to me.
Finally, welcome to the forum. It’s been a bit since I’ve had to break out the ol’ “this is why the Prequels are insults to the franchise” arguments.
Also, good luck!