If you actually think about it, it is extremely based of George to do this. He isn't just creating a vague 'force', but has created a system in which it makes sense for some to be better at wielding the force than others. It justifies Qui Gon taking an interest in Anakin in the first place.
Honestly 'super power destiny germs' are pretty cool. But Star Wars, since Empire, has always been a giant ret con.
That's not based. That's comic book/anime/vidya tier garbage.
The original force was clearly based on all those oriental concepts of ki, chi or whatever. Prequel force is basically just a mutation, like Jedi are some moronic X-men. It's capeshit tier.
It is still Ki, it’s just that the Force spoke through the midi-chlorians, allowing certain beings to use the Force if they were sensitive enough to its powers.
Still, this scientific explanation kills the mysticism. But that's generally what the prequels did, killed all the mystery about Star Wars.
I imagined the Jedi as a secret order of buddhist-like monks coming out of the shadows and helping the good guys when they needed it. Lucas gave me a creepy Jesuit-like order fully involved in the galactic politics.
I don't like the direction this entire franchise moved. This includes the EU and everything else. I like the stories about spiritualism vs modern technology and the OT was such a story.
The prequels demystified everything about Star Wars.
>Still, this scientific explanation kills the mysticism
How? It's not biological. >I imagined the Jedi as a secret order of buddhist-like monks coming out of the shadows and helping the good guys when they needed it.
They are, the Jedi Order was not a military organization, they were incorporated into political matters during the war, but that doesn't make the Force or the Jedi any less interesting because they are that different. >I like the stories about spiritualism vs modern technology and the OT was such a story.
They do this anyways. How does one blood sample to quantify what makes someone a Jedi trigger you? It's a high-tech space world.
Not OP, but they do not add or accomplish anything. It's a moronic attempt at best to toe the line between scientific and spiritual and to add an empirical aspect to the Force, but in the end it just quantifies one's potential in a fricking adventure story. That symbiosis remark also doesn't go anywhere.
>Jedi Order was not a military organization
Yet all the Jedi are generals when war comes to z republic. To be clear I don't consider them military either, thats earth-thought. Yet the fact remains in spite of my opinion.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Because a war will stretch out the Jedi forces and would eventually destroy their code, all according to Palpatines plan really. They were never met to be poltical leaders and it shows.
>UGHHH NOW THEYRE LIKE A HECKIN REAL LIFE RELIGION AND IM A BRAINWASHED homosexual WHO HATES RELIGION
don’t care lol. midichlorians don’t make the force not supernatural, they are just a physical marker of the force, it’s a middle man between the physical and metaphysical. george isn’t a midwit who sees the supernatural and empirical as binary opposites and this was his way of showing how they interact and can be quasi measured using biological signifiers.
>george isn’t a midwit who sees the supernatural and empirical as binary opposites
It's how it was portrayed in the original trilogy. No one remembered Jedi and most did not believe in the force. At the end of the movie it turned out that this supernatural power was more powerful than all the technology and allowed Luke to destroy the Death Star.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Because the empire has been persecuting them and they were in hiding. Imagine if your pineal gland could be analysed to determine your psychic strength. If the government killed most of the psychics, and went around banning any information about training psychic powers and stopped any of the tests which could indicate them, removed it all from history books etc, how long do you think it would take for most people to deny the existence of it all? Luke was strong in the force and had no idea/ couldn’t do shit with it until he was given specific training and instructions. If anyone with the knowledge to train people was killed and the physiological tests called fake all this shit could 100% fall out of common knowledge that quickly
Brainlet. Real world is irrelevant. Lucas was inspired by East Asian culture when he made Star Wars. There are lots of stories from that region about some martial arts masters living in seclusion. The main character has to find them to learn some secret technique or something.
That's literally what the original Star Wars was about. Prequel Jedi are completely different from the OT Jedi and I doubt they were supposed to be like that. Most likely Lucas changed his mind about the whole Jedi order and how they should act.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>the weird buddhist monks have nothing to do with asians
2 years ago
Anonymous
it’s your headcanon at play here though. obi wan straight up tells luke how powerful the jedi were, they defended “the republic” for a thousand generations. sounds pretty fricking political to me, especially since the emergent political order started persecuting and killing them, hence why they are the monks in hiding you mention. it’s yet another case of george’s vision of the saga contradicting fanon
2 years ago
Anonymous
No. No one remembers them. I don't think even Leia believes in them. She think Obi Wan was just a general during the Clone Wars. Why would she not know who the Jedi were?
2 years ago
Anonymous
because she grew up under a regime that denied they existed, covered up the fact that they existed, and murdered them and people with knowledge about them
2 years ago
Anonymous
No, she grew up among people who allies of the Jedi.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Her father literally fought in the fricking Clone Wars that had Jedi generals and shit
2 years ago
Anonymous
And he literally stayed on the DL maintaining his seat on the senate (like a super secret spy anon).
2 years ago
Anonymous
By Senator Organa & wife protecting her, what Leia doesn't know can't hurt her.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>Why would she not know who the Jedi were?
Why would she have memories of Padme, for that matter?
2 years ago
Anonymous
>Why would she not know who the Jedi were?
Why would she have memories of Padme, for that matter?
Jedi knights were set up from the beginning to be Knights Templar in space. A group of mystic warriors who were up to their eyeballs in political intrigue, eventually got burnt by it, and purged.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>Real world is irrelevant. Lucas was inspired by East Asian culture when he made Star Wars.
That's a contradiction anon. Is it relevant or not.
The RLM arguments are just the arguments people widely made against the prequels after release boiled down in video form. And they are good arguments zoomer.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>prequels bad because pizza roll hooker rape XD
go back
That's not based. That's comic book/anime/vidya tier garbage.
The original force was clearly based on all those oriental concepts of ki, chi or whatever. Prequel force is basically just a mutation, like Jedi are some moronic X-men. It's capeshit tier.
midichlorians don't cause the force they are attracted to the force. 101 iq prequel haters strike again. Also the whill of the force is 100% cosmic hippie buddhist monk crap, it's not some hard sci-fi concept. I swear ya'll peak at 104iq, because after that point you can start to appreciate the prequels.
I always laugh at this argument. Like can you imagine saying "thing thing is bad because...it's a potato!". Like what kind of argument is that? What the frick does that even mean? Literal buzzwords.
It could just be their understanding in-universe as far as the science goes; it's still a mystery, and things like blood transfers from force sensitives and cloning midichlorian dense persons/tissue doesn't have the kind of effect one might expect if it was strictly down to these organelles.
Still, this scientific explanation kills the mysticism. But that's generally what the prequels did, killed all the mystery about Star Wars.
I imagined the Jedi as a secret order of buddhist-like monks coming out of the shadows and helping the good guys when they needed it. Lucas gave me a creepy Jesuit-like order fully involved in the galactic politics.
I don't like the direction this entire franchise moved. This includes the EU and everything else. I like the stories about spiritualism vs modern technology and the OT was such a story.
The prequels demystified everything about Star Wars.
It's still a mystery. Their science has only demonstrated a tenuous connection correlated to level of force sensitivity, which is still almost entirely random.
>Kasdan: The Force was available to anyone who could hook into it? >Lucas: Yes, everybody can do it. >Kasdan: Not just the Jedi? >Lucas: It’s just the Jedi who take the time to do it. >Marquand: They use it as a technique. >Lucas: Like Yoga. If you want to take the time to do it, you can do it; but the ones that really want to do it are the ones who are into that kind of thing. Also like karate.
So measuring midichlorian count is essentially pointless. Jedi can already sense how strong someone is with the Force.
Life as such is part of the field that the Force is, so it oughtn't be zero unless there's an adaptation to dampen it (like the yslamari lizards) or active attempt to conceal one's self (like Order 66 Jedi on the run)
The prequels are just capeshit with a Star Wars shine. Every single notable aspect of them is something that capeshit used only a few years later >II and III use shitty digital cameras that lack >overuse of CGI and blue/greenscreen to create unconvincing digital sets >a focus on flash and style over any meaningful substance >lame memeable quips so morons like you can pretend they're good simply because you recognise your favourite reddit "joke" >characters you recognise from better films/stories appear for forced, misused cameos just so you can clap at them
Pic very much related
The CGI was leading edge for the time and holds up with this in mind. LOTR got away with more in things like Helm's Deep with the darkness.
of CGI and blue/greenscreen to create unconvincing digital sets
The only objective criticism is bad CGI, and even then, one could argue George Lucas pioneered CGI and AotC was the first film ever shot fully on digital camera.
Most of the prequels criticism is either factually incorrect, like Jango's head not falling out of the helmet, when George Lucas provided a shot clearly showing where the head went, or it's the sort of criticism, where George Lucas did Star Wars not the way you would have done it, and your headcanon was different from that of Star Wars creator. His style didn't suit your taste, and that's perfectly fine. But so many entitled manchildren just chimped out, because Lucas told a story the way he wanted to tell, as if the movies were objectively shit. It's not like he didn't know people would criticize it. He was aware of kid Anakin possible backlash, AotC romance and so on. Nobody ever asks the question why. He didn't pander to manchildren with le ebin Vader hallway sequence.
And yes, as you have noted, TCW expanded the prequels, it didn't fix them as some idiots like to think. Everything was already in the movies, and TCW makes them even better. And people tend to forget, that TCW is George Lucas, and they all praise Filoni exclusively. Without Lucas you get Rebels. And now The Mandalorian, painfully mediocre, uncreative, safe show, that is meant to fix Disney's sequels, not expand Star Wars universe and not add anything new.
People's nostalgia for the OT cost us Star Wars. The sequels were a direct reaction to the supposed objective hate of the Prequels. Studios are not creative, they are reactive.
>The sequels were a direct reaction to the supposed objective hate of the Prequels
Yet it never occurred to them that the target audience at the time never objected to them in the way the Gen X Darias did, and was significantly larger than that cohort. The lack of any retrofuturistic aesthetic for the rat sequels in favor of the rehash reboot is their most conspicuous feature.
'Do your friends consider you lucky? do you ever have dreams that come to pass? I've put something in this box, try to tell me what it is, use your feelings...'
The hate comes from everybody in the 80s trying to move things with their minds playing with fake lightsabers and self inserting as Luke. Luke was just a farm boy from nowhere and it seemed less genetic in ANH more about the right type of training and accessible to anyone. After ESB it seemed to be more about genetics and after the prequels it was literally point blank measured with an electronic tool and explained as genetic and organisms living within your cells. The original concept was more accessible to everyone and less elitist.
>The hate comes from... self inserters
Pissing off those manchildren is based though, am I supposed to dislike the Prequels because of it?
Power fantasies are a blight on the medium
Not OP, but they do not add or accomplish anything. It's a moronic attempt at best to toe the line between scientific and spiritual and to add an empirical aspect to the Force, but in the end it just quantifies one's potential in a fricking adventure story. That symbiosis remark also doesn't go anywhere.
>empirical aspect to the Force
Again, it's not solely caused by the space cells, the force speaks through them. Everyone has these cells, some have more than others:
>Lucas confirmed that "everyone has the Force", since every single living organism has midi-chlorians inside their cells. The only difference between Jedi that the Jedi are trained
Yeah I know, they're a conduit, not the source.
What do they add to the story? How do they get explored? How do they even work? As Jedi get more powerful do they grow extra midichlorians or just utilize them at a better rate?
They also somewhat shit on Yoda's "haha, size matters not, Force is my ally blabla" quote, as it turns out he just got lucky with his midichlorians and his race living for a thousand years.
Potential, that’s what it adds, endless possibilities. it’s a hardly reductive, nor does it trivialize anything. It’s a just Sci-fi movie way to measure a non deterministic “power level”, just to say Anakin's naturally gifted, but that doesn’t mean he’s perfect. Far from it.
>chosen one is such a stupid concept >OH MY GOOOOOOD LUUUUUUUKE RISE TO THE CALL OF ADVENTURE THIS IS YOUR FATHER'S LIGHTSABER HE WAS A GREAT JEDI
see
[...]
midichlorians don't cause the force they are attracted to the force. 101 iq prequel haters strike again. Also the whill of the force is 100% cosmic hippie buddhist monk crap, it's not some hard sci-fi concept. I swear ya'll peak at 104iq, because after that point you can start to appreciate the prequels.
destiny and fate was always the key central theme in star wars you dumb ass.
>midichlorians as a concept predate a new hope
head canon sisters it's not fair..... I get that star wars is about fate and destiny but why can't I be a jedi master too it's not fair....
>Lucasfilm maintains that midi-chlorians were first conceived by George Lucas as early as 1977. However, there is no evidence of this before the publication of The Making of Star Wars in 2007;
>Kasdan: The Force was available to anyone who could hook into it? >Lucas: Yes, everybody can do it. >Kasdan: Not just the Jedi? >Lucas: It’s just the Jedi who take the time to do it. >Marquand: They use it as a technique. >Lucas: Like Yoga. If you want to take the time to do it, you can do it; but the ones that really want to do it are the ones who are into that kind of thing. Also like karate.
So measuring midichlorian count is essentially pointless. Jedi can already sense how strong someone is with the Force.
>Lucas: It’s just the Jedi who take the time to do it > anyone can learn to deflect bolts from a training drone with a lightsaber while blindfolded in about 10 minutes, they just don't because reasons
>wow invisible microscopic organisms in your blood decide your destiny before your birth that is an interesting and philosophically deep literary device
midichlorians raise more questions than they answer and enrich the story. They were always part of the force, they were in the script before a new hope came out.
>Qui Gon, the levelheaded and rational Jedi, is who introduces us to the concept of Midichlorians, representing the Jedi's beliefs in an age of enlightenment >After Qui Gon dies, midichlorians stop being mentioned by the Jedi as they become more cultish and insular >Only person to bring up midichlorians again is Palpatine, in exactly the same conversation where he talks about the narrow dogma of the Jedi and their incomplete view of the Force >Lucas' sequel trilogy would have featured Whills and midichlorians heavily, implying that Luke took the order back on the right path like Qui Gon before him
Quo-Gon would have saved Anakin, he's more like a father figure. Obi-won didn't have the discipline nor the appropriate knowledge to help Anakin's problems, he's a special needs child.
The implication is that while all living matter is connected to the "force", midichlorians act as a physical embodiment of the will of the force, only present in some people.
It's pretty clear there is a wide range of mc concentrations. It seems to be more about taking appropriate action with one has, if one wants to (or in the Jedi case, kidnapped and made to if you have been identified as having a specific amount or above).
There was always some kind of biological component to Force use given that the original 1977 film hinted that it was hereditary (Luke can use the Force because his father could use the Force). What's the issue?
This scene is based because it shows you the state of the Jedi at the time of the prequels. They were very “modern” and therefore soulless. Read Decline of the West and you’ll understand.
>Mystic Space Knight order that has pretty much totally lost its way are literally reducing thr force to just some numbers.
It kinda makes sense with the overall story but like everything in the prequels its a chore to actually watch unfold in the film.
>A young Jedi named Darth Vader, who was a pupil of mine until he turned to evil, helped the Empire hunt down and destroy the Jedi knights. He betrayed and murdered your father. Now the Jedi are all but extinct. Vader was seduced by the dark side of the Force. >helped to hunt down
Because he was the only one who could sense them. Obviously Order 66 wasn't part of the lore when Lucas wrote the first movie.
Well, yeah, but it was over a span of time and over the course of his missions as a Jedi. Of course with that backstory you run into the "How long should it take before people catch on?" question, as well as the fact it doesn't make for as dramatic a climax to a story centered around Anakin like Lucas chose to do with the prequels. Not hard to see why Lucas changed his mind and went with something else.
i thoroughly enjoy all the scenes in Episode II and III with Anakin standing around brooding deeply. especially on Mustafar after he has slaughtered the separatist leaders and waits for Obi-Wan. something about a tragic broken figure silently weeping while he contemplates the twisted wreckage his life has become.
>Anakin only exists because the Sith tried to use the Force to create an all-powerful evil being but the midichlorians rejected this and impregnated Shmiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii Skywalker instead
>Spielberg was preparing Jaws there at that time. On one occasion, Lucas and John Milius visited the studio space after hours where Spielberg showed them the giant mechanical shark undergoing construction. Spielberg grabbed the controls and began excitedly showing them how the mechanical beast worked, opening the enormous jaws which made a loud grinding noise like an oversized bear trap. Lucas climbed a ladder and poked his head inside the open mouth to see how it worked and Spielberg closed the jaws on him. As they laughed at Lucas’ flailing Spielberg realised that the mouth wouldn’t open, a troubling premonition of the mechanical failures on the film to come. Finally the mouth was pried apart and Lucas freed himself
Why did Spielberg save him and doom cinema bros?
When will you guys learn? It's actually fricking genius but like typical entitled morons you guys hate that the artist has autonomy and isn't succumbing to what the fans wanted.
>Hasn’t watched the prequels >Doesn't study film
Marvel created the capeshit era of film once they found their reddit crowd niche, in fact, when they made the first Iron man movie its build similar, or darker, to Dark Night Trilogy. It wasn’t until later they found a disgusting consumer audience that Art had to be degraded.
When will you guys learn? It's actually fricking genius but like typical entitled morons you guys hate that the artist has autonomy and isn't succumbing to what the fans wanted.
The prequels are just capeshit with a Star Wars shine. Every single notable aspect of them is something that capeshit used only a few years later >II and III use shitty digital cameras that lack >overuse of CGI and blue/greenscreen to create unconvincing digital sets >a focus on flash and style over any meaningful substance >lame memeable quips so morons like you can pretend they're good simply because you recognise your favourite reddit "joke" >characters you recognise from better films/stories appear for forced, misused cameos just so you can clap at them
Pic very much related
>>II and III use shitty digital cameras that lack
of CGI and blue/greenscreen to create unconvincing digital sets
Pic related. George Lucas said that most critics don't know much about movies, their history, and the tech behind them, so they can't grasp or give informed opinions. And he is 100% right. Thats why youtube critics always dissect plot, plotholes and the meaning, and symbology of the "plot". Because you dont need to have any knowledge about film to do so. Anyone can dissect a narrative. But to talk about the actual medium you need to know about it.
This is one of the reasons why Armond White is unironically so pleasant to read. Even with some moronic (aka based) takes you enjoy his encyclopedic knowledge of the history of them medium. You know he knows his shit. He is not quoting tarantino, nolan and shawshank redemption. You might be a film buff, but then White talks about a movie you have never heard off and explains to you why its a landmark of cinema. All of that in a Green Hornet vs Ultron: dawn of infinity godzillas review. I remember some homosexual on youtube complaining about how boring the pod racing was because the camera pans all moved to the right. But thats something you would know if you knew basic film making. In his ignorance, it was some kind of mistake.
Marvel has destroyed cinema. Marvel is the embodiment of the very thing that George Lucas and Steven Spielberg feared what would happen to cinema as a result of the success of their own films; it would become nothing more than an eye-candy themepark ride spectacle instead of actually looking deep into and sharing the human experience.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Lucas is the primary reason why films are so soulless today.
2 years ago
Anonymous
You are actually moronic, they aren't even remotely the same. Every single one of those Marvel films is the exact same, with the same formula, the same beats, the same timing of the jokes, the same color pallate, the same fricking everything. You could mix and match any one of the characters and scenarios in each one of those movies and you wouldn't notice. It all has that gross Disney shit-smeared polish of sunshine and happiness and that the heroes are never ever in real danger and are able to wink into the camera that they too are in on the joke that its just a theme park cartoon with over-saturated colors as the actors play in front of a greenscreen. Disney banned theatres from showing other films during the Star Wars sequel shit and it hurt them and theatres in the long run as a result of word of mouth saying how terrible it was. Its just cookie cutter assembly line shit with no substance, no depth, no coherency and are literally forgotten by the time you walk out of the theatre and all that remains lingering in your memory is the post credit scene that ties into the previous shit movie to get you excited for the next coming out in a month. Bland, non-offensive unchallenging garbage for mass consumption and caters to China. Non-stop for damn near 20 fricking years now.
Disney killed cinema. Disney wipes its ass on art and film as an artform medium. Francis and Scorcese are %150 right in that every one of these movies are interchangable crap that is not distinct from anything else. It can't die fast enough. The next big thing isn't going to come out of Hollywood or Disney no matter how much money they throw at it; make your own kino, guys.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>implying Lucas didn't pave the way for filmmakers to become much lazier and less creative by relying on CG studios to do 3/4s of the work
Also 99% of major big-budget films are now shot on digital mainly because of him.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>develop new technology >somebody else uses technology badly >hurr guy who made technology is the cause of this
smoothbrain logic
2 years ago
Anonymous
except George Lucas also used the technology badly, hence why his prequels (the second one in particular) aged like fricking milk and there's constant immersion breaking
2 years ago
Anonymous
>except George Lucas also used the technology badly
?
2 years ago
Anonymous
Yes? Attack of the Clones was the first major movie to be shot on digital and Lucas didn't use the CG sparingly. In interviews and behind the scenes he was boasting about creating entire worlds and characters by using CG and how it was going to "innovate the industry". Him and James Cameron heavily pushing that shit in their movies is why we now have so many schlocky CG flicks with hardly any substance.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>is why we now have so many schlocky CG flicks with hardly any substance.
I wasn't aware Lucas and Cameron are directing those movies
2 years ago
Anonymous
They certainly contributed to the rise of them. Both the PT and Avatar prioritized "innovation" over good story telling and writing.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>guy invents a new hedge trimmer >someone buys it and cuts their hedge in a way you don't like >blame the guy who made the trimmer
How can you not see that this is drooling moron logic? Lucas and Cameron have nothing to do with other people making shitty movies. Lazy movies existed before them and will exist after them regardless of the technology.
And to use the Prequels and Avatar as examples of lazy movies is just laughable, it only shows you care more about plothomosexualry than cinema
2 years ago
Anonymous
>it only shows you care more about plothomosexualry than cinema > narrative cinema doesn't need good scripts!!
when will this meme die?
2 years ago
Anonymous
They have good scripts though? What the frick is wrong with Avatar's story?
2 years ago
Anonymous
If I invent a cheaper way for studios to make films, those studios are going to use that tech regardless if it affects the quality or not. It's the fact that he called it "innovation" when in the long run it's turned out to be about 100 steps back than what we got decades ago. >it only shows you care more about plothomosexualry than cinema
I care about films being believable, engaging, and well made. The PT and Avatar don't have much to offer outside of gawking at their special effects and action scenes. Both of the directors have earlier works that show that they know how to write great stories with believable characters. Meanwhile the PT and Avatar have characters that are either bland and unmemorable, or just archetypes.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>those studios are going to use that tech regardless if it affects the quality or not.
Right, and before CGI took off they were using the cheapest alternative at the time, so what does it have to do with Lucas/Cameron what people do with their tech?
>It's the fact that he called it "innovation" when in the long run it's turned out to be about 100 steps back
But it hasn't. Digital filmmaking still has far higher potential than film no matter how much you whine and shit your pants
>I care about films being believable, engaging, and well made
You clearly don't if you're whining about the prequels lol
2 years ago
Anonymous
>so what does it have to do with Lucas/Cameron what people do with their tech?
They were the ones who heavily pushed it in the industry and made it the norm for big blockbusters to use heavy CG. Neither of them used it sparingly. >But it hasn't. Digital filmmaking still has far higher potential than film no matter how much you whine and shit your pants
It arguably looks much worse, someone posted a miniature that they used for Geonosis but the main reason why it looks "fake" to so many people was because of it being shot on digital. This can apply to most modern flicks, especially capeshit. >You clearly don't if you're whining about the prequels lol
Nothing about the prequel trilogy is believable or engaging. All of the characters behave like aliens.
2 years ago
Anonymous
So why does [...] still look so fake and unconvincing?
>CGI bad because I said so
Done with you gays lmao
If you don't like the movies why are you even here 20 years later crying about them?
2 years ago
Anonymous
I gave you a clear reason why heavy CG makes a world and the overall film much more unbelievable. It's not my fault that your zoomer brain is conditioned to expect it in every flick you watch. >If you don't like the movies why are you even here 20 years later crying about them?
Why do you get so defensive when someone else says they don't like them 20 years later?
2 years ago
Anonymous
Black person I just don't care. I've yet to hear a compelling argument why Lucas pioneering new special effects in the 70s is le good but doing it in the 2000s is le bad. I also don't see why I'm supposed to care if the effects in a 20 year old movie look dated. It's not like the OT doesn't look old as frick too.
CGI isn’t “bad” just like cartoons aren’t “bad”, the problem is that it doesn’t match the original feel if Star Wars. Imagine if someone made a prequel to Citizen Kane and made it filled with CGI and weird physics that don’t make sense. Even if the visuals are beautiful and the plot is interesting it would still just be fricking weird because it doesn’t appear to be the same world as the one taking place in Citizen Kane because in every shot is a smooth cgi sunset and every building looks fake and people look like cartoons. Maybe it could be good as a stand alone thing but if it doesn’t match the original in fundamental ways it’s stylistically incoherent.
>CGI isn’t “bad” just like cartoons aren’t “bad”, the problem is that it doesn’t match the original feel if Star Wars.
Weird how only you seem to have that issue
2 years ago
Anonymous
>>>CGI isn’t “bad” just like cartoons aren’t “bad”, the problem is that it doesn’t match the original feel if Star Wars. >Weird how only you seem to have that issue
Prequel gays have now devolved to gaslighting. "Only you thinks the prequels are bad" lmao dude get real.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>gaslighting
go back holy fricking shit
2 years ago
Anonymous
> you are the only person who complained about the usage of CGI in Star Wars
Ok dude.
2 years ago
Anonymous
neckbeards aren't people
2 years ago
Anonymous
Hey frick you buddy.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Every single person who wasn't a young child when those movies came out thought they looked dodgy. Particularly the second two, and particularly the third. The whole damn theater laughed at yoda spinning, myself with them.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>Weird how only you seem to have that issue
Prequelteens are sum'n else. Sum'n stupid.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>I've yet to hear a compelling argument why Lucas pioneering new special effects in the 70s is le good but doing it in the 2000s is le bad.
Have already stated why. The way they implemented CG wasn't "innovation", just a cheaper more accessible way for studios and filmmakers to create movies even though it does look worse when it isn't used sparingly. >It's not like the OT doesn't look old as frick too.
The difference is that the CG in the prequels looked noticably out of place and fake even back then. The effects in the OT, while dated, still look pretty great for their time and won't age as badly as the effects used in the prequels.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>still look pretty great for their time and won't age as badly
the originals already aged like shit lol, thats why Lucas went back and touched them up with modern CGI
and now you moronic fricks go back and watch the OT and think 'wow this 70s movie really aged well!', when you're literally watching a movie with modern filmmaking technology
2 years ago
Anonymous
>the originals already aged like shit lol, thats why Lucas went back and touched them up with modern CGI
You mean the CGI that already looked dated even for late 90's/early 00's standards? >and now you moronic fricks go back and watch the OT and think 'wow this 70s movie really aged well!', when you're literally watching a movie with modern filmmaking technology
Kind of like with the CG in the prequels, the changes Lucas made are out of place and distracting to most people. Pic related is a good example.
This is why I watch the despecialized editions or 4K77/4K80/4K83.
2 years ago
Anonymous
listen man it was really important to show audiences the side of an elephant at that moment. don't question it, you aren't the artist so you cant criticize it. it's the thought that counts anyway just stop bullying prequels okay!
2 years ago
Anonymous
Because delusional pseudointellectuals like you need to know the truth
2 years ago
Anonymous
CGI isn’t “bad” just like cartoons aren’t “bad”, the problem is that it doesn’t match the original feel if Star Wars. Imagine if someone made a prequel to Citizen Kane and made it filled with CGI and weird physics that don’t make sense. Even if the visuals are beautiful and the plot is interesting it would still just be fricking weird because it doesn’t appear to be the same world as the one taking place in Citizen Kane because in every shot is a smooth cgi sunset and every building looks fake and people look like cartoons. Maybe it could be good as a stand alone thing but if it doesn’t match the original in fundamental ways it’s stylistically incoherent.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>is why we now have so many schlocky CG flicks with hardly any substance.
I wasn't aware Lucas and Cameron are directing those movies
Lucas believed he'd be able to change entire scenes, shots, even the narrative using computers alá Running Man! So in his mind nothing he'd done was etched in stone.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Not really, you're always going to get cheap, pastel trash in comparison to your success as a filmmaker. Lucas initiated his Art the way he wanted to. Don't blame Lucas or Spielberg, blame the low-brow consumers that don't like challenging, cutting-edge work -- put your money where your mouth is. Consumers want painfully mediocre, uncreative, safe mediums. Why even bother creating anything of substance if worthless sneaks want the piece of the cake without the work? CGI can be used well.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Those pretty shot are exactly the reason AOTC and ROTS kind of suck. They simply don’t look real. It’s like looking at a cartoon sunset vs a real sunset. When everything looks picture perfect and smooth and crisp in every shot the mind no longer believes what they are seeing. Also, the fighting style became like looney tunes in AOTC, in TPM 99% of it still felt pretty grounded in the physics of the OT. In AOTC and ROTS the physics are unbelievable it’s just watching bugs bunny or road runner. People are flying in helicopters with no windows at break neck speeds and their hair is barely blowing around at all people are flying through the air millions of feet in the sky and look calm as a cucumber yoda is doing Olympic flips sticking to walls like Spider-Man, it just looks weird af. TPM at least felt like a grounded film and used CGI a little bit sensibly.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Compare these fights.
OT:
TPM:
——it’s at this point on that the fights lose believability and goes into cartoon /looney tunes territory
AOTC:
ROTS:
2 years ago
Anonymous
This is because TPM was actually shot on film and made better use of location shooting and miniatures, in addition to not overusing CGI. It feels more grounded and visceral, something that was key to the success of the OT, and looks infinitely better than the other two prequels, which were shot on digital cameras and mainly on studio sets with bluescreen.
It's telling that the cinegrid in
>>II and III use shitty digital cameras that lack
of CGI and blue/greenscreen to create unconvincing digital sets
Pic related. George Lucas said that most critics don't know much about movies, their history, and the tech behind them, so they can't grasp or give informed opinions. And he is 100% right. Thats why youtube critics always dissect plot, plotholes and the meaning, and symbology of the "plot". Because you dont need to have any knowledge about film to do so. Anyone can dissect a narrative. But to talk about the actual medium you need to know about it.
This is one of the reasons why Armond White is unironically so pleasant to read. Even with some moronic (aka based) takes you enjoy his encyclopedic knowledge of the history of them medium. You know he knows his shit. He is not quoting tarantino, nolan and shawshank redemption. You might be a film buff, but then White talks about a movie you have never heard off and explains to you why its a landmark of cinema. All of that in a Green Hornet vs Ultron: dawn of infinity godzillas review. I remember some homosexual on youtube complaining about how boring the pod racing was because the camera pans all moved to the right. But thats something you would know if you knew basic film making. In his ignorance, it was some kind of mistake.
Marvel has destroyed cinema. Marvel is the embodiment of the very thing that George Lucas and Steven Spielberg feared what would happen to cinema as a result of the success of their own films; it would become nothing more than an eye-candy themepark ride spectacle instead of actually looking deep into and sharing the human experience.
is comprised mostly of the short Naboo and Tatooine scenes, which were the only ones shot on location. In reality, those scenes take up only like 15-20% of the actual film while the rest of it is shit that looks like this
2 years ago
Anonymous
Geonosis wasn't CGI though lol
2 years ago
Anonymous
Of course, what was I thinking, I forgot they put a floor in. Definitely not bluescreen CGI
Jesus those bluescreens really look terrible. Imagine if they shot this now with the Volume.
The Volume is also pretty poor, it was alright the first time they used in The Mandalorian but then Disney started overusing it for everything and now it's just a modern version of old school rear projection. The actors have only a small space to work in, and you can tell they're just inside some air conditioned studio the whole time which doesn't exactly work when most of your Star Wars shows are set on a sweltering hot desert planet. It's completely sterile
>All the Jedi extras flailing around in the background
Something something soul something kino etc.
It's also another thing about the prequels, the poor integration of CGI and live action. Most of the time the actors had absolutely no reference for the CGI characters they were meant to be interacting with. Jar Jar in TPM works because they had an actor there with a costume and then pasted the animated character over him, but then they got lazy with the next two films. These guys were literally just told to fight against air
2 years ago
Anonymous
Black personhomosexual
2 years ago
Anonymous
And uh, the tiny actors are there?
2 years ago
Anonymous
>get btfoed so you deflect
laffin
2 years ago
Anonymous
So why does
This is because TPM was actually shot on film and made better use of location shooting and miniatures, in addition to not overusing CGI. It feels more grounded and visceral, something that was key to the success of the OT, and looks infinitely better than the other two prequels, which were shot on digital cameras and mainly on studio sets with bluescreen.
It's telling that the cinegrid in [...] is comprised mostly of the short Naboo and Tatooine scenes, which were the only ones shot on location. In reality, those scenes take up only like 15-20% of the actual film while the rest of it is shit that looks like this
still look so fake and unconvincing?
2 years ago
Anonymous
While the background is real the CGI has an incredibly poor depth of field.
2 years ago
Anonymous
The background actually looks great I. These scenes, it’s the cgi characters galloping around. The physics look cartoonish. The weight distribution or the motion or something is just ridiculous.
2 years ago
Anonymous
It's not blurred properly and it has no physics rigging at all.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>These guys were literally just told to fight against air
Despite all their rage they are still just rats on a soundstage
2 years ago
Anonymous
they really overdid the sabers-deflect-blasters shit in the prequels.
2 years ago
Anonymous
But obviously there's a way to use it right, which they would on a feature film.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Jesus those bluescreens really look terrible. Imagine if they shot this now with the Volume.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>All the Jedi extras flailing around in the background
Something something soul something kino etc.
2 years ago
Anonymous
You bring a good point. But you are still missing one good piece from uncovering the conspiration.
Redditlettermedia gaslighted everyone who wasnt there or who was too young to know better. "How?" You might ask, "I have the dvds!"
Well, you see, while the prequels were shot in digital mostly, they were processed chemically in film and projected in film. The higher contrast, chemical process and grain of film helped to hide the shoddy cgi. This is how it was intended for us to watch them.
People who watched them in theaters and were old to know better, remember them in all their glory. Your dvd, is the digital version without any of the chemical enhancements. Your dvd version is not the way it was projected in theaters. Your dvd version looks like shit and RLM convinced everyone that this is the real version and the rest is nostalgia.
This scan looks a bit dark, but you can already see how good it looks most of the times. You can even see the Senator room and it actually looks fine.
1:24-1:30 This one straight up looks better than modern Marvel Disney.
Dont get zoomers and r3dditlettermedia tell you otherwise, they looked great, years ahead of anything before.
2 years ago
Anonymous
The fans never cared about rlm
2 years ago
Anonymous
This would be a good post if it weren't for the key fact that pure digital is actually how Lucas intended them to be viewed. The only reason those film-scanned versions even exist is because most cinemas (rightfully) resisted changing to the required projectors >Lucas had stated that he wished to film The Phantom Menace on this [digital] format but Sony was unable to build the cameras quickly enough. In 2002, Attack of the Clones became the third film to be released that was shot entirely on a 24p digital camera (preceded by 2001's Jackpot and Vidocq). The cameras record in the 16:9 HDCAM format (1080p), although the image was cropped to a 2.40:1 widescreen ratio. The area above and below the 2.40 extraction area was available for Lucas to reframe the picture as necessary in post-production. Despite Lucas' efforts to persuade movie theaters to switch to digital projectors for viewing of Episode II, few theaters did.
2 years ago
Anonymous
I'm well aware, Lucas made a bet by wanting the prequels to be set with an innovative tech of its time. People thought PS2 graphics looked like real life for it's time, some are better than others, but I believe it's unfair to cherry-pick a 2 hour-movie that was otherwise shot almost experimentally. You win some parts you lose them, the clone troopers being animated is a remarkable feat.
2 years ago
Anonymous
It's COMPLETELY fair to criticize these movies for being shot "experimentally" in the first place. No aspect of a director's technical or creative decision making is protected from criticism.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Prequelgays often seem to think that intent matters more than the actual execution and effect
2 years ago
Anonymous
That does seem to be the way with them. It's the participation-award generation, they think people deserve praise just for trying.
2 years ago
Anonymous
'execution' in this case just means following mainstream hollywood conventions right?
2 years ago
Anonymous
No, it just means being good
2 years ago
Anonymous
No, you fricking zoomer. Execution means the actual act of DOING IT. Not your intent, but what you ACTUALLY DO.
2 years ago
Anonymous
No, it just means being good
Right, but every time one of you gays complains about the 'execution' of something, what you're talking about is just wanting it to be more generic. If these movies were rehashes of shit you'd already seen then you wouldn't be here complaining
2 years ago
Anonymous
That's fine, but that's not the point though. What I can't stand is lazy, uninformed takes by others, I've said many times that the gain and the higher contrast of the projectors helped hide the shoddy parts of the CGI, This is how it was meant to be watched.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>What I can't stand is lazy, uninformed takes by others,
It just looks bad.
>noo you're not informed
It looks bad. >saying that doesn't take enough effort
It looks bad.
2 years ago
Anonymous
You're wrong, but despite what the incoherent meme video defending the special editions might try to goad you into accepting, Lucas's intent doesn't matter either way.
2 years ago
Anonymous
attack of the clones is my least favorite from the prequels so don't watch it often, but man padme riding on that beast looks really dumb
2 years ago
Anonymous
It's a complete disaster. The least they could have done is put her on a greenscreen mechanical bull and shaken the shit out of her for effect. But either they were too cheap for even that, too lazy, portman too stuckup, or they really thought this end result looked good. I don't know which possibility is worse.
2 years ago
Anonymous
at some points it really looks like they just pasted a freeze frame of her in a seating position, lol
2 years ago
Anonymous
This scene just like most other fight scenes in the prequel look fake but it's not so much because of the effects than it's the fight choreography, or rather, the lack of it. 100% Lucas just gave the CG artists instructions to "I don't know put some jedi and droids in the background fighting, or something" and the artists, not knowing what to do, just had the droids stand there with sticks up their arse and the jedi randomly swirling their sabers in the air for no reason.
The pattern repeats in every fight scene, nobody is ever trying to take cover or use tactics of any kind. No one has seemingly any training, situational awareness or even basic self-preservation.
I can't believe in these scenes because I can't believe the geeks casually frolicking around in them are warriors. It's got nothing to do with the CG.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>all these words, refuted by the screencaps you posted which all look like crap
Capeshit is exactly what everyone wanted Lucas to make though. All the fricking complaints from boomers were the movies being too different from the OT
Then Abrams shits out TFA and you homosexuals eat it up and beg for more, its pathetic
2 years ago
Anonymous
>Then Abrams shits out TFA and you homosexuals eat it up and beg for more, its pathetic >implying
It's entirely possible to dislike both the prequels and sequels, dumbass. It's not one or the other
The prequels at least had good ideas and imagination which the sequels didn't, so it beats them out there, but as films they're still laregely joyless digital shit
2 years ago
Anonymous
>I didn't fight to get my freedom in order to do what the studios would do.
This part always gets me. What is a person supposed to do if they just want to make movies?
If you go work for a studio they'll tell you to shut the frick up and churn out capeshit, and anything else you make they'll cut to shit and ruin. Even if you fund your own personal fricking studio, mouthbreathing general audiences will cry about you making YOUR own movies the way YOU want them.
I don't get it at all. To all the people who hate the Prequels, why are you here? Why do you keep watching these movies if you hate Lucas and you hate Star Wars? There are an infinite amount of movies shat out yearly made exactly to your tastes, so why do you pick out one guy who makes things NOT aimed at you, and demand he change them?
of CGI and blue/greenscreen to create unconvincing digital sets
The only objective criticism is bad CGI, and even then, one could argue George Lucas pioneered CGI and AotC was the first film ever shot fully on digital camera.
Most of the prequels criticism is either factually incorrect, like Jango's head not falling out of the helmet, when George Lucas provided a shot clearly showing where the head went, or it's the sort of criticism, where George Lucas did Star Wars not the way you would have done it, and your headcanon was different from that of Star Wars creator. His style didn't suit your taste, and that's perfectly fine. But so many entitled manchildren just chimped out, because Lucas told a story the way he wanted to tell, as if the movies were objectively shit. It's not like he didn't know people would criticize it. He was aware of kid Anakin possible backlash, AotC romance and so on. Nobody ever asks the question why. He didn't pander to manchildren with le ebin Vader hallway sequence.
And yes, as you have noted, TCW expanded the prequels, it didn't fix them as some idiots like to think. Everything was already in the movies, and TCW makes them even better. And people tend to forget, that TCW is George Lucas, and they all praise Filoni exclusively. Without Lucas you get Rebels. And now The Mandalorian, painfully mediocre, uncreative, safe show, that is meant to fix Disney's sequels, not expand Star Wars universe and not add anything new.
People's nostalgia for the OT cost us Star Wars. The sequels were a direct reaction to the supposed objective hate of the Prequels. Studios are not creative, they are reactive.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Capeshit is exactly what everyone wanted Lucas to make though. All the fricking complaints from boomers were the movies being too different from the OT
Then Abrams shits out TFA and you homosexuals eat it up and beg for more, its pathetic
The prequels and sequels are both shit, and in a couple regards are shit for similar reasons despite being very different overall. I know reality makes it harder for peanut-brains to grapple with, but it's a false dichotomy.
>the galaxy is full of futuristic hightech gadgets and tech >somehow noone has figured out how the force works
Ofcourse it makes sense. Its even better, when you realize that the jedi are now extinct and have become this mysterious urban myth.
The midichlorians don't necessarily demystify the Force. I see it the same way some Reddit-types say "Love is just chemicals and electrodes in the brain" and whatnot. Sure, there is scientific truth in that statement, but it would be ridiculous to consider something so immense and powerful as love the same way one might consider passing gas or popping a pimple.
The Jedi - who, at this point in the story, are considered to be an arm of the Republic and are responsible for upholding peace throughout it's territories - use the midichlorian test to identify potential initiates for the Order. It's not particularly a spiritual or mystic process, but it's necessary for the world they live in. But the Force, like love, is a much higher power. It can unite planets or destroy them; it tells us of the past and future; it is an energy that unities us all. Most importantly, it requires a level of faith that can't simply be measured or inspired with a machine.
Reminder that if you dislike the sequels it's simply because you're too stupid and uncultured to fully understand them, or you're just mad that Disney made the films the way they wanted to make them and didn't adhere to your headcanon
what I didn't understand is: >midichlorians are attracted to the force sensitive >jedi, themselves force sensitive, rely on medichlorians to detect other force sensitives
well prior it had been established that they could use the force to sense others strong in the force. why not use that time to develop a human aspect in the film rather than another mechanical one
why have midiclorians sense the force instead of having humans do it? midiclorians don't make anything simpler, nor do they make the story any richer. why do they even exist? what implications do they have to the story? anything at all? they're utterly pointless, and for that reason, they are bad writing.
I like the old rubber suit godzilla movies. The effects are very dated, but (in the good ones) done with soul and are very fun to watch.
This is soulless:
This is because TPM was actually shot on film and made better use of location shooting and miniatures, in addition to not overusing CGI. It feels more grounded and visceral, something that was key to the success of the OT, and looks infinitely better than the other two prequels, which were shot on digital cameras and mainly on studio sets with bluescreen.
It's telling that the cinegrid in [...] is comprised mostly of the short Naboo and Tatooine scenes, which were the only ones shot on location. In reality, those scenes take up only like 15-20% of the actual film while the rest of it is shit that looks like this
It's lazy, like godzilla fighting in the wilderness with no scale model builds to smash. Those godzilla movies are shit, I don't like those ones. I like the ones where they have really intricate models of cities and smash them up. It doesn't look real, it's a very dated effect. But it's cool and soulful, not lazy, and that's what really counts. And this is where the prequels fail.
If you actually think about it, it is extremely based of George to do this. He isn't just creating a vague 'force', but has created a system in which it makes sense for some to be better at wielding the force than others. It justifies Qui Gon taking an interest in Anakin in the first place.
Honestly 'super power destiny germs' are pretty cool. But Star Wars, since Empire, has always been a giant ret con.
That's not based. That's comic book/anime/vidya tier garbage.
The original force was clearly based on all those oriental concepts of ki, chi or whatever. Prequel force is basically just a mutation, like Jedi are some moronic X-men. It's capeshit tier.
It is still Ki, it’s just that the Force spoke through the midi-chlorians, allowing certain beings to use the Force if they were sensitive enough to its powers.
Still, this scientific explanation kills the mysticism. But that's generally what the prequels did, killed all the mystery about Star Wars.
I imagined the Jedi as a secret order of buddhist-like monks coming out of the shadows and helping the good guys when they needed it. Lucas gave me a creepy Jesuit-like order fully involved in the galactic politics.
I don't like the direction this entire franchise moved. This includes the EU and everything else. I like the stories about spiritualism vs modern technology and the OT was such a story.
The prequels demystified everything about Star Wars.
>Still, this scientific explanation kills the mysticism
How? It's not biological.
>I imagined the Jedi as a secret order of buddhist-like monks coming out of the shadows and helping the good guys when they needed it.
They are, the Jedi Order was not a military organization, they were incorporated into political matters during the war, but that doesn't make the Force or the Jedi any less interesting because they are that different.
>I like the stories about spiritualism vs modern technology and the OT was such a story.
They do this anyways. How does one blood sample to quantify what makes someone a Jedi trigger you? It's a high-tech space world.
>Jedi Order was not a military organization
Yet all the Jedi are generals when war comes to z republic. To be clear I don't consider them military either, thats earth-thought. Yet the fact remains in spite of my opinion.
Because a war will stretch out the Jedi forces and would eventually destroy their code, all according to Palpatines plan really. They were never met to be poltical leaders and it shows.
>science kills mysticism
Unironically why are atheists like this? Nobody else has an issue with this concept
>UGHHH NOW THEYRE LIKE A HECKIN REAL LIFE RELIGION AND IM A BRAINWASHED homosexual WHO HATES RELIGION
don’t care lol. midichlorians don’t make the force not supernatural, they are just a physical marker of the force, it’s a middle man between the physical and metaphysical. george isn’t a midwit who sees the supernatural and empirical as binary opposites and this was his way of showing how they interact and can be quasi measured using biological signifiers.
>george isn’t a midwit who sees the supernatural and empirical as binary opposites
It's how it was portrayed in the original trilogy. No one remembered Jedi and most did not believe in the force. At the end of the movie it turned out that this supernatural power was more powerful than all the technology and allowed Luke to destroy the Death Star.
Because the empire has been persecuting them and they were in hiding. Imagine if your pineal gland could be analysed to determine your psychic strength. If the government killed most of the psychics, and went around banning any information about training psychic powers and stopped any of the tests which could indicate them, removed it all from history books etc, how long do you think it would take for most people to deny the existence of it all? Luke was strong in the force and had no idea/ couldn’t do shit with it until he was given specific training and instructions. If anyone with the knowledge to train people was killed and the physiological tests called fake all this shit could 100% fall out of common knowledge that quickly
>moron who thinks buddhists don’t also have an organised religion involved in politics
Look into burma and what’s happening there.
Brainlet. Real world is irrelevant. Lucas was inspired by East Asian culture when he made Star Wars. There are lots of stories from that region about some martial arts masters living in seclusion. The main character has to find them to learn some secret technique or something.
That's literally what the original Star Wars was about. Prequel Jedi are completely different from the OT Jedi and I doubt they were supposed to be like that. Most likely Lucas changed his mind about the whole Jedi order and how they should act.
>the weird buddhist monks have nothing to do with asians
it’s your headcanon at play here though. obi wan straight up tells luke how powerful the jedi were, they defended “the republic” for a thousand generations. sounds pretty fricking political to me, especially since the emergent political order started persecuting and killing them, hence why they are the monks in hiding you mention. it’s yet another case of george’s vision of the saga contradicting fanon
No. No one remembers them. I don't think even Leia believes in them. She think Obi Wan was just a general during the Clone Wars. Why would she not know who the Jedi were?
because she grew up under a regime that denied they existed, covered up the fact that they existed, and murdered them and people with knowledge about them
No, she grew up among people who allies of the Jedi.
Her father literally fought in the fricking Clone Wars that had Jedi generals and shit
And he literally stayed on the DL maintaining his seat on the senate (like a super secret spy anon).
By Senator Organa & wife protecting her, what Leia doesn't know can't hurt her.
>Why would she not know who the Jedi were?
Why would she have memories of Padme, for that matter?
Jedi knights were set up from the beginning to be Knights Templar in space. A group of mystic warriors who were up to their eyeballs in political intrigue, eventually got burnt by it, and purged.
>Real world is irrelevant. Lucas was inspired by East Asian culture when he made Star Wars.
That's a contradiction anon. Is it relevant or not.
> science kills the mysticism.
Lol why do you think we even have newtonian physics you daft frick.
While Newton himself was a mystic, mechanistic explanations did indeed disenchant the world
>I imagined the Jedi as
EVERY
TIME
LOL
headcanoners, self-inserters and fanfic writers need to be shot on sight to save cinema
this
based
with you homosexuals it's always the same stupid RLM arguments that have been rebutted a thousand times
The RLM arguments are just the arguments people widely made against the prequels after release boiled down in video form. And they are good arguments zoomer.
>prequels bad because pizza roll hooker rape XD
go back
Agreed, if there's some biological underpinning then biotech can give mundanes Force powers and then you need some bs as to why that's not done
midichlorians don't cause the force they are attracted to the force. 101 iq prequel haters strike again. Also the whill of the force is 100% cosmic hippie buddhist monk crap, it's not some hard sci-fi concept. I swear ya'll peak at 104iq, because after that point you can start to appreciate the prequels.
chinese people thought qi was influenced by your humors
My arm bone?
>it's bad because....it's anime!!!
I always laugh at this argument. Like can you imagine saying "thing thing is bad because...it's a potato!". Like what kind of argument is that? What the frick does that even mean? Literal buzzwords.
Anime is low-tier garbage made for children that's why. It's a fair description
>low-tier garbage made for children that's why
and star wars isn't? okay boomer.
So why is Star Wars popular and you aren’t? kek
>lol no u
nice argument. as expected from sub iq moron. anime is ten times better than your star wars trash for literal children.
It’s a pretty valid point actually.
>thing is bad because its a potato
Yeah? Potatoes fricking suck. As does anime, dumbass.
Are posts like this meta trolling or just autistic weirdos with objectively bad taste?
>you are OBJECTIVELY wrong
>george lucas OBJECTIVELY raped my childhood!
>JJ abrams OBJECTIVELY should have directed the prequels!
zoomers are so deep in post-post-post-irony that they can't even tell themselves
George is probably on the spectrum and the prequels are his pure unfiltered autism so autistic people relate to it
It could just be their understanding in-universe as far as the science goes; it's still a mystery, and things like blood transfers from force sensitives and cloning midichlorian dense persons/tissue doesn't have the kind of effect one might expect if it was strictly down to these organelles.
It's still a mystery. Their science has only demonstrated a tenuous connection correlated to level of force sensitivity, which is still almost entirely random.
Life as such is part of the field that the Force is, so it oughtn't be zero unless there's an adaptation to dampen it (like the yslamari lizards) or active attempt to conceal one's self (like Order 66 Jedi on the run)
The CGI was leading edge for the time and holds up with this in mind. LOTR got away with more in things like Helm's Deep with the darkness.
>The sequels were a direct reaction to the supposed objective hate of the Prequels
Yet it never occurred to them that the target audience at the time never objected to them in the way the Gen X Darias did, and was significantly larger than that cohort. The lack of any retrofuturistic aesthetic for the rat sequels in favor of the rehash reboot is their most conspicuous feature.
How else would Qui-Gon know if Anakin was incredibly forced sensitive.
By sensing it. He was a Jedi after all.
But then how would that explain Vader not picking up Princess Leia being force sensitive?
How do you know he didn't?
I propose these obvious things and get accused of making up nevermind, forgot where I am posting
bad writing.
'Do your friends consider you lucky? do you ever have dreams that come to pass? I've put something in this box, try to tell me what it is, use your feelings...'
>Anakin was incredibly anus sensitive.
What did he mean by this
Midichlorians are a perfectly fine explanation for force sensitivity. Never understood the hate.
The hate comes from everybody in the 80s trying to move things with their minds playing with fake lightsabers and self inserting as Luke. Luke was just a farm boy from nowhere and it seemed less genetic in ANH more about the right type of training and accessible to anyone. After ESB it seemed to be more about genetics and after the prequels it was literally point blank measured with an electronic tool and explained as genetic and organisms living within your cells. The original concept was more accessible to everyone and less elitist.
>The hate comes from... self inserters
Pissing off those manchildren is based though, am I supposed to dislike the Prequels because of it?
Power fantasies are a blight on the medium
What are you moronic? Luke was ALWAYS portrayed as the son of a powerful Jedi.
I never said he wasn’t. But it wasn’t explicitly stated that the ability to use the force was genetic or based on lineage until ESB.
can you even tell me what's wrong with midichlorians?
Not OP, but they do not add or accomplish anything. It's a moronic attempt at best to toe the line between scientific and spiritual and to add an empirical aspect to the Force, but in the end it just quantifies one's potential in a fricking adventure story. That symbiosis remark also doesn't go anywhere.
>empirical aspect to the Force
Again, it's not solely caused by the space cells, the force speaks through them. Everyone has these cells, some have more than others:
>Lucas confirmed that "everyone has the Force", since every single living organism has midi-chlorians inside their cells. The only difference between Jedi that the Jedi are trained
Yeah I know, they're a conduit, not the source.
What do they add to the story? How do they get explored? How do they even work? As Jedi get more powerful do they grow extra midichlorians or just utilize them at a better rate?
They also somewhat shit on Yoda's "haha, size matters not, Force is my ally blabla" quote, as it turns out he just got lucky with his midichlorians and his race living for a thousand years.
Potential, that’s what it adds, endless possibilities. it’s a hardly reductive, nor does it trivialize anything. It’s a just Sci-fi movie way to measure a non deterministic “power level”, just to say Anakin's naturally gifted, but that doesn’t mean he’s perfect. Far from it.
Not to mention kidnapping and slave purchasing by Jedi (whats good about that?).
midi-chlorians
iamgine caring about star wars
theyre fun movies who cares
oomers are embarrassing
The Chosen One shit was worse than the midichlorians themselves, though neither were a good or even useful story addition.
>chosen one is such a stupid concept
>OH MY GOOOOOOD LUUUUUUUKE RISE TO THE CALL OF ADVENTURE THIS IS YOUR FATHER'S LIGHTSABER HE WAS A GREAT JEDI
see
destiny and fate was always the key central theme in star wars you dumb ass.
Okay. It is different though, and if you can't grok that you're not very bright.
Which movie is this from?
Problem Child 2
Star Wars gays will defend anything in their shitty series
>midichorloians are just attracted to force sensitive people
i like how this ignores the fact quigon says the exact opposite. midichlorians are what give them connection to the force.
They have to say that to shut down the 'Why not give people midichlorians to make them Force sensitive?' question
Because the midichlorians are part of your body.
>midichlorians as a concept predate a new hope
head canon sisters it's not fair..... I get that star wars is about fate and destiny but why can't I be a jedi master too it's not fair....
>Lucasfilm maintains that midi-chlorians were first conceived by George Lucas as early as 1977. However, there is no evidence of this before the publication of The Making of Star Wars in 2007;
homie the whills were in the very first draft
>Kasdan: The Force was available to anyone who could hook into it?
>Lucas: Yes, everybody can do it.
>Kasdan: Not just the Jedi?
>Lucas: It’s just the Jedi who take the time to do it.
>Marquand: They use it as a technique.
>Lucas: Like Yoga. If you want to take the time to do it, you can do it; but the ones that really want to do it are the ones who are into that kind of thing. Also like karate.
So measuring midichlorian count is essentially pointless. Jedi can already sense how strong someone is with the Force.
you laugh but without the mitochondria in your body, you wouldn't be able to do yoga.
>Lucas: It’s just the Jedi who take the time to do it
> anyone can learn to deflect bolts from a training drone with a lightsaber while blindfolded in about 10 minutes, they just don't because reasons
it takes time okay, not everybody is rich enough to have the privilege of 10 minutes of free time.
You could move to a far far galaxy and hope the timing is right when you get there
>wow invisible microscopic organisms in your blood decide your destiny before your birth that is an interesting and philosophically deep literary device
midichlorians raise more questions than they answer and enrich the story. They were always part of the force, they were in the script before a new hope came out.
Questions that will never be answered don't enrich stories. They're meaningless filler to sate morons.
RLMillennials will defund this scene.
>Qui Gon, the levelheaded and rational Jedi, is who introduces us to the concept of Midichlorians, representing the Jedi's beliefs in an age of enlightenment
>After Qui Gon dies, midichlorians stop being mentioned by the Jedi as they become more cultish and insular
>Only person to bring up midichlorians again is Palpatine, in exactly the same conversation where he talks about the narrow dogma of the Jedi and their incomplete view of the Force
>Lucas' sequel trilogy would have featured Whills and midichlorians heavily, implying that Luke took the order back on the right path like Qui Gon before him
>What are midichlorians?
>It's heroin
No one gives a frick about star wars. Its a dying franchise taking its last breaths. Same with Star Trek.
>a dying franchise
kek
Dying respectively since 1977 and 1966. Thats a lot of dying, oh wait, maybe its not...
>thing isn't dying [proceeds to talk about the 70s]
Quo-Gon would have saved Anakin, he's more like a father figure. Obi-won didn't have the discipline nor the appropriate knowledge to help Anakin's problems, he's a special needs child.
Obiwan never pretented to be a father figure, he was only more of brother towards Anakin
The implication is that while all living matter is connected to the "force", midichlorians act as a physical embodiment of the will of the force, only present in some people.
It's pretty clear there is a wide range of mc concentrations. It seems to be more about taking appropriate action with one has, if one wants to (or in the Jedi case, kidnapped and made to if you have been identified as having a specific amount or above).
Georg Lucas Mentions midichlorians in the 1977 making of star wars documentary
> Luminous beings are we, right hand circularly polarized light of 374.7 Angstroms to be specific
There was always some kind of biological component to Force use given that the original 1977 film hinted that it was hereditary (Luke can use the Force because his father could use the Force). What's the issue?
This scene is based because it shows you the state of the Jedi at the time of the prequels. They were very “modern” and therefore soulless. Read Decline of the West and you’ll understand.
>silicon based organisms cannot have midichlorians and can't wield the Force
bit racist
It's presumptuous, not racist.
>Mystic Space Knight order that has pretty much totally lost its way are literally reducing thr force to just some numbers.
It kinda makes sense with the overall story but like everything in the prequels its a chore to actually watch unfold in the film.
>A young Jedi named Darth Vader, who was a pupil of mine until he turned to evil, helped the Empire hunt down and destroy the Jedi knights. He betrayed and murdered your father. Now the Jedi are all but extinct. Vader was seduced by the dark side of the Force.
>helped to hunt down
Because he was the only one who could sense them. Obviously Order 66 wasn't part of the lore when Lucas wrote the first movie.
The backstory Lucas had in mind prior to the prequels involved Anakin as a kind of backstabbing serial killer.
>involved Anakin as a kind of backstabbing serial killer.
I mean..
Well, yeah, but it was over a span of time and over the course of his missions as a Jedi. Of course with that backstory you run into the "How long should it take before people catch on?" question, as well as the fact it doesn't make for as dramatic a climax to a story centered around Anakin like Lucas chose to do with the prequels. Not hard to see why Lucas changed his mind and went with something else.
>this 20 second scene caused the meltdown of an entire generation of neckbeards
How is Lucas so based?
I cover my eyes and ears during this scene. I don't understand why Lucas did this.
A true fall from grace
This and "I HATE YOU!" are the only good things in the prequels.
i thoroughly enjoy all the scenes in Episode II and III with Anakin standing around brooding deeply. especially on Mustafar after he has slaughtered the separatist leaders and waits for Obi-Wan. something about a tragic broken figure silently weeping while he contemplates the twisted wreckage his life has become.
>Anakin only exists because the Sith tried to use the Force to create an all-powerful evil being but the midichlorians rejected this and impregnated Shmiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii Skywalker instead
>also it ended up mostly working anyway lol
>Spielberg was preparing Jaws there at that time. On one occasion, Lucas and John Milius visited the studio space after hours where Spielberg showed them the giant mechanical shark undergoing construction. Spielberg grabbed the controls and began excitedly showing them how the mechanical beast worked, opening the enormous jaws which made a loud grinding noise like an oversized bear trap. Lucas climbed a ladder and poked his head inside the open mouth to see how it worked and Spielberg closed the jaws on him. As they laughed at Lucas’ flailing Spielberg realised that the mouth wouldn’t open, a troubling premonition of the mechanical failures on the film to come. Finally the mouth was pried apart and Lucas freed himself
Why did Spielberg save him and doom cinema bros?
based
the left column made me laugh
When will you guys learn? It's actually fricking genius but like typical entitled morons you guys hate that the artist has autonomy and isn't succumbing to what the fans wanted.
Go shill your gay furry Youtuber elsewhere.
This, the prequels were too high brow for the Capeshitters.
The prequels directly led to modern capeshit you utter fricking pseud
>Hasn’t watched the prequels
>Doesn't study film
Marvel created the capeshit era of film once they found their reddit crowd niche, in fact, when they made the first Iron man movie its build similar, or darker, to Dark Night Trilogy. It wasn’t until later they found a disgusting consumer audience that Art had to be degraded.
Watch this video, maybe you’ll learn something.
The prequels are just capeshit with a Star Wars shine. Every single notable aspect of them is something that capeshit used only a few years later
>II and III use shitty digital cameras that lack
>overuse of CGI and blue/greenscreen to create unconvincing digital sets
>a focus on flash and style over any meaningful substance
>lame memeable quips so morons like you can pretend they're good simply because you recognise your favourite reddit "joke"
>characters you recognise from better films/stories appear for forced, misused cameos just so you can clap at them
Pic very much related
the bait isn't even fun anymore, this is just sad
go back
>frog poster
>prequelgay
i know you people are zoomer newbies, but you guys could try a bit harder at not making yourselves look like fools
>>II and III use shitty digital cameras that lack
of CGI and blue/greenscreen to create unconvincing digital sets
Pic related. George Lucas said that most critics don't know much about movies, their history, and the tech behind them, so they can't grasp or give informed opinions. And he is 100% right. Thats why youtube critics always dissect plot, plotholes and the meaning, and symbology of the "plot". Because you dont need to have any knowledge about film to do so. Anyone can dissect a narrative. But to talk about the actual medium you need to know about it.
This is one of the reasons why Armond White is unironically so pleasant to read. Even with some moronic (aka based) takes you enjoy his encyclopedic knowledge of the history of them medium. You know he knows his shit. He is not quoting tarantino, nolan and shawshank redemption. You might be a film buff, but then White talks about a movie you have never heard off and explains to you why its a landmark of cinema. All of that in a Green Hornet vs Ultron: dawn of infinity godzillas review. I remember some homosexual on youtube complaining about how boring the pod racing was because the camera pans all moved to the right. But thats something you would know if you knew basic film making. In his ignorance, it was some kind of mistake.
Marvel has destroyed cinema. Marvel is the embodiment of the very thing that George Lucas and Steven Spielberg feared what would happen to cinema as a result of the success of their own films; it would become nothing more than an eye-candy themepark ride spectacle instead of actually looking deep into and sharing the human experience.
Lucas is the primary reason why films are so soulless today.
You are actually moronic, they aren't even remotely the same. Every single one of those Marvel films is the exact same, with the same formula, the same beats, the same timing of the jokes, the same color pallate, the same fricking everything. You could mix and match any one of the characters and scenarios in each one of those movies and you wouldn't notice. It all has that gross Disney shit-smeared polish of sunshine and happiness and that the heroes are never ever in real danger and are able to wink into the camera that they too are in on the joke that its just a theme park cartoon with over-saturated colors as the actors play in front of a greenscreen. Disney banned theatres from showing other films during the Star Wars sequel shit and it hurt them and theatres in the long run as a result of word of mouth saying how terrible it was. Its just cookie cutter assembly line shit with no substance, no depth, no coherency and are literally forgotten by the time you walk out of the theatre and all that remains lingering in your memory is the post credit scene that ties into the previous shit movie to get you excited for the next coming out in a month. Bland, non-offensive unchallenging garbage for mass consumption and caters to China. Non-stop for damn near 20 fricking years now.
Disney killed cinema. Disney wipes its ass on art and film as an artform medium. Francis and Scorcese are %150 right in that every one of these movies are interchangable crap that is not distinct from anything else. It can't die fast enough. The next big thing isn't going to come out of Hollywood or Disney no matter how much money they throw at it; make your own kino, guys.
>implying Lucas didn't pave the way for filmmakers to become much lazier and less creative by relying on CG studios to do 3/4s of the work
Also 99% of major big-budget films are now shot on digital mainly because of him.
>develop new technology
>somebody else uses technology badly
>hurr guy who made technology is the cause of this
smoothbrain logic
except George Lucas also used the technology badly, hence why his prequels (the second one in particular) aged like fricking milk and there's constant immersion breaking
>except George Lucas also used the technology badly
?
Yes? Attack of the Clones was the first major movie to be shot on digital and Lucas didn't use the CG sparingly. In interviews and behind the scenes he was boasting about creating entire worlds and characters by using CG and how it was going to "innovate the industry". Him and James Cameron heavily pushing that shit in their movies is why we now have so many schlocky CG flicks with hardly any substance.
>is why we now have so many schlocky CG flicks with hardly any substance.
I wasn't aware Lucas and Cameron are directing those movies
They certainly contributed to the rise of them. Both the PT and Avatar prioritized "innovation" over good story telling and writing.
>guy invents a new hedge trimmer
>someone buys it and cuts their hedge in a way you don't like
>blame the guy who made the trimmer
How can you not see that this is drooling moron logic? Lucas and Cameron have nothing to do with other people making shitty movies. Lazy movies existed before them and will exist after them regardless of the technology.
And to use the Prequels and Avatar as examples of lazy movies is just laughable, it only shows you care more about plothomosexualry than cinema
>it only shows you care more about plothomosexualry than cinema
> narrative cinema doesn't need good scripts!!
when will this meme die?
They have good scripts though? What the frick is wrong with Avatar's story?
If I invent a cheaper way for studios to make films, those studios are going to use that tech regardless if it affects the quality or not. It's the fact that he called it "innovation" when in the long run it's turned out to be about 100 steps back than what we got decades ago.
>it only shows you care more about plothomosexualry than cinema
I care about films being believable, engaging, and well made. The PT and Avatar don't have much to offer outside of gawking at their special effects and action scenes. Both of the directors have earlier works that show that they know how to write great stories with believable characters. Meanwhile the PT and Avatar have characters that are either bland and unmemorable, or just archetypes.
>those studios are going to use that tech regardless if it affects the quality or not.
Right, and before CGI took off they were using the cheapest alternative at the time, so what does it have to do with Lucas/Cameron what people do with their tech?
>It's the fact that he called it "innovation" when in the long run it's turned out to be about 100 steps back
But it hasn't. Digital filmmaking still has far higher potential than film no matter how much you whine and shit your pants
>I care about films being believable, engaging, and well made
You clearly don't if you're whining about the prequels lol
>so what does it have to do with Lucas/Cameron what people do with their tech?
They were the ones who heavily pushed it in the industry and made it the norm for big blockbusters to use heavy CG. Neither of them used it sparingly.
>But it hasn't. Digital filmmaking still has far higher potential than film no matter how much you whine and shit your pants
It arguably looks much worse, someone posted a miniature that they used for Geonosis but the main reason why it looks "fake" to so many people was because of it being shot on digital. This can apply to most modern flicks, especially capeshit.
>You clearly don't if you're whining about the prequels lol
Nothing about the prequel trilogy is believable or engaging. All of the characters behave like aliens.
>CGI bad because I said so
Done with you gays lmao
If you don't like the movies why are you even here 20 years later crying about them?
I gave you a clear reason why heavy CG makes a world and the overall film much more unbelievable. It's not my fault that your zoomer brain is conditioned to expect it in every flick you watch.
>If you don't like the movies why are you even here 20 years later crying about them?
Why do you get so defensive when someone else says they don't like them 20 years later?
Black person I just don't care. I've yet to hear a compelling argument why Lucas pioneering new special effects in the 70s is le good but doing it in the 2000s is le bad. I also don't see why I'm supposed to care if the effects in a 20 year old movie look dated. It's not like the OT doesn't look old as frick too.
>CGI isn’t “bad” just like cartoons aren’t “bad”, the problem is that it doesn’t match the original feel if Star Wars.
Weird how only you seem to have that issue
>>>CGI isn’t “bad” just like cartoons aren’t “bad”, the problem is that it doesn’t match the original feel if Star Wars.
>Weird how only you seem to have that issue
Prequel gays have now devolved to gaslighting. "Only you thinks the prequels are bad" lmao dude get real.
>gaslighting
go back holy fricking shit
> you are the only person who complained about the usage of CGI in Star Wars
Ok dude.
neckbeards aren't people
Hey frick you buddy.
Every single person who wasn't a young child when those movies came out thought they looked dodgy. Particularly the second two, and particularly the third. The whole damn theater laughed at yoda spinning, myself with them.
>Weird how only you seem to have that issue
Prequelteens are sum'n else. Sum'n stupid.
>I've yet to hear a compelling argument why Lucas pioneering new special effects in the 70s is le good but doing it in the 2000s is le bad.
Have already stated why. The way they implemented CG wasn't "innovation", just a cheaper more accessible way for studios and filmmakers to create movies even though it does look worse when it isn't used sparingly.
>It's not like the OT doesn't look old as frick too.
The difference is that the CG in the prequels looked noticably out of place and fake even back then. The effects in the OT, while dated, still look pretty great for their time and won't age as badly as the effects used in the prequels.
>still look pretty great for their time and won't age as badly
the originals already aged like shit lol, thats why Lucas went back and touched them up with modern CGI
and now you moronic fricks go back and watch the OT and think 'wow this 70s movie really aged well!', when you're literally watching a movie with modern filmmaking technology
>the originals already aged like shit lol, thats why Lucas went back and touched them up with modern CGI
You mean the CGI that already looked dated even for late 90's/early 00's standards?
>and now you moronic fricks go back and watch the OT and think 'wow this 70s movie really aged well!', when you're literally watching a movie with modern filmmaking technology
Kind of like with the CG in the prequels, the changes Lucas made are out of place and distracting to most people. Pic related is a good example.
This is why I watch the despecialized editions or 4K77/4K80/4K83.
listen man it was really important to show audiences the side of an elephant at that moment. don't question it, you aren't the artist so you cant criticize it. it's the thought that counts anyway just stop bullying prequels okay!
Because delusional pseudointellectuals like you need to know the truth
CGI isn’t “bad” just like cartoons aren’t “bad”, the problem is that it doesn’t match the original feel if Star Wars. Imagine if someone made a prequel to Citizen Kane and made it filled with CGI and weird physics that don’t make sense. Even if the visuals are beautiful and the plot is interesting it would still just be fricking weird because it doesn’t appear to be the same world as the one taking place in Citizen Kane because in every shot is a smooth cgi sunset and every building looks fake and people look like cartoons. Maybe it could be good as a stand alone thing but if it doesn’t match the original in fundamental ways it’s stylistically incoherent.
Lucas believed he'd be able to change entire scenes, shots, even the narrative using computers alá Running Man! So in his mind nothing he'd done was etched in stone.
Not really, you're always going to get cheap, pastel trash in comparison to your success as a filmmaker. Lucas initiated his Art the way he wanted to. Don't blame Lucas or Spielberg, blame the low-brow consumers that don't like challenging, cutting-edge work -- put your money where your mouth is. Consumers want painfully mediocre, uncreative, safe mediums. Why even bother creating anything of substance if worthless sneaks want the piece of the cake without the work? CGI can be used well.
Those pretty shot are exactly the reason AOTC and ROTS kind of suck. They simply don’t look real. It’s like looking at a cartoon sunset vs a real sunset. When everything looks picture perfect and smooth and crisp in every shot the mind no longer believes what they are seeing. Also, the fighting style became like looney tunes in AOTC, in TPM 99% of it still felt pretty grounded in the physics of the OT. In AOTC and ROTS the physics are unbelievable it’s just watching bugs bunny or road runner. People are flying in helicopters with no windows at break neck speeds and their hair is barely blowing around at all people are flying through the air millions of feet in the sky and look calm as a cucumber yoda is doing Olympic flips sticking to walls like Spider-Man, it just looks weird af. TPM at least felt like a grounded film and used CGI a little bit sensibly.
Compare these fights.
OT:
TPM:
——it’s at this point on that the fights lose believability and goes into cartoon /looney tunes territory
AOTC:
ROTS:
This is because TPM was actually shot on film and made better use of location shooting and miniatures, in addition to not overusing CGI. It feels more grounded and visceral, something that was key to the success of the OT, and looks infinitely better than the other two prequels, which were shot on digital cameras and mainly on studio sets with bluescreen.
It's telling that the cinegrid in
is comprised mostly of the short Naboo and Tatooine scenes, which were the only ones shot on location. In reality, those scenes take up only like 15-20% of the actual film while the rest of it is shit that looks like this
Geonosis wasn't CGI though lol
Of course, what was I thinking, I forgot they put a floor in. Definitely not bluescreen CGI
The Volume is also pretty poor, it was alright the first time they used in The Mandalorian but then Disney started overusing it for everything and now it's just a modern version of old school rear projection. The actors have only a small space to work in, and you can tell they're just inside some air conditioned studio the whole time which doesn't exactly work when most of your Star Wars shows are set on a sweltering hot desert planet. It's completely sterile
It's also another thing about the prequels, the poor integration of CGI and live action. Most of the time the actors had absolutely no reference for the CGI characters they were meant to be interacting with. Jar Jar in TPM works because they had an actor there with a costume and then pasted the animated character over him, but then they got lazy with the next two films. These guys were literally just told to fight against air
Black personhomosexual
And uh, the tiny actors are there?
>get btfoed so you deflect
laffin
So why does
still look so fake and unconvincing?
While the background is real the CGI has an incredibly poor depth of field.
The background actually looks great I. These scenes, it’s the cgi characters galloping around. The physics look cartoonish. The weight distribution or the motion or something is just ridiculous.
It's not blurred properly and it has no physics rigging at all.
>These guys were literally just told to fight against air
Despite all their rage they are still just rats on a soundstage
they really overdid the sabers-deflect-blasters shit in the prequels.
But obviously there's a way to use it right, which they would on a feature film.
Jesus those bluescreens really look terrible. Imagine if they shot this now with the Volume.
>All the Jedi extras flailing around in the background
Something something soul something kino etc.
You bring a good point. But you are still missing one good piece from uncovering the conspiration.
Redditlettermedia gaslighted everyone who wasnt there or who was too young to know better. "How?" You might ask, "I have the dvds!"
Well, you see, while the prequels were shot in digital mostly, they were processed chemically in film and projected in film. The higher contrast, chemical process and grain of film helped to hide the shoddy cgi. This is how it was intended for us to watch them.
People who watched them in theaters and were old to know better, remember them in all their glory. Your dvd, is the digital version without any of the chemical enhancements. Your dvd version is not the way it was projected in theaters. Your dvd version looks like shit and RLM convinced everyone that this is the real version and the rest is nostalgia.
This scan looks a bit dark, but you can already see how good it looks most of the times. You can even see the Senator room and it actually looks fine.
1:24-1:30 This one straight up looks better than modern Marvel Disney.
Dont get zoomers and r3dditlettermedia tell you otherwise, they looked great, years ahead of anything before.
The fans never cared about rlm
This would be a good post if it weren't for the key fact that pure digital is actually how Lucas intended them to be viewed. The only reason those film-scanned versions even exist is because most cinemas (rightfully) resisted changing to the required projectors
>Lucas had stated that he wished to film The Phantom Menace on this [digital] format but Sony was unable to build the cameras quickly enough. In 2002, Attack of the Clones became the third film to be released that was shot entirely on a 24p digital camera (preceded by 2001's Jackpot and Vidocq). The cameras record in the 16:9 HDCAM format (1080p), although the image was cropped to a 2.40:1 widescreen ratio. The area above and below the 2.40 extraction area was available for Lucas to reframe the picture as necessary in post-production. Despite Lucas' efforts to persuade movie theaters to switch to digital projectors for viewing of Episode II, few theaters did.
I'm well aware, Lucas made a bet by wanting the prequels to be set with an innovative tech of its time. People thought PS2 graphics looked like real life for it's time, some are better than others, but I believe it's unfair to cherry-pick a 2 hour-movie that was otherwise shot almost experimentally. You win some parts you lose them, the clone troopers being animated is a remarkable feat.
It's COMPLETELY fair to criticize these movies for being shot "experimentally" in the first place. No aspect of a director's technical or creative decision making is protected from criticism.
Prequelgays often seem to think that intent matters more than the actual execution and effect
That does seem to be the way with them. It's the participation-award generation, they think people deserve praise just for trying.
'execution' in this case just means following mainstream hollywood conventions right?
No, it just means being good
No, you fricking zoomer. Execution means the actual act of DOING IT. Not your intent, but what you ACTUALLY DO.
Right, but every time one of you gays complains about the 'execution' of something, what you're talking about is just wanting it to be more generic. If these movies were rehashes of shit you'd already seen then you wouldn't be here complaining
That's fine, but that's not the point though. What I can't stand is lazy, uninformed takes by others, I've said many times that the gain and the higher contrast of the projectors helped hide the shoddy parts of the CGI, This is how it was meant to be watched.
>What I can't stand is lazy, uninformed takes by others,
It just looks bad.
>noo you're not informed
It looks bad.
>saying that doesn't take enough effort
It looks bad.
You're wrong, but despite what the incoherent meme video defending the special editions might try to goad you into accepting, Lucas's intent doesn't matter either way.
attack of the clones is my least favorite from the prequels so don't watch it often, but man padme riding on that beast looks really dumb
It's a complete disaster. The least they could have done is put her on a greenscreen mechanical bull and shaken the shit out of her for effect. But either they were too cheap for even that, too lazy, portman too stuckup, or they really thought this end result looked good. I don't know which possibility is worse.
at some points it really looks like they just pasted a freeze frame of her in a seating position, lol
This scene just like most other fight scenes in the prequel look fake but it's not so much because of the effects than it's the fight choreography, or rather, the lack of it. 100% Lucas just gave the CG artists instructions to "I don't know put some jedi and droids in the background fighting, or something" and the artists, not knowing what to do, just had the droids stand there with sticks up their arse and the jedi randomly swirling their sabers in the air for no reason.
The pattern repeats in every fight scene, nobody is ever trying to take cover or use tactics of any kind. No one has seemingly any training, situational awareness or even basic self-preservation.
I can't believe in these scenes because I can't believe the geeks casually frolicking around in them are warriors. It's got nothing to do with the CG.
>all these words, refuted by the screencaps you posted which all look like crap
Capeshit is exactly what everyone wanted Lucas to make though. All the fricking complaints from boomers were the movies being too different from the OT
Then Abrams shits out TFA and you homosexuals eat it up and beg for more, its pathetic
>Then Abrams shits out TFA and you homosexuals eat it up and beg for more, its pathetic
>implying
It's entirely possible to dislike both the prequels and sequels, dumbass. It's not one or the other
The prequels at least had good ideas and imagination which the sequels didn't, so it beats them out there, but as films they're still laregely joyless digital shit
>I didn't fight to get my freedom in order to do what the studios would do.
This part always gets me. What is a person supposed to do if they just want to make movies?
If you go work for a studio they'll tell you to shut the frick up and churn out capeshit, and anything else you make they'll cut to shit and ruin. Even if you fund your own personal fricking studio, mouthbreathing general audiences will cry about you making YOUR own movies the way YOU want them.
I don't get it at all. To all the people who hate the Prequels, why are you here? Why do you keep watching these movies if you hate Lucas and you hate Star Wars? There are an infinite amount of movies shat out yearly made exactly to your tastes, so why do you pick out one guy who makes things NOT aimed at you, and demand he change them?
of CGI and blue/greenscreen to create unconvincing digital sets
The only objective criticism is bad CGI, and even then, one could argue George Lucas pioneered CGI and AotC was the first film ever shot fully on digital camera.
Most of the prequels criticism is either factually incorrect, like Jango's head not falling out of the helmet, when George Lucas provided a shot clearly showing where the head went, or it's the sort of criticism, where George Lucas did Star Wars not the way you would have done it, and your headcanon was different from that of Star Wars creator. His style didn't suit your taste, and that's perfectly fine. But so many entitled manchildren just chimped out, because Lucas told a story the way he wanted to tell, as if the movies were objectively shit. It's not like he didn't know people would criticize it. He was aware of kid Anakin possible backlash, AotC romance and so on. Nobody ever asks the question why. He didn't pander to manchildren with le ebin Vader hallway sequence.
And yes, as you have noted, TCW expanded the prequels, it didn't fix them as some idiots like to think. Everything was already in the movies, and TCW makes them even better. And people tend to forget, that TCW is George Lucas, and they all praise Filoni exclusively. Without Lucas you get Rebels. And now The Mandalorian, painfully mediocre, uncreative, safe show, that is meant to fix Disney's sequels, not expand Star Wars universe and not add anything new.
People's nostalgia for the OT cost us Star Wars. The sequels were a direct reaction to the supposed objective hate of the Prequels. Studios are not creative, they are reactive.
The prequels and sequels are both shit, and in a couple regards are shit for similar reasons despite being very different overall. I know reality makes it harder for peanut-brains to grapple with, but it's a false dichotomy.
Telling the truth to these people doesn't work.
>posts screencap from 2021
kek
>they made the first Iron man movie its build similar, or darker, to Dark Night Trilogy
So this is the power of prequelgay cinematic analysis
Name a better duel
Cloud City. Death Star 2.
>the galaxy is full of futuristic hightech gadgets and tech
>somehow noone has figured out how the force works
Ofcourse it makes sense. Its even better, when you realize that the jedi are now extinct and have become this mysterious urban myth.
The midichlorians don't necessarily demystify the Force. I see it the same way some Reddit-types say "Love is just chemicals and electrodes in the brain" and whatnot. Sure, there is scientific truth in that statement, but it would be ridiculous to consider something so immense and powerful as love the same way one might consider passing gas or popping a pimple.
The Jedi - who, at this point in the story, are considered to be an arm of the Republic and are responsible for upholding peace throughout it's territories - use the midichlorian test to identify potential initiates for the Order. It's not particularly a spiritual or mystic process, but it's necessary for the world they live in. But the Force, like love, is a much higher power. It can unite planets or destroy them; it tells us of the past and future; it is an energy that unities us all. Most importantly, it requires a level of faith that can't simply be measured or inspired with a machine.
Reminder that if you dislike the sequels it's simply because you're too stupid and uncultured to fully understand them, or you're just mad that Disney made the films the way they wanted to make them and didn't adhere to your headcanon
what I didn't understand is:
>midichlorians are attracted to the force sensitive
>jedi, themselves force sensitive, rely on medichlorians to detect other force sensitives
what doesn't make sense about that?
well prior it had been established that they could use the force to sense others strong in the force. why not use that time to develop a human aspect in the film rather than another mechanical one
why have midiclorians sense the force instead of having humans do it? midiclorians don't make anything simpler, nor do they make the story any richer. why do they even exist? what implications do they have to the story? anything at all? they're utterly pointless, and for that reason, they are bad writing.
It's heroin.
>go watch a movie from the 40s
>complain that the effects are bad and say the director must have been a hack
heh I am very intelligent
>go watch a movie from the 40s
>admire the genuine in-camera stunts, on-set effects, and makeup for their artistry and craft
it's hard to appreciate cgi when it's used in every movie today
CG effects were not new in 2001 there's no excuse for how shitty AOTC looks.
I like the old rubber suit godzilla movies. The effects are very dated, but (in the good ones) done with soul and are very fun to watch.
This is soulless:
It's lazy, like godzilla fighting in the wilderness with no scale model builds to smash. Those godzilla movies are shit, I don't like those ones. I like the ones where they have really intricate models of cities and smash them up. It doesn't look real, it's a very dated effect. But it's cool and soulful, not lazy, and that's what really counts. And this is where the prequels fail.