- Time
- Post link
Dang! How could I have made that mistake? =(
old cameras used for PT films — Page 2
- Time
- Post link
Anchorhead said:
If it's a puppet, it still exists in the physical world.
You're missing the point. If a puppet doesn't look realistic or believable (which is the main purpose) then it looks as fake as some CGI. Realism and being real are not the same thing. And that's evident on many OT scenes.
Do you see Yoda as a doll, or as a living character?
- Time
- Post link
DuracellEnergizer said:
Dang! How could I have made that mistake? =(
You are correct about the magnetic grip. Or are you being sarcastic now?
- Time
- Post link
When I see the OT Yoda I see Yoda (with wonky eyes in ROTJ but still Yoda).
When I see the TPM puppet I see a puppet, when I see the PT CGI Yoda leaping around with a deadly weapon I see an inexcusable farce with all the irony of Buffy Summers' impersonation of Gandhi only unintentional.
- Time
- Post link
Bingowings said:
When I see the OT Yoda I see Yoda (with wonky eyes in ROTJ but still Yoda).
When I see the TPM puppet I see a puppet, when I see the PT CGI Yoda leaping around with a deadly weapon I see an inexcusable farce with all the irony of Buffy Summers' impersonation of Gandhi only unintentional.
TPM Yoda aside (which in my opinion is only believable on TPM Visual Dictionary), both Yoda's have their limitations.
OT Yoda, with his mouth and general movement, and PT Yoda, with the lightining and texture.
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
Alexrd said:
DuracellEnergizer said:
Dang! How could I have made that mistake? =(
You are correct about the magnetic grip. Or are you being sarcastic now?
JOKE FAIL.
Read the exchange again.
- Time
- Post link
TV's Frink said:
JOKE FAIL.
So be it.
- Time
- Post link
Alexrd said:
TV's Frink said:
JOKE FAIL.
So be it...Jedi.
Fixed.
- Time
- (Edited)
- Post link
To varying degrees all representations are illusion, even plain documentary footage is subject to both selective filming (a form of author editing) and subjective reading, interpretation (a form of consumer editing).
In cinema all performances are obviously illusion, all actors are people pretending, even natural light is managed, the shot is framed the lines written and/or part improvised.
So it all boils down to the quality of the illusion.
Do individual elements fit together to create a compelling illusion of a reality (even a fantastic reality with laser swords).
In ESB and most of ROTJ Yoda fits as a character in the pre-defined Star Wars universe (like Artoo and Chewie).
In all the other films the illusion isn't as compelling.
Not just because of the choice of technology to create the character but also and more importantly because of what he does and says.
Yoda in the PT isn't just a less successful meld of voice acting and digital puppetry (or in the TPM inferior physical puppetry) he actively contradicts the character as defined in the other films by being overly physically violent and rather stupid and speaks lines like someone doing a crude uninformed parody of the character.
These traits can't just be put down to being the same character earlier in the story. The PT Yoda is an unconvincing joke on every level and an example of everything that doesn't work in the PT.
The author has either forgotten, never knew or doesn't care how the fictional world, he largely created, worked and when using the brand name (which is all Star Wars now is) to make these newer films he failed to reconnect with that world.
Some of the episodes of The Clone Wars animated series (where the visual puppets are more abstract) feel more like Star Wars because some of the people working on those episodes have a better feel for the original universe than was represented in the PT films.
- Time
- Post link
Alexrd said:
You're missing the point.
If I may, sir.
I'm not missing my own point.
Realism and being real are not the same thing.
I stated that the puppet Yoda (exists in the physical world) looked much more believable than the cartoon Yoda (exists in the Characters folder of the C drive). My point in this discussion has been that the appearance of physical objects in the prequels - ships, people, beings, structures, surfaces, light, shadow, etc - look unrealistic to me because they aren't rendered in the manner in which things exist in the real world. Technology isn't there yet. Better than ever - sure, but still not there yet.
Puppets & models - while not real animals, beings, structures, or ships - do exist in the real world. As such, they show texture, reflect light, absorb light, cast shadows, and move correctly (depending on the skill of the crew). They interact correctly with the physical world we exist in because they exist in it as well. Cartoons do not. At least none that I have seen. Claiming that realism and being real are the same thing was never the point I was trying to make, nor was giving Han to this bounty hunter!
Do you see Yoda as a doll, or as a living character?
I see the puppet Yoda as a much more realistic looking version of a make-believe character. It's impossible to completely buy the character because as soon as he appears on screen, we know he's not real. The task is for the film maker to get us to focus on the character, not the method of presentation. When it's a puppet, I think "hey, he talks funny and seems impatient with Luke". When it's the cartoon version (which I've only seen in screencaps) - I think "look, it's a cartoon of the character from the second film".
My point again is that this...
...helps me focus on the story.
This...
...causes me to focus on how well they drew a picture of Yoda.