Rogue One: A Star Wars Story, in theaters Dec. 16, 2016

[Bolt]

Haha Boba Fett is the best!

Any how, I own TFA and I'll definitely be owning R1. As much as we debate and split hairs, we're all slurping it up. 

I saw TFA 3 times in the theater and R1 twice already..

[sh9000]

Blu-ray release date 2/28.

[mechaninac]

8 hours ago, kajnrig said:

The way I understand it, she's supposed to play a more prominent role in Episodes 8 and 9. I didn't pay attention to the pre-release hype, so I didn't know who she was and wasn't disappointed with what screentime she got and didn't get.

It's not the screen time or pre-release hype, it's the character's idiotic acquiescence in the face of being threatened; but for her blatant cowardice and lack of dedication to her cause/comrades, Starkiller Base's defenses wouldn't have been disabled; her sacrifice would've won the day, but she caved immediately and her betrayal doomed the First Order to an ignominious defeat.  If Phasma is representative of the caliber of officers the 1st Order produces, they've got bigger problems than the Resistance.

 

3 hours ago, anime52k8 said:

 

 *cough*boba fett*cough*

Boba Fett wasn't a plot device misused as a means to an end.  For the most part he was just background and, at the end, a bit of comic relief.

[CoryHolmes]

6 hours ago, jenius said:

I don't think we saw a Yoda character yet,  that might be Luke... and may have been Luke previously.

I was referring to Maz Kanata.  She's a short, ancient, alien whom imparts training and knowledge of the Force to the main character.  Instead of long green ears, they gave her wide eyes and comically over-sized glasses.

Ultimately the same character, just not nearly as well done as Yoda.

5 hours ago, kaiotheforsaken said:

 A lot of stories just simply didn't work right with things like the Clone Wars, Republic and especially the Jedi set in stone the way they were.

I'll agree that the Clone Wars isn't what I'd envisioned when I first read the Zahn novels, but I really enjoyed how the decay and glacial pace of the Republic was shown.  And I really liked how the Jedi were so utterly locked in their own dogma that they couldn't see the forest because of the trees.  Anyone whom dared to challenge that dogma, like Qui-Gon Jinn, was quietly put the side and ostracised from any real authority. 

And the best part of the Prequels was how they de-scaled the Jedi in power and ability.  The EU took Force powers and Jedi abilities much farther than I'd liked.  The PT brought them back down and gave them quite a few undesirable sides as well.

4 hours ago, anime52k8 said:

Why can't she just be able to do this stuff intuitively because she's that strong with the force?

Being able to out-Force Darth Vader's grandson?  How much more pathetic could he get, to let an untrained woman with merely unharnessed potential, to out mind-trick him?

[Big s]

Being able to out force Vader's grandson may not have been too difficult after he took a hit from that bowcaster. I also don't think Rei did anything too special and out of character. She already knew how to fight well with a pole and she was also shown to be able to get a mental connection with force users on at least a couple occasions.

Edited January 7, 2017 by Big s
Added idea

[CoryHolmes]

I was referring to the mind-probe scene, where Rey was able to push Kylo out of her mind.

I have some issues with the fight scene at the end.  I know her martial skill was established earlier, but I always felt that the lightsaber was too unwieldy for someone not trained in its use.  The fact that it's made of light, and thus weightless, but still cuts through everything it touches should make it harder to use than a wooden stick.  But that's just my opinion, and the fight at the end is the lesser of TFA's errors.

 

(ps: The hallway scene in Rogue One ROCKED!!! )

[jenius]

I don't think Maz is meant to be a parallel to Yoda... I get what you're saying about the physical attributes but wouldn't she more be a parallel to ObiWan with Luke being the new Yoda? It was old Ben that handed Luke the light saber. It also might just be an instance of TFA being its own movie and having a character that is a small alien that seems a little too conveniently placed and knowledgeable. 

[Chronocidal]

I think...

1 hour ago, jenius said:

 a little too conveniently placed and knowledgeable. 

is a good summary of most of TFA's issues.

Not going to belabor the point, but the SW universe as a whole tends to run on extremely convenient coincidences.  TFA just has more than your average amount, I think.

Rogue One had its share as well, but they didn't seem to be so forced.  (no pun intended )

[sh9000]

 

[Hikuro]

I can certainly understand the controversy of using the likeness let alone down right details of an actor or actress long after their dead for certain promotional items or for the sheer hell of it. But in these kind of instances where the character is key to push to a certain area of the story, it's needed. I don't think it'll be done to Carrie for Episode 9, it'll feel far to hallow and to sudden to work. Not too mention her voice, the way she speaks, very difficult to replicate from another actress I think.

[kajnrig]

33 minutes ago, Hikuro said:

But in these kind of instances where the character is key to push to a certain area of the story, it's needed. I don't think it'll be done to Carrie for Episode 9, it'll feel far to hallow and to sudden to work. Not too mention her voice, the way she speaks, very difficult to replicate from another actress I think.

I dunno, seems like "needed" is a strong word. It's not needed at all, but it certainly is more comfortable... from a certain point of view. For my part, I didn't care much either way, but I imagine it must have cost a pretty penny to implement.

[sketchley]

1 hour ago, Hikuro said:

I can certainly understand the controversy of using the likeness let alone down right details of an actor or actress long after their dead for certain promotional items or for the sheer hell of it. But in these kind of instances where the character is key to push to a certain area of the story, it's needed. I don't think it'll be done to Carrie for Episode 9, it'll feel far to hallow and to sudden to work. Not too mention her voice, the way she speaks, very difficult to replicate from another actress I think.

Personally, I'm against it.  Just because CG has enabled it, it doesn't mean we (they) have to do it.

For example: Maggie Gyllenhaal replacing Katie Holmes as Rachel Dawes in The Dark Knight.  Initially I was disappointed that Holmes wasn't reprising the role, but I got over it - especially as Gyllenhaal was extremely effective at projecting the complex emotions needed for the character in the second movie.

 

Aside from the uncanny valley effect, I think the main reasons I'm against it are the performance itself (it's done by committee when done in CG) and the interaction of the other actors in the shot (compare the prequel series to TFA and RO - sets composed of blue screens vs. realia).

Edited January 8, 2017 by sketchley

[Hikuro]

3 hours ago, sketchley said:

Personally, I'm against it.  Just because CG has enabled it, it doesn't mean we (they) have to do it.

For example: Maggie Gyllenhaal replacing Katie Holmes as Rachel Dawes in The Dark Knight.  Initially I was disappointed that Holmes wasn't reprising the role, but I got over it - especially as Gyllenhaal was extremely effective at projecting the complex emotions needed for the character in the second movie.

 

Aside from the uncanny valley effect, I think the main reasons I'm against it are the performance itself (it's done by committee when done in CG) and the interaction of the other actors in the shot (compare the prequel series to TFA and RO - sets composed of blue screens vs. realia).

Maggie Gyllenhaal was a HORRIBLE choice for Rachel, I still cringe when I see that movie and she pops up on a scene.

 

But you also don't have someone who can look spot on like Cushing either for this particular film....it's hours before ANH.....the look, the sound, the age, it has to be pretty damn close and you're not gonna have someone pull that off without sacrificing.

 

[kajnrig]

They sacrificed with Rhodey, Bruce Banner, Dumbledore, (the entire cast of Star Trek*,) and countless others, and no harm to The Canons was done in the long run. I'm not saying your opinion is wrong, but I do think you're overstating the importance of the technique.

[Dangard Ace]

36 minutes ago, kajnrig said:

They sacrificed with Rhodey, Bruce Banner, Dumbledore, (the entire cast of Star Trek*,) and countless others, and no harm to The Canons was done in the long run. I'm not saying your opinion is wrong, but I do think you're overstating the importance of the technique.

Dumbledore's original actor died.  They had no choice but to find a replacement.

[Big s]

Don't forget the. Countless James Bond actors lol.

[Dynaman]

4 hours ago, Big s said:

Don't forget the. Countless James Bond actors lol.

The thing with Bond is that the whole franchise rebooted with each new actor - not to the degree that was done with the latest Bond but it was a shift of focus with each new one. They could get away with this since Bond films are Bond films and are not directly linked for the most part.  Replacing Carrie Fisher for the last movie is going to be tough since Leia is her to an extent, there are no books being adapted on an existing character she was playing.  Another example is William Shatner as Kirk, granted they replaced the whole cast in the reboot movies but if just Kirk (or Spock, or McCoy) were replaced it just wouldn't work.

 

Most likely it is going to be far easier to write leia out of the last movie as an offscreen death, use the existing footage they shot for Episode 8, and use a little bit of CGI if "reshoots" are needed.  There is a chance the character may die in episode 8 now (using the CGI bit) as well.

[Thom]

It was great seeing Tarkin back on scene. He was so pivotal in ANH that I think having a 'stand-in' would have been more jarring. I would have been, 'who is this guy..?'

Just my personal opinion. It's more important to me that they did this was approval. If they hadn't, then that would have been a big problem.

[kalvasflam]

On 1/7/2017 at 6:57 PM, sketchley said:

Personally, I'm against it.  Just because CG has enabled it, it doesn't mean we (they) have to do it.

For example: Maggie Gyllenhaal replacing Katie Holmes as Rachel Dawes in The Dark Knight.  Initially I was disappointed that Holmes wasn't reprising the role, but I got over it - especially as Gyllenhaal was extremely effective at projecting the complex emotions needed for the character in the second movie.

 

Aside from the uncanny valley effect, I think the main reasons I'm against it are the performance itself (it's done by committee when done in CG) and the interaction of the other actors in the shot (compare the prequel series to TFA and RO - sets composed of blue screens vs. realia).

Although this  does  mean that those expensive Hollywood actors would become far less important, want Iron Man 15?  Just get RDJ to sign off on his likeness and throw a few million at him, then the Empire of the Mouse can use his likeness forever, same with Chris Evans, Civil War 4, anyone?  

Not being too serious here, because it would essentially mean that all movies can become animated features, and all we need is some voice actors... but hey, thanks to the magic of Pixar, we're already headed in that direction.  Thank you, Steve Jobs.

 

Edited January 9, 2017 by kalvasflam

[Dynaman]

After seeing "The Jungle Book" I'm willing to let all movies be blue-screen works.  Give it a few more years to work out the remaining kinks and it will start becoming abnormal to have location shooting.

[no3Ljm]

4 hours ago, Dynaman said:

After seeing "The Jungle Book" I'm willing to let all movies be blue-screen works.  Give it a few more years to work out the remaining kinks and it will start becoming abnormal to have location shooting.

Or it's abnormal to shoot actors now where there could just be CGI. Who needs talent anyways if you're going to use CGI. You need better CG Artists by then. 

 

Edited January 9, 2017 by no3Ljm

[Big s]

I was still amazed by the look of the last final fantasy movie. At least the cgi actors matched the cgi backgrounds 

[BlueMax]

Finally watched RO yesterday, and I enjoyed it very much, much much better than TFA! 

A few things that i really liked:

- it is nice to have something rather than following the main characters from the main story all the time.

- Everyday people with no super powers (force skills) makes for more relatable characters

- Storm troopers actually show themselves to be able to aim AND hit their target!

- Vader was actually menacing in his combat scene.

- Rebels and their actions are many times less noble than perceived from main films. Some were even openly being cowards.

- The fact that the volunteer rebels were willing to, and actually gave up their lives for a cause they believed was beautiful. (For too long have films state how little chance of survival their characters have, but yet have plot armor thicker and more durable than any pinpoint/ omni directional barrier.)

 

Of course, it is far from perfect, but it turned out far better than i had expected.

[Big s]

I don't really agree about the storm troopers being able to hit what they are aiming at, they missed a lot even the old slow walking blind guy. Unless you mean that they hit what they see shooting at after a million trigger pulls.

[Chowser]

I liked RO more than I did TFA. TFA didn't make me want to build another lightsaber. RO did even though it was just Vader's. (Building an Obi TPM as my reentry into lightsabers). 

My ten year old liked RO better than TFA as well. 

[Chronocidal]

On ‎1‎/‎7‎/‎2017 at 6:57 PM, sketchley said:

Aside from the uncanny valley effect, I think the main reasons I'm against it are the performance itself (it's done by committee when done in CG) and the interaction of the other actors in the shot (compare the prequel series to TFA and RO - sets composed of blue screens vs. realia).

I couldn't help but chuckle remembering Leia's line in ESB:  "I am not a committee!"

I don't think we'll learn anything substantial about the plans for Episode IX until after VIII is out.  For all we know, Leia may not even have been intended to be in IX, but they can't reveal anything without the entire interwebs jumping down their throat about spoilers.

What I am slightly surprised at is that they didn't try to do Tarkin with just prosthetic makeup.  I know there was the really ugly younger version of him shown at a distance in ROTS, but I'm fairly convinced they could do better if they actually tried, and knew he'd be in close-ups.  They could potentially do the same with Leia.

 

I think what was more jarring for me about the CGI Leia wasn't the likeness, but the fact that instead of getting someone to impersonate the voice, and do a full line, they used a single word soundclip.  And based on the inflection, I'm almost dead certain they used the very end of her holo-recording to Obi Wan for the source.

I've seen some insane prosthetic makeup jobs though, and while I'm sure part of it has to do with compatible facial structure, I'd much rather see that done, and get someone to impersonate the person's voice, than see a CGI recreation of Carrie.

Anywho, I was discussing R1 with a coworker yesterday, and I don't quite remember if we ever decided why, but we agreed that everything about the end battle was just somehow a lot more satisfying than the combat shown in TFA.  Maybe it was just less frantically done?  The battle felt like it was done a bit closer to the old WWII combat movie feel that was used for ANH, or at least done in a way that mimicked the older movies to the point of feeling familiar.  It just felt right.

Edited January 12, 2017 by Chronocidal

[CoryHolmes]

17 hours ago, Big s said:

I don't really agree about the storm troopers being able to hit what they are aiming at, they missed a lot even the old slow walking blind guy. Unless you mean that they hit what they see shooting at after a million trigger pulls.

I saw that as the old slow walking blind guy using the Force.  Nothing as flashy as a lightsaber or force jumping or lightning.  Instead, just the Force nudging the Stormtrooper's blaster rifles just a smidge as they pulled the triggers.  Untrained Force sensitivity can still do some amazing things.

[sketchley]

9 hours ago, Chronocidal said:

I couldn't help but chuckle remembering Leia's line in ESB:  "I am not a committee!"

Heh.  That's funny.

The reason I stated it that way is in one of the making of featurettes for the 2nd Pirates Of The Caribbean movie, the production staff were commenting on Bill Nighy's performance and said something along the lines of because it was done with motion capture, the bubble popping noise that Bill created became a distinctive part of the performance.  Whereas that character particularity wouldn't have happened if they had done it with CG animation because with that, creative decisions are made by committee with movie execs involved.  Or something along those lines.

 

Anywho, I was discussing R1 with a coworker yesterday, and I don't quite remember if we ever decided why, but we agreed that everything about the end battle was just somehow a lot more satisfying than the combat shown in TFA.  Maybe it was just less frantically done?  The battle felt like it was done a bit closer to the old WWII combat movie feel that was used for ANH, or at least done in a way that mimicked the older movies to the point of feeling familiar.  It just felt

right.

Hmm... that's an interesting point.  I agree with those observations, but would like to add that, on the whole, RO did a better set up of the Rebel Fleet's desperation (TFA cut out a lot of the context behind the Rebels and everything about the New Republic).  Not to mention that things don't quite add up with the whole Star Killer base concept, either.

[Mommar]

11 hours ago, Chronocidal said:

What I am slightly surprised at is that they didn't try to do Tarkin with just prosthetic makeup.  I know there was the really ugly younger version of him shown at a distance in ROTS, but I'm fairly convinced they could do better if they actually tried, and knew he'd be in close-ups.  They could potentially do the same with Leia.
 

Wayne Pygram as Scorpius from Farscape was that ugly guy.

[Mommar]

20 hours ago, Chronocidal said:

Anywho, I was discussing R1 with a coworker yesterday, and I don't quite remember if we ever decided why, but we agreed that everything about the end battle was just somehow a lot more satisfying than the combat shown in TFA.  Maybe it was just less frantically done?  The battle felt like it was done a bit closer to the old WWII combat movie feel that was used for ANH, or at least done in a way that mimicked the older movies to the point of feeling familiar.  It just felt right.

It's because it wasn't whack-a-doo aerial, Poe Dameron, cartoon BS.  It was shot like the original trilogy but with better effects and modern sensibilities.  JJ's was uninteresting, unfocused, munchkin bs.

[danth]

Also the final battle in Rogue One was actually, you know, in space. 

[sh9000]

[Black Valkyrie]

 

Its JAMMED ! 

 

 

[sh9000]

 

[CoryHolmes]

On ‎1‎/‎6‎/‎2017 at 10:50 AM, jenius said:

If the sequels explain Rey's back story and that she was trained in the force but was made to forget, that would help.

I've been thinking about this for a while and decided that I really don't want it.  We've already gone down that route with Revan in KOTOR, and reusing that plot point would just be another example of the creative sterility.  Why is George Lucas the only one to try new things?