Nov 30, 2014 Yeah it's too bad that he's using practical effects and not relying entirely on CGI like the prequels...said no one...ever...trailer looked amazing, much more real and tangible than the green screen bs that Lucas relied on so heavily...
Nov 30, 2014 You do realize each of the prequels had more practical effects than the entire original trilogy, right? And that they built a fuckload of actual sets for each of them as well? And that unlike this they didn't look low budget as f---? Also the OT is filled with blue screen shots, which serves the same purpose as green screen.
Nov 30, 2014 I think it looks pretty sick, I like the lack of CGI and the direction they are going with the visual effects.
Nov 30, 2014 I have high hopes for this. Very high in fact. Some people shake heads at the fact that Disney is behind this. But honestly look at Disney's track record for movies. They have the best writers in the game and brilliant soundtracks to go with the movies. They have the money and power to do with this movie what needs to be done with it. I believe the force is with them on this. And to the people that don't understand why they are making more star wars movies. Why the h--- not? Stars Wars wasn't just some random movies. They literally changed s---. Star Wars has the biggest die hard fan base of any movie. If they can't pull it off it will s---, but if they do happen to pull it off this will be something for the books.
Nov 30, 2014 Filming on location is the way this needs to be done. I think lord of the rings trilogy vs. The Hobbit is a perfect example of why it should be.
Nov 30, 2014 First off, nice job not addressing a single thing I actually said in my post. Secondly, there was on location filming for episodes II and III, but even if there wasn't, it makes no difference at all because on location filming doesn't automatically make things look better, especially not when the film world is suppose to contain exotic otherwordly alien locations.
Nov 30, 2014 Absolutely. Same s--- the Hobbit suffers in comparison to LOTR. Original painted over with
Nov 30, 2014 Except that isn't what happened with the PT at all, and the PT still visually s----s all over the OT in literally every single way possible, whether you admit it or not.
Nov 30, 2014 we're comparing films that are released nearly 27 years a part. The CGI in the Prequels makes everything seem fake. It goes against everything that made Star Wars so incredible back then. It was doing s--- with effects that no one could've imagined. It felt REAL. Literally nothing in the Prequels feels real. Doesn't matter if it is a sc-fi film and none of it could ever be real. How the f--- am I supposed to be engrossed with a film if my f---ing video games look better?
Nov 30, 2014 which makes me question how anyone could seriously think the visuals of dated a--- scifi films from the 70's and 80's touches on even one of the massive blockbusters that are the prequels while they had the same special effects techniques, only far better and more advanced and on a much larger scale than the entire set of OT movies combined, and mixed with the very best modern special effects available at the time. You're out of your god d---ed mind if you think the OT looks better.
Dec 1, 2014 There are reasons that films like 2001: a Space Odyssey hold up over time. The problem is that George Lucas went CGI crazy. Instead of having practical mixed with CGI like the original films, he took the easy way out and made everything look cheap. Everything on screen feels light weight. When I see the at at pic I posted, it feels and looks heavy as s--- to me. For The Hobbit, Peter Jackson would've made them the same way as LOTR because he too thought it felt real. You can tell how heavy their armor is in that film, but he wanted to try out 48fps and 3D and it would look to fake without the motion blur. There is not a single human in a clone trooper costume in Revenge of the Sith. Compare it to the Storm Troopers in the new teaser. Who looks more real? The shiny new suits in the teaser. There are certain qualities that over use of CGI cannot achieve. Why do you think Gravity looked so great? A perfect mix.
Dec 1, 2014 The sad thing is you actually think the prequels are CGI heavy, and lacking in a lot of practical real locations and sets and models and bigatures when they simply aren't. The only thing I can give you is the clone troopers, but there are obvious technical reasons behind why that was done. And lmao at CGI being "lazy". :SSSSS I'm done arguing this.
Dec 1, 2014 A lot of the time CGI is actually more difficult to do, I think directors are starting to realize that using cgi in as few places as they can is better but when it is used it should be used for something that really benefits from having it.
Dec 1, 2014 a lot more difficult how? A real person not being able to interact with someone unless they are in a green suit or a prop? If something f---s up in CGI u just take the computer and move it closer etc.. If something f---s up with a practical set piece, u have to re do the whole shot.
