Star Wars: Rogue One *spoilers from post 1195*

mloc123

ricero wrote: »

So we have episode 8 next year and another star wars spin off the following year. Anyone know what the other spin off film is about ?

Young Han Solo

Theboinkmaster

Saw the film on Thursday, some thoughts:

- story was great
- action was brilliant, as were most special effects
- opening was very weak, just felt disjointed - missed opening crawl tbh and opening shot was poor
- Mads Mikkelsen was unused
- music was terrible
- when the 2 aisan lads died I felt they were doing it just for the sake of it, thought it would've been better if most of the rogue one crew were holding hands on the beach waiting to die - would have been more impactful
- K2SO droid was great and humour spot on
- I didn't realise Tarkin was CGI just assumed it was another actor, very well done however didn't think they needed the character to feature that much would've preferred Krennic to be main bad buy, with Vader in some key scenes
- C3PO and R2 fan **** was pointless and interrupted flow of film
- Film was probably a solid 8/10 for me but last shot with Leia ruined the ending and dropped to 7/10 - was completely unnecessary and obvious CGI, looked really really bad and really pissed me off. So pointless - assume was studio interference and not director's choice...

All in all thought it was on par with TFA - TFA had weaker story but better characters and music, though Rogue One had better story and action.

Disney not being able to resist these fan **** for sake of story/better movie isn't a good sign going forward.

derm0j073

Radiosonde wrote: »

Tarkin just didn't work. As someone said above, Charles Dance would've been perfect for that role. I'm stunned anyone could be fooled by that CGI.

It seems to me that viewers not so familiar with the series didn't cop on that Tarkin was a special effect . It worked for me , it wasn't perfect but I'm happy with the result . As a huge SW fan and with Peter Cushing being one of my favourite actors I'm delighted they made the call and it took a lot of balls . I doubt the vast majority of viewers would care if they used Cushing's image , it's not like they'll sell more tickets because it's in there . I'm sure it took a lot of work to get Tarkin on-screen and it's one more of many details that makes R1 tie in with ANH .
Seeing Tarkin's reflection in the window had a real impact on me and given the time frame of R1 you can't have the Death Star without him on the bridge .
It was brilliant to hear him say those five little words once more . You may fire when ready .

fluke

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

Saw the film on Thursday, some thoughts:

- when the 2 aisan lads died I felt they were doing it just for the sake of it, thought it would've been better if most of the rogue one crew were holding hands on the beach waiting to die - would have been more impactful

Are you kidding? Cringe city!!

Osmosis Jones

The CGI is as close to perfect as it can be when we know it can't possibly actually be Peter Cushing. This is Star Wars, they try to be groundbreaking when it comes to film technology and they've done a pretty great job here. There was absolutely no need to show Leia's face, I thought it was perfect when we just saw her hood, having her turn around was just showing off on the movie's behalf.

Pete Moss

For the rest of my life, in any pressurised or stressful scenario I'll mutter...


"I am with the Force, the Force is with me" :P

TerrorFirmer

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

Disney not being able to resist these fan **** for sake of story/better movie isn't a good sign going forward.

On the contrary from what we know about the film, Disney largely saved the film by ordering major re-shoots when they did.

I think the franchise is in very safe hands - possibly too safe, was my initial worry when I first saw The Force Awakens, but they've nailed Rogue One very well.

Both TFA and Rogue One have their own flaws to varying degrees and are by no means perfect but in spirit and charm they absolutely are incredibly worthy successors to Lucas' original trilogy.

Disney's acquisition of the franchise is probably the best thing that could have happened to it, really.

I hear George Lucas was very enthusiastic about Rogue, and it's hard to see why he wouldn't be - it ties into his vision almost flawlessly and doesn't mess around with or alter the universe he created in the 70's, quite the opposite it strengthens ANH immensely.

The Force Awakens is a fairly significant departure from his vision for the post-ROTJ galaxy, I'd genuinely love to hear his detailed thoughts on both movies though.

Despite the (very) disappointing albeit entertaining prequels, I'd still be fascinated to see his rough treatments for an EpVII, VIII and XI.

judeboy101

Music bad, action good. Cgi tarkin and Leia bad, humour spot on. Overall better than caravan of courage but not as good as battle for endor.

eviltimeban

Pete Moss wrote: »

"I am with the Force, the Force is with me" :P

I found that very interesting. Sort of like someone training themselves to become a Jedi almost organically. Obviously at this stage the Jedi have been wiped out so there would be no one able to train him, and this is his method of being "one with the Force". I would've liked an expansion on that, or more development of what he could do. Saying that, his skills did come into play when it mattered.

Theboinkmaster

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

On the contrary from what we know about the film, Disney largely saved the film by ordering major re-shoots when they did.

How do you know Edwards version wasn't better?

quad_red

I left the cinema really disappointed.

Not that there weren't great moments. The Death Star turning it's eye towards the planet as the director looked skyward, Vader's rampage at the end etc.

But the film was a mess.

There was a film contained in the first teaser. A film that promised a main character with a story arc, perhaps a struggle between the light and the dark. Her mentor character (the broken leader now 'more machine than man' with the same raspy respirator as vader to boot) asking her what she will become if she continues down this road etc.

Now? Jyn Urso has zero character progression. The allusions to the war on terror (bombing of a convoy in a middle eastern esque city, the 'water boarding' by psychic snail etc.) all stand aloof to a wobbly narrative. The light sabre/jedi connection is never fleshed out, the 'samurai' who guarded it never explained or given a chance to.

Cassian is poorly cast and has zilch charisma. Mikkelsen is criminally underused - the issue of what he has become, the darkness inside of him etc never explored.

Krennic is well cast but not given allot.

The rebel alliance leaders are all anonymous. Even Mon Mothma is just badly handled.

It wasn't awful. And I'm not saying the other cut was better or worse. But it doesn't sit easily in its frankenstein form.

Zubeneschamali

quad_red wrote: »

There was a film contained in the first teaser.

This may be why i was less disappointed. I avoided teasers, trailers, tie-in novels and so forth, I just watched the movie as shown.

I do agree that there are signs that a different movie is in there, probably a darker one. Jyn goes from cynical to rebel too quickly and completely. Andor is a creepy murderer at the start, and becomes a hero overnight. And whatever Forest Whitaker is overdoing, it has clearly been mostly cut out. His psychic squid is just completely random.

I think we were originally in for more of a Dirty Dozen/Where Eagles Dare war movie, with bad characters on the Good side interfering, double crosses from both sides and so on. Not Disney princess material, though.

TerrorFirmer

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

How do you know Edwards version wasn't better?

It's not really about it being a better film as such in this instance, but a better 'Star Wars' film.

We know that the reshoots involved the inclusion of a huge amount of special effects shots, which are widely understood to be almost the entirety of the space battle, greater addition of Vadar in the film, particularly at the end, and heavily re-worked ending.

What we got was an excellent movie by most accounts - while I'd be very interested in see Edwards first vision, and would imagine it to be a pretty good film in its own right, I think Disney probably did the right thing here for the franchise as a whole.

I would imagine that the original cut was darker, murky, grittier, and overall far less black and white in its portrayal of heroes and villains (look at the original trailers introduction to Jyn as a character and her dialogue interactions with Saw - all totally removed and re-worked in the final film).

Some elements of that remain but Disney intervened to make it a more familiar 'Star Wars' film that slots into the franchise despite it's darker edge - I think the original cut would have been far too stark a film and out of sync with existing movies.

I wasn't trying to claim that Edwards original cut was likely to be bad, more so address the notion expressed that Disney 'meddling' in the movie is a bad sign.

It could have been a brilliant piece of gritty, sci-fi war film, but it evidently wasn't a good 'Star Wars' film - and judging by how the radically re-worked film turned out, I'd be inclined to believe that to be true.

Looper007

I liked it a lot, didn't think they go as bleak as they did by

Killing off all the main cast

but the last third is as good as anything in the Star Wars Canon imo, great to see a space battle again too. I do think it lacks Force Awakens well drawn characters but I think Rogue One is the better film for me. Felicity Jones was the stand out, although Donnie Yen and K-2SO (voiced brilliantly by Alan Tudyk) were excellent. Poor Mads Mikkelsen was wasted again in another blockbuster (Dr Strange also) and Ben Mendelsohn bad guy wasn't given much too do.

The First act was a bit slow to begin with but the film did pick up going into the second act. Also got to say the CGI was excellent especially when it comes to

Peter Crushing and Carrie Fisher

was amazing. Also Darth Vader for how little he was used was brilliant. I did love the ending and it definitely was a more down and gritty Star Wars film. Great addition to Star Wars canon.

derm0j073

D0NNELLY wrote: »

Looking forward to the original directors cut off this.

Can't see this happening TBH . But I'd really interested in seeing it .

david75

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

It's not really about it being a better film as such in this instance, but a better 'Star Wars' film.

We know that the reshoots involved the inclusion of a huge amount of special effects shots, which are widely understood to be almost the entirety of the space battle, greater addition of Vadar in the film, particularly at the end, and heavily re-worked ending.

What we got was an excellent movie by most accounts - while I'd be very interested in see Edwards first vision, and would imagine it to be a pretty good film in its own right, I think Disney probably did the right thing here for the franchise as a whole.

I would imagine that the original cut was darker, murky, grittier, and overall far less black and white in its portrayal of heroes and villains (look at the original trailers introduction to Jyn as a character and her dialogue interactions with Saw - all totally removed and re-worked in the final film).

Some elements of that remain but Disney intervened to make it a more familiar 'Star Wars' film that slots into the franchise despite it's darker edge - I think the original cut would have been far too stark a film and out of sync with existing movies.

I wasn't trying to claim that Edwards original cut was likely to be bad, more so address the notion expressed that Disney 'meddling' in the movie is a bad sign.

It could have been a brilliant piece of gritty, sci-fi war film, but it evidently wasn't a good 'Star Wars' film - and judging by how the radically re-worked film turned out, I'd be inclined to believe that to be true.

All sources have said the only thing reworked was the ending. Nothing at all like the entire film. There isn't a 'different version' of the film anywhere. The original ending had them all escaping on the beach (and rumoured to be all mowed down in the attempt).

TerrorFirmer

david75 wrote: »

All sources have said the only thing reworked was the ending. Nothing at all like the entire film. There isn't a 'different version' of the film anywhere. The original ending had them all escaping on the beach (and rumoured to be all mowed down in the attempt).

In earlier interviews it was said that the number of special effects shots almost tripled. The re-shoots and additions were fairly significant in nature to bring the film in line with the 'feel' of other Star Wars films. Almost nothing from the original trailer is in the final film.

That all points to fairly significant alternations to not just the ending, but the overall tone of the film and the portrayal of its protagonists as well - look at Jyn's character as introduced in the trailers versus in the final movie - radically different.

I'm not claiming there's a totally different film, the core would be similar, but it's been significantly re-worked from it's draft cut - the characters, the ending, the feel and the general tone.

That doesn't necessarily mean the majority of the movie was reshot or close to it - some brief scenes would be re-shot with new dialogue and re-edited, to change the context and tone of existing scenes. Suicide Squad is a good example of how the tone and context of certain scenes were radically altered by a few lines of additional dialogue and recuts.

I'm quite sure the first draft was probably closer to a sort of Saving Private Ryan/Star Wars hybrid that Disney slammed the breaks on for being too bleak.

david75

Oooh this will be well worth listening to
Empire Podcast: Rogue One spoiler special with Gareth Edwards

http://www.empireonline.com/movies/news/empire-podcast-rogue-one-spoiler-special-gareth-edwards/

david75

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

In earlier interviews it was said that the number of special effects shots almost tripled. The re-shoots and additions were fairly significant in nature to bring the film in line with the 'feel' of other Star Wars films. Almost nothing from the original trailer is in the final film.

That all points to fairly significant alternations to not just the ending, but the overall tone of the film and the portrayal of its protagonists as well - look at Jyn's character as introduced in the trailers versus in the final movie - radically different.

I'm not claiming there's a totally different film, the core would be similar, but it's been significantly re-worked from it's draft cut - the characters, the ending, the feel and the general tone.

That doesn't necessarily mean the majority of the movie was reshot or close to it - some brief scenes would be re-shot with new dialogue and re-edited, to change the context and tone of existing scenes. Suicide Squad is a good example of how the tone and context of certain scenes were radically altered by a few lines of additional dialogue and recuts.

I'm quite sure the first draft was probably closer to a sort of Saving Private Ryan/Star Wars hybrid that Disney slammed the breaks on for being too bleak.

I've heard three different podcasts this week with interviews with people involved including production and they all said it was the ending was reshot. And that's all.

TerrorFirmer

david75 wrote: »

I've heard three different podcasts this week with interviews with people involved including production and they all said it was the ending was reshot. And that's all.

The 'ending' can be considered as the entirety of the film time devoted to Scarrif which is where I'm arguing that the film was significantly altered.

Almost all scenes and dialogue featured in early trailers are not in the film. The character of Jyn is completely different in those trailers, presented as a morally questionable character - an assertion supported by the overlaid dialogue of Saw implying her association with the rebel alliance and pursuit of the plans is not entirely black and white. None of those scenes, or dialogue, appears in the final film, nor is Jyn presented as anything remotely resembling that initial portrayal of a troubled, conflicted individual.

The missing footage does indeed suggest that the original ending, in the sense of the final 20 minutes or so, were initially completely different - but I'd argue furthermore throughout the entire film, the overall tone was 'softened' through the re-working and re-editing of scenes to give it a more 'Star Wars' feel and somewhat closer to the notion of a battle between good and evil, broadly speaking.

There are zero references to any major space battles in the earlier trailers, which supports the widely believed rumor that the original 'ending', or Scarriff battle, did not involve any large scale space battle initially (but likely did involve minor, more localized aerial combat scenes on the surface).

A heavily re-worked film can have 80% original footage but still be a very, very different film in tone, and I fully believe that happened with Rogue One to bring it closer in line with the existing franchise, albeit allowing it to retain a certain level of bleakness previously unseen to date in Star Wars.

D0NNELLY

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

On the contrary from what we know about the film, Disney largely saved the film by ordering major re-shoots when they did.

Is there a source on how bad the film was prior to the reshoots?

TerrorFirmer

D0NNELLY wrote: »

Is there a source on how bad the film was prior to the reshoots?

At no point did I say it was bad, just that it was out of sync with the existing franchise.

That's crucial to a multi billion dollar, family friendly established franchise on this scale.

The original cut could have been a multi Oscar winning production, parts of it may have been Superior to the final product in some respects.

But ultimately Disney were seriously concerned and given the end product I'd say they did well by the Stars Wars brand.

But again, its not a question of "how bad" the original vision was....just how "Star Wars" it was.

Roar

Gareth Edwards interview with the LA Times. He discusses the reshoots

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/la-ca-mn-rogue-one-gareth-edwards-20161201-story.html

It's interesting that when asked about Gilroy's involvement, Edwards doesn't mention him directly at all.

D0NNELLY

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

At no point did I say it was bad, just that it was out of sync with the existing franchise.

That's crucial to a multi billion dollar, family friendly established franchise on this scale.

The original cut could have been a multi Oscar winning production, parts of it may have been Superior to the final product in some respects.

But ultimately Disney were seriously concerned and given the end product I'd say they did well by the Stars Wars brand.

But again, its not a question of "how bad" the original vision was....just how "Star Wars" it was.

Sorry, wrong turn of phrase. I'm just interested in reading up on Disney's decision on the reshoots

D0NNELLY

Roar wrote: »

Gareth Edwards interview with the LA Times. He discusses the reshoots

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/la-ca-mn-rogue-one-gareth-edwards-20161201-story.html

It's interesting that when asked about Gilroy's involvement, Edwards doesn't mention him directly at all.

Cheers

TerrorFirmer

See now that's very interesting, I hadn't read that but if you read between the lines (not that it's even that subtle), Edwards does largely support was I was saying above.

Also, regarding Gilroy, he was paid $5 million for the reworking of the film at scripting and production levels. You don't get a paycheck like that for minor alterations. Gareth Edwards gives a fair interview and gives everyone credit for the final picture but I think it's fairly clear that the final vision and his initial vision were radically different.

“There were a ton of reshoots,” acknowledges actor Riz Ahmed, who plays a cargo pilot named Bodhi Rook. “But if people want to read anything into that, I’d encourage them to read into it the guts it takes to unpick stitching rather than just try to embroider over it, to make it right. I admire [Lucasfilm President] Kathleen [Kennedy] and Gareth and the whole team for having the guts to go, ‘Let’s reopen this. Let’s do some of this again.’ I think it’s because they really care — and hopefully that’s something that shows when people see the film.”

And because of that — because “Star Wars,” more than any other film, is kind of guaranteed to make its money back — I think it should take more of a risk than other films. It should go out on a limb a little more. And for whatever reason, because “Rogue One” is a standalone, we were given that license from the studio to be different.

Stylistically we knew to some extent it was going to be a war movie, so we looked at footage from Vietnam, the Gulf War and World War II. In the edit, we did a rough version of the movie using pieces of war footage and photography just to see what the rhythm and feel of that would be like.

It felt so strong when you took real footage from a real conflict and instead of a Huey you put in an X-wing and you put Rebel helmets on the guys who are in a trench scared for their lives. You just look at that image and go, “Oh my God, I’ve always wanted to see that.”

We pushed it. At times we probably went too far and then dialed it back. Obviously “Star Wars” is as much for kids as it is for adults.

We’d always planned to do a pickup shoot but we needed a lot of time to figure out all this material and get the best out of it. So that pushed the entire schedule in a big way. Then Disney saw the film and reacted really well and they said, “Whatever you need, we’re going to support you.” Our visual-effects shot count went from 600 to nearly 1,700, so suddenly we could do absolutely anything we wanted. To design 1,000 visual effects shots should take a year, so it was all hands to the pump and we never came up for air really until about a week ago.

It would be beautiful if you write a story, you shoot exactly that, you edit it and it’s a hit. But art — or good art — doesn’t work like that. It’s a process, and you experiment and react and improve. And if I make more films, which I hope to, I want to make them like that as well, where it’s organic and it’s not predetermined.

You can have a dictatorship creatively where you say, “We’re going to do this, this and this and I’m not going to listen to anyone and I’ve pre-decided it in my head.” I think that kind of filmmaking is like the Empire and this other kind of filmmaking is more like the Rebellion. I feel like I’m more of a Rebel than those other guys, so I prefer to be in that camp.

There were reports that Tony Gilroy was brought in to help with the reshoots and the overall tone and the ending underwent changes. Was that part of it?

Things kept improving constantly and the film was getting better and better — and if you’re improving it, you don’t stop. I think any other movie you would say, “That’ll do. We’re going to get a hit.” But “Star Wars” is going to live forever if you do it properly. We just can’t let it go. You’ve got keep going until they prise it out of your hands.

Making “Star Wars” is a team sport, really. You can’t make these massive movies completely on your own. Even from the costumes to the guns to the ships to the VFX, it’s a real team effort.

And honestly, if anyone takes credit for all of it, it should be George Lucas. We’re just borrowing it. George gave it to the world and it’s like this precious thing you get to hold for a moment and do your thing with it and then you have to give it back. “Star Wars” doesn’t belong to you. You borrow it from the world.

Osmosis Jones

I must say, between this and the DC Superhero movies this year I'm sick of hearing about reshoots. I'd rather just judge the movie on what it is when released and assume that people smarter than myself made the decisions to say that this is the best version of the movie they have based on all their footage.

DrumSteve

Well I went in knowing feck all about it and I enjoyed it.

strandroad

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

Almost all scenes and dialogue featured in early trailers are not in the film. The character of Jyn is completely different in those trailers, presented as a morally questionable character - an assertion supported by the overlaid dialogue of Saw implying her association with the rebel alliance and pursuit of the plans is not entirely black and white. None of those scenes, or dialogue, appears in the final film, nor is Jyn presented as anything remotely resembling that initial portrayal of a troubled, conflicted individual.

Having read the book, I don't think she was ever meant to be a double agent etc. Saw's words from the early trailer (and his hairstyle in some of the clips) point to the period when he trained her, and in the book

more is made of her initial training with Saw, how she fought alongside his rebels and left them and how it informs her momentary leadership of Rogue One team. Perhaps they wanted to give her more of a backstory and dropped it (Felicity Jones is already older than Jyn who's supposed to be about 23, I can't see how they could make her be a believable teenager).

She had some more cocky lines in her first talks with the Alliance which were then dropped - presumably because they were going for a more stoic/cynical initial portrayal of her.

Nervous Wreck

People are so weirdly obsessed with reshoots, 'original versions' and extended cuts these days. Who cares what way the movie may have been?!