Quote:
Originally Posted by Janszoon
I understand that's what you're saying but what I'm saying is that all three movies were a mixture of sets and green screens. The space stations, the scenes on Coruscant, the underwater scenes, final Darth Maul saber duel, etc. in Phantom Menace were not sets, they were computer created or computer enhanced, as was pod race and the battle at the end of the movie. I don't see how that makes it any different from the other two.
|
I know there were a lot of computer generated scenes in Phantom, but just look at the scenes on Tatooine and compare them to
A New Hope, the shot composition is more consistent, film grain is present, and elaborate sets constructed. Yes, it was all augmented by CGI and yes there were sets entirely composed of CGI, but it was far more restrained than the other two films, which now look completely dated only a few years removed.
Just look how digital and inconsistent with the original films the aesthetic devolves into by
Revenge of the Sith.
A New Hope:
Phantom Menace:
Revenge of the Sith:
Maybe my problem isn't as much with where they chose to shoot on sets vs. CGI soundstages, and more with the cheesy digital camera feel the prequel trilogy acquired. It got worse in
Attack of the Clones and looks flat out horrible in
Revenge.
As far as I'm concerned, these three films contain equally bad writing, directing, and acting. My opinion is basically only influenced by the look and feel of the film itself.
Quote:
|
Did you see them in the theater?
|
All three. I was a wee lad when
Phantom came out but by
Attack was already disappointed. I grew up watching the originals on VHS.