George Lucas: 1983 vs. 2005

[Florin Andrei]

 

[M Most]

I don't think it's coincidence that the pictures he made in 1983 were, in almost every respect, far superior to the ones he made in the early 2000's.

 

[Fredrik Callinggard]

I don't think it's coincidence that the pictures he made in 1983 were, in almost every respect, far superior to the ones he made in the early 2000's.

What do you mean? All that green looks GREAT :rofl:

 

[MiguelOrtega]

thats retarded...obviously you are implying that it was the greenscreen, vfx fault that his films now suck. thats equivalent to saying shooting with a red makes you a great filmmaker. a tool is just a tool

the truth is.. this mentality is damaging and insulting to us artist that are killing ourselves to further the state of the art in films fx. and every step of the way we have people hating on the work we do. comparing our new work to the childhood memory of somehting that doesnt look nearly as good as you remember it being.

and thats coming from someone who works for the guy who built 90% of the monsters on your "1983 image" .

 

[Neil Larson]

thats fucking retarded...obviously you are implying that it was the greenscreen, vfx fault that his films now suck. thats equivalent to saying shooting with a red makes you a great filmmaker. a tool is just a tool

the truth is.. this mentality is damaging and insulting to us artist that are killing ourselves to further the state of the art in films fx. and every step of the way we have people hating on the work we do. comparing our new work to the childhood memory of somehting that doesnt look nearly as good as you remember it being.

Yikes dude, it was a joke. It's hard to argue that the newer Star Wars films are better than the older. Many films have benefited a great deal from CG VFX. Lets not lose our heads.

 

[Felix K.]

Boy did it get insulting here...

I think what many people feel about Lucas' new Star Wars movies is that he should have relied more on the old school values of film production (good skript, hire a director...) and especially some old ways of FX production. The old trilogy felt more real to me; maybe because if the miniatures, maybe bacause of the sets and props, maybe because there were real people in real Storm Trooper costumes.

Nobody said anything about visual FX per se, I guess every person involved in the film industry (especially in a digital camera forum) likes visual FX.

I personally think Lucas went overboard with keeping him all options open for post. "3D editing" (as he calls it), where he cuts out an actors performance in one take and replaces it by the performance of another take while the other actor(s) stay as they were... well I don't believe in it. I'm oldschool... I think good actors (which Lucas should be able to hire) will perform organic, reacting to the performances of eachother and thus creating a more believable performance...

 

[M Most]

Boy did it get insulting here...

I think what many people feel about Lucas' new Star Wars movies is that he should have relied more on the old school values of film production (good skript, hire a director...) and especially some old ways of FX production. The old trilogy felt more real to me; maybe because if the miniatures, maybe bacause of the sets and props, maybe because there were real people in real Storm Trooper costumes.

Nobody said anything about visual FX per se, I guess every person involved in the film industry (especially in a digital camera forum) likes visual FX.

Thank you for being, shall we say, a bit more reasonable than the previous poster. I was, of course, referring to the original Star Wars pictures as opposed to the more recent ones. And yes, I do believe that copious use of green screen is ultimately a bit harmful in terms of performance, in part because I was a visual effects supervisor for 9 years (still do that on occasion) and a large part of my job was helping to give actors something to play in those situations. For some actors it makes little difference. For others, the physical environment is part of what they use in their own personal process, and removing that removes some of their emotional world. And, quite frankly, besides missing decent writing, the newer Star Wars movies were rather infamous for, ahem, "languid" performances by otherwise very talented actors.

 

[MiguelOrtega]

i wasnt being unreasonable. but the cg hating is annoying.
especially coming from people who are rooting for new technology such as digital cameras.

and lets not even get in the conversation as to who was the first person to use a digital camera on a feature film of any real caliber. cause you might find yourself looking at the same guy youre bashing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_cinematography

"""In May 2002 Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones became the first high-profile, high-budget movie released that was shot on 24 frame-per-second high-definition digital video, using a Sony HDW-F900 camera"""

 

[Felix K.]

I know that; still like the FX in the old ones better...

 

[M Most]

i wasnt being unreasonable. but the cg hating is annoying.

Who said anything about "cg hating" besides yourself? I made a comment about his early Star Wars pictures being better movies than the later ones. That has to do with a lot of things, primarily writing, direction, and performance. My problem with all-greenscreen productions has nothing to do with the quality of visual effects, but everything to do the with lazy direction and weak performance that often results. And I speak from experience on that.

 

[Steve Sanacore]

i wasnt being unreasonable. but the cg hating is annoying.
especially coming from people who are rooting for new technology such as digital cameras.

and lets not even get in the conversation as to who was the first person to use a digital camera on a feature film of any real caliber. cause you might find yourself looking at the same guy youre bashing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_cinematography

"""In May 2002 Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones became the first high-profile, high-budget movie released that was shot on 24 frame-per-second high-definition digital video, using a Sony HDW-F900 camera"""

I think good CG work has made SciFi movies a thousand times better as long as the scripts are as good. The problem is that too many new films try and use CG to make up for a poor script, winding up with nothing more than an amusement park ride on a big screen.

 

[Zakaree Sandberg]

I dont HATE CG.. but I do feel that it takes away from film making... but you can easily argue that it adds to it..

for me.. when i was a kid.. I would go to universal studios.. do the back lot tour.. see where they filmed back to the future.. saw the prop cars and everything.. and that to me was hollywood magic.. green screen makes the film making process to me fake and boring.

I would HATE to work on a film that is mostly CG as there really isnt any on set magic happening.... thats my rant

 

[MiguelOrtega]

I know that; still like the FX in the old ones better...

yeah sure...love those muppets

keep it real

 

[Felix K.]

yeah sure...love those muppets

Those especially! Frank Oz made a believable Yoda...

You don't get my point. I respect what you do. I respect FX artists a lot. I do AE stuff for fun too. (Nothing worth showing here though...)
Still the backgrounds in Episode I-III always looked like a computer game to me. Never real.

On other movies it's different. Some of them you mentioned here, like Lord of the Rings. I liked the effects there. But they also used more props and real sets... I think it always shows... This is my last post here because you obiously won't listen to what people say here...

 

[Nuno Ribeiro]

star warps

star warps

4 years past the 22 being refered much more than love and hate could be stated, veemently I mean, star wars episode III is a greeat intro to the early ones, just imagine that in the first ones the empire was still trying to deal with the semantics of image. like now. great thread.

 

[MiguelOrtega]

Who said anything about "cg hating" besides yourself? I made a comment about his early Star Wars pictures being better movies than the later ones. That has to do with a lot of things, primarily writing, direction, and performance. My problem with all-greenscreen productions has nothing to do with the quality of visual effects, but everything to do the with lazy direction and weak performance that often results. And I speak from experience on that.

ummm whats a green screen have to do with lazy direction and performances?
maybe a more approporate image for your argument would be this.

 

[MiguelOrtega]

Still the backgrounds in Episode I-III always looked like a computer game to me. Never real.
.

http://www.fxguide.com/modules/NewsUpload/files/07Oct/kerner

[IMG]http://www.fxguide.com/modules/NewsUpload/files/07Oct/kerner/EP2_1.jpg/EP2_2_1.jpg[/IMG]

 

[Jason Ramsey]

CG CAN be over-used and sometimes misused...

Practical effects can be more appropriate at times. I'm not bashing CG... love it and all that jazz...

But, it doesn't mean that people can't overuse it to the point that it becomes a crutch and actually (in my opinion) reduces the overall production value of a flick.

There was a great article along these lines a while back... wish i could remember it or find a link.

Sometimes folks use cg just b/c it's the "easier" choice nowadays... not necessarily the "best" choice.

later,
jason

 

[MiguelOrtega]

CG CAN be over-used and sometimes misused...

Practical effects can be more appropriate at times. I'm not bashing CG... love it and all that jazz...

But, it doesn't mean that people can't overuse it to the point that it becomes a crutch and actually (in my opinion) reduces the overall production value of a flick.

There was a great article along these lines a while back... wish i could remember it or find a link.

Sometimes folks use cg just b/c it's the "easier" choice nowadays... not necessarily the "best" choice.

later,
jason

you can overuse ANYTHING. again my argument is the cg is always the one attacked not the director/producer who made the choice.

easier? to whom?
yes the good old press a button makes it much easier.. 6 years in this racket and i still havent found the "make easy" button everyone talks about.

 

[Florin Andrei]

i wasnt being unreasonable. but the cg hating is annoying.

Well, I definitely pinched a nerve, didn't I?

There was no "CG hating" in the initial post. There was, though, a great deal of George Lucas mocking, for almost universally agreed reasons.

But this being a cinema forum I'm sure y'all know perception is everything. :wink: