Star Wars: Rogue One *spoilers from post 1195*

BMMachine

david75 wrote: »

Ah look a lecturer cum evangelist. You can't lecture people about how they enjoy films or what they should take from them. To meet your standard?

That's far past patronising.

I don't care if its patronising. What I care about is cutting through bullsh*t. I care about objectivity and perception. If that bothers you or you feel like your values are under attack you can do two things:
1 - Assess yourself and your values as regards art & culture. Open your perception of yourself and what you digest in this regard.
or
2 - Get in the safe space with Steven Seagal and just keep going.

Osmosis Jones

I don't understand why people are getting so worked up about the CGI faces, sure they used CGI to get Carrie Fisher into a few scenes in The Force Awakens and no one seemed to notice.

david75

BMMachine wrote: »

I don't care if its patronising. What I care about is cutting through bullsh*t. I care about objectivity and perception. If that bothers you or you feel like your values are under attack you can do two things:
1 - Assess yourself and your values as regards art & culture. Open your perception of yourself and what you digest in this regard.
or
2 - Get in the safe space with Steven Seagal and just keep going.

I don't know what kind of response you're expecting to that except lots of laughter.

Get over yourself

david75

Osmosis Jones wrote: »

I don't understand why people are getting so worked up about the CGI faces, sure they used CGI to get Carrie Fisher into a few scenes in The Force Awakens and no one seemed to notice.

Brilliant

The chemo days after all them sunbeds no doubt.


I liked the maz character. Don't know if I need to see more of her though in 8

Arne_Saknussem

BMMachine wrote: »

I don't care if its patronising. What I care about is cutting through bullsh*t. I care about objectivity and perception. If that bothers you or you feel like your values are under attack you can do two things:
1 - Assess yourself and your values as regards art & culture. Open your perception of yourself and what you digest in this regard.
or
2 - Get in the safe space with Steven Seagal and just keep going.

Repetitive, obvious, monotonous, lacking originality or any real wit.

Troll score: 1.5/10

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

BMMachine wrote: »

I happen to think their opinion is worth balls. mass does not equal weight.
I personally think there has been a severe dip in what is considered good and I think that has a lot to do with online culture. I think there is a mass distortion out there as regards quality of art and meaning of culture.

I think this is a pretty bad film which is being carried by fanboys and hype. And from reading yours and others comments, I know Im right

Rubbish. Even the hardest of Star Wars Fanboys can tell you how bad the prequels are, how return of the Jedi is not a good movie etc. This new Star Wars film is great, I'm not a big Star Wars fan myself, I haven't watched the original trilogy since I was a kid but this movie would have blown my 12 year olds mind! It's what I always wanted as a kid, another movie from the Star Wars universe directly linked to the original trilogy.

Sure it's got flaws...It's not exactly Shawshank but it doesn't have to be, it's a movie set in goddamn space with lasers and stormtroopers and fücking Darth Vader. It's a movie for children, it's for the people who were children when the original trilogy came out, it has to entertain both groups and not alienate anyone.

You'd wanna go and get a grip of yourself. Because you didn't like it is a bad movie??
Some people enjoy these movies and I'm one of them. I'm not a "fanboy" but I know when I've enjoyed a movie...And believe me I enjoyed this...It's definitely one of the highlights of 2016 for sure.

As for the internet falling over themselves over this, just take a read through this thread and you'll see that's not the case at all.

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

....Oh, and your trolling is pathetic.

Sad Professor

david75, BMMachine and others,
I don't know how this started and I don't care, but take the pissing contest to PM or Skype and let other people post in the thread, thanks.

BMMachine

didnt see Sad Professors post

david75

Given R1 was so dark I can see the Han movie being really fun and comedic. Lorde and Miller are great at that stuff. And they have Kasdan writing. He is Hans voice. Really encouraged. It'd be a great counter balance to the tone set in Rogue One.

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

Is BMMachine private messaging everyone on thread who made bits of him or just me?

david75

Hugh Mungus wrote: »

Is BMMachine private messaging everyone on thread who made bits of him or just me?

Yep I'm being 'enlightened' by him also.

johnny_ultimate

Mod note: Seriously folks, this is a final warning. If someone is annoying you in PM, ignore it. If they're being abusive, report it. But please don't relight the dumpster fire this thread temporarily became.

david75

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Mod note: Seriously folks, this is a final warning. If someone is annoying you in PM, ignore it. If they're being abusive, report it. But please don't relight the dumpster fire this thread temporarily became.

Tried to get back to Star Wars above. Sorry for the interference.

Member star wars?

Zubeneschamali

While I have seen the originals many times, it must be a very ong time since I actually read the opening crawl in Episode IV. I had the idea that spies stole the plans, but like others, I was expecting a heist/sneaking about/hack sort of operation rather than a fleet deployment. But Rogue One is right there in Episode IV:

It is a period of civil war.
Rebel spaceships, striking
from a hidden base, have won
their first victory against
the evil Galactic Empire.

During the battle, Rebel
spies managed to steal secret
plans to the Empire's
ultimate weapon, the DEATH
STAR, an armored space
station with enough power
to destroy an entire planet.

Pursued by the Empire's
sinister agents, Princess
Leia races home aboard her
starship, custodian of the
stolen plans that can save her
people and restore
freedom to the galaxy....

Tony EH

Slydice wrote: »

Wow! Rogue One joins up so well with A New Hope! Also,

the Vader Helmet has that same clunky look which I thought was off in Rogue One!

Looks like they were keeping that mind

Not only that,

Vader's helmet has the same red tint to the eyepieces that they did in the original 'Star Wars' too.

Something that's absent from 'The Empire Strikes Back' and 'Return of the Jedi'.

It's gas, when 'Rogue One' ended, I immediately wanted to watch 'Star Wars' again. Not like I haven't seen it over 100 times by this stage, but it blends so well, it was like switching the film off half way.

Tony EH

david75 wrote: »

People complaining that they can't suspend disbelief for a CGI human character while watching a film about spaceships and Death Stars and magic space wizards with laser swords


Haha

In fairness they have a point though. Something like a CGI character that's overused can interfere with the enjoyment of the film.

If you're to something like Star Wars, then you expect to be seeing spaceships, Death Stars and magic space wizards with laser swords. Those things are largely a given and if they are going to wreck the experience, then you may as well stay at home.

However, suspension of disbelief can only extend so far. So, when a CGI stand in for an actor so well known as Peter Cushing is used so extensively, like we see in 'Rogue One', the cracks will eventually show and for some people, that will bring them out of the film as it were.

Personally, I thought it was a great achievement and when I saw CGI Peter Cushing (an actor I've been very fond of since I was a kid) I thought it was magnificent...at first. But, then with its overuse, I felt it began to outstay its welcome frankly and thought the producers would have been better off using long shots and other trickery to complete the illusion.

In short, they showed their hand continuously and ruined the magic.

The Leia shot at the end was an even worse decision. She just should have been shown from behind. That would have been perfectly fine. There was simply no need to show her face at all.

While it certainly didn't ruin the film for me and - as a one time computer animator myself - I can appreciate the efforts that went into the creation of CGI Tarkin and Leia. However, the bottom line is, the tech simply isn't there yet and I would say it won't be there for many, many years to come.

On the plus side with the CGI, 'Rogue One' contains some of the best physically convincing hardware that I've seen in a film. Whereby, I was convinced by the physical movements of the vehicles in the movie and there were no silly maneuvers being pulled that only non-physical, computer generated, animated models are capable of. That kind of thing goes a long, long way to believing that TIE fighters and X-Wings - albeit fictional craft - really are knocking the crap out of each other in a huge space battle.

Seanachai

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Its star wars, its suppose to be a fun adventure movie of kids and that's what it was,
People looking for an amazing plot are never going to get it, its Star wars after all,
The originals had loads of plot holes, for a start trying to hide Luke from his dad and still calling him Luke Skywalker is retarded but guess what there still a fun movies and that's all there suppose to be.

But they had a signature certain feel and look that means people have very fond memories of them. They have become victim to the modern production craze where everything has to appear sharp and high definition which doesn't suit SW in my opinion.

Padraig Mor

Saw this yesterday. Absolutely dreadful I thought - just a mish mash of bland, chaotic action for its own sake - a bit like Transformers in space. Some very shoddy effects also - some of the Star Destroyer shots were clearly cheapo models. Not having read anything in advance about the film though, I spent several scenes amazed that they found an actor so similar to Peter Cushing - so to subsequently find that he was CGI manipulated is genuinely impressive. Knowing this now, I'm sure I'd spot some flaws, but on viewing yesterday I had no inkling it wasn't a physical actor.

Seanachai

Deleted User wrote: »

Member star wars?

Member artistic production values and when it wasn't a competition to see who could create the sharpest definition? A lot of films these days have a look that is similar to the effects you get with psychedelics, I'm wondering if there's a younger generation of FX artists who have been taking too much of the jungle vine.

Tony EH

orubiru wrote: »

I am trying to convince myself that maybe I am just not getting it and Rogue One really is a great film.

Why bother?

If you're not entertained, then you're not entertained. Why make excuses?

Personally, I thought it was the best Star Wars film since 'Return of the Jedi' and I liked the build up to the final battle. It made sense to spend the time with these people to help the ending make an impact.

But, if you don't like something, why try to convince yourself or anybody else otherwise?

Kirby

david75 wrote: »

Ehhhh that last scene with Vader..

True but he's hardly lopping guys heads off left and right is he? Besides, jango fett lost his head in the prequels and the kid has seen those so....its not a million miles worse.

Tony EH

david75 wrote: »

Can you guys see yourselves coming back to this often? And once it's settled in do you see it rising or falling in your personal Star Wars rankings?
I'm not sure for myself.

Eye roll at a lot of the Star Wars fan base suddenly turning on the force awakens saying they hate it and this is way better but I guess that's to be expected. Surprised at a lot of people I know liking this I never imagined would and I lot of people I thought would love it that really not liking it at all. Seems to fare better with very casual Star Wars fans than the few hardcore I know.

Yes. To me, it's my prequel. Star Wars part 1 if you will.

Funny, in "preparation" I watched (a fan edit of) 'Revenge of the Sith' before I went to the cinema for 'Rogue One'. It still sucks absolute balls. Those prequel films are irredeemable as far as I'm concerned and I've never bought into the hype of the, frankly, hideously overrated 'The Force Awakens'.

But I genuinely came out of 'Rogue One' smiling. Will it diminish with further viewings at home? Maybe. But, for the fist time in over 30 years I felt truly happy with a Star Wars film.

As for "a lot of the Star Wars fan base suddenly turning on the force awakens..., I think that's just an inevitable effect of the scales falling from people's eyes and them realising that 'The Force Awakens' really just isn't that great a film, contains a ton of flaws and rehashes far too much from the 1977 film to gloss over any more.

Not Propaganda

Padraig Mor wrote: »

Saw this yesterday. Absolutely dreadful I thought - just a mish mash of bland, chaotic action for its own sake - a bit like Transformers in space. Some very shoddy effects also - some of the Star Destroyer shots were clearly cheapo models. Not having read anything in advance about the film though, I spent several scenes amazed that they found an actor so similar to Peter Cushing - so to subsequently find that he was CGI manipulated is genuinely impressive. Knowing this now, I'm sure I'd spot some flaws, but on viewing yesterday I had no inkling it wasn't a physical actor.

I'm nearly sure that was a stylistic choice to make it feel like the original film tbh, especially how they used the lighting in those shots

PhiloCypher

Tony EH wrote: »

Personally, I thought it was a great achievement and when I saw CGI Peter Cushing (an actor I've been very fond of since I was a kid) I thought it was magnificent...at first. But, then with its overuse, I felt it began to outstay its welcome frankly and thought the producers would have been better off using long shots and other trickery to complete the illusion.

In short, they showed their hand continuously and ruined the magic.

As I've said previously I was fine with cgi Tarkin , but he could and possibly should have been used more sparingly . But I guess they were too proud of this technological terror they had constructed and wanted to show off .

The Leia shot at the end was an even worse decision. She just should have been shown from behind. That would have been perfectly fine. There was simply no need to show her face at all.

Yeh , I thought Leia was a lot less convincing then Tarkin , Tarkins wrinkles give him a lived in quality, whereas the lack of same on Leia give her a smooth manniquinesque cgi sheen.

On the plus side with the CGI, 'Rogue One' contains some of the best physically convincing hardware that I've seen in a film. Whereby, I was convinced by the physical movements of the vehicles in the movie and there were no silly maneuvers being pulled that only non-physical, computer generated, animated models are capable of. That kind of thing goes a long, long way to believing that TIE fighters and X-Wings - albeit fictional craft - really are knocking the crap out of each other in a huge space battle.

Absolutely agree . It was something that really ground my gears in TFA . It seemed to me that with the exception of the Falcon which they had skidding around corners like a rally car ,everything else had all the weight of a mayfly. The biggest offender being Poe " I am like a leaf on the wind " Dameron who takes out an entire squadron of ties in one fluid move . In atmosphere . In an area no bigger then the 3 arena . Ignoring all the laws of inertia established by crashing the Falcon into just about everything just so Finn can see it all and be super impressed.

Tony EH

Tony EH wrote: »

Yes. To me, it's my prequel. Star Wars part 1 if you will.

Funny, in "preparation" I watched (a fan edit of) 'Revenge of the Sith' before I went to the cinema for 'Rogue One'. It still sucks absolute balls. Those prequel films are irredeemable as far as I'm concerned and I've never bought into the hype of the, frankly, hideously overrated 'The Force Awakens'.

But I genuinely came out of 'Rogue One' smiling. Will it diminish with further viewings at home? Maybe. But, for the fist time in over 30 years I felt truly happy with a Star Wars film.

As for "a lot of the Star Wars fan base suddenly turning on the force awakens..., I think that's just an inevitable effect of the scales falling from people's eyes and them realising that 'The Force Awakens' really just isn't that great a film, contains a ton of flaws and rehashes far too much from the 1977 film to gloss over any more.

It's mad. If you swap the two film titles here (R1 and TFA), that's my opinion on them.

Conall Cernach

I wonder why they went the cgi route with Leia and didn't use some footage of her from 1977 like they did with the two squadron leaders. Surely they could have "cut and pasted" her into Rogue One rather than recreate her face digitally.

Jan_de_Bakker

Whoever did this should be just shot on site ..

Tony EH

PhiloCypher wrote: »

Absolutely agree . It was something that really ground my gears in TFA . It seemed to me that with the exception of the Falcon which they had skidding around corners like a rally car ,everything else had all the weight of a mayfly. The biggest offender being Poe " I am like a leaf on the wind " Dameron who takes out an entire squadron of ties in one fluid move . In atmosphere . In an area no bigger then the 3 arena . Ignoring all the laws of inertia established by crashing the Falcon into just about everything just so Finn can see it all and be super impressed.

Yeh, it's partly the physics of 'The Force Awakens' that I was thinking of when I wrote my post. The Millennium Falcon crashing into everything and still flying was, to put it bluntly, fcuking stupid and unnecessary. Coupled with Poe's turn on a dime X-Wing, I just gave up.

What irks me though is that it's really not that hard with animation technology to add weight to your models and make them look like they are operating in an environment, instead of simply swishing around on a blank screen. This physical element can be achieved by simply observing real world tech as it stands.

I know the likes of TIE fighters etc are supposed to be super maneuverable, but there's limits to what the human mind will believe.