Now that's the subtle kind of changes I love Angel. Great job on "floating" the barge. You can even see the sand berms burying the wooden platforms underneath the barge in the original shot.
vaderios said:
Yes they are ppl. taken from a previous shot.
I dont know if you notice that i add the towers from ANH that the rebels are up to yavin IV. Only these are covered for the cold.
Really?! I've never noticed that before.
*Paging Angel and his magically appearing windows*
*ahem*
Repeat that. I didnt understand a shit :P
-Angel
lol. Put a window where he is talking. That was what I meant to shit...I mean say.
Bingowings said:
There are only two aspects of the romance that don't work, the words and the pictures :-D
Once again a redub as well as an edit would push it further but we'd still have to look at Hayden's face.
Trooperman's redo Shroud of the Dark Side had some good reordering and trims of existing scenes.
Bingowings said:
The SE Sarlacc looks like something Giger would throw in the bin for being too out there.
(ON BE THE SWISS ACCENT) : "A lady's front bottom with teeth, with a trouser-snake tongue with a beak? Nah... "
Talk about gilding the willy :-D
lol. Geesh.
lol.
Just cut and paste Audrey! Audrey's revenge!
Ganamae said:
Ahh there you go again Angel m8, impressing us again hehe
I like it, the control room window is a nice add, since ppl actually look out it in the control room ( one can see that just before the ION cannon fires ) some ppl are running over and looking our somewhere on the right side.
oh and are those ppl I see on the right side there?
Really?! I've never noticed that before.
*Paging Angel and his magically appearing windows*
*ahem*
Bingowings said:
Fair enough but still I can't help but wonder what a Star Wars prequel trilogy written by Tom Stoppard (to Lucas' outline) would have been like.
Well, the opera scene might be a clue.
Bingowings said:
Fisher was also rumored to have worked on dialogue.
That was just a rumor. It never happened.
Bingowings said:
Darth Venal said:
Bingowings said:Christopher Lee appeared to give an uncharacteristically flat performance and he is theatrically trained, worked a lot on radio and has worked well on other green screen heavy films.
Maybe he gave a good performance that was massaged to death in the editing or not very well photographed (we don't have all the footage so it's impossible to tell).
Well, he only really has one scene where he's talking with another actor at length, when Obi Wan is strung up. The rest of his scenes are either against CG characters or just odd lines with no real structure in the middle of action scenes. I think his class still shows out in the scene with McGregor. Other than that, he doesn't really register much because his character is totally undeveloped. In the Lord of the Rings movies, he does at least act with real actors in all his scenes, and pretty good ones at that.
There were more scenes with Dooku, some of which have never seen the light of day and even a good performance can be made to look flat by bad camera work and sloppy editing. I would really love to see all the footage most of the actors are really talented and some are used to acting with minimal or no scenery. Lee's story readings (no scenery, no other actors) are also often brilliant so I find it hard to believe that green screenery is entirely to blame.
I am really going to bite my tongue here because Ben Burtt is such an amazing artist. He created classic sounds and everything in all the SW films, all of them.
BUT......the AOTC's final act was a complete **** up. I don't know who butchered the score in the third act and buried it in the final mix, but it was a complete shambles in the film's final act. Whole portions of William's original score were replaced with retreads from TPM....when you could hear them.
But I don't blame Burtt. He's not the one who made the final call on that.
edit Lest I sound too hard on Burtt(which is not my intent at all), I loved Wall E. He helped make that film the gem it is. I'm so glad he's at Pixar now.
Bingowings said:
If anything it's the PT that have hidden or ghost writers, Carrie Fisher and Tom Stoppard apparently contributed to the PT.
The scriptwriting credits for the OT if anything point the opposite way giving him less credit than he could claim (though he didn't write the novelisation credited to him that was Alan Dean Foster).
I've been thinking about the prophecy regarding the chosen one.
I know this is seen as unpopular to some people but I think it's one of the elements that don't work because of it's execution.
I loved the way that the television adaptation of I Claudius uses the Delphic prophecy to bookend the series and I also like the idea of assuming that a prophecy points one way when it may point in the opposite direction.
A scene where we see an ancient recording of the prophecy being played before the council and some of the council like Dooku and Qui-Gon reading portents in events like the invasion of Naboo could sell the idea better and sow the seeds of doubt that Palpatine would later exploit.
No, only Stoppard. And that was for ROTS and it was some small bits.
SomethingStarWarsRelated said:
vaderios said:
SomethingStarWarsRelated said:
Well, there could be *some* shots that could have set extensions made...instead of cropping...but I know you know this, Angel. ;)
Yes i do! :D
-Angel
I love the sand being disturbed underneath the sail barge!
What do you guys think about having the sand being disturbed the whole time...to kind of achieve a hovering effect? or is that too much?
Indeed you are powerful as the Adywan has foreseen.
I love that shot(except for the billowing sand). :p
But you probably should make the pit more visible like in the original or more as Venal suggested.
Great job though. Keep it up. :)
vaderios said:
I like the extra detail of the new one.
-Angel
Sometimes extra detail makes things look less realistic, especially if you're trying to convince audiences they're looking at something large and set back in the frame with distance between the viewer and the object.
Darth Venal said:
The problem is, without convincing characters/performances, nothing else works.
Well who is to blame for that? I've watched Ewan give better performances. Natalie Portman. Liam Neeson.
To me it starts and stops with George. He wrote the script for TPM and co-wrote AOTC and ROTS. He also directed all three.
My biggest problem with the prequels is I don't think Lucas really had a fully fleshed out story for all 3 films. And he dragged his feet on writing the scripts, especially for the first 2 prequels. And it shows.
All I can say is I'm glad he's done with it because he'd clearly rather be making historical films like Red Tails, and documentaries, like the excellent mini-docs he produced for the Young Indy DVD sets.
vaderios said:
Edit:
Shine removed
-Angel
I love the new scale elements and the control room....yes! But I have to ask, why did you replace the miniature of the cannon to begin with? Why not just take the shot and add those turrets and control room and be done with it? I don't see what's wrong with the old cannon.
The other thing is it shouldn't be that that shiny just from a hidden base standpoint.
I thought Ewan did a fine job all things considered. When it comes to the prequels, I got bigger beefs than his performance as Obi-Wan.
Ithilgore said:
Darth Venal said:
I agree, SSWR (sorry, your name is so long!). Introducing Luke in such a mundane way is going to undermine the pacing and structure of the movie, and totally ruin what is a pretty decent entrance at Jabba's Palace.
And usually when movie is edited about, you can see it a mile away. Anyone seen Hannibal recently? It's horrendously re-edited and totally destroys the original structure and introduction of Gary Oldman's character. He has several scenes where his face is hidden before he's finally revealed when Clarice visits him, but they ruined it by editing a later scene to be a prologue and you just see him full on. Not one of Ridley Scott's finest moments.
Legend is another one where the US version destroys the "big reveal". In the European and Directors versions Tim Curry is not actually revealed until 3/4 of the way into the movie, the rest of the time he's hidden, and his reveal coming out of the mirror is GIANT. But the US version just shows him in the first scene. Ridley Scott again.
Ridley Scott seems to have almost all his movies re-edited against his will, like a running gag. Blade Runner, the studio added that voiceover that both Scott and Harrison Ford hated (and it shows, Ford deliberately did it as badly as he could, hoping to get it cut), and Scott's intended cut didn't get to happen until the Final Cut a couple of years ago.
Same with Kingdom of Heaven, Scott's director's cut version is something like 45 minutes longer than the threatrical one that the studio had him release, and apparently (I've seen neither) the threatrical version is a very poor film, and Scott's version was either very good or downright excellent, depending on the person asked.
I've seen both. The theatrical is too short. The director's cut a tad too long. But of the two, the director's cut fleshes out the character's more and adds subtle character moments that deepen the film. And the fx work by Moving Picture Company is top notch. Excellente. You can watch the film and go "where are the fx?". Exactly.
Venal, nice to see you also like Bottin's work. I've enjoyed all of his work with Dante. Their segment on the Twilight Zone film was the best one. I still get a laugh from Bottin's and ILM's work on Innerspace.
Angel Blue01 said:
Yeah, I never had much of a problem with the design of the rancor as much of the model, well, puppet that they used. Its plenty scary if the lighting is right, as Angel's mockups showed!
And of course more ILM lying about the mattelines: they said they'd removed them in the SEs but they weren't removed until the 2004 DVD. One less thing that need fixing by Adywan I suppose.
First, ILM doesn't dictate what is done and not done. That's the director's or filmmaker's prerogative. Second, ILM never said they'd fix matte lines on everything. Basically, if Lucas didn't budget for it, it didn't get done.
There's this idea out there that fx companies can almost do what they want with a film. They're service companies under contract by studios or production companies to do specific things.
Unless it's an ILM production(coming soon with Gore Verbinski's Rango) or co-production(there were some of those in the mid-'80's), they don't have the kind of control you're speaking of.
I just don't know what approach we could use to have the Gamorrean's drop their guard beyond some serious tweaking.
hehe
Ric Olie said:
Davnes007 - If I were someone other than Ric, I'd think that pic was super hilarious. Since I'm Ric, and now the picture is really doing my job, I'm super depressed.
doubleofive said:
Roc Olie? Ric, is that your brother there?
My brother is Olis Olie. Check the prequel radical thread.
lol
Ric Olie said:
shanerjedi said:
Hey, Olis was a unique character. He was fine even if a little stilted.
My brother Olis Olie? Yeah, he was pretty wooden. Me, I got tips from Natalie on set and I think I came off very dynamic.
Oops. LOL Olie!
Darth Venal said:
Shanerjedi:
That's cool. Angel can do the mock up/concept work and Venal can realize it. I'm sure we're in for some really cool stuff.
Oh great, don't put any pressure on us or anything.
;-)
Hey, at least you don't have people camping out at their computers waiting for your next image. Oh wait....darn sleeping bag zipper is caught again. :p
That's cool. Angel can do the mock up/concept work and Venal can realize it. I'm sure we're in for some really cool stuff.
Hey, Olis was a unique character. He was fine even if a little stilted.
Darth Venal said:
I don't know what it is about traditional matte painting, but I just prefer it. I just feel it works better on film than digital mattes have so far. Yes, of course, digital mattes are more detailed and can be manipulated in 3D for different angles etc, but there's just something about painted mattes...
Maybe it's the work that goes into them, I know the artist has painted every bit of it, but with digital art, that's rarely the case any more. Is digital stuff technically more accurate? For sure. Does it look more real? Often, no. I feel the same about digital animation over hand drawn. Most of us are aware just how much work went into traditional animation, and how much the machines have taken that skill away. Oh, don't get me wrong, I wouldn't wish a workload like that on anyone! But people used to do that, every frame of it, and I can't help feeling they deserved higher praise than someone who does theirs on a computer, like me.
Well, there are some of you guys who do(did) both. Many folks like Chris Evans from Matte World, Mike Pangrazio from Weta, and Yusei Uesugi from ILM all did mattes on glass before transitioning. I think those folks creations work very well in the digital medium. Then there is some great matte work I've seen recently in some recent films that was very good by people who've never painted on glass.
Now I'm not saying any of these people approach Ellenshaw, Whitlock, etc. But they're very good in their own right.
