imperialscum

Don't get me wrong. Properly acted scene on the real set is pretty much the best option. But as you said, it may take a lot of takes and time. There are factors, such as poor direction from the director, lack of chemistry between the actors, improvisation etc., which cannot be predicted/solved in pre-production. ESB took 6 months of filming to make it right. Not many can afford that. I guess picking a competent director who can direct cast and crew to make the scene work in a few takes is crucial. Still you never know about the actors, especially if they are inexperienced and have never worked with each other before.

Anyway I don't inherently regard films above CGI based stuff. I am a fan of story based video games. They can have just as great storyline and characters.

Sadako said:

OBI-WAN37 said:

There are more miniatures and models in each Star Wars prequels than entire OT. The whole "there's too much CGI" is not true. I've seen people comment on TFN saying they prefer the original trilogy but still know there are more models and miniatures in the PT. I love the PT. I think it's more fun and moving than the OT, and are better films. 

The number of models and/or miniatures used has no bearing on whether or not there's too much CGI in the prequels. Which there totally is. The sets that they bothered to physically construct were only built up to about head height, with everything above filled in with CGI (Liam Neeson's height alone supposedly cost an extra $150,000 in materials for Episode I). CGI ceilings are silly and unnecessary when you're building physical walls.

As the prequels went on, fewer and fewer sets were physically built, replaced with green screens. Until finally, we ended up with shots like this in Episode 3:

Nothing in this shot is real--Temuera Morrison's head was CGI'd onto that CGI armor, and Ewan McGregor was CGI'd onto the CGI Boga. I'm not talking 'He and Temuera Morrison were on a sound stage draped in green fabric and Ewan McGregor was sitting on a green-draped mechanical bull'--the two actors weren't even in the same room to deliver these lines to one another, let alone on a set which bore any resemblance to this. This entire scene was composed inside a computer. I don't care if a sculptor down at ILM had to sculpt a model of the Boga--the fact that it was then CGI'd cancels it out. We never saw that model. There was no animatronic Boga that was used in close-up shots.

Something else Lucas did in Episode 1 was composite two different takes into one shot--if one actor's best take of a shot with two actors on screen together was take 3, and another's was take 5, he would cut and paste actor 1's take 3 onto actor 2's take 5. This would save the cost of having to shoot a Take 6 and hope that both actors performed well (and is the reason films will have multiple cuts during a scene rather than filming everything in one long take). Natalie Portman remarked on how odd it was to see two completely different takes of the same shot at the same time. This experiment ultimately resulted in pasting real heads on CGI bodies and such that we saw in Episode 3--too much.

Still it is fair to admit that a scene like that is practically impossible to reproduce in non-CGI fashion. I am not defending PT btw, just CGI.

As for combining two takes, as an engineer I think that is a clever optimisation. :)

darklordoftech said:

The Empire convincing people to forget about The Force. 20 years won't make people forget!

It is the PT fault because it portrayed the force ability as something widely known and attached a "movie star" like status to Jedi.

CO said:

Just look how they re-shaped Episode 7 from Lucas/Arndt's first draft, as they are making Han, Luke and Leia more prominent in the movie.

That seems like a change for the worse.

SilverWook said:

I merely think it's too much to have to explain up front to say a hundred years has gone by. That and our heroes would have too many kids and grandkids to fit in one movie. ;)

Even 30 years is too much.

Star Wars is a galactic fantasy. Star Treek is science-fiction.

I find Star Treek rather unappealing and not so enjoyable. Star Treek storyline is boring compared to Star Wars.

darklordoftech said:

This isn't a criticism of the fact that the SWTOR Sith are human, but rather of how the SWTOR Sith being human was explained. The explanation that we're given is that the red alien genes were bred out. However, in TOTJ, and even the timeline of SWTOR's own website, it's the human genes that have been bred out. Therefore, SWTOR should have mentioned a massive human population joining the red alien population.

The way I see it is that after Great Hyperspace War most of the Sith and Sith-Human hybrid were targeted and killed by the Republic. To fill the void, they just integrated a huge amount of humans from various colonies. So that way the Sith genes were in minority from the beginning. However in one SWTOR missions it is stated that 98% of all imperial population have Sith genetic material. This kind of complicates the upper explanation.

Btw I am not trying to start any argument. :P

As I said so many times... CGI is not any kind of problem. The problem with prequels is that we have an extremely unlikeabe jerk as the main character that we were supposed to care about. Along with other stupid stuff such as Jar Jar, clone army, droid army, aliens with bad accent, etc.

Yes it was an interesting character and concept. Sadly they didn't go beyond a few minutes video.

Btw I am curious what do you think about this organisation: Star Cabal. It is a huge Imperial Agent spoiler so if you ever intend to actually play the game, don't read about it.

Tack said:

I would have had a scene somewhere in the film of the Emperor, hidden in the shadows entirely, but just enough of a presence.

I like the absence of Emperor in ANH. I love how his character progression in OT. In the first film he is only mentioned in a way that it sparks your interest and get your imagination working. Then in the second film he makes short but interesting call to Vader, which further fuels expectations. And then he finally appears in last film and he is well acted and written.

darklordoftech said:

imperialscum said: I really don't understand your functioning. In one instance you complain about something as petty as lightsabre colour variety, and in other you like that they stick lightsabre in every era and "pollute" every faction with it. What about the variety in this case?

Lightsabers in every era doesn't destroy the uniqueness of Vader or Palpatine. All Sith having red sabers does destroy their uniqueness (and yes, the prequels are just as guilty of this as KOTOR and SWTOR).

Vader was a Sith and if it was later established that it is a Sith tradition to have red lightsabres... it's doesn't diminish Vader's character uniqueness in anyway. It is just a damn weapon and red is a very popular colour. You don't expect him to be the only one having it in order to achieve your bizarre uniqueness in that respect?

Let me try to put it differently. Making Rakata use lightsabres 25,000 years before OT is stupid. It makes it look like lightsabre is eternal. If I take Obi-Wan's quote "An elegant weapon, for a more civilised age" I can assume it is quite new compared to a blaster.

Tobar said:

His species is so weird and different I would have pegged you for liking him. What about him do you despise?

It is hard to understand DuracellEnergizer and darklordoftech and their double standards. :P

darklordoftech said:

imperialscum said: I agree. We better drop it.

I hope this means that you will stop getting so butthurt every time somebody says something bad about KOTOR and/or SWTOR.

I was not offended or anything. I was either trying to correct false claims from lack of knowledge or point out double standards.

darklordoftech said:

imperialscum said:

darklordoftech said:

There is one thing I like about KOTOR: The Rakata. They're Lightsaber-wielders who aren't Sith and still were able to rule the galaxy. I feel that they could be the villains of episodes 7-9.

You see. That is why I doubt you have ever play KOTOR or SWTOR. Rakata did not wield lightsabres. At least KOTOR gives no such indication.

They wield lightsabers in Dawn of the Jedi. I didn't mean to imply that every aspect of them that I mentioned was established in KOTOR itself.

I will stick to KOTOR and as far as I am concerned Rakata did not have lightsabres.

I really don't understand your functioning. In one instance you complain about something as petty as lightsabre colour variety, and in other you like that they stick lightsabre in every era and "pollute" every faction with it. What about the variety in this case?

DuracellEnergizer said:

*sigh* You think it makes sense within the context of the SW Universe, I don't. Fine, sure, whatever.

Frankly, I'm tired of this discussion. You like the modern depiction of the Sith, I hate it, we're never going to agree on anything, we'll never change each other's mind, so can we just drop it, please?

I primarily like OT depiction of the Sith. As for EU, my liking is not limited to "old" or "modern". If it is good I like it. If it is bad I don't like.

I agree. We better drop it.

darklordoftech said:

There is one thing I like about KOTOR: The Rakata. They're Lightsaber-wielders who aren't Sith and still were able to rule the galaxy. I feel that they could be the villains of episodes 7-9.

You see. That is why I doubt you have ever play KOTOR or SWTOR. Rakata did not wield lightsabres. At least KOTOR gives no such indication.

DuracellEnergizer said:

The Africans never ruled an interstellar empire, did they?

Seriously... I was giving real life examples of both gradual evolution and rapid change of civilisations in real world and you come up with that?

DuracellEnergizer said:

imperialscum said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

This analogy doesn't work because the Sith of the Sith Empire and the Sith of TOR are both interstellar civilizations with FTL travel and advanced energy weapons.

The analogy is completely valid. The level is different but the variation is the same.

Going off the current EU timeline, almost three thousand years passed between the end of the Hundred-Year Darkness and the Great Hyperspace War. In all that time, there was no significant change in regards to Sith technology or aesthetics. Yet I'm supposed to believe that only a thousand years, give-or-take, after the Great Hyperspace War, every single aspect about their culture undergoes a radical overhaul, turning them from sword-and-sorcery type magicians and warriors into ultra high-tech space age marauders.

I'm not buying it.

Take a look at Africa. Just several decades ago most of them were naked, living in tribes and fought with spears. Now they are fighting each other (in conflicts you are not even aware of) with modern assault rifles, rocket launchers and drinking coca cola.

DuracellEnergizer said:

Opinion.

Yeah, it's an opinion. How about you provide an argument showing how it's at all wrong or inaccurate?

Opinion is an opinion... it can't be wrong. It is like you telling me you like apples and then someone would try to argue you are wrong.

darklordoftech said:

The Making of ROTJ says that Palpatine uses the dark side to prolong his life and that his appearance is a consequence of that.

I know, but at that point we were talking strictly on-screen stuff.

DuracellEnergizer said:

This analogy doesn't work because the Sith of the Sith Empire and the Sith of TOR are both interstellar civilizations with FTL travel and advanced energy weapons.

The analogy is completely valid. The level is different but the variation is the same.

DuracellEnergizer said:

I'm basing my "assumption" that Palpatine's appearance was the result of dark side corruption on Dark Empire, which overtly established that Palpatine's appearance was the result of dark side corruption.

Dark Empire is just another EU source... and a very bad one imo. That is no better than basing stuff on PT.

DuracellEnergizer said:

Making Anakin a snivelling whiny unlikeable jerk tarnishes and undermines the character as he was in the OT. Making the original Sith a race doesn't tarnish or undermine the non-biological Sith.

Opinion.

DuracellEnergizer said:

Sith who aren't sociopathic social Darwinist assholes.

Sith has been that since OT... Vader chocking imperial failures, Emperor replacing Vader with a younger more capable guy.

DuracellEnergizer said:

imperialscum said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

There are two ways to deal with TOTJ. First, ignore it for the most part like KOTOR did. Second, consider it and make some evolution from it, like SWTOR did.

You're ignoring a third option -- running with what TOTJ set up.

No I am not ignoring it. It is basically the second option without any evolution/development, which is hands down stupid and unacceptable. Thousand years ago in Europe people wore armour and fought with swords... in your version, soldiers in WW2 should wore armour and fought with swords as well.

 I fail to see how this has anything to do with Sith aesthetics/characterization.

Well just extend my example... compare today's aesthetics (clothes, buildings, art, cities, transportations, etc) and way of living to medieval aesthetics and way of living.

DuracellEnergizer said:

That's a single character, who was never identified as a Sith prior to the release of TPM, whose body was ravaged from a lifetime spent in uncommonly extreme devotion to the dark side.

Technically he was never explicitly identified as a Sith prior to ROTS. In ROTJ he is only referred to as the emperor of the empire. Only in ROTS it was explicitly revealed that Palpatine and Sidious are one and the same person and then connected them with ROTJ as he proclaimed himself an emperor.

As for his pale skin being an effect of Dark Side... that is how I see it too. However that is only our assumption since it is never explained. It is the same as assuming emperor in OT was a Sith. Yet you claim the first to be an indisputable fact and the second as something completely false. And this is just one of many cases where you do that. That kind of attitude is quite arrogant and childish if I may say so.

DuracellEnergizer said:

Nothing about what little was revealed about the Sith prior to TOTJ precludes the possibility that the Sith started out as a species/culture before evolving into a religion.

Nothing prior to PT precludes the possibility that Vader was actually a snivelling whiny unlikeable jerk before he turned into one the most awesome characters ever. Do you finally get my point? Just because the concepts are not fully explored it doesn't mean one can crap over them.

(Btw personally I like Sith starting out as a red-skinned species... I am just being objective here)

DuracellEnergizer said:

Why should I? Ever since TPM was released, the Sith have become shallow, one-dimensional, interchangeable clowns who are evil for the sake of being evil, and I for one am sick and tired of see them overrun each and every era and aspect of the EU.

A nice generalisation over much of the stuff you aren't even aware of.

DuracellEnergizer said:

There are two ways to deal with TOTJ. First, ignore it for the most part like KOTOR did. Second, consider it and make some evolution from it, like SWTOR did.

You're ignoring a third option -- running with what TOTJ set up.

No I am not ignoring it. It is basically the second option without any evolution/development, which is hands down stupid and unacceptable. Thousand years ago in Europe people wore armour and fought with swords... in your version, soldiers in WW2 should wore armour and fought with swords as well.

DuracellEnergizer said:

I also hate the corpse-white skin, the glowing yellow/orange/red eyes, and the general Goth-like attire.

Here is one of them:

DuracellEnergizer said:

A "KISS reject" is any character who looks like this

"Generic" refers to any Sith who fits this or any similar mold.

Yea I thought so. But I just can't visually connect any of the Sith I saw in KOTOR or SWTOR with those guys.

DuracellEnergizer said:

Face facts -- prior to TOTJ, "Sith" was an undefined, nebulous concept; Tom Veitch was the one to give the Sith a distinct culture and history.

Just because the name didn't appear on-screen it doesn't mean the concept wasn't there. Prior to TOTJ, if we take Vader as a reference, we were safe to assume Sith was sort of a dark-side centred religion (an obvious counterpart to Jedi) rather than species/culture.

DuracellEnergizer said:

Perhaps Veitch and co. expected the readers to use a little imagination and deductive reasoning to fill in the gaps -- something you apparently are incapable of.

I am capable and so were the developers of SWTOR. It is just you who is unwilling to go along with anything reasonable. You insist on using the TOTJ Sith (which were almost extinct) 1000 years later without any evolution/development.

DuracellEnergizer said:

Sure, go ahead. Just don't attempt to link these Sith to the Sith that preceeded them.

How convenient... in one instance you accused me of lack of imagination in connecting the dots and filling the gaps and in the next instance you forbid any kind of linking at all.

KilroyMcFadden said:

I may be going a little meta here, but what I really hate about the EU is that since the announcement that only the PT, TCW, Rebels, the OT, and the ST count, there are people that continue to even have a conversation about the 300 books, 100 video games, and 5000 comics that are all now just a pile of professional fan fic.

I am sorry but you don't get the point. Most us here do not argue about "official canon". I don't give a rat's ass about what LucasFilm claims to count within SW universe. I couldn't care less about PT or TCW even if LucasFilm made a million statements about how important and canon they are.

The discussion is related to what each of us personally accepts or doesn't accept, and why.

darklordoftech said:

I have played KOTOR and SWTOR, and I hated what I saw.

I asked you this already but I didn't get the answer. To what extent did you play it, i.e. which classes and what chapters did you finish. If you don't mind revealing of course.

darklordoftech said:

I'm also sick of 25,000 years of history being reduced to Revan.

Even in SWTOR Revan and events in KOTOR become something of secondary importance. So I really don't know how did you come up with that statement.

DuracellEnergizer said:

I don't hate human Sith. I hate it when a writer decides to use the Sith Empire in their story without sticking to how the Sith of the Sith Empire were originally depicted.

Please stop referring TOTJ Sith as "original Sith". Like I said, Sith were originally depicted in OT and are very different from what TOTJ turned them into much later.

There are two ways to deal with TOTJ. First, ignore it for the most part like KOTOR did. Second, consider it and make some evolution from it, like SWTOR did. Now don't get me wrong, I like TOTJ but I just don't like it when you consider it liks some "holy cow" of the EU.

DuracellEnergizer said:

Unmasked Vader looks like a sad, damaged old man, not a KISS reject, as he doesn't have a bunch of stupid black tattoos criss-crossing his face.

So you are bothered by the black tattoos. Very few human Sith In SWTOR have any kind of tattoos (and if they do they have red tattoos). Probably you just saw some Zabrak Sith and made the wrong generalisation. Zabrak tattoos don't have anything to do with Sith anyway. They are part of their culture.

Btw I don't know the exact definitions of your terms "KISS reject" and "generic" but I would very much like to learn them.

DuracellEnergizer said:

Because TOTJ clearly established a difference between the Sith of the Sith Empire and the later Sith like Vader and never tried to confuse the two. TOR -- like almost all current stories about the Sith -- justs sticks generic PT-inspired Sith into any nook and cranny it can find, context or original intent of whatever works it may be going off of be damned.

I really don't care how TOTJ justifies the meddling with the original Sith concept (i.e. OT). However painful this might be to you, PT Sith are by a lightyear closer to the original OT Sith. I wonder why did TOTJ even had to call them Sith. Why not just name them something of its own since it would work just as well. Calling them Sith was bound to cause friction and trouble.

DuracellEnergizer said:

TOTJ made no mess. If anything, it left some historical blanks to fill -- blanks that probably would have been filled if the bullshit prequels hadn't come out and taken over the comics.

So if you follow your own principles, you wouldn't mind if a similar EU source made yet another version of Sith (just like TOTJ did) about 2,500 years before OT and 2,500 years after TOTJ. After all, if we gave TOTJ the right to do that why not to someone else, right? And since we don't want them to be "generic", they would be yet another aliens, this time green skinned four legged creatures wielding blasters (we wish to avoid red lightsabres, actually lightsabres altogether). It would leave more than enough "historical blanks" to fill. And then we will blame decent sources like KOTOR and SWTOR for having to deal with these "historical blanks" (read: mess).