To those who think AOTC was just made with CGI.....

Ah, miniatures. I love them. Though none will replace the Q-tip pod race crowd from TPM that holds so special a place in my heart.

I have to say, I actually grow rather tired of all the CGI bashing I run into. It's okay if it's done in jest, but after awhile, it's tiring. I don't see ten posts in forums complaining about how cut-out the rancor looks in ROTJ, or how fake the Executor's graceless, crashing descent into the Death Star 2 appeared. Yet any time the CGI doesn't look *just* right, it is painfully, tirelessly bashed, and I find that highly unfair. Everyone has to start somewhere. CGI is still not perfected, but even then, I think ILM and related companies are doing a darn good job with what they have. What makes a minimature model so much more "genuine" than a computer model that took 5000 hours to perfect? Does a mouse in place of a toolbrush an artist any less make? It just annoys me that some people will continually bash the prequel's use of CGI without ever pointing out the good points too. Yeah, there are some places where there certainly could have been improvement, but then there are other scenes that are beyond perfection. And yet so often the performance of these graphic illustrators is overlooked in favor of nitpicking at other sections of the film.

I'm not saying that people don't have a right to dislike CGI. I'm not saying they don't have a right to note it's flaws. But I do think it's only fair, given the hard work that the animators put in, that they balance their opinion by pointing out the good segments too. I think the least we can do is at least give the animators the credit they deserve for doing as fine a job as they did.

 

Good post, Chaotic.

I've posted several times about how annoying it is to see the dismissal of the time and effort and work and talent that went into the FX in the prequels, be they CGI or practical. The FX team sometimes spent months on a particular scene, yet the anti-CGI crowd acts like all they did was click their mouse a few times.

 

It's simply another way of attacking Lucas - he's the real target of the haters.

 

It's amazing how certain films are praised for their work in that area yet if you truly look at the work done in the Prequels so far, it clearly is far superior in most areas compared to certain other films yet because the films are labeled "Star Wars", they're inferior.

Think about this, after Revenge of the Sith hits, ILM would've completed around the neighborhood of 6500 Visual Effects and countless number of minature effects yet the quality of the effects for 95% of them don't change a bit. That's a unbelievable feat coming from a series of films that don't have the backing of a major studio behind them.

 

Thanks, Billy_Dee_Binks. The link to this thread came quite handy while browsing the IMDb board for AOTC.

 

Interesting founding. Why weren't these pics shown earlier? In the DVD there was no part dedicated to this process, only the "from puppets to pixels" documentary.

 

Interesting founding. Why weren't these pics shown earlier?

Does it really make any difference? A lot of people who like bashing the PT have already made bad comments for these very locations as "poor CG". Do you think that'll change their minds? I doupt it, they'll just say Lucas used "poor camera filters" and so on.

 

Those people have no life and should be made fun of.
Funny thing is that people are already gearing up to bash ROTS's CGI. For example, I read a post about the Teaser in a non-SW forum that the Wookies were CG and that they looked horrible. Right. the Wookies that stand up in front aren't and those in the background, if they are CGI are too hard to make out.

 

Well models are fake too but I'm talking about looking real. The Clones and everything else looked real and as if it was really there. Some fans need to quit with their narrowminded acting and let their imagination flow.

I think some fans need to let go of their self-importance. You thought the clones looked real? Good for you. Alot of us knew it from the start that they weren't real and we're labeled as "bashers" or "not real fans". Get over yourselves. Just because you happen to like AOTC does not make you more "enlightened", or "more of a fan".

Not even LOTR used so many models.

Ok, Mr. Know-it-all. Can you give a comparison number to how many location shots were done in LOTR and AOTC/TPM? Seems like you wouldn't need to build as many models when you shoot on location.

For those who cry about creatures, vehicles, and characters being fake I ask that you listen to the ANH commentary for the real reason. While talking about the Bantha used Lucas is clearly still disappointed that he could not have a believable, moving creature for the Sand People to ride, but had to settle for a costume slipped over an elephant.

I thought the Banthas looked just fine in ANH...and you people say we have a problem suspending disbelief?

But you don't care so long as it's one more thing to complain about.

Your whole post, and this whole thread for that matter is one big long whine. "Waaaahhhh....mommy, mommy...someone said they didn't like AOTC....what am I gonna do??????"

Well said, Roland.

Not really.

You can tell them, but they won't listen to us.

Look who's talking.

STAR WARS is full of great special effects, the best special effects, regardless of what was used.

The smartest thing I've seen in this thread, so far.

It's simply another way of attacking Lucas - he's the real target of the haters.

Well, duuuhhhhhh.

Those people have no life and should be made fun of.[i/]

Pot...meet kettle. Kettle meet pot. Oh yeah...stop calling each other "black".

the Wookies that stand up in front aren't and those in the background, if they are CGI are too hard to make out.

No, I'm sure they used real Wookiees for the film. Kashyyk isn't really that far away.

 

The point is not the CGI used for the locations and the enviroments, but the excessive use of green- and blue screen when actors are involved. Use models or CGI for establishing shots, space shots, ships and vehicles as long as you want, but having the actors walking in a blue, empty corridor, talking to someone who isn't there and looking at something that isn't there, that's just too much!

The Wookies in ROTS aren't CGI, that's for sure. Lucas hired some really tall people (amature basketball players, if I'm not mistaken) and put them into suits.

 

I know they aren't CGI but some moron attacked ROTS's Special Effects by saying so on a non SW board.

Anyway, I don't see (or saw onscreen) that the actors couldn't handle the CGI. They had the same quality to their performance and attitude as in scenes that were shot on location/ sets.

Let's take the Senate hall Mace walks through. No one knew it was CGI until we it was posted by ILM. Back to my point, Sam Jackson handled it great. Sure, they could have built a set or a miniature but would that have made the performance more believeable? No.

 

I think some fans need to let go of their self-importance. You thought the clones looked real? Good for you. Alot of us knew it from the start that they weren't real and we're labeled as "bashers" or "not real fans". Get over yourselves. Just because you happen to like AOTC does not make you more "enlightened", or "more of a fan".

And where did he say that those who like AOTC are more enlightened or more of fans than those who don't?

Not really.

Yes really.

Your whole post, and this whole thread for that matter is one big long whine. "Waaaahhhh....mommy, mommy...someone said they didn't like AOTC....what am I gonna do??????"

Along with "Waaaaaaaaaahhh...mommy, mommy, I don't like bluescreen and CGI, what am I gonna do???"

The point is not the CGI used for the locations and the enviroments, but the excessive use of green- and blue screen when actors are involved.

How is it excessive?

Use models or CGI for establishing shots, space shots, ships and vehicles as long as you want, but having the actors walking in a blue, empty corridor, talking to someone who isn't there

They are talking to someone who is there. The actors who provide the voices of CGI characters are there on the set, filming their scenes and saying their lines. Later the character is computer-generated over them and they redub their dialogue.

and looking at something that isn't there, that's just too much!

How do you know? Are you an actor who's performed with a lot of bluescreen?

And if actors can perform plays with few or no props and just a painted background, then they can perform with blue- or green-screen. Indeed, Christopher Lee praised working with bluescreen, saying it reminded him of the theater.

 

thanks Shelley, your comments mean I don't have to retype my usual 15 paragraph rant about people's ignorant remarks regarding bluescreen, CGI and acting skills.

I teach acting and if an actor was up for a role in a movie that would involve a lot of bluescreen and CGI and they went into their audition saying, gee, I'm not sure I can pull this off, I don't have enough imagination to work with bluescreen or CGI, the casting people would think that actor had LOST THEIR MIND. Any trained, professional experienced actor should be able to work under ANY conditions on the set.

BTW, bluescreen work was usually EXTENSIVELY in the OT, certainly all of the battle scenes involving spaceships, walking vehicles, the battle with the rancor, and funny but I don't hear much complaining about THAT. ALL of the cockpit work in the Millenium Falcon involved bluescreen. But of course that was pre-internet and it's also when a lot of the fans were still in elementary school and didn't know what bluescreen was, so they believed.

Funny, no one was complaining about it then.
Same technique, different era.

The model pics at the start of the thread
are proof positive a lot of people whining
about CGI do not remotely have a clue what
they're talking about. There were plenty
of non-computerized effects in AOTC.

 

I am looking forward a silly attemt trying to say what was posted in the last two posts was wrong.
Bluescreen acting really is like stageacting. I never thought of it like this before. Thanks!

 

And where did he say that those who like AOTC are more enlightened or more of fans than those who don't?

Ok, you got me...he didn't say it. But it has been said many many times in threads just like this one.

Along with "Waaaaaaaaaahhh...mommy, mommy, I don't like bluescreen and CGI, what am I gonna do???"

No. Its more like this.

"Hmm....those clones are computer generated. Heck, half the movie is. *shrug*"

thanks Shelley, your comments mean I don't have to retype my usual 15 paragraph rant about people's ignorant remarks regarding bluescreen, CGI and acting skills.

If you make statements like that, you really have no business labelling anyone as "ignorant". See what I mean, Shelley? People who liked what was done in AOTC simply cannot let someone else have their own opinion.

 

Well, saying you didn't like AotC on an AotC forum is rather dumb

Strilo edit: Flaming is not acceptable.

 

It is really sad to see how most SW fans hold endless conversations about the tools this movie and TPM were created with rather than just enjoying the friggin' movie itself.

 

Well, discussing the effects is ok, but the mindless Lucas-hating could be left out

Strilo edit: Calling users on these boards mindless is also a bad idea.

 

I teach acting and if an actor was up for a role in a movie that would involve a lot of bluescreen and CGI and they went into their audition saying, gee, I'm not sure I can pull this off, I don't have enough imagination to work with bluescreen or CGI, the casting people would think that actor had LOST THEIR MIND.

In addition, most auditions do not take place on a fully dressed set. If you can't be convincing in a tiny room with not much more than a chair, with the casting director and other people scrutinizing you, then chances are you're not going to get a chance to prove yourself on the set of film, bluescreen or totally practical.

 

It might be a mental thing with some actors - they just panic at the thought of having to rely on their imagination.

 

How is it excessive?

It is excessive, when you use it everywhere and all the time. I've seen the same TPM and AOTC DVD documentaries, as have all.I don't say it's neccesserely 'bad', just that it is used a lot.

How do you know? Are you an actor who's performed with a lot of bluescreen?

I'm not an actor (yet...).Yet, we all read interviews from various actors that worked with bluescreen (in Star Wars, as well in other movies), that, it may be a part of their job, but it's an exausting process as well.Sure, bluescreen was used A LOT in the Original Trilogy as well, not offcourse at the same scale as in the Prequels, especially when talking about real actors interacting in front of a bluescreen.

Well, discussing the effects is ok, but the mindless Lucas-hating could be left out

Hey, look, I'm just a honorable fan, trying to make his way through the Forums. I don't mean to offend anyone, just saying my opinion.
And surely I DON'T hate Lucas!
I'm kidding!
He gave me Star Wars, for crying out loud! How can I hate him? I may have two or three objections about the way he worked on the prequels, but that's just it. Honestly.

Bluescreen as stage acting? Yes and no, I never saw it like that. See, I'm open minded, I can accept other people's opinions. That's what I love in the JC, that we can discuss those things and exchange opinions [face_Ghandi]<-

 

Okay, then let us know how it can't be compared?

 

In the 1970s, Lucas had dreams that no current sfx could make a relaity, so he created new ways of making effets.

In the 1990s, Lucas had dreams that no current sfx could make a reality, so he created new ways of making effects.


It's hard to see what the problem is

 

In the 1970s, Lucas had dreams that no current sfx could make a relaity, so he created new ways of making effects.

Mmm hmm...no argument there.

In the 1990s, Lucas had dreams that no current sfx could make a reality, so he created new ways of making effects.

I beg to differ on this one. I think the dreams Lucas had in this era were the SFX, the story is playing second fiddle.

 

Ok, you got me...he didn't say it. But it has been said many many times in threads just like this one.

I know it has, and I think that's wrong. It reminds me of the superior attitude I've seen in many "original fans" (those who saw the movies when they were first released back in 1977, 1980, and 1983), thinking they are truer fans than those who came into the fandom later, or who weren't born yet when the movies originally came out.

Unfortunately, from what I've seen, many (if not all) fandoms have those kinds of phony hierarchies.

"Hmm....those clones are computer generated. Heck, half the movie is. *shrug*"

And the defenders of CGI weren't wailing like you said they were.

If you make statements like that, you really have no business labelling anyone as "ignorant". See what I mean, Shelley? People who liked what was done in AOTC simply cannot let someone else have their own opinion.

Dev, it's not a matter of "letting." I don't see anyone preventing you from having and stating your opinion. Pointing out that there were sets, models, etc. used in AOTC doesn't prevent people from thinking the CGI was overused or crappy or both.

It is excessive, when you use it everywhere and all the time.

But it isn't used everywhere and all the time. That's what the point of this thread is.

I've seen the same TPM and AOTC DVD documentaries, as have all. I don't say it's neccesserely 'bad', just that it is used a lot.

Yes, but not as much as people claim.

I'm not an actor (yet...).Yet, we all read interviews from various actors that worked with bluescreen (in Star Wars, as well in other movies), that, it may be a part of their job, but it's an exausting process as well.

Acting in general is an exhausting process.

Sure, bluescreen was used A LOT in the Original Trilogy as well, not offcourse at the same scale as in the Prequels, especially when talking about real actors interacting in front of a bluescreen.

Maybe not, but the OT actors also complained about emoting to a box with an X on it, and about feeling like they were playing second fiddle to FX. After the original movie came out, Carrie Fisher insisted that even though they (meaning herself, Mark Hamill and Harrison Ford) were now well-known because the film was such a hit, they still had to prove they could act.

In addition, most auditions do not take place on a fully dressed set. If you can't be convincing in a tiny room with not much more than a chair, with the casting director and other people scrutinizing you, then chances are you're not going to get a chance to prove yourself on the set of film, bluescreen or totally practical.

Yep.