|
Noam Chomsky posted:Primitive CG doesn't hold up as well as well made puppets and props. Just like Primitive CG in 3D games does not hold up as well as a lot of animation in old 2D games. Primitive puppets and props don't hold up as well as well made CG. Just like primitive sprites in 2D games does not hold up as well as a lot of animation in old 3D games. Movie effects being good or bad has a lot more to do with the budget and time allotted than with whether it's CG or not. I believe a goon on this board worked on RAMBO can attest to how the CG gunfire/water looks awful because they kept getting told to add more more more at the last second as an example. Plus in the prequel trilogy, the CG being good or bad isn't has damaging to the flick as stuff like the lighting, the way the characters are integrated into it, that kind of thing. The extras especially really stand out in a bad way in a lot of the larger battles. A lot of this looked bad when the movies were new, the CG itself looked great at the time though, and most of it still does now. Neo Rasa fucked around with this message at 02:45 on Jan 10, 2016 |
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 02:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 03:03 |
|
|
The lighting of the special effects in a lot scenes (in all three prequels) is really drat off. This isn't a case of "aged poorly" either. It's just sometimes a loving mess.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 02:44
|
|
|
porfiria posted:It made more, but still not as much as TPM--people realized they weren't good. The number you see on Wikipedia includes the re-release.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 02:51
|
|
|
porfiria posted:It made more, but still not as much as TPM--people realized they weren't good. Empire Strikes Back made the least, out of all the films. Adjusted for inflation, it's still behind Episodes 1, 6, and 7.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 02:54
|
|
|
Clones didn't do quite as explosively well because it was going against Spider-Man. This was hyped up in movie news/hype sites and magazines a lot too whether one or the other would make more and which would be better, this rivalry reaching it's apex when the New York Times published a piece going into detail about how Attack of the Clones will be a ~~~real story~~~ and an artful film while Spider-Man is ~~~just a comic book character~~~ and therefore will make for a terrible film.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 02:56
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Empire Strikes Back made the least, out of all the films. Different times.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 02:58
|
|
|
porfiria posted:Different times. unskewing the polls.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 02:59
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Empire Strikes Back made the least, out of all the films. What was Empire up against? The Shining? Friday the 13th? That is actually way stiffer competition than Spiderman.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 03:07
|
|
|
Also, ESB probably suffered because people thought that sequels would suck, since that's true in 90% of cases.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 03:09
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Also, ESB probably suffered because people thought that sequels would suck, since that's true in 90% of cases. It's just the opposite. http://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/chart/?yr=1980
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 03:11
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Also, ESB probably suffered because people thought that sequels would suck, since that's true in 90% of cases. According to contemporary audiences, the sequel to Star Wars kind of did suck. It still made a lot of money, though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 03:12
|
|
|
The Shining opened the week after Empire, but it opened soft and began to pull in money later in the summer. The Blues Brothers was the closest big hyped release following Empire/Shining, and that was out over a month after either's release. Otherwise it didn't really have much competition. It was the gorilla of its year, the follow-up to the biggest movie of all time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 03:18
|
|
|
Star Wars IV was in theaters for like 100 weeks or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 03:20
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:The correct answer to "what is a child supposed to believe?" is "I am not talking to a child." Additional context - I saw Episode I in theaters for my 6th birthday, and followed Episodes II and III closely as I grew up. I have fond memories of them but I always felt something was off, quality wise. I was raised on the original movies also, and I always sensed that there was something different between the two other than when they were made and the stylistic differences. I realized that I watched the prequels primarily for the action setpieces, and the originals primarily for the characters. The CGI never bothered me. In the prequels I latched onto Qui Gon, Obi Wan, Yoda, and Mace Windu because they were cool and because all the promotional media portrayed them as heroes (and I really liked the Tartakovsky Clone Wars show.) I disliked Jar Jar and Anakin and Padme because they annoyed me, and I didn't like any of the prequel scenes with C3PO and R2D2 either. The older I get, the more articles and opinion pieces pop up to tell me that I was tricked, as you say. I was unfairly bullying George Lucas by not liking his movies. Further, it was unwise to enjoy the originals too, because the good guys were bad all along. This narrative is catching on, especially now that The Force Awakens is here. Like, I'm not having a serious crisis of conscience here. I don't actually think I was tricked, and I don't think that George Lucas is some kind of secret genius trying to teach me that good is evil, up is down, right is left, black is white. But I want to understand why other people think the way they do. That's all. I'm trying to figure out if it's simple contrarianism to get attention, or if there's something more to it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 03:21
|
|
|
Jack Gladney posted:What was Empire up against? The Shining? Friday the 13th? The Shining came out 2 days later (It seems Empire came out on a Wednesday), otherwise there's nothing. Friday the 13th came out two weeks before.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 03:30
|
|
|
Soggy Cereal posted:Additional context - I saw Episode I in theaters for my 6th birthday, and followed Episodes II and III closely as I grew up. I have fond memories of them but I always felt something was off, quality wise. I was raised on the original movies also, and I always sensed that there was something different between the two other than when they were made and the stylistic differences. I realized that I watched the prequels primarily for the action setpieces, and the originals primarily for the characters. The CGI never bothered me. Man discovers concept of differing opinions at ripe old age of 22
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 03:31
|
|
|
homullus posted:I have definitely seen this "George Lucas needed somebody to rein him in" many times. I have no idea whether it's general consensus, but I've definitely seen it. Where does this idea come from? Like, we don't say "man, that Leonardo da Vinci really needed somebody to tell him to draw more wooden helicopters and give a lady more eyebrow definition." We don't say "Mozart really did have too many notes," we just accept (and critique) these works as they come to us. The prequels made over a billion dollars. Why did he need somebody to tell him to do something other than what he did? Unironically comparing Gorge Lucas to Mozart? (also the "it made a lot of money = it was good" fallacy) There's no way the people defending the prequels are not trolling.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 03:32
|
|
|
Hat Thoughts posted:Man discovers concept of differing opinions at ripe old age of 22 It's almost like some people feel differently about something than I feel about it. It's very confusing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 03:37
|
|
|
 - Phasma front and center leader of all bad things - No sign of Hux - Tiny Maz (gosh would it have been better or worse if instead of a tiny alien it was just Lupita playing this role) - They knew Chewie's crossbow was an important character - Nice matchup between Kylo's spazzsaber and Rey's staff  - BB8 surprisingly tiny - Starkiller is just the worst - What happened to Kylo's arm is really unfortunate
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 04:03
|
|
|
HoboMan posted:Unironically comparing Gorge Lucas to Mozart? I still get a laugh out of SMG comparing shots from the prequels to various classical artwork. One put Jar Jar in the position of Emperor Napoelon at his coronation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 04:49
|
|
|
turtlecrunch posted:
Carrie Fisher's face, frozen in the only expression she can make
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 04:51
|
|
|
Neo Rasa posted:Primitive puppets and props don't hold up as well as well made CG. Just like primitive sprites in 2D games does not hold up as well as a lot of animation in old 3D games. Movie effects being good or bad has a lot more to do with the budget and time allotted than with whether it's CG or not. I believe a goon on this board worked on RAMBO can attest to how the CG gunfire/water looks awful because they kept getting told to add more more more at the last second as an example. Plus in the prequel trilogy, the CG being good or bad isn't has damaging to the flick as stuff like the lighting, the way the characters are integrated into it, that kind of thing. The extras especially really stand out in a bad way in a lot of the larger battles. A lot of this looked bad when the movies were new, the CG itself looked great at the time though, and most of it still does now. You're comparing really old and lovely props and puppets to modern great CG. That's not even what I'm talking about. Primitive CG, like what's used in Jedi Rocks or the scene on Tatooine with the storm troopers patrolling where one is riding on a CG dinosaur type creature, ages poorly. I'm not railing against the use of CG in modern movies, or the use of CG period. I'm just saying that primitive CG ages fairly poorly. The CG in ROTS will stand the test of time, probably, since by that point the tech was at a level where it was realistic looking enough so as to not set characters apart so starkly from other real objects in a scene. Puppetry wouldn't have worked better in the scenes I mentioned in the previous paragraph, from ANH, the answer is for those scenes to just not exist rather than edit in lovely 90s CG that looks horrible by today's standards. I guess you think you're trying to argue with a patently anti-CG person which you're definitely not. But, whatever, purposeful obtuseness is like a hobby for lots of folks here.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 04:53
|
|
|
Abrams gets an A+ for getting Fisher out of Margot Kidder territory and back to seeming like a normal human.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 04:55
|
|
|
HoboMan posted:Unironically comparing Gorge Lucas to Mozart? I think you're confused; the best Star Wars film is Attack Of The Clones, which did not make the most money.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 04:56
|
|
|
Soggy Cereal posted:Additional context - I saw Episode I in theaters for my 6th birthday, and followed Episodes II and III closely as I grew up. I have fond memories of them but I always felt something was off, quality wise. I was raised on the original movies also, and I always sensed that there was something different between the two other than when they were made and the stylistic differences. I realized that I watched the prequels primarily for the action setpieces, and the originals primarily for the characters. The CGI never bothered me. Also some people feel bad for Lucas, that people didn't like the PT, and they want to redeem his movies to make him feel better. Others, like SMG, are just trolling us all, since nerds are really easy to troll.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 04:57
|
|
|
Lots of people like the pt.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 04:57
|
|
|
Noam Chomsky posted:Also some people feel bad for Lucas, that people didn't like the PT, and they want to redeem his movies to make him feel better. Others, like SMG, are just trolling us all, since nerds are really easy to troll. Some people actually see good things in the movies!
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 04:58
|
|
|
Yeah, the prequels are pretty good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 04:58
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Lots of people like the pt. You keep saying this as if people don't know that, just like people keep quipping that Star Wars isn't real even though people also know that. I know you're just being annoying to troll nerds but it's sort of tired. Also, I really like most of the PT, except Amidala is a poo poo character and Natalie Portman hated the gig so she sucked even worse.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 04:59
|
|
|
It is very controversial to posit that people like Star Wars movies In the Star Wars Movie thread.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 05:02
|
|
|
The prequels are really good kids films. I hate the prequels, but they are enjoyable to watch with kids. I took my nephews to each one and they loved them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 05:03
|
|
|
The TIE bomba run continuesquote:Launching into wide release yesterday was Fox's The Revenant, and early returns are excellent as it's the first movie to unseat Star Wars: The Force Awakens from first place on the daily chart. The strongly buzzed-about film from Oscar-winning Birdman director Alejandro González Iñárritu earned an estimated $14.4 million on Friday following an excellent $1.56 million two-week platform in four theaters. http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2016/01/09/box-office-star-wars-the-force-awakens-scores-huge-32m-opening-day-in-china/ quote:Star Wars: The Force Awakens has earned an estimated solid $32.1 million in its first day of play in China, with final figures going as high as $33m for its opening Saturday. For reference, that’s one of the biggest single-day grosses of all time in what is now the second biggest movie-going marketplace. It is just ahead of the $27m opening day of Paramount/Viacom VIAB +5.00% Inc.’s Terminator: Genisys and the $30m opening day of Paramount’s Transformers: Age of Extinction. It is, as of this writing, behind merely the $33.9m opening day of Marvel’s Avengers: Age of Ultron, and the $63m opening day of Universal/Comcast CMCSA +0.00% Corp.’s Furious 7.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 05:10
|
|
|
Furious 7 made $63m opening day in China? That's not a typo?
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 05:20
|
|
|
Soggy Cereal posted:But I want to understand why other people think the way they do. That's all. I'm trying to figure out if it's simple contrarianism to get attention, or if there's something more to it. There are plenty of ways to state that you like one of the trilogies better than the other without it being argumentative at all; like: "I prefer the original trilogy because the prequels are too much like soup operas for my taste." or "I enjoy the dark tragi-comedy of the prequels more than the straightforwardness of the originals." The reason there is such vociferous argument is because since the prequels have entered Memeic Badness land 'Star Wars Fans' have been claiming they're poo poo because, objectively, the plot is poo poo, the art is poo poo, the dialogue is poo poo, etc, etc. But in most cases these judgements were made not by reading the movies themselves, but by comparing them to the expectations of the fandom. The Red Letter Media reviews are great examples of this. Plinkett goes into great detail about how the relationship between Anakin and Obi'Wan is an example of terrible writing because if they're supposed to be close friends with a strong student/mentor bond, then it's completely missing from the text/dialogue/plot of the film! The idea that Anakin and Obi'Wan were not 'supposed' to have a great friendship, and the films totally support their mutual antagonism (that's why they end the series trying to kill each other), is not brought into consideration at all. To make a food analogy - it's completely fine to say "I dislike the taste of broccoli" and completely unreasonable to say "Broccoli should be sweet, but when I took a bite it was bitter! It's an objectively poo poo plant." and the latter is what the Star Wars fandom at large has been saying for the last decade.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 05:30
|
|
|
euphronius posted:It is very controversial to posit that people like Star Wars movies In the Star Wars Movie thread. This but unironically
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 05:37
|
|
|
Scrree posted:There are plenty of ways to state that you like one of the trilogies better than the other without it being argumentative at all; like: There are even some of us who think that depicting Obi-Wan and Anakin during the tail-end of Anakin's rebellious teen years, where Obi-Wan is trying desperately to reign him in while in denial of the fact that he himself has a rebellious streak, doesn't mean that they weren't good friends. But yes, Anakin being Han Solo with a lightsaber was always something the fans desired, not something that was ever promised by the originals.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 05:39
|
|
|
Seeing as a significant portion of viewers thought the films were trying to convey a friendship, I wouldn't necessarily place all the blame on the PT's detractors. I feel like a better version of the strawman statement would be "My friends told me Broccoli was sweet, the marketing at the grocery store told me it was sweet, it makes parallels and references to sweet vegetables, and it has a half-hearted attempt at some sweet notes on first taste, but it's bitter! By my standards this is a terrible sweet vegetable!"
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 05:40
|
|
|
I don't like the prequels because it didn't make me give a single poo poo about any of the characters and I am generally bored watching them. They fail to entertain me. Also I thought of more satisfying and less jarring character arcs in about 15 minutes. Edit: And I am a person who doesn't really like Star Wats, in fact I veto it on movie night regularly. The "your expectations were wrong" argument is dumb. HoboMan fucked around with this message at 05:45 on Jan 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 05:41
|
|
|
What annoys me a lot is that not only do the prequels have to be terrible, a lot of nerds have to take it ten steps further and say George Lucas is terrible and always was, every bad thing was his fault, and every good thing was either luck or some other person saving his rear end. It's ridiculous. He's basically Darth Vader now. Disney never told you what happened to Star Wars. It told me enough, it told me you killed it! No, I created Star Wars! No! That's not true! That's impossible!
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 05:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 03:03 |
|
|
The rabid hatred of George Lucas as a human being is pretty absurd, but so is the crazy adverse reaction towards anything Disney in Camp CineD. The lesson here is that terribly annoying and awkward people exist on all sides.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 05:44
|
|