We Remade the STAR WARS Trench Run in 1 Day 

Bruh 😂😂😂

🤣🤣🤣 lmao

Also Disney: We getz the revenue then we sue

I was here before Disney got them

Damn, Disney is run by a bunch of assholes smh 😔

Agreed. That was really nice.

Agreed. That was really nice.

Agreed. That was really nice.

Agreed. That was really nice.

Agreed. That was really nice.

No it doesn’t. It makes me appreciate the CGI more and screw the original effects

@@firestriker3580 huh

@@Sourbrautwurst21 he’s prob joking

@@firestriker3580 really!! if it wasn't for the original effects there wouldn't be a star wars!!

Analog is KING!

what i find funny is how these VFX artists are much more scientist then real artists... afterall they are not recreating anything they are not original in their works either... all they do all day is to scientifically tell you why your shots should look like this and that. thats not an artist to me, thats a scientist... back in the days they didn't care about physics, they didn't care about the lighting and the small little shadow and reflections... all they cared about was the dream of going into another galaxy. after all... 12 parsec is nothing... its literally a really really really slow measurement of distance, not speed. its clear that george lucas didn't care about the science behind things... he did the dream though and thats what i want from movies.... yeah sure your shot loks great and all... but so was the old one and it deliverred the dream.... what has your shot done ? delivered an old dream with much better lighting... also... if you wanted to be more realistic... there is no sounds in space... so basically, remove all sounds from any shots from outer space. the only sounds that should be is in the cockpits !!! that would be much more realistic now would it.

haha r2 flying go brrrrrrrrr

That was very apparent with the iconic shot of the back of R2D2 in the trench, in the in the remastered version it's bouncing around so much and out a frame so often that that iconic shot is lost. It's too busy, It's got too many elements moving and no chance to fine its poetry.

@@dndbasement2370 CG isn't art. It's craftsmanship. Don't get me wrong. There is something very admirable bring a good craftsman. However there's a difference between painting the Mona Lisa with your own hands or rendering it on a computer. Everyone would agree that there is a distinction to be made.

@@EbonyPope are you saying that everyone who creates stuff with 3D programs aren't artists ? or more precisely sculptors ? the thing is... ART takes many forms and definitely is something of a term that is very loose in its description. but i have to say that craftsmanship is art. crafting is definitely an art by itself. otherwise we wouldn't have paintings, we wouldn'T have musics, we wouldn't have those dwarven forge stuff... it doesn't matter if you make them digitally or if manually by hands. i see it more like this... craftmanship is the way you do it, Art is the end product. thats how i see it. but again the word art is very very loose to what it means so its hard to differentiate what it is.

Haha year, let's "Ark of the covenant" all the Corridor crew themselves... a big box is delivered to the Studio, they unbox is with everybody watching and it's god's gaudi little diary box... yay... cue the "ZAPP". Who would be the two to avert their faces? Maybe Jordan and Peter as the ones usually not that deep in the stuff? :D And a year later they could revisit for the office party and get out the wrong grail. LOL you choose poorly, Corridorites!

I would love to see that.

yes.

Thats actually a reaealllyyy good idea

That could be fun!

Continuity error

@@Honestandbrokecameraguy *just fix it in post

Wait swoosh watches corridor? The more ya know

Lol wait what are you doing here

@@Scawsum I guess yes

But it looks epic too

To be fair the have more advanced technology then back then

yep! exactly.

Agreed. CGI "artists" are artists and frequently try to make things too artsy instead of trying to MODEL realism. Not that original Star Wars or 80s movie production were absolutely perfect, but I think CGI is abused as far as making flashy ***** appear on the screen for the sake of flashy ****.

@pyropulse These guys remaking a vintage game like Tie Fighter would be awesome. But remaking movie scenes? Sorry but nothing beats the original models.

For real, I’ve been seeing their Black Rifle Coffee commercial during preseason football games.

They're great at cgi, that's where the compliment ends.

Who forgets that? Lol

Yeah. And their friends are literally people who work in Hollywood lol

Ye

well yeah, i think this video is a showcase of how much technology has improved that a small team could make in one day what may have taken many for a studio team decades ago, whereas with new technology, it’s possible to make a much better version in a short timeframe

Good point. Copy/recreate & improve is way easier than not even knowing if it’ll be cool or even work…

Not to mention the tech didn't exist in 77 ILM invented it. As they did with cgi. So these millennials owe a heap of respect while they pat themselves on the back for this video game looking edit. Granted it was a day but better nah I dont think so. But I do agree interactive lighting would be a benefit to the scene. These kids are bragging about technology George lucas and ILM gave them. And before some nerd says this software wasn't made by Lucasfilm. Maybe not but they invented cgi. Heck Pixar's origins are at ILM

@@hansolo374 We'd probably all agree with you. But I don't think they were bragging about the modern software; I think they were showing how much technology has improved since 1977.

@@RAndrewNeal They were bragging. It's very clear in the way they express it.

It wasn't made in a day, they did Zero modeling, stole them off the internet...

@@craigbloxham8344 I respect your view on things, though, I do believe they had modelled it. I may be completely wrong, though, and it potentially could be up for debate!

@Bloodbath-I- No, they specifically said they downloaded the models from the internet. The only thing they did was copy and pasted sections of the trench together, downloaded the ship models, mapped materials to them, and set up the animation, adding some lasers.

You also need to take in the fact the the original was done form scratch! Multiple retakes, actual filming over and over again, several artists from different backgrounds managing several aspects of a single shot, let alone the whole sequence! This was just piggy backing the final result!

TBH no, not in one day nor in "possibly" years. And is neither up for debate, there exist facts.

Or it shows how far the tools have come to make it easily done in a day along with the fact they didn't actual create any of the models just downloaded someone else's work (that alone saved many days of work, even today). In a decade or two from now the next gen of FX artists will use their more advance tools and it will be done in seconds. It will go something like this "Co-pilot, replicate Star Wars trench scene from the point Luke enters the trench until 30 seconds after he releases second torpedo. Modify Luke model to be a giant rabbit smoking a lit cigar and speaking with a French accent, blah, blah, blah... (more instructions), initiate rendering of scene!". 15 seconds later, done. "Wow! are we good or are we good!"

Dew eet

Do it!!

Do it!

Do it!

Do or do not, there is no try.

It's super satisfying when i pick up on something, scroll down and someone has already commented it

i was literally about to say that

So was I 😅

@@SpaghettioH Right?! As soon as I noticed I just _had_ to search the comments for "15:" assuming that someone would mention the timestamp in the comments. Was not disappointed!

It looks old. Star Wars is hardly the only show to use that kind of effects. Some shows it looks better, some shows worse. But it's like claymation or animatronics. They have a feel to them you tend to recognize. Sometimes nostalgia is better than being good. There's also a difference in pacing in old movies. Sometimes deliberate, sometimes driven by the lack of technology.

@@GeekOfAllness Star Wars were movies, not shows.

@@notsure1969 Holy pedantic response. You, I and everybody else know what he meant.

Nostalgia plays a big part in making the older aesthetic look good.

thats what i mean, ik it sounds weird but i prefer the lightsaber in the prequels where the lightsaber doesnt cast light rather than the lightsaber effects from the sequels

well yes It should be practically impossible to do what Luke did, Alas the designers never foresaw a single ship being piloted by someone who can react to laser bolts before they even actually fire. (p.s ignoring that disney fan fiction nonsense)

He used the force

Luke SkyyWalllkrrr had The Force . økAy thEn .

When vader's tie fighter appears, the trench guns stop. That's covered in the movie. Remember, "The guns. They've stopped". But yeah, this part seemed more realistic. There were so many turrets on either side, I can't see why there wouldn't be that much fire. Frankly though, I could never figure out why they flew along the entire trench. It's an open-top trench. Just fly in right at the end and fire the torpedo. Why are you flying along a narrow space for a full minute or so? Swoop in, fire, gtfo. Repeat as necessary

​@@danreyn Unless the zone with the weak spot was heavily covered by turrets above the trench, or had some sort of magnetic shield above the trench. Reasons can be found.

And it has potential to be re-redone years down the line as technology improves

Agreed. I'd be waiting for episodes just like I do vfx artist react episodes. They need to make it happen. Maybe if they get enough suggestions.

Only thing is, they have a lot of projects on their plate and it would take a lot of effort and commitment. I would love to see it too though!

haha isn't.. that what this is? We do it pretty regularly, but these videos are more of a time sink than react, so an every day series would not be possible atm.

@@CorridorCrew maybe weekly at most? You guys do absolute amazing work, keep it up!

Because shooting physical objects versus doing everything CGI almost always looked better.

I give credit to these guys just because they are constantly referencing how borderline impossible it was for the guys back in the day... "they couldn't just watch it in real time", "they could just copy and paste", etc. It is amazing that the effects came out as good as they did in 1977. Lucas truly did capture lightning in a bottle... not only with the concept and story, but with the crew he put together.

All disrespect to them lol!!! They challenged the OG!

The problem with the shot (which does look great, of course) is that there's too much noise. Too many lasers, too many lighting effects. The eyes wander about the screen, unsure what to look at and you lose focus. There's just too much stuff in the frame at once. Add to this the motion blur going on and the grain effects, they create the uncanny valley effect and make your mind realize it's obvious CG, which breaks the suspension of disbelief. That's why it's not as effective as the original, it's spectacular but devoid of actual suspense. That's not to say you couldn't recreate the original shots using CG. You could do that while making some subtle imrpovements to the lighting and so forth and it would probably be more pleasant on the eyes, but that's deliberately NOT what these guys were going for. They wanted to their own thing, and I respect that.

I still think the original looks better. The brain knows when it is looking at a real object.

I doubt they noticed the difference.

well to me it looked off so I had to check the rendered footage and the model :)

Also Hey Scott. Again a ranom vid I watch and find you.

MADE ME ANGEREY

I would love it if they were

That really is a masterful one - I never noticed it in all my years of watching. The initial flash before it that *doesn't* change the background sets our expectations, and then the absolute genius of the model shop covers the switch in a split second. Sometimes the smallest touches are the cleverest!

I think that‘s mostly because of the 1 day limit. You can spend a week on an X-Wing alone.

ikr. The sense of scale is completely lost in the remake. Also, the surface of the trench looks very shiny, which reduces the sense of realism even more.

I think it's the speed the trench is moving. It's way too fast. They're talking about the reflections and the shadows, but you can't see any of it. It's a bit TOO flashy. The trench itself needs to be a background so the ships are the focus.

Lasers look too fat and flashy. Feels like too much going on. Less is more. Overall, let me explain it in food terms.... After seeing this, it feels like I just ate 5 snickers one after the other instead of a nice balanced meal.

My professional impression: a little too much motion blur, too much camera shake occasionally, too shiny shaders, too flashy compositing, 3D models have not enough details. All the things that are indeed associated with video games. Also IMHO they should have reproduced the original shots and their camera movements and illumination of the scenes more accurately and instead of making it look more like modern film-making, they should have introduced some film-grain and making it look more like the 70s. If they had done so, their work would blend much better with the original footage.

Bro that’d be sick

Thanks for repeating what he said in the video, that's helpful.

@@holliswilliams8426 Thanks for being an asshole, I was worried I wouldn't encounter any today.

The vignettes and power windows are typically more of a color grading trick but in a pinch can punch up VFX shots instantly

What the hell is a rundown?

@@holliswilliams8426 I really appreciated how his comment repeated the content of the video.

Yeah, the people praising this are crazy, it looks like a dark and murky video game.

"grrr new thing bad". The old is clean and readable because they had extremely limited technology. If episode 4 was made today with the same people it would look 100% similar to the Corridor version.

Ok nerd

@@VLE-Grimace Do you got nothing better to do than making fun of people’s interests? Get a life

Got any more fun facts? Doesn’t have to be about this scene.

huh. no shit. i've been an ultra star wars VFX nerd since the first movie came out, i've seen it hundreds of times, i've studied every bit of it, and i never caught that transition. good shit.

Nice

Yeah, I agree with this. I definitely felt like there was a lot of lost readibility. It's probably something that could have been cleaned up with stronger lighting. I just don't think there was enough contrast between the ships and the death star.

Exactly. They started with a pretty low detail model of the trench and the x wings, and then I think there were some issues with scale. If they made the scale of the scene bigger in the 3d software the bounce lighting wouldn't have been as intense and there would be more contrast in the render to start with, which means they wouldn't need to color grade it as much in post. From my experience with trying to fix low contrast renders, it's really hard to get a good result

This exactly

Exactly. This is the problem with modern CG, its always more about what they can do, rather than what they should do, for the sake of the scene.

Post process chromatic aberration always makes things look like crap. And lens dirt is like "hey look I'm a cg shot"

Flat earthers are surely going to love this comment 😂😂😂. Just to be clear, i'm not calling you one.

@@DJKHOTTA As a flat-earther, I feel I should point out that we do actually believe the world is round... It's just also flat. Like a pizza! 🍕 (jk I'm not really a flat earther! 😜)

Many things have improved in the last 45 years. Fuel efficiency, vehicle safety (and life preserving technology on board of vehicles), communication speed and ease, computing power and what the excess is used for, Information available about Earth and other Solar planets, medical and pharmaceutical technology and operation methods and completely new materials and production methods a 1976 person could only have dreamed of. We just are too used to it BEING that way, that we rarely notice if we do not sit down and actively try to compare the two eras.

They did a great job without doing too much. There was another video where Wren (I think) said something to the affect of, “VFX should help support the story and not be the focal point.” They did just that with this project.

i cringed so hard when that random ass dude asked who are you???? bruh chilll

@@nakachinjah7240 I thought it was a joke

I think that's because of the interactive lighting. Without it, you don't really have any frame of reference to understand how big the fighters are compared to the anything around them. So even though the shots have very similar blocking, the added details help to sell the perspective so much more

I not that difficult. I knew someone who could bulleye a womprat at that distance.

Yes, I really want a fully remastered The Last Starfighter with modern FX.

@@tomwilson2112 Didn't even read the comments before posting this same thing. Agree 3000

I was just thinking about that movie the other day. They went 'all in' on those sweet sweet 3D effects, but it hasn't aged well! That's trouble with a capital T and that rhymes with P and that stands for Pool! Right here in River City!

Awww heck yes.

True. It would be epic to see that redone with modern technology. I'd love to see them remake that movie.

Exactly. The "new" shots are more flashy and have more effects, but at the same time you can tell that they are fanmade and not from a movie. A little bit funny to see these guys falling a bit into the "mid-2000s action movie" trap of more/faster = better

@@Papersheepp Yeah and don't get me wrong, they look sexy as hell! Just an observation about this and all VFX in general

I honestly love the chaotic "you're in the middle of a war" aesthetic they're going for but the way the original scene is shot doesn't allow for that. The cinematography of the original is clearly done serve the "gracefulness" of the scene, because that's just what they could do with the technology of the time. I feel like for their style to work with the scene, they have to completely redo the cinematography.

@m yeh

@@Papersheepp yeah like shark boy and lava girl or spy kids 3D it has the corny vfx trope

I concur, his touches made the texture more real feeling. Before he touched it up it looked like an intro to a video game

He added all the effects that gamers hate lol

Reminds me of the making of Wall-E, where the camera experts brought in to make the shots feel more real were confused that the CGI team was trying to add all the stuff they had been trying for decades to get rid of.

@@alexanderjones3830 the gamecube game looked pretty close to the movie but with the added lighting etc ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-6Xyge10USMU.html

@@alexanderjones3830 ye, but gaming and movies are completely different things

Underrated reference

Just rewatched it a few weeks ago, solid.

when you are at your workstation and are seriously trying to generate sympaty in the listener by laughing at the original instead of focusing on what you should look at to learn from a masterpiece well that's the result. The so called " professional animator" of todays are just like that , the results in the low quality in 3D films is more clear to me now :)

@1998SIMOMEGA Yes baby but that fix requires a couple of seconds adjusting the subject and the camera handlers on the spline. What gives more gain than an action that requires second and provides full fidelity when you,as you said , have Just few hours. That s exactly the point Bro!

Yeah the x wing looks like it's facing the bottom of the trench and is about to crash into it

@@_Areknames_ tf

Yeah...seriously. If you tried to perform that maneuver in the real world (dive straight down into a trench and make a 95-degree turn to exactly the right orientation at interplanetary speeds...) you're a dark spot on the wall or floor. A computer could do it, but even if the spaceframe could withstand it, the human body sure as heck couldn't. It'd be like getting hit by a truck to have that kind of direction change at that speed. I doubt any human could survive it at even 300KPH.

The comparison footage they're showing isn't the original 1977 footage.

@@musguelha14 They showed the original 1977 footage in several parts of the video aswell

@@Spoon80085 he wants to say it's the 1997 Episode IV Special Edition footage that swapped a lot of the original 1977 ILM model shots with inferior 90's CGI shots

THIS IS A GREAT IDEA

love this

You’re 100% correct. Alien and the 1982 “The Thing” are some prime examples. Also yes, Disney’s Star Wars is complete trash.

@@mattharrell4 “Disney’s Star Wars is completele trash.” What about the Mandolorian, SWTCW season 7, Bad Batch, Star Wars Rebels, Rogue One a Star Wars story, Solo a Star Wars story, Star Wars Battlefront I (2015), and II (2017), and more..

@@TacticaLLR lmfao I should’ve been WAY more specific. I meant to say Episodes 7-9 are trash. All the movies/shows you listed were great; the animated shows to me are the best and truest to what Star Wars always aimed to be. SWTCW actually did the most amazing job of fleshing out episodes 1-3 by showing the slow dragging on of the war and how special the bond was between the clones and Jedi which in turn showed what tragic characters they were when they were unwittingly forced to betray the Jedi they loved. So yeah, I totally stand corrected not ALL Disney touched was ruined. Some of the shows are very good and some not so much. What kills me most is that by the end of episode 9 there’s not great revival of the Jedi, their holocrons, wisdom, and knowledge are pretty much lost and everything feels small and insignificant compared to what the Jedi were in episodes 1-3 and all the lore prior to that point.

@@mattharrell4 oh ok sorry, I agree, except I still kind of liked the force awakens just because it introduced some cool new ships, the first order, etc, and I’m ok with the last Jedi, however episode 9 was pretty much complete garbage.

@@TacticaLLR My big issue with Force Awakens is it’s basically Episode 4. The empire is back, they have a Death Star, an angsty discount Sith(he’s no Vader for sure), all our “heroes” meet, we get a new Jedi, etc. It basically says that everything our heroes accomplished in episodes 4-6 meant nothing bc nothing changed. Then they crap all over our beloved heroes. Just my opinion and I can see why others can enjoy aspects of it I just don’t.

Extend the explosion showing the planet crack before it explodes, then skip to Leia crying.

Up you go sir

Yes! That's a scene begging to be remastered!

Yes, yes and yes. "You can't just shoot a hole into the surface of Alderan!".

All the big explosions in the OT happen way too fast. Alderan, the two death stars - they pop like balloons, but Alderan is (I assume) an earth sized planet. Even a super powerful explosion equal to quintillions of Gigatons of TNT does not "pop" from nothing to tens of thousands of miles across in zero fathomable time. Even the death star explosions are way too large to simply go from a perfect space station to a ball of flame in less than a frame of film. Movies still make this type of mistake - in Avengers: Infinity War, Thanos pulls the moon down on them - well if that moon is even half the distance from the planet that our moon is and those pieces of it were travelling a MILLION miles an hour (ridiculous), it would still take almost 8 minutes for the pieces to reach our characters. Suspension of disbelief is fine and I'm okay with this, but my brain can't help but notice the obvious suspension of the physical laws of the universe.

They just meant technically better, not a more convincing shot than the original

I think it’s a problem that your only notes is to make the cgi look better. In reality if they could get a physical high detail model of an x wing and other things they could make it look that bit more realistic since it doesn’t really look better just more modern and all cgi instead of the charm star wars has with its practical effects

yea, I'd like to see what it actually takes them to get to "film-quality CGI"... instead of the "high-end-tv VFX" as mentioned in the video.

@@scottking8189 well however they go about improving the visual fidelity of the scene to make it more hyper realistic is good with me. The problem with practical elements is that digital cameras and lighting (they make a point that they can’t afford a crane) don’t interact with practical elements as well as they do with digital ones. Could they make it work however, then of course I’d like to see practical elements, too. They are a VFX studio, however.

Some people are never satisfied

Agreed! Any time they do these VFX challenges, I always wish they would take more time and make it even better.

Yes this!☝

Yup

They did it in a day…

@@Jealod24 they could make it in a year, and it would still be obvious cgi. The human brain can detect all of the flaws, and computers still can't simulate real-world physics good enough to fool it.

@@DungeonMiser If they spent the time to make the textures and lighting look realistic, 99% of people wouldn’t be able to tell the difference. (Despite the fact that it’s obviously science fiction)

"We IMPROVED the trench run in 1 DAY!" = "We made a modern janky version in a week"

@@esotericVideos Except it isn't improved at all.

This could be a netflix series with the corridor crew.

Your prayer might be answered here : ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-QOcN5kr20Lo.html

ru-vid.com ru-vid.com

@@melvinch I actually thought that was gonna be a rickroll

Tf I was watching SidemenReacts and I see your comment now I click on a corridor crew video and I see u here aswell.

Sorry for the interruption, I know this has nothing to do with the video but its for you, to whoever is reading this and its urgent. One day millions of people will vanish, the rapture is near! Accept Jesus as Lord and Savior! And Live a Faithful Holy Life! He doesn’t want anyone to be left behind! time is short! Call me a crazy person if you want too, but what I’m saying is the truth and you don’t know and realize, that you need Jesus! You don’t know Him, because you don’t go to Him! He is your only Hope Accept Jesus as Lord and Savior, that He died for you and all of our sins, acknowledge that you are a sinner and that you need Him, repent and ask forgiveness, and believe and have faith that He is real Now once you accept Him, you will receive the Holy Spirit, now while you are alive, read your bible, follow God, and live for Him

watch star wars the clone wars. if you havent already

do you really need to comment on almost every video?

@@CobiVonSchweetz hey, what date is the rapture? I can’t wait! I packed my suitcase and have all my Hawaii shirts as well. How is the weather over there? Should I bring a jacket?

Thank god most of us don’t have room temperature IQ like you

@pyropulse it’s better, not more impressive, and they had to push in a lot of content cause this was made in a single day

I think the next level of CGI effects will be when traditional practical effects can be simulated with heat, chemistry, physics, all together. So the artists would put on VR headsets and mess with endless virtual materials like playing in a sandbox until they got the look that they want. That's what it would take to top the practical effects.

watch star wars the clone wars. if you havent already

I'm with you there. One of the things that made the prequel so bad was the lack of any practical effects.

@@Dantalisman there are more practical effects than you think in the prequels. Just a lot of cgi as well.

@@charlesiverson1769 They covered most of the practical effects with cgi

That's the point they missed totally; George Lucas kept telling John Dykstra he wanted the trench to be a total blur, and Dykstra told him it wouldn't look real. Lucas said he didn't want real. You don't hear spaceship engines, or explosions in real space either. Lucas wanted fantasy, not realism. That is why their remake does not work!

@@bobrew461 The irony is the blur of that trench completely sells the shot.

Not just the blur of the background, but the contrast against the clear and focused fighters in the foreground. I gives a sense of speed and the smoothness of space. And it is "realistic" in it's own way. So much of the trench run (and all the other fighter movements) is really ridiculously slow if you stadiometrically range things and try to calculate speed. edit - also, didn't like the shaky cam.

@@markthomas5683 Yeah, the CGI trench is also too compact, the textures that look good in stills, also run together and ends up making the trench "messy" and looking more like a computer graphic. *ALSO* I feel that the tench repeats itself too soon, so it also feel... fake... the way the original DOES NOT. The original trench also has grey and yellow parts, while the CGI is mono-color... and that "texture" is is still bad. The camera /model rotation from top to rear = looks strange, not as organic as the original, it's always an odd shot anyway. But the CGI BENDS the trench artificially and messes up the shot. The Fighter movement needs to be toned down a bit... the movement is good otherwise. The reflecting canopies look great! The reflecting of the green blasts looks great too! Exploding Y-Wing looks great. The darkness of the 3 X-wings is too dark, its hard to see them. (Too real problem). The greyness, fuzziness makes it look like a TV show... keep things CRISP, colors vibrant and DON'T shake the camera. The sense of SPEED was done on the original was jittering the camera!! The X-wings are the same Red 3 model. Red 1~6 have different markings, Some have yellow in them and in different areas. I know they had a day, but they bothered to color the Astromechs. But it's less work to change a few red parts "white" and add a bit of yellow here and there. Red 5 = Luke. Has broken red stripe in two places. Red 2 = Wedge. Solid red stripe, yellow nose. Red 3 = Biggs, red stripe, a bit of yellow past the nose. Otherwise very basic. The 3D models didn't have much "weight" to them. The shot behind R2D2 looked like a toy. Out of focus did not help. Look at Rogue one when an X-Wing comes out of Hyperspace with the fleet... that's how its done. Right, I'm not a film expert. But the people who make movies make adjustments to the 3D models to make them "work" visually.

Its not that its too real, its badly directed. Why are the random zooms in, focuses, from like arbitrary magical place in space. If its not the perspective of the pilot then whose is it? Also the render looks ... bad. The materials on the 3d models are too simple, they dont look like metal or paint, they are gray non destinct blocks with no color. Also the render is too noisy by far, even with all the post effect gimmick to me it looks like big smear, there is just too much low sample reflections going on everywhere.

More than Tron really.

great film & yeah, those guys rly did work their collective arses off way back then to make that film!

YESSSS!!! Great idea dude 👍

Yes yes yes I just watched that movie. Please do the death blossom scene.

@@djmips what do you mean more than tron? As in " The Last Starfighter is the granddaddy of real world computer graphics?" in that case yes it really is. Don't get me wrong though Tron is Tron but the graphics were meant to look like a computer world whereas The Last Starfighter was meant to look like the real world.

I agree. They seem to have a tendency to make there be too much going on. But it's still cool.

Yeah, I like the cleaner lasers, too. The particles remind me of Kylo Ren's lightsabre.

Exactly, just like many of the models from Lord of the rings looks better then CGI hobbit

I agree that the space ship models and the trench looked better in the original one.

@@GothicLightingQueen Quality of CGI mostly comes down to budget and time nowadays. Hobbit had multiple changes and the CGI had to be rushed so the end result is what it is.

@@axelibrotherus3526 Perhaps they should have spent the time improving the background lighting and adding some more after effects to the original. Best of both worlds.

Not really, because the jitter isn't believable.

@@Liofa73 I think that's my big problem with modern cinema as a whole. "Oh the jitter makes it look better." Actually, no, it doesn't. I'd much rather have a smooth as silk shot with the fighters themselves doing the movement.

I think the idea behind those lasguns by Lucas was, that they do - in fact - hit the same moment you would hit the trigger, like a laser would. The red or green glow is just some particles following the invisible, original laser trace after to shot has passed. Like a soundwave following a fighterjet. There are no "plasmabolts" being shot in STAR WARS.

The glow is fine, because the laser release some light obviously, but I also don't like how the laser looks, it should have thinner and sharper look, they ruined the look of the laser for sure, doesn't feel like the original SW one.

The inspiration for Star Wars lasers was 100% from tracers in WW2 aerial combat footage. In fact, for the Millenium Falcon turret gunning scene in A New Hope, they straight up copied footage from bomber turrets shooting at German fighters. If you're in a plane trying to shoot down another plane, it's really hard to tell how close you are to hitting your target unless you're using tracers. The engagement distance for WW2 fighters is pretty long by your everyday ground-based standards because they move so fast and cover so much distance, and they might be taking potshots at each other from a kilometer or more away. That gives you plenty of time to see the bright glowing multicolored bullets traveling through the air, streaking toward your target or your own plane. Lucas and crew thought that was a neat look, and extended it to basically all the weaponry in the Star Wars universe, so I think it's probably fair to say that blaster bolts travel at approximately the same speed as IRL bullets (at least in canon, they're pretty slow if you actually count frames on a handheld blaster).

@@craddocraddoc "There are no "plasmabolts" being shot in STAR WARS." So why is there recoil in the turrets' barrels? Why are "cases" ejected from artillery emplacements? Why do have turbo-laser hits an "impact" force to the target? Because they are "Turbo-Lasers", which could be attributed to a lack of the English word for the original Aurabesh word, and the technology behind it would be super-charged & accelerated plasma: "Turbolasers operated on the same principles as other blaster weaponry, converting high-energy gas into plasma bolts, but made use of much larger power generators and multi-person crews." h__ps://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Turbolaser

@@MistedMind which is not the point here. There were ideas of Lucas in the 1970s. A lot of these can be seen - or at least being taught of - by the original added materials for the "original" series. I've got them on vhs, it is a two-hour-video mostly narrated by Lucas and showing the technic and visual effects of the movie and how they were created. Still, a laserpointer is not the best tool for some hollywood action shots, therefore I'm sure there are many ammo crates getting blown up or ammunition getting ejected. Still, the vision of George Lucas was, that laser "shots" are just a particle afterglow following the shot. Originally, fighters and men should explode/collapse before being "hit" by the light to simulate that, but this was just too complicated and look "weird" in the testing shots that were produced.

Yeah that's a good one, they collaborate with the Captain.

That was a great video from the Captain, one of his best. He clearly loves the film. The effects were very impressive at the time.

Good pick.

@The Insufferable Tool love the idea of this but I think the flight mechanics are such an integral part of each production that it just wouldn’t feel right. I *love* Star Wars but jeez, the first time I saw the flight mechanics of Battlestar I think my heart stopped for a bit. I got the same buzz from them on every time someone picked up cyclons on the scanners that I get whenever someone ignites a lightsaber.

@The Insufferable Tool looking at this with a fresh head the next morning; of course, the whole thing with this channel is “let’s try it anyway”. It’s a good shout

A collab would be dope

I think the render kinda has the force awakens final battle vibes. It's more hyper real. While i thought it was gonna be more like rogue one, which was more grounded.

"fake things look more fake than real things" yes and water is wet.

Congratulations, captain obvious.

@@DreadnaughtyArt No, he is quite correct. Only someone who grew up on video games would think this an improvement.

@@chamilton4577 you don't need to cope I don't care.

@@DreadnaughtyArt Well those are certainly all words...

Same, perfect example Aliens, CGI can not compete with those special effects.

I agree with you 100%. The new footage looks overdone, with all the effects and camera vibrating

Agree 100%… The original trench run is better and more realistic because lasers do not cast light to the sides unless they hit something and the light scatters. The vibrating doesn’t make sense either. It’s like a lot of modern Hollywood where things are done just because, while actually making things less real world and more video game.

The jittering is HORRIBLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I agree. The CGI (as cool as it is) is too busy and flashy