Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[CreasyBear]

Originally Posted by Scottishguy

The reason why practical effects are better, is because you can appreciate the artistry that went into them, even though it's clearly fake. Because of the enormity of imagine and, creativity that it visibly took to create that, gives a feeling of magic. Like King Kong did in 33, and still does today. That magic lasts forever.

CGI in live action only really works as an auxiliary to practical. It's why the likes of LOTR still holds up today, heck even 90s CGI like Titanic, or dare I even say The Postman.

But maybe CGI will become more respectable one day, who knows.

Because there's no artistry in CG. Please. If you only knew the level of time and care that goes into CG on the scale of what Lucas was having ILM accomplish in Episodes I-III fifteen to twenty years ago.

Originally Posted by The Fallen Deity

The colour timing is atrocious on the 2004/2011 transfers. Oversaturated, extremely revisionist and sloppily done.

The new ones look lifeless and drab, like modern films. Going from the vivid and rich colors of Episodes I-III to the unsaturated colors of the new masters just shows how poor these new transfers look.

[CreasyBear]

Originally Posted by ProjectB

How are the new Dolby Atmos mixes? They obviously aren’t lossless, but how do they compare to the 6.1 tracks that have been around for a while?

They're weak as hell compared to the DTS-HD MA on the Blu-ray's.

[Alan_Grant]

Originally Posted by CreasyBear

Because there's no artistry in CG. Please. If you only knew the level of time and care that goes into CG on the scale of what Lucas was having ILM accomplish in Episodes I-III fifteen to twenty years ago.

If it weren't for the prequels, most movies - including everyone's precious MCU movies - wouldn't be possible.

[Scottishguy]

Originally Posted by CreasyBear

Because there's no artistry in CG. Please. If you only knew the level of time and care that goes into CG on the scale of what Lucas was having ILM accomplish in Episodes I-III fifteen to twenty years ago.

I didn't say that. My point was that the artistry involved is not as appreciated, due to the fact it's a computer generated effect. The creativity and imagination put into practical effect is fully visible to the viewer.

[SGB]

Looking at the screenshot comparisons I've seen so far from the original trilogy, it looks like the transfers for those films were given a modern-day colour makeover/grading instead of retaining their original colour grading, something I greatly despise. The blues-gone-teal (except for Luke's lightsabre) is the dead giveaway. Very disappointing, but I'll reserve final judgement until I watch them when Disney+ launches in Australia in a couple of days' time.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by CreasyBear

Hyperbole central, this post is.

More models and miniatures were used in ROTS alone than the entire OT. It's pretty obvious if you don't go in with the mindset of "EVERYTHING IS CGI OMFG WUT DIS SUX!"

That's right, they did use loads of models and miniatures in the prequels so how they ended up looking so false and plasticky and fake is quite some feat, Lucas having slathered so much more CG on top that it all might as well have been (see also: jungle chase in Crystal Skull). And using the nascent HD cameras to shoot the miniatures on AOTC was a major, major mistake as the depth of field on the tiny sensors was ridiculous and they couldn't shoot at the usual high frame rates for miniatures either so they had to bodge it in the computer. The optics and lenses and frames rates improved for ROTS which is why it looks soooooo much better for all the miniature stuff.

Yeah, the argument is always that if Lucas hadn't first taken these steps and encountered these obstacles then we wouldn't have the quality of digital imaging that we have now, I've mentioned that myself once or twice. But why did he have to use THESE movies, these once in a generation occurrences that are following on from the most iconic trilogy of all time, as his digital test beds, thus baking in their flaws for eternity? Gah.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by Alan_Grant

If it weren't for the prequels, most movies - including everyone's precious MCU movies - wouldn't be possible.

A certain T-Rex is looking for you, Dr. Grant...years before the Phantom Menace.

[TM2-Megatron]

The cartoonish CGI in the prequels pales in comparison to the mediocre writing, which is the real problem with the films. I can forgive bad or imperfect effects (especially early CG) a heck of a lot more than bad writing.

[Richard Graham]

There were alot of practical models and miniatures in the prequels, it's just George tinkered with everything until they looked digital.

[Scottishguy]

Originally Posted by TM2-Megatron

The cartoonish CGI in the prequels pales in comparison to the mediocre writing, which is the real problem with the films. I can forgive bad or imperfect effects (especially early CG) a heck of a lot more than bad writing.

Remember Alec Guinness probably saved the orginal trilogy from similar writing.

[eternalbiz]

I just want a new Star Wars movie that looks like Ep IV. CG does wonders, but practical effects have quite alot of impact and I prefer practical over CG in most instances.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Scottishguy

Remember Alec Guinness probably saved the orginal trilogy from similar writing.

Nah, that would be people like Gloria Katz and Willard Huyck and Lawrence Kasdan

[Scottishguy]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Nah, that would be people like Gloria Katz and Willard Huyck and Lawrence Kasdan

It was Guinness telling Lucas the dialogue was awful that lead to the alterations. And Guinness getting a percentage.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3IxN...ature=youtu.be

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhkr...ature=youtu.be

[CreasyBear]

Originally Posted by Scottishguy

I didn't say that. My point was that the artistry involved is not as appreciated, due to the fact it's a computer generated effect. The creativity and imagination put into practical effect is fully visible to the viewer.

Whether it's digital or practical, it still requires the same attention to detail and artistry. Your argument is nonsense, as it's entirely subjective as to what the viewer can appreciate.

[CreasyBear]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

A certain T-Rex is looking for you, Dr. Grant...years before the Phantom Menace.

Did the T-Rex talk and emote? Did he fight an army of Velociraptors on an alien planet?

[The Fallen Deity]

Originally Posted by CreasyBear

The new ones look lifeless and drab, like modern films. Going from the vivid and rich colors of Episodes I-III to the unsaturated colors of the new masters just shows how poor these new transfers look.

Agree to disagree.

[The Fallen Deity]

Are the garbage mattes still really noticeable on the new transfers of 4-6?

The boosted contrast on the previous Lowry transfers made them stick out more.

[Galactus123]

Originally Posted by CreasyBear

I like the colors on the older version. ESB is the one that suffers the most from these new retooling. The colors are just off on that whole movie. Hoth practically looks black and white and the Carbonite chamber is a total mess. Blu-ray's for the win.

Plus, DTS-HD MA audio. I'll take lossless over Disneyfied Atmos.

The colors might be like that because it looks like they scanned the 97 version:

https://twitter.com/StarWarsVisComp/...80269791485952

It had the more accurate colors.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by CreasyBear

Did the T-Rex talk and emote? Did he fight an army of Velociraptors on an alien planet?

Talk, no. Emote, well, sure. But I'd pay to see a T-Rex fight an army of velociraptors on an alien planet. Especially vampire velociraptors. Bram Stoker's Nosferatptors, directed by Francis Ford Coppola.

[StingingVelvet]

Originally Posted by CreasyBear

Whether it's digital or practical, it still requires the same attention to detail and artistry. Your argument is nonsense, as it's entirely subjective as to what the viewer can appreciate.

Even if you like CG you can say a movie's CG doesn't look great. I've come around a lot on CG over the years and genuinely enjoy it now when it's well done. However I still think the prequels have bad CG, because it's way too prevalent for how early it was in the technology's life, and is used for really stupid stuff it shouldn't have been used for, like the clone troopers.

In contrast the practical effects in the original trilogy were top of their game level, for the most part.