That is somewhat correct, for some models, the Jawa Crawler being a good example - the profile and hull shapes were intentionally broken up to confuse perspective. Just aesthetics, but there were also bluescreen considerations which required the ships to be very un-glossy.
Aside from that, greeblies and dirty weathering were the order of the day because Star Wars is a Western. If you want a good idea of how awful it can look when Star Wars forgets itself and relocates to the big city, just go watch Attack of the Clones, as others have suggested.
My 2c - while you're totally welcome to your opinion, but what you're criticising is a core part of what made Star Wars so fresh and so great. It seems like criticising Indiana Jones for using a whip when logic would suggest he should have relied on his gun far more. These things are what they are!
If Lucas could have had what he wanted within the limits of 70s technology, it'd have been a wall-to-wall chromearama, perhaps even worse than the Prequels. He wanted Flash Gordon, and if he'd gotten that, *we'd* have gotten nothing new.
Don't you remember that feeling of euphoria as you left the cinema? You'd just had a glimpse into an amazing new world. Your world changed that day, didn't it?* You BELIEVED it precisely *because* it was funky and dirty and complex and detailed. That was the miracle of it. That was a GOOD thing.
*Rhetorical point; I'm guessing you're too young to have been there? If you're much under forty or so, I guess it might be hard to understand just how much Star Wars changed everything which came after it.![]()
*Rhetorical point; I'm guessing you're too young to have been there? If you're much under forty or so, I guess it might be hard to understand just how much Star Wars changed everything which came after it.![]()
With regards to the special effects, I think 2001: A Spacy Odyssey is still one of the best sci-fi movies ever made....Go back and watch 2001 a space odessy, and imagine that until Star Wars THAT was the best anyone had ever seen... EVER...
So far as the greeblies are concerned, I love them aesthetically, but from a practical point - at least as far as the trans-atmospheric ships like the Falcon and X-Wing are concerned - I take issue. All those greebled surfaces wouldn't last very long at high speed atmospheric flight. Heck, the Falcon's sensor dish would have been ripped clean-off during the high speed departure from Mos Eisley. I suppose one could argue for some sort of structural integrity force field or extended energy shields that prevented the shearing force of the wind to effect the greeblies. As a matter of practicality and sensible aeronautical design, a smooth surfaced trans-atmospheric ship (Naboo starship designs come to mind here) more along the lines of McQuarrie's original concept drawings makes a lot more sense.
I can't believe this long, drawn out discussion was started just because someone didn't want to bother putting Greeblies on their model ...![]()
As I said in post 88
'Yep The Millennium Falcon is as smooth as a baby's a** flying in atmosphere with it's particle deflector shields switched on (IMPO)'
In the world of Star Wars the not so aerodynamic starships don't have to worry with atmosphere resistance with their shields up
J
Sometimes it's just fun to geek out with similarly minded folks.