main
side
curve
  1. In Memory of LAJ_FETT: Please share your remembrances and condolences HERE

PT Was the "reputation "of the Prequels doomed from the start ?

Discussion in 'Prequel Trilogy' started by fastcooljosh, May 2, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Sith Lord 2015

    Sith Lord 2015 Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Oct 30, 2015
    [Mod edit: Not nice. Not on topic].
    Yes, the films you mentioned were "least acclaimed" by just those fanboys. It takes more than a stupid internet poll to find out what those moviegoers who don't spend all day in fanboy forums whining about how the new SW "ruined their childhood" think. [Much of the same]
    Could it be these glorious JC forums might, just MIGHT, be dominated by OT fanboys as well?
    Of course the OT cast NEVER had unkind things to say about the OT. But it's useless trying to have an objective debate with a hardcore fanboy.
    They were fresh, brave, daring, innovative and brought new ideas, styles, characters, worlds, designs and story lines to the saga. That's definitely NOT what the [Bait] wanted. What they wanted was "YEAH!!... more X-Wings, more TIEs, more badass Vader, more badass Han, more of EVERYTHING we had seen before, but God forbid, nothing NEW", under NO condition was Lucas allowed to add anything NEW and DIFFERENT to the saga. I hope they are happy with the piece of fanservice junk that Jar Jar has the audacity to call a SW movie.[face_laugh]
     
    TheDutchman and fastcooljosh like this.
  2. Darth Downunder

    Darth Downunder Chosen One star 6

    Registered:
    Aug 5, 2001
    A hysterical response featuring a world record number of emoticons o_O

    I didn't just refer to polling on fan sites like this one. I also mentioned general polling like on IMDb & RT. Those metrics include votes by hundreds of thousands of people. Eps 1 & 2 are yet again, dead last. Why is that? Obviously it doesn't prove that they're lesser films. Subjective opinion & all that. Just as we can't "prove" that the Godfather is better than Norbit. Films/tv shows/songs etc do receive varying levels of acclaim though. Nothing wrong with asking why the same couple of movies always seem on average to be regarded as the worst in their series.
    The number count of "CGI shots" does not reflect the volume of animation. TFA had more complete sets & most importantly featured a tonne of location shooting. Eps 2 & 3 featured far less. RotS had no location shooting at all involving the actors. They shot thew whole movie on sound stages. I'm sure we all recall this from Ewan McGregor: "There were less & less (actors) as we went along. I don't know if they didn't like me or what...but as we went along I had less & less people to work with. By the third one they sent me off...off I went on my own & I spent 3 months in a green stage."

    So many of TFA's "CGI shots" featured smaller effects that supplemented an outdoor location. Or an almost complete set. There was very little if any occasions where the actors were running around on entirely green sets. Add to that the fact that there were way way fewer animated characters in TFA. There was Snoke & Maz in very small roles & some digital stunt characters here & there. A creature or two. The PT had hundreds of animated droids, clonetroopers, creatures, aliens & countless animated characters on screen. It's laughable to say that TFA had "more CGI" than the PT just bcs of the shot count. So yeah, they most definitely did do some things differently.
     
    DarthCricketer likes this.
  3. darkspine10

    darkspine10 Chosen One star 8

    Registered:
    Dec 7, 2014
    You're saying complete sets as if the PT used none. Most of the PT's sets were 'full', using green screen only for windows. TFA also used 'partial' sets, like that hangar shown previously. There were plenty of bluescreen and greenscreen sets.
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG][​IMG]


    The only 'full' sets I can think of are Rey's small home, Maz's cantina, and underground, Rey's prison, and the Rebel base. None of those had windows either. All of those are small, dark sets, that don't need extensions.

    Additionally to CG characters, every spaceship in TFA was CG. There were no model ships, and no miniatures (that I've seen) used for TFA.

    As for location footage, AOTC had a sizeable shoot in Tunisia, and Italy, while ROTS had plate shootings in China, Sicily, among others, and used material shot from the AOTC Tunisia shoot.

    For comparison, ANH had one location shoot in Tunisia, and then the rest was sets, extended with bluescreen.
     
  4. ezekiel22x

    ezekiel22x Chosen One star 5

    Registered:
    Aug 9, 2002
    That strange green planet set shows me more creativity than most of TFA's environments. Too bad it was cut from the final film. =((
     
  5. AndyLGR

    AndyLGR Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Registered:
    May 1, 2014
    darkspine10 I think you're missing the point of the specific criticisms aimed at the PT. Its not about the number of shots or how many were practical or CGI in comparison to the other films.

    What they have in the OT, TFA and RO are worlds and characters that look like you could be there with them. You only have to watch the films and see how much of a stark contrast the PT looks in comparison to everything else. Look at the digital characters and aliens in there that interact with humans, look at the sets and environments they are in (or not in), these were the things that jump out straight away and these were the things they were at pains to distance themselves from in the run up to TFA.

    Compare the originals cantina or Maz's castle to Dexters cafe or compare RO's Scariff land battle to the battles on Geonosis, Naboo or Utapau as just a couple of examples. I suppose another comparison I can make is look at the worst scenes in Jedi, the back projected scene on the Skiff or the matte background in the hangar as Han and Lando talk. Imagine that Jedi used that technique all the way through, its not convincing and it wouldn't look like they were in another world that you felt like you could be at. To me thats what some aspects of the PT did with the digital environments and the digital characters. IMO it looked poor because they seem too much like an animation or cartoon. I just feel they over used it as there was too much of it and that doesn't immerse me in the film. Thats the kind of stuff that took the PT away from the look and feel of the OT IMO because it doesn't look convincing that they are in a tangible world (to my eyes anyway).
     
  6. Seagoat

    Seagoat Former Manager star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Jan 25, 2013
    Sith Lord 2015

    Please keep the discussion on the content of the films themselves, not fans, and keep it on topic. Thank you
     
  7. Gamiel

    Gamiel Chosen One star 9

    Registered:
    Dec 16, 2012
    Strange green planet set?
     
    Tosche_Station likes this.
  8. Tosche_Station

    Tosche_Station Jedi Master star 2

    Registered:
    Feb 9, 2015

    [face_laugh]
     
  9. Qui-Riv-Brid

    Qui-Riv-Brid Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Apr 18, 2013
    Not at all. We knew from a pure production standpoint that CGI was going to dominate this movie just as it does all movies now. Certainly the kinds of movies that these are.

    Besides the marketing push undertaken by everyone involved including everyone from Eisner down to the Pinewood tea lady to talk practical and the huge push about shooting on film (notice they weren't crowing about R1's digital shoot).

    I've heard some people say that but I have yet to find an answer to what that is supposed to mean. What about the CGI is "disguised" by advancements? We know it's CGI. It's look like CGI. It's certainly not models or miniatures because we know that to be the case.On examination we can analyze this and see the difference.

    Over time there are both technical advancements with the tools and the experience how to use those tools. This leads to imagining and designing more grandiose sequences. TESB's vehicles and environments advance from ANH, ROTJ advances on TESB, TPM has a massive advance from ROTJ and so on.

    For some people they look at the CGI of TFA and R1 and apparently think that it's somehow disguised to not look like CGI while the PT which has all sorts of practical work that is by then by their reckoning disguised to look like CGI. Some of those insist that it is CGI when it isn't. We know that places like Mustafar or Kamino are far more "practical" than anything we well ever see in the new Star Wars movies. The new movies of course have set out to redefine the term practical to expand to using sets and going to locations. The first six movies built lots of sets so that is nothing special. The main difference seems to be that the new movies want to do a lot of location work while Lucas liked to limit it to what was necessary. Otherwise he liked to be in studio where things are under control. Obviously they didn't have great times shooting on location for the OT. It can work well for other movies but for Star Wars not so much at that time. No doubt shooting on location is a far more advanced process now thanks to be able to add (or subtract) anything digitally.

    So what is going on here? I would contend that this "disguise" is merely the fact that TFA and R1 are using the actual designs as well as designs based off of the OT in both vehicles and environments in the main. It's probably no co-incidence that TPM which while different still has overall environments in Naboo, TPM's Tatooine and Coruscant that while they would be impossible to do during the OT are not egregiously far away from the OT baseline. AOTC's Kamino and Geonosis, ROTS' Kashyyyk, Mustafar and Utapau as well as the associated vehicles largely do not fit into that baseline.

    So the disguise really isn't the CGI but the design ethic and environmental look. The battles on Geonosis or above Coruscant are on a scale that the new movies haven't touched. TFA didn't get anywhere close and while R1 was closer it still is more of an amped up version of Endor along the TPM lines of scale.

    So the "disguise" is to somehow sort of relate to the look of the OT despite doing things that they couldn't possibly do. Lucas was imagining things like the Clone Wars in the 70's but knew that it was a non-starter. It took all they had to do simple things like attack a Death Star or battle on snow plains.

    Even something as simple to imagine as Rebels vs Stormtroopers battling on the snow as well as the walkers and speeders was nigh impossible to do in a serious way.
     
  10. Daxon101

    Daxon101 Force Ghost star 6

    Registered:
    Jan 7, 2016

    Well its been over 10 years since ROTS so you would expect CGI to have advanced some what to the point they can throw CGI in to any shot and you might not even notice they even used CGI.

    Although the CGI for the prequels is still fairly ahead of its time even today.
     
    Gamiel likes this.
  11. Daxon101

    Daxon101 Force Ghost star 6

    Registered:
    Jan 7, 2016

    I think this is one of the things that hurt the PT abit, because Lucas wanted to do something different and the fans at least at the time just wanted the same sorta thing they had seen in the OT.

    This is pretty much why TFA was how it was.
     
  12. Qui-Riv-Brid

    Qui-Riv-Brid Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Apr 18, 2013
    I still don't get that. If they didn't use CGI then what would they use?

    The Star Destroyers of R1 are CGI but they made them to look more like the OT models but far beyond anything that could be done then.

    It's used far better than much used today but that is due to know how and the imagination of the design.

    The CGI today is technically better looking but they also don't try to do as much. No ROTS opening battles in a Star Wars movie anytime soon I think.
     
  13. Deliveranze

    Deliveranze Force Ghost star 6

    Registered:
    Nov 28, 2015
    I feel like the PT had to take the fall either way. There was no way the PT was ever gonna live up to 20 plus years of speculation. The reason why TFA was praised for its "back to basics" approach was because of the PT's more innovative approach.

    If Episode I had just decided to do another Rebel vs. Empire conflict, it would be considered a rehash. If Lucas decided to anything different than starting The Clone Wars with Mandalorians or an army of evil clones invading the Republic, it would be a "failure."
     
    Jedi Knight Fett and Darthman92 like this.
  14. Gamiel

    Gamiel Chosen One star 9

    Registered:
    Dec 16, 2012
    Most likely that would lead to some people complain about Lucas selling out to please the loudes fans and not being a real auteur
     
    Deliveranze likes this.
  15. fastcooljosh

    fastcooljosh Jedi Knight star 2

    Registered:
    Mar 15, 2017
    If we go to Metacritic Episode 6 has the second worst score (53) only beaten by TPM (51).
    ATOC has 54 and RotS has 68, which also more than R1 (65).

    I agree that technically the first two SW movies are in a league of its own. Again Metacritic shows that with ANH having a 92 score and ESB 81 (same as TFA btw).

    It also supports my argument that RotJ is one of the luckiest movies ever, because its part of a trilogy with ANH and ESB.

    People forget how divisive this movie was back then.

    Edit: also take a look a this

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/film/star-wars-the-force-awakens/best-worst-movies-poll/

    over the last few years people downvoted the prequels like crazy.(especially TPM, because of the 3D release I guess)
     
    Sith Lord 2015 and Deliveranze like this.
  16. The_Phantom_Calamari

    The_Phantom_Calamari Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Nov 10, 2011
    LOL, I don't think TFA needed yet another bland green planet.
     
  17. Sith Lord 2015

    Sith Lord 2015 Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Oct 30, 2015
    But those "bland green planets" were REAL, not some fake CGI planets like in the prequels. Who wants alien looking planets in a SF movie anyway? What we want is environments we can relate to, like they were shot in our back yard. Like the planets in the OT, places that look as familiar as our neighborhood, like Tatooine, Yavin IV, Hoth, Dagobah, Bespin or Endor. :D
     
  18. The_Phantom_Calamari

    The_Phantom_Calamari Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Nov 10, 2011
    Endor at least had giant trees you don't see most places on Earth.

    In contrast, Takodana has a lake and D'Qar has, uh, some hills?
     
    Sith Lord 2015 likes this.
  19. Sith Lord 2015

    Sith Lord 2015 Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Oct 30, 2015
    True enough. Oh, and Jakku has... SAND, Starkiller Base has snow and some not-so giant trees. Truly imaginative ;)
    To be fair though, I DID like that star destroyer wreck in the sand. However that was pretty much the only thing I found visually interesting in the whole film. Not good enough to pass.[face_waiting]
     
  20. CIS Droid

    CIS Droid AOTC 20th Anniversary Banner Winner star 5 VIP - Game Winner

    Registered:
    Oct 21, 2015
    How is it dexters cafe a fair comparison to the OT cantina and Maz castle? The obvious comparison should be with the coruscant night bar outlander club

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
    Gamiel and {Quantum/MIDI} like this.
  21. The_Phantom_Calamari

    The_Phantom_Calamari Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Nov 10, 2011
    I agree with you completely. And there were aspects of Starkiller Base (as seen from space) that were visually interesting, but the fact that its role in the move was exactly the same as the role of the Death Star in A New Hope was a letdown. Overall, there are glimmers of creativity in TFA (like the aforementioned things and I'd add BB-8 to the list) but the overwhelming balance of the movie is bland designs, bland locations, and bland storytelling. Whereas every single prequel is fairly bursting with interesting new concepts in virtually every single goshdarn scene--hell, every single shot just about. There's just no contest. Lucas has the superior imagination because his draws on sources from throughout all history and from a wide breadth of genres, art formats, and cultural reference points. Abrams's imagination sources are limited to the movies he saw in the 80's.
     
  22. Sith Lord 2015

    Sith Lord 2015 Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Oct 30, 2015
    Coruscant's Outlander Bar really went into a totally new direction from the cantina. It was sort of high-tech, had some video games, even drugs. Visually it reminded me a little of 80s-style movie scenes as in the first Terminator or Blade Runner. The bar in TFA in contrast is nothing more than a rip-off of the cantina. It doesn't really add anything new to the saga or provide exciting visuals. Every single episode after ANH provided something totally new and visually inventive: ESB has Dagobah, Cloud City, ROTJ has Jabba's Palace, Emperor's throne room, TPM has an underwater civilization, the first real introduction to the city world Coruscant and Jedi Order, AOTC has the "lower" levels of that super-city, an entire city floating in a world of ocean and rain plus clone factory, an insect-hive-like civilization, ROTS has that famous opera scene, new worlds like Utapau, Kashyyk, Mygeeto, volcanic world Mustafar... (the one episode with the most settings). And TFA has.....[face_dunno]
    Agreed! And I'll be the first to admit there were a few things I liked about TFA. The already mentioned SD wreck... well, that WAS kind of cool, and we haven't seen it before in any SW, although I'm pretty sure I have seen the image decades ago on some EU book or comic cover. I also liked that we have a deserted stormtrooper as a lead character, though its execution could have been better. BB8 is arguably also one of the movie's better elements. Apart from those, I honestly can't think of any. I certainly could have done without the angry (at what???) Vader fanboy who loses his temper in every scene and hides his face behind a mask for no reason whatsoever. If he worshiped his grandfather so much why not be a complete copy of him including the original mask? That at least would have been honest. In the movie it came across as a half-hearted attempt to justify yet another mistreated good-guy-turned-bad and thus having to hide behind a mask. For Vader at least we had a REASON and backstory.
     
  23. WebLurker

    WebLurker Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Mar 12, 2016
    To quote an old Star Trek/X-Men crossover novel: "It's not where you fight, it's who."

    New locations are all well and good, but the movie stands and fall on its characters.
     
    Tosche_Station likes this.
  24. Sith Lord 2015

    Sith Lord 2015 Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Oct 30, 2015
    Obi-Wan, Padmé, Anakin, Palpatine, Yoda, Chancellor Valorum, Mace Windu, Qui-Gon, Dooku, Shmi Skywalker, Darth Maul, Bail Organa.....:eek:
     
  25. ezekiel22x

    ezekiel22x Chosen One star 5

    Registered:
    Aug 9, 2002
    To quote me, characters and visual atmosphere are both vital.
     
    Qui-Riv-Brid likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.