Big Boy Laroux

Correct - the OT still had things that jibed with "a long, long time ago". The prequels were too shiny.

kgrogers1979

Things from a long long time ago can't be shiny?

The OT era is akin to the Dark Ages. The Empire took over and basically everything regressed. So looking at it that way, it makes sense why the PT could be shiny and the OT not so shiny.

hanshotfirst1138

Lucas argument-which makes sense- was that the PT actually depicts a more technologically advanced time before things fell into disrepair in the the OT era. Which doesn't really fucking matter now since almost every last "old" special effect has been digitally painted over to match the PT or whatever Lucas' whim was that week. But it was what Lucas called the "used" future. The idea was that just because it was futuristic didn't mean that it was shiny like 2001 and Star Trek. It wasn't the only film of the era to do it- Solaris, A Boy and His Dog, Mad Max, Planet of the Apes, Clockwork Orange, Omega Man-there were any number which did at the time. Though an interesting stylistic choice, it's probably mostly because of budgetary constraints. It's still popular-Serenity, etc.

Supermallet

Honestly, the issue isn't shiny vs. dusty. The issue is CGI vs practical. Things looked too artificial in the PT because they were mostly CGI. Things looked better to our eyes in the OT because they were practical.

And yes, I think there's tons of good looking CGI shots and characters out there, but Lucas pushed it so far that it gives the PT a particular look, and that look doesn't fit with the OT. It appears Abrams is trying to find the balance to retain the OT look while still getting the benefits of CGI.

kgrogers1979

Also, another thing is that while the PT may be more shiny, many things in the PT were technologically inferior to the things in the OT. For example, the Jedi Starfighters in the PT had external hyperdrives. The X-Wings in the OT had internal hyperdrives. So the X-Wings were actually superior despite not being shiny.

hanshotfirst1138

I don't think that CG is inherently the problem-you can make CG looked used and more realistic. The problem is that Lucas CG was so overwhelming and designed in such a way that everything looked cartoony and artificial.

stvn1974

Also in the PT they had the technology to fly across the galaxy, droids, lasers and cloning technology but they didn't have doctors that pregnant women would have gone to during childbirth.

RichC2

The PT had an issue with simply looking fake and staged.

Big Boy Laroux

Jesus, I didn't mean literally shiny vs dusty. My bad on word choice.

Everything in the PT looked newer by DESIGN, not physical age. You could look at a brand new car from the 50s and still know it's from the 50s. All of the designs of the PT (vehicles, clothes, etc) looked newer and fresher than the OT.

I do understand how things can hit a dark age after a period of amazing wealth, but so much so that all technology seems to regress? Poverty or not, technology always seems to advance through discovery.

In addition, everything in the PT looked slick, artificial, not real.

Ky-Fi

Yep, you hit the nail on the head.

hanshotfirst1138

You know, that's an odd expression. Where else would you hit a nail?

Josh-da-man

Watching the PT is like watching people playing video games.

Ky-Fi

You've never seen my attempts at carpentry.

Ky-Fi

Yes, and that's why I give a slight nod to Phantom Menace of the three--at least we got real stunt people during the climactic lightsaber battle.

Mabuse

Indeed. And it actually uses some real locations with minimal special effects augmentation.

PopcornTreeCt

Same.

Additional points:

+1 for Darth Maul
+1 for not having Hayden Christensen

Big Boy Laroux

-10000 for Jake Lloyd and Jar Jar.

But agree, if I had to pick one movie of the PT to watch, it would be phantom menace.

kgrogers1979

-10 for having Jake LLoyd

Christensen was annoying, but LLoyd was much worse.

Also, -1000000000000000000000000000 for introducing Jar Jar

Ky-Fi

Lloyd was less annoying than Christensen to me----and Christensen replacing Neeson's screen time was not an improvement.

PopcornTreeCt

Agreed. Forgot about Liam Neeson too, that cancels out Jar Jar.

joe_b

They announced at Celebration that Alan Dean Foster is writing the novelization. He did the same for the original Star Wars (though as a ghost writer) and authored the very first EU book "Splinter of the Mind's Eye".

mcnabb

No doubt Lucas got CGI-crazy in the PT, but I also believe that shooting AOTC/ROTS in Digital made things look even more video game-ish.

TPM was shot in 35mm, so it sort of holds up visually next to the OT, whereas AOTC/ROTS look like complete video games. The CGI environments are already too 'new' looking to begin with, thrown in that they aren't shot on film and it loses any sense of realism.

RocShemp

mcnabb

This family should be on Dr. Phil to iron out all of their issues!

RocShemp

Absentee father, child abuse (both physical and psychological), and potential sibling incest. Heck, if rumors about certain characters in this movie are true, it seems Sounds more like an episode of Jerry Springer.