Sundown Posted February 12, 2005 Share Posted February 12, 2005 (edited) Ok. Well this is 2005 and photorealism doesn't always mean gritty. Sure. But gritty isn't really the operative word here. Drop "gritty" and my preferences still apply... Who knows, maybe the CG Grevious will look better composited. EDIT: Saw the shot from what looks like actual footage that I missed earlier. Looks better, if not perfect. -Al Edited February 12, 2005 by Sundown Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zentrandude Posted February 12, 2005 Share Posted February 12, 2005 you know if you scroll down fast enough through the pictures you have the movie without sound Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Jenius Posted February 12, 2005 Share Posted February 12, 2005 Ok. Well this is 2005 and photorealism doesn't always mean gritty. Sure. But gritty isn't really the operative word here. Drop "gritty" and my preferences still apply... Who knows, maybe the CG Grevious will look better composited. EDIT: Saw the shot from what looks like actual footage that I missed earlier. Looks better, if not perfect. -Al Hehe, yes. The actual images are way better. What ever happened to suspension of disbelief anyway? I mean all this CG bashing seems to be a modern version of "I can see the strings." In the end, it detracts from the film no more than being able to tell that the earlier films used models. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skunkobot Posted February 12, 2005 Share Posted February 12, 2005 Ok. Well this is 2005 and photorealism doesn't always mean gritty. Sure. But gritty isn't really the operative word here. Drop "gritty" and my preferences still apply... Who knows, maybe the CG Grevious will look better composited. EDIT: Saw the shot from what looks like actual footage that I missed earlier. Looks better, if not perfect. -Al Hehe, yes. The actual images are way better. What ever happened to suspension of disbelief anyway? I mean all this CG bashing seems to be a modern version of "I can see the strings." In the end, it detracts from the film no more than being able to tell that the earlier films used models. Simply put: You're not supposed to be able to see the strings!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewie Posted February 12, 2005 Share Posted February 12, 2005 It's not as bad as you make it out to be AND if you know your Grievous, you know he's like a flippin transformer. I wouldn't take any shot of him at face value until seeing the movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundown Posted February 12, 2005 Share Posted February 12, 2005 What ever happened to suspension of disbelief anyway? I mean all this CG bashing seems to be a modern version of "I can see the strings." In the end, it detracts from the film no more than being able to tell that the earlier films used models. Well, strings are something you have to look for. CG looking "off" is something you sense as you look at. It's a preference really. Models and real sets look like they're there. And those of us brought up to watch CG with a critical eye are just wired to find fault with it. I find that models break suspension of belief much less often than imperfect CG does... but that's the way my brain works. Obviously it's not true for everyone else. -Al Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chronocidal Posted February 12, 2005 Share Posted February 12, 2005 What's really kind of depressing about all the CG is that nothing seems believable anymore.. I mean, I get sick of the overuse of CG, when a man-made prop would more than suffice, and actually probably be more effective than a CG one, even if it's less glamorous and fantastic. Granted the robots would be hard to do.. but then again... the walkers in ESB were stop motion, and that worked fine. Yes, it's tedious. But it looks REAL. Same for the space battles. Real models have something about them that CG can't duplicate no matter how hard it tries.... plus, there's the invevitable copy-paste errors that become obvious in CG, ie, you see half a dozen droids with EXACTLY the same pattern of wear on them. Or, in the case of ANH, suddenly, every X-wing pilot got a duplicate of R2-D2. I'd take the entirely man-made battle in the original ROTJ over anything in the prequels... it was more hectic, more detailed, and better looking than anything I've yet seen with CG. Same can be said for sets... I dunno, I just tend to think of CG as a cheap way out of doing work that could end up looking better if a real model was used. LOTR is a perfect example of this... Minas Tirith was a handcrafted model, pasted into the landscape. And it blew the crap out of anything CG'd for Coruscant. Granted, CG troops are handy when you need hundreds of troops marching without hiring hundreds of extras... but then again, hey... LOTR did it. After seeing all the work that was put into LOTR, anything CG'd for EpIII is gonna look like a lousy cop-out by comparison. Now, I don't really know to what extent CG was used in LOTR, I'm assuming a great deal. But I think Lucas needs to take a lesson from Peter Jackson. Whatever LOTR did right with CG, the SW prequels have so far gotten wrong. CG should be like whipped cream.. a good topping to enhance the appearance and flavor, not the first and most important ingredient in everything you make. Without CG, LOTR would've still been doable, just on a much smaller scale. The prequels, on the other hand, wouldn't have a leg to stand on. K, sorry, ranting over now. Sheesh, I start typing like I'm talking, and before you know it I've written an essay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundown Posted February 12, 2005 Share Posted February 12, 2005 (edited) Yeah. But I'm guessing some folks just don't see visual differences between traditional models and CG, and the descrepancies don't affect the "feel" of the imagery for them. Or they prefer the flash and glitz of CG elements that tend to call attention to themselves, where some the novelty lies in it being CG-- over the sorts of CG that's hard to spot and merely enhances real imagery. It's a matter of having different senses of aesthetics. Examples of Great CG (IMO): Blackhawk down-- couldn't spot any of the CG effects until I'd seen the Making Of documentaries that highlighted the scenes that used them. Even then, it was hard to spot the CG-ness. LOTR-- It's all been said already. Gollum looked somewhat CG-ish in moments, but the animation and characterization was so well done that it tended to draw your attention away from that fact. Not perfect, but compelling use of CG, considering how many computer generated shots were used. Examples of Meh CG: The Star Wars Prequels-- I think some of it was just due to over saturated colors, with everything screaming "Look At Me!" Episode One didn't bother me too much, though I wasn't a big fan of most of the CG aliens. AOTC's battles were largely unconvincing, and looked like the giant CG fest it was. There's something about ILM's render that I just don't like, and they're intent on using it, even when there are renderers out there that can produce much more photorealistic results. I know that not everyone sees things the way I do, and for those that don't, I probably seem positively crazy and arbitrary. I've always had a critical eye... it's a curse sometimes. Anyway, highly off topic again, and most of this has already been said one way or another before. Still looking somewhat forward to Anakin's pwnage, even though I'd always thought that it would have and should have been something to dread instead. -Al Edited February 12, 2005 by Sundown Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HWR MKII Posted February 12, 2005 Share Posted February 12, 2005 (edited) His shift may still be something to dread we just dont know yet. Sure we may not like the actor but if pulled off right we could be looking at the best thing on screen since the frist SW in 77. Chrono i also agree with you that models have a visual weight and depth that CG models just dont get right . Aside from that ILM still uses models in its space pattles they only used CG in the large closeup beauty shots where you might make out the details of the pilot. Example of bad CG. X-Men when Wolverine cuts the shotgun in half in canada the actor holding it isnt holding anything look at his hands they are open and the shotgun is stuck onto his palm. Physical prop would have been quicker and easier. Edited February 12, 2005 by HWR MKII Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Jenius Posted February 12, 2005 Share Posted February 12, 2005 Now, I don't really know to what extent CG was used in LOTR, I'm assuming a great deal. But I think Lucas needs to take a lesson from Peter Jackson. Whatever LOTR did right with CG, the SW prequels have so far gotten wrong. CG should be like whipped cream.. a good topping to enhance the appearance and flavor, not the first and most important ingredient in everything you make. Without CG, LOTR would've still been doable, just on a much smaller scale. The prequels, on the other hand, wouldn't have a leg to stand on.K, sorry, ranting over now. Sheesh, I start typing like I'm talking, and before you know it I've written an essay. You do know that WETA went to ILM for help wen doing LOTR right? With the exception of interaction with real-life actors, I see no glaring examples of poor CG in the PT. Now, you can call Jabba in ANH all you want, and granted; nothing will top the gigantic puppet. Without CG, the prequel trilogies wouldn't have been as good for me. I think despite its flaws, the worlds presented in the PT are FAR more vibrant and seem much more alive to me. But, we are in a transition period and of course people will cling to the men in suits and tethered models for quite some time. Heheh, the paragraphs really flow when you're writing about something you love. And yes, you're not supposed to see the strings, but there are many instances in the much ballyhooed OT where you clearly can. "Oh it was made in '77." Ok. Ep I was made in '99 and in many ways pioneered Special Effects as we know it. Again. But again, people see things differently. I mean, personally, I thought the battle in Ep II owned ESB's Hoth battle. Much more exciting to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coota0 Posted February 12, 2005 Share Posted February 12, 2005 So the Storm/Clone Troopers in Ep.III are they supposed to be less clones and more individuals? Is that what is up the colorful Armor? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Effect Posted February 12, 2005 Share Posted February 12, 2005 The different colors on the Clone Trooper armor is to show different ranks I believe. The clones developing different personalities makes sense to me to be honest. Each clone wouldn't actually being doing the same thing or be around the same commanders and people. Their experiences(being on a different planet, being in a differnt part of the battlefield in a battle, facing a different direction, etc) would cause them to develop differently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Majestic Posted February 12, 2005 Share Posted February 12, 2005 The Star Wars Prequels-- I think some of it was just due to over saturated colors, with everything screaming "Look At Me!" Episode One didn't bother me too much, though I wasn't a big fan of most of the CG aliens. AOTC's battles were largely unconvincing, and looked like the giant CG fest it was. There's something about ILM's render that I just don't like, and they're intent on using it, even when there are renderers out there that can produce much more photorealistic results. Look out, you're going to be labeled (paradoxically) as a "fanboy" for your negative prequel opinions! I completely agree. The arena battle in AoTC was especially glaring in terms of bad CGI, IMO. The clone trooper that helped Padme up from the sand was utterly CGI as well - they could have used a man in suit for this scene, but didn't for some odd reason (maybe for consistency?). CGI Yoda looks bad as well, IMO, although his puppet version, while endearing, looks pretty bad too. Maybe there's no way to make a good Yoda! Don't get me started on CGI Jabba... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guvava Posted February 12, 2005 Share Posted February 12, 2005 I'm sure it's been mentioned before, but my biggest gripe with Christensen as Vader is thier lack of making Christensen not talk with an accent like Jame Earl Jones. Not sure what accent is suppose to be exactly, slightly British maybe. The deep voice is could be explained as a mechanical or injury issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coota0 Posted February 12, 2005 Share Posted February 12, 2005 The different colors on the Clone Trooper armor is to show different ranks I believe. The clones developing different personalities makes sense to me to be honest. Each clone wouldn't actually being doing the same thing or be around the same commanders and people. Their experiences(being on a different planet, being in a differnt part of the battlefield in a battle, facing a different direction, etc) would cause them to develop differently. I agree with what you say, and I knew that the colors meant differnt ranks, I was referring to the picture on the page before this one that seems to have far more color than the Clones did in Ep.II Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cobywan Posted February 12, 2005 Share Posted February 12, 2005 If you really want to know what is wrong with the CG imagery we see these days read this editorial and get the current Cinefex. It has a round table with 50 top FX people in the world. It is a very enlightening article. http://www.starwarslegacy.com/site/pages/Editorials.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Valkyrie Posted February 12, 2005 Share Posted February 12, 2005 SPOILER ! I wonder if all the toy marketing people for ep 3 were scratching their heads on how to market this for a young audience. It's like all those Aliens action figures that came out and flopped. The kids didn't like em cos the movie was too violent and they never saw it. The adults who liked the movie didn't like the toys cos they were for little kids and super-crappy. My favourite Aliens toy is this micro machines playset from Alien. There's even a little diorama for the kitchen scene with a chestburster popping out of John Hurt's chest. Just realised I got way sidetracked! hehe. Anyway my point is that it's funny to see dark/violent/scary movies with toy lines aimed at the kiddies. Indeed, the kids are the one who grew up with SW, namely us. Hasbro should be careful in not make the same figure over and over let`s say variation, they should make only the basic with it`s accessories and thats it. Also not making too many side character figures especially the ones who appear for less than a minute and thats it. Look what happen with Episode-I figures ... FAILED why ? the samething mentioned before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Jenius Posted February 13, 2005 Share Posted February 13, 2005 Look out, you're going to be labeled (paradoxically) as a "fanboy" for your negative prequel opinions! I wonder if any SW fanboys even exist anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke Togo Posted February 13, 2005 Share Posted February 13, 2005 Besides you, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Jenius Posted February 13, 2005 Share Posted February 13, 2005 Besides you, of course. If you think I'm a fanboy, then you don't know what a fanboy is. But that wouldn't suprise me in the least. Fanboys don't fall asleep in the middle of EVERY movie PT+OT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke Togo Posted February 13, 2005 Share Posted February 13, 2005 Jesus Christ, what the hell has happened to everybody here? No one has a sense of humor anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Jenius Posted February 13, 2005 Share Posted February 13, 2005 Jesus Christ, what the hell has happened to everybody here? No one has a sense of humor anymore. I had to stay up til 8am against my will last night. Sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke Togo Posted February 13, 2005 Share Posted February 13, 2005 Sounds kinky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Jenius Posted February 13, 2005 Share Posted February 13, 2005 Sounds kinky. Yep. Because writing reports all night because two native chicks decide to fight eachother in the hallway really turns me on. They probably don't like Star Wars either.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zentrandude Posted February 13, 2005 Share Posted February 13, 2005 k this is getting creepy. now i have to cut my eyes out for reading what turns him on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ladic Posted February 13, 2005 Share Posted February 13, 2005 Nothing New, but info on all the charters for ep3. http://www.theforce.net/episode3/jtf/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewie Posted February 13, 2005 Share Posted February 13, 2005 (edited) Nothing New, but info on all the charters for ep3.http://www.theforce.net/episode3/jtf/ Except after reading the profiles for Mace and Grievous alone I know more about the movie than I ever did. That link needs a huge SPOILER warning. Edited February 13, 2005 by Chewie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Effect Posted February 13, 2005 Share Posted February 13, 2005 (edited) Actually the actual page, above the links, a warning is is shown saying the links contain spoilers. Don't blame anyone else if you didn't actually read what you were clicking on or read things before you clicked on a name. The warning is in the link above, once you click a character, the warning is there again and you have to scroll down to read the information. The warnings were there. Edited February 13, 2005 by Effect Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
striderhiryu Posted February 13, 2005 Share Posted February 13, 2005 anyways, there are certain advantages of beeing spoiled, for an instance i have done a bet with some friends, everything i need to win is for palpatine to at least once mention darth plagueis, by getting info this way there is no doubt i'm for the dark side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guppy Posted February 13, 2005 Share Posted February 13, 2005 darth who? Darth Plageus? Did he copy someone else's homework? That must be what turned him to the dark side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewie Posted February 13, 2005 Share Posted February 13, 2005 anyways, there are certain advantages of beeing spoiled, for an instance i have done a bet with some friends, everything i need to win is for palpatine to at least once mention darth plagueis, by getting info this way there is no doubt i'm for the dark side. Rofl That's the name from supershadow. HAHAHAHAHAHA I love that guy...shadow makes me laugh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewie Posted February 13, 2005 Share Posted February 13, 2005 Actually the actual page, above the links, a warning is is shown saying the links contain spoilers. Don't blame anyone else if you didn't actually read what you were clicking on or read things before you clicked on a name. The warning is in the link above, once you click a character, the warning is there again and you have to scroll down to read the information. The warnings were there. Yeah, it's also this big. I wasn't complaning. I like knowing as much as I can because it makes excellent conversation and really doesn't spoil the movie for me but there are others who might miss that tiny print and read only to find out a MAJOR, movie ruining plot point. I was just adding a warning and making a suggestion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundown Posted February 13, 2005 Share Posted February 13, 2005 (edited) I mean, personally, I thought the battle in Ep II owned ESB's Hoth battle. Much more exciting to me. My turn. You're kidding right? But again, people see things differently. Indeed they do. I think it might also just be a matter of what excites us. ESB does it for me because it resembles a real-world military engagement, except with equipment and a setting from a galaxy far away. AOTC just seemed to have a lot of... stuff... for stuff's sake, and the overt CG-ness I'm cursed with spotting didn't help. Then again, I'm one of those folks who'd nod at Deep Impact over Armeggedon, and Contact over Independence Day. My exact sentiments, from Cobyway's link. The super saturated, high-contrast "punchy" aesthetic: "The depth is gone. At some point, people decided this punchier look was better. I'm not sure why, but this is the primary difference between the look of the prequels and the original trilogy. Have you ever actually seen images from the movies side-by-side? The prequels look like video games in comparison; their images are crafted by younger digital-age artists, not photographers. Powerful tools, no idea how to use them. " I guess the CG-ness of the prequels is somewhat exacerbated by the punchy look. And in audio, this has the same effect as on the video - it takes all the warmth, depth and imaging out of the experience. But there's a visceral experience to having bright, tinkly sounds and chest-thumping bass; just like getting sparkly brights and deep rich blacks in images. What's sad is that people don't realize you don't have to choose one or the other. You just have to know what you're doing, and you can have the best of both worlds: satisfying images and sound, that also have the full spectrum of frequencies in the middle, for believable depth. Don't forget, most of the time now, we're crafting images in ways that could never exist in nature, and then presenting them to the eye as though it were real. The eye is the most perfect camera in the universe - it never takes a bad picture, and it is hard pressed to believe this flat, shallow world of images could ever exist. While our brains and eyes are busy trying to figure this puzzle out, our hearts can't focus on giving a damn. Bingo. For some, anyway. The rest of the article has some pretty good insights. And they're a lot more compelling than "Lucas is performing sexual battery upon my youth." -Al Edited February 13, 2005 by Sundown Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guppy Posted February 13, 2005 Share Posted February 13, 2005 Then again, I'm one of those folks who'd nod at Deep Impact over Armeggedon, and Contact over Independence Day. I'd throw rocks at all those films in equal measure. Well, maybe a bigger rock at Armeggedon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mechleader Posted February 14, 2005 Author Share Posted February 14, 2005 (edited) Edited February 14, 2005 by Mechleader Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts