Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens

[Elfdart]

Except Utapau is a series of models, not CGI.

[Lord Revan]

when fully armored the Clonetroopers look ok except for 1 thing, their visors look way too shiny and reflective compared to things like Fett helmet visors or Stormtrooper eye peices. it's kind of the problem of using alot of new and untested tech for the PT, (while party true for the OT as well it was more doing old things a new way then using totally untested tech).

That's also while the effects improve so clearly thru out the PT.

[Patroklos]

Yeah, RotS aged far better than the other two.

[Col. Crackpot]

Except Utapau is a series of models, not CGI.

CGI enhanced models. Regardless, it looks like shit a dozen years later.

[Vympel]

CGI enhanced models. Regardless, it looks like shit a dozen years later.

Whatever they did to those models, they slathered so much digital processesing or whatever the hell over them that it just doesn't look good at all. The effects of the prequels have aged much faster than those of the OT. Very few of the locations can be mistaken for a real place as opposed to an illusion. Phantom Menace suffers the least from this. Attack of the Clones took on an entirely different look (digital camera introduction?) and props for technical trailblazing (nearly everyone uses digital cameras now) but I'm pretty sure the look of that film more than the other two suffered for it.

[Galvatron]

[Purple]

I am going to go see the movie in a day or two and I need to know one thing. How is the 3D?

Simply put, in 99% of movies lately the 3D has really been just a cheap gimmick that definitively absolutely resoundingly was not worth paying extra for. So is the new SW any different? Or should I just go for the regular version?

[Borgholio]

I have not watched it in 3d but one of my co-workers did. He said he tried to reach out and touch some of the X-wings during the fight sequences, it was that good.

[Channel72]

There's no point in seeing it in 3D.

[Akumz Razor]

If you can see it in IMAX 3D it's totally worth it. However I also saw the film in regular 3D was was fairly unimpressed, FWIWI.

[Mad]

I know some of the PT scenes were filmed with models instead of sets for interior scenes. I wonder how much this led to the feeling of sparse interiors, with the lack of clutter that set decorators like to add to make the place feel more real. it also means there's less real objects during filming for the actors to interact with or otherwise play off of. So they never felt real.

[Purple]

If you can see it in IMAX 3D it's totally worth it. However I also saw the film in regular 3D was was fairly unimpressed, FWIWI.

There are different types of 3D? How do I tell them apart?

[Iroscato]

If you can see it in IMAX 3D it's totally worth it. However I also saw the film in regular 3D was was fairly unimpressed, FWIWI.

There are different types of 3D? How do I tell them apart?

IMAX screens are considerably larger and have more powerful sound systems than conventional cinema screens. Also the definition is much higher, I believe, so it all adds up to a big difference in the experience.

[biostem]

If you can see it in IMAX 3D it's totally worth it. However I also saw the film in regular 3D was was fairly unimpressed, FWIWI.

There are different types of 3D? How do I tell them apart?

IMAX screens are considerably larger and have more powerful sound systems than conventional cinema screens. Also the definition is much higher, I believe, so it all adds up to a big difference in the experience.

Doesn't IMAX also use a curved screen?

[The Romulan Republic]

It appears The Force Awakens will best Avatar as the highest grossing film in history.

Suck it, James Cameron!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/sta ... mg00000024

Sorry, Leo, there's a new king of the world.
No iceberg could stand in the way of "Star Wars: The Force Awakens," sailing past "Titanic" on Friday for second on the all-time domestic box office list. The movie's reported U.S. total of $686.4 million beats the James Cameron directed blockbuster by nearly $30 million ("Titanic" made $658.7 million). Now it has another Cameron film, the all-time record holder, "Avatar," in its crosshairs.
"Avatar" has a domestic total of about $760.5 million, but projections have "Star Wars" reaching around $740 million or more by Sunday night, according to Deadline. The movie is expected to blow past "Avatar" early next week.
How do you feel about that, BB-8?

Internationally, "The Force Awakens" has already earned about $704 million -- and it doesn't even open in China until Jan. 9. With its current global total approaching $1.4 billion, "Star Wars" is already 7th on the all-time list. "Avatar" is number one, with about $2.7 billion worldwide (numbers not adjusted for inflation), but that movie came out in 2009, while "Star Wars" has only been going for three weeks. It may just be a matter of time before it becomes the greatest box office force ever...

[Adam Reynolds]

I wonder how much of Avatar's numbers are due to the fact that it was the first big 3D movie with that as something of a gimmick. It is interesting how it largely faded from pop culture after that period of time. You can probably find more people today discussing The Dark Knight, which came out well over a year earlier.

[The Romulan Republic]

Yeah, Avatar never seemed to be either very loved by critics or loved by a devoted fanbase, at least from what I've seen. It was a big flashy (and pretentious) popular blockbuster with no staying power. Its main long term impact seems to be the fact that movies are constantly put in 3D now (for which I rather dislike it and Cameron).

[Grumman]

Avatar made very good use of the medium it was designed for. It was a beautiful movie on the big screen that looked even better in 3D. Unfortunately, it was not a strong enough film to function well outside of that medium - I own the DVD and I still haven't watched it all the way through to the end.

Its main long term impact seems to be the fact that movies are constantly put in 3D now (for which I rather dislike it and Cameron).

I don't blame Cameron for that. Blame the other filmmakers for making 3D movies even though they suck at it, and blame the moviegoing public for watching them, but blaming Cameron for his copycats is like blaming Marvel for Batman v Superman.

[ray245]

I don't think TFA is going to have much staying power in terms of pop culture reference to be honest. While people do enjoy the characters, I highly doubt people will enjoy all the new visual aspect of the film too much. Would people like the new x-wing over the old ones?

JJ's film have a habit of being well received but having little in terms of lasting impression on pop culture.

[The Romulan Republic]

I do think that Force Awakens may have a considerable impact on the film industry. The film did at least two major atypical things- having a highly diverse main cast, and shooting on actual film rather than digital. And with it almost a lock for highest grossing film of all time, its going to have a lot of imitators. I think its going to shake up the Hollywood film industry quite a bit.

[Vympel]

I do think that Force Awakens may have a considerable impact on the film industry. The film did at least two major atypical things- having a highly diverse main cast, and shooting on actual film rather than digital. And with it almost a lock for highest grossing film of all time, its going to have a lot of imitators. I think its going to shake up the Hollywood film industry quite a bit.

Agreed - compare to the other big nostalgia fuel release of 2015 - Jurassic World. The cast was lily white and highly conventional, right down to the female lead who ran around in fucking high heels for the entire film.

[The Romulan Republic]

I also think there's a bit of a momentum thing going on now, too, which Force Awakens can both tap into and fuel.

There's Fury Road, with its female co-lead and numerous prominent female characters. And there's the female Ghostbuster movie coming out soon. And the fairly diverse new Avengers line up at the end of Age of Ultron.

I feel like we might be reaching a tipping point here for the industry.

Edit: How could I forget the Wonder Woman movie and the apparently Harley Quinn dominated (going by the teaser) Suicide Squad movie?

[Borgholio]

Minor question...what do we call the latest set of movies? We have the PT, OT then...what, NT? Prequel Trilogy, Original Trilogy, New Trilogy? I guess that works for now. But what do we call Episodes 10 - 12 a decade down the line?

[Purple]

I vote for DT. As in Disney Trilogy.

[ray245]

Most people seem to call it Sequel Trilogy