Jump to content

Welcome to Nightly.Net
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Are you less interested in Star Wars now?


38 replies to this topic

#26
Brando

Brando

    83% Muppet

  • Admin
  • 19,738 posts
Heir to the Jedi. Its set between ANH and ESB. Not great but way better than Aftermath.

#27
Zerimar Nyliram

Zerimar Nyliram

    Dude

  • Member
  • 3,252 posts

That one actually fits in the old EU, too. In fact, it was what it was supposed to be initially.

All the new Zahn and Luceno books fit as well. They write them around the old continuity to conceivably fit within both timelines if one so desires, which is super cool.



#28
Filthy Jawa

Filthy Jawa

    Bring back Mandard!

  • Member
  • 8,791 posts
I'm actually less interested in Star Wars movies now than I ever was. I used to be a movies only guy. (Well, the video games were usually cool and satisfied that part of me that still yearned to be a kid playing with my action figures).
But I'm much more interested in Star Wars TV in recent years. I love TCW and Rebels and also Mando is cool and shows a lot of promise. I feel like a traitor to my former self to believe that TV is a better medium for Star Wars than the big screen, but it is.
Don't get me wrong, I think the movies could be amazing - as a medium that's where the big epic stories and sweeping landscapes and melodramatic moments can be really powerful. But the way Hollywood works now, having to appease so many different interests, seems to work against having any artistic integrity for a blockbuster film like this. They'll just keep failing and I'm not sure you can blame Disney or Lucasfilm or Kathleen Kennedy. It's just the landscape of Hollywood.
  • Zathras +1 this

#29
Tank

Tank

    Driver

  • Member
  • 35,222 posts

The biggest factor in that is that TV and film are now shot on the same formats and all FX are digital. In the 80s, SW was shot on 35mm film and all the effects were composited on 35mm, and that took a crap ton of time.

 

TV was shot on Super 16mm film, sometimes 35, and video. 

 

Given that TV production time is so limited, you simply didn't have time for doing full 35mm composited shots. So TV FX would never look as good as movies.

 

A great comparison is when you had TNG on TV the same time Trek 5 and 6 came out in theaters. On TNG, the actors were shot on 35 film, but ALL of the effects were done with video. Composite stuff (people shooting phasers) was added to the already compressed to video footage for broadcast.

 

Meaning-- for a movie, you shoot on 35, composite at 35, then make an assembly to make a master 35mm print. Shows like TNG were shooting on 35, but then scanning and rez-ing down to broadcast video standard. Meanwhile the space scenes were shot AT that broadcast res purely on video. If you go back and look at it now, it's easy to see the difference. So TNG had that while the films were still doing ILM level effects (well, TUC did, TFF was terrible effects).

 

But now-- everything, TV and film is shot at 4k. TV and Film having different standards an aspect ratios is done. We're all on the same format now.

 

Mando's FX work isn't QUITE at the same level of TROS, but it's not far off. In terms of fidelity and resolution, it's there. In terms of budget to farm out shots to a dozen FX houses with hundreds of paint/comp artists working, not so much. That's the only roadblock with FX now, the more complex the shot, the more hours it takes to create, and the more money it costs.


  • Zathras +1 this

#30
Zathras

Zathras

    Not The One

  • Members
  • 226 posts

Doesn't the Stagecraft help with that, too?  It won't be long where locations can be pre-recorded and edited digitally for a lot of stock footage for backgrounds.



#31
captainbleh

captainbleh

    RIP Beau, he would have hated you

  • Member
  • 5,055 posts


Doesn't the Stagecraft help with that, too?  It won't be long where locations can be pre-recorded and edited digitally for a lot of stock footage for backgrounds.


That's already happening, look at Quixel Megascans, which was acquired by Epic Games last year (Stagecraft uses their Unreal Engine)


  • Zathras +1 this

#32
Tank

Tank

    Driver

  • Member
  • 35,222 posts

Stagecraft is the only way they were able to make this show. Even still, it had an insane budget for TV. No one but Disney would have spent that money.

 

Stagecraft helps you cut location shooting but special effects still have to come into play. If you look at any Star War you have countless types of effects-- miniatures, matte insertions, compositing, 3D asset construction, animation, and rendering, etc. There's a ton of things done to bring SW to life.

 

Stagecraft has basically just replaced greenscreen shooting by having a background screen with enough fidelity and resolution that  they save the time compositing the action into different backgrounds. But everything else on that list is still being done the traditional way.


  • Zathras +1 this

#33
Filthy Jawa

Filthy Jawa

    Bring back Mandard!

  • Member
  • 8,791 posts
The money saved on flying even a skeleton crew around the world has to help with that though. As you say, that stuff all had to be done either way and now they save on flights, hotels, per diems, transportation, shipping fees, equipment rentals, etc etc etc. That's gotta add up to...what, hundreds of thousands?

#34
Tank

Tank

    Driver

  • Member
  • 35,222 posts
In the long run, yes, it saves money for sure. I was talking more a out the TIME high quality, complex FX take. Stagecraft replaces green screen and the need for location shooting, not the multitude of FX used to make a massive space battle.

#35
The Kurgan

The Kurgan

    There can be only one

  • Member
  • 2,126 posts

I guess I've moved on, but still appreciate it. My sons are into it, and when you really stop and think about it, that's kinda what SW is all about. Passing on what you've learned, and all that. 



#36
Brando

Brando

    83% Muppet

  • Admin
  • 19,738 posts
My kids really dont care as much as they want to care about Star Wars. But my oldest is 7 and were not doing PG-13 movies yet so hes only seen the OT

#37
Darth Krawlie

Darth Krawlie

    privileged ****lord

  • Moderators
  • 35,111 posts

My kids talk about it and ask about it and like the characters and the music but won't sit through more than 3 minutes of any of it.



#38
Tank

Tank

    Driver

  • Member
  • 35,222 posts
My kid was a huge Clone Wars fan. CW to him is what the OT was to me. Funny enough, he doesn't love the prequels. That base has kept him interested enough that we watch SW stuff as it comes out, but he's not watching anything repeatedly.

#39
Destiny Skywalker

Destiny Skywalker

    Actually, I am a rocket scientist

  • Member
  • 20,894 posts
I am really not interested in a lot of this Galaxy's Edge stuff. I did go back and read Resistance Reborn, and am working through Master and Apprentice. There's still a ton of timelines to be mined for books, it would be nice if they filled in those blanks. I've actually liked the PT era novels, I've read most of the new ones.



Reply to this topic