Is it Lucas's fault if audiences can't see past the special effects?

No, actually I think we're asking for fewer puppets.

 

Maybe you guys should just stick with the novelization, where you can only blame your own imagination for "crappy effects".

 

No matter how good the effects are, if they overwhelm the story they become meaningless. You've devoted a lot of key presses to how "crappy" the OT's effects are. Maybe they are and maybe they're not, but you know what? I was far too engrossed in the story to notice much one way or another.

 

I thought the effects for the classic trilogy were more than great for their time.

But notice none of those movies tried to do ANYTHING of the scope to be found in TPM and what we have seen of Episode II. The stuff he is doing now would simply NOT BE POSSIBLE using only the older effects.

That is why he waited.

From where I sit, TPM is the epitome of restraint when it comes to effects, and wherever they were used, they looked real enough to me. It baffles me that you guys would think it was somehow sub-par or overdone.

 

"From where I sit, TPM is the epitome of restraint when it comes to effects."













...wait...














...can't...














...quite...














...breathe...














...better now. Your use of the word "restraint" in regard to TPM's effects knocked the wind out of me for a second there...

 

<<My answer to the question is yes, obviously it is Lucas' fault if his film's story winds up getting submerged under a barrage of special effects. He's not an innocent bystander and these are not home movies. He's the director, his job is to tell the story. One of the main arguments in TPM's defense is always that Lucas was trying to reach a larger audience and that's why it has this tone that is so off-putting to long-time fans. Unfortunately, most non-fans (his new audience) found the film incomprehensible. One of the reasons for this is that you have to sift through the glut of effects that fill every shot just to get at the story. One of the most basic rules of storytelling (and filmmaking especially) is "show, don't tell". TPM fails in this aspect by allowing the story to get lost in the visuals and by relying on expository dialogue to pick up the slack. Who made all those decisions? Lucas. >>


Thank you. This is how I feel. And it is possible for a movie to have a lot of special effects without suffering from the same problems as TPM. A good example of this is AI. Made only a year after TPM, yet a superior film IMO.

 

I honeslty think the reason that concept winds you is because you have completely fixated yourself on the effects. You watch the movie looking for "errors" and things that might not be 100%.

If you ever turned your eagle eyed approach on the classic trilogy, you would probably think they were overdone too.

I mean really give me an example of something that was overdone, or showcased, or obviously there in spite of the story.

 

Come on, Go-Mer. I don't know anyone who sat down to watch TPM consciously looking for "errors". It's in the course of watching it that things appeared or felt off or wrong. I wasn't looking for anything but to be told a decent story.

 

Then how did they find them all?

I didn't see any more "problems" than I found in the classic trilogy myslef, and thought the story of TPM was so good, it improved the classic trilogy.

 

Ah, yes. The ever-popular "bashers only watch the movie looking for errors" argument. Unfortunately, when I first watched TPM I wasn't looking for errors, I was far too excited that I was about to see a new "Star Wars" movie. In fact, I don't go to see any movie looking for errors, I go to see them hoping for a positive and enjoyable experience. But when errors or other problems present themselves I don't turn a blind eye, either.

As far as the OT being overdone, I would agree that "Return Of The Jedi" suffers from a similar problem of allowing the effects to take precedence over the story (though it's not on TPM's scale). But the first two chapters strike a nice balance between story and effects. At least they did before the Special Editions, but they still hold up pretty well in that regard.

 

Thats too bad for you guys then.

I just wish you guys could enjoy it as much as the rest of us do.

 

<< I honeslty think the reason that concept winds you is because you have completely fixated yourself on the effects. You watch the movie looking for "errors" and things that might not be 100%.

>>

Dude, did you even hear what I said about AI? That has just as much and just as impressive FX, but I feel it's a better film, and yes, I am keeping in mind that AI was a "standalone movie", so don't go there. So if I'm saying that TPM is flawed because it has effects, than shouldn't I also feel that way about AI.

 

I don't think you have it in for AI as much as the prequels.

 

It's not the ability or inability to enjoy TPM (or any movie) that's the point here. Suspension of disbelief is a tenuous thing. A word, an action, an image can destroy the world being created in a person mind by the movie. If it gets in the way or distracts from the story being told, it need to be toned down or eliminated.

The story is all.

As for "having it in for the prequels"...

No, no, a thousand times no! No, I didn't want it to be a carbon copy of the OT. I wanted something made with the same care and respect for the material and the audience as they were, however.

 

From what I can tell they were made with that same care and respect.

It is unfortunate that many of you have problems suspending your disbeleif these days.

I guess we can't all be kids forever.

 

Well, to join Halibut as devil's advocate, isn't it possible that some of the veteran fans are prejudiced against TPM and biased towards the original trilogy because the originals were better films?

Yes, but it is equally likely that they are just being prejudiced against TPM because of idealism. I can spot it when I see it. And it is also likely that they like the SFX, biased or unbiased. So weve got 2 factions: the number of people that liked the SFX, and ones that hated it. Im sure the actual numbers are not in proportion to what halibut is saying. And if the "hated it" numbers rival the "liked it", the ones that inched it over it were biased so it doesnt count. Remember, a piece of the ones that disliked it are biased. Its like a throw away vote. As would be the case for vice versa. It is my opinion that its more biased against the SFX than it is for it.

But to assert that disappointed vets are biased towards the OT without allowing for a rational basis for their disappointment paints the disappointed vets as unreasonable... So if veteran fans thought the FX were overdone, it's because they're judging TPM unfairly in comparison with the OT.

As ive seen before, many do that. Lets go back to the sentence shall we?

Just as Many vets dont realize the spectacle that SW is supposed to be but couldnt be realized for the OT

MANY, not all. I even accidentally capitalized it.

There are people out there that let their opinion of the story seep into their opinion of the movies production as a whole, thus demeaning the SFX. Biased opinion.

...if non fans thought the FX were overdone, it's because they aren't familiar with the OT. That seems to be what you're saying, and I'm not sure that it stands up to critical analysis.

Scrap or cancel that critical analysis thought cause youre waaaaay off with the generalizations, and I may have erred in one of my sentences in question. Im pointing out the existence of ones that judge TPM by what they think a universe like this should look like judging by other franchises theyve seen.

It is not out of reason that many newcomers that havent seen the OT would complain about the SFX, then realize how cool that same SFX would look in the OT when they see the obvious models. Its the lesser of 2 evils, because CGI is NOT perfect.

So you see, many newcomers that have this opinion can change when they get more acquainted with EP1's style, or the OT's often lack of visual competency.

Remember I am responding to someone who says that the MAJORITY of people hated the SFX, whether it be vets or newcomers. Its the "AUDIENCE", as he put it. I cannot tell you that ALL non fans that saw the movie and are critical of the SFX hated the SFX because theyre not familiar with how a universe like this is supposed to be realized. But I can tell you, that its much more complex, thus making it harder to find the true number, to state about this MAJORITY, which hailbut said (consensus of the audience).

In other words, it should read:

"And if the majority of non fans DID think the SFX was overdone, many of them probably do not realize the spectacle that a SW movie is supposed to be, or will realize it when more acquainted with the film(s)."

Getting to the point, my whole goal in that previous post was to get rid of his "majority of the audience hates the SFX" claim, because i believe its more complex than that. The majority would be created by biased or uninformed votes that are mixed in, on both sides. Gushers too can just stick up for it just to be sticking up, or using how well they thought the plot of TPM was made, to say that everything should look like it. And throughout this, many will not admit it on either side. So I assure you it'd be hard to figure out the real numbers.

The one set of malcontents can be explained away by saying they're too familiar with/attached to the OT, while the other set of malcontents can be explained away by saying they just don't know/understand the OT. In other words, criticism of TPM's effects

 

<<I don't think you have it in for AI as much as the prequels. >>

What would I have to gain from "having it in for the prequels?" Hmmmmmm? Do I get a prize if I say every single prequel movie sucks? Do I get money?


Oh, and about this "having it in for the prequels" nonsense, I'm looking forward to AOTC and it looks like a helluva lot better movie than TPM. So if I was "having it in for the prequels," shouldn't I do the opposite and say it looks a helluva lot worse, even, hmmm? Or was the comment of me "having it in for the prequels," just a knee-jerk reaction to what I said based on sweeping generalizations you gave towards bashers? And if I end up loving this movie, then what will you do? You'll look pretty goofy as far as this whole "having it in for the prequels," thing goes.

 

Unfortunately, most non-fans (his new audience) found the film incomprehensible.

This type of generalization should not be, folks.

Would someone be sidetracked in NYC because theres traffic and constant movement? No, it becomes mundane.

The business on coruscant etc is all about giving the movies a 3d feel and not just showing the necessary, but rather how someone would see it in R/L: the necessary, with the constant business surrounding.

This is why i say SOME people do not understand how the scope is supposed to be portrayed, but rather instantly its irritating to them, "so get rid of it!" Notice im not blanketing the statement this does NOT apply to EVERYONE who doesnt like it.

 

Only you know how you feel Darth Torgo.

You have to understand, it is hard for me to see where you are coming from, just because I thought TPM was an exceptional entry to the saga.

When you guys say the effects were too overblown, I can't see that. Especially when compared to the Matrix, which if I didn't know any better was written around the "Bullit Time" effect.

Just sit back and look at TPM. The story is told in a very straighforward way (well the surface story is). The effects that are there are there because they need to be, not "just because they could do it".

Sure when it came to lining up the live actor's eyelines to the CG creatures it wasn't always done well, but aside from that, I had to keep reminding myself that Jar-Jar wasn't a man in a suit.

The sense of actually being in the scene was unprecedented, especially the ones done in very bright daylight. They had some freaky aliens like Watto and Sebulba, both of which couldn't have been handled without CG looked so beleivable it was uncanny.

I remember seeing still images of Watto and that breif glimpse of him in the trailer and thinking "man he sure looks hoaky". But when I saw him shift his weight around and emote his lines, I completely bought him, as bizzare as he is. The way Sebulba walked around on his hands and used his feet to grab things was done so well that I am certain if there were Dugs out there, that's -exactly- how they would look and move.

To tell you the truth, the only things I thought looked "hoaky" in the final film were some of the real men in latex mask effects they had like the Lizard saleswoman.

 

<<From what I can tell they were made with that same care and respect.

It is unfortunate that many of you have problems suspending your disbeleif these days.

I guess we can't all be kids forever. >>

Oh, and who the heck are you to judge? Don't opinions on that sort of thing vary from person to person? Or is it " I find it OK so therefore it is, and anyone who disagrees with me is just WRONG."? That just strikes me as being very arrogant and narrow-minded. You know, for someone who talks about how I should be more "tolerant" of a certain movie character, they should actually extend this courtesy to those of flesh and blood. If anyone dislikes TPM, they instantly become subject to all sorts of psycho-labelling such as "You've lost your inner child.", "You have it in for the prequels.", "You are intolerant.", "You are arrogant for thinking you know better than Lucas.", "You just didn't understand themovie." and so on and so on. You should not be making such statements because:

1) You are not a psychiatrist. I know. I looked it up in your profile and you put, "Video Game Consultant."

2) Even if you were, you do not have enough information about me to make such assumptions. You don't know anything about me except, "I liked the OT, but didn't like TPM."

So enough with all the lame psychological labelling.

 

I am not saying you are wrong, you are just less happy with TPM than I am.

Also, I am not sure why you think I am practicing phsycology, I just happen to like some movies.

 

Agentcoop:
As far as the OT being overdone, I would agree that "Return Of The Jedi" suffers from a similar problem of allowing the effects to take precedence over the story (though it's not on TPM's scale).

I say, ROTJ's new SFX added to the overall scale and package of it, and the OT will be even better when they're completed for the archivals. Did you honestly loathe the ending celebration?! Thats incomprehensible to me. My 2 cents.

Daughter_Of_TheForce:
Suspension of disbelief is a tenuous thing... an action, an image can destroy the world being created in a person mind by the movie. If it gets in the way or distracts from the story being told, it need to be toned down or eliminated.

I guess Im in agreement, but instead, its about the crappy effects in the OT, that still seep through after the SE's. You know, its all good, cause I enjoy out TFN community here, even though we disagree horribly. Its just a movie, this doesnt spill onto the streets or anything [face_shocked]

 

But honestly, id like to see someone who thinks ANH's original SFX is just as good as the PT's to create AOTC, release it in theaters, and just see how many people continually see it looking like that. Itd appear as if it were done by an amateur, or 1/10 through post production, then released. My opinion is that it'd be on VHS in a week. Despite what people think, visual aides for a galaxy like this ARE necessary, and TPM has created the new level of epic feel that should be seen in ALL of the movies.

 

Just to clarify, I did think the special effects in TPM were spectacular. There's no question that from an FX point of view, the original trilogy cannot compare with TPM. The technical skill that wen t into making that movie is overwhelming. The problem that I had with the FX was not their quality, but the way (in my perception) the FX sometimes overshadowed the story. I think that some of the people who preferred the OT are not saying that the FX are better in the OT (because, obviously they aren't; the OT was on the cutting edge of technology in the late 70's/early 80's, but the FX are now considered old fashioned) but that the FX were better integrated into the stories the OT were telling.

 

<<I am not saying you are wrong, you are just less happy with TPM than I am.

Also, I am not sure why you think I am practicing phsycology, I just happen to like some movies. >>


Yeah, and anyone who doesn't has "lost their inner child" or some stupid crap like that.