logo Sign In

Star Wars: Episode VII to be directed by J.J. Abrams **NON SPOILER THREAD** — Page 68

Author
Time

Here is what George forgot in the PT. What makes a good franchise is a great story of romance and adventure. It also made James Bond, Lord Of The Rings and The Godfather. George put great feeling of exactly that in the OT but when the PT came in it was more like politics and we get enough of that in real life. Yeah that's right I am talking to you Obama and you Bush.

What’s worse George Lucas changing the OT or selling the rights to Disney

Author
Time
 (Edited)

timdiggerm said:



xhonzi said:


Bingowings said:

[Carrie] was great in ESB and not so in ROTJ...


Look Bingo, I think you may be alone in this.  Carrie was great* in RotJ, it's probably her best performance in the trilogy.

 

*And by great, I mean hawwwwwwwt.


I still don't understand this. She's much better looking in ESB. It's like amount of clothes is inversely proportional to attractiveness for y'all.


She doesn't strike any interesting poses, either, so the gold bikini could be a burqa for all the good it does.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

i really want hamill, ford, and fisher to have meaningful roles, i didn't read any eu books for the supposed 'next generation' to take over.

Author
Time

DuracellEnergizer said:

 

timdiggerm said:



xhonzi said:


Bingowings said:

[Carrie] was great in ESB and not so in ROTJ...


Look Bingo, I think you may be alone in this.  Carrie was great* in RotJ, it's probably her best performance in the trilogy.

 

*And by great, I mean hawwwwwwwt.


I still don't understand this. She's much better looking in ESB. It's like amount of clothes is inversely proportional to attractiveness for y'all.


She doesn't strike any interesting poses, either, so the gold bikini could be a burqa for all the good it does.

 

I was going to post a picture of her in the bikini next to a picture of a woman in a burqa, but there's no point in arguing with a ridiculous comment like that.

Author
Time

Having said that, I'm totally registering burqaporn.com

Author
Time

Davnes007 said:


(don't worry - it's just a parked domain)

Not for long!

Author
Time
 (Edited)

How many interesting poses can one strike while forcibly neck chained up to a giant slug? If they weren't sultry enough for you, blame it on the people behind the camera. ;)

Leia being able to use The Force ought to be dealt with in the story. If she's more politician than Jedi, those abilities can give her an edge, or take her down a dark path that's hopefully more subtle than what we got in the prequels.

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:

FWIW, I never thought any of them (Fisher, Hamil, Ford) were very good actors.  But what they did have is on-screen chemistry - they weren't great individually, but they were fantastic together.  It takes more than a good script to achieve that.

Objectively, the only really great actors in the OT, in my opinion, were Guiness and Cushing.  Every time they were on screen they lit it up.  And Yoda, but I'm not sure what that means.

It means Frank Oz gave a great performance too. George has expressed frustration he couldn't get him nominated for a best supporting actor back in the day.

There is now a similar debate over whether motion capture actors like Andy Serkis deserve such recognition.

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

SilverWook said:

There is now a similar debate over whether motion capture actors like Andy Serkis deserve such recognition.

Yes, he should of at least been given a nomination from the Baftas/Oscars for 'Planet Of The Apes'. He carried that whole film, silent with just his eyes and face to tell the story. The anti Jar Jar.

If they are having any CGI characters in Episode VII, I hope they get Serkis in on it, so it's at least done as well as is possible. Or just get Serkis in to play a Sith lord/Imperial-agent/Gangster.

VIZ TOP TIPS! - PARENTS. Impress your children by showing them a floppy disk and telling them it’s a 3D model of a save icon.

Author
Time

TV's Frink said:



DuracellEnergizer said:

 


timdiggerm said:

xhonzi said:

Bingowings said:

[Carrie] was great in ESB and not so in ROTJ...



Look Bingo, I think you may be alone in this.  Carrie was great* in RotJ, it's probably her best performance in the trilogy.

 

*And by great, I mean hawwwwwwwt.



I still don't understand this. She's much better looking in ESB. It's like amount of clothes is inversely proportional to attractiveness for y'all.



She doesn't strike any interesting poses, either, so the gold bikini could be a burqa for all the good it does.

 


I was going to post a picture of her in the bikini next to a picture of a woman in a burqa, but there's no point in arguing with a ridiculous comment like that.


http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hyperbole

Author
Time

Mrebo said:

Bingowings said:

The video essay is too simplistic.

Agreed with much in your post. I do think the extensive CGI is the issue being complained about when people talk about too much cleanliness. It's more an abundance of fake stuff that looked fake. And Padme's ship was silly! Didn't have the iconic status they must have intended.

The big problem with the "too much CG" is Lucas did too much, too early. He made most of the sets, stunts, creatures, etc CG in 1999, 2002, 2005, way too early for that amount of CG to look good. Avatar was the first one to have primarily CG sets that looked real. The PT now looks embarrassingly bad in many spots and it's not even that old.

 

The ST won't have such a problem with CG sets, they'll look more convincing, and JJ Abrahms uses a lot of physical sets anyway.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Ithilgore said:

Mrebo said:

Bingowings said:

The video essay is too simplistic.

Agreed with much in your post. I do think the extensive CGI is the issue being complained about when people talk about too much cleanliness. It's more an abundance of fake stuff that looked fake. And Padme's ship was silly! Didn't have the iconic status they must have intended.

The big problem with the "too much CG" is Lucas did too much, too early. He made most of the sets, stunts, creatures, etc CG in 1999, 2002, 2005, way too early for that amount of CG to look good. Avatar was the first one to have primarily CG sets that looked real. The PT now looks embarrassingly bad in many spots and it's not even that old.

 

The ST won't have such a problem with CG sets, they'll look more convincing, and JJ Abrahms uses a lot of physical sets anyway.

A lot of what people assume to be CGI in the PT is in fact a old fashioned models

 

(the same errors are made with the Alien in Alien 3 which was only CGI for a couple of shots).

The problem with the PT could be that these elements were integrated with low quality (and now dated) CGI so closely that whole shots were given a generally plastic, fake look.

We know which parts of the SE are real or models so we can tell which bits have been scribbled on.

With the PT we never had the luxury of a 1970's/80's edition so it all looks like a computer game.

Green screen usage in general is more of an offender than CGI.

Actors should be in actual physical environments whenever possible, in the PT they were often against green screens when they didn't need to.

Prometheus may have been terribly written but it looked more realistic on the whole than the PT because it used less green screen.

Author
Time

This has been discussed somewhere recently and someone said that they 3D scanned the models into a computer and then used that, at least in Episode 3.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Arguably ROTS integrated the effects elements better (awful clone head inserts aside).

Not that it didn't have it's share of totally unnecessary effects which by their nature made the film feel utterly fake (elderly Jedi flipping around the place for example when they could just walked downstairs).

 

Author
Time

Bingowings said:

WTF?! Is that the MythBusters guy?!

A picture is worth a thousand words. Post 102 is worth more.

I’m late to the party, but I think this is the best song. Enjoy!

—Teams Jetrell Fo 1, Jetrell Fo 2, and Jetrell Fo 3

Author
Time

Harmy said:

Oh, yeah - didn't you know they worked on the prequels?

Nope. I know very little about the PT.

A picture is worth a thousand words. Post 102 is worth more.

I’m late to the party, but I think this is the best song. Enjoy!

—Teams Jetrell Fo 1, Jetrell Fo 2, and Jetrell Fo 3

Author
Time

Yeah, I remember they mentioned it on the show on several occasions :-)

Author
Time

Harmy said:

Yeah, I remember they mentioned it on the show on several occasions :-)

I also know very little about MythBusters. :-D

A picture is worth a thousand words. Post 102 is worth more.

I’m late to the party, but I think this is the best song. Enjoy!

—Teams Jetrell Fo 1, Jetrell Fo 2, and Jetrell Fo 3

Author
Time

Harmy said:

This has been discussed somewhere recently and someone said that they 3D scanned the models into a computer and then used that, at least in Episode 3.

 I was always wondering: is this the best approach time-wise and money-wise? Assuming the physical models won't get used directly (ie: won't be edited in the film).

Let's compare:

1) designer draws a thing

2) modelmakers build it (think about time here: glue & paint need to dry; ever tried to build a model kit?)

3) the model gets 3D scanned (I take 3D scanners got more common & cheaper?)

4) we still need 3D artist to fix model errors (scan won't be perfect), add animation etc.

 

All-computer way skips #2 and #3. Shouldn't this be faster & cheaper? Especially when talking about whole miniature sets?

What are the benefits of building miniature physical models just for reference for 3D artist? I can only think of easier work with lighting the model (more natural if tested with miniatures) and perhaps textures... and... ?

I saw the original theatrical release of the Old Trilogy on the big screen and I'm proud of it...
How did I accomplish that (considering my age) is my secret...
Author
Time

Harmy said:

This has been discussed somewhere recently and someone said that they 3D scanned the models into a computer and then used that, at least in Episode 3.

Ehhhhhhhhhh, they might have scanned the maquettes to use as a basis for the CG characters but I can't see them scanning entire miniatures.

Forum Moderator
Author
Time
     ^ At the end you have one heckuva valuable collectible. I wonder what the original star destroyer would bring at auction.
Author
Time

It would be cool to see a landspeeder like the one Luke had in ANH.

What’s worse George Lucas changing the OT or selling the rights to Disney