Away all Goats posted:The funniest thing is how Grevious is supposed to be this super deadly jedi killer (that's why he has so many lightsabers, he collects them as trophies) but apparently his main form of attack is spinning two of his arms as he slowly walks towards you. Wow. He forces his opponent to rely on thrusting or weak cuts while still being able to parry them, what a dumbass. Check out that dipshit Obi-Wan Kenobi, who pointlessly spins around for no reason in a duel to the death: https://youtu.be/8kpHK4YIwY4?t=34 mycot posted:Ignoring how they literally make Star Wars video games, I still don't see why you're arguing how good it looks when what everyone is saying is how bad the actual scene was. I would suggest that he doesn't believe in consensus reality.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 06:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 12:06 |
|
|
Effectronica posted:Check out that dipshit Obi-Wan Kenobi, who pointlessly spins around for no reason in a duel to the death: I agree, that duel's choreography is terrible too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 06:18
|
|
Away all Goats posted:I agree, that duel's choreography is terrible too. It's actually good. You can't appreciate movie swordfighting, it seems.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 06:19
|
|
|
mycot posted:Ignoring how they literally make Star Wars video games What is the relevance of this exactly? Cnut the Great fucked around with this message at 06:37 on Jan 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 06:30
|
|
|
Cnut the Great posted:So what's your professional opinion on how this particular scene should have been achieved instead? Real set, blue screen extenders, CGI character. It just looks weird when the only real thing is Ewen. He stands out. Actually, real droids too. They aren't doing much in the background. could save a few bucks on effects.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 06:34
|
|
|
Cnut the Great posted:What is the relevance of this exactly? I just think it's ridiculous to bring up how much money something cost as a sign of quality; they make expensive video games too. I actually agree with all of your edited post's points about the intent of Grievous (though it's way too subtle for its own good in the actual movies and he just comes off as a narratively useless character) so I'm going to drop the argument. mycot fucked around with this message at 06:38 on Jan 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 06:35
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:Real set, blue screen extenders, CGI character. It just looks weird when the only real thing is Ewen. He stands out.  Help me out here. Is this CGI or a practical miniature? Should be easy to tell without Googling, since there's always such an obvious difference. I think if it was a real set you'd still think it was CGI. As evidenced by all the real sets in the prequels that people nevertheless think are CGI. Case in point, I'm pretty sure no one ever gave this scene a pass: 
Cnut the Great fucked around with this message at 06:46 on Jan 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 06:39
|
|
|
The stormtroopers also stand around and watch Vader and Kenobi going at it in ANH. I think this is the point where someone sneers "It's like poetry, it rhymes" and spits on the ground.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 06:41
|
|
|
Nah, its just the part where we recognize that one of the passive powers of the force is that, when used in combat, it passively mind tricks those nearby to stare until it is completed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 06:50
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:Real set, blue screen extenders, CGI character. It just looks weird when the only real thing is Ewen. He stands out. The character is lit consistently with the rest of the scene and, consequently, does not stand out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 06:53
|
|
|
Barudak posted:Nah, its just the part where we recognize that one of the passive powers of the force is that, when used in combat, it passively mind tricks those nearby to stare until it is completed. Just like how Superman is vibrating his face at all times.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 07:00
|
|
|
Cnut the Great posted:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bL6hp8BKB24 I love CGI and everyone else should, too. That's not to say that the PT CGI was perfect, but they were pushing the limits with those movies and it's noticeable in both good and bad ways. I'm sure Lucas could have included more practical sets and props in the PT, but often times given the scope and complexity of what was going on it just didn't make sense to do so. Everyone needs to cut CGI some slack 
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 07:08
|
|
|
Barudak posted:Nah, its just the part where we recognize that one of the passive powers of the force is that, when used in combat, it passively mind tricks those nearby to stare until it is completed. You may be joking, but that's exactly the case in the films. In the prequels (the only films where a force user is ever killed with weapon (!!!)), Lucas makes a deliberate point of showing that the loser in a fight isn't ever 'just' stabbed. Jedi and Sith alike are invariably rendered immobile, stupefied. They stare, powerless, as they're cut down. What's actually going on is simply that the Force has abandoned the loser, and they are reduced to mere humans. This effect reaches an extreme with Padme, who makes herself so void of Force that she spontaneously dies.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 07:23
|
|
|
Shoren posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bL6hp8BKB24 The scope and complexity of what he was trying to do was a huge part of the problem! Why did Obi-Wan have to fight a giant 4 armed lightsaber twirling robot back dropped by a battle droid army when he can't even make it look good? Doesn't it tell you something that in the few cases where there were practical sets they were completely drowned out by nauseating amounts of CGI? This isn't Mad Max where the CGI complemented things as shown in the Freddie Wong video. In the PT the CGI often took away from what little else there was. Good god why have the prequel apologists migrated into this thread too? Just keep making GBS threads up the other one.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 07:50
|
|
|
The video is absolutely right that CGI isn't the real problem and is often used as a scapegoat. Half the answer to fixing that Grievous fight would be to rewrite the whole scene into something that made a lick of sense.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 07:58
|
|
|
Wait, last I remember hearing, the fact that their is no "real" seduction to the dark side is a both long lasting and consistent complaint about Anakin's fall as portrayed in the PT.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 07:59
|
|
|
NecroMonster posted:Wait, last I remember hearing, the fact that their is no "real" seduction to the dark side is a both long lasting and consistent complaint about Anakin's fall as portrayed in the PT. It's pretty dumb that the main reason he was "seduced" by the Dark Side was that he was tricked into believing that by going Dark he could save his wife, even though he ended up killing her himself anyway. Whoops. Yeah it's intended to be a tragically ironic ending I get that. It's still stupid and meaningless because it had next to no time to properly develop so that anyone would actually care.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 08:06
|
|
|
The PT are bad movies. Interesting yes, but also simply awful.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 08:07
|
|
|
    All these shots look better than Force Awakens. Two are sets, two are CG (I think; it's often impossible to tell), and they all display a consistent aesthetic. The massive CGI machine has more detail than the real-world staircase. SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 08:35 on Jan 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 08:18
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:It's pretty dumb that the main reason he was "seduced" by the Dark Side was that he was tricked into believing that by going Dark he could save his wife, even though he ended up killing her himself anyway. Whoops. Yeah it's intended to be a tragically ironic ending I get that. It's still stupid and meaningless because it had next to no time to properly develop so that anyone would actually care. The reason why he thinks that is that in the previous film, he got a vision of a loved one dying and arrived too late to save her. If that's not enough development, I'm curious what would be.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 08:20
|
|
|
The Prequels aren't bad movies. TPM, considered the worst Prequel by most, is shot better than TFA.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 08:21
|
|
|
TPM is actually the best prequel because it at least had some effort put into it, misguided as it was. I've never seen an entire production phoned it in quite like AoTC. On a related note I just spent a large amount of time browsing Te Force.net forums for the first time in nearly a decade. I thought there might be some interesting insight or discussion on at least some topics. Ho. Ly. poo poo. I don't think I've ever been more irritated by an internet message board as I am now. And I sometimes browse Free Republic. Between the people who literally can't understand basic story information that a scene is conveying and those who literally hate TFA because according to them it doesn't have the spirit and vision of George Lucas's creative imagination like the prequels did I think I've gone insane. Ugh I loved this movie but gently caress Star Wars, should have just died a slow death along with Lucas. And this coming is from a fan of a good bit of the old EU. Shimrra Jamaane fucked around with this message at 08:49 on Jan 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 08:41
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:TPM is actually the best prequel because it at least had some effort put into it, misguided as it was. I've never seen an entire production phoned it in quite like AoTC. well it really doesn't. For all of Lucas's flaws, he is at least a fearlessly imaginative crazy person.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 08:49
|
|
|
NecroMonster posted:well it really doesn't. For all of Lucas's flaws, he is at least a fearlessly imaginative crazy person. Oh I am well aware how fearlessly imaginative and creative he was. The first drafts of "The Star Wars" back in the mid 70s were loving batshit insane and would probably have made a wondrously fascinating b-movie to examine 30 years later. Except it was clear in the context of those discussions that they regarded Lucas as having no flaws. All of his ideas were great and if anything went wrong it was because he was failed. Also a healthy dose of the usual "you just don't understand the four-dimensional complexity of the story and direction he was going for." To them he wasn't imaginatively crazy, he was imaginatively stoic and knew exactly what he was doing at every step of the way. Shimrra Jamaane fucked around with this message at 08:56 on Jan 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 08:50
|
|
|
  
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 08:55
|
|
|
A good use of non practical visual effects that more or less blend seamlessly with the scene around it. So what's your point? That Matte paintings and blue screens were used in the OT to accomplish visual feats that would have otherwise been impossible, the same rational for using CGI in the prequels? Because we all know that. It's just that in one case it looked good, in the other it looked bad. Also we care about what is happening in the scenes here. We care about the characters in them and what's going to happen next. That's the most important thing going on here. Shimrra Jamaane fucked around with this message at 09:02 on Jan 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 08:59
|
|
|
I like Jar Jar, but I think he overwhelms TPM. Obi-wan really does jack poo poo the entire movie. An odd choice, given how Binks fades away into obscurity and Obi-wan becomes the protagonist. TPM as a whole just feels very disconnected from what comes after, narratively and aesthetically. The best part about TPM is that Anakin comes off as a sweet, caring, and genuinely good kid. Lloyd does a great job and it's a shame that people torn him to pieces for no discernible reason.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 08:59
|
|
|
Oh, I don't doubt for a second that's how and what they think, it's just important to keep the "criticism" that TFA lacks Lucas's vision in it's proper frame and context. It's true, the film does, but this isn't actually a statement on quality. And it actually does suck that Lucas's vision isn't present here, but it also sucks that Lucas is no longer able to collaborate with others in any meaningful way or to any real extent thus necessitating his ousting in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 09:02
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:A good use of non practical visual effects that more or less blend seamlessly with the scene around it. I simply posted three pictures. Your reaction is strange. But, ok, you care about... (pausing to consult Wookiepedia) Tiaan Jerjerrod? And that's what makes CGI bad?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 09:07
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:I simply posted three pictures. Your reaction is strange. Who? And no I don't care about him. But I do care about the Emperor's dramatic entrance both onto the Death Star and into the story at large after two films of enticing build up. It's also our first time seeing the almighty Vader truly subservient to another, a really interesting character dynamic that previews their relationship through the rest of the movie. Yes he paid lip-service to Tarkin in ANH and talked with the Emperor via hologram in ESB but neither really compare to what we start to see here. Shimrra Jamaane fucked around with this message at 09:16 on Jan 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 09:10
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:What the hell are you talking about? I'm talking about Tiaan Jerjerrod, the character in that shot. He's the one that you care about what happens next to him, remember?  That guy! He built the Death Star 2.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 09:16
|
|
|
The whole practical vs cgi is a bit of a misnomer. It's more of an aesthetic preference. You could, I think quite charitably call the prequels Brechtian. They do clearly have an alienation effect, something both their proponents and detractors seem to recognize. A Brechtian aesthetic is an unusual choice for a director who says he is making children's movies for children. But I think prequel proponents are protesting too much. Making movies into cartoons caromed the caped crusader from the silver screen and Batman fans will still make sardonically say "ice to see you" with more vitriolic venom than poison ivy could mustard. It's an aesthetic that appeals to some but is profoundly repellent to others. All the sweet scenes from the prequels look like poo poo to me. Grievous vs Obi Wan looks like Zangif vs Ryu. Its not bad movie fix,p it's consciously framing a scene like a video game. If they wanted the alienation effect: mission accomplished.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 09:17
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:I'm talking about Tiaan Jerjerrod, the character in that shot. I edited my post because it took me a moment to understand your point, being unbelievably obstinate as you are. Who on earth watches that scene and thinks that this random Imperial Officer is in any way the focus of the what is occurring? In fact he doesn't even have any lines of dialogue, that occurred about a half hour earlier in the movie when Vader first arrived. IIRC, he's only seen for a second standing in line as the Emperor and Vader nonchalantly walk past him. Shimrra Jamaane fucked around with this message at 09:22 on Jan 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 09:18
|
|
|
Y'all think Snoke will be real dude or CGI when he shows up for real? I read somewhere that the filmmakers said he's about 7 feet tall, so real dude is possible.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 09:24
|
|
|
sometimes the absolutely best thing to do is to simply ignore SMg
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 09:25
|
|
|
The Falcon one works well because of the (apparent) lighting and atmospherics, but honestly that ROTJ matte is kind of lovely. Like a lot else in ROTJ. Just look at the shuttle--yeesh.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 09:26
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:Y'all think Snoke will be real dude or CGI when he shows up for real? I read somewhere that the filmmakers said he's about 7 feet tall, so real dude is possible. Andy Serkis is doing a mo-cap performance for him for the entire series. I've kind of wondered, what happens if Andy Serkis gets hit by a bus or something and studios can't just use him in every production as the go-to actor for literally every token mo-cap character? I know he's fantastic but drat, he gets around. Are there any other dedicated mo-cap actors out there? Shimrra Jamaane fucked around with this message at 09:34 on Jan 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 09:26
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:Andy Serkis is doing a mo-cap performance for him for the entire series. Ah well. Maz looked pretty good, but was still kind of distracting.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 09:30
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:Andy Serkis is doing a mo-cap performance for him for the entire series. I have a sneaking suspicion there are a lot of other people who can or could do what he does. He's certainly been smart about building a brand though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 09:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 12:06 |
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:I edited my post because it took me a moment to understand your point, being unbelievably obstinate as you are. What's interesting is that, when you assumed you were being challenged about special effects, you immediately switched the topic characterization - which has pretty much nothing to do with the quality of the special effects. Then you started describing the plot of the film. The matte painting itself is vaguely described as "dramatic".
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 09:38
|
|