maybe "awful" was a little harsh. It was nicely drawn but it's still a freaking static shot of a painting in the middle of a movie, and it is so obviously a painting. The SEs (and I assume also the Revisited Editions) are supposed to bring a consistent, modern and polished look to the movies. CG in one shot and a matte painting in another do not consistency make. Don't get me wrong, cg can look as fake as a matte painting but it's more modern and less jarring. If only there was some way to tweak the matte painting to make it look more real... I feel like the point of the Revisited Editions are to make an optimal SE that brings the movies into the 21st century without damaging their classic stories. It's Star Wars for a new generation (and fans that just want to see Star Wars like they've never seen it before) There were no obvious matte paintings in ANHR and I'd like to see no obvious matte paintings in ESBR.

In short, I meant brilliant for the original release, not brilliant for the SE, which is supposed to bring the movie beyond the technical limitations of the era...GL and ILM's idea of this was adding some extra, unnecesary 21st century cg shots while leaving the movie that was already there still looking like it was made in the 70s.

I'm not criticizing the original film, just the supposedly "updated" version.

For one, the clouds shouldn't just sit there, clouds move. This bothers me about almost all sky mattes.