Re: Star Wars Episode VII
There is an element to all of this that I don't think many people are aware of. According to all of the extras on the Prequel DVD's and having read 365: The Sets of Star Wars, I learned that most of the sets of those films were in fact miniatures, as well as the vehicles. Perhaps what makes something not look quite right to the human eye is the digitizing process that can take a model and allow it to be composited onto a background. Plus all of the backgrounds were digitally painted, vs, actually painted. Makes a difference. Perhaps there are incidental flaws in a hand painted background that the eye registers in a different way than they would see in a digital one.
You also have to consider how it must have been for the actors. I mean, yes, an actor's job is to pretend for a living, but when you consider how much detail and work goes into their costume alone, you have to consider that it gives the actor something to work with. Even if the audience doesn't see it, it will give the actors a grounding with which to work. If it were theater or stage work, we could assume that the actors would use a different set of skills to convey the scenes. But the rhythm of stage and film are different. As a child we could easily pretend we were anywhere, doing anything, but as an adult it takes a great amount of suspension of disbelief to accept the impossible. For the actors and audience, we both need some context.
I have to heartily agree with redlettermedia's assessment that many times the scenes come across sterile because you can tell that the actors are acting out scenes on a completely blue or green void. If they have no context, no set to look at or other actor to look at (in the case of a digital character- though not all of the digital characters looked fake) then they could easily be lost.
I hope that the new films have a good mixture of both real sets and actual real world locations. As long as they don't film the entire movie in the studio, I'd be happy.
