The models show a big difference. Star Trek models, indeed Star Trek in general has a very clean, sterile look. Star Wars in general has a very dirty look. Used, battered, etc. I think that lends itself to seeming more realistic. In a world where peopel are exploring planets, things get dirty and used. I realize that the idea of a perfect future like Star Trek includes magical cleaning things, but give me a break, it's just too much. I was startled to see that ILM interviews in the special features of the ST:III DVD echoed precisely this, comparing their model-making process to those for Star Wars and for Alien(s.)
Then I thought about the prequel trilogy. Everything looks much cleaner. I'd previously thought that perhaps, even though the CGI was quite good, and at times indistinguishable from model work, that was what had bothered me about the prequels, but I think I hadn't quite hit on it with that. What bothered me wasn't that it was all CGI, but rather that everything seemed much too clean and shiny for Star Wars. It's in keeping with the chronology; the prequels take place during the height of the Republic, when things were shiny and new; clean and kept up, but it still just doesn't have the same feel. And I think that's what actually bothered me about the CGI, and what made the prequels have so much of a different feeling and simply a lack of the magic that was inherent in the original trilogy, where you had the sense of a greatness lost, and could see remnants of it. I'm a sucker for lost technology and stuff like that, loving that discussion in The Lost World.
No comments:
Post a Comment