UPDATE! Awesome 10 Minute Star Wars: The Force Awakens VFX Reel for Oscar Considertaion, Plus 1 Hour of Q&A with J.J. Abrams and Crew for the VES Awards!
The Oscars are just over a month away (Sunday, February 28, 2016). It’s a no-brainer that Star Wars: The Force Awakens will be a contender in some of the technical categories. The movie has a real chance of winning the award for Best Visual Effects, although the competition is really tough this year. Lucasfilm released a 10 minute before-after video showcasing the visual effects from the movie for an Oscar consideration…
All the contenders in the VFX category are:
“Ant-Man”
“Avengers: Age of Ultron”
“Ex Machina”
“Jurassic World”
“Mad Max: Fury Road”
“The Martian”
“The Revenant”
“Star Wars: The Force Awakens”
“Tomorrowland”
“The Walk”
There will be 5 nominees. According to the official Academy Award rules, the criteria are (via Wiki):
(a) consideration of the contribution the visual effects make to the overall production and
(b) the artistry, skill and fidelity with which the visual illusions are achieved.
The Oscar nominations will be announced later today – Thursday, January 14, 2016 at 5:30 a.m. PST (13:30 UTC) (8:30 a.m. EST) at the Samuel Goldwyn Theater.
Thanks to Mike Gill @goosegill and Bennett R. Boyle @BoyleJayhawk for the link.
UPDATE!
Also here’s almost an hour of Q&A with Director, J.J. Abrams, Visual Effects Supervisor Pat Tubach, Special Effects Supervisor Chris Corbould and Creature Effects Supervisor Neal Scanlan with moderation by Visual Effects Society Chair Mike Chambers.
Special thanks to
Founder of SWNN, MNN and The Cantina forums.
Born on April 24, 1980.
They should really re-render episode 1-3 … It won’t change anything to the dialogue (and it shouldn’t, it is the way it is) … but rendering quality has improved A LOT.
No thanks.
The one spot that I always think REALLY needs it is the Muun on Geonosis with Dooku and the Techno Union guy. That freaking Muun looks like a PS1 cutscene.
This guy: https://youtu.be/_xr4m7q5MJA
awful.
And the factory scene – on so many levels is a failure.
CGI, narrative, performance, Artoo’s ability to fly, Threepio as slapstick humor helped by nobody (as opposed to Chewie and R2 in ESB)…..
Factory was a practical not CGI. And was great.
And R2D2 in every movie has some new ability.
And I love that. He looks cool when flying.
It was not practical. It was bright green blocks.
She is clearly trolling us.
That scene is 14 years old. And it was groundbreaking back then.
And you really need to watch PS1 CGI again.
https://youtu.be/QxRZ8gSdxjU
I see no difference.
The problem of episodes 2 and 3 is not the render quality at that time. Prove is, simply, Episode 1, which looks fantastic. If you delete the horrendous additional shots of the Podracing they did for the DVD edition, the race scene is as good as anything from The Force Awakens. The problem for 2 and 4 was the amount of work George gave to ILM. Within the same schedule as Episode 1, they passed from 700 digital shots to over 2000.
Actually didn’t ILM have more time for those? Lucas always started filming about 23 months before the release of the movie. June 97 for a May 99 release, June 2000 for May 2002 release, June 2003 for May 2005 release. JJ started filming TFA in April 2014 for Dec 2015 release.
Yes, but there’s a huge difference between TFA and the prequels. In TFA many complicated things are real. CG was used to expand or to add things to real sets. Just the fact of having the real image as a reference helps a lot to get a photorealistic result. There’s no big CG city in TFA, or CG army. And you’ve got 2 CG important characters, yes, but they have used motion capture for body and face, which saves a lot of time.
OMG actual Stormtroopers running around and getting blown up. So awesome.
Alot of them where CGI.
And a lot of them weren’t.
Not true. As can you see in video. Starkiller base, Hosnian prime, Tekondana, D’qar. All complete CGI.
In prequels ships in space where miniatures, not CGI.
http://boards.theforce.net/threads/practical-effects-in-the-prequels-sets-pictures-models-etc.50017310/
The fact that Lucas wanted to make $150 million movies for $115 million didn’t help. “The best we can” got replaced by “good enough.”
He got breaks from his own company I assumed. Spielberg said is he made the movie it would almost double budget. How did Lucas cut corners on budget that hurt the FX?
Yes, he got ILM to give him an employee discount, but the amount of effects (and the integration thereof) taxed the hell out of the budgets. Lucas was notorious for being frugal, which is clear in the end result. Sure, it’s understandable why he didn’t want to spend large chunks of his own money, but spending the extra dough in order to make everything as realistic as possible would have been better than digitally smoothing the whole image, which in the end made everything (including the practical elements) look artificial.
Yeah I hated those additional shots too. You could soooo tell they were done on the cheap, or by different, lesser experienced staff. The original scene still works to this day, looks amazing and is one of the few high points of the films. I think a huge problem with the later films were simply having such boring, mundane locations done (poorly) in CGI. Flat, going off into the distance, like inside the Jedi temple it’s all just pillars and shafts of light and a floor that goes on for miles into the background. Flat as anything… it’s all rendered poorly, never looked real at all, and it’s just so dull which is the fundamental problem with it. Would rather have had the Jedi temple have some sort of character to it, it just feels like a mansion some soulless billionaire built to mimic the grandeur of Rome or something.
Las Vegas Jedi Temple.
Everything in Prequels looks waaaaay better than in rehash called TFA.
Prequels gave use new alien locations, that do not exist in real life.
TFA gave us CGI locations that exist in real life. Everything in TFA looks boring.
Lora, go home. You’re drunk.
I thinking more and more Lora is a parody.
lolno
Agree. They should get their Special Edition treatment, too. It would help a lot.
The CGI is the least of the prequels problems, you cant polish a turd.
Prequels are waaaaaaay better than rehash of ANH called TFA.
93% on Rotten Tomatoes.
That is all.
Disney should just release all of the original green screen footage and let the world have at it to try to craft something better from all the footage. That and a million hilarious parodies. Go on Disney!
http://boards.theforce.net/threads/practical-effects-in-the-prequels-sets-pictures-models-etc.50017310/
You haters are just trolls.
render in Episode 1 was VERY GOOD. Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith suffer from overload of CGI shots done in a tight schedule.
Star Wars The Force Awakens VFX https://youtu.be/RJaJDaONaOY
Also you can add this:
Recorded January 10, 2016 with Director, J.J. Abrams, Visual Effects
Supervisors Roger Guyett and Pat Tubach, Special Effects Supervisor
Chris Corbould and Creature Effects Supervisor Neal Scanlan with
moderation by VES Chair Mike Chambers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P68ahq9Bz3E
thanks for sharing.
Well that was awesome. Nice to relive it a little while I wait for Blu-ray!
Just an amazing work, really nice to watch this. And there you have it, cgi all over the movie, the practical “REAL” effects speech, just for marketing, CGI isn’t bad at all as they sugested for a year or more, prequels had cgi and practical too, not just cgi as a lot of people think, you wont beleive how much sets and practical effects were used for the prequels. CGI is good and gets better and better every time.
Still more practical by far over the prequels.There’s tons of shots in the prequels filmed on entirely green sets, not even a real floor, even the floor was CGI’d in afterwards. Even now it would more than likely be noticeable, but back then it was even worse. Everything looked like a flat static CGI rendered background with actors awkwardly placed into it, and it showed. Humans are good at subconsciously noticing when something is off, when the floor texture doesn’t properly light the actors an so on…. that was the prequels in a nutshell (and I mean mostly 2 & 3, TPM had way more full sets built for it and holds up better to this day as a result.
Exactly. You watch this video and you’re amazed that what you thought was practical was actually CG or a combination of the two. You watch something similar for the prequels and you wonder why even the practical stuff looks like mediocre CG.
Right – like Obi-Wan’s fake beard in Ep. II – its just poor quality, like an amateur made it.
And Palpatine’s office looks fake, and I don’t think it actually was lol
Yep.
EP II looked waaaaaaay better than rehash of ANH called TFA.
lol
Nope.
The fact that you thought the office was fake when we
know it wasn’t makes me question your judgement sometimes. (Hey, it happens to all of us.)
I rewatched the prequels recently, and: episode III has no single scene that looks fake, episode II has Mace windu jumping in the arena in the geonosis battle that looks fake, and episode I has the first scene with the MTTs crushing trees on naboo and multiple creatures that looks fake the same way the oliphants in the two towers were (and that movie is from 2002). What I’m trying to say is that VFX in the prequels were almost always ahead of time despite being outdated sometimes, just check movies from the same tIme and you’ll get some worse CG. And, if you go and check a gallery I unfortunately forgot to bookmark, you’ll see that there were done tons of models and sets for all of the prequels. Even many animatronics for the humanoid creatures. They really used CG for those creatures you couldn’t do practically like sebulba and geonosians.
http://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/starwars/images/d/de/BogaROTS-SWE.png/revision/latest?cb=20130206054558
I disagree, @clone11038 : The Phantom Menace looks far better than anything in Revenge of the Sith.
Thank you. This indeed does look awful. Anyone unwilling to see it either grew up with these films and has a bias bubble as a result, or is plain blind or lacking in critical faculties.
It looks great. Anyone who say it looks bad is blind or stupid.
The CGI is done poorly and the depth-of-field is lacking. i wouldn’t be surprised to find out that you didn’t even look at the picture.
That shoot is amazing. Better than anything in TFA.
At that shoot we can see truly alien world and alien creature that can not be created with practical effects.
I just love that scene.
Temura Morrison’s floating head.
The Emperor’s office looks fake, and I don’t even think it was LOL
Temuera Morrison’s floating head was realistic. The emperor’s office was one of the built sets. LOL.
It was a floating head, and it showed, because he wasn’t even looking at anything, much less Obi-Wan. The real set even looked bad. Obi-Wan’s fake beard looked bad in AOTC. It didn’t even matter, things just looked awful.
It’s a question of attitude. obi wan’s beard e.g. never bothered me, and I liked most of the sets. If we use the same attitude in the OT… there are two scenes were a really fake looking greenscreen was used. In the original version of episode V Han saying the line “I know” before the carbon freezing had a coat that disappeard in the other shots. TIE fighters in episodes V and VI have a brown-coloured square around, sign of the cut.
Not to mention some of the fake looking aliens in the cantina, or R2 falling the stairs in the background. We could go nitoicking around the OT the same way as with the PT.
What TFA proved with its criticism, is that a portion of star wars fans like to complain about anything that is not the OT.
1970’s and 80’s effects that were way better at the time that still nearly hold up
vs.
2000s effects that were done better in films like Pirates of the Caribbean and the original Matrix films
Don’t be intellectually dishonest – the complaints about the PT (especially AOTC) were immediate.
Main complaints about the PT were I think because it was different than what was expected. you brought in the game pirates of the carribean, wich is one year older than AOTC. In one year there was much improvement in vfx, believe it or not. even nowadays there’s always better VFX in every film they do. VFX from the matrix… I don’t remember how much of it was CG, but I don’t think it was THAT much, so I can’t compare. What I’m able to compare with AOTC is what I already quoted in other comments around.
Actually Tem was there in bluescreen suit with Ewan sitting up on a saddle, I saw a BTS photo somewhere
Office was real set. And looked great.
http://boards.theforce.net/threads/practical-effects-in-the-prequels-sets-pictures-models-etc.50017310/
It looked fake.
It really would be beneficial to watch the Making Of videos for the Prequel Trilogy. A few people have complained about CGI since the Prequel Trilogy was released but the complaint just isn’t accurate. There’s far more physical studio model work done in any of the Prequel films than the entire Original Trilogy. Dexters diner, Theed Palace, Mustafar, The Geonosis arena, Utapau, Jabbas grandstands at his palace for the race, these were all examples of gorgeous highly intricate physical models built. CGI backgrounds were created with CGI as opposed to the more traditional matte paintings throughout Episode IV-VI. Where CGI was used was creatures, as opposed to puppets or animatronics. There was an abundance of green/blue screened material and scenes in IV-VI, the difference being, instead of compositing and completing the shot with a guy with a paintbrush and paint, CGI was used. If anything made the Prequel films look “CGI” it was probably the early generation digital cameras perhaps?
Except matte paintings had more character and were easier to light to make it feel as if it were part of the scene.
Most of the problems with CGI is lighting. It’s hard to do. I love TFA, but one of the most annoying scenes for me CGI wise is anytime Snoke is on the screen.
I don’t think HE’S poorly done, in fact, on repeated viewings I’ve come to appreciate his rendered model, it looks cool. But that AWFUL light source from above just takes me out of the scene every time.
And sorry to burst your prequel defense bubble, but no. Too much CGI, not enough real sets.
What you listed as “practical” sets were largely from Episode I. It’s the oldest of the three prequels, and in my opinion aged the best for exactly what you just said. A majority of the sets in that movie EXISTED.
Now move on to Episodes II & III. You know, the movies that didn’t have one set of actual clone trooper armor because there never was an actual actor playing a clone except in voice. Seriously.
II has aged the worst, III was a bit better but still just too many sequences where you can tell the floor they are walking on isn’t even there. Lucas wanted to replace EVERYTHING with a digital back drop and yes, digital characters. He should have kept his Episode I level of mix and match because in my humble opinion, the appearance of II & III would have aged better.
No need for a “Prequel defense bubble” it just helps when people actually know what they are talking about. There was an abundance of green/blue screen enviroments in IV-VI that were optically composited with a static matte painting, or actually physically built model. Same with the Prequel Trilogy. Merely a difference in techniques. Perhaps some people just like to bitch for the sake of bitching?
Or the proof is in the pudding. The active decision in the prequel movies to use digital backdrops, sets, and characters was over whelming.
Yes, the Star Wars movies used green/blue screens. For instance the speeder bike chase on Endor. Which looked amazing at the time, but used two sets of real footage to create the illusion of racing through a forest.
Coruscant. 100% digital. Naboo (Almost every single wide shot save for a scant few in Episode II) digital. Jedi Temple, digital. Kashyyyk, digital. No locations. Just filming on sound stages.
You’re welcome to look up interviews by actors who participated in those movies who have all said their performances suffered by not being an actual set or location.
And lastly, you know, look at the films. If you can watch all three and tell me there’s only one or two scenes that look bad, you’re either lying or in denial.
I Love Star Wars. I personally defended the prequels for years before I couldn’t stomach lying to MYSELF about it. They’re poorly done films with HUGE budgets. And one of the biggest reasons they suck is they look like poorly animated cartoons.
That just isn’t the case. What alot of people indiscriminantly, and rather callously dismiss in the Prequels as a “Too much CGI” is actually rather elaborate and intricate physical studio models built. Entire backdrops and backgrounds were models. Yeah, actors are filmed against a green or bluescreen, and then a background is composited against the actors, but what alot of people assume incorrectly is that the background was CGI created. No. They are physical models. Dex’s diner is a physical model. Theed Palace is a physical model. The Geonosis arena is a physical model. Essentially any “establishing shot” if the Prequels, like the original trilogy, is a physically built model. If a person is going to criticize a movie for that, then they might as well criticize any Hollywood film for the past 85 years since that technique has been around as long as the art of movies. It’s doing a disservice to the model builders to callously criticize something as “CGI” when somebody set down and built and painted a physical model.
Oh yeah, look at those beautifully built models.
http://a.disquscdn.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/3061/9959/original.jpg
Well I tell you what smartass, how is that CGI matte painting any different than this matte painting from Episode VI?
http://thestarwarstrilogy.com/StarWars/wallpaper/Original-Trilogy-Matte-Paintings/Original%20Trilogy%20-%20Matte%20Paintings%2016.jpg
Or this
http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s–uM9XQJbH–/gwmrhtxdlvqngntudupw.jpg
It isn’t the background, or backdrop elements in the Prequels that “look bad.” Those are stylized beautiful models built, or matte painting equivalents. If anything in the Prequel Trilogy “looked bad” it would be “digital manipulation” of live action elements. For example, when Anakin is riding that fat cow thing to impress Padme; in the fields. That looked unpolished. It had an appearance of a guy manipulating a digital Anakin , “moving him around a screen” to line him up with a fake fat CGI cow thing. I suppose that scene could have been conveyed better, had Hayden Christensen riding on a practical animatronic fat cow thing, but the ridiculousness of the scene it didnt really matter. Or, during the Geonosis battle when Padme gets knocked out of that cart pulling Anakin, it looked unpolished. Sure, having a stunt double for Padme’ get knocked over in a cart would have been practical, I suppose it just depends what effect Lucas was going for depicting fantasy.
It was a Nerf. The fat cow. And you call yourself a Star Wars fan, psh.
It isn’t the background or back drop elements in the prequel that look bad. That’s your opinion. You’re entitled to it.
My opinion is a majority of those background and backdrop elements do look like trash. The wide shots are better, but anything with an actor in it shows how fake it all is.
Keep. Defending. Them. Peter Pan taught us that If you believe in Fairies, they never die. If we apply that logic to your love for the prequels, George still won’t care. He made them for himself.
Not true.
http://boards.theforce.net/threads/practical-effects-in-the-prequels-sets-pictures-models-etc.50017310/
Also Hosnian prime in TFA was complete CGI.
I’m not denying there wasn’t CGI in this film, dear. It doesn’t save the fact that the prequels used too much and depended on it far too often to have them look consistent with what was given to us in the OT and now the ST.
But keep banging that Prequel defender drum. I never get tired of the sound of mindless droning.
1. You’re weak for caving in and allowing the haters to change your mind (succumbing to groupthink because it seems like the “cool” thing to do and allowed others to do the thinking for you instead of you coming up with your own opinion).
2. You’re lying by way of being deceptive (you probably have an agenda) and being ignorant (as suggested by your username).
Big words Mr. Internet bully.
First of all, no one changed my mind on the movies. I didn’t go to internet forums and discuss them endlessly, ever. This is my first time in a Star Wars related forum.
The only people I had were my friends to talk to, and we all decided we liked the prequels, for a while. We had to, right? It’s Star Wars. There was no way new Star Wars movies could suck. But they did. As youth departed and we grew into men it was harder to make excuses for films that were terrible.
Terribly written. Terribly acted. With far too much CGI that now looks atrocious in II & III.
And I do have an agenda. I troll trolls. It’s fun. It’s even better when angry children such as yourself come at me with baseless accusations, but hey, at least your diction was decent.
I’m impressed you have some semblance of an intellect yet you’re willing to attack someone for thinking the prequels are what they are. Complete trash.
<3 you.
The difference in techniques is crucial though. Matte paintings from the OT still gelled in better with the real footage than the CGI backdrops EVER did in the prequels. And yeah when criticising over reliance on CGI in the prequels I think most can agree we’re focusing on Episodes 2 and 3, which had an absolutely lifeless look to them.
If Lucas had done TFA we just know the forest scene would have been a green stage with some green “lamp posts” for trees. Everything George strived to do came from a good place, i.e. cheaper, faster, more flexibility, quicker turnaround etc… but he fundamentally forgot that all of the real stuff and giving actors something to work with to improve their performance injects SO much character into the final work, it is something that isn’t really tangible until you compare the final results.
Yeah but thats precisely my point. “CGI backdrops.” The majority of what people refer to as “CGI backdrops” in the Prequel Trilogy was a physically built, painting, lit MODEL that could be touched.
Not true. EP II and EP III are the best looking Star Wars movies.
They gave us truly alien worlds and creatures. Worlds with alot of details and things happening in the background, that make this worlds look alive.
Just look at Coruscant. It looks amazing.
http://boards.theforce.net/threads/practical-effects-in-the-prequels-sets-pictures-models-etc.50017310/
You lost me at “the best looking Star Wars movies”. Frankly, that statement is absolute BS.
The problem isn’t really the amount of CG used in the prequels, it’s that the CG is rarely integrated with the live footage in a seamless manner. The practical and CG elements are combined with great skill in TFA, just as the practical elements and matte paintings were for the OT. I’s a fault of the prequels that what’s “real” looks as plastic and digital as the stuff that actually is digital. The illusion of reality is rarely present in the end result.
CGI in prequels is 17, 14 and 11 years old.
Just look how CGI in PC games changed in that time.
And the CGI in ‘Jurassic Park’ is now 23 years old. It’s held up better than a lot of what’s in the prequels.
EpIII is the movie with more practical sets and models, in number, than any other including IV, V, VI, you can read about it.
You are right, you can notice the CGI in some parts, but its 10 years ago, that movies were ahead in technology at that time, if you watch IV, V, VI, you will see a lot of details that look fake too, or weird, that movies were ahead too.
TFA have what CGI had become, its really amazing, it is much better than 10 years ago, but if you think about it, this movie doesn’t bring anything new, visually, just repeat what you have seen before, so there is not much chalenge, compared, just to make it better, to improve it. And think how this movie will look compared with the ones in 10 years ahead.
The only thing ROTS brought were new ways to cringe and ruin the Star Wars story. Anakin the creepy weirdo from the outset, manipulated by the obvious villain, balletic non threatening lightsabre duels, terrible, and I mean truly awful “romance” and a relationship that didn’t make much sense and Padme turning into a pathetic wife in distress figure, completely against her character in the preceding films. Meh. I don’t care what ROTS or the prequels did with breaking new ground yadda yadda, who cares when the films were shit.
TFA has more CGI than prequels.
Prequels had more practical effect.
In prequels ships in space where amost all real miniatures, not CGI.
http://boards.theforce.net/threads/practical-effects-in-the-prequels-sets-pictures-models-etc.50017310/
Incredible they digitally replaced Kylo Ren’s helmet rather than just get him in the helmet and reshoot, lol. Never noticed in the movie which is all that matters. This film looks gorgeous. The lightsabre scenes look more and more glorious the more I see of it.
Id rather them slap a helmet on the guy than try to CHANGE HIS PERFORMANCE in post, which George did.
Anyone know a place I can download the 1080p version? Vimeo itself is telling me it’s no longer available for download.
AHAHAHAHAHAHAH NOT SO PRACTICAL AFTERALL!
Anyhow, this just proves that CG is good. Hah anti-CGI-ers!
No one said that they hated CGI, they said that they hated overused CGI. As you can see, this movie was still far more practical than the prequels.
TFA has more CGI than prequels.
In prequels almost every ship in space was real miniature, not CGI.
http://boards.theforce.net/threads/practical-effects-in-the-prequels-sets-pictures-models-etc.50017310/
Mmmmm…no.
I’m not anty-CGI, I’m anty-attack-of-the-clones-and-revenge-of-the-sith….
which over-used green screen…
to create this:
What part of those backgrounds would have been “practical” to build as a prop? What part of those backgrounds would have been created with a matte painting a few years prior to ’99, 2002, or 2005 when the Prequel Trilogy was released?
Look, Joshuavance1701, a stormtrooper/clone-trooper should have never been created CG, to start with. You’ve got this great actor, Ewan Mc Gregor, and you don’t even give him a proper character to interact with, just a guy on a green suit handing him a saber that (judging by the photo) wasn’t on set either.
The matte painting speech doesn’t apply either. Let’s be back in The Phantom Menace: They built the city of Naboo as a real set, and they enhanced it with matte painting. It just looks REAL. You don’t listen, guys. David Hunter said it in different occasions: Several sets in 2 and 3 have 0% real element. If you knew something about CGI, you would understand that mostly any small element in a set has a light interaction with the rest of it. If you don’t even build a floor, the result gets very poor, and (AGAIN) this is easily seen comparing Episode 1 with the rest of the prequels.
Nobody uses matte paintings anymore as background. This TFA VFX video is proof that they didn’t either (they just benefit from advanced technology compared to 10+ years ago).
they are digital, but they are informally considered matte paintings (digital matte paintings) and this is a comment section of a fan site.
However the background of the snowy forrest in The Force Awakens was a huge on set matte painting and the scene looks phenomenal.
You sure about that? Because I saw some greenscreen in that forrest scene.
Quit trying to further your agenda of fact-skewing.
I’m very sure about that.
And digital matte paining is just a fancy and new (yet misleading) way of saying the following: digital shots composited and plating (hardly something that is considered “matte” in a traditional sense).
Your agenda-driven biased views are truly showing.
I give up. You just said nobody uses matte paintings as backgrounds anymore in a comment section of a movie that uses them (REAL, HANDPAINTED MATTE PAINTING). Even the official art book from the movie uses the name matte painting. But well… Keep on.
You question every single thing I say. I’m giving you information and names of people who were working very hard on this movie, but you just want to show off your fanboy level or whatever you call it.
Just don’t waste your time answering me, because you don’t even read my comments before doing so.
Sounds like you’re the one that is giving up in furthering your agenda-driven deception because you know I’m right and you’re wrong.
You repeat concepts like “armchair director” (by the way, my new nickname 🙂 ) and agenda-driven deception instead of talking about the topic itself, which is CGI.
You know nothing about that topic. You are completely ignorant when it comes to CGI used in prequels and TFA.
There’s this planet we live on. It’s called Earth, there’s tons of places on it to film (like Naboo).
Take a gander at Blade Runner, 2009’s Star Trek, Gladiator – all movies with large settings – the sets there are both real and blend CGI compositing in. George did nothing with those scenes of pure exposition, nothing is happening in them, nothing interesting, and we’re supposed to be wowed by the background…the background? Really?
Star Wars take place in alien galaxy, on alien worlds. Not on Earth.
I do not care for Earth like places I can see every day. I want to see alien places, thing I can not see in real life.
And prequels where great for that.
They gave use truly alien locations. I love look of the prequels.
Now go back to the video and you’ll see completely animated scenes and the opening scene featuring a huuuge greenscreen.
You can tell that all of these “sets” were completely fake, ESPECIALLY the floors. I mean they couldn’t be bothered to even design and build some floors for crying out loud. It just looks poor, especially nowadays, but it still did at the time. For TFA they used the mantra of doing everything possible “in film” as they could. Adding in large background interiors to augment the sets they already built is what we would always have expected them to do, that’s the norm. Completely filming sets in entirely green screen rooms is a whole other ball game, and poorly reflects in the finished product in a bunch of ways (actors having absolutely no foundation upon which to base their reactions on etc).
http://boards.theforce.net/threads/practical-effects-in-the-prequels-sets-pictures-models-etc.50017310/ Here.
These effects in AOTC are 14 years old. Alot of things changed in 14 years.
These effects where groundbreaking.
TFA has the same amount if not more of CGI than prequels.
And today, with all technology improvements in CGI, they didn’t risk a little to create something new, as George did with the Prequels and OT, they just went the safe way, its true, and I really liked TFA but there are no comparisons in some aspects.
George innovation has nothing to do with CGI at the time of AOTC and ROTS. It was by the time of the Special Edition and of course Jurassic Park, but not episodes 2 and 3. The innovation on those films is they’re entirely shot in digital (and I may recall they were not the first ones), but in terms of CGI, there’s just more of it. No innovation.
I think you’re the one that doesn’t know what they’re talking about. Just get off this site, you’re embarrassing yourself.
If you don’t think GL is an innovator, then you’re a lost cause in the world.
PS. I’m tired of seeing your comments on this site. Get off it because I’m been questioning your SW fandom level for a while now.
Just relax. This is what I said: “George innovation has nothing to do with CGI at the time of AOTC and ROTS. It was by the time of the Special Edition and of course Jurassic Park, but not episodes 2 and 3”
The visual effects Oscar nomination for AOTC for the 2003 Academy Awards says otherwise (for its relative time of course).
Oscar nomination means innovation?
It means something at least, such as positive recognition by folks in the film industry.
Geez, why do you have to be so negative all the time? This is why I question your fandom level.
I find “fandom level” concept pathetic.
You don’t need to like every single aspect of Star Wars to be here, because one of the things that makes it beautiful is the fact that is HUGE.
George Lucas is a genius. Non of my comments implies the contrary. He re-invented sci-fi in the 70s with a huge impact on the whole business.
His most important achievement for all filmmakers alike is non-linear edition. Cinema would be something completely different without him nowadays.
You have the right to honor him being a fan, and we can celebrate George Lucas together as a genius. BUT when you stop by in this site to talk about things like film production and CGI in the way you do, don’t be shocked that other people who works on film and visual FX give you an answer. I don’t need a fandom thermometer because I chose my life according to what George Lucas did.
Nah, you’re a fake fan and a poser/armchair filmmaker (you really think I’m going to believe you saying that people on this site have experience in filmmaking?). You’re also a delusional and irrational Gen-X’er (I really hate people from Generation X by the way because they act all condescending thinking that the best films came from the 1970’s and 1980’s and everything else afterwards is crap) in the loud and vocal minority.
Furthermore, the average moviegoer just cares that a movie looks decent; they really don’t care how much practical effects was used in so-and-so portion of the movie and where CGI and VFX was used, nor how exactly they blend. They just care that it looks decent (they’re not coming out of the movie theater having conversations like ” wow, it’s great that they went with practical effects here and CGI over here. I like that it was 40% practical and 60% CGI/VFX).
Lol stop. He doesn’t have to like the prequels to be a Star Wars fan. That is the “No True Scotsman” fallacy and it’s BS.
You are trolling.
George Lucas created modern CGI tehnology. All movies today are using CGI tehnology created by George Lucas for Star Wars prequels.
Everything in these movies where groundbreaking.
Not true. Peter Jackson actualy used tehnology created by George Lucas in his movies.
Without Jar Jar ( first real digital character ) there would be np Gollum in LOTR.
George Lucas created groundbreaking tehnology for prequels that is still used in modern movies.
Prequels had the best VFX ever created in their time.
AOTC and ROTS where groundbreaking. There where first movies with soo imaginatives worlds and creatures.
Mmmmm…no. Jurassic Park and LotR both look much better than II and III.
Maybe you need to read more about history in cinema, with the prequel movies came a lot of technological achivements, and big CGI improvements, that not existed before, not just the digital camera. Lord of the rings came later and took a lot that was developed for starwars. And Im not just defending prequels, Im talking about TFA and how the didn’t risk much creating new stuff, the story is amazing a think, i liked a lot, but visually lacks of creativity and doesnt bring new imaginative stuff, they just stick with enviroments that looks more than earth, and that looks like other stuff we already saw, in other star wars movies, same ships designs, etc, etc.
They used tried and tested movie making methods that retain the fundamental heart and soul of the actor’s performances. The only “risk taking” the prequels did was gamble on the quality of the finished product just so George and co could sit on a chair and not have to move from the spot while directing green screen shots and relying on ILM to put something interesting in the background (nevermind the fact that the actual shots themselves are so stale and uninteresting. Sitting down, walking and talking, sitting down. etc tec)
And that all is waaaaaaaay better than almost anything in TFA. Prequels gave use new, alien, unique, imaginative worlds, places, creatures. In TFA everything looks boring. Like something we can see on Earth.
To be fair, that was the scene where baby Luke is given by Kenobi to Beru. They had shot plate footage of the Homestead for EP2 and used it for this shot. Why go to the desert for ONE shot.
Nobody ever said CGI wasn’t going to be used. That reel showed plenty of practical sets blended with CG very well. The problem is when CG becomes the answer to everything, and your actors have no connection to anything real, it starts to look painfully artificial like Episodes 2-3 became.
here: http://boards.theforce.net/threads/practical-effects-in-the-prequels-sets-pictures-models-etc.50017310/
this, my friends, is how “practical effects” and computer generated effects can be blended to create a truly wonderful film. it isn’t about choosing one over the other, it’s about blending them. regardless of your opinion on the story, this is A+ work by j.j. abrams and his team.
Preach. This is seamless, never breaking the illusion or pulling you out of what you’re experiencing.
Yeah watching this I’m finding myself see parts that I thought was real footage actually to be CGI, whereas in the prequels it was done quite poorly that you begin to question even the real stuff and think it’s CGI, lol.
fair enough. i understand that george lucas just wanted to keep breaking ground in terms of using the most cutting edge technology.. that’s why i never really minded the CGI in the prequels. though, i will admit that nowadays a few scenes from the prequels (especially dex’s diner) really pull me out of the story.
The diner scene works fine if we don’t see a buttcrack and that awful server droid.
A 50’s style diner really pulled me out.
A truckstop style diner or a restaurant in the Star Wars universe is understandable
But a 50’s style diner with droid waitress with short skirt, beehive hairdo style head, and rolling around like on rollerskates, and a big fat cook with a greasy white t shirt?
yeah no thanks
I feel that the graphics really delivered on TFA.
I was expecting it to be 60% CGI, but the little bit of Practical they DID use was where it mattered.
I only counted one scene where a physical actor stood directly on green-screen with zero props, and that was Rey on the imploding planet.
Everything else, they gave them a physical floor to stand on.
I also like how they went through the trouble of pasting in an actual extra to be running around beneath the Jakku dogfight, and that was a CGI shot that they pasted an actual person into. COMMITMENT.
Overall, they used Practical for the normal stuff — like stormtroopers that EXIST — and CGI for anything weird or above the ordinary, AS IT SHOULD BE.
Though the practical elements, when necessary, stood up with the CGI. Not against — WITH.
This is what a CGI-heavy blockbuster SHOULD look like!
I can’t speak for the other nominees, but I’d say Star Wars 7 is fully deserving of AT LEAST a nomination, if not the big win, for their efforts.
Then again, Mad Max had some pretty great visuals, while Practical-heavy, it actually used a fair bit of CG-pasting for the backgrounds and the sand-storm; in fact, Mad Max used just as much digital as Star Wars 7 did practical. Both are equally beautiful films to look at. They BOTH deserve an oscar.
Yeah it’s so nice to see they actually got a decent amount of storm troopers together for Hux’s speech. So much better than the scene at the end of AOTC where we see all the cgi clone troopers standing to attention, and it’s so cgi it hurts. Real stuff in the forefront augmented with CGI in the background to add to the scale of the scene, THAT’S how you do it.
I absolutely LOVE that little wink to the podrace just after about 1:55, that little low hug to the ground slide Rey does in the Falcon. (See, I don’t totally despise the prequels!) :p
I love the ferociousness of Kylo Ren’s combat. You can feel every hit, it’s as if his sabre weighs a ton or something. I’m sure against Finn he literally hammers him down onto the ground so heavy his hit is. So incredible. Yet again (sorry guys) it puts the balletic tappity-tap fights in the prequels to shame. Gets back to how Empire and ROTJ showed lightsabre duels. Energetic, quite raw, powerful, dangerous. The prequel lightsabre stuff had no power or danger at all. Just people lamely swirling sticks about and tapping them together. (Edit: Although the Obi Wan v Darth Maul was a damn cool segment I’ll admit).
The lightsabre stuff in this movie, and especially just the entire way Kylo Ren moves… it’s just so badass haha! Love it.
To be fair to the prequels, we’ve had 10-16 years of technology improvements since then. I think the prequels need to be thanked as examples of where you can go wrong with Star Wars. I’m no fan of those but it’s clear to me that the backlash and constructive criticism of the prequels fed into fixing Star Wars with the Force Awakens.
Prequels are waaaaaaaaaay better than TFA. Prequels where original story with great VFX.
Prequels where full of unique alien planets and creatures.
TFA is just rip-off of ANH with boring earth like planets and boring aliens.
Uh-huh.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!
Prequels had appalling scripting and direction, and a director who couldn’t decide what he actually wanted until the film ABSOLUTELY had to be locked for release. OTOH, it was better designed, took more storytelling chances, had stronger photography, and superior scores. They’re both problematic, just in different ways, with TFA having the edge on crowd pleasing.
what’s somewhat disappointing is that bb-8 wasn’t 100% practical as promised. I understand when he uses needles that it was required to be made digitally, but there are many other shots where they added bb-8 digitally.
You do know the built eight different versions of BB-8 all with different functions? I can forgive a few CGI shots with that level of practical effects.
Yeah but did you see that they CG added him for the scene where they run towards the falcon? That’s quite a delusion. Not that I don’t like CG, I’m okay with its usage, but if you’re going to digitally animate sometimes BB-8 don’t sell it as a “fully practical effect”
Could you tell, though? I couldn’t. That’s all that matters. Use practical when it’s needed (closeups and humans and most aliens). Use CGI when it’s needed (fast action, more intricately moving or impossible aliens). The problem with the PT was that they used CGI when it wasn’t needed (fully CGI characters that could have been costumed people, outlandish, over-the-top sets, etc.).
because Geonsosians were possible, jar jar, who’s a head taller and moves in various impossible ways is possible and so on.
about CG used for landscapes: http://boards.theforce.net/threads/practical-effects-in-the-prequels-sets-pictures-models-etc.50017310/ Here’s the amount of practical sets and minatures done. it’s way more than what you thought, I guarantee.
The Geonosians definitely could’ve been puppets.
Just look at them again and tell. me how. They would’ve been unstable.
If James Cameron can do the Terminator practically, the Geonosians can be suits/puppets.
Go back to see a geonosian and try to think how to do it. The only way could be having a greensuited guy handling the puppet, but that’s more difficult than making a fully CG geonosian. Also, 2002 CG VFX wasn’t as good as today, so erasing the greensuited guy would make the thing look fake anyways.
No, it wouldn’t have. they did that exact thing with C-3PO in TPM. If they had wanted to it, they could have.
what the hell… You’re talking about human-like props. Look at the geonosians’ legs, they wouldn’t stand up. Think again.
“fully CGI characters that could have been costumed people”
.
(cough) Snoke (cough cough)
“that level”? they didnt use more practical effects than any other movie, all that was just for Marketing, yes they built a lot, but every star wars movie built a lot of practical sets and miniatures, do your research, there are a lot of info in the web.
Show me where they said everything would be 100 percent practical. Please?
I didn’t say that they said everything would be practical, learn to read!
I said that they promised us that BB-8 was 100% practical. Not that I hate CG, but I wish they were honest
I read he was about 2/3rds of the time practical with a painted out puppeteer. They said he was a practical effect, which he was. Where they said he was 100 percent of the time I want to know.
i’m pretty sure “BB-8 is practical” was sort of a tagline at the star wars celebration panel
Just saw nominees. I foresee an oscar for john williams
really? i thought TFA soundtrack was one of his careers all time lows. while i’d love to see Bridge of Spies get the statue, it’s probably gonna be H8 hence the Golden Globe
I listened to some scores and out of the 5-6 ipI liked TFA’s score better. Didn’t listen to bridge of spies score yet. I didn’t like the force awakens score at first aswell, but eventually relistened at it. As an isolated score wasn’t at all as bad as it sounded to me first. My favourite scores must be the PT scores, but this film score was good. Still, the hateful eight’s score shoudln’t win oscar because it got a golden globe. It wasn’t ennio morricone’s best work either. He himself was interviewed on italian Tv and I saw that he didn’t really thought it would win anything.
It just doesn’t fit our expectations of what a Star Wars score should be. His other scores were more “pop” classical. This was definitely more “experimental” classical, but it’s really a work of genius when you dig into all of its layers.
http://boards.theforce.net/threads/practical-effects-in-the-prequels-sets-pictures-models-etc.50017310/
Damn,Snoke have more destroyed face that i thought.Im curious who did this to him.
Yeah, it’s good to get a clear, good look at the guy’s face. It also looks more human to me than I originally thought.
Snoke is definitely human, no alien race
He looked humanoid to me on the film, but not as human as he does in these images, tbh.
Yeah i agree,he is human,what is interesting that he have blue eyes not a yellow like siths like Emperor.
Yeah. And neither did Kylo, for that matter. I wonder if this is just a trait exclusive to the Sith or if we’ll see Snoke and/or Kylo’s eyes change in the next 2 films.
Probably the former. Kylo is a Dark Jedi I believe, so his eyes should stay normal.
I believe Andy Serkis said that Snoke is of a species that we’ve never seen before. We’ve most definitely seen some humans.
kinda interesting that the replaced unmasked Driver with CGI Kylo.. why bother if they could have easily reshoot the sequence with a double wearing the costume.
also, the dogfighting while looking flashier the OT, felt too me a billion times faker, I cannot understand why they didn’t use any miniatures, I mean the Battle of Endor is absolutely perfect with little to no CGI (depending which version you watch). that shot with a “camera” mounted on the X Wing wing looks so terrible I can’t even, the lightning screams fake from all over especially on the cockpit’s glass
I believe they didn’t have the mask for that scene when they shot it and already moved the set when they got a kylo ren helmet.
CGI with rigid objects is 100% just as good as model work, IMO. I can’t tell a difference between good model work and good CGI work in that case (except models tend to have matte lines).
Depends on lighting – the lighting of the cityscape was sometimes nice for theatrical effect, but then looked weird when shining through windows (except the Jedi tower, those were OK shots).
But every time they’re walking through the temple, it looks like a cartoon, because nobody’s really been able to replicate sunlight bouncing off different surfaces.
“except models tend to have matte lines”
.
In 1980. Before digital compositing. Now? Not so much.
Mmmmm…no.
mmmmm… totally. i mean, im sorry im right. i wish i wasnt
The blue screened background during the Endor speeder bike chase sequence looks fake as shit. Just sayin’.
This is pretty awesome! I Iove how they let the movie come out and let everyone say how much of a difference the return to practical effects make and then they drop this which reveals the movie has about as much CGI as TPA. Only difference is, not only is this CGI good (which is kind of unfair since it is 15 years later), but it is used right. When we see Rey and Finn running on Jakku that is all real so when it is immediately followed by a barrage of CGI our brains accept it a lot more than when we see two people fighting on a fake bridge and then jump onto fake lava. Other than Snoke and Maz, who both look god but are clearly not real, and some obviously fake rocks and a few chincy explosions here and there the CGI in this movie felt every bit as tangible as anything Ive ever seen.
As TPM? Nope. But almost. Maybe.
TPM has tons of practical stuff. If not more, than about the same I would say.
Maybe. Either way, TFA still does it better.
Well 15 years does help
So does using the CGI for backgrounds as opposed to full (non mo-cap) characters and entire landscape shots. And if the CGI of the time was bad, it was George Lucas’ responsibility to not use it (like James Cameron when he came up with Avatar).
I had someone tell me those explosions looked like fake CGI as they running away leaving the gateway on Jakku. When they are shown here to be real explosions.
WHAT? THEY USED GREEN SCREEN ON TFA? I THOUGHT IT WAS ALL PRACTICAL EFFECTS!!!
Question is, where did they get those Rathtars? I thought they went extinct 150 years ago…
125…but I hear North Korea has a couple in a zoo.
Nah, they just moved to Africa.
Lots of armchair filmmakers commenting in this article.
Most people with criticism couldn’t write or film their way out of a wet paper bag.
Let’s see what people will think of TFA’s CGI and VFX 10+ years from now (I’m sure that many of you armchair filmmakers will be grasping for straws and throw out “dated” arguments by then).
Nobody talks about Pirates of the Caribbean CGI (made by the same company more than 10 years ago) or Jurassic Park (made by the same company 20 years ago).
Or T2.
Or the original Matrix (which beat TPM for the Oscar that year).
Or LOTR.
It seems that TFA has more CGI than prequels.
Mmmm…no. Have you seen the prequels? The set of Epsiode 3 was a green wall.
TUD is another armchair filmmaker who pretends he’s a professional/expect in making films in various aspects such as directing, film effects and technology.
Just because he has a well-founded opinion about things.
Nope. I just know when a film looks shitty and when it doesn’t The prequels look shitty and TFA doesn’t. Excuse me for expressing that opinion.
Yes I seen them and they have alot of true sets. And they used CGI to create alien worlds that does not exist on Earth. In TFA they used CGI to create thing that exist on Earth. So not the same.
TFA has more CGI than prequels.
http://boards.theforce.net/threads/practical-effects-in-the-prequels-sets-pictures-models-etc.50017310/
“TFA has more CGI than prequels”
That’s………………
Not true 🙂
TFA has some (few) shots with no CGI at all. AOTC and ROTS has no shot without CGI, and George Lucas and Rick McCallum were very proud to state that.
McCallum dixit. It’s in the extras of the DVDs.
What you say is so true about using CGI to create things that doesnt exist, and TFA using it to recreate what actually exist, thats a big difference, i agree with you, I think prequels have more value in that area.
Mmmmm…still no. And my comment about the green wall was a joke.
hehe, do you really believe about the green wall?? you have to read a little more, in the meantime you can check the post Lora replied to you, its really illustrative.
It was a joke, man.
That’s ok, but there are people that really believe that and say it all the times they can, and then there are the people who really beleive them, i just find it really funny.
But really, it doesnt mather wich movie have more CGI or Practical, that doesn’t make the movie, but the story telling, actually TPM did more practical than TFA, ships in TPM, for example, most of them were real models, and TFA is all digital. But who cares those are just facts, just information. Now you can do more with CGI than before, anyway is good to share opinions
Blah blah blah people. There is only one deciding factor in all this.
If it looks good……it is good!
Completely agree with you!
Yeah I can’t believe they are still dragging this up. I don’t care anymore. Watch em or don’t. I like TFA… can’t wait for more.
The clip at 22 seconds in 3D I thought was going to poke me in the eye
I’m glad they talk about the “growing bread” shot, it’s one of the greatest effects of the movie 🙂
I thought it was pretty nifty. I would have loved watching her live her life a little longer… but I would have been ok with a 3 hour movie 😛
That was really cool, and it made me hungry lol
Wow I’m just back to read some comments I missed from Lora and Crusher. Guys you really need to relax, you are not George Lucas’ Official Online Police. You don’t need to ask for the ID card or use the fanbreathalyzer everytime someone expresses an opinion that differs from “the prequels are groundbreaking”.
Don’t feed trolls, their goal is to antagonize.
Yeah but I wish we could permanently hide their comments. Getting tired of the “This is the worst Star Wars movie, hands down, it just copies A New Hope, not even the prequels were this bad [!]” garbage…
Rick McCallum, proud of the achivement that you guys want to dismiss today. The prequels were CGI overloaded.
Damn Snoke’s a lot more messed up than I thought
Yeah,and he is clearly a human race.
you mean humanoid?
somebody get an alternate link to the video I need it! the only extensive Episode VII material until the blu ray!
https://vimeo.com/151732579
it showed the “oops” tab
now it works thanks man
I gotta admit… watching the video made me kinda mad. There were so many shots where things that could have been practical weren’t used. The shots that stood out to me (even when watching TFA):
1. Maz’s castle & destruction
2. Star Destroyers & Debris that the Falcon flew through/ CGI desert (what happened to the helicopter footage?)
3. CGI falcon as Rey & Finn were running up to it… I could tell
4. Kylo Ren close up/ Snoke convo (wtf?)
5. The could have used models for Star Destroyers & some of the fighter shots… at least to composite them into shots.
6. The shot where the tie fighter takes off… they could have composited a model for that shot.
The star destroyer looks pretty fake to me too. For the rest… sometimes it’s a matter of production. this movie suffered from losing one of the leads for several weeks. They moved the schedule, and maybe some stuff wasn’t ready at that point. The important thing (as some has appointed here) is the film looks good overall 🙂
I can’t disagree with anything you said… though “good overall” should have been “best ever” (haha).
I remember when I was a kid & watched Star Wars OT on VHS… I was stunned. IMO, nothing ever really topped the effects. True, while in many ways special effects look more “real” now, I’d still take the space battle of endor over any action scene similar to that in any film since.
Maz’s castle bothers me more than anything else… even Lucas would have had his team construct a miniature model!
Tumbs up Aras. The Battle of Endor is yet the best battle for me too 🙂 I’m sure you’ve seen this already but it’s always good to remember how much work went into that. I’m not saying nowadays it’s not hard work, but as a result of the techniques they used, that battle stays true even today. BEST EVER 😉
Funny enough, the more you watched the VHSs the less darker the picture was, and there was a moment you could see a green square around the star destroyers in ROTJ!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONDQVeoKiZw
To me that castle looked 100 percent real as they approached for landing.
Oh yeah. I had no idea that it was CGI.
Maybe when he was making TPM, but not after. Anyway, the OT has very good effects, but not great. If you look at the originals (before the SEs) things like matte lines, matte boxes, and matte paintings are painfully obvious, especially with the rebel air vehicles (I forgot the name) in the beginning of V.
http://boards.theforce.net/threads/practical-effects-in-the-prequels-sets-pictures-models-etc.50017310/
I don’t care about your stupid link. The prequels look bad, regardless of their practical effects.
That’s true. When Harrison broke his leg, they went ahead and did some of the all CGI shots without being fully prepared. no matter what the reason, the movie still looks great, and i bet VIII will look even better.
Loved the visuals of TFA. Just stay as far from the prequels as possible
https://vimeo.com/151732579
Since the video was taken down.
Just rewatching these scenes from TFA I realised I fckin love this movie. I loved the music and I loved the visual style. Acting, dialogues and characters were also great. I dont care what people say, for me this movie was an exciting adventure with characters I cared for.
And thats way more than the prequels can provide.
Me too. And Starkiller looks badass.
The scene where Rey slipped down from that sand hill, made my eyes a bit wet. Its like the binary sun scene. No words, just John Williams’s perfect music and beautiful visuals. JJ really understood what made Star Wars so good.
From now on, anyone that mentions the effects in the PT in a negative way will be hit with this link: http://boards.theforce.net/threads/practical-effects-in-the-prequels-sets-pictures-models-etc.50017310/
I’m not even going to try to get into a discussion with the haters and detractors (especially since the discussion will lead to nowhere since they are too hard-heads to be more open-minded and accept that they were inaccurate on some of the allegations they bring up instead of accepting things on how they are), you bring up any comparisons between the PT and TFA regarding effects, YOU WILL BE HIT WITH THAT TFN LINK.
This is a stern warning. I strongly suggest that you haters and detractors drop it, get over it, and move on or else…
TPM has great visuals Imo. It has a unique style.
Aotc and Rots are both garbage visually imo. Maybe kids loved those visuals in the early 2000s but nowadays they look cringeworthy.
http://boards.theforce.net/threads/practical-effects-in-the-prequels-sets-pictures-models-etc.50017310/
http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/square_medium/11112/111127627/4963831-6340542879-tumbl.gif
http://boards.theforce.net/threads/practical-effects-in-the-prequels-sets-pictures-models-etc.50017310/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rh-5UhwcBW0
http://boards.theforce.net/threads/practical-effects-in-the-prequels-sets-pictures-models-etc.50017310/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rh-5UhwcBW0
I guess they were supposed to build that entire Geonosis Arena at full scale. They did build a huge practical miniature they used for the backgrounds. http://www.theasc.com/magazine/sep02/brave/images/image7.jpg
They could have at least extended the set/built some of the background and had some finite targets for the actors to shoot at. They just look high in that.GIF posted above.
No prequel won any oscar for visuals. Rots wasnt nominated, regardless what you think. Go and watch Matrix from 1999. Or Two towers one year before Aotc. Those movies have great visuals even nowadays. Aotc looks like a low budget videogame.
1. Didn’t say anything about winning them, I said nominations (and yes, I know ROTS didn’t get a nomination, I merely stated that I feel that it should’ve that year, but that’s just my opinion (and I know not everyone will agree with me). Your biased agenda is showing.
2. http://boards.theforce.net/threads/practical-effects-in-the-prequels-sets-pictures-models-etc.50017310/
3. You’re not winning this argument at all (and if you think you are, you’ve got another thing coming to you so stop grasping for straws).
This isnt arguing, Im just stating some facts. The preuqels didnt win any oscar for visuals (neither for anything else). You can call a nomination impressive (its not really), but for a movie which was nothing really more but visuals, and with that high budget I’d rather call it a faliure. And besides I would never argue with a prequel fanboy. They are one of the worst fanatics on this planet, immune to facts and logical reasoning. Think what you want, but please dont try to force your biased opinion to others.
Wouldn’t you say an Oscar nomination is more impressive than NOT getting a nomination?
Again with BS spewing from a delusional and irrational PT hater that is in the loud and vocal monitory as various stats/data have shown (despite of what they like to think because they clearly lack logical reasoning and math) but in any case, I’m not going to get into arguments about the PT in general but I again leave you with this: http://boards.theforce.net/threads/practical-effects-in-the-prequels-sets-pictures-models-etc.50017310/
(So funny hearing a hater talk about “facts” like he speaks the truth but most of the time it’s just opinion being present like if they were facts (a sad attempt really lol))
Seriously, are you 13 or something? This is ridiculous. You can’t win an argument by repeating the same 3 step process or whatever to anyone who disagrees with you! Talk about hitting your head off a brick wall… Wish I could unsee all of the bile I guess I’m about to see a lot more of on this site. A shame.
A “stern” warning … Hes so totally super cereal about the impending link of doom for you naysayers, but why so vicious, so mean, so angry? what did humanity do to get you to resort to such a drastic measure of link raping the foolhardy ones? … also, curious, does the search for ManBearPig continue?
http://boards.theforce.net/threads/practical-effects-in-the-prequels-sets-pictures-models-etc.50017310/
What exactly does posting a link, ad naseum, suppose to accomplish here? (Besides just being plain irritating yet uber dork funny) You realize that it takes the participation of the offending party to actually click your link of retribution for it to even try to be effective …. uhm, right?
Good luck with your crusade of … of … well, whatever it is youre trying to do.
Stop using logic and reason it doesn’t work when someone has already prejudged something no matter how right you are (and you ARE right).
The Prequel effects looked terrible then, looked terrible now, and will live in infamy till the end of time as we know it. TFA had a perfect blend of practical, augmented with CGI instead of sole reliance on it.
Wow. All Heil Crusher, apparently he knows what’s up…
Ridiculous.
Repeatedly posting this link doesn’t prove anything. Everyone knows that that PT had tons of practical effects. No one has issues with that. People have issues with the CG in the PT.
Gotta say, even though I wasn’t as blown away by the movie as I hoped I’d be, and have only seen it twice so far…. watching those clips again suddenly reminds me just how great and fun much of it was, and makes me REALLY want to see it again.
Me too. I hope that they do a re-release in April or May; I’d love to see it in IMAX for my birthday or something. They could maybe even add in some of the deleted scenes (like the snow speeder chase).
Going through the clip and analysing each sequence I’m happy that the use of CGI was used well and justified, their wasn’t a load of scenes with lazy CG plastered all over. My only nit pick was no Model Star destroyer.
Love that long distance shot of them all jumping into hyperspace
The video was taken down again.
I’ll try and get it up on Vimeo again. They are cracking down
My account got deactivated
Sorry about that.
Do you need the video because I can email it to you
https://vid.me/H7ou
Thought you might like this
Thanks.
https://vid.me/H7ou