They’re not tech people, they’re theater people. And they’re easily wowed by the big new fancy-smancy tech that is “cutting edge”
We’ve seen this before, with George Lucas’ special edition Star Wars and the prequels being full of the finest CGI 1999 could offer. It’ll probably be a decade or two before this stuff is anywhere close to looking decent.
I think I’ve identified a key point of disagreement. You value shorter run times. I am the opposite. 3 hours min given the price point. Also, longer movies get to tell more complex stories and ought to be encouraged. Example: the last duel.
Please think critically for a second. If in Episode 2 when Obi is arguing with that Droid about the location of a planet, after he left the camera just panned back to the robot who then spent 5 hours rattling of cosmology facts, explaining the precise orbits of a few dozen planets that are never otherwise mentioned, along with their moons, that would be “a more detailed world” and a shitpost of a bad film.
That scene sucks because Han would not fucking walk over jabbas tail and make him squeak without being iced by other members of the crime syndicate. It would be like some nobody runner pinching sonny and calling him a microdick and then just walking away unscathed.
Counterpoint: When the empire freezes him, they just put him on display and then repeatedly try to kill him when people try to break him out, and all this without basically any complicating of his relationship with Jabba prior. Han should have at least had the shit kicked out of him for what he did, especially since his debt was past due.
Neither James Camwron or George Lucas are theater people in the slightest. They’re film people and both did works that were incredible technical achievements. Both of these guys are camera and lense and lighting and editing system nerds first and do the theater stuff so they can get a budget to do the technical stuff.
I mean they have eyes. They look at the results and decide they like it. Looking at this, I think it looks worse, but it’s not hugely different and I can easily believe it looking better in motion. (The picture in the body. The post-picture looks better in the version that has multiple colours, can’t tell if that’s new or old, but I doubt the technology chose to make it all blue on its own).
I don’t think the people at the top actually sit down and watch the entire process. They are just told it will make the picture “clearer” or “sharper” or “more up to date” or something, they’re wined and dined and constantly told how “advanced” this stuff is. If they’ve put a lot of money into “updating” something they’ve done, they probably don’t want to admit to themselves that they just wasted millions, they’ll focus on the positives of it, rather than the negatives.
They’re not tech people, they’re theater people. And they’re easily wowed by the big new fancy-smancy tech that is “cutting edge”
We’ve seen this before, with George Lucas’ special edition Star Wars and the prequels being full of the finest CGI 1999 could offer. It’ll probably be a decade or two before this stuff is anywhere close to looking decent.
deleted by creator
Legit looks worse than some AI art from 5 years ago
That scene was good even if the CGI was bad. Or maybe I’m biased because I read the novelization first that included it.
deleted by creator
Disagree because it ties into the, by the early 90s, established lore of Han’s time working as a smuggler for Jabba.
The old expanded universe had a lot of lore about Han’s time as a glorified drug dealer.
deleted by creator
Eh, it adds additional details. A more detailed world is better.
It adds an unnecessary scene to the run time. It was a smart chop.
I think I’ve identified a key point of disagreement. You value shorter run times. I am the opposite. 3 hours min given the price point. Also, longer movies get to tell more complex stories and ought to be encouraged. Example: the last duel.
Please think critically for a second. If in Episode 2 when Obi is arguing with that Droid about the location of a planet, after he left the camera just panned back to the robot who then spent 5 hours rattling of cosmology facts, explaining the precise orbits of a few dozen planets that are never otherwise mentioned, along with their moons, that would be “a more detailed world” and a shitpost of a bad film.
I realize you are going are going to say mean things in response to this, but I would actually enjoy that.
Although still in the original you can see three or four Greedos in the background behind the millennium falcon while they escape.
That scene sucks because Han would not fucking walk over jabbas tail and make him squeak without being iced by other members of the crime syndicate. It would be like some nobody runner pinching sonny and calling him a microdick and then just walking away unscathed.
The amount of money he was in the hole is a damn strong incentive to try and keep him alive tk lay you back eventually.
If I owe you 100 it’s my problems I owe you a 100k it’s your problem type shit.
Counterpoint: When the empire freezes him, they just put him on display and then repeatedly try to kill him when people try to break him out, and all this without basically any complicating of his relationship with Jabba prior. Han should have at least had the shit kicked out of him for what he did, especially since his debt was past due.
That would be an interesting take on it. I’d buy a ticket to that version of the movie.
Edit: I lied. I’d pirate it. Point stands.
deleted by creator
It wouldn’t bro, buoy different.
Neither James Camwron or George Lucas are theater people in the slightest. They’re film people and both did works that were incredible technical achievements. Both of these guys are camera and lense and lighting and editing system nerds first and do the theater stuff so they can get a budget to do the technical stuff.
Sorry, I’m adopting a “once a theater kid, always a theater kid” approach.
Neither ever did anything involving theater.
You probably stood in the general direction of a theater once.
Checkmate theater children!
I mean they have eyes. They look at the results and decide they like it. Looking at this, I think it looks worse, but it’s not hugely different and I can easily believe it looking better in motion. (The picture in the body. The post-picture looks better in the version that has multiple colours, can’t tell if that’s new or old, but I doubt the technology chose to make it all blue on its own).
I don’t think the people at the top actually sit down and watch the entire process. They are just told it will make the picture “clearer” or “sharper” or “more up to date” or something, they’re wined and dined and constantly told how “advanced” this stuff is. If they’ve put a lot of money into “updating” something they’ve done, they probably don’t want to admit to themselves that they just wasted millions, they’ll focus on the positives of it, rather than the negatives.