Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[BankytheHack]

Originally Posted by Uxi

Meh, the muppet in TESB and RotJ needs to be replaced with a more aged version of the Ep3 CGI model. At the very least, some eyelids and movement instead of less obvious muppet bouncing when he walks, if not the whole enchilada.

No.

[starwarsagent]

fun question. Who would win? robocop, Terminator or Grievous?


Grievous right?????

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by starwarsagent

fun question. Who would win? robocop, Terminator or Grievous?


Grievous right?????

I say Inspector Gadget would beat them all but that is only my personal opinion

[Chordata]

Originally Posted by starwarsagent

fun question. Who would win? robocop, Terminator or Grievous?


Grievous right?????

Grievous got owned mid-way through his first movie by a dude who didn't even know how to use a gun.

At least Terminator lasted 2 movies. He got shot like 645 times and lived to talk about it.

[Brightstar]

why does everyone hate starwarsagent?

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by BankytheHack

Amen. I'll take a well-crafted puppet any day of the week over a shoddy looking CGI render. I'm good with CGI characters if the time and care is taken to bring them fully to life (i.e. Gollum or Davey Jones), but nothing in the Star Wars special editions or prequels even came close to those creations.

Bullcrap.

Yoda in ROTS
General Grievous
Watto
Clone troopers
Jar Jar (like him or not, he's "there" and not fake)
Kaminoans
various digital stunt doubles
Jabba in TPM

...and many more that slip by in the background.

[greg_achen]

Originally Posted by Imrahil2001

Bitter much?

Not at all.

[Ryan0503]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Bullcrap.

Yoda in ROTS
General Grievous
Watto
Clone troopers
Jar Jar (like him or not, he's "there" and not fake)
Kaminoans
various digital stunt doubles
Jabba in TPM

...and many more that slip by in the background.

And like him or not he is the first CG main character in a movie

[Jay444]

Originally Posted by starwarsagent

The Phantom Menace was Darth Sidious in TPM. I agree..but if you look at the whole PT...you get the sense that the real menace was Anakin. So the title of the first movie goes beyond the first film. The same way A new Hope follows up till ROTJ.

In Star Wars there is only one opinion that matters and that is of George Lucas. So, if he says the Phantom Menace was Palpatine, you can't agrue it no matter how intelligent your argument may indeed be. Fanboys will wig out and say "George said this..." or "In the EU it is this..." Blah blah blah. I do like your thoughts though, as the Phantom Menace CAN be interpreted as Vader, but the creator of the series feels its necessary to explain his art to you for whatever reason. Then again, he is in the business of making children's movies and kids are always asking "Why?" So, he kinda has to explain himself.

However, true art is always left open to interpretation. The best directors leave a LOT to the imagination of the viewer (Nolan, Tarantino, Hitchcock, and the list goes on). Lucas just can't do that because of a mix of fanbase issues and the target audience of the films themselves.

[BankytheHack]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Bullcrap.

Yoda in ROTS
General Grievous
Watto
Clone troopers
Jar Jar (like him or not, he's "there" and not fake)
Kaminoans
various digital stunt doubles
Jabba in TPM

...and many more that slip by in the background.

And yet not one of them left the kind of lasting impression that Gollum, Davy Jones, or even Kong did.

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Originally Posted by Jay444

In Star Wars there is only one opinion that matters and that is of George Lucas. So, if he says the Phantom Menace was Palpatine, you can't agrue it no matter how intelligent your argument may indeed be. Fanboys will wig out and say "George said this..." or "In the EU it is this..." Blah blah blah. I do like your thoughts though, as the Phantom Menace CAN be interpreted as Vader, but the creator of the series feels its necessary to explain his art to you for whatever reason. Then again, he is in the business of making children's movies and kids are always asking "Why?" So, he kinda has to explain himself.

However, true art is always left open to interpretation. The best directors leave a LOT to the imagination of the viewer (Nolan, Tarantino, Hitchcock, and the list goes on). Lucas just can't do that because of a mix of fanbase issues and the target audience of the films themselves.

I'll just stick with the arguement that "The Phantom Menace" was a stupid title!

[starwarsagent]

Originally Posted by BankytheHack

And yet not one of them left the kind of lasting impression that Gollum, Davy Jones, or even Kong did.

Who said those 3 left an impression? got solid evidence for that? Yoda, Jar Jar and the clone troopers are WAY better..

[Jay444]

Originally Posted by Dynamo of Eternia

I'll just stick with the arguement that "The Phantom Menace" was a stupid title!

...and I will agree with you...

[Chordata]

Originally Posted by starwarsagent

Who said those 3 left an impression? got solid evidence for that? Yoda, Jar Jar and the clone troopers are WAY better..

It's his opinion dude. Your opinion varies. Neither one of you is more factually correct than the other.

[KubrickFan]

Originally Posted by Ryan0503

And like him or not he is the first CG main character in a movie

Casper would like to have a word with you.

Originally Posted by Beast

The CGI Jabba looks no worse than the giant puppet from RotJ. So there's no sense messing with either.

Of course there's the difference between a character that was always there in a movie, and a character that was added (badly, I'd say) to a movie twenty years later.

[Jay444]

Originally Posted by starwarsagent

Who said those 3 left an impression? got solid evidence for that? Yoda, Jar Jar and the clone troopers are WAY better..

Hmm, I know awards aren't everything but I do think they help show that an impression was made. Pirates 2, King Kong and the Two Towers all won Academy Awards for special effects. None of the PT films did. That is sort of a testament to the impression the characters of Gollum, Davey Jones and King Kong made. However, they did have a lot of help that characters like Jar Jar, Yoda and the Clone Troopers didn't have. Ya know, good acting, writing and direction. Small things like that...

[JamesKurtovich]

ROTJ Jabba destroys ANH Jabba. I don't even know know what that cartoon-y, wimpy Jabba is doing in the first film. That scene should be removed.

I might be moving back into a house, so I'm hoping I'll be able to get the full experience from these BD's. It will be awesome.

[Chordata]

No comparison for me:



vs.




I actually like the CG quality from the prequels, just not Jabba in ANH.

[BankytheHack]

Originally Posted by O_V_N

No comparison for me:



vs.




I actually like the CG quality from the prequels, just not Jabba in ANH.

Exactly. The CGI Jabba in A New Hope looks like a melting ice cream cone.

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Originally Posted by O_V_N

I actually like the CG quality from the prequels, just not Jabba in ANH.

But that's the Jabba from the 1997 version of ANH in the picture that you posted. NOT the Jabba from the 2004 version. They completely redid his animation for the 2004 DVD. As stated in my earlier post, I'm still not thrilled with the way Jabba looks in the 2004 version, but it was still a tremendous improvement over the 1997 version.

Here are some videos to compare the two...

1997 ANH Jabba:

YouTube - Han Solo and Jabba

2004 ANH DVD Jabba:

YouTube - JABBA_SCENE_HD

Supposedly the TPM model of Jabba was used in 2004. And while I do see the similarity in the basic design, in addition to his coloring being off, the animation just doesn't look as good to me (particularly when he laughs, as stated in my previous post).

So, at any rate, I'm hoping that they redo him once again for the Blu-Ray release. But having said that, despite the issues that I have with both existing versions, the 2004 version was still a big improvement over the 1997 version, and it's a very safe bet that even if no further enhancement it done to him in ANH, they are as hell aren't going to revert back to the 1997 version for the Blu-Ray release, so using that version for your arguement isn't really a fair comparison.