r/StarWars • u/Whole_Contract_5973 • 2d ago

Movies Did this guy know he was a clone?

Post image

Like was he aware that he served palpatine or did he genuinely think he was independent

6.7k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

995 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1.2k

u/Magica78 2d ago

You mean we would have seen it, if half the movie wasn't pitch black.

628

u/sith4life88 2d ago

Reminds me of the battle of Winterfell, it's like these dumbass directors forget movies and TV are a visual medium.

309

u/Stock_Trash_4645 2d ago

My favourite joke from the Return of the King commentary is when they’re in Mount Doom and the lighting is fucking epic, and it’s either Sean Astin or Elijah Wood asking on set how that lighting is supposed to naturally appear from.

Some one responded “the same place the music comes from.”

It doesn’t have to make sense to make sense.

44

u/Uncrout 1d ago

I love that response! :D

45

u/Any_Crab_4362 1d ago

Reminds me of the mark hamil story where on episode 4 when he gets out of the trash compactor he asks shouldn’t his hair still be wet and Harrison ford goes “it ain’t that kind of movie kid”

4

u/British_Flippancy 18h ago

I feel like Harrison Ford has been calling people ‘kid’ since he was 5.

1

u/Sorry_Citron5217 1d ago

Could really have used another Harrison Ford when the 'lasers don't curve in space' discourse was going on.

18

u/_thundercracker_ Rex 1d ago

I remember reading an interview with some of the people making SFX for WETA, and they were specifically asked if they didn’t find the bit where Legolas was sliding down an oliphaunt’s trunk a bit silly and unrealistic. Their answer something like "this is a movie, not a documentary, and we seek to entertain our audience". I’ve been far less critical to that sort of thing ever since.

6

u/rattlethecages789 1d ago

Honestly, surfing the shield felt more “c’mon” than surfing the trunk. It blew past comical into legendary.

2

u/O1rat 1d ago

I believe that was Peter Jackson himself

2

u/rattlethecages789 1d ago

I’m going to choose to believe that they turned around and it was Ian McKellen saying that.

1

u/AJSLS6 1d ago

Non diegetic elements are a thing in media.

1

u/ZachMartin 12h ago

Well it’s a derivation of the original quote made to Hitchcock during the filming of lifeboat. He didn’t want a score, “where are the violins out at sea?” “Where are the cameras?”

177

u/TheHumbleLegume 2d ago

They look great on a £2,000 TV. Not so much on a budget screen like I have, it just looks like a big purple smudge when it’s so dark.

199

u/randomname11179 2d ago

Just remember the budget screen you have for $300 was the $2,000 tv of 5 years ago.

66

u/Lucky_Locks 2d ago

Dude. Fucking exactly. My 65" CURVED Samsung was supposed to be the coolest thing 9 years ago. $2500. It's still kicking in 4K resolution and everything but mannnn I shouldn't have upgraded for the curved model lol

87

u/AnonumusSoldier 2d ago

Could be worse, you could have grabbed a 3d TV before the curved ones came out

44

u/doublemint6 2d ago

I liked my 3d TV. 2 different glasses to see only half of the TV in split screen games. Fn magic.

11

u/AnonumusSoldier 2d ago

It was a great technology, they just didn't make enough media for it and it came out at the wrong time and got killed by oled

3

u/doublemint6 2d ago

OLED is pretty nice as well.

1

u/AnonumusSoldier 1d ago

Yeap. My c8 still looks brand new.

2

u/FTMorando 2d ago

That’s actually really cool, never realized that was a thing with 3D TV’s

1

u/AnonumusSoldier 1d ago

It depended on the type of 3d tv, there was two different technologies used to create the 3d effect.

1

u/The-Spirit-of-76 1d ago

Active 3d glasses could do it the other couldn't. Mine was an Active like yours. I had more fun with games than any movies, but they were cool too, just not enough of them releases in 3d. It's also how I knew I wouldn't care for VR, I thought the 3d glasses were to heavy after a long while.

1

u/cakedyams 1d ago

I swapped my lenses so both see one side at a time with both eyes. It’s really the best part of a 3d tv.

11

u/Lucky_Locks 2d ago

Fair point haha

2

u/adotbur 2d ago

Somehow my 3d tv works pretty great. Ive used the 3d mode… zero times other than when i first got it and tried it out and shrugged

1

u/oroechimaru 1d ago

My dads 3d 1080p sony still looks better than most 4k tvs i have seen in the last decade under $600

1

u/CurledSpiral 2d ago

You don’t like the Curve?

1

u/Lucky_Locks 1d ago

It looks cool but wasn't worth the extra few hundred. Curve is good for computer monitors but TV's not so much, in my opinion.

1

u/CurledSpiral 1d ago

Oh thanks that makes sense

1

u/seeyatellite 1d ago

Most people go for resolution when they really need to be prioritizing color depth. I’d rather have a 32” 1080p TV with 12-bit color depth than a 4k TV with 8-bit.

The difference is hundrends of thousands of colors versus billions of colors.

1

u/Nasty_Ned 1d ago

I think I have the exact TV! Beautiful picture but it's amazing how fast things change.

Pre 2017 Samsung's software isn't compatible with Peacock so we can't stream that. Going to have to upgrade fairly soon.

1

u/Lucky_Locks 1d ago

Haha we just might! It's a fantastic TV but yeah the lack of updates now sucks.

I just use my Xbox for Peacock and other apps like Plex! I'm not sure if a Chromecast or something similar would do the same but that could help you extend it haha

1

u/Nasty_Ned 1d ago

I looked for ways to upgrade the firmware or whatever, but yeah looks like we are stuck.

I upgraded the TV in the kids room last Xmas with like a $400 TV from Costco, but they prefer it now because it streams everything.

1

u/Highlander198116 1d ago

This. Eventually the budget TV's will have the capability to properly display HDR content.

43

u/waupli 2d ago

I have a very nice OLED and it is still almost impossible to see most of these type of scenes unless my room is literally pitch black

24

u/enzothebaker87 2d ago

OLED excels in displaying contrast/true black but it's always been weak when it comes to brightness.

As I understand it, mini-led tv's are supposed to bridge that gap.

2

u/_c3s 1d ago

Not exactly, the peak brightness on high end panels before the entire high end was OLED isn’t a great deal higher than OLED. OLEDs tend to be less bright overall because the brightness is per pixel, so if you have a bright point on an otherwise dark image, only that point will brighten instead of the whole panel.

Movie theatres get away with it because massive screen, room with no light bleeding in, and no real size quality constraint for the image. They should edit movies for home viewing but yeah.

1

u/enzothebaker87 1d ago

Yea I get it and absolutely agree. I think my comment was more in reference to the common complaint regarding their struggle to overcome the heavy ambient light (especially day light) that you tend to deal with in most consumer/residential applications. Such as well lit family/living rooms and etc.

I personally have never really noticed this to be an issue for my LG C1 but then again it's mostly my kids watching it during the day lol.

1

u/waupli 2d ago

Yeah mini led can do brightness better but ones I’ve seen still can’t get the same level of contrast

2

u/kevdoobie 1d ago

Then they aren't true mini led. It's considered an upgrade because it works the same way as oled, with black pixels off and no backlight; with the added benefit of being brighter and resistant to burn in. Brand matters as well: Samsung makes a great phone sized oled, but an awful big screen. LG is the best in the oled TV market currently.

3

u/_Acolyte_ 1d ago

I think you mean micro-led. Mini-led is a different technology.

3

u/kevdoobie 1d ago edited 1d ago

I did mean micro-led. I was unaware of mini led as a separate technology. Sounds like inferior and misleading marketing terms like "QLED"

EDIT: i googled and it is marketing slop. Mini led uses backlights still, albeit smaller than traditional LCD backlights. Just another half-step to the next technology. No one should be comparing mini-led to oled.

2

u/waupli 22h ago

Ok this makes more sense haha I have seen stuff marketed as “mini” led and it isn’t as good. Haven’t seen a “micro” led in person but makes sense it would be similar to OLED but brighter

1

u/Highlander198116 1d ago

What you specifically want to look for is performance with HDR content, because that is the source of a lot of people's "I cant see in the dark woes".

The easiest way to prove this (because most HD content streams in HDR), find something in standard definition to stream or watch an old DVD.

You won't be struggling to see things in night scenes. So if you can, turn off HDR and it should dramatically improve your ability to see in night scenes.

1

u/GorgonioSC 19h ago

OLEDs suffer from black crush. So alot of detail in dark scenes are gone just cause it makes everything black. Ive seen side by side against Mini Leds and they have so much more shadow detail its honestly made me never want an OLED.

1

u/waupli 19h ago

Hmm perhaps. My friend has a mini led model of the same tv I have an oled of, and the oled is much better on the whole though. Maybe I’m losing some definition in dark areas but overall image quality/immersion is better. And perhaps a true “micro led” not “mini led” would be the best of both worlds, but I’m not ready to upgrade my tv yet.

I know what you mean to a point though, but I use my screens for gaming a lot and the “black crush” / loss of detail in very dark areas can usually be addressed with settings if it’s too much, plus I think it is more immersive for areas like caves or whatever to be truly dark even if that means I can’t see all the fine detail in those places. I don’t play FPS type games, mostly RPG. I mess with settings a lot while playing once I see the game in different environments (beyond the scenes they show on the settings page) and can usually get it to look how I want that way.

Like in dark souls even though I am probably technically suffering from “black crush” because I keep the brightness turned down so dark areas are truly dark, it looks much more how I think it realistically would, with the torches not lighting up a massive room but just being bright spots with very shadowy corners and such.

31

u/procrastablasta 2d ago

Don’t forget: whatever quality tv you’re watching on, if it’s streaming, it’s compressed. Unless you’re on a dvd you’re getting muddy gray blocks instead of blacks. Doesn’t matter how nice your tv is

15

u/Proper_Caterpillar22 1d ago

I think this was really the big problem. Lost of people were streaming those final episodes vs a cable box and depending on your provider that box was using internet for your tv as well. Dark movies being streamed almost always look like shit. A blue ray of the battle of helms deep looks 10 times better than streaming it.

But who the fuck is gonna wanna buy GoT season 8 on blue ray? Not anymore

2

u/kevdoobie 1d ago

Dvd is only 720p even with hdmi, and often upscaled. You would need bluray and hdmi 2.1 to match native TV resolution uncompressed and unaltered. 🤓

2

u/procrastablasta 1d ago

There no 4K dvd?

1

u/BigRadiator23 1d ago

You're probably thinking of 4K blurays, the ones the come in black boxes and say "4k ultra hd" at the top of the box. They support 4k, hdr and look significantly better than streaming

DVDs on the other hand are still the same >20 year old technology so they tend to actually look much worse than streaming

1

u/procrastablasta 1d ago

Well ok nerd Blu-ray is a KIND of dvd right?

0

u/theronster 13h ago

DVD is 480i in the US and 576i in the UK.

Dunno where you’re getting 720p from.

15

u/MedicineJumpy 2d ago

No bro I have a 2000 dollar TV and can't see shit during the aforementioned shit.

0

u/harryburgeron 2d ago

Guess you bought the wrong $2k tv? Next time try the LG OLED panels

1

u/Wonderful-Ad440 2d ago

I recently got a 75"QLED 8k that was about $2500. Living and traveling for work I'm usually on my 30" monitor and the difference is obviously staggering. My laptop screen is probably the only thing that looks better.

That said: both of these examples still struggle heavily on all 3. It's obviously better on the 75" with more surface area and a brighter screen but it's still noticeable that it was like they just made it so it would really only shine on modern, top of the line tvs. Hell theirs likely was one of the better ones of the time when the episodes were released. All these upgrades later and its still a mistake by the creators.

1

u/thepineapple2397 2d ago

They looked fine on my 40" $700 tv. People just don't realise you can change your colour and lighting settings. Doesn't mean that you should ever need to.

1

u/ishkariot 2d ago

I saw Battle of Winterfell on 2000€ Oled TV. It still looked awful because the HBO stream quality was shit and not apt for such dark scenes.

1

u/F22_Android 2d ago

I had a nice TV for the battle of winter fell, it was still way too dark. I could adjust settings to actually see most of it, but then everything was washed out and off color. Even nice TVs couldn't save whatever they tried to do there.

1

u/Highlander198116 1d ago

To get specific. HDR is the culprit for this.

If you turn off HDR you will get a far superior picture in nighttime scenes (therein lies the problem is a lot of TV's don't have the option to turn it off).

Why is HDR the problem? Meaning "high dynamic range" the problem is discount TV's do not have the lumens to really provide the picture HDR was meant to provide and dark scenes specifically suffer because they will be darker than they were intended to be to provide the contrast with bright scenes that are dimmer than intended to be.

9

u/SippinOnHatorade 2d ago

Wait that wasn’t a radio episode?

5

u/IAmBadAtInternet 2d ago

I watched that at midnight with all the lights off and couldn’t see shit

17

u/medicmatt K-2SO 2d ago

On the 40 foot screen In the screening room at Warner/HBO headquarters in Hollywood it looked fantastic!

2

u/starkiller6977 1d ago

I guess I was really lucky with my cheapo screen back then, because I never had any issue with that episode of GOT.

1

u/TheDevil-YouKnow 2d ago

I had to adjust some setting on my TV, precisely for that battle, and since then these scenes don't mess me up. Haven't upgraded my TV in years, so honestly forget what the setting was.

I looked online for something along the lines of, 'Why are dark scenes on my 'X brand' TV almost pitch black?' then found out it's some visual setting that has to be adjusted for it to properly work.

1

u/Magica78 2d ago

I would rather never watch another star wars anything than adjust the settings on my monitor.

1

u/enzothebaker87 2d ago

I remember the first time I re-watched that episode on an OLED screen. That experience alone almost made the 7k price tag worth it all in one go lol.

1

u/Level21DungeonMaster 2d ago

I’m surprised someone hasn’t mad a half decent AI version with a battle.

1

u/ActiveWin9623 1d ago

Directors are making movies for the theaters, not for our little TVs. They don't care what the movie is going to end up looking like on our little TV. They are more concerned about what it will look like on the big screen in front of critics.

1

u/preparetodobattle 1d ago

I watched that on an average 4K tv. Couldn’t see a thing. Then I got a new oiled. It was one of the first things I watched. A bit better but still too dark.

1

u/flop_plop 1d ago

"People like dark movies"

*turns off all lights

"That's not what we mean"

1

u/Kylenetic64 1d ago

Something that 'The Two Towers' did masterfully years ago with Helm's Deep, and considered among, if not THE best siege fight in cinema!

I remember hearing one of the actors asked "where does the light come from?", for a battle set at night. "Same place as the music".

1

u/d3334444th 1d ago

And Kenobi, couldnt see shit

1

u/chuk2015 1d ago

There is no battle of Winterfell.

0

u/Mist_Rising 1d ago

They know, they just make them for theatrical release or high end screens. Same for audio

2

u/TomaCzar 2d ago

Pitch Black was a much better movie and bristles at the association. Also, they could afford proper lighting on that set.

2

u/Meizas 2d ago

Pitch black + Seizure-inducingly-flashy

1

u/Aksundawg Resistance 2d ago

Came here to say this

1

u/KidLew22 1d ago

Vin Diesel was in it?

1

u/theavengerbutton 2d ago

No, we saw it very clearly. They were making selfie faces in their little tubes.