And I echo the thought about the writing, but I definitely look forward to seeing them as the cgi was getting more and more annoying.
I don't know, I assume good post production can make digital look fine. I guess my point is if digital is done to look like film, I doubt anyone in the theater can tell the difference. In other words, this is just the evil Disney marketing machine trying to appeal to people who liked the original three movies. They'll still be using CGI to do all the effects, ships etc. anyway, right? It's not like anyone is going to build physical models like they did for the original series, are they?
Never seen Star Wars. Just never was a fan.
As I've mentioned before Abrams is a big fan of model and yes there will be some CGI but to a lesser extent than other Sci-Fi Movies. Miniature models are still superior to cgi and the cost are almost the same. Due to the overuse of digital manipulation at the DI Stage film looks almost like digital and not vice versa (Transformers 2 is a good example). Unmanipulated film looks very different to say the RED look (Video) or Arri Alexa look (better than Video) and even a half blind monkey can spot the difference. The question is wether the moviegoers care or not.
I wish I knew what "ambiance" meant in this context. And, "The Empire Strikes Back" used many models instead of CGI.
I'm not sure if I'm interested in the new Star Wars. The first three certainly were good. When the fourth (Episode 1) came out I was very disappointed. Not only were the computer graphics less realistic than models and puppets, but the cinematography seemed lacking, and the story line was very poorly executed. I didn't even watch the next ones all the way through when they hit TV - just the odd 15-minutes when channel surfing.
Although I can overlook cgi and digital to a point (a story like Star Wars does require the typical suspension of disbelief as it is), the writing and plot are what turned me off.
That ought to be good for a few million feet of film. Good for Kodak!