|
There's also the Disney content control as well. Half of what's in the first two Iron Man movies alone would've never made it into the post Disney MCU for example. E: ooof page snipe
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2020 16:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 07:12 |
|
|
nemesis_hub posted:ok you kinda got me there. Granted ROTJ looks dingy and cheap at times from a cinematography POV but it still has the very well choreographed space battle and throne room stuff. I’ll take that over individual shots that are prettier but don’t make me feel anything when they’re put in sequence. This is a huge part of it; Episode 6 has bad cinematography, but it is very well-edited - which is what makes it unobjectionable, breezy fun. Episode 8 looks adequate, but the editing is real bad. And the cinematography isn't, like, exceptional. The low-contrast pastel naturalism is like anathema to the prequel-inspired production design. Here are three images: the concept art for a shot in Last Jedi, the exact same shot as it appears in the film, and a shot from Attack Of The Clones that I chose for its roughly similar lighting, composition, and subject matter.  Of the three, Clones really looks the best - and the Last Jedi image is clearly the weakest of the three.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2020 16:46
|
|
|
Part of that is the conceptual design. Mustafar is the standout planet of the prequels for visual imagery that reflects the narrative, but they found a way to make Geonosis, the series' second desert planet, visually distinct from Tatooine, which the sequel trilogy never could.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2020 16:54
|
|
|
Neo Rasa posted:Should have gotten Wayne Pygram back with de-aging CG and a hair-piece instead or something. Tarkin only works in RotS because they shot him from a distance. If they'd gone any tighter it would have looked like utter poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2020 18:21
|
|
|
BizarroAzrael posted:But in an age of Deep Fakes I don't understand why Tarkin and Leia didn't look better. Edit: I take it the technology also wasn't used for ROTS? It seems like that scene could have been a gleaming jewel in a pile of poo poo instead of just another kernel of corn. Cheesus fucked around with this message at 19:20 on Oct 18, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2020 19:17
|
|
|
ENQ. Dammit.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2020 19:19
|
|
|
Rise of the Skywalker The Revenge of Sith
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2020 23:03
|
|
|
They got a decent lookalike in heavy makeup (to the point where I think they gave him fake cheekbones?) to play Tarkin in the last scene of Revenge of the Sith if that's what you're referring to
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2020 23:12
|
|
|
Wayne Pygram's Tarkin looks like a melting wax statue
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2020 23:38
|
|
|
All of the fake tarkins feel like stunts to see how hard they could push the technicals. It's fascinating how long a shadow Peter Cushing casts over the franchise from one movie that they keep making him into puppets
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 00:57
|
|
|
RotJ does have one place where it has absolutely stellar[i] cinematography, the Space Battle. The action is shot in a way that movies to this day are trying to emulate and failing at. Every movie with a space battle is without exception measured by "How does it compare to RotJ?". And considering the SFX were always a thing Lucas was super into and we know he did some directing, I wonder if Lucas was part of the reason it was so good. The prequels show that if nothing else he can direct an SFX heavy action scene. And I want to take this opportunity to poo poo on the Sequels again because this segues right into why no one cares about the space battles in the sequels even on a technical level, they're badly directed. A big thing that sets the OT apart from previous Sci-fi (and most later stuff too) Is the sense of movement. Both in pure speed but also in direction and orientation. Even in ANH where the technology and talent was at it's most primitive we have masterful shots of giant Star Destroyers zipping around at novel angles at high speeds from unorthodox camera angles. It was as different from the standard "ship lazily floats from left to right/right to left" of 99% of Sci-Fi as you could get. Despite being modeled on Napoleonic naval combat the big ships still always felt like they had a Z-axis, and that they were always [i]doing something. Now lets looks at the Sequels. No big ship ever does anything but float lazily from on side of the screen to the other. The infamous "Low speed chase" of TLJ might as well have is often indistinguishable from if all the participants were stationary. And this all reaches it's pinnacle in the Death Star Destroyers of TROS, which literally sit unmoving in a flat plane completely unresponsive to anything happening. They were more scenery than spaceship.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 01:49
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/TitlesInMedia/status/1317992515748855809?s=19 I made this one. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 02:16
|
|
|
Tarkin is such an interesting character in part because he belongs more to the original concept of Star Wars then the what it became. He is the actual main villain of the story and represents the top power of the Empire. He has authority over Vader, he orders Alderaan to be destroyed, he orders Leia to be executed. Vader is just a traditional "interesting henchman" enforcer type who has personal ties to Luke, very similar to the 6 finger man in Princess Bride.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 02:53
|
|
|
2house2fly posted:I kind of figured the imperials could scan better than the rebels so they could park a safe distance away from the planet, figure out where the rebels were exactly, approach the planet from the other side so the rebels wouldn't detect them, and then I like this explanation best, and will choose this as canon, supplemented by Shiroc posted:Strong rejection of at-will murdering by Vader in the Imperial military, as evidenced in the conference room scene in A New Hope and Vader needed to invent a work performance related reason to remove a guy he didn't like personally.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 05:18
|
|
|
You know what sucked rear end about Disney Star Wars? Them using HOPE all the time. I'm pretty sure the only time it's used in Episode IV is Leia's recording to Obiwan, while that recording gets played a few times, it doesn't linger on the word. But in the Disney movies, they make it the goddamn centerpiece of their finales. And from what I recall, they place the "hope" around the formation of the Rebellion, rather than Luke, the titular New Hope. Something about it feels so amateurish. Like a hastily written high school essay.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 07:12
|
|
|
The sequels have got absolutely no idea what to do with the spaceships.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 07:15
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:The sequels have got absolutely no idea what to do with the spaceships. What do you need to do with them other than let them shoot each other?! That's all people want to see in a Star Wars film!
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 07:16
|
|
|
Detective No. 27 posted:You know what sucked rear end about Disney Star Wars? Them using HOPE all the time. I'm pretty sure the only time it's used in Episode IV is Leia's recording to Obiwan, while that recording gets played a few times, it doesn't linger on the word. "That boy is our last hope" "No, there is another". is the other prominent use in the originals.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 07:22
|
|
|
Gee, I wonder if there is a popular politician in recent US history who made generic hope for the future into a cornerstone of his message. Maybe this message can be juxtaposed against a regressive fixation on the past and traditional structures like gender roles. Maybe a dominant media corporation could position itself as the vanguard of social change, even if it was actually responding to trends already almost a decade in the making. Makin' bank on the culture war.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 07:34
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:This is a huge part of it; Episode 6 has bad cinematography, but it is very well-edited - which is what makes it unobjectionable, breezy fun. Yes, you nailed it. Seems like what people are responding to when they say TLJ looks great are the few shots that are “flashy” in a very obvious attention-grabbing way, like the lightspeed ramming. But of course I haven’t seen anyone explain why that moment is supposed to be good. Why does the movie come to a halt, why does the sound drop out, what is the “break” in the film that is being signaled? What is the cinematic language in that scene saying about the films themes, characters, etc?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 08:01
|
|
|
It's a key moment in the trilogy, because it marks the moment that the tyrannical First Order is slightly inconvenienced for a few moments.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 09:07
|
|
|
This is pretty interesting https://the-swsc.com/2020/09/18/jedi-finn-in-the-leaked-the-force-awakens-shot-list/ Tldr massive changes to the plot, FN was meant to be a Jedi, changed beyond JJs control
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 11:24
|
|
|
lol hey smg was right about the extensive reshoots
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 11:36
|
|
|
Just wait til The Abrams Cut
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 13:27
|
|
|
Though on the subject of CGI Tarkin, why couldn't they have just done the same thing for Carrie Fisher in TROS? Also out of curiosity, how were they able to recreate Peter Cushing's voice for that?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 15:21
|
|
|
Larryb posted:Though on the subject of CGI Tarkin, why couldn't they have just done the same thing for Carrie Fisher in TROS? 1) Because her body was still practically warm and it would have been grossly distasteful to puppet around a CGI simulacrum of her without her prior explicit consent 2) They just got a guy who did a good impression
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 15:33
|
|
|
They were sensitive to the rogue one cgi people backlash and wanted to turn it around into a marketing point that they were being ever so respectful to someone they as good as killed. Additionally maybe they actually deluded themselves into believing the footage they had was adequate
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 15:38
|
|
|
Reminds me that iirc the guy they got to replace Darth Vader is the voice of Chad Vader.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 15:46
|
|
|
multijoe posted:1) Because her body was still practically warm and it would have been grossly distasteful to puppet around a CGI simulacrum of her without her prior explicit consent Fair enough. Who voiced Tarkin in Rogue One then?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 16:02
|
|
|
Guy Henry, who if you watched the Harry Potter movies you may remember from his role as... Pius Thicknesse?!
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 16:04
|
|
|
Guy Henry apparently played a young version of a Cushing character in something else before (I don't remember what) so had some prior experience with imitating him. Plus he sort of has the cheekbones.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 16:09
|
|
|
Horizon Burning posted:lol hey smg was right about the extensive reshoots April, 2019: Timby posted:
I am the ultimate killing machine.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 16:15
|
|
|
No Mods No Masters posted:They were sensitive to the rogue one cgi people backlash and wanted to turn it around into a marketing point that they were being ever so respectful to someone they as good as killed. Additionally maybe they actually deluded themselves into believing the footage they had was adequate I definitely remember Disney loudly and repeatedly proclaiming they wouldn't be using a CGI double for Fisher's performance, which is hilarious because what they did was a thousand times more unsettling and ghoulish than that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 16:44
|
|
|
multijoe posted:Because her body was still practically warm and it would have been grossly distasteful to puppet around a CGI simulacrum of her without her prior explicit consent What difference does it make when someone died? It’s somehow less distasteful if someone died 30 years ago? That’s nonsense to me
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 16:52
|
|
|
The Shame Boy posted:What do you need to do with them other than let them shoot each other?! That's all people want to see in a Star Wars film! The spaceships in the OT had a very clear and clean on-screen objective and were easy to follow. Simple tracking of a single craft, interspersed with shots of the pilot, quickly and easily built a mini narrative for each pilot. In the sequels, it's just a swarm of gnats doing things.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 17:11
|
|
|
Yeah the attack on Starkiller is one of the most inert pieces of filmmaking I can remember. There’s a stunning lack of craft in it. It doesn’t improve or enhance on the 1977 scene in any way. It’s like an extremely faithful cover song that is nonetheless performed by very mediocre musicians.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 17:55
|
|
|
Jewmanji posted:What difference does it make when someone died? It’s somehow less distasteful if someone died 30 years ago? That’s nonsense to me Because these stories are all fictional and that means you have infinite choice in what you do and it is a little creepy but also extremely disturbing to the acting profession in general to reduce them and their talents into puppets that a dead person's likeness will be overlaid (obviously without the dead person's consent).
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 18:19
|
|
|
Jewmanji posted:What difference does it make when someone died? It’s somehow less distasteful if someone died 30 years ago? That’s nonsense to me
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 18:24
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:April, 2019:
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 18:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 07:12 |
|
|
Alchenar posted:Because these stories are all fictional and that means you have infinite choice in what you do and it is a little creepy but also extremely disturbing to the acting profession in general to reduce them and their talents into puppets that a dead person's likeness will be overlaid (obviously without the dead person's consent). I think it’s morally repugnant, I was asking why would it be more repugnant whether the person in question died a year ago rather than 50 years ago. Halloween Jack posted:In the abstract, I agree. In practice there are a number of differences, starting with the way that Disney arguably contributed to her death and doesn't want to shine a spotlight on that. I don’t really want to wade into this but I see this point.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 18:42
|
|