Movie Reviews 2.0
- Thread starter Dresden
- Start date
tongue_of_colicab
Veteran
Yeah that is what I wanted to write but didnt for some reason 
Thanks for pointing it
Thanks for pointing it Word is that Disney wants to go CG Leia for Star Wars Episode IX, as the character would have a major role in the story. Supposedly they're already in talks with Fisher's daughter.
On the one hand, the tech and artistry is surely going to be better in the next 3 years, and Carrie Fisher at about 62 years old age should be considerably less challenging than the CG characters in Rogue One.
On the other hand, the morality of this is definitely a lot more complex and controversial than bringing back Cushing. Just for a start, Disney has bought insurance for the case of Fisher's premature death (and probably for all the others...) which they've already cashed in...
On the one hand, the tech and artistry is surely going to be better in the next 3 years, and Carrie Fisher at about 62 years old age should be considerably less challenging than the CG characters in Rogue One.
On the other hand, the morality of this is definitely a lot more complex and controversial than bringing back Cushing. Just for a start, Disney has bought insurance for the case of Fisher's premature death (and probably for all the others...) which they've already cashed in...
Rumor debunked (thankfully)
http://www.theverge.com/2017/1/13/14271182/star-wars-carrie-fisher-no-cg-recreation
As for clauses and such, as I've said Rogue One is definitely a game changer. A good part of the audience (mostly those unfamiliar with Cushing or Tarkin) have 'bought' the CG character, there is now proof that the approach can work. Sooner or later someone is going to do it again, especially as the tech is only going to get cheaper and better.
http://www.theverge.com/2017/1/13/14271182/star-wars-carrie-fisher-no-cg-recreation
As for clauses and such, as I've said Rogue One is definitely a game changer. A good part of the audience (mostly those unfamiliar with Cushing or Tarkin) have 'bought' the CG character, there is now proof that the approach can work. Sooner or later someone is going to do it again, especially as the tech is only going to get cheaper and better.
Sigfried1977
Legend
A friend of mine didn't even notice fake Jeff Bridges in Tron Legacy. Judging by the pictures at least, Poly-Tarkin looks a lot more believable than he did, so this doesn't surprise me.
DuckThor Evil
Legend
Personally I have to say that the CG characters looked almost embarrassingly bad, so I definitely believe that it must be hard to do something like that. Princess Leia looked alright until the face started to animate. Tarkin had so much more screen time that the flaws were more apparent. I can still believe that a regular movie watcher doesn't pay that much attention to them. Personally I don't know anything about creating stuff like that, but I have watched my entire life either real persons or CG characters in games and movies and those Rogue One characters still have ways to go.
Enjoyed the movie in general though. Not an awesome movie, but pretty good.
Enjoyed the movie in general though. Not an awesome movie, but pretty good.
Surely the only reason to use the original Tarkin actor is for those people that were extremely familiar with the character/actor. They could have used anyone, for those unfamiliar.
Well, I've just been to see Rogue One and it was another, 'Meh', film for me. Still better than 'The Force Awakens', however.
Just a bit too much pointless dumb stuff going on as always seems to be the case in these days of CGI. If you look back to the original trilogy, the plots were very much more simple but were also more coherent because they couldn't just insert a whizz-bang space combat scene or two and didn't tend to have the budget to just destroy scenery left, right and centre.
Obviously in the Star Wars milieu, everybody has evolved out of any sort of fear of heights because they don't half like to build structures with platforms built on the side of precipitous drops and they also don't seem to bothered about handrails most of the time. Just like the LoTR/Hobbit movies, in fact, and they even managed to sneak Mount Doom into Rogue One as well!
Regarding the Tarkin Uncanny Valley, I was certain that it was Rafe Fiennes behind the mask (so to speak), but it turns out it wasn't 'M' after all. Next time you see Rogue One, look closely and you'll see that the actor in the role looks and sounds very similar to Fiennes at times! I thought that was all a bit pointless really. So many movies are reboots with new faces in these days, I don't think there would have been any problems just casting another actor for the role. Certainly wouldn't have detracted from the plot in any way.
I have to say that one of my biggest problems with the film was that I thought Felicity Jones was just a bit crap in the role. Didn't find her believable in any way, shape or form. I seem to recall she put in a good performance A Theory of Everything so she obviously can act, but she just didn't fit the role for me at all.
I do live in hope that we will start to see a bit of realisation that 'less is more' when it comes to plots and use of CGI, but this seems unlikely. One of the trailers before the film tonight was for the newest Transformers movie, God help us!
It would also be good if filmakers realised that it is possible to have a bit of drama without having characters dangling one-handed over some random form of certain death. Try some interesting dialogue, perhaps, to go in with the effects?
Just a bit too much pointless dumb stuff going on as always seems to be the case in these days of CGI. If you look back to the original trilogy, the plots were very much more simple but were also more coherent because they couldn't just insert a whizz-bang space combat scene or two and didn't tend to have the budget to just destroy scenery left, right and centre.
Obviously in the Star Wars milieu, everybody has evolved out of any sort of fear of heights because they don't half like to build structures with platforms built on the side of precipitous drops and they also don't seem to bothered about handrails most of the time. Just like the LoTR/Hobbit movies, in fact, and they even managed to sneak Mount Doom into Rogue One as well!
Regarding the Tarkin Uncanny Valley, I was certain that it was Rafe Fiennes behind the mask (so to speak), but it turns out it wasn't 'M' after all. Next time you see Rogue One, look closely and you'll see that the actor in the role looks and sounds very similar to Fiennes at times! I thought that was all a bit pointless really. So many movies are reboots with new faces in these days, I don't think there would have been any problems just casting another actor for the role. Certainly wouldn't have detracted from the plot in any way.
I have to say that one of my biggest problems with the film was that I thought Felicity Jones was just a bit crap in the role. Didn't find her believable in any way, shape or form. I seem to recall she put in a good performance A Theory of Everything so she obviously can act, but she just didn't fit the role for me at all.
I do live in hope that we will start to see a bit of realisation that 'less is more' when it comes to plots and use of CGI, but this seems unlikely. One of the trailers before the film tonight was for the newest Transformers movie, God help us!
It would also be good if filmakers realised that it is possible to have a bit of drama without having characters dangling one-handed over some random form of certain death. Try some interesting dialogue, perhaps, to go in with the effects?
Sigfried1977
Legend
Speaking of crap movies with bad CGI, I've watched both the new Ghostbusters and Suicide Squad in their respective director's cut versions last weekend. Two grade-A stinkers before the lord indeed. Ghostbusters almost seemed like a bad spoof to me. As if someone decided to spend 250 million dollars on "Meet The Spartans". Suicide Squad was mostly just boring. I was particularly surprised at how tame and docile the thing was in the end. These were supposed to be a bunch of sociopathic super criminals ... plus a boomerang-throwing bankrobber for whatever-the-fuck reason, yet at the end they acted more like the harmonious, family-friendly Power Rangers and were about as threatening too. It was actually a worse film than Batman V Superman in my opinion. Granted, it never quite reached "Martha" levels of awefulness, but unlike the mess Zach Snyder unleashed on the audience, it was utterly devoid of any redeeming highlights - for what it's worth: I thought Batman V Superman had a bunch of cool looking fight scenes - whatsoever. Heck, it even looked like shit. Hard to believe the same director made End of Watch and Fury.
I also watched Don't Breathe. It was basically a moraly grey home invasion horror thriller, and it was tight as a drum. Directed by the dude who gave us the awesome Evil Dead remake, there was a fair bit of craft and polish (in a good way) on display. That guy definitely knows his ways around a horror film, and he also managed to get stellar performances out of his actors. Best horror since "The Witch". Loved it.
I also watched Don't Breathe. It was basically a moraly grey home invasion horror thriller, and it was tight as a drum. Directed by the dude who gave us the awesome Evil Dead remake, there was a fair bit of craft and polish (in a good way) on display. That guy definitely knows his ways around a horror film, and he also managed to get stellar performances out of his actors. Best horror since "The Witch". Loved it.
Last edited:
La La Land... I haven't watched this movie, but I'm already getting pretty pissed off by it. I don't know, it's just I find so obnoxious when people can't stop talking about how cool a movie is so that you MUST watch it because it has received a lot of praise, blah blah blah, etc. I see all the promo pictures and I can't help pulling a face while saying something in a 'duuuhhh' voice. Ugh...
Plus, oddly enough I really really love music and opera, but I have never liked musical movies (even though I loved my Disney movies when I was a little kid... some of which I still watch and sing along when I HAVE to).
La La Land... Stupid name (Homer's 'stupid Flanders' tone).
/baseless rant because I didn't even watch the movie
Plus, oddly enough I really really love music and opera, but I have never liked musical movies (even though I loved my Disney movies when I was a little kid... some of which I still watch and sing along when I HAVE to).
La La Land... Stupid name (Homer's 'stupid Flanders' tone).
/baseless rant because I didn't even watch the movie
Maybe you could find something worthwhile to get pissed of instead of movies you have no interest in seeing?
I'll try. Thank you for your suggestion.
Hahaha! That's exactly what I thought.Maybe @Lalaland will like it
I feel the same way. Almost. I mean, I already said that I like opera. I also like to dance and watching other people dance. Heck, I even like the actors in this movie. However, I find this (what you mentioned) so out of place in a live action film.
I know, I know it's only my opinion and a matter of taste, and I can't quite explain why my opinion is like this, bearing in mind that I like all those things out of a movie, but it is what it is...
Sigfried1977
Legend
Same here. Musicals just aren't my cup of tee. That includes all the Disney movies. This is especially unfortunate as I enjoy the animation a great deal. What's particularly weird is that films usually get battered by critics when they rely on expository dialogue because it's all supposed to be "show, don't tell". Yet for some strange reason it's all a-okay when said eposition is being delivered through song and dance.
I also like Opera, by the way. It's really not the same thing, though.
I also like Opera, by the way. It's really not the same thing, though.
Last edited:
I agree with those that say movies that suddenly break into song don't do anything for me. I guess it's because I like my movies that can take me into another place, and when people start singing for no reason, it just breaks the illusion.
It's like watching live sport on a dodgy Kodi box, and then the stream starts stopping and starting due to buffering, after a few of those I just turn it off.
It's like watching live sport on a dodgy Kodi box, and then the stream starts stopping and starting due to buffering, after a few of those I just turn it off.
What if that "another place" is somewhere where the laws of music, singing and dancing differ from where we are?
Similar threads
