What I wanted in AOTC...

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2003-08-18 08:25pm

This detailed practical AT-TE model was the basis of its digital incarnation used in the Clone Wars sequences.

WTF, it looks great to me. The AT-AT in ESB was great because it
was a model, but these new AT-TEs look like shit because they feel
too cartoonish as a result of being 100% digital.

The Tipoca City landing platform set is doused with over four swimming pools' worth of water.

You know, they could have built a bit more - its not like lucas has
a cash pinch

Grand Admiral Thrawn · Post by **Grand Admiral Thrawn** » 2003-08-18 08:39pm

I would have settled for the original tracked SPHA-T. Silly Lucas.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2003-08-18 08:58pm

I've got to agree with Shep. Lucas's love of nifty new tricks has largely been to the detriment of the films. He's spent more time on the looks than the story. But that's hardly news.

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2003-08-18 09:00pm

I wanted 2 hours of entertainment.

I got it.

Crazy Goji · Post by **Crazy Goji** » 2003-08-18 09:06pm

Ender wrote:I wanted 2 hours of entertainment.

I got it.

Thank you. My thoughts exactly. Lucas trying out new things and stretching a little is fine with me. It's his movies after all.

Crayz9000 · Post by **Crayz9000** » 2003-08-18 09:07pm

I still enjoy the movies, but I just wish he'd be a little less... ham-fisted when it comes to making the prequels.

Montcalm · Post by **Montcalm** » 2003-08-18 10:15pm

Walkers are inefficient wheels are much better.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-08-18 10:20pm

Bah, it's become nerd-fashion to whine about how CGI looks bad. The AT-TEs have vastly superior motion animation than the old hand-animated AT-ATs ever had.

I love TESB, but just watch the Battle of Hoth. The AT-ATs are just really high-end Harryhausen special effects, and you can see it plain as day in their jerky stop-gap movements. I have my own issues with CGI and I really think that foreground clonetroopers should have been men in suits, but the AT-TEs looked excellent.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-08-18 10:20pm

There is nothing wrong with using low tech; PJ used it quite well in LoTR. There are quite a few scenes that would have worked better in EpII had they used low tech special effects rather than the digital stuff.

Darth Fanboy · Post by **Darth Fanboy** » 2003-08-19 12:49am

Durran Korr wrote:There is nothing wrong with using low tech; PJ used it quite well in LoTR. There are quite a few scenes that would have worked better in EpII had they used low tech special effects rather than the digital stuff.

LoTR is set in a low tech society though, Lucas in THIS situation ws right to go with CGI, for the sort of scene Geonosis was a model would just not have cut it.

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2003-08-19 01:08am

Darth Fanboy wrote:
Durran Korr wrote:There is nothing wrong with using low tech; PJ used it quite well in LoTR. There are quite a few scenes that would have worked better in EpII had they used low tech special effects rather than the digital stuff.
LoTR is set in a low tech society though...

However, that has nothing to do with special and visual effects.

Crayz9000 · Post by **Crayz9000** » 2003-08-19 01:25am

Darth Fanboy wrote:LoTR is set in a low tech society though, Lucas in THIS situation ws right to go with CGI, for the sort of scene Geonosis was a model would just not have cut it.

I'll agree that Geonosis could not have been done without CGI, but Lucas really should have used real actors and models in places where CGI mistakes can be far too visible.

Arthur_Tuxedo · Post by **Arthur_Tuxedo** » 2003-08-19 03:11am

CGI is great when done right. Just look at Jurassic Park. Gotta be 11 years old now and still looks fantastic. Or Terminator 2 for that matter, although the CGI was much more sparing in that one.

Trogdor · Post by **Trogdor** » 2003-08-19 04:17am

Darth Wong wrote:Bah, it's become nerd-fashion to whine about how CGI looks bad.

I have to agree with you here!

I went into AOTC wanting war, lightsabers, and dark Jedi throwing blue lightning around. I got all three in quantities beyond what I had hoped for. As far as I'm concerned, AOTC ranks up there with the original trilogy, CGI or no CGI.

Robert Treder · Post by **Robert Treder** » 2003-08-19 05:20am

You guys are also forgetting the fact that by experimenting so heavily with CGI, Lucas is paving the way for the future. CGI isn't at the point where it looks flawless yet, but we won't get there if we don't have folks like GL tossing millions of dollars towards the cause.

Do you think Ray Harryhausen should have used men in costumes instead of skeletons, because that would have been more seamless? Should RotJ not have featured a Rancor because chroma-keying technology wasn't up to snuff? Should Georges Méliès not have had the rocket hit the moon just because the strings would be visible?
The field won't advance if filmmakers are afraid to try new things because they think they won't look perfect. I for one am glad to see the progress made.

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-08-19 05:23am

The AT-TEs are the best CGI in the movie, followed closely by the LAATs. Far superior to any model work they could've done. Can you imagine how long that would TAKE?

D.Turtle · Post by **D.Turtle** » 2003-08-19 08:08am

I jsut watched the audio commentary of AOTC.
I have to say: I was amazed how much was CGI.
Really amazing if you ask me - especially because you don't really realize it.

That's also why I think the CGI in AOTC was way superior to the CGI in LOTR for exampls: You do not (or barely never) realize or really SEE (even if you know it is CGI) that it is CGI (with Yoda for example)

Gollum however was very obviously CGI.

Also when you realize how many times the actors were replaced by CGI characters - it is simply amazing what was done with CGI in AOTC.

Warspite · Post by **Warspite** » 2003-08-19 08:53am

D.Turtle wrote:That's also why I think the CGI in AOTC was way superior to the CGI in LOTR for exampls: You do not (or barely never) realize or really SEE (even if you know it is CGI) that it is CGI (with Yoda for example)

Gollum however was very obviously CGI.

I'm sorry, but Yoda screamed CGI, the plastic gloss gave that one as soon as he appeared.

Lucas clearly states in the DVD's (I think in the AOTC, on one of the small making off movies) he wants to advance the techonlogy in digital flim-making.
Of course, there were scenes that came out too CGI, and some others where the tweaks are so small one doesn't notices them until a closer inspection, Kenobi's robes during the Kamino fight is a good example of the later.

I would like to add that using CGI reduces the amount of time spent in constructing sets and shooting live actors, and probably for Lucas it may well be more cheaper to use his in-house CGI artists, instead of paying a legion of people, from set-builders to extras and actors.
CGI only consumes electricity, and you're paying only a small group of computer nerds that will do the same tasks that would be assigned to a lerge group of people, from character animation to world-building, a jack-of-all-trades if you will.

Still, live action still beats CGI in most aspects, but the day when CGI becomes almost undistinguishable from reality is fast approaching.

Peregrin Toker · Post by **Peregrin Toker** » 2003-08-19 09:24am

Arthur_Tuxedo wrote:CGI is great when done right. Just look at Jurassic Park. Gotta be 11 years old now and still looks fantastic. Or Terminator 2 for that matter, although the CGI was much more sparing in that one.

That's not the end of the story - I've noted that when used in live-action films, CGI either looks amazingly convincing or amazingly fake.

Smiling Bandit · Post by **Smiling Bandit** » 2003-08-19 10:24am

However, that has nothing to do with special and visual effects.

Untrue: Having a bunch of guys in suits works better when all you are expecting is a bunch of guys in suits (orcs). The shots that were CGI in TTT were easily spotted, albeit very good. However, they required much more limited and focused action.

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2003-08-19 11:31am

Oh, don't be such a fucking nitpicker...

Anyway, as long as it looks good enough, I'm happy with it.

Montcalm · Post by **Montcalm** » 2003-08-19 11:53am

How long before they use CGI for everything,and keep only the main charcters of a story?

Peregrin Toker · Post by **Peregrin Toker** » 2003-08-19 02:07pm

Montcalm wrote:How long before they use CGI for everything,and keep only the main charcters of a story?

Not very long. At least not if it continues the direction AOTC is spearheading.

Slartibartfast · Post by **Slartibartfast** » 2003-08-19 03:20pm

Robert Treder wrote:You guys are also forgetting the fact that by experimenting so heavily with CGI, Lucas is paving the way for the future. CGI isn't at the point where it looks flawless yet, but we won't get there if we don't have folks like GL tossing millions of dollars towards the cause.

Do you think Ray Harryhausen should have used men in costumes instead of skeletons, because that would have been more seamless? Should RotJ not have featured a Rancor because chroma-keying technology wasn't up to snuff? Should Georges Méliès not have had the rocket hit the moon just because the strings would be visible?
The field won't advance if filmmakers are afraid to try new things because they think they won't look perfect. I for one am glad to see the progress made.

You raise a good point. Myself, I hate the CGI scenes that involve "actors" with a face or regular clothing, but have no problem with vehicles or armor-clad troopers. But I have to agree that somebody has to do the bad shit so it gets better.

Slartibartfast · Post by **Slartibartfast** » 2003-08-19 03:22pm

Lucas also said that if he hadn't had the technology that we have now (able to use lots and lots of 3D instead of spending months on models and stuff) there wouldn't even be another trilogy, because he's way too old for it and can't spend that kind of time.

In other words, he doesn't want to go thru all the shit that involved making the OT, again. I suppose I can respect that.