Another George Lucas Star Wars live action TV show thread!

[Spaceman Spiff]

One problem Lucas has always had is an inability to recognize when budget limitations have worked out in his favor.

Take Jabba, for instance. He was supposed to appear in Star Wars, but they couldn't pull it off. As a result, the first two movies made mention of a mysterious mobster figure who was after Han, leaving the audience to wonder about him until Return of the Jedi. When we finally see him, he doesn't disappoint.

Now, if you throw in the special editions, the first movie spoils that suspense right away. Worse, the threat of Jabba is completely dashed by making him look like a bit of a chump. Han steps on his tail, for crying out loud.

Anyway, all that to say Lucas needs to recognize the opportunities within his limitations, instead of shelving everything and deciding it can't be done.

 

[I Grok Spock]

I guess he wants the visual scope of the prequels, which either means lots of post-production CGI or lots of location shooting - both of which are expensive. I'm guessing that it's the former when he talks about the process of getting costs down. I'm sure the studios would be thrilled to make today's $150M summer blockbuster effectstravaganzas for $60M, but I wonder what the path is they see to get there.

 

[Dac]

The quality of FX in the original trilogy would still look well enough for TV, and can be done at a low budget. I wish he'd go the route of retro-Star Wars.

Err, no. The FX in the OT were all models (for the sake of argument at least). Models are way, WAY too expensive for a TV show, especially if Lucas is trying to get it done cheap.

Not to mention the production time needed to make model shots. That's a stupid idea when Lucas wants to make a show cheaply and quickly.

 

[Distorted Humor]

The quality of FX in the original trilogy would still look well enough for TV, and can be done at a low budget. I wish he'd go the route of retro-Star Wars.

Err, no. The FX in the OT were all models (for the sake of argument at least). Models are way, WAY too expensive for a TV show, especially if Lucas is trying to get it done cheap.

Not to mention the production time needed to make model shots. That's a stupid idea when Lucas wants to make a show cheaply and quickly.

Indeed, Lucas concern is that he wants to do inexpensive FX, (which means CGI) but at a lot better CGI then currently workable under TV budget.

 

[I Grok Spock]

Anyway, all that to say Lucas needs to recognize the opportunities within his limitations, instead of shelving everything and deciding it can't be done.

I find it interesting that the two films I like best (SW & ESB) were the ones he was least able to realize his vision. Makes me wonder if they would have been as good if he had unlimited resources then.

 

[O'Dib]

Star Trek was done for TV with models. Once you have them made, isn't it pretty easy and quick to film?

 

[Kegg]

Star Trek was done for TV with models. Once you have them made, isn't it pretty easy and quick to film?

Even the Star Trek franchise had basically abandoned models by the time of ENT, although DS9 and VOY had been using CGI models increasingly as those programs progressed.

You can do pretty decent work with CGI on a TV budget (Battlestar Galactica comes to mind here)... but it's not at the level of the prequel trilogy, and prequel trilogy levels is appearing what George wants.

 

[Distorted Humor]

Star Trek was done for TV with models. Once you have them made, isn't it pretty easy and quick to film?

It is more time consuming and costly to do models. Trek had a larger budget then most shows, and was more conservative with the methods of production. For example, a lot of the later DS9 shots you would have a hard time doing on a movie budget and timeframe using models. For example, they could never do the last shot of "Call to Arms" without CGI, as it would take too long to do all those model shots.

Star Trek TNG was able to do what they did in the model era by using a LOT of stock footage and doing editing on Tape instead of Film. That is why if you watch TNG episodes in the row, you will start reconizing "Enterprise-D at warp shot #3" or other establishing shots.

Babylon 5 was able to be produced since they proved that you could make workable FX for a lot less using video-toasters.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

I know Star Wars is supposed to feel big, but Caprica got made, presumably on a similar budget to what a Star Wars show would have and they had FX work in damned near every scene of the show.

For whatever reason, my hunch is that Caprica was a lot cheaper. They didn't spent a lot of time zooming around in space, and there was a lot of cheap scenes of actors just talking, you know, old fashioned drama stuff. If Lucas had acting and writing of that caliber (hopefully with writing a bit more focused) maybe he could have $$$ on the SFX?

I'd like to see an animated series in the style of The Clone Wars, featuring characters from the original trilogy, taking place between the movies.

I don't know how well it would do with fans; it's just what I'd like.

YES! Between the movies or after the movies or both. If the much-derided PT era can do well in the ratings, then the beloved OT should do just fine. The audience isn't huge - it's just a cable show - but combine the kids who love everything to do with Star Wars with the grownups who will watch a well written show, and that's more than enough to support an animated series, particularly when you factor in all the increased sales of toys, videos, etc.

I think a post-ROTS show with just Ahsoka and maybe young Boba Fett as the only familiar characters (with maybe occasional visits from Obi Wan when he's not on babysitting duties on Tatooine) would work creatively and financially, nevermind the bonanza that Lucas could reap getting the OT characters back on the screen. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the ratings doubled or tripled.

 

[Dac]

I know Star Wars is supposed to feel big, but Caprica got made, presumably on a similar budget to what a Star Wars show would have and they had FX work in damned near every scene of the show.

For whatever reason, my hunch is that Caprica was a lot cheaper. They didn't spent a lot of time zooming around in space, and there was a lot of cheap scenes of actors just talking, you know, old fashioned drama stuff. If Lucas had acting and writing of that caliber (hopefully with writing a bit more focused) maybe he could have $$$ on the SFX?

Thing with that is - ships flying around in space is easy to do. So easy I was taken the piss out of at Uni when I presented an example of my previous work that was a series of flying spaceships. Big giant battles are easy. It's the compositing which takes time, even with blue screens and green screens sometimes you just gotta do an old fashioned rotoscope. And that takes a lot of time.

Towards the end of Caprica, all the stuff in V world where Zoe and Tamara transformed the city into the mountaintop monastery and in the finale when the Cylon's took out the STO terrorists were much more involved and complicated processes than a wing of TIE Fighters flying around an asteroid field.

And as for people saying BSG's vfx weren't as good as the prequels, have you people watched them lately? The visfx really haven't aged well, especially in Attack of the Clones. It looks really dated in some scenes. Zoic's work on the Resurrection Ship battle is easily equal to that of the Battle of Coruscant in terms of quality if not scale - and even then, if the show is set during the Empire era/rise of the rebellion, there shouldn't be any large scale battles to speak of.

 

[Dac]

Well, I guess there is also the issue of volume. BSG usually only had about 2 minutes worth of actual space battle FX shots in a battle scene. But then how much did Star Wars have in the films? It's more, yes, but if you went back and counted how long the screen was filled with pure FX shots, I don't think you'd have a figure which is drastically bigger than BSG's.

 

[Kegg]

And as for people saying BSG's vfx weren't as good as the prequels, have you people watched them lately? The visfx really haven't aged well, especially in Attack of the Clones.

Pretty much nothing Battlestar Galactica's done compares to the sheer density of CGI that we got in that film's early Coruscant scene.

And that's presumably another matter to consider here. Battlestar Galactica was almost entirely spaceship bound, with the rare exterior looking like shooting locations in Canada for some reason. The CGI on the series, which was good, was almost exclusively confined to spaceships and Cylons.

We have to remember though this isn't BSG, this is Star Wars. If Lucas wants to do stuff on say, Coruscant, that's flying cars, towering CGI skyscrapers, dozens of CGI alien residents, flying cars, etc. Similar problems face frequent locale Tattooine, which wasn't just not shot in Canada, it wasn't shot in America (ROTJ excepted). Narrowing my focus to the planet hopping alone, or dwelling at any one planet for a decent length of time and wanting to keep it to the film's standards and I can see why he doesn't think TV has the budget for it.

 

[jefferiestubes8]

the sheer density of CGI that we got in that film's early Coruscant scene.

I highly doubt that Lucasfilm would shoot a live-action Star Wars series scenes at the actual southern Tunisia location in Africa.
Surely during shooting for SWEp.I:TPM they shot 35mm plates without actors in it of all the wide shots and medium shots from the desert planet Tatooine scenes that could be reused from the 35mm film shot in 1997 and telecined at 4K resolution in 2015.
Or it could just be totally digitally recreated like they did for the the entire podracing scene which was computer-generated. Surely Lucasfilm saved all the CGI models and background digital mattes...
Yes green screen would be just fine for any scenes set on Tatooine...

 

[Kegg]

I highly doubt that Lucasfilm would shoot a live-action Star Wars series scenes at the actual southern Tunisia location in Africa.

Perhaps not, but I doubt they'd settle for the Canada-Planet routine of Battlestar Galactica either. Which does mean, as you pointed out, a very probable preponderance of CGI. And they could need CGI at dozens of distinct locations, quite possibly in every scene for all I know.

It's the sheer amount that is likely to outstrip BSG.

 

[Turtletrekker]

I highly doubt that Lucasfilm would shoot a live-action Star Wars series scenes at the actual southern Tunisia location in Africa.

Why not? Lucas shot The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles series on location all over the world. Egypt, Spain, Prague, Paris, Vienna, Italy, Russia, Poland, Africa the list goes on...

 

[Yevetha]

I just hope George wont mess this up.

 

[Dac]

I highly doubt that Lucasfilm would shoot a live-action Star Wars series scenes at the actual southern Tunisia location in Africa.

Perhaps not, but I doubt they'd settle for the Canada-Planet routine of Battlestar Galactica either. Which does mean, as you pointed out, a very probable preponderance of CGI. And they could need CGI at dozens of distinct locations, quite possibly in every scene for all I know.

It's the sheer amount that is likely to outstrip BSG.

I did mention the issue of volume up at the top of this page, and I agree - but like I also said, would a Star Wars TV show need to have a 15 minute action sequence every week? That's something I really, really doubt. A show about a bounty hunter or some smugglers which it has long rumored to be about would in my mind be very similar to Firefly. Granted, the FX in Firefly leave a lot to be desired, but that was nearly a decade ago now (fuuuuck) and at the end of the day it still told the story in an effective manner.

http://drexfiles.wordpress.com/2010/12/25/capracool-the-cg-sets-of-caprica-you-never-knew-about/

I really can't see a Star Wars TV show needing much more than what's seen in that reel.

 

[Kegg]

I did mention the issue of volume up at the top of this page, and I agree - but like I also said, would a Star Wars TV show need to have a 15 minute action sequence every week?

I'm not even necessarily saying an action scene every week. But maybe we have some conference scene on a planet like Coruscant and we have some big windows that look out onto the planet and all the buzzing activity there and boom.

Or to fit the 'bounty hunter' idea, maybe we have a seedy hive of scum and villainy that the bounty hunter's hanging out in, a real cantina environment with a half-dozen seedy-looking CGI aliens skulking about all over the frame.

That kind of thing.

 

[Harvey]

I highly doubt that Lucasfilm would shoot a live-action Star Wars series scenes at the actual southern Tunisia location in Africa.

Why not? Lucas shot The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles series on location all over the world. Egypt, Spain, Prague, Paris, Vienna, Italy, Russia, Poland, Africa the list goes on...

That series was a bit of a financial disappointment, though, wasn't it? Only 28 episodes were produced (though five were feature length episodes rather than hour-long ones) and some were never even aired. On top of that, Wikipedia lists a number of scripts that were written, but never put into production. Presumably, if the series had been more successful, Lucas would have produced these scripts as well in order to approach the more lucrative syndication package of 100 episodes.

 

[Broccoli]

^ There were 44 hour episodes produced. And it was amazingly expensive. However, at the time, nothing like that had ever been done before for television. If they do go the world-wide, on location route, maybe they learned from Young Indy on how to do it more economically doable.