>TPM looks and feels like a Star Wars movie >TFA looks

>>64650818
>TFA looks and feels like a Star Wars movie

When will this meme end?

>>64650818
The problem wasn't shooting digitally the problem was shoddy CGI that made it almost look animated

Many movies are shot digitally and done well.

>>64650857
>When will this meme end?

When will THIS meme end?

File: Drunk nazi.png (379KB, 502x460px) Image search: [Google]

379KB, 502x460px

>>64650818
>TFA looks and feel exactly like ANH minus the timeless classic status

Fixed that for you, f@m.

>>64651022
it wasnt shoddy it was too early and cg wasnt gud enough yet

The Phantom Menace:
>For Star Wars Episode I, sets were only built as tall as the actors' heads. The rest of the sets were created using CGI. However, Liam Neeson's height necessitated the rebuilding of the sets, which cost the production team an extra $150,000.

Clones and Sith:
>I'll try shooting on a greenscreen. That's a good trick.

>>64650818
>TFA looks and feels like a Star Wars movie

no, it doesn't it looks and feels like a JJ Abrams movie with way too many close in shots, every other scene there's a giant fat face on the screen it's irritating, also fucking stupid frantic pacing and >plot

File: 345903250936.jpg (157KB, 1196x504px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 1196x504px

>>64651271
watch some of the shots in TPM. a great deal are very well shot and beautiful to look at. it's defendable as film because they put in a lot of effort. the other two were practically shot in a computer.

>>64651447
theres nothing wrong with shooting digitally but it was very early generation digital filmmaking and hasnt aged well

File: images (2).png (2KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 500x281px

>>64651447
>>64651469
>35mm
>Has somewhere between 4-6k practical resolution
>AOTC and ROTS were shot in 2K
>They master copies of this are pixel for pixel nearly the same resolution as the bluray
Ahahahahaha

>>64651469
>there's nothing wrong with shooting digitally
>implying

File: it aint sheev.png (92KB, 750x836px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 750x836px

SOME SHEEVS ARE BORN

>>64651553
>>64651554
That's my point though. Early generation digital films were limited but now we have cameras that can shoot at 8K resolution.

Most of the arguments for celluloid no longer apply.

File: Blackhat.jpg (430KB, 1293x2048px) Image search: [Google]

430KB, 1293x2048px

>>64651554
pic related was shot entirely digitally and even if you didn't like the movie you have to admit it was aesthetically great

>>64651553
>Has somewhere between 4-6k practical resolution
Only the negatives. The release print doesn't have that level of detail.

>>64651616
>That's my point though.
Umm don't take this the wrong way but I wasn't disagreeing with you.

>>64650818

Shooting all digital in 2002 and rendering all of your movie in fucking Windows XP or some early iteration of Mac OSX was ambitious and it backfired horribly. Shooting digital in 2015/2016 is fine, at this point it's up to the director and cinematographer to fuck it up, the medium doesn't matter outside of a few niche conditions.

>>64651690
oh okay I guess I misunderstood your tone

>>64651699
okay look we can give those movies shit but Lucas did revolutionaize digital filmmaking which has had good effects on movies

Star Wars use to be about pushing boundaries that is until the regressive TFA came about.

>>64651740
Hollywood used to be about creating new memories

Now it's just about remind you of old ones

>>64650818
>TFA looks and feels like a Star Wars movie
it felt like a cheap copy that was marginally better than AOTC and RotS but that doesnt make it a good movie only the 3rd worst ever made
i agree though TPM isnt that bad if you ignore jaja binks

>>64651740
>>64651756
/tv/ used to be about discussing movies, not being contrarians to feel cool

>>64651844
Debate the point though

What exactly did TFA do that was groundbreaking or unique?

>>64651874
I would but no matter what I say you'll respond by calling me Reddit. Its not worth it.

>>64651910
no I won't, like honestly im actually curious how you found anything in TFA memorable because absolutely nothing to me stood out

File: c13a4d6d11f5511bc91faf8d5b97.jpg (7KB, 179x200px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 179x200px

>>64651844
>/tv/ used to be about discussing movies

>>64651735

Lucas only revolutionized digital film making by having a hand in the creation of Pixar by proxy. That's it. There's nothing revolutionary about the effects in the prequels, they *always* looked fake.

>>64651948
I dont mean the CGI, I mean actually shooting digitally on digital cameras was pretty new for the time and Star Wars doing it made people take it seriously.

>>64651973
It was more significant in getting digital projection in theaters.

>>64651973

Too bad it resulted in such shitty movies! I don't give a rat's ass about "revolutionizing" special effects if it means sacrificing the overall quality of the film.

>TFA looks and feels like a Star Wars movie
Well no shit considering that it apes New Hope. At least ROTS introduced more Sonic The Hedgehog level planets with Lava Zone

>>64652004
true but im saying you cant really ignore the fact that it was pretty groundbreaking

youre right that that doesnt give it an excuse to be bad, but at least it pushed boundaries and made a difference

>>64651447
i rewatched the phantom menace yesterday, some of the shots were pretty good but a lot were just messy and lacked focus. there were shots like the long distance ones of shmi when anakins fixing his pod that were out of place, a lot of the angles were boring in general. but i like the directing far more than in episodes 2 or 3

>>64652050
Jakku wasn't really like Tatooine though. It was an even bigger shithole actually, everyone just lives in tiny groups and there's no proper towns like Mos Eisley. Also the planet Luke's on is nice enough.