Does CGI bother you?

In a word: Yes.

If it could be avoided completely, I'd be happy. I'd much rather have miniatures and matte paintings and sets than CGI-land. Don't get me wrong, I realise that it's necessary if you really want to do some things like have Yoda fight or have a huge army... but why are the clone troopers all CGI again? Why is every set not real? I'm too much of a film traditionalist I suppose. I would much rather have CGI spared for when it is absolutely necessary and have the other things just worked out in the old-fashioned, creative ways.

-sj loves kevin spacey

 

"I would much rather have CGI spared for when it is absolutely necessary and have the other things just worked out in the old-fashioned, creative ways."

Which, sadly, is the more expensive, wasteful way. Think of the making of Independence Day: Would you spend thousands to build a miniature white house, only to blow it up, with only one chance of getting the shot? With CGI, you can build a White House digitally, include camera moves, and manipulate the explosions. An overuse is if you make a CGI Press Room or something like that.

And let's remember that ILM has, I believe, the biggest model shop in the world. A lot of the shots in AOTC were models.

Cometgreen

 

What Cometgreen said.

Many fans would be surprised about how much traditional methods still factor into a SW movie. CGI is just another tool to bring a film to life.

 

The CG clonetroopers for the close ups was what killed it for me. Everything else I could accept, but that was just too much to buy.

 

Which, sadly, is the more expensive, wasteful way.

CGI isn't cheap, either.

 

No, they don't bother me at all. They belong in the Star Wars world because it is a world that needs to be created.

The clone troopers, Yoda, Jar-Jar, and of course, the pod racing scene from TPM are all brilliant moments and characters mainly because they do not look like CGI effects.

 

I don't understand why people think Yoda looks good, it looks like he's melting or something and he looks different in every shot.

I was watching chamber of secrets last night, and despite all the bashing people do of the Harry Potter FX, Dobby looked ten times more real and tangible then Yoda in AOTC

 

....and lets not forget Gollum.

 

Rebel: Why do you always have to contradict or challenge anyone who has the audacity to actually enjoy the elements of this film?

I LOVED THE WAY YODA LOOKED IN AOTC!!!!

Geez, the nerve of me!!!

 

i thought yoda looked perfect in aotc, i have no clue to what ur talking about rebel

 

He just looks weird to me. But I think Watto, Jarjar, Poggle, Lama Su and Taun We all look great, perfect infact.

 

In regards to the Yoda not looking all that great or what not, I tend to disagree. I have a strong feeling, (whether you realize it or not) that you feel he's not the BEST looking CGI character is more because of the fact that you already are familiar with how he looked and moved like as a puppet pre-prequels. Seeing him walk or take more, how should we say, humanistic movements as opposed to his puppet stiff movements, provides the ultimate difference. I too admit that upon watching the movie at first, I was taken back how different he moved. But you have to give Lucas and his SFX team credit on one thing, they tried their best to keep intact as many of the stiff movements as they possibly could. I'm sure if there was nothing to compare it to, you too would've applauded Yoda, and I can guarantee there would've been no complaints. Except for anal people, like people dissing the wonderful Gollum creation.

 

Yeah...I just got a PM from one of those "anal" people. Trying to start an argument by PM??? What's next?

 

I get a lot of hate PMs from people asking me stupid questions and hurdling insults. Its no fun.

"In regards to the Yoda not looking all that great or what not, I tend to disagree. I have a strong feeling, (whether you realize it or not) that you feel he's not the BEST looking CGI character is more because of the fact that you already are familiar with how he looked and moved like as a puppet pre-prequels. Seeing him walk or take more, how should we say, humanistic movements as opposed to his puppet stiff movements, provides the ultimate difference. I too admit that upon watching the movie at first, I was taken back how different he moved. But you have to give Lucas and his SFX team credit on one thing, they tried their best to keep intact as many of the stiff movements as they possibly could. I'm sure if there was nothing to compare it to, you too would've applauded Yoda, and I can guarantee there would've been no complaints."

I agree to an extent, but I still think of the various CG aliens he looked the worst. The wide shots were fine, it was the close ups where I felt he looked off, though the senate scene looks really good, so does a lot of the clone battle where yoda is giving orders. But both scenes in the jedi council chamber look really flat and cartoony to me. Sorry.

 

In all fairness, I think he looks the worst to you because you're used to seeing him as a puppet in your favorite film. If you didn't have such hang-ups, I don't think he'd looks nearly as bad.
The clones couldn't possibly be as awful as you insist because everyone I inform of the fact that every single one was CGI was blown away. Which shots did this impress them the most? Yep. The close-ups.
'There was too much CGI in the movie!!'

'Is that cause all the clones were CGI?'

At this point they honestly think I'm joking. I'll prove it to them later.
Even in the shot where they're all getting their helmets, the people assumed he took a live actor and just duplicated him.

And I think anyone would be hard pressed to find every CG stunt double in the movie. I remember I just found out that 3PO on the ship when they leave Tatooine was CGI a few weeks ago. Now it sticks out a little that I know what to look for, and I think that's a big part of it. When you're told something is done a certain way, you'll know what to look for to make it more obvious.

 

Plenty of the clones looked good, but others did not. I wasn't sure that they were all CG, but i could tell that some of them were, like the one talking to Yoda, or the one talking to Mace. Again I think a lot of it is just the prinicple of it, its dumb to make them all CG.

As for Yoda, I can't prove otherwise without erasing the memory of ESB from my mind, I think I can be pretty objective, you're free to to disagree.

 

CGI doesn't bother me at all. If Lucas and ILM used all old methods, then the complaints would be they are stuck in the past and need to modernize their effects. I think they do a pretty masterful job on the CGI stuff, and it makes the PT much more expansive and varied visually than the OT. Of course, the OT movies were the best effects movies of their time, but the prequels effects' are just as impressive, comparatively speaking.

And of course the incredible number of models, minatures and sets in AOTC gets ignored. Acknowledeging that there were so many models, minatures and sets disproves the false assertion that AOTC is all CGI or a "cartoon" movie. Of course, using the very word "cartoon" to put down effects is a slap in the face of animators, be they computer animators, cel animators or model animators.

I'm glad Lucas is making his movies with the very best effects technology available. It's what he did in the OT and I expected no less from him in the PT. Thankfully, he and ILM have come through.

 

The proper blend of old an new is the most preferable.

 

Yoda looked great to me. Not Gollum-level, but still one of the best looking and acted CG characters out there.

Jar Jar and Dex on the other hand.... *shudder*

 

What was wrong with Jarjar, especially in TPM he looked amazing. Same with Watto, he looked a bit better in TPM for some reason

Great quote in your sig BTW, I agree with Mr.Welles.

 

It is just part of the story. CGI serves it's purpose. It never bothered me, and even in LOTR where it looks like everyoneis floating in the cave scene, I didn't care.

It's a fantasy. Who cares? If anyone hates CGI, go watch movies like Under the Tuscan Sun, or whatever. Something about real life.

 

Jar Jar's texturing and animation made him stick out like a sore thumb.

Does this look real?

[image=http://dvdmedia.ign.com/dvd/image/tpm_new02.jpg]

 

I watched AOTC the other day, and most of the CG bits seemed like they were from a computer game or something; when the ship blows up at the beginning, the long shot looks like something off Rogue Squadron (the game) ie blatantly not real.

A lot of the time the film seems like a cutscene from a game; it looks like nearly all of the sets are blue- or green-screened, and the quick zooms on the clonetroopers near the end look like a trailer for an RTS game, which really grates on me after a while...

 

Darth_Insidious apparently Jar Jar worked well enough for an aunty of mine to ask me where the actors head was. I guess that's some indication of realism.

I'm sure if us discussion board boys didn't know how these things worked (more or less) then we wouldn't notice.

But I can be wrong.

 

Same with Watto, he looked a bit better in TPM for some reason

I thought Watto looked better in TPM too.Everyone talked about how great he looked in his scene in AOTC when it came out,but I thought he didn't seem quite as realistic as before.Getting back to Yoda-I think he looks best in the Jedi chamber scene right after the Tusken slaughter.The way the camera circles around him and the shadows fall on his face looks amazing.Even the close-up at the side of his face (when Mace walks in) looks completely believable,like he is a living being just sitting there.I've done zooms with my DVD remote on him durring this scene and it is remarkable how much detail he has (one thing I thought was neat was his eyeballs have a very slight quiver to them,like a real persons).