Originally posted by hunchy
68 by ROTS, 88 by ANH, and NOT 100 by ROTJ,but according to the Star Wars timeline it takes place 4 years later. So 92, and so what? Is that that unbelieable? He looks freakin old in it.
duh he looks old in it. thats what i said and you contradicted me by saying he would be 55 in ROTS
I was the one that knew what his age was and now you change your story and actually agree with me but I don't think you meant to.
and I said he was pushing 100 that means close to it.
By the way, I just watched AOTC again. I'm here to say, once and for all, that you are all terribly mistaken when you say the Clonetroopers were badly animated. At the part when Yoda arrives via gunship, every trooper looked sickiningly real, as did Yoda for those few shots. However, they do begin to show themselves later on.
And about the whole Gollum vs. Yoda debate happening a few pages ago, there are times when Yoda looks incredible in AOTC, and there are times when Gollum looks terrible in TTT and RotK.
When Yoda says, "rally more systems to his cause, he will," he looks great. And when Gollum speaks to his reflection in RotK, he appears to be quite CG-ish.
And I DO think Watto is a better CG character than Gollum.
Darth Maul, I didn't know Palpatine's exact age, as I don't really care that much, so he was 40-50ish...not a big deal. Your whole point was after I said the thing about Yoda, you then tried to say Palpatine's age was absurd and I was saying that it was not.
Harold, everyone is entitled to their opinion so to say we're terribly mistaken, is your own opinion. Yes, I do think the clonetroopers are very good CG...but in context with real people....Why not just use some real ones because up against real people they look cartoonish. Now if you can't tell their CG, that just shows me you can't tell CG from real at all. There are also some really bad shots of them, like that close up of them at the end of the movie when they are boarding the ships, horrible in my opinion.
Yoda looks good and terrible at parts. I would say Gollum looks WORSE in the reflection scene, but not really bad enough that it bothers me. He still looks great in my opinion.
I agree that in the shot where Yoda says "rally more systems to his cause, he will" that he looks great, great, great. Now if only he looked like that the entire movie. What's cool I think is that in Episode 3 he looks closer to looking as good as that one shot...if only every team that worked on various scenes of Yoda were as good as that one....we'll see.
Watoo is one of the best CG characters I've seen also, but I don't think compares to the realism of Gollum. Gollum fits in with real people flawlessly most of the time, wheras Watoo still sticks out as CG to me.
And yes that new Episode 3 footage, all the CG looked very good and improved. It does look to be the most visuall stunning of the PT.
Yes, I CAN tell the Clonetroopers are CG. But there are shots, like the one where Yoda lands with about seven of them, where it is extremely hard to see through.
Oh yeah, then there are the battle droids and gunships. Take a good look at the battle droids in the arena scene. Are they not PERFECTLY animated? And the gunships, THEY LOOK INCREDIBLE. if anyone is wondering why this film got nominated, those gunships and battle droids should tell you a little bit. I mean, they LOOK LIKE MINIATURES, only they move much better. Had miniatures been used for these, the motion would have been very stiff. I'm telling you, everything in the arena/clone war looks legendary.
Yes hunchy, the Clonetroopers look bad on Coruscant. But do yourself a favor and watch those few shots of them on the gunship with Yoda. If you come back here saying they STILL don't look photo-real (for those specific four or five shots), I'll stop trying to argue with you.
And when you say the Clonetroopers are good for CG, but just don't compare with real humans in costume, I understand what you mean. But if you think about it, Gollum is the same way. He's 'good for CG', but he still doesn't look/move like the real thing. People who are ignorant about how these films are created will believe in the Clonetroopers and Gollum.
Just out of curiosity, I'd like you to show your friend's dad (the one who thought Gollum was real), the Clonetroopers and see if he's not fooled.
Originally posted by HAROLD
Oh yeah, then there are the battle droids and gunships. Take a good look at the battle droids in the arena scene. Are they not PERFECTLY animated? And the gunships, THEY LOOK INCREDIBLE.But if you think about it, Gollum is the same way. He's 'good for CG', but he still doesn't look/move like the real thing. People who are ignorant about how these films are created will believe in the Clonetroopers and Gollum.
I agree with that last comment you made. Which is proven by the above post.
No one had mentioned the battle droids before had they? I think they are excellent CG work. They are all CG right? I assume so... see, it's when I have to ask whether or not they are CG that it is great work. I think the battle droids look great!
The Gunships could have been better. They looked cartoony in more than a few shots.
ok, I just rewatched the Geonisis battle again...
yup, you're right, the Gunships do look pretty damn good! There's maybe one shot that looked a tad suspect. Sorry, my bad... again 😄
Battle droids are superb 👆
My feelings on the Clontroopers are still the same though, they would have been much better as costumes. I just don't think their movements look real enough. I mean, I don't think that's how a real trooper would move. And I'm talking mainly about the close-ups/mid-shots.
Yoda on the line "rally more systems..." is amazing! Looks as good a Ki Adi Mundi in that shot!
also... Poggle continues to amaze me... I think he's better CG than Watto, and Gollum for that matter! (he is completely CG isn't he?)
Hey Hunchy I was not saying that Palps age was absurd. I was saying that he was old but can still do alot of stuff even in ROTJ, then you brought up about how old he really was and I proved you wrong, but anyways back to the topic at hand.
If you are a complete yutz and analize every scene by pausing it and watching it frame by frame then of course you are going to see imperfections, but if you are a NORMAL fan and watch it the way it is suppose to be watched then the scenes are fantastic, I seriously think that some of you that are complaining about the quality of the CG must be watching the movies on an 1975 14" tv
In my opinion the CG is fantastic there is not too much of it, it beats the matt paintings and they still do use rubber masks.
There are many things to answer. Let me do my best.
Yes, the Clonetroopers look good. Very good in fact. That is not my point. The point is why not have people in suits if they are supposed to be real humans? If you can't tell that they are fake you have a serious problem.
But let me also state, that I am not bothered by the clonetroopers. That is not the fx in the movie that bothers me. In fact, I quite enjoy the clonetroopers stuff despite that they are great in some shots, and just good in others, and occasionally not so great...but I don't mind, because it is stylistic like some mentioned earlier. So let me again say that I really enjoy the clonetrooper stuff a lot. I think there is bad fx in the movie elsewhere (aka the CG Jango Fett)...But I won't go over that again.
I wouldn't say the Clonetroopers are say photo realistic, but pretty damn good. Damn good. I just want to clear this up that I don't think they look bad. But the difference that you can tell they are fake is what I was trying to make. If you can't, then there's no point in debating fx with you, because obviously I can tell where something is CG and where it isn't for the MOST part...some things I didn't know of course...I'm not saying that I'm a professional at seeing through CG, but for the most part it sticks out at me.
Here's the difference between Gollum and Clone Troopers. I think Gollum is a more photo realistic thing than they are. Whereas they have suits and reflections and everything has to be done right to look real, which you can definately tell they are fake...Some shots while they look "good" still look cartoony and fake...but I still think it looks cool and of a style of its own.
Gollum is a creature, whereas clonetroopers are human. And I'm sure actually that my friend's dad would find the clonetroopers to be real however. But I have never asked him.
The gunships and droids I thought have always looked good....as have the clonetroopers. Wasn't the gunships done partially with models too? If not, either way they look good. I mean, again I can tell there that the droids are CG, but they never bothered me really. As far as things looking cartoony, the prequels definately do. If you can't see this, that leads me to wonder how you see these films.
I thought Poggle looked very good, but I don't think he's better than Gollum. I agree that if he and Watoo look so good though, that why didn't they apply that as much to Yoda. He could have been as good as them....
Then to Darth Maul, the topic of Palp's age came up when I said that Yoda wouldn't age that much from the PT to the OT if he's around 800 years old, and then you said that neither would Palps, so I believed you changed what YOU said around, not I.
Again, where in the hell did I ever state that I watched the films frame by frame? Not only would I not waste my time doing so, but I don't need to to notice the bad fx. A normal fan has to bullshit and pretend that he thinks the movie is full of great fx? No. Not if he doesn't think so. In fact, if you want to go by what a fan is, you'd realize that the real fans are the fans of the OT, not the PT. The old school fans, which I consider myself to be.
Myself being a filmmaker and working with computers etc, can see bad fx when I see it. That's cool that you like it so much, but don't try to force your opinions down my throat. I prefer matte painting and costumes/masks. It adds something more real to it, whereas CGI tends to look cartoony.
Originally posted by hunchy
Myself being a filmmaker and working with computers etc, can see bad fx when I see it. That's cool that you like it so much, but don't try to force your opinions down my throat. I prefer matte painting and costumes/masks. It adds something more real to it, whereas CGI tends to look cartoony.
Are you really a filmmaker?
By the way, after having seen much of Yoda in Episode III, I can honestly say that he looks every bit as good as Gollum. In the new 'Jedi Action 2' TV spot, he says, "destroy the Sith, we must." Take a good look at his robes. Completely digital. Phenomonal work.
That brings up something, by the way. About eight pages back, there was an argument concering TPM's loss of the visual effects Oscar to The Matrix. As somebody else said, TPM was the first film to feature digital cloth movements. And to this day, I think ILM is the best at animating cloth.
In my opinion, TPM should've taken the Oscar without question. But, then again, I'm beginning to disagree with the Academy a LOT recently. Best Achievement in Visual Effects to Spider-Man 2? If any film is CARTOONY, this is it. Prisoner of Azkaban was a much better-looking film. Buckbeak? Dementors? Am I missing something here?
So, if ROTS doesn't win even if it's truly the best, I'm not going to be mad.
Harold, yes I make movies, so I am an independent filmmaker. I am currently working on a new film right now actually, and I rent them out at our local video store and we show them at a local independent theater here. I definately plan on getting into the movie business as a career.
Anyhow, as I've said everyone has their own opinions and views and I still don't think Yoda looks as good as Gollum, but definately improved over Episode 2's Yoda. The robes are good, but I still think digital clothing looks fake, especially in that one shot where he moves toward the camera with his lightsaber. Just looks so cartoony. ILM may be the best at animating clothing, but it still doesn't look convincing to me.
The Matrix I thought was FAR better fx wise than Episode 1. Far more realistic, and revolutionary than Episode 1. I don't care what some people claimed, it was the first movie to use bullet time. And actually the first film to use CGI clothing was called the Boxer, which came out in 1996.
Here's the link: http://www.usc.edu/isd/pubarchives/networker/97-98/Sep_Oct_97/feature-digital_history.html
I think Matrix rightfully won beating Episode 1 (which was good for the time), and Sleepy Hollow (which I thought was also very good)...then I think Fellowship rightfully won beating out the very good visually, A.I. and (the not so realistic) Pearl Harbor, and then Two Towers rightfully beat out Spider Man (which I thought had a mixed bag of good and bad), and Star Wars Episode 2 (also mixed bag, but mostly bad), and I think Return of the King rightfully won beating out Master and Commander (also very good), and Pirates of the Caribeaan (which was good, but nothing great).
As for this year's I think it was wrong. I also agree that Harry Potter should have won BY FAR. Wheras I think Spider-Man 2, was like you said cartoony, I thought it had some good CG, but still didn't deserve to win, and neither did iRobot to even get nominated. Sky Captain should have there in my opinion. But nonetheless, Harry Potter should have won. It had great fx, definately the Dementors and Buckbeack.
Now comes to this upcoming year's, and I think that what I've seen from Episode 3 looks good, but what I'm seeing from other movies this year will be better. Sin City was great visually I thought, even far better fake backgrounds than Star Wars.. Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy looks like it has great visuals for such a low budget film, because they use them accordingly and not for everything. Then we have Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. We're talking Tim Burton stuff here. Batman Begins. War of the Worlds. Harry Potter 4. Narnia. King Kong. That's some tough competition. As a prediction, I think Star Wars will be nominated, just because they always tend to. Then that leaves two more. I think Sin City will be overlooked just like Sky Captain. As will Chocolate Factory. And Batman Begins. I think it'll come down to Star Wars, Narnia, and either HP4 or King Kong. We'll see....
Here's another cool list of movie firsts:
Don't some of you realize that they are trying to make CGI Yoda look like the puppet.That is why some of you assume That gollum looks better.If they were to redo Yoda as a whole he would look superior to gollum.And the fact that ILM is using state of the art digital camera's that make all real images and CGI images blend together perfectly helps alot.If you really look closely at alot of the Gollum scenes you can tell he was inserted due to the lack of digital cameras used in Lord Of The Rings Movies.You can almost see mat-lines on Gollum due to this.
Harold I appreciate that we can disagree, but not fight about it like some. So thanks for the comments.
NinthSith, that actually may be a good point there that they are trying to make it look like the puppet, HOWEVER, thats mostly in how he MOVES not looks. I mean, if they could make him LOOK better I'm definately sure they would such as they have for Episode 3. Moving is a different matter. That is all they have tried to do to match him to the OT. I mean obviously he has to look like Yoda, but that's not the point.
And actually I highly disagree with what you said about using a digital camera, that the digital things blend in better. Actually, I don't know if its just bad fx in parts of AOTC, but some of the scenes look very bluescreened, such as a lot of parts of the droid factory. There are plenty of movies being/been made that have featured CG people and they were shot on film and look fine. If you could point out these supposed "matte lines" around Gollum please show me because I'm not seeing them. Because there wouldn't be matte lines around a CG character, because inserting THEM into live action, that doesn't occur. It's when you insert real people in front of something else that looks like matte lines....however that was in old movies...nowadays there really aren't too many matte lines, because they can fix that up in the computer, so I don't know what your talking about.
And Harold, and others, for the record, I watched part of AOTC last night, and there are scenes still with amazing fx. The chase above coruscant is great, and I loved that scene. The whole Clone Wars are just amazing to watch, I wish they were longer though, (which again could have been fixed by cutting out Episode 1 mostly, and starting mostly with Episode 2, then we could have gotten more clone wars action) etc. So despite my opinion that it has a lot of bad fx, there is a lot of really good shots as well. And there is also a difference between looking just bad where you can't bear to watch a shot, and then looking cartoony but still stylistic and unique and entertaining to watch.