GMER4: Silence of the Lambs vs. The Matrix vs. Star Wars: A New Hope

[John McHenry]

Doesn't know the difference between VFX and CGI is my guess. VFX tend to look more believable. When I see CGI I can instantly tell it's fake.

 

[We Are Legion]

You'd be hard-pressed to find a single person in 1977 who took issue with the Star Wars special effects. League of their own.

 

[Keith]

You'd be hard-pressed to find a single person in 1977 who took issue with the Star Wars special effects. League of their own.

Yes but the issue we are talking about here is over use of effects and having a director who can keep a handle on them. The effects in Star Wars were good, but they were pushed too much ahead of story and character, and because the director was clueless it just became a blur.

 

[Deezy]

Yes but the issue we are talking about here is over use of effects and having a director who can keep a handle on them. The effects in Star Wars were good, but they were pushed too much ahead of story and character, and because the director was clueless it just became a blur.

The director was not clueless, he had a vision for what he wanted and got mostly what he wanted. He also was a genius for keeping the rights for merchandising and knew that it was going to be a mjaor revenue stream. George Lucas changed cinema as much as Spielberg.

The story was great, the characters were fleshed out perfectly and the effects made it even better.

 

[PHX]

All of these movies aren't exactly movies I'm that fond of but Silence of the Lambs

 

[Keith]

The director was not clueless, he had a vision for what he wanted and got mostly what he wanted. He also was a genius for keeping the rights for merchandising and knew that it was going to be a mjaor revenue stream. George Lucas changed cinema as much as Spielberg.

The story was great, the characters were fleshed out perfectly and the effects made it even better.

Yes all of that in your opinion not in mine as I have already expressed. There is a difference for giving him credit for being a servy business man who exploits an oppunity (you could agrue he was lucky by the way because if the first film had floped chances are he would never have worked in hollywood again) and then claiming he is a good director or storyteller, if that man can direct I would hate to see a bad director.

 

[John McHenry]

American Graffiti was a perfectly fine movie directed by Lucas. He can direct the issue is he's more of a writer who wants exactly what he imagined on screen. With Sci-fi that seems to be pretty difficult. But also he really fucked up in not casting Jodie Foster.

 

[Ozymandias]

Anyone who says George Lucas can't direct - indeed can't direct sci-fi - has never seen THX1138.

Absolutely crazy to say he cant direct, as Optimus Primetime says, American Graffiti is a fantastic film, lauded by his pals Francis Ford Coppola and Spielberg. A complete visionary, flawed? Yes, but a visionary director nonetheless.

 

[Keith]

Anyone who says George Lucas can't direct - indeed can't direct sci-fi - has never seen THX1138.

Absolutely crazy to say he cant direct, as Optimus Primetime says, American Graffiti is a fantastic film, lauded by his pals Francis Ford Coppola and Spielberg. A complete visionary, flawed? Yes, but a visionary director nonetheless.

Not a fan of AG so my view remains the same.

American Graffiti was a perfectly fine movie directed by Lucas. He can direct the issue is he's more of a writer who wants exactly what he imagined on screen. With Sci-fi that seems to be pretty difficult. But also he really fucked up in not casting Jodie Foster.

Yeah well that goes without saying...