Hollywood Historical Revisionism

[Tea Earl Grey Hot]

With the advent of high definition TV, computer animation, etc. "classic" movies and tv shows that were made before all this technology existed I think are being ruined by today's taste for realism and detail in film. Blu-ray releases of TV shows and movies such as Star Trek remastered or Star Wars IV, V, and VI that were made from rescanned film negatives and incorporate new CGI scenes I think are a form of historical revisionism. The ingenuity and technical skill of animators, technicians, etc., who worked with real sets, props, and explosions is being forgotten because of new CGI scenes replacing their work (see every episode of Star Trek Remastered). Sure, their work doesn't look realistic but what's amazing is seeing what they did despite all the limitations. That's something worth remembering and admiring. Who cares whether or not they may have preferred CGI if they had it? Fulfilling their "unfulfilled intentions" is not creating product that existed and caused history. It's not the thing that made it great.

[downbeatplumb]

With the advent of high definition TV, computer animation, etc. "classic" movies and tv shows that were made before all this technology existed I think are being ruined by today's taste for realism and detail in film. Blu-ray releases of TV shows and movies such as Star Trek remastered or Star Wars IV, V, and VI that were made from rescanned film negatives and incorporate new CGI scenes I think are a form of historical revisionism. The ingenuity and technical skill of animators, technicians, etc., who worked with real sets, props, and explosions is being forgotten because of new CGI scenes replacing their work (see every episode of Star Trek Remastered). Sure, their work doesn't look realistic but what's amazing is seeing what they did despite all the limitations. That's something worth remembering and admiring. Who cares whether or not they may have preferred CGI if they had it? Fulfilling their "unfulfilled intentions" is not creating product that existed and caused history. It's not the thing that made it great.

Labryinth as CGI would ahve sucked. It was the creatures that made it magical.

Although they could have fixed that dummy at the end that flounced around on the Escher staircase.

[Doubting Thomas]

I hate it when they mess around with old movies. Ted Turner colorizing black & white movies back in the 80's was bad enough. They don't need to turn old movies into "hi def."

[Ryantology]

I don't think CG ruins a movie, nor is a movie with it automatically inferior to movies that did not benefit from technological innovation. Different isn't automatically bad.

I mean, I definitely agree that some older works are charming in part because of the limitations their creators had to work around, but a good movie is good in spite of things like this, not because of them.

[Doubting Thomas]

I hate it when movie producers think that a bunch of CG special effects make up for a shitty story.

[Napoléon]

I was watching Star Wars Return of the Jedi a few weeks back and didn't realise just how much they'd tampered with the film from the original. It was still the same great film sure, but I actually loved the fact that it was so retro (at least to me, I wasn't born when it was made) when I first watched it on video.

[Minimalist]

I hate it when movie producers think that a bunch of CG special effects make up for a shitty story.

Isn't that every movie out there?

[Faith No More]

Labryinth as CGI would ahve sucked. It was the creatures that made it magical.

Although they could have fixed that dummy at the end that flounced around on the Escher staircase.

I was just watching that film and thinking about how different it would be made these days. There's no way they could acheive that kind of whimsical charm with computer graphics.

I do miss the days of great puppetry.

[Chas]

Just leave other people's movies alone. Make your own movie if you have something to say.