Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[jess1581]

Originally Posted by Nicolawicz

Making all the clones CGI is probably the most stupid decision Lucas made regarding the visual aspect of the prequels (besides shooting II and III on video). They cheapen the movies immensely and kind of negate all the practical effects. They are CGI even in closeups or where it would obviously be cheaper, easier and look a million times better to do it for real. His obsession with CGI is ridiculous.

Agreed. Cgi coulda been used for background troops in massive quantities, but not all of em... and I will always favor film over digital... but I appreciate filmmakers that at least make their movies look "film-like" when they use 4k or 8k cameras like Arri-Alexa.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by JEDGAR1000

[Show spoiler]Most of that prequel cg is actually practical effects. Granted there are bad shots, but the use of cg is way overemphasized.

[Show spoiler]

Full album I put together for anyone interested

https://imgur.com/gallery/hVHNzPq

Dude, there are more miniatures in Phantom Menace alone than in the entire OT...but the point is that it's ALSO wreathed in copious amounts of CG so the overall effect is still one of a jarring 'unreality', especially in Episode II. I've probably said this a dozen times in this thread alone but on Ep II they had a HELL of a time getting the proper depth of field on the miniatures because of the digital cameras with their tiny 2/3" sensors, and the backgrounds look so fake and false and overlit once the live action people's have been composited in that they might as well be all CG.

[JEDGAR1000]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Dude, there are more miniatures in Phantom Menace alone than in the entire OT...but the point is that it's ALSO wreathed in copious amounts of CG so the overall effect is still one of a jarring 'unreality', especially in Episode II. I've probably said this a dozen times in this thread alone but on Ep II they had a HELL of a time getting the proper depth of field on the miniatures because of the digital cameras with their tiny 2/3" sensors, and the backgrounds look so fake and false and overlit once the live action people's have been composited in that they might as well be all CG.

My original post was primarily in response to the people who go on and on about the prequels using cg and not practical effects. No one in particular on this forum, just the years of complaining I've seen online, and a few comments here about the cg inspired me to compile it for those interested. People have complained that Lucas & team were lazy when making the films.

That's interesting about the 2/3" sensors, do you have any further info/links on that? Never heard about that before, and would explain some things regarding it.

[steel_breeze]

Just watched RETURN OF THE JEDI for the millionth time, as part of my current saga run-through. If I remove myself from all the nostalgia of having seen JEDI on opening day when I was 12 — and then again the very next day, and then five more times before it left theaters in ’83 — I must admit: it really is kind of a train-wreck of a movie. Too bad such an important installment is so poorly executed. It has all the style of an 80’s made-for-TV movie, and is easily the worst-directed STAR WARS flick, in my opinion. The acting may be (slightly) better than the prequels, but the rudimentary shot choices make it so un-cinematic, to my snobby eyes.

I’m sorry to start the “ranking thing” again in these pages, but since I’ve been slowly and casually goin’ through these flicks since November, interspersed with many non-SW movies, I'm seeing them with more objective eyes than when I power through them all as one concentrated saga. So here’s where I’d put them…

TOP TIER STAR WARS — containing every key ingredient I love about the franchise, with very few distractions that make me wince
1. STAR WARS (1977)
2. EMPIRE STRIKES BACK (1980)
3. LAST JEDI (2017)
4. ROGUE ONE (2016)
5. FORCE AWAKENS (2015)
6. SOLO (2018)

SECOND TIER STAR WARS — I genuinely enjoy all these flicks, but have to look past a lot of the elements that make me wince in the franchise
7. RETURN OF THE JEDI (1983)
8. ATTACK OF THE CLONES (2002)
9. PHANTOM MENACE (1999)
10. REVENGE OF THE SITH (2005)

Clearly I don’t generally favor the movies where Lucas had the deepest involvement… except the classic original, of course…. but I only rank that “first” if it’s the 1977 edition, and not the 1997 theatrical, 2006 dvd, or 2011 BD Special Editions.

[Egons Ghost]

Originally Posted by steel_breeze

Just watched RETURN OF THE JEDI for the millionth time, it really is kind of a train-wreck of a movie. Too bad such an important installment is so poorly executed.

I wholeheartedly disagree about everything you say about shot choices and all the rest but, we are sentient beings with unique synaptic pathways.

[steel_breeze]

Originally Posted by Egons Ghost

I wholeheartedly disagree about everything you say about shot choices and all the rest but, we are sentient beings with unique synaptic pathways.

To clarify, I think Industrial Light & Magic's work is phenomenal; the compositions and camera work of the effects shots are aces... but everything involving actors talking to one another just seems so basic and uninspired to me; standard "80's TV" coverage and nothing more.

[Allgood]

Originally Posted by JEDGAR1000

Wow! look at all that GREEN! /s

[Egons Ghost]

Originally Posted by steel_breeze

To clarify, I think Industrial Light & Magic's work is phenomenal; the compositions and camera work of the effects shots are aces... but everything involving actors talking to one another just seems so basic and uninspired to me; standard "80's TV" coverage and nothing more.

Maybe. I'll have to give it an attentive watch. My recent memory is that is has more wide "medium" shots than remotely anything today, which I always appreciate. Of course, it will look likely look pedestrian compared to the master class filmatism of Empire.

[StingingVelvet]

It doesn't matter how many sets or miniatures they used, all that matters is "does it look fake as shit?" And the answer is yes, the prequels look fake as shit.

[TripleHBK]

Originally Posted by steel_breeze

To clarify, I think Industrial Light & Magic's work is phenomenal; the compositions and camera work of the effects shots are aces... but everything involving actors talking to one another just seems so basic and uninspired to me; standard "80's TV" coverage and nothing more.

Is it really a fair criticism to say that Return of the Jedi looks like "standard 80's tv" when it was filmed in Spring 1982? The 80's were barely underway at this point so to say that it looked like everything that came AFTER it is an odd criticism to make.

This is equivalent to me saying that the movie Scream is much too similar to all the late 90's horror films and far to self aware when that film was essentially the blue print for what came after it. It's not the fault of Scream that a million copy cats came after and I don't know that it's fair to say that Return of the Jedi looks like 80's tv when the direction 80's television may very well have been influenced by the success of the Star Wars saga and other programs at the time.

[happydood]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

It doesn't matter how many sets or miniatures they used, all that matters is "does it look fake as shit?" And the answer is yes, the prequels look fake as shit.

Yeah... okay, I guess? There's enough wrong with the Prequels to fill a barn, but these kind of claims make me wonder what standards folks are holding these movies to. A Star Wars movie is 'fake as shit?' I generally find things to like in movies as opposed to going in guns blazing for what's wrong and Lucas- as legit clumsy as he is- has a lot of heart. I would never for a second defend his movies to someone who doesn't like them, but it seems like forums are- more than 10 years later- still filled with people looking for the validation of universal disdain. Seems like people need to get right with the idea that many hate these movies and many love them and many are content to let them be somewhere in between.

[bobbyh64]

I wonder what would happen if there was a massive boycott of the current box set due to the unaltered OT not being available. Would Disney cave in and release it?

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by happydood

Yeah... okay, I guess? There's enough wrong with the Prequels to fill a barn, but these kind of claims make me wonder what standards folks are holding these movies to.

I'm holding it to the standard of other big sci-fi/fantasy movies and how fake they look. The prequels look muck more fake and artificial. It's not really that complicated.

[JEDGAR1000]

Originally Posted by bobbyh64

I wonder what would happen if there was a massive boycott of the current box set due to the unaltered OT not being available. Would Disney cave in and release it?

Lucas seems to be the one preventing them from being released.

[badfingerboogie]

I honestly think pretty much every Star Wars movie looks fake as shit, but that's just me.

[steel_breeze]

Originally Posted by TripleHBK

Is it really a fair criticism to say that Return of the Jedi looks like "standard 80's tv" when it was filmed in Spring 1982? The 80's were barely underway at this point so to say that it looked like everything that came AFTER it is an odd criticism to make.

This is equivalent to me saying that the movie Scream is much too similar to all the late 90's horror films and far to self aware when that film was essentially the blue print for what came after it. It's not the fault of Scream that a million copy cats came after and I don't know that it's fair to say that Return of the Jedi looks like 80's tv when the direction 80's television may very well have been influenced by the success of the Star Wars saga and other programs at the time.

Ohmygod. I wasn't saying it was derivative of anything, I was simply making an analogy to describe how basic and pedestrian I found the camera-work to be. I honestly can't even believe you read my post that way; these forums never cease to amaze.

And for what it's worth, I still enjoy JEDI immensely when I watch it as part of the Saga... I simply don't find it to be inspired visual storytelling.

[Takeshi666]

I never thought the prequels were particularly good either, but they never left me with the same kind of feeling of intense distaste for them the same way The Last Jedi did.

I think I've watched the prequels at least twice by now and I still can't remember feeling particularly strongly about any of them one way or the other, whereas TLJ made me feel something was definitely wrong while watching it for the first time. And it'll probably be the only time because it has effectively killed any interest I might've had in seeing episode 9. Not even Attack of the Clones managed to snuff my interest in seeing the next chapter of the saga, and I doubt I'm the only person feeling that way.

[English Patient]

Originally Posted by Takeshi666

I never thought the prequels were particularly good either, but they never left me with the same kind of feeling of intense distaste for them the same way The Last Jedi did.

I think I've watched the prequels at least twice by now and I still can't remember feeling particularly strongly about any of them one way or the other, whereas TLJ made me feel something was definitely wrong while watching it for the first time. And it'll probably be the only time because it has effectively killed any interest I might've had in seeing episode 9. Not even Attack of the Clones managed to snuff my interest in seeing the next chapter of the saga, and I doubt I'm the only person feeling that way.

Interesting - I had the same feelings about Last Jedi. Pretty much snuffed out any interest in seeing Episode 9. I really disliked the prequels but somehow Last Jedi seemed like more of a tragic waste and a massive error in judgment, for reasons too numerous to delve into here.

[balthazar_bee]

Not to be yet another person dumping on the Disney films, but you know what's always annoyed me about The Force Awakens?

[Show spoiler]The editing. I feel like any time it has a shot at recapturing that old Star Wars feel we're cutting to another shot prematurely and ruining the effect. It might be the same in the other nu-SW films, but TFA is the one I've seen multiple times. The last act of that movie (apart from a moment here or there) is just too flighty and distracted. It affects both comedic and serious bits.

Seriously, I'm not one who tends to fixate on editing as a flaw; frankly, if I'm invested at all, I barely notice it. But something...something just doesn't seem to work about the construction of this movie.

[Caseyscott]

Originally Posted by balthazar_bee

Not to be yet another person dumping on the Disney films, but you know what's always annoyed me about The Force Awakens?

[Show spoiler]The editing. I feel like any time it has a shot at recapturing that old Star Wars feel we're cutting to another shot prematurely and ruining the effect. It might be the same in the other nu-SW films, but TFA is the one I've seen multiple times. The last act of that movie (apart from a moment here or there) is just too flighty and distracted. It affects both comedic and serious bits.

Seriously, I'm not one who tends to fixate on editing as a flaw; frankly, if I'm invested at all, I barely notice it. But something...something just doesn't seem to work about the construction of this movie.

I agree, the editors seem to be resistant to “holding on to the moment.”