Pinky Wrote:the new SW movies were the first movies of their kind. of course there is a learning curve to all new things, that doesn't make it wrong or bad. it's amazing that lucas was able to spearhead the film industry into a paradigm shift by combining complete digital film with extensive use of digital effects. it's been a little more than ten years since episode1 and things are not just better, it's getting better at an accelerating rate.

the same can be said of 3D technology. sure, it's a gimmick and is often poorly used today. by definition of it being new tech, the industry doesn't have many people who know what to do with it. what's really crazy is that things are changing so fast these days, 3D is going to be obsolete before the end of the decade.

Anzekay Wrote:Well, the new SW movies did have a lot of cutting edge tech that helped give the industry in general a push in the direction of digital filming, but you can't say they were the only movie that had that sort of effect. The Matrix came out in the same year, and it also had a similar effect on the industry, to name one example. But in the end, yes, they were pretty groundbreaking in terms of tech advancements. But being groundbreaking doesn't mean they are good, and doesn't mean they didn't sacrifice key elements of what makes a film good in order to use all that CGI to the extent they did. They used some awesome stuff that really had the potential to enhance the film, but in the end they just went overboard massively. By comparison, though, the Matrix (which still having a very heavy presence of digital effects) used them in a much finer way and produced a movie that was much more well regarded critically than Episode 1.

I'd dig up the interview, but it's a video one and I can't remember exactly which interview it was, but I remember Lucas himself stating that CGI should be used as a powerful tool to enhance a movie, not become the movie itself. It's just a shame he seemed to have forgotten that when he directed the PT.

Back to 3D. It certainly can be used as a powerful tool to enhance a movie (this has been shown a small handful of times, but as long as such examples exist it's true). But what's been happening with 3D tech since Avatar is that instead of using it to make a film better (most of the time) it's been used as a way to increase the profit that a film produces, and in many cases I would wager that the focus on adding 3D can severely detract from the focus on just making a good film. It is being used as a- if you will- gimmick. It being new tech doesn't really excuse how poorly it's being used; it's just a reason for why such poor use occurs so damn often.

Jonathan Meer Wrote:whomp whomp whomp X is being used most often as a money-maker whomp means it sucks whomp whomp can't be used artistically whomp whomp whomp

Pinky Wrote:er, the wachoskis used *minimal* cgi with a lot of old celluloid cameras and hong kong wirework to create 'bullet time.' it was a great contrast with lucas's new school digital film making, but they lost to SW. they got swept into the wake of huge budgets and excess cgi trilogies. and i thought the prequels were fine ;x

Anzekay Wrote:I still have no idea what to think of them doing 5e this year aside from "already?"