Dek Rollins said:
The CGI replacements have aged worse than the original shots.
This. Not to mention that the compositional changes and editing changes are worse for many of the shot replacements.
Take the opening approach past the planet for example. They changed two distinct shots into a single moving shot where the order of the angles is reversed. That shot replacement is not only worse compositionally and ill-fitting to the visual style of the film, but it also changes the editing of the sequence and ignores the timed musical cue.
Another good example is the “lock s-foils” approaching shot. In the original shot, the x-wings are in a formation, and the imagery is striking. In the SE shot, the x-wings don’t appear to be in any sort of formation, and the altered composition and movement makes the shot far less visually striking.
I think you’re looking into it too much. The shots do lose a tiny bit of compositional appeal, but that was done in service of greater realism and more dynamic motion. It’s not a game-breaker to my eyes.
I’m not looking into anything too much. I’m looking at precisely what is visible on screen and determining that the CGI replacements are artistically inferior to the original shots.
Admittedly, the CGI models needed […] motion that fit with ROTJ-period effects,
Um… why not have motion that fit with Star Wars-period effects? ROTJ wasn’t shot like SW.
Because the effects in the original movie, to be perfectly frank, weren’t as good as the other two. Back then, they only had the technology to show spaceships moving in straight lines, and big battle scenes like the Yavin battle looked kind of iffy because of it. The new effects of the ANH-SE space scenes really help bring that movie more in line with the dynamic motion of the other two movies.
Star Wars was not shot like the other two movies.