Star Wars VII (film) - December 18th 2015

[Neil]

I guess my biggest annoyance was just, an even bigger death star... again? Can you really not think of anything else?

[MoonSylver]

Is it weird that for a series of movies that was such a big part of my life, & that I use to be so passionate about, that I feel...indifferent now, & haven't even bothered to see the new one yet?

[AcesandEights]

Is it weird that for a series of movies that was such a big part of my life, & that I use to be so passionate about, that I feel...indifferent now, & haven't even bothered to see the new one yet? No, you have an "Eeyore's Gloomy Place" gif in your signature, so I'd say that sounds about right

[MoonSylver]

No, you have an "Eeyore's Gloomy Place" gif in your signature, so I'd say that sounds about right Yeah, point taken.

[DayoftheZ]

Well I was born in 79 so grew up watching Star Wars on the TV throughout the 80's. I have such fond memories of sitting down with my brother and parents watching the films and they were such a part of my life for so long. Gradually George Lucas chipped away at that magic with the tampering with episodes 4-6 to the point that I couldn’t watch them anymore. I mean changing Boba Fetts voice and having the ghost of young Anakin kind of makes me feel ill to this day. Also HAN SHOT FIRST!! On top of all this Lucas made the god awful prequel films, and aside from getting to see the Dooku vs Yoda fight and perhaps the Anakin vs Obi Wan duel they were for the most part horrendous attempts at reviving the Star Wars franchise. Anyway I went today to watch the new one with my mum and dad because the weather is shocking again, and I have to say I was grinning from ear to ear. I must confess I was a little apprehensive at first because revisiting old characters I was concerned that maybe they would ruin what made the characters so special but I feel they got the balance right. They also did a great job of giving us the right mix of emotion, humour and action which the prequels failed at. The new characters in Finn, Poe and Rey were great additions and I can see them becoming important players in the new Star Wars. The only thing I was underwhelmed with was the “bad guys” neither Snoke or Kylo Ren reach the heights of Darth Vader or even Count Dooku. Overall a 7 or 8 out of 10

[AcesandEights]

The only thing I was underwhelmed with was the “bad guys” neither Snoke or Kylo Ren reach the heights of Darth Vader or even Count Dooku. I think Kylo Ren is generally getting a bad rap, when the general alternative would be to have another uber mary sue. You can't replicate Vader, so instead they gave us...   someone who is himself a flawed character trying to replicate his idealized version of Vader. Maybe a little hackneyed, but it's better than an over-the-top stand-in for Vader who never makes a mistake and whom the viewer is supposed to buy as being more badass than Vader at first blush.

[MinionZombie]

I think Kylo Ren is generally getting a bad rap, when the general alternative would be to have another uber mary sue. You can't replicate Vader, so instead they gave us...   someone who is himself a flawed character trying to replicate his idealized version of Vader. Maybe a little hackneyed, but it's better than an over-the-top stand-in for Vader who never makes a mistake and whom the viewer is supposed to buy as being more badass than Vader at first blush. I agree - and what's more, there's room to breathe and grow and develop the character of Kylo Ren, much like many of the other new folks we've been introduced to. I wasn't impressed by Snoke, though ... I was like "wtf is that thing? Is it really that massive, or is that just his hologram being projected really large? It also looks particularly obvious in the CGI stakes" ... fortunately there wasn't much of him. I suppose, like with other new characters, we'll learn more about this creasy-faced old bastard in time.

[bassman]

Agreed...Snoke was a disappointment. Especially when you consider how great of a performer Serkis can be. I'm sure the hologram was being projected at a larger scale like we saw with Palpatine's head in the original trilogy, but it seemed completely "off". I also feel like Maz would have been a better character if it were a person or combination of puppet and CGI rather than a complete CGI character.

[MinionZombie]

Agreed...Snoke was a disappointment. Especially when you consider how great of a performer Serkis can be. I'm sure the hologram was being projected at a larger scale like we saw with Palpatine's head in the original trilogy, but it seemed completely "off". I also feel like Maz would have been a better character if it were a person or combination of puppet and CGI rather than a complete CGI character. Which one was Maz, again? Is that the one that Lupita N'Yongo was playing? With Snoke the CGI made it almost look like the face was too expressive to be real ... as if the skin moved too much ... ... if that make sense?

[bassman]

Yeah, the little woman Alien with goggles. With so many other practical effects throughout the film, her completely CGI character felt like she belonged in Lucas' prequels. It obviously didn't ruin the film, but was one of the negative aspects, IMO.

[MinionZombie]

Yeah, the little woman Alien with goggles. With so many other practical effects throughout the film, her completely CGI character felt like she belonged in Lucas' prequels. It obviously didn't ruin the film, but was one of the negative aspects, IMO. I liked the character, but yes, the execution of the CGI was underwhelming there as well - again, it was as if the skin moved too much, as if there were too many muscles in her face working overtime. Such instances of overt CGI were kind of awkward compared to the practical stuff going on, as you say. Far better to be practical entirely - or - practical with a bit of CG enhancement (e.g. to animate a face/mouth when speaking). All-CG characters are hard to get right. They did a good job on Avatar, Gollum is a fantastic piece of work, and then the golden example is Caesar in the recent couple of Apes movies. Perhaps Disney could have chucked a bit more cash at some extra pixels rather than advertising the film on bags of fucking oranges?

[bassman]

Yes...Caeser in Rise and Dawn is without a doubt the benchmark for bringing CGI characters to life. I still can't believe how well done the apes are. Very much looking forward to the third one. War for the Planet of the Apes, I think it is?... Abrams and company should have looked at those films in order to reach the same level of photorealistic creatures.

[shootemindehead]

Or else just slapped some prosthetics on a real person, which 9 times out of 10 is far more convincing. Even Walrus man or Hammerhead from 1977 is more convincing.

[bassman]

Or else just slapped some prosthetics on a real person, which 9 times out of 10 is far more convincing. Even Walrus man or Hammerhead from 1977 is more convincing. Oh yeah, no doubt. As I said earlier, they should've used practical effects with maybe a bit of CGI to enhance it if needed. But if they were dead set on going with a fully CGI character, they could've at least done better than that final product.

[MinionZombie]

Oh yeah, no doubt. As I said earlier, they should've used practical effects with maybe a bit of CGI to enhance it if needed. But if they were dead set on going with a fully CGI character, they could've at least done better than that final product. A case of where post-release tinkering would actually be useful - i.e. to improve upon the iffy CGI on Snoke and that goggle-eyed little alien lady! The roller ball alien things aboard the Millennium Falcon were obviously CGI creations - they couldn't be anything else as practical effects wouldn't have worked for that, I don't think - but at least in that scene they generally move fast and there's lots of distractions within the frame ... whereas with Snoke and the glasses lady alien it's a case of lingering close ups (Snoke's hologramatic projection distortion aside).