I'm really enjoying the special features disc. Last night, I watched "Star Warriors", a docu about the 501st Legion fans as they auditioned for and participated in the Rose Parade. It was surprisingly entertaining.
Star Wars Eps I-VI Blu-Ray Release - Review Thread
- Thread starter Candlelight
- Start date
The online comic "Shorpacked" mentioned this today and I had the same thought when I saw it. The blu-ray of Star Wars is such a good picture you can see fingerprints on Vader's helmet. It actually looks pretty rough through most of the film. By Empire they must have hired a full-time buffer for it because it's perfect and shiny throughout.
One of the things I really love about ANH is how rough it is. They were creating an entire universe out of nothing. But Lucas somehow still made his 10 million dollar film at the time look like it cost 40 million.
I completely agreee. It really does look like it was filmed in places that are not quite on Earth.. every background is so full of detail. And the Death Star corridors look fantastic.
also, I love how, when their blaster fights, you can see a lot of smoke, real smoke, not animated smoke, and this was something that the prequels didn't have.
The sets look like real places
Yeah, Lucas was big in the idea of the "worn universe." Everything looked like it had use. When you CGI everything in the prequels, you lose that.
As I recall, Vader's eye lenses were red and you could see his eyes at times in ANH.
They weren't visible on the standard DVD? I remember seeing them, but it looked more like smears.
Vader must have choked the guy who kept poking his head when he was sleeping.
I still think the prequels do have that used universe feel to a degree. The Trade Federation droids and stuff might be CG, but they still visibly had lots of rust/damage/dirt etc. Same goes for the later Seperatist stuff (Which is sort of an extension of the TF anyway), the Pods, and the proto-Imperial Republic fleet/Clones all looked 'used' still.
I think the reason this misconception occurs is mainly because of the Naboo ships which were largely featured in the prequels. They were supposed to represent the Golden Age of the Republic and hence were all shiny (Although in AOTC, when we see a brief glimpse of the Naboo fighters that have some scuff marks and damage). But everything else still had a 'used' look IMO.
There were real sets and locations used in the films as well. A good chunk of Naboo was shot in Europe, you can even spot the same set they used for LAWRENCE OF ARABIA's Cairo scenes in AOTC.
Also for the gas/Dioxis scene in TPM, they did use real smoke. In fact it's pretty much the only shot in the film without an effect.
I think the reason this misconception occurs is mainly because of the Naboo ships which were largely featured in the prequels. They were supposed to represent the Golden Age of the Republic and hence were all shiny (Although in AOTC, when we see a brief glimpse of the Naboo fighters that have some scuff marks and damage). But everything else still had a 'used' look IMO.
There were real sets and locations used in the films as well. A good chunk of Naboo was shot in Europe, you can even spot the same set they used for LAWRENCE OF ARABIA's Cairo scenes in AOTC.
Also for the gas/Dioxis scene in TPM, they did use real smoke. In fact it's pretty much the only shot in the film without an effect.
Yeah. I was under the impression that the use/unused contrast between the two trilogies was intentional.
Yeah, I remember Rick Berman saying once in an interview that the scene with "the vent" was the only one without a digital effect.
I believe I found another. After Obi Wan and Qui Gonn land in the cargo bay they are in a corner watching the battle droids. The shot of them in the corner didn't have any effects.
Those Ricks need to be rolled.
I admit that I saw that shot right when I went to get this one, but I had already done most of the work and I thought it was too funny to ignore. And yes, I was going to come clean if you hadn't called me on it.
It always looked smudged/dirty...but now they definitely look like fingerprints.
I agree that the practical locations look far more real than the prequels. But, the prequels were going for the grander scale.
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yHJOz_y9rZE&feature=player_embedded[/yt]
I have it on my wish list. It sounds like these are the way to see them since they were made for 2-D and not the 3-D conversion at the cinema in February. I'm looking forward to the commentaries and the high quality of HD.
Anyone else get them for Christmas and just saw them this week for the first time in HD?
Anyone else get them for Christmas and just saw them this week for the first time in HD?
