Jump to content

Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens (JJ Abrams 2015)


crocodile

Recommended Posts

I hope the film has quality costume and makeup effects, comparable to the great work done in THE EWOK ADVENTURES films.

KT1.jpg

My hope is we'll finally learn what becomes of Chewie's family. Especially Lumpy.

giphy.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a hunch she would be playing a baddie in this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do regret that Jorah Mormont isn't a jedi in the new Star Warses. He would be so perfect!

Ser-Jorah-Mormont-Iain-Glen_zpsej79rvlq.

Indeed! He would be just pitch perfect! I can imagine him dispensing Jedi wisdom with that world weary wise voice of his. Maybe Gwendoline Christie can put a good word in for him. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasn't there a photo of Driver wearing a good guy pilot outfit?

You are probably thinking of Isaacs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasn't there a photo of Driver wearing a good guy pilot outfit? He may be a good guy gone bad... or a spy...

That might also have been a misdirect since they knew people were snapping spy pictures

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The article says that Abrams considered putting Jar Jar’s bones on Jakku -

“I have a thought about putting Jar Jar Binks’s bones in the desert there. I’m serious! Only three people will notice, but they’ll love it".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The article says that Abrams considered putting Jar Jar’s bones on Jakku -

“I have a thought about putting Jar Jar Binks’s bones in the desert there. I’m serious! Only three people will notice, but they’ll love it".

If I had noticed I would have cheered!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lupita Nyong'o in Performance Capture? I hope this doesn't mean an entire character will be CGI like Jar Jar... though the photo of all those practical alien masks, costumes and prosthetics are very encouraging!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lupita Nyong'o in Performance Capture? I hope this doesn't mean an entire character will be CGI like Jar Jar...

It does.

As long as the character is well written, it does not entirely matter to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The article says that Abrams considered putting Jar Jar’s bones on Jakku -

“I have a thought about putting Jar Jar Binks’s bones in the desert there. I’m serious! Only three people will notice, but they’ll love it".

If I had noticed I would have cheered!

Such a lack of respect for Lucas!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just saying that Guardians of the Galaxy having CG creatures is fine for a film filled with CGI. Abrams is trying everything to go practical. Building huge sets and making costumes and masks and makeup instead of CGI aliens, yet they make her characters fully CGI? It might look obvious and out of place. I don't want to see a well lit scene outside with real locations, sets and actors dressed as aliens and then Nyong'o walks in full CGI.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's hard not to really considering the footage shows her in full Andy Serkis mode. Does any one know what he's doing in it? I hope not performance capture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The dots on the face would lead one to believe it's performance capture.

It would be foolish to think that there won't be CGI in this film. It looks/sounds like they're making a big effort to do as much as possible with practical effects, but CGI is a tool, and a useful one. If they want something they can't do practically for one reason or another, they'll do it CGI.

The original trilogy was full of stop motion animation, puppetry, etc. This is no different. They'll use all of the tools at their disposal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm fine with performance capture. I'm not being negative about that. I mean that I don't want to be ripped out of the film by the contrast of everything in a scene being practical and just one big CGI slap in the face. Apes are easy to be convinced because they're real. Look at Lurtz in LOTR compared to Azog in Hobbit. I know which one I'd prefer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was greatly improved but he was obviously CGI. I will always favour practical over Digital. Back in the 70's film makers had limitations of what they could do, which can make films better. Being able to do anything can be bad because Lucas and Jackson both fell into that trap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's great CG, but it's still clearly CG. Lurtz is undeniably right in front of you, fighting Aragorn. CGI still looks too perfectly smooth and clean. Practical is always more convincing, which I prefer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What prosthetics lack in movement/articulation, they gain in tangibility. I agree with LeeAllen, I typically prefer a physical presence to a CGI presence if it's feasible. Azog is a good example - Jackson proved in three movies that he knows how to turn a human person into an orc, but he opted for CGI in the Hobbit movies across the board, and in my opinion it's really bad. Despite the advances made in the two years since AUJ, Azog never looked like he was actually in scene to me.

I have no problem with CGI or motion capture in things that can't otherwise be done. We don't know anything about Lupita's character besides a name and an occupation, so we'll just have to wait and see how it turns out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree there were some scenes that convinced me almost 100 percent. Like the close-up of him dying. Incredible CGI. I guess I can't see him as real becsuse of the sketchy and rushed last minute CG job on the first two Hobbits, but I will always find practical more enjoyable than VFX. CGI has yet to convince me in a film that its really there. Makes me care less for characters that aren't there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and rushed last minute CG job on the first Hobbit

Fixed.

While the CG may have also been rushed on DOS, they atleast had a CG design down instead of how it was with AUJ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see it. Azog could just as well have been live action

Ha! That's funny.

And seriously, at this stage, one CGI character is certainly not something to be worried about, especially in a very practical effects-driven film. This team knows what they're doing and are keen on preserving the original Star Wars look.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you seen Gravity?

Yeah I did but that's different. The motion capture was of real objects like spacesuits not close ups of faces or aliens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.