In Theaters :: New in the cinema


You must be logged on My Town to use this service.

Page 2 of 2
Friday, May 20, 2005
Member since:
December 2003
I think this all comes down to one thing. Whether you're a "fan" or not. It seems to me that some people like myself, and a few other members here, fell in love with this series as a kid, and continue to love, and think of the Star Wars universe like a best friend you've known all your life. The "believers" are willing to forgive the shortcomings of the film(s), and are able to see the things that Lucas did intentionally, and understand it as part of the story, as well as see all of the positive things about the film. The "non-believers" have fun tearing the film apart, and can't find any redeeming qualities. Though, isn't it funny that they also paid for a ticket to see something they (supposedly) hate? What's also interesting is that these same "non-believers" have their own film(s) they believe in, and think as highly of as Star Wars fans do, and would as adamantly defend any negative comments made towards their favorite films. It's all subjective... everything. I just find the human ego funny.




- Josh ;)
Friday, May 20, 2005
Member since:
March 2002
John,

Even assuming intentionality, the colors that ARE there are muddy, fuzzy, and lacking in definition.

Eddie
Friday, May 20, 2005
Member since:
March 2002
Eddie,

I agree that a digital camera probably can't reproduce the range of colors that a conventional camera can, but I think the reduced color palette in "Sith" was intentional. I didn't particularly like it, but I think it's how Lucas wanted it to look.

As far as colors go, Robert Rodriquez got an excellent and vivid array of colors from his digital photography in the first two "Spy Kids" (discounting "Spy Kids 3-D").

John
Friday, May 20, 2005
Member since:
March 2002
The reduced color palette is courtesy of the HD video cameras, which are incapable of reproducing colors the way that film can.
Saturday, May 21, 2005
Member since:
September 2004
Revenge of the Sith finally is here and i have mixed feelings about the movie after seeing it. There sure were some questions still unanswered. The end of the movie felt abit rushed when me and my brother saw it we were like ok that gay the end should have been somthing like Kenobi riding off to the sunset or to make it truley dark show the fleet of Star Destroyers with Vader, emperor and Tarkin flying away similar to Empire. The Saga does feel conncected now especially seeing Vader rise at the end the only problem i had was that the awkward NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO by James Earl Jones. But there are sure to be lots of deleted scenes and cool features on the dvd cant wait.
OVERALL this movie in my opinion it was just what i was expecting even better than i thought it would be and it is second best behind EMPIRE STRIKES BACK.
GOOD JOB GEORGE U DID IT RIGHT THIS TIME.:p
Saturday, May 21, 2005
Member since:
March 2002
For what it's worth, "Attack of the Clones" was photographed with a Sony HDW-F900 camera, capturing an image at 1080p/24. "Sith" was photographed using an upgraded HCE-F950, with virtually the same resolution. The film print was enlarged slightly to 1280x1024.

John
Saturday, May 21, 2005
Member since:
May 2004
About the color palette issue. Lucas used it in various scenes, but not extensively..just for key scenes. The Live action blue screen method, as i said on my previeous post, is now more close to "presentable" than Episode 2. As for the colors of film v.s. Video, if i am not mistaken, the video cameras use a device called CCD (Charged couple device) which "translates" light into Digital streams (10100100111010101110000), it was first used on the hubble space telescope. Cameras with more ccd's have better light&color reproduction. The problem with dv for G.Lucas during the pre-production in episode 2 was the framerate. Video until then was shot at 29fps, and george needed it to be at 24. So they went with SONY hd cams. My question is in how many lines was the shooting actually recorded? 1080 or more? If they shot it at 1080 is no wonder it looks a bit blured, its like a 16mm blow-up to a 70mm film. Who else things that the emperor was a dissapointment?
Saturday, May 21, 2005
Member since:
December 2003
mra,

Actually, Lucas answered that exact question to a reporter for a famous magazine, which one I don't remember off hand. According to Lucas however, you should watch them 1-6. Kids of the next generation will watch the movies (said Lucas), and when they get to "A New Hope", they'll wonder if Vader knows about "Luke" and "Leia" yet. That's about all I remember from the interview.

- Josh
Saturday, May 21, 2005
Member since:
August 2003
Thinking ahead a few years, it 's the year 2010.
Kids who were too young to watch any of the Star Wars movies are now old enough.
Do you watch them:
4-5-6-1-2-3
or
1-2-3-4-5-6?
Sunday, May 22, 2005
Member since:
May 2004
"the end should have been somthing like Kenobi riding off to the sunset"
How about obi-wan wearing a fedora hat while riding off the sunset, and after that a black screen appears with the following:

Obi-wan wanted a new change in his life after the defeat of the jedi order, so he chose humility and went to the fergo galaxy, visiting the primitive planet of earth to become an archeologist.
Page 2 of 2

You must be logged on My Town to reply to this topic.

Don't miss the latest news:

Advertisement: