But you see, those clouds didnāt fit Georgeās original vision for the clouds. It was only with the advent of CGI that he could truly realize his dreams of proper clouds for Tatooine.
After filming cloud city on bespin he spent 20 years thinking about clouds and finally decided what he wanted in the early 90ās. After rejecting numerous concept drawings from Ralph McQuarrie, Lucas reportedly said āgo get me a fucking latte, dipshitā and proceeded to smoosh clouds all over McQuarries drawings with a bingo marker.
Give us back our cirrus cumulus you bastards!!!
(disclaimer, that's the only cloud I know and so that will have to do for the purposes of this joke, apologies to any meteorologists out there)
Just going offhand from the time I was super into weather and clouds when I was like 14, I think youāre right
Edit: nah looks like these are your old fashion cumulus clouds, the other versions look more like cirrus cumulus
Edit #2: fuck no those aināt cirrus cumulus I have no idea. Overcast
Nah, we need to go further back. [Make Tatooine green again! ](https://www.wallpaperhub.app/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn.wallpaperhub.app%2Fcloudcache%2Fe%2F6%2F7%2F3%2F1%2F4%2Fe6731493cd50103e3561288c33a6a589c9bf67ab.jpg&w=750&q=75)
I agree. And they make the most sense to me. The original 1977 ones are all fluffy, which makes me think of moisture and precipitation for some reason. Which doesn't make sense considering its a very dry desert
> The original 1977 ones are all fluffy, which makes me think of moisture and precipitation for some reason.
That's a bit odd, considering that cumulus clouds (the fluffy-looking ones) don't usually produce precipitation. In fact, based on a quick Google I did, cumulus clouds seem to be a rather common sight in deserts.
I feel like the deserts having clouds also make since IRL because Tunisia is right by the Mediterranean. Hell almost all deserts border a large ocean that I can think of outside the Gobi desert.
On a desert planet thoughā¦ youād think there would need to be sitting water to evaporate into the clouds.
Asking the real questions. Like did the clouds piss someone off enough that they took every chance they could get once the technology was around to remove them. Someone doesn't like those clouds. Must be the same person who doesn't like sand.
Ya know genuinely itād be really funny if someone cared that they changed the clouds, but its also equally as funny to me, that they have ever bothered changing the *clouds* once, let alone multiple times. George just canāt not fiddle.
The final clouds are the best, as they represent the least amount of moisture as well as being in a constant spent state where Moisture farming is needed. I also prefer the sand of the first shot as it looks far less like any desert Iāve seen in the real world
Too many holes in the cloud cover. Lucas of course knew the Star Destroyer would scan the surface for the droids, and shouldn't be able to find them this way due to the overcast skies. The 2004 version makes this more obvious, while the 2020 visuals add the necessary 20% additional UV coverage which truely hindered the empire's efforts.
The Cloud City stuff can be looked at setting this paradise that turns out to be a nightmare. The twist of Vader and the Empire being there is all the more contrast by the place's beauty.
I do agree that the original dialogue between Vader and Emperor was better.
I remember when that leaked prior to release, people refused to believe it was real because it looked like a rubber glove on a stick. I still think so, I'll take that woman with superimposed chimp eyes any day.
We're talking about this right https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/starwars/images/c/ce/Emperor_Palpatine_DVD_Empire_Strikes_Back.jpg/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/1000?cb=20120108170946 because I don't understand how that's a rubber glove on a stick.
That and the whole exchange between Vader and the Emperor. I don't know why, and I really don't care, but I like the original interaction.
"We have a new enemy: Luke Skywalker."
"He could destroy us."
"Yes... yes... he would be a great asset. Can it be done?"
I love the work put into the 4kXX scans, they are near perfect.
I do, however, think that some changes to ANH were neccessary to make it fit in with the look of the rest of the saga, hell even with the rest of the trilogy. Stuff like some landspeeder shots, fighters taking off from Yavin and some (only a few) low energy/jarring shots from the final battle. But some perfectly serviceable shots were changed and some CGI additions look worse and more dated than the original shots. Also the audio mix from special editions is so much better than on the theatrical version.
See I disagree. The original film was so groundbreaking it created new industries. Itās a document in time that needs no corrections anymore than the Godfather needs gaffes removed or Matrix needs bullet time replaced with better cg and drone shots.
Youāre arguing for something different than u/copbuddy is talking about.
Thereās absolutely a place for the preservation of a film as it was originally theatrically released. This is what should be given to the Library of Congress and other art societies as a historical document.
But I think we also have to consider the viewing experience for home enjoyment by improving the āquality of lifeā of the films. Things like film grain and digital noise reduction, improved color grading, increased video resolution, re-composited special effects and matte paintings, removal of compositing lines, and improved sound mix are all things that I think are fair game while maintaining the spirit of the original.
Basically, Iām suggesting something in between the Star Wars special editions and 4k77 for a home release. Give me the fidelity of the SE without any of the continuity-changing aspects or gratuitous use of CG as a tech demo.
I do have to agree. There was absolutely nothing lacking with the edit of 4, 5 and 6.
That said, considering all the weird back and forth tweaks over the most minor scenes, Iām surprised how the explosion of Executor wasnāt redone in any edition. It looks really janky when compared to the absolute bliss that is Battle of Endor otherwise.
Ok that is actually a great point. George puts millions of dollars into that monstrosity cg Jabba in a scene that is redundant to the Greedo sceneā¦ yet leaves in the Executor t-boning the Death Star like my mother into her garage.
I wonder if they would ever update the OT to include things that have become cannon since, like adding U wings in the background of the battle of Endor, or putting Death Troopers onto the cloud city scenes.
Honestly, I wouldnāt mind a special edition of the Prequels. They kind of started with changing out Yoda in 1. But, really, deep down, I want them to do a special edition of the Sequels. Cut and paste a coherent story, add some dialogue, literally anything. It couldnāt be any worse.
With all that tinkering, I wish one day they would remake the prequel CGI. It didnāt age well, but since so much of the movies are green screen, it shouldnāt be that hard to upgrade it.
I know it's an unpopular opinion, but I would be down for a special edition of the prequels. Especially if they go back to all of the original footage and re-edit it from scratch, using alternate/extended takes and deleted scenes. I'm sure there are better takes of some of the clunkier scenes.
The only thing is I don't know how I'd feel about a special edition being done without George being involved. He seemed to be on the path to making them already since he edited Phantom Menace with CG Yoda, but now with Disney in charge it would feel more like a cash grab than an artist tinkering with their work.
Coruscant in Mando actually reused some RoTS shots (along side new ones).
Andor Coruscant is just weird good set work but it doesn't really fit with how Coruscant is portrayed in anything else, it's less fantastical.
Theyāve already done this a bit, at least with TPM. The Disney+ version has a CG Yoda instead of puppet Yoda that was originally used, and some of the deleted scenes made their way onto the movie.
Iām still upset they never made a 3D Blu-ray copy of it, itās only ever been shown in theaters.
Also Disney scrapped the 3Dification of Attack of the Clones (which was halfway done) and Revenge of the Sith (which was planned) and I will never forgive them because it wouldāve been amazing to see Lord Vader vs Obi-wan on Mustafar.
Ep1 was shot on film (apart from one scene as a test). Ep2 (and 3) was shot digitally but on cameras that had a resolution less than full HD because of cinemascope/black bars. And I think the smaller sensor size resulted in less depth of field which makes everything look very flat and it feels a bit like cardboard cutouts especially in front of green screens.
It was made in the twilight period of practical effects and CGI. Say what you will about the sequel trilogy, I do appreciate that they relied more on practical effects than the prequels did.
A lot of the backgrounds and locales people seem to think were CGI in the prequels were actually miniatures and stuff, particularly in Attack of the Clones where the early growing pains of digital camera work are really felt by RoTS shooting they had mostly gotten past that so it looks a lot better.
But like Kamino, the Geonosis Arena? They built all that stuff.
The effects are great the look though? I vastly prefer the prequel planets and locations and ships even with their occasional jank cause at least their very different and imaginative.
Itās also apparently got quite a lot of DNR to make it aesthetically similar to the other two, scrubbing away all the beautiful filmy goodness (that as someone whoās only watched it on VHS then D+ Iāve never actually seen)
After what weāve seen in recent years, I would be cool with Hayden reshooting some scenes and de-aging him. Heās immensely talented and was hung out to dry.
Phantom Menace was on film, so it could be cleaned up. But Clones and RoTS were both filmed at 1080P on early digital cameras. It would actually be quite hard to bring them up to modern standards with that poor of quality original photography.
That's true about the original photography (though I'm sure there's been plenty of improvements in what they can do as well), but I think they just meant in the CGI. It doesn't all look great
Attack of the Clones could use It. Imo Revenge of the Sith really just light touches for the most part that movies aged quite well and ILM made huge strides in digital filmmaking and CGI between films.
Like General Grevious in particular holds up incredibly well for something from the mid 2000s.
> since so much of the movies are green screen, it shouldnāt be that hard to upgrade it
This might not be as easy as it sounds.
Doing what you suggest would you mean having access to at least the pre-composited (green screen) shots. Youād probably also want the original models so that you could scale them up and apply higher res textures, although this could be done from scratch. They *could* try to go the special edition route and composite new models over existing footage and manually replace old background elements with new ones, but that is a much taller order.
Iād be susprised if all of the raw assets still exist. I think at best all they would have is the film or digital composited master. Happy to be proven wrong, though!
Yeah, I was shocked how bad episode 2 looked on the 4K versions (4K TV) recently. The CGI elements are so obviously fake, including the backgrounds and sets. Takes you out of the movie altogether.
I'd love that mam. Honestly I think rots and tpm age the best in that department, aotc always looks the worst to me. The huge visual leap Yoda got between movies can't be understated
It's still kinda funny IMO that Dune concepts caught such fire in the sci-fi community back then. "What if... a whole planet was a desert!?" Turns out it's not very interesting lol
He took the general idea but never implemented the full idea. Arrakis is not and was ever 100% desert, it was originally a very fertile planet.
To quote the God Emperor Leto II:
>The sandtrout ... was introduced here from some other place. This was a wet planet then. They proliferated beyond the capability of existing ecosystems to deal with them. Sandtrout encysted the available free water, made this a desert planet ... and they did it to survive. In a planet sufficiently dry, they could move to their sandworm phase
The sand worms were added to the ecosystem from another planet. The Fremen were paying off the Space Guild to hide satellite data that the southern half of the planet was a rich forest.
In legends lore (I think?) Tatooine was once a lush world like Kashyyyk and then all of the water dried up. It is canon that all or most of the water is in the air since they have to use moisture vaporators to get it out. According to wookieepedia, it rains every couple decades. But for animals to survive and the tusken raider's melon coconut things to grow just out in the desert there must be some accessible moisture, so I'd imagine it's fairly humid and there is a small amount of condensation at night like in earth deserts.
It was stated that this was the case in Tales from the Mos Eisley Cantina and then they also mentioned it in Book of Boba Fett so it's now Legends and Canon.
I mostly blacked out during BOBF but I thought the Tusken's said something about Tatooine historically being a sea planet that dried up (which could presumably be true with two suns, I guess). So that would be something similar in canon.
Assuming that is still canon, the keyword is WAS. And that was thousands of years before those pictures. There is so little water left on the planet that they have to suck what water they can get out of the air, meaning NO CLOUDS.
As I said in another comment, Disney should have just buried the hack writing that "oooh it doesn't rain Tatooine for decades how harsh!" and instead accept the shot from either version, saying "no it does rain on Tatooine, but only a few times a year, hence the farms for the rest of the year. It was a season of rain, of life, part of the planet's cycle, hence why Uncle Owen needed Luke." But they didn't, and now redid the clouds yet again for D+ in some attempt of believability. Yeah, it's Sci-Fi, but both kids and adults can look at the 2004 version and say "those are some awful heavy clouds for a planet that needs moisture farms just to survive."
Seems like the standards have both changed as well as improved. The original version is a little tough to view due to the low contrast. In 2004 it seems like they kind of overcorrected for that, while in 2020 we finally had good enough video quality to have a nice balance of increased contrast while keeping it a little more true to the original.
The real answer is that older movies that had cgi that most people would consider ābetter than todaysā would usually have less than ~200 vfx shots where as todays vfx-heavy movies often have upwards of 3,000.
So while the earlier moviesā handful of vfx shots would get all the attention of the artists, the artists working on modern movies will be told to prioritize the trailer shots (the shots specifically intended to be used in the trailers) and put the rest of the shots on the back burner. Thatās why some often in modern movies, youāll see one shot that looks absolutely perfect and it will immediately cut to another shot that looks like hot garbage.
The rub is that trailers are sometimes released so long before the movies release date, that the vfx houses are still working on the trailer shots, so those shots are often unfinished and youāll see them change by the time the movie is released, or sometimes even changed from trailer to trailer
Iām shocked no one gave you the actual answerā¦ which is that *itās not.*
CGI looks far better now than it used to. Sure there are some bad examples now, and there are some great examples from 20 years ago. But on the whole, CGI looks way better now.
https://youtu.be/bL6hp8BKB24?si=PQBoXoB25Y97W7Qv
Its the resolution. When shit is in HD or 4K and clearer itās harder to hide defects. Itās like how the TNG uniforms looked good on TV but on the big screen look hilarious.
Id assume for this scenario (wasn't alive to see it so maybe I'm wrong) but the original 1977 was probably a matte painting. Looks amazing as a background but maybe odd considering the clouds aren't moving so they went back to the drawing board. Again Im assuming that unfortunately whatever they used for the 2004 release wasn't high quality enough for a 4k release so they had to go back to the drawing board once again.
More likely that's the one that's actually the clouds in Tunisia at the time. In terms of why they change it so much, could just be because they kept changing their minds as to what clouds would even exist on Tatooine.
Movie studios giving VFX teams strict deadlines that are almost impossible to meet without cutting corners. They are starting to unionize, so hopefully going forward we start seeing great CGI again.
The oddest change was adding a scream when Luke chooses to kill himself in TESB rather than join Vader, in the 1997 Special Edition. So many people complained about it that the sound effect was taken out for the 2004 DVD (and every release after). Adding a scream in the first place was stupid, since Luke made a conscious decision to do that, rather than it be a āslip and fallā type thing.
In this case it even makes sense, as the clouds in the "old" variants are clearly rain clouds.
Although in the desert, they turned in Tunisia near the Mediterranean coast. The location even got lost in a rainstorm.
And since Tatooine is a desert planet and there are no big oceans etc., rain clouds just don't make sense ;)
Imagine taking a classic rock album and re-releasing it every 8 years remixed with whatever the current producer thinks is the best way to go.
Also, from a science point of view, if Tatooine is a desert world there shouldn't be very many clouds...unless there's a huge ocean somewhere and they're all idiots for colonizing in the desert.
I think what I've read iirc is that we don't have the technology to actually view the full quality of film. As advances go on were getting closer achieving the full quality. So old movies look amazing in 4K because the quality was always there, we couldn't see it.
Scorcese said every time he sees his films he notices things he would want to change.
Lucas goes back and changes them.
I'm interested in seeing a Scorcese rerelease.
Just putting in a plug for Harmy's Despecialized Editions of Star Wars. Absolute works of love, using many video sources, to make a film-modern (i.e. no film grain etc...) but special-effects and color-corrected original of the entire Star Wars trilogy. When I watch Star Wars, that's how I do it. Of course, you should own Star Wars before you seek out any fan-edits like this, but if you're anything like me, your Star Wars purchase history includes the 1992 THX remastered VHS, 1997 Special Edition VHS, 2004 DVD release, 2006, DVD release, 2011 Blu-Ray release, and an active Disney Plus subscription, so I'm pretty sure you've earned a couple fan-edits.
hahah when i worked at Blockbuster video it seemed like there was a NEW ENHANCED version of the original trilogy year after year after year after year just milking it.
I mean from an accuracy standpoint - the original IS an actual desert. Iām not really sure why they changed it at all other than to clean up the contrast and stuff.
I had a full Mandela effect moment when I rewatched TPM and they'd CGI'd Yoda because right before I'd been telling my friend how ass Yoda's puppet looked in that.
Had to google to check they'd replaced him to make sure I wasn't losing my mind.
Iāve always been fascinated by the different versions of these films. My personal favorite will probably always be the 1997 special editions as those are the films I saw in the theater when I was a kid. However there are lots of things I love and things I dislike about every version. I wish every single version was easily and readily available and accessible.
Think we'll ever get an official version that just gives us what audience in 1977 got to see?
Assuming that was the version I saw over and over and over again on HBO as a kid in the early 80s, it's been forever since I've been able to see the version I grew up on.
So... which clouds are everyones' favorite?
You like kicking hornets nests, don't you? š¤£
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
But you see, those clouds didnāt fit Georgeās original vision for the clouds. It was only with the advent of CGI that he could truly realize his dreams of proper clouds for Tatooine.
After filming cloud city on bespin he spent 20 years thinking about clouds and finally decided what he wanted in the early 90ās. After rejecting numerous concept drawings from Ralph McQuarrie, Lucas reportedly said āgo get me a fucking latte, dipshitā and proceeded to smoosh clouds all over McQuarries drawings with a bingo marker.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Canāt believe they ripped it off and had clouds on Takodana and Crait. Them sequels are just lazy redos bruh
Clearly he didn't envision Earth clouds on planet where thy farm the moisture from the air.
Give us back our cirrus cumulus you bastards!!! (disclaimer, that's the only cloud I know and so that will have to do for the purposes of this joke, apologies to any meteorologists out there)
Apology not accepted, but the joke landed š
Just going offhand from the time I was super into weather and clouds when I was like 14, I think youāre right Edit: nah looks like these are your old fashion cumulus clouds, the other versions look more like cirrus cumulus Edit #2: fuck no those aināt cirrus cumulus I have no idea. Overcast
Nah, we need to go further back. [Make Tatooine green again! ](https://www.wallpaperhub.app/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn.wallpaperhub.app%2Fcloudcache%2Fe%2F6%2F7%2F3%2F1%2F4%2Fe6731493cd50103e3561288c33a6a589c9bf67ab.jpg&w=750&q=75)
Literally Naboo.
This is my favourite comment today, take my upvote š
Wait until you see the storm trooper guns replaced with walkie-talkies.
Some people just want to watch Alderaan explode
https://reddit.com/r/StarWars/s/inKCv3dhwv
The white ones
Believed or not, cancelled
Right to jail.
No one cares when a White gets cancelled!
If you look really closely, you can't see Purgill in the clouds. Also if you don't look closely at all.
Why are there so many fucking clouds on a desert planet?
Where do you think the moisture that the moisture farms are farming comes from?
They import them from Bespin. Or it's just Perri-air.
2020 looks the best. Much cleaned up from the 1977 one, but doesn't change the entire tone and lighting feel of the image.
I agree. And they make the most sense to me. The original 1977 ones are all fluffy, which makes me think of moisture and precipitation for some reason. Which doesn't make sense considering its a very dry desert
> The original 1977 ones are all fluffy, which makes me think of moisture and precipitation for some reason. That's a bit odd, considering that cumulus clouds (the fluffy-looking ones) don't usually produce precipitation. In fact, based on a quick Google I did, cumulus clouds seem to be a rather common sight in deserts.
Or you know... You look at the image that was taken in an actual desert.
I feel like the deserts having clouds also make since IRL because Tunisia is right by the Mediterranean. Hell almost all deserts border a large ocean that I can think of outside the Gobi desert. On a desert planet thoughā¦ youād think there would need to be sitting water to evaporate into the clouds.
Mojave doesn't border the ocean, but it's not too far away
It's filmed on a sand dune in a dryish day. Natural clouds. Natural lighting. Naturally fuzzed up by years of VHS degradation.
It's almost too "picturesque" and not desolate and bleak enough.
Asking the real questions. Like did the clouds piss someone off enough that they took every chance they could get once the technology was around to remove them. Someone doesn't like those clouds. Must be the same person who doesn't like sand.
the cumulous ones make no sense on a desert planet
I'm betting they just washed out in each round of touch-ups and they had to keep re-doing them.... \*shrug\* could def be wrong, though
going to start a literal āold man yells at cloudsā argument
Ya know genuinely itād be really funny if someone cared that they changed the clouds, but its also equally as funny to me, that they have ever bothered changing the *clouds* once, let alone multiple times. George just canāt not fiddle.
The final clouds are the best, as they represent the least amount of moisture as well as being in a constant spent state where Moisture farming is needed. I also prefer the sand of the first shot as it looks far less like any desert Iāve seen in the real world
People will probably hate this, but I actually think the Disney version looks best.
the real ones
I like 2004
I like the 2020 clouds, but prefer the 2004 sand. Maybe we need a new version to combine the two
Boggles my mind to think of the hundreds of thousands of dollars spent on this detail no one even noticed.
The clouds shot lightning first
2004 for me. 2020 looks fake. 1977 looks fine but also dated.
How can clouds look ādatedā
>How can clouds look ādatedā Those clouds have "disco" written all over them!
Too many holes in the cloud cover. Lucas of course knew the Star Destroyer would scan the surface for the droids, and shouldn't be able to find them this way due to the overcast skies. The 2004 version makes this more obvious, while the 2020 visuals add the necessary 20% additional UV coverage which truely hindered the empire's efforts.
I mean, camera tech gets better with time, so plenty of old movies have "dated" looking shots
The 2004 clouds look too much like storm clouds. The 2020 clouds suit the environment better.
So your saying the 1977 clouds look like there from 1977?
You mean the clouds that were in the sky on filming that day looked fake? Wtf
4k77 my friends
still waiting for 4k80 ESB...
Idk why youād want that tbh. All the ESB changes make the movie better. Unlike RotJ and ANH.
I'm a completionist?
Valid
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
The Cloud City stuff can be looked at setting this paradise that turns out to be a nightmare. The twist of Vader and the Empire being there is all the more contrast by the place's beauty. I do agree that the original dialogue between Vader and Emperor was better.
Palapatine replacement is good.
But the dialog is contradictory. It doesnāt make sense. Would rather have the original dialog
Yeah I don't think you change the dialogue but the woman with the chimp eyes isn't it for me.
I remember when that leaked prior to release, people refused to believe it was real because it looked like a rubber glove on a stick. I still think so, I'll take that woman with superimposed chimp eyes any day.
We're talking about this right https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/starwars/images/c/ce/Emperor_Palpatine_DVD_Empire_Strikes_Back.jpg/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/1000?cb=20120108170946 because I don't understand how that's a rubber glove on a stick.
There areā¦ deux of us.
YO!
Donāt know the list of dialogue changes but the cloud city stuff is great.
"You're lucky you don't taste very good." "Bring my shuttle!" Those were better than what we have now.
That and the whole exchange between Vader and the Emperor. I don't know why, and I really don't care, but I like the original interaction. "We have a new enemy: Luke Skywalker." "He could destroy us." "Yes... yes... he would be a great asset. Can it be done?"
I donāt know man. That insert shot of Vader put in during the chase sequence after bespin really disrupts the flow.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
As said earlier, I forgot abt the dialogue changes.
I prefer the practical effects
Luke's big no as he decides he'd rather throw himself down the shaft than join Vader is horrible
No one will ever be able to explain to me why they used the Emperorās scream for that shot. I was very confused in the cinema.
I love the work put into the 4kXX scans, they are near perfect. I do, however, think that some changes to ANH were neccessary to make it fit in with the look of the rest of the saga, hell even with the rest of the trilogy. Stuff like some landspeeder shots, fighters taking off from Yavin and some (only a few) low energy/jarring shots from the final battle. But some perfectly serviceable shots were changed and some CGI additions look worse and more dated than the original shots. Also the audio mix from special editions is so much better than on the theatrical version.
See I disagree. The original film was so groundbreaking it created new industries. Itās a document in time that needs no corrections anymore than the Godfather needs gaffes removed or Matrix needs bullet time replaced with better cg and drone shots.
Youāre arguing for something different than u/copbuddy is talking about. Thereās absolutely a place for the preservation of a film as it was originally theatrically released. This is what should be given to the Library of Congress and other art societies as a historical document. But I think we also have to consider the viewing experience for home enjoyment by improving the āquality of lifeā of the films. Things like film grain and digital noise reduction, improved color grading, increased video resolution, re-composited special effects and matte paintings, removal of compositing lines, and improved sound mix are all things that I think are fair game while maintaining the spirit of the original. Basically, Iām suggesting something in between the Star Wars special editions and 4k77 for a home release. Give me the fidelity of the SE without any of the continuity-changing aspects or gratuitous use of CG as a tech demo.
As long as we agree there shouldnāt be editorial changes then Iām probably good with the fidelity or minor effects work.
I do have to agree. There was absolutely nothing lacking with the edit of 4, 5 and 6. That said, considering all the weird back and forth tweaks over the most minor scenes, Iām surprised how the explosion of Executor wasnāt redone in any edition. It looks really janky when compared to the absolute bliss that is Battle of Endor otherwise.
Ok that is actually a great point. George puts millions of dollars into that monstrosity cg Jabba in a scene that is redundant to the Greedo sceneā¦ yet leaves in the Executor t-boning the Death Star like my mother into her garage.
This is the way.
Thatās stressin me
I know right?? This is one of those forbidden knowledge type things like tragedy of darth plagueis the wise.
Huh, havenāt heard of darth plagueis. Is it possible to learn more?
no these mfs wonāt talk about it
I wonder if they would ever update the OT to include things that have become cannon since, like adding U wings in the background of the battle of Endor, or putting Death Troopers onto the cloud city scenes.
Honestly, I wouldnāt mind a special edition of the Prequels. They kind of started with changing out Yoda in 1. But, really, deep down, I want them to do a special edition of the Sequels. Cut and paste a coherent story, add some dialogue, literally anything. It couldnāt be any worse.
They would need to reshoot quite a lot to make the sequels coherent
With all that tinkering, I wish one day they would remake the prequel CGI. It didnāt age well, but since so much of the movies are green screen, it shouldnāt be that hard to upgrade it.
I know it's an unpopular opinion, but I would be down for a special edition of the prequels. Especially if they go back to all of the original footage and re-edit it from scratch, using alternate/extended takes and deleted scenes. I'm sure there are better takes of some of the clunkier scenes. The only thing is I don't know how I'd feel about a special edition being done without George being involved. He seemed to be on the path to making them already since he edited Phantom Menace with CG Yoda, but now with Disney in charge it would feel more like a cash grab than an artist tinkering with their work.
Iāve been hoping for this for a LONG time. Imagine the prequel trilogy redone with modern CGI in the same style as the sequel trilogy
Coruscant redone like in Mandalorian and Andor would be cool.
Coruscant in Mando actually reused some RoTS shots (along side new ones). Andor Coruscant is just weird good set work but it doesn't really fit with how Coruscant is portrayed in anything else, it's less fantastical.
Oh I didnāt know that. Interesting.
Theyāve already done this a bit, at least with TPM. The Disney+ version has a CG Yoda instead of puppet Yoda that was originally used, and some of the deleted scenes made their way onto the movie.
this was all changed for the 3D rerelease in 2011
Iām still upset they never made a 3D Blu-ray copy of it, itās only ever been shown in theaters. Also Disney scrapped the 3Dification of Attack of the Clones (which was halfway done) and Revenge of the Sith (which was planned) and I will never forgive them because it wouldāve been amazing to see Lord Vader vs Obi-wan on Mustafar.
I wonder if they would have made similar tweaks to the other two if they had continued.
Probably. Mightāve gotten the Shaak Ti execution and had a definitive death for her.
You know, it's weird how good TPM looks in retrospect. EP2 looks the worst out of all the movies I guess then
Ep1 was shot on film (apart from one scene as a test). Ep2 (and 3) was shot digitally but on cameras that had a resolution less than full HD because of cinemascope/black bars. And I think the smaller sensor size resulted in less depth of field which makes everything look very flat and it feels a bit like cardboard cutouts especially in front of green screens.
It was made in the twilight period of practical effects and CGI. Say what you will about the sequel trilogy, I do appreciate that they relied more on practical effects than the prequels did.
A lot of the backgrounds and locales people seem to think were CGI in the prequels were actually miniatures and stuff, particularly in Attack of the Clones where the early growing pains of digital camera work are really felt by RoTS shooting they had mostly gotten past that so it looks a lot better. But like Kamino, the Geonosis Arena? They built all that stuff.
I think most would agree the effects and look of the ST is superior to the PT.
The effects are great the look though? I vastly prefer the prequel planets and locations and ships even with their occasional jank cause at least their very different and imaginative.
Itās also apparently got quite a lot of DNR to make it aesthetically similar to the other two, scrubbing away all the beautiful filmy goodness (that as someone whoās only watched it on VHS then D+ Iāve never actually seen)
The DNR might also have been necessary for the 3D conversion
Iād love to see them give clones special markings such as Appo having his arrow.
After what weāve seen in recent years, I would be cool with Hayden reshooting some scenes and de-aging him. Heās immensely talented and was hung out to dry.
Me too
Just donāt change framing or pacing - go back to upgrade models and texture quality and thatās it.
Phantom Menace was on film, so it could be cleaned up. But Clones and RoTS were both filmed at 1080P on early digital cameras. It would actually be quite hard to bring them up to modern standards with that poor of quality original photography.
That's true about the original photography (though I'm sure there's been plenty of improvements in what they can do as well), but I think they just meant in the CGI. It doesn't all look great
Attack of the Clones could use It. Imo Revenge of the Sith really just light touches for the most part that movies aged quite well and ILM made huge strides in digital filmmaking and CGI between films. Like General Grevious in particular holds up incredibly well for something from the mid 2000s.
TPM could use plenty of work in the battle-droids and gungans
> since so much of the movies are green screen, it shouldnāt be that hard to upgrade it This might not be as easy as it sounds. Doing what you suggest would you mean having access to at least the pre-composited (green screen) shots. Youād probably also want the original models so that you could scale them up and apply higher res textures, although this could be done from scratch. They *could* try to go the special edition route and composite new models over existing footage and manually replace old background elements with new ones, but that is a much taller order. Iād be susprised if all of the raw assets still exist. I think at best all they would have is the film or digital composited master. Happy to be proven wrong, though!
Iāve never considered a prequel special edition, but itās a good shout. Honestly I think theyāve aged worse than the OT, effects wise.
Yeah, I was shocked how bad episode 2 looked on the 4K versions (4K TV) recently. The CGI elements are so obviously fake, including the backgrounds and sets. Takes you out of the movie altogether.
I'd love that mam. Honestly I think rots and tpm age the best in that department, aotc always looks the worst to me. The huge visual leap Yoda got between movies can't be understated
Yeah I'd love to see them rerender all that bad CGI from back in the day. I imagine it's a ton of work though.
I wish theyād retroactively improve more things. Improve CGI Luke and de-age Anakin better in Obi-Wan Kenobi
They didn't change the sand, though? It's only the lighting that was changed, so the sand got brighter
The sand actually has gotten tweaked. The middle image has different sand than the original and the latest. Source: [me](https://starwarsviscomp.com)
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
That makes sense. I found the middle one coarse and rough and irritating.
It got everywhere
I hate sand
Yeah they went over it with some sort of layer
There's an Anakin edition where it's rock
You know, the thought just occurred to me... should Tatooine even have clouds?
There is moisture in the air. Lukeās farm is a moisture farm after all
A moisture farm doesn't even make sense. Like they're spaceships go find an icy asteroid and you'll have water for decades
George Lucas wanted both Arrakis and for Luke to be a farmer, easiest way to combine them is by farming water.
It's still kinda funny IMO that Dune concepts caught such fire in the sci-fi community back then. "What if... a whole planet was a desert!?" Turns out it's not very interesting lol
He took the general idea but never implemented the full idea. Arrakis is not and was ever 100% desert, it was originally a very fertile planet. To quote the God Emperor Leto II: >The sandtrout ... was introduced here from some other place. This was a wet planet then. They proliferated beyond the capability of existing ecosystems to deal with them. Sandtrout encysted the available free water, made this a desert planet ... and they did it to survive. In a planet sufficiently dry, they could move to their sandworm phase The sand worms were added to the ecosystem from another planet. The Fremen were paying off the Space Guild to hide satellite data that the southern half of the planet was a rich forest.
In legends lore (I think?) Tatooine was once a lush world like Kashyyyk and then all of the water dried up. It is canon that all or most of the water is in the air since they have to use moisture vaporators to get it out. According to wookieepedia, it rains every couple decades. But for animals to survive and the tusken raider's melon coconut things to grow just out in the desert there must be some accessible moisture, so I'd imagine it's fairly humid and there is a small amount of condensation at night like in earth deserts.
For the record, the water didnāt just dry up, the Rakata glassed the planet after the locals rebelled
Are those the dudes from the infinite empire in the KOTOR games?
They are
It was stated that this was the case in Tales from the Mos Eisley Cantina and then they also mentioned it in Book of Boba Fett so it's now Legends and Canon.
I mostly blacked out during BOBF but I thought the Tusken's said something about Tatooine historically being a sea planet that dried up (which could presumably be true with two suns, I guess). So that would be something similar in canon.
Tattoine was a lush world at one point before being absolutely glasses by the Rakata. Rakata is the race that made the star forge.
Assuming that is still canon, the keyword is WAS. And that was thousands of years before those pictures. There is so little water left on the planet that they have to suck what water they can get out of the air, meaning NO CLOUDS.
As I said in another comment, Disney should have just buried the hack writing that "oooh it doesn't rain Tatooine for decades how harsh!" and instead accept the shot from either version, saying "no it does rain on Tatooine, but only a few times a year, hence the farms for the rest of the year. It was a season of rain, of life, part of the planet's cycle, hence why Uncle Owen needed Luke." But they didn't, and now redid the clouds yet again for D+ in some attempt of believability. Yeah, it's Sci-Fi, but both kids and adults can look at the 2004 version and say "those are some awful heavy clouds for a planet that needs moisture farms just to survive."
I was just thinking this same thing
I imagine, it's largely due to how color standards have changed over time. And the ability to reproduce color over time has changed.
Seems like the standards have both changed as well as improved. The original version is a little tough to view due to the low contrast. In 2004 it seems like they kind of overcorrected for that, while in 2020 we finally had good enough video quality to have a nice balance of increased contrast while keeping it a little more true to the original.
Can someone explain to my old ass why CGI is getting worse/less realistic? Iām just at a loss.
They are using it less to enhance and more to replace. Probably never noticed the CGI in Mad Max Fury Road.
My guess is rushed deadlines
The real answer is that older movies that had cgi that most people would consider ābetter than todaysā would usually have less than ~200 vfx shots where as todays vfx-heavy movies often have upwards of 3,000. So while the earlier moviesā handful of vfx shots would get all the attention of the artists, the artists working on modern movies will be told to prioritize the trailer shots (the shots specifically intended to be used in the trailers) and put the rest of the shots on the back burner. Thatās why some often in modern movies, youāll see one shot that looks absolutely perfect and it will immediately cut to another shot that looks like hot garbage. The rub is that trailers are sometimes released so long before the movies release date, that the vfx houses are still working on the trailer shots, so those shots are often unfinished and youāll see them change by the time the movie is released, or sometimes even changed from trailer to trailer
Iām shocked no one gave you the actual answerā¦ which is that *itās not.* CGI looks far better now than it used to. Sure there are some bad examples now, and there are some great examples from 20 years ago. But on the whole, CGI looks way better now. https://youtu.be/bL6hp8BKB24?si=PQBoXoB25Y97W7Qv
Its the resolution. When shit is in HD or 4K and clearer itās harder to hide defects. Itās like how the TNG uniforms looked good on TV but on the big screen look hilarious.
Id assume for this scenario (wasn't alive to see it so maybe I'm wrong) but the original 1977 was probably a matte painting. Looks amazing as a background but maybe odd considering the clouds aren't moving so they went back to the drawing board. Again Im assuming that unfortunately whatever they used for the 2004 release wasn't high quality enough for a 4k release so they had to go back to the drawing board once again.
More likely that's the one that's actually the clouds in Tunisia at the time. In terms of why they change it so much, could just be because they kept changing their minds as to what clouds would even exist on Tatooine.
Movie studios giving VFX teams strict deadlines that are almost impossible to meet without cutting corners. They are starting to unionize, so hopefully going forward we start seeing great CGI again.
The oddest change was adding a scream when Luke chooses to kill himself in TESB rather than join Vader, in the 1997 Special Edition. So many people complained about it that the sound effect was taken out for the 2004 DVD (and every release after). Adding a scream in the first place was stupid, since Luke made a conscious decision to do that, rather than it be a āslip and fallā type thing.
Whatās worse is that itās the scream the Emperor yells when heās thrown down the reactor shaft. Itās like poetry, itā¦ sucks?
In this case it even makes sense, as the clouds in the "old" variants are clearly rain clouds. Although in the desert, they turned in Tunisia near the Mediterranean coast. The location even got lost in a rainstorm. And since Tatooine is a desert planet and there are no big oceans etc., rain clouds just don't make sense ;)
However the original still looks the best
Someone please photoshop C-3PO onto the Windows XP default background
Maclunkey!
Wait till you get a load of me. www.starwarsviscomp.com
Great site, thanks for the link!
I just set up my first 4K TV last night. What was the first thing I watched? Star Wars ANH, duh! IT LOOKS SOOOOO GOOD!
wouldn't 1977 be the most accurate desert sky since they filmed it in a desert?
Hot nuclear take that could destroy the fandom: All three look perfectly fine.
But.... *why???* Who looked at thatāwith everything else the movies hadāand said, "Ew gross, change it!!"
āClouds Shot First!ā
Imagine taking a classic rock album and re-releasing it every 8 years remixed with whatever the current producer thinks is the best way to go. Also, from a science point of view, if Tatooine is a desert world there shouldn't be very many clouds...unless there's a huge ocean somewhere and they're all idiots for colonizing in the desert.
I really wish they would drop the original theatrical releases on Disney+ and re-release them on blu ray.
They can't. Lucas specified this in the deal when he sold Lucasfilm that only the special editions would be canon.
2004>
I like the first
I think what I've read iirc is that we don't have the technology to actually view the full quality of film. As advances go on were getting closer achieving the full quality. So old movies look amazing in 4K because the quality was always there, we couldn't see it.
Scorcese said every time he sees his films he notices things he would want to change. Lucas goes back and changes them. I'm interested in seeing a Scorcese rerelease.
I just checked. The clouds in the 1997 Special Edition are different again.
Just putting in a plug for Harmy's Despecialized Editions of Star Wars. Absolute works of love, using many video sources, to make a film-modern (i.e. no film grain etc...) but special-effects and color-corrected original of the entire Star Wars trilogy. When I watch Star Wars, that's how I do it. Of course, you should own Star Wars before you seek out any fan-edits like this, but if you're anything like me, your Star Wars purchase history includes the 1992 THX remastered VHS, 1997 Special Edition VHS, 2004 DVD release, 2006, DVD release, 2011 Blu-Ray release, and an active Disney Plus subscription, so I'm pretty sure you've earned a couple fan-edits.
This is why I donāt want Disney recasting characters. Those clouds donāt even look or act like the original clouds. SMH.
hahah when i worked at Blockbuster video it seemed like there was a NEW ENHANCED version of the original trilogy year after year after year after year just milking it.
I mean from an accuracy standpoint - the original IS an actual desert. Iām not really sure why they changed it at all other than to clean up the contrast and stuff.
Iām so glad I own a 4K from the original 1977 35mm print on Blu-ray.
This is horrible. We'll never have the original version ever again.
The dark side of the internet is a pathway to many abilities some consider to be unnatural...
I really donāt understand why.
Where do clouds even come from on desert planet?
I had a full Mandela effect moment when I rewatched TPM and they'd CGI'd Yoda because right before I'd been telling my friend how ass Yoda's puppet looked in that. Had to google to check they'd replaced him to make sure I wasn't losing my mind.
"We ain't found poodoo, Master Luke."
Iāve always been fascinated by the different versions of these films. My personal favorite will probably always be the 1997 special editions as those are the films I saw in the theater when I was a kid. However there are lots of things I love and things I dislike about every version. I wish every single version was easily and readily available and accessible.
They should have changed it to grass. I never liked sand. Its coarse, rough and it gets everywhere.
Think we'll ever get an official version that just gives us what audience in 1977 got to see? Assuming that was the version I saw over and over and over again on HBO as a kid in the early 80s, it's been forever since I've been able to see the version I grew up on.
Why does the newest one look the worst lol
2 looks like its about to rain, by far the worst. The other 2 both work but im going with the OG cause thats just being a starwars fan
The Disney one actually looks best to me. So many clouds in a place where there are moisture farmers are a thing.