gethedgical

User Group: Members
Join date: 26-Dec-2005
Last activity: 8-Sep-2006
Posts: 34

Post History

Post: #165984
Topic: Favorite old-school star wars game?
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/165984/action/topic#165984
Time: 28-Dec-2005 1:57 PM

I remember the ROTJ arcade game...I got to the death star but couldn't beat that.

Post: #165927
Topic: Favorite old-school star wars game?
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/165927/action/topic#165927
Time: 28-Dec-2005 5:10 AM

Xwing and Tiefighter were both amazing. Also enjoyed the side scrollers for SNES. I loved that original Star Wars arcade game when I was pretty little, I used to play that while my parents bowled at the local lane.

I quite enjoy the most recent OT arcade game...they have it at the Pittsburgh Dave and Busters...its kind of like a better version of Rebel Assault...pretty easy though.

Other than that, I've only really played KOTOR and KOTOR2 (and enjoyed both despite the kind of weak/rushed ending for 2)...I'd like to play some more of the recent (read: last 5 years or so) games, but I'm not sure which are decent or worth my time - any advice?

Post: #165919
Topic: digitally remastered
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/165919/action/topic#165919
Time: 28-Dec-2005 1:59 AM

Basically, I'm just praying for a digitally remastered Holiday Special...that 17th generation copy I've been watching every other week or so is starting to deteriorate significantly.

Post: #165806
Topic: Green screen, CGI and the 'Minute' documentary from ROTS
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/165806/action/topic#165806
Time: 27-Dec-2005 1:15 PM

Another reason why I am so baffled by the CGI in these films is that I recently read through the 'Art of Episode III' book...I recommend that anyone do the following: open the first 10 or so pages, and compare those pages with the last 10 pages (where the actual scenes are displayed)... There is so much imagination in the artwork for the films, so many potential scenes that just never became part of the films... I really wish that there would have been an emphasis on making the films more epic (as they appear in the artwork) and fantastic, but not at the expense of creating needless details such as the always-moving skyline in EVERY SINGLE BACKGROUND of the Coruscant shots or creating an entire planet completely from scratch, such as in the Mustafar scenes. I wonder whether creating more of the worlds seen during the Order 66 sequence would have led to more shitty CGI or a better story... One of my biggest complaints with the prequels and that sequence is that the Jedi Masters are killed and, while I thought the sequence was an emotional one, I don't know a single one of their names. Why weren't they more than just additional props in the films?

Ugh. Sorry, I have all these things I've wanted to talk about with people for so long so they're all sort of bleeding back into this discussion.

Post: #165799
Topic: Holograms...
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/165799/action/topic#165799
Time: 27-Dec-2005 12:57 PM

I'm not saying I like the scene - I think its totally unnecessary and really hurts Jabba's ruthless gangster character we know from ROTJ. It also looks absolutely horrible.

I just spend lots of time thinking about ways that he could have done those sorts of scenes more tastefully. I really love the holograms throughout the trilogies and that seems like a perfect spot to use them.

Post: #165700
Topic: Holograms...
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/165700/action/topic#165700
Time: 27-Dec-2005 1:39 AM

Two comments about the use of 'holograms' in the films...

1) in ROTS, specifically the scene where obi wan/yoda review the 'security archives' - the shots of Palpatine and Anakin, are they meant to be archived footage of Anakin speaking to a hologram of Palpatine after he has 'destroyed' the Jedi Temple? I can't quite figure out why they would be able to view such an interaction otherwise, because it doesn't seem that Palpatine did or would have had any reason to be in the Temple.

2) Wouldn't the additional scene in A New Hope with Jabba/Han been better had Lucas used a hologram of Jabba instead of trying to have a 'moving' version of Jabba in the scene? I'm watching the DVD as I type this to see what they actually say in that scene (in my imagination it seems totally redundant to simply repeat what Greedo reveals)... holograms, use 'em.

Post: #165697
Topic: Green screen, CGI and the 'Minute' documentary from ROTS
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/165697/action/topic#165697
Time: 27-Dec-2005 1:32 AM

I guess part of my reason for posting this comes from having watched both the first Chronicles of Narnia film and King Kong in the past 3 days during my holiday break from work... While I didn't think Chronicles of Narnia was a particularly great film, the CGI was, relatively, more tasteful than the effects-fest that was King Kong...I am reminded once again of my constant remark that, 'As Star Wars has taught of late, CGI does not a movie make...'

The thing is that I've seen films recently that use CGI in a tasteful way. Serenity, for example. Real backgrounds, real sets. Space footage done in CGI, but all has the sort of dark mis-en-scene that Lord of the Rings does, so as to make tasteful the CGI moments integrated with models/actors/sets. Both LOTR and Serenity are films that I feel use CGI in a productive and tasteful way.

Post: #165639
Topic: Green screen, CGI and the 'Minute' documentary from ROTS
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/165639/action/topic#165639
Time: 26-Dec-2005 6:47 PM

Wow, I just reread that and realize I sound like a totally idiot...thats what I get for typing it over the course of 3 hours while doing other stuff.

You'll probably get what I mean though.

Post: #165635
Topic: Green screen, CGI and the 'Minute' documentary from ROTS
Link: https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/165635/action/topic#165635
Time: 26-Dec-2005 6:34 PM

Greetings...after lurking on the boards for several months, I've finally decided to start interacting with you all. Like many of you, I have been a huge Star Wars fan for my entire life and am rather conflicted about the PT and the rennovated OT. I spend an unfortunate amount of time ruminating over what was, what is, and what could have been.

One thing I've been thinking quite a bit about is the use of CGI and blue (now green) screen in films. This has been particularly on my mind after watching the 'In a Minute' (or whatever it was called) documentary included with ROTS, wherein a minute of the final light saber duel is broken down into its creation from the very beginning. Honestly, it made me even more conflicted about the PT, being as it highlights the insane amount of work that goes into producing just one minute of footage. I must say that I felt inclined to give credit where it is due and admit that, while I still feel that the script and dialogue and directing nearly completely fails in these films, there is still an incredible amount of talent behind their creation. I don't think many folks would question that. At the same time, the complete waste of resources and time and energy in order to make possible the integration of CGI and, well, the actors (since there is little otherwise 'real' in the films, save some props and occasional backgrounds) makes me want to just say, 'Thats it - I am finished with Star Wars. Game over.'

Several things about the documentary made me think of this...Lucas acts with such concern for the smallest details while largely ignoring the glaring problems with the dialogue, acting, believability, etc. For example, in the scene on Mustafar, both Anakin and Obi Wan had 40+ versions of their costumes, each showcasing further wear and tear as the battle goes on and their clothing interacts with their environment. There is actually progressing amounts of 'burns' to the clothing that had to be kept track of...nevermind that they're fighting in what would appear to be unbearable heat and barely notice. Nevermind that they only sweat slightly despite massive amounts of physical exertion near a spewing RIVER OF LAVA. Their outfits, all 40 (well, 80 between them), tell that story. And I would imagine the story those outfits tell is an expensive one. It just seems like an incredible amount of waste to create that many outfits for a minute of action.

Which brings me to another aspect of the documentary...the green screen. The entire scene is basically shot onto green screen. I need to watch it again, but I believe the entirety of the section where they are battling on the piece of the building that eventually falls into the lava was green. Entire sets were built to the scale and details of the structures in the scenes, but instead of being painted the way they would appear in the movie, they were painted green so that those details could be later 'perfected' by the CGI artists. Am I the only person who finds this completely insane? They build the actual sets, but basically didn't use them except as physical spaces for the actors to 'interact' with. Not only does this showcase where the emphasis in the process lies (more concern for the CGI than the actors), but I would imagine that this makes it very very very difficult to act. You are given dialogue, maybe thrown in with another actor or two (a lot of filming between actors is done without them both in the same room at the same time), and told to act out a scene without any environment. Granted, this is what actors are trained and paid to do: act (read: pretend) in an artificial space. But to be completely removed from any sort of sense of the surrounding space that will later be integrated seems like it would be really difficult. So I wonder whether a lot of the acting and poorly executed dialogue in the PT's is a result of this environment. Case and point: Liam Neeson (an incredibly talented actor) has openly blamed a lot of his 'stiff' acting from the first film on this. Furthermore, it probably seems a bit demoralizing when considering the above point about emphasis on effects rather than acting. A quote from Neeson:

"I was wearing a wig and hair, and the resin glue that they use for the wig was awful. I mean it immediately crystallized and became white, the colour of a white tablecloth, like talcum powder, and very, very visible. So my makeup lady kept coming out in the heat, and I kept saying, "C'mon, c'mon, touch this up, touch this up." Finally, she says, "Liam, when this film comes out, no one is going to be looking at you. See that empty space there beside your head? That's where they are going to be looking (i.e. at the special effects)." Then she says to me, "Liam, you could be a monkey smoking a pipe, and it wouldn't matter when The Phantom Menace comes out and no one's going to be looking at you with all those special effects George Lucas' people are going insert later." That was a real blow to my ego because I realized she was probably right. That actors are secondary to all the computer stuff in this movie."

Sure, there was blue screen work on the original films...but in those cases it seemed more a blending of actual shots, or painted backgrounds, or model sets. In other words, blending physical objects with one another... all of which contributes to the realism of the films. I just have such a hard time believing that the emphasis was THAT much on getting CGI into the movies...squeezing it into every single shot, supersaturating it to the point that people like my dad will forgive its total overall shittiness because there are a few great moments of special effects.