Discussion in 'Prequel Trilogy' started by Sith-Spitter01, Feb 10, 2012.
Like the 3D made The Phantom Menace look more...dated than it should look?
Not at all. In my eyes, it looked generally fresher, because CG characters look more real in 3-D, just like it happened in "Avatar".
It's actually surprising how enjoyable the movie remains, 13 years after its initial release
Well I mean, normally when i watch the movie on my PC or TV, the CG doesn't look outdated, but for some reason, I felt the 3D made the CG look really ugly a lot of the times. Whereas normally I find Phantom Menace's special effects to still be up to date. Generally any moment involving pure CG characters to be especially painful to look at (except for Yoda, whose CG rendering was only recently added, and like one or two other instances).
I thought TPM looked fantastic in 3D. To me, it looked very clean and I saw lots of things in the film that I didn't even notice before.
More detailed for sure - sand on Padme's handmaiden outfit, the texture of the clothing...the planets were gorgeous. I saw facial expressions I don't remember seeing before.
So, the 3D itself wasn't spectacular as to "in your face" but it did add to the movie. For once I didn't hate the pod racing.
You lost me at watching Star Wars on the PC.... unless you have a big screen HD TV hooked up as a monitor and a blu ray disc drive. Star Wars begs to be seen in the most up to date way...
No actually the added sense of depth even made the animated characters feel more real. Watto in particular benefited from the 3-D enhancement with his face and neck every so subtly sticking out more from his wings flapping in the background. The crosscutting between Watto and Qui-Gon during their post-race discussions about Anakin were very effective with the added depth.
Jar Jar looked fine and certainly didn't look fake. Now would I have loved for the Gungan army to get a touch up during the battle scenes? You betcha. But those shots have always stood out a little whether in 3-D or not.
I've already seen the movie twice, maybe I should just go see it again one more time. Last time I saw it, I actually came home feeling horrible and found out I was dehydrated. lol
So I don't know if it's that I really didn't enjoy it or that it was just cause my body was lacking fluids.
It's just that the Gungan-Droid battle and Watto felt like their textures were smoother than they usually were, but maybe I should shell out the extra cash to see it one more time.
It's called DNR, and its excessive use plagued some shots of the movie on Blu-ray (and now in theaters).
I was curious about whether the Blu rays looked the same. Cause I've only watched the DVD versions.
The Blu-ray version is still much better than the DVD version. Mostly because the DVD is cropped and the Blu-ray gives you the full frame, and some restoration.
There were times I felt the 3d movie was cropped at the sides - did anyone else feel like this or was that my imagination?
Maybe it's not just the 3d that made it look better. A lot of the places showing it now have improved a lot in the last 12 years
I felt the same
I didn't notice that the movie looked dated. However, I wasn't that impressed by the 3-D. And yes, I still found the movie very enjoyable to watch.
Also, in the case of TPM, the blu-ray has the new, digital Yoda (which most feel to be a huge improvement over the puppet), just like the 3-D version.
Oddly enough, I felt you get to see a lot more detail in Yoda's face than in, say, Mace Windu's.
Oddly enough, I felt you get to see a lot more detail in Yoda's face than in, say, Mace Windu's
That's due to the fact the CG model they used was highly detailed whereas the live action actors on set were dealing with lenses, filters, lighting, etc. Sometimes filmmakers keep the detail in the CG models because they think it makes them look more realistic.