|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Jan 5, 2017 9:52:27 GMT -5
On the subject of Tarkin, I just got back from my second viewing and I took my girlfriend this time and until I mentioned it right at the end she hadn't realized he was computer animated. I noticed it right away...but that's because I was looking for it and I suspect that every single person who did find him off putting knew as well and it was that bias of knowledge over the actual animation that made it stick out. I disagree. My girlfriend wasn't looking for it, but as soon as Tarkin's full face came onto the screen, she looked at me, as if to say, "eh?". A close friend also told me that when he took his 11-year-old son, his face twisted up into a "WTF" expression at the sight of Tarkin too. I wasn't "looking for it" either, by the way, since I had no idea that Tarkin would appear in the film prior to him appearing on screen, but obviously I knew that CGI shenanigans were afoot because I know that Peter Cushing is dead. I'll say it again, they should've just cast a new actor in the role. Just like they did for Mon Mothma or General Dodonna, or, in fact, the young Tarkin himself in Revenge of the Sith. It's OK, audiences will buy into it -- we've all seen James Bond films, we can accept different actors playing the same roles, if it's done well enough. The CGI Tarkin was so badly done and such a freaky-looking trip to uncanny valley that it totally took me out of the story every time he appeared on the screen. If anything, the CGI Princess Leia at the end was even worse, with that weird, squinty expression with her eyes...I mean, what the hell kind of facial expression was that supposed to be?! In that particular case, there really was no excuse for showing Carrie Fisher's face at all. As soon as you saw her from the back, you knew exactly who the character was supposed to be and, actually, while I watched, I assumed that they'd not show her face and we'd all knowingly go "a-ha, Princess Leia Organa, I presume." But no, they had to show off and spoil the scene with some crappy CGI. The CGI Tarkin and Leia were real blots in an otherwise almost perfect Star Wars film. Such a shame.  The real joke of it is that the Galaxy chocolate bar advert, which features a similarly "CGI resurrected" Audrey Hepburn, actually looks more realistic and convincing than either Tarkin or Leia did. A crumby chocolate bar advert, doing a better job than the massed skills of ILM! Not sure if this ad is even shown in the U.S., but if not, take a look here... I think they could have recast the role as well and I would have been more than okay with it...I mean the guy's dead so it's to be expected. But even though it's noticeable it still looked damn good, I mean the young Jeff Bridges looked good when Tron II came out but this was much more realistic than that. So, yes it was unnecessary and it certainly wasn't seamless but it was a damn good effect. |
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Gordon Scratch on Jan 31, 2017 19:11:03 GMT -5
So here we have the movie that simply buries the concept of narrative elipse. I thaught this was supposed to be an independent story that would allow the producers to tell creative stories, wasn't it?
|
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Feb 1, 2017 10:20:42 GMT -5
So here we have the movie that simply buries the concept of narrative elipse. I thaught this was supposed to be an independent story that would allow the producers to tell creative stories, wasn't it? The fact that writer/director Gareth Edwards chose to tie into A New Hope doesn't make it less creative. |
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Gordon Scratch on Feb 1, 2017 13:49:45 GMT -5
So here we have the movie that simply buries the concept of narrative elipse. I thaught this was supposed to be an independent story that would allow the producers to tell creative stories, wasn't it? The fact that writer/director Gareth Edwards chose to tie into A New Hope doesn't make it less creative. Did I say that? And less creative than what? I only said that the original movie made good use of narrative elipse, and that this movie (which wasn't supposed to be what it eventually became) made that elipse much less effective (if at all) since nothing is now left for our imagination. And now that you mention it, it could indeed have gone another way, but in this case it didn't and it made for a less creative movie, as it used pre-existing foundations. All in all, this was the most pointless installment of the whole SW stories. At least they got a real talented director for the next one, one whose three previous movies were all telling unique stories. Still, with Disney/Lucas over its shoulder, I'm not holding my breath...  |
|
|
|
Post by Jesse on Jun 18, 2017 12:59:01 GMT -5
Picked this up on Blu-ray yesterday and watched it last night. This may be my favorite Star Wars film since Empire. I feel like I will have to watch it a few times to really absorb all of it. I thought some of the casting was quite good but some of the actors weren't used as particularly well as they could have been.
Going into it I was wondering what the title Rogue One was going to have to do with the Rogue Squadron. If I recall correctly Wedge Antilles went by the call sign Rogue Two in either A New Hope or Empire. So I guess we can assume the sacrifices made by Rogue One inspired the Red Squadron survivors to rename their attack force in homage.
As far a criticisms go I think are similar things I can say about the other films. The Stormtroopers are comically useless except when the plot dictates they're not. It sure was weird that the Empire kept their super secret files in a giant arcade claw machine.
The use of a CGI Peter Cushing felt kind of creepy but the voice actor did an exceptional job however the young Carrie Fisher at the end sounded nothing like her.
I'm not sure how I feel actors playing characters posthumously. There's actually a really good novelette called The Darfsteller by Walter M. Miller, Jr. about an actor turned theatre janitor in a future where all actors have been replaced by robots that play their likenesses holographically.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Jun 20, 2017 7:26:15 GMT -5
The use of a CGI Peter Cushing felt kind of creepy but the voice actor did an exceptional job however the young Carrie Fisher at the end sounded nothing like her. It was actually Carrie Fisher! They lifted the word "hope" from an unused take of her line "Help me Obi Wan Kenobi- you are my only hope" in Star Wars. |
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,202 
|
Post by Confessor on Jun 20, 2017 10:35:59 GMT -5
The use of a CGI Peter Cushing felt kind of creepy but the voice actor did an exceptional job however the young Carrie Fisher at the end sounded nothing like her. It was actually Carrie Fisher! They lifted the word "hope" from an unused take of her line "Help me Obi Wan Kenobi- you are my only hope" in Star Wars. But unfortunately the CGI work on the princess was done by the man who created Morph...   |
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Jun 20, 2017 10:44:46 GMT -5
It was actually Carrie Fisher! They lifted the word "hope" from an unused take of her line "Help me Obi Wan Kenobi- you are my only hope" in Star Wars. But unfortunately the CGI work on the princess was done by the man who created Morph... Yeah... I really wish they would have used some test footage of Carrie Fisher and green screened that onto a modern background. Heck, for just one word, a well-made animatronic head of Carrie Fisher could have done the job. That videogame CGI Leia was... disturbing. |
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,202
|
Post by Confessor on Jun 20, 2017 10:54:27 GMT -5
But unfortunately the CGI work on the princess was done by the man who created Morph... Yeah... I really wish they would have used some test footage of Carrie Fisher and green screened that onto a modern background. Heck, for just one word, a well-made animatronic head of Carrie Fisher could have done the job. That videogame CGI Leia was... disturbing. Thing is, they didn't even really need to show her face. Showing Tarkin was one thing because he had such a big part in the film, although I still say they should've simply cast a new actor in the role. But with Leia, we all knew exactly who it was the moment we saw her, with her back to us and her hood up. Even when she turned around, we initially got a low angle shot looking at her from behind. She could've stayed in that same position and said "hope" without us ever having to have seen her face. |
|
