Star Wars: Episode VII - The Force Awakens (USE SPOILER TAGS!)

[master gandhi]

Originally Posted by Falaskan

On another note why would they need to bring Kenny Baker back? I've never understood why there needed to be anyone at all inside R2.

I assume it's just tradition by now. R2 should be remote controlled. Seems archaic to have a person inside a droid that simply rolls around on wheels and turns its head. Maybe he has the magic touch though.

[mrr1]

I don't care if it's shot on film or digitally. I just want to see a really good Star Wars movie.

[Kaiju]

Originally Posted by mrr1

I don't care if it's shot on film or digitally. I just want to see a really good Star Wars movie.

Don't you know? Shooting on film automatically makes your movie 10 times better.

[JonD7]

I know I'm in the minority... but I prefer digital, especially for a film like this.

[Slim Jim]

Why would they not use digital?

[PUsokrJosh305]

Originally Posted by Slim Jim

Why would they not use digital?

Because filming in digital, even in today's standards, is limited to certain resolutions. If film is preserved, you can do anything with it! This is why you can take a 1950's movie, restore it properly, and then put it on blu-ray because it was filmed on physical film. With the case of Star Wars, Episodes 2 and 3 were filmed entirely from digital cameras and back then, 1080p was the highest resolution of those cameras. So if we upgrade to 4k down the road, Episodes 2 and 3 will have to be upconverted from 1080p because that's the highest resolution they can go up to. That's why they are filming on physical film, so that they can rescan the film as movie technology continues to improve into the future. Also, filming on film helps create a better feeling that's closer to the original trilogy than if they filmed it digitally!

[CRMA]

Originally Posted by PUsokrJosh305

Because filming in digital, even in today's standards, is limited to certain resolutions. If film is preserved, you can do anything with it! This is why you can take a 1950's movie, restore it properly, and then put it on blu-ray because it was filmed on physical film. With the case of Star Wars, Episodes 2 and 3 were filmed entirely from digital cameras and back then, 1080p was the highest resolution of those cameras. So if we upgrade to 4k down the road, Episodes 2 and 3 will have to be upconverted from 1080p because that's the highest resolution they can go up to. That's why they are filming on physical film, so that they can rescan the film as movie technology continues to improve into the future. Also, filming on film helps create a better feeling that's closer to the original trilogy than if they filmed it digitally!

well said

[radagast]

Episode 4 was originally shown in some theaters in 70mm.

[Steelmaker]

To quote Billy Bob Thorton in Bad Santa...

"Thank the f _ _ k Christ!"

[Agent Zero]

Originally Posted by PUsokrJosh305

Because filming in digital, even in today's standards, is limited to certain resolutions. If film is preserved, you can do anything with it! This is why you can take a 1950's movie, restore it properly, and then put it on blu-ray because it was filmed on physical film. With the case of Star Wars, Episodes 2 and 3 were filmed entirely from digital cameras and back then, 1080p was the highest resolution of those cameras. So if we upgrade to 4k down the road, Episodes 2 and 3 will have to be upconverted from 1080p because that's the highest resolution they can go up to. That's why they are filming on physical film, so that they can rescan the film as movie technology continues to improve into the future. Also, filming on film helps create a better feeling that's closer to the original trilogy than if they filmed it digitally!

IMO

Post of the Year!

[canuckerfan]

Originally Posted by PUsokrJosh305

Because filming in digital, even in today's standards, is limited to certain resolutions. If film is preserved, you can do anything with it! This is why you can take a 1950's movie, restore it properly, and then put it on blu-ray because it was filmed on physical film. With the case of Star Wars, Episodes 2 and 3 were filmed entirely from digital cameras and back then, 1080p was the highest resolution of those cameras. So if we upgrade to 4k down the road, Episodes 2 and 3 will have to be upconverted from 1080p because that's the highest resolution they can go up to. That's why they are filming on physical film, so that they can rescan the film as movie technology continues to improve into the future. Also, filming on film helps create a better feeling that's closer to the original trilogy than if they filmed it digitally!

These are all valid points, but I just want to add a few to the other side of the coin. It is common for modern digital cameras to support 4K resolutions, which is plentiful for digital projectors, Blu-ray, and of course any 4K physical format in the future. The technology is now well beyond the early 2000's where the highest resolution was 1080p. Also, the "filmy" appearance that is a bi-product of analogue 35 mm film can easily be reproduced in the digital medium during post-production.

With that being said, I don't think it will make much of a difference whether Star Wars is shot in digital or film, because for the most part both formats can achieve the same thing. I just hope they make a good movie.

[Steelmaker]

Originally Posted by canuckerfan

These are all valid points, but I just want to add a few to the other side of the coin. It is common for modern digital cameras to support 4K resolutions, which is plentiful for digital projectors, Blu-ray, and of course any 4K physical format in the future. The technology is now well beyond the early 2000's where the highest resolution was 1080p. Also, the "filmy" appearance that is a bi-product of analogue 35 mm film can easily be reproduced in the digital medium during post-production.

With that being said, I don't think it will make much of a difference whether Star Wars is shot in digital or film, because for the most part both formats can achieve the same thing. I just hope they make a good movie.

I believe The Hobbit was shot in 4K digital wasn't it? One thing that stuck out to me when I first saw the trailer was how artificial and "perfect" everything seemed to look compared to the original LOTR trilogy. Everything seemed to have a level of sheen to it that wasn't in the first 3 films (that were actually shot on film). I absolutely attribute that to the decision to shoot that on digital rather than traditional film.

[Falaskan]

Originally Posted by Steelmaker

I believe The Hobbit was shot in 4K digital wasn't it? One thing that stuck out to me when I first saw the trailer was how artificial and "perfect" everything seemed to look compared to the original LOTR trilogy. Everything seemed to have a level of sheen to it that wasn't in the first 3 films (that were actually shot on film). I absolutely attribute that to the decision to shoot that on digital rather than traditional film.

This and the CGI orcs was the most dissapointing thing about The Hobbit.

[canuckerfan]

Originally Posted by Steelmaker

I believe The Hobbit was shot in 4K digital wasn't it? One thing that stuck out to me when I first saw the trailer was how artificial and "perfect" everything seemed to look compared to the original LOTR trilogy. Everything seemed to have a level of sheen to it that wasn't in the first 3 films (that were actually shot on film). I absolutely attribute that to the decision to shoot that on digital rather than traditional film.

Well in that case the director intended it to look that way. Like I said, the "filmy" look can be reproduced in post-production on digital.

[THXGuru]

Originally Posted by saprano

I don't understand? It's about film being superior. Digital is too clean and fake looking. Film has a realistic look and an organic quality about it.

The only digital shot movie i like is Skyfall and that's because it sort of has film qualities about it.The Arri Alexia is a good camera. All the other digital shot movies look bad imo. Especially with the Red One.

I agree Skyfall look good, however, it must be said that it was done by Roger Deakins who clearly knows a thing or two about the film making process.

As for all other digital movies, you are nuts to think that. You would have a hard time telling the difference.

Originally Posted by blonde_devil

I think a lot of theatres are switching to digital projection anyways so it won't matter. besides, being shot on film and distributed on film are 2 different things.

Yes and no, digital can look very good if done right. Film has a better tendency of not looking terrible as long as the film is handled correctly. Film also projects lower resolution much better than digital can.

Originally Posted by chris_sc77

I Promise they will still show film at my local theatre. W!

All it will take is one major director to want his movie shown on film. It would be hard for Warner to say "no" to Christopher Nolan if had wanted to make Dark Knight 4 and then demand to show it on film.

The theater operators quickly converted a number of cinemas to 70mm for The Master, so it can be done..

Originally Posted by 42041

By the time summer of 2015 rolls around, you're not gonna be seeing any sort of print in theaters...

Probably....

Originally Posted by 42041

Skyfall looks 100% digital.

They can shoot SW VII on a HDV camcorder for all I care, if they manage to make the movie not suck.

You are wrong! I saw Skyfall in 15/70 and it looked spectacular.

[BaerGriggs]

Originally Posted by Steelmaker

I believe The Hobbit was shot in 4K digital wasn't it? One thing that stuck out to me when I first saw the trailer was how artificial and "perfect" everything seemed to look compared to the original LOTR trilogy. Everything seemed to have a level of sheen to it that wasn't in the first 3 films (that were actually shot on film). I absolutely attribute that to the decision to shoot that on digital rather than traditional film.

The Hobbit actually was 8K digital filmed with Red cameras, if I remember correctly. Someone correct me if I'm mistaken. I personally liked the look of the movie but I do agree that it was noticeably different than the LOTR..not necessarily a bad thing though.

[THXGuru]

Originally Posted by Taipan

Ooh yay, 35mm. Let me know if they decide to film on 70mm, then I might give a shit. Until then,it's still just another Star Wars.

That would be pretty cool if they were shooting it on 70mm.

Originally Posted by Scorpion Soldier

Surprising that this is being filmed on actual film. Now J.J., could we get some IMAX scenes to go with it?

I fully expect Star War VII to have the Imax 3D Experience.

[ObiTrentKenobi]

Originally Posted by THXGuru

That would be pretty cool if they were shooting it on 70mm.



I fully expect Star War VII to have the Imax 3D Experience.

and THATS what I'm afraid of... I doubt though if they are going to stoop to the 3D gimmick they would be shooting it on film. Wouldn't they be doing themselves a favor shooting in Digital so they could skip a bunch of the processing to create 3d? I have yet to be blown away or impressed by a 3D film yet... Avatar was the best i've seen, but it's 2d version is just as good imo.

Petition: Keep 3D out of Star Wars!

[THXGuru]

Originally Posted by ObiTrentKenobi

and THATS what I'm afraid of... I doubt though if they are going to stoop to the 3D gimmick they would be shooting it on film. Wouldn't they be doing themselves a favor shooting in Digital so they could skip a bunch of the processing to create 3d? I have yet to be blown away or impressed by a 3D film yet... Avatar was the best i've seen, but it's 2d version is just as good imo.

Petition: Keep 3D out of Star Wars!

I don't really care. Usually there is a choice 2D and 3D for movies. I saw Man of Steel in 3D, I liked it, had no complaints, for the most part I never watch movies in 3D. I saw World War Z in 2D, and I liked it and I had no complaints. It would be very hard for most people to be able to tell the difference between a film vs digital 3D conversion, almost impossible.

I am very happy they are shooting the movie on film.

[TDSOTM]

Originally Posted by PUsokrJosh305

Because filming in digital, even in today's standards, is limited to certain resolutions. If film is preserved, you can do anything with it! This is why you can take a 1950's movie, restore it properly, and then put it on blu-ray because it was filmed on physical film. With the case of Star Wars, Episodes 2 and 3 were filmed entirely from digital cameras and back then, 1080p was the highest resolution of those cameras. So if we upgrade to 4k down the road, Episodes 2 and 3 will have to be upconverted from 1080p because that's the highest resolution they can go up to. That's why they are filming on physical film, so that they can rescan the film as movie technology continues to improve into the future. Also, filming on film helps create a better feeling that's closer to the original trilogy than if they filmed it digitally!

None of this is true. You'd have a point if they were shooting this in 65mm, but they're shooting in 35mm, which means the maximum resolution they can get is somewhere between 4K and 6K. There are already tons of 4K cameras, and RED just released a 6K camera.

Not to mention the fact that all you get to see in standard theaters is a 3rd of 4th generation print.