PDA

View Full Version : so fake they're funny



CropDuster
01-04-2004, 12:53 AM
Was it just me or did those HUGE, fat, bucking, dog-tick looking things that Anakin and Padme rode through the meadow look SO stupid and fake that they make you laugh? lol

bobafrett
01-04-2004, 01:11 AM
Was it just me or did those HUGE, fat, bucking, dog-tick looking things that Anakin and Padme rode through the meadow look SO stupid and fake that they make you laugh? lol

With George's Fart and doo doo jokes, I'm suprised he didn't make Anakin land in a pile of tick pie. :eek:

jjreason
01-04-2004, 04:46 AM
Silly me. Based on the title, assumed this thread would be about Ay Vida, or one of the other hottie night club patrons.......

TheDarthVader
01-04-2004, 02:40 PM
They don't make me laugh but they are weird looking. But hey which character or animal in the Star Wars universe (besides humans) doesn't look odd or weird?

Turambar
01-04-2004, 06:12 PM
Silly me. Based on the title, assumed this thread would be about Ay Vida, or one of the other hottie night club patrons.......

LOL! Good one.

Actually the fakest part of that scene was the weird looking Anakin cartoon riding the giant tick. But if you squint enough, it really doesn't look that bad.

JediTricks
01-04-2004, 10:29 PM
The Shaak looks like Craap, only slightly worse than the riding of the well-named Reek at the arena battle.

stillakid
01-04-2004, 11:21 PM
But if you squint enough, it really doesn't look that bad.


Yeah, until your eyes are completely shut. :ko:

CropDuster
01-06-2004, 12:50 AM
Good points everyone! With a title like that I should have written a post about Cher and Michael Jackson.

CropDuster
01-06-2004, 12:56 AM
They don't make me laugh but they are weird looking. But hey which character or animal in the Star Wars universe (besides humans) doesn't look odd or weird?

Besides humans?
There are some weird looking humans in SW movies, and on top of that my point was that they were fake looking, not just weird, because looking weird and looking fake are 2 totally different things. Haven't you ever seen weird things that were real?

Billy_Dee_Binks
01-06-2004, 04:27 PM
Apart from the one shot were Anakin falls off the Shaak these creatures are
quite good looking-in term of animation of course. :nerv:

The Reek also is done very well except for that shot when Obi Wan jumps onto it- which the ILM team said they made while squinting an eye or two.
They said it was more gag like.
Something like that is said in the commentairy. I forget what exactly they said.

CropDuster
01-07-2004, 12:36 AM
Apart from the one shot were Anakin falls off the Shaak these creatures are
quite good looking-in term of animation of course. :nerv:

The Reek also is done very well except for that shot when Obi Wan jumps onto it- which the ILM team said they made while squinting an eye or two.
They said it was more gag like.
Something like that is said in the commentairy. I forget what exactly they said.
Point well taken BDBinks, animation-wise they may have been good...
but, looking like a good animation doesn't amount to a pile of bantha fodder unless they are in a cartoon.
Aren't the prequels supposed to be movies and not cartoons?

JediTricks
01-07-2004, 01:00 AM
I don't like the designs of either the Acklay or the Nexu, they seem too cartoony to me. I also dislike all 3 arena creatures' sound effects, though the prequels have left me cold in that department a lot.

2-1B
01-07-2004, 01:09 AM
I prefer a fake looking CGI Ani-on-the-Shaak to a fake looking puppet Luke-on-the-stop-motion-Tauntaun.

The first time I saw AOTC, that scene stuck out as one of the more obvious fake scenes but over time I am accepting it more.

CG can be a great tool but it's still limited in what they can do with making digital people.

I think they could have done a better job with the Ani-Shaak scene. They have that cut footage of Ani and Padme riding a gimbal (which was a cut scene of them riding a shaak). I think that they should have just shot Hayden falling off of that thing and mesh it in with the shot of a bucking Shaak. Sure, it will ultimately still look fake but I'd rather see a real Ani falling off . . . something . . . and trick in a CGI beast instead of using a CG Ani which technically should "blend" in better with a CG Shaak.
I think they had a good intention there but they should have just erred on the side of mixing elements and having it look "fake" that way.

JediTricks
01-07-2004, 01:45 AM
Weird, I've never met anybody in person who had any trouble with the Luke on tauntaun or Luke & Leia on speederbikes puppetry from the OT. I occasionally get people buggin' over either version of the Wampa, but not about the tauntaun.

2-1B
01-07-2004, 02:08 AM
Yep, I don't like the ROTJ puppets either. :)

I think the Tauntaun closeups are some of the coolest shots in ESB, 100 times better than what they could do with CGI in those scenes.

I really dislike the overhead shot of Luke's Tauntaun running over that open snowfield as he chases after the meteor. The shot of Han coming up on Luke's collapsed body isn't the greatest either.

I dunno, as much as I LOVE the closeup prop Tauntauns and how real they look, I dislike the stop motion shots. So as much as I would prefer CGI models in those action shots, I think it would be dangerous because it would not match up well with the real-space closeup animals. Not that the stop motions blend perfectly either . . .

CropDuster
01-07-2004, 09:59 AM
Yep, I don't like the ROTJ puppets either. :)

I think the Tauntaun closeups are some of the coolest shots in ESB, 100 times better than what they could do with CGI in those scenes.

I really dislike the overhead shot of Luke's Tauntaun running over that open snowfield as he chases after the meteor. The shot of Han coming up on Luke's collapsed body isn't the greatest either.

I dunno, as much as I LOVE the closeup prop Tauntauns and how real they look, I dislike the stop motion shots. So as much as I would prefer CGI models in those action shots, I think it would be dangerous because it would not match up well with the real-space closeup animals. Not that the stop motions blend perfectly either . . .
So, its about which YOU like better, not what looks more real. You like cartoons and are probably an anime fan. The taun-taun and speeder bike shots looked much more real than those ridiculously fake cartoons, be it JarJar flipping into the water, the hideous SE Jabba's palace musical, or the fat, bouncing tick-thing with what I guess was supposed to be anakin falling off.

stillakid
01-07-2004, 10:44 AM
Yep, I don't like the ROTJ puppets either. :)

I think the Tauntaun closeups are some of the coolest shots in ESB, 100 times better than what they could do with CGI in those scenes.

I really dislike the overhead shot of Luke's Tauntaun running over that open snowfield as he chases after the meteor. The shot of Han coming up on Luke's collapsed body isn't the greatest either.

I dunno, as much as I LOVE the closeup prop Tauntauns and how real they look, I dislike the stop motion shots. So as much as I would prefer CGI models in those action shots, I think it would be dangerous because it would not match up well with the real-space closeup animals. Not that the stop motions blend perfectly either . . .


I'm with you. A couple of those Tauntaun shots do a little weak. For what they could do at the time, it represents the best of it. But undoubtedly, it wouldn't take too much to go back in and fix some of that stuff. The best results are always to mix techniques (mechanical fx, stop motion, motion control, CG) and blend them together with good editing to create the seamless illusion. Going full on with just one technique is generally a good way to fail. Even Spielberg knew better than to just use all CG for Jurassic. ID4 also comes to mind as a film that uses a good healthy mix of ideas to create a new reality.

George has proven his point to the world that CG can help create anything a filmmaker needs, but he needs to step back from his crusade now and go back to story.

2-1B
01-07-2004, 01:38 PM
So, its about which YOU like better, not what looks more real. You like cartoons and are probably an anime fan. The taun-taun and speeder bike shots looked much more real than those ridiculously fake cartoons, be it JarJar flipping into the water, the hideous SE Jabba's palace musical, or the fat, bouncing tick-thing with what I guess was supposed to be anakin falling off.

Hello ? ? ? :rolleyes:

It's about what I like better BECAUSE of what I think looks more real. All of these SFX are "fake" . . . I can point to instances of old school FX where I think it looks more real just as I can point to CG shots where I think it looks more real. Not once have I taken a wholesale preference of one style over another. stillakid has the right idea about blending different techniques as seamlessly as possible. In my opinion, there have been times in SW where they have done a less than stellar job of blending CG with other elements and
there are other times when they have done a wonderful job.

No, I do not like cartoons save for The Simpsons and maybe South Park once in a great while.

And your assumption that I am probably an anime fan could not be further from the truth. I hate anime, despise it with a passion.

bobafrett
01-07-2004, 02:20 PM
I enjoy the running TaunTaun stop motion puppets. Even though they look a lot more active than the big prop close ups. I look at it as the medium they had to work with at the time. Computer animation wasn't where it is today, other wise I'm sure George would have had the whole scene with the TaunTauns done by computer. I wish he wouldn't have gone and changed the Dewbacks like he did in the ANH SE. The whole thing that bother me about Anikin standing a top the tick like creatures, is the fact that he is standing. It just looks stupid and unnecessary.

stillakid
01-07-2004, 02:33 PM
The whole thing that bother me about Anikin standing a top the tick like creatures, is the fact that he is standing. It just looks stupid and unnecessary.


Ahhh, but how else could he possibly have shown two young lovers, frolicking in the grassy fields, longing for that forbidden touch and the kiss that shouldn't be? I mean, if it hadn't been for showing off on top of that wild creature, Anakin might of had to resort to levitating fruit and .... oh..... :rolleyes:


BLECH!

bobafrett
01-07-2004, 02:39 PM
To me, it looks like Anakin is riding a surf board, and they should play "wipeout" as the background music. I think he could have sat maybe on top of this creature, then fell off the side. Maybe I'm just upset, because it comes after the long (yawn) talk in the feild. I shouldn't even say anything, as I haven't watched the film in some time. I do watch the OT quite frequently, much more enjoyable.

CropDuster
01-07-2004, 06:07 PM
Hello ? ? ? :rolleyes:

It's about what I like better BECAUSE of what I think looks more real. All of these SFX are "fake" . . . I can point to instances of old school FX where I think it looks more real just as I can point to CG shots where I think it looks more real. Not once have I taken a wholesale preference of one style over another. stillakid has the right idea about blending different techniques as seamlessly as possible. In my opinion, there have been times in SW where they have done a less than stellar job of blending CG with other elements and
there are other times when they have done a wonderful job.

No, I do not like cartoons save for The Simpsons and maybe South Park once in a great while.

And your assumption that I am probably an anime fan could not be further from the truth. I hate anime, despise it with a passion.

I hear ya; I was playing with you a bit, but I was probably out of line with the anime accusation (because you're right - it sucks horribly).

TheDarthVader
01-07-2004, 08:11 PM
Yes I have seen few weird "real" things. But my point is that this particular CGI animal was created to look weird and "spacey" (primarily) not funny. :)

JediTricks
01-08-2004, 01:29 AM
I dunno, as much as I LOVE the closeup prop Tauntauns and how real they look, I dislike the stop motion shots. So as much as I would prefer CGI models in those action shots, I think it would be dangerous because it would not match up well with the real-space closeup animals. Not that the stop motions blend perfectly either . . .Hmm, I don't remember you complaining about the AT-AT sequences, they're stop-motion as well, so maybe it's just living creature stop-motion that bugs you. The ROTJ speederbike puppets aren't stop-motion though IIRC, they're moving in real-time or under/overcranking (I don't remember which, it's been a while since I saw the ROTJ documentary).


All of these SFX are "fake" . . . I can point to instances of old school FX where I think it looks more real just as I can point to CG shots where I think it looks more real. Not me, until I saw the documentaries, I couldn't tell some of the Luke on Tauntaun shots were stop-motion (some I could though) and didn't know about the ROTJ speederbike puppets.



Why would Ani be standing on the Shaak anyway? It seems mean, he doesn't know if that hurts it, there don't seem to be a lot of animals in the SW universe or our own that are safe to stand on.

2-1B
01-08-2004, 02:50 AM
No JT, I've never had a problem with the AT-ATs, probably because their mechanical nature lends itself better to stop motion, I dunno.

As for the ROTJ speeder puppets, you're correct - they are not stop motion.
I remember the From Star Wars to Jedi footage in which they show the figures being maneuvered by rods against a blue screen. Actually I think it was a green screen.

As for Ani standing on the Shaak, I agree it's not very thoughtful and maybe that's why it bucked him off? lol
The earlier surfing analogy is a good one, he was just trying to show off.

stillakid
01-08-2004, 11:02 AM
Hmm, I don't remember you complaining about the AT-AT sequences, they're stop-motion as well, so maybe it's just living creature stop-motion that bugs you. The ROTJ speederbike puppets aren't stop-motion though IIRC, they're moving in real-time or under/overcranking (I don't remember which, it's been a while since I saw the ROTJ documentary).
I seem to recall some old documentary where they were talking about the AT AT sequence and specifically chose to use stop-motion because it "felt" like a mechanical motion.

They would probably overcrank the puppets by a few frames to help smooth out the miniaturized motion.



Why would Ani be standing on the Shaak anyway? It seems mean, he doesn't know if that hurts it, there don't seem to be a lot of animals in the SW universe or our own that are safe to stand on.
Cuz he's tryin' to get in her pants. I still maintain that there is absolutely nothing funnier in this world than watching another guy try to pick up on a chick. They act and do the stupidest things sometimes. :p

jedi master sal
01-09-2004, 01:44 PM
The Speederbike chase was done with Go-motion. This is similar but not the same as Stop-motion. Stop motion requires the operators to position each frame indiviually, shoot it then go to the next.

Go-motion (developed in part by Phil Tippett) involves mechanics and electronics within a puppet to move it slightly as frames are shot to give it a slight lurring effect, so that it seems more real and not "mechanical".

Also the shots we see of the speederbikes racing away from screen were actually the camera being pulled away from the model, nuch easier to do that then the other way around.

I agree that it is more belieeable to use stop motion with mechinal things rather than "living" things. Mechanical things have a rythmic/rigid way of moving whereas living things flow more and tend to be unpredictable even in the slightests of movements.

Over time I have come to cring a little at the sceen where the TaunTaun runs up to the crest of a hill. That looks very fake to me. Of course I do put that into perspective to say that this was the technology of they day, but I would have rather seen GL have it redone as CG. That was a moderate far shot and the "Real" characters could have been blurred slightly (afterall it was a blizzard at that moment).

One or two of the AT-ST shots were static as well, and if I wanted to I could go on, but I won't. We are overanalyzing the movies. Try and recall the FIRST time you sa them. Didn't you have that sense of AWE! I could have cared less back in 1980 if a Tauntaun looked a little fake. I was a kid and I was enjoying every minute of these movies.

Maybe we should all take a step back from analyzing these and just watch them for the entertainment value. I know I do. It makes these much more fun to watch.

I know alot of folks aren't please with the prequels but I loved AotC! I thought it all fit quite well with the Saga and even though some of the techniques used in the OT seem a bit outdated when compared to today's technologies, these movies will forever hold a place dear to my heart.

Okay, sorry for the long post.

El Chuxter
01-09-2004, 01:57 PM
The fakest bits in the original saga are the speeder bikes and the dianoga. They're so bad that it hurts.

The shaak scene is horribly fakey, but it doesn't bother me nearly as much as Padme's magical bite from the pear-fruit-thingy. Could they not have had her somehow take a real bite from a real fruit, rather than close her mouth and a bite disappears from a nonexistent fruit about an inch from her mouth? :confused: It's about as bad as Han's arm passing through Jabba in the ANH:SE. (Though the tail bit of that scene I--for one--like. :))

JediTricks
01-10-2004, 05:32 AM
Over time I have come to cring a little at the sceen where the TaunTaun runs up to the crest of a hill. That looks very fake to me. Of course I do put that into perspective to say that this was the technology of they day, but I would have rather seen GL have it redone as CG. That was a moderate far shot and the "Real" characters could have been blurred slightly (afterall it was a blizzard at that moment).Why not CG in some blurring to the existing shot instead of crafting an all-new one?



Chux, you're saying the trash compactor monster was worse than the FX butchery of Luke vs Rancor? I'll definitely give you Ani Force-feeding (sorry, bad pun) Padme some fruit, that scene was an abominable use of CGI, but the dianoga & speederbikes worse than Luke vs Rancor? I dunno, that just doesn't compute.

stillakid
01-10-2004, 10:58 AM
Chux, you're saying the trash compactor monster was worse than the FX butchery of Luke vs Rancor? I'll definitely give you Ani Force-feeding (sorry, bad pun) Padme some fruit, that scene was an abominable use of CGI, but the dianoga & speederbikes worse than Luke vs Rancor? I dunno, that just doesn't compute.


The majority of the Speedbike sequence was pretty good. There are one or two shots that look like old fashioned process shots (you know, the old Barney Fife ones when they're in the car and the background bounces around unnaturally). The other thing that bugs me about that sequence isn't the compositing or model work...but the wind. Anyone who has travelled in the back of a pickup truck which is only going about 25 mph knows that it doesn't take much speed to whip your hair into a frenzy. These bikes were supposed to be going 100 to 200mph! And what do you see? A gentle breeze flapping their cloaks around every once in a while. That illusion of speed could (should) have been enhanced with a Ritter fan in their faces.

Yeah, and the Rancor sequence needs cleaned up a lot.

CropDuster
01-10-2004, 01:02 PM
My point wasn't whether one FXstyle was better than another; I think they could easily make the OT SFX better with the technology these days. My point was that the shaak was a bad choice for an animal design. It'd have looked fake no matter what tech was used because of the visual concept, where as a taun taun, although being not-of-this-world, is a more believable creature. I just think that even though you are able to do virtually whatever you want with the tech today that the things created need to be more realistic in conceived appearance.

bobafrett
01-11-2004, 01:03 AM
I hear you, the Shaak looks like something you would see prancing around in a Dr. Suess book. I thought a lot of the creatures looked rather odd in the PT. Most of the creatures in the OT, while they may have looked stiff, still look more believable.

JediTricks
01-11-2004, 06:34 PM
The Shaak does seem like an unrealistic animal, made a more believable asteroid. Another one that bugs me is the Eopie, just 2 legs and a vague body and huge cartoony eyes.


Stilla, I don't mind the process shots all that much in ROTJ, at least they're not poor-man's process with just some jerks in the studio pushing trees on wheels by. ;) The speeds are a little hard to gauge IMO because the vehicles are so small that even at 40mph it'd look very fast. Perhaps the speederbike's design directs wind away from the rider, otherwise Luke & Leia wouldn't be able to hear each other's dialogue. :crazed:

dustrho
01-13-2004, 06:59 PM
Was it just me or did those HUGE, fat, bucking, dog-tick looking things that Anakin and Padme rode through the meadow look SO stupid and fake that they make you laugh? lol

It actually made me really ticked off. Why? Well, after seeing the scenes on the DVD that were deleted from the original movie, I don't understand why they deleted GOOD scenes and not the "Tick Riding" scene. Bad choice of scene deletion IMO.

CropDuster
01-13-2004, 07:37 PM
It actually made me really ticked off. Why? Well, after seeing the scenes on the DVD that were deleted from the original movie, I don't understand why they deleted GOOD scenes and not the "Tick Riding" scene. Bad choice of scene deletion IMO.

I feel you pain... and what a great point. I hadn't even thought about the good material they displaced by putting some of the silly scenes into the movie.

stillakid
01-13-2004, 09:40 PM
It's been awhile, but I think that they pulled that goofy stuff from the IMAX release which was far superior in my opinion. Sometimes less is more.

bobafrett
01-14-2004, 12:55 AM
It's been awhile, but I think that they pulled that goofy stuff from the IMAX release which was far superior in my opinion. Sometimes less is more.

I agree with you there. I really enjoyed the IMAX showing, because that scene was not in there, nor the one with 3PO riding on that robot sled thing after being bumped by R2. It looks instead like he falls, and lands face down on the floor.

Darth Kirk
02-16-2004, 01:29 AM
The Reek , the Shaak, the crab monster in the arena etc.. I have found that there will inevitably be something that we will all catch that will make the creation on the big/small screen unreal... I think that with the progression of computer animation/cgi, we will one day have photo-realistic beings and creatures and backgrounds.. We are slowly getting there.. The computer animation field has only been around for 20 years and look what they have accomplished already.. Let me just say though, at a 'dazed and confused' state of mind, damn, its like watching a cartoon come too life, truly very entertaining.. :D :D lol :D :D

Bel-Cam Jos
02-16-2004, 08:44 AM
Something like that is said in the commentairy. I forget what exactly they said.
Lucasfilm Employee #1: "George is really creative. He comes up with such unique and interesting ideas. But we at ILM have gotten tired of him. So what we do is mess up his plans, we create inferior images, dialogue, plot lines, and such. That way, as director and producer, the critics and fans blame him. It's kinda funny if you think about it. A computer program ruining a man's reputation? We all get a morbid sense of joy out of that."
Lucasfilm Employee #2: "Yeah. We hate George. Anything that we can do to crush his spirit or hurt his credibility, we're up for it."
Lucasfilm Employee #3: "I mean, who needs money? I sure don't."

;)

But, I am NOT in favor of changing any more scenes in these movies! It becomes a slippery slope of "let's do anything differently," which to me changes the natural flow of the films, since that's the way they were in the first place. As added Easter eggs on a DVD? Sure, okay. But changing the movie? Nah.

JediTricks
02-17-2004, 11:28 PM
Let me just say though, at a 'dazed and confused' state of mind, damn, its like watching a cartoon come too life, truly very entertaining.. :D :D lol :D :DBig deal, so is watching your stucko ceiling. :crazed: