Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****
-
@mn5 said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@crucial said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
Why would people get so offended about all this?
Luke is a character not THE actor.
Obviously producers would want to make the character look similar (evidence how much shit they got for another actor playing Han in the Solo movie) so I have no issues with them doing whatever they need to to try for some continuity.
I’d rather a non Hamill CGI version of Luke that is still obviously Luke than not having him at all.When they first did it in Rogue One I though they absolutely nailed Moff Tarkin ( mannerisms, how he talked etc ) but for other characters ( Mon Mothma, drunk guys from the pub in tattooine ) they just got other actors. Surely it’s one thing or another ? ( to be fair Peter Cushing isn’t up to much acting these days )
The young fella who played Han actually did a great job…..but he’s not Harrison Ford and Childish whatshisname isn’t Lando.
i agree I thought Tarkin was good, some people think if you can tell at all then its rubbish, i dont buy that, worked enough for me and theyre are getting better and better at it
I get why they did CGI rather than another actor as he's pretty distinctive (mom mothma is a bit more generic but they still managed to find someone that did a great job), they couldnt do it with han because there is probably huge difference between people tolerance for a few minutes (tarkin) and carrying a whole film
-
@kiwiwomble said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@mn5 im not sure about De Niro, But de aged would generally mean the same actor comes in and acts out the scene and then they use CGI to make them look younger. the first time we saw Luke in Mando, they had a younger dude come and do the scene for the body, but also had Mark Hamill come in and act out for the voice and facial expressions
with Luke in BoBF last week Mark Hammill had nothing to do with it, rando played out the physical bits and then the face and voice is all computer, hence he is not listed in the credits
Because ford is supposedly listed, although i havent seen that, you would think it will be a case of the former rather than the latter
MH is listed in the credits on IMDB. Same listing that had HF on it (now removed)
-
@crucial said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@kiwiwomble said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@mn5 im not sure about De Niro, But de aged would generally mean the same actor comes in and acts out the scene and then they use CGI to make them look younger. the first time we saw Luke in Mando, they had a younger dude come and do the scene for the body, but also had Mark Hamill come in and act out for the voice and facial expressions
with Luke in BoBF last week Mark Hammill had nothing to do with it, rando played out the physical bits and then the face and voice is all computer, hence he is not listed in the credits
Because ford is supposedly listed, although i havent seen that, you would think it will be a case of the former rather than the latter
MH is listed in the credits on IMDB. Same listing that had HF on it (now removed)
you're right, i looked and didn't see him but there he is
-
@kiwiwomble said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@mn5 said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@crucial said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
Why would people get so offended about all this?
Luke is a character not THE actor.
Obviously producers would want to make the character look similar (evidence how much shit they got for another actor playing Han in the Solo movie) so I have no issues with them doing whatever they need to to try for some continuity.
I’d rather a non Hamill CGI version of Luke that is still obviously Luke than not having him at all.When they first did it in Rogue One I though they absolutely nailed Moff Tarkin ( mannerisms, how he talked etc ) but for other characters ( Mon Mothma, drunk guys from the pub in tattooine ) they just got other actors. Surely it’s one thing or another ? ( to be fair Peter Cushing isn’t up to much acting these days )
The young fella who played Han actually did a great job…..but he’s not Harrison Ford and Childish whatshisname isn’t Lando.
i agree I thought Tarkin was good, some people think if you can tell at all then its rubbish, i dont buy that, worked enough for me and theyre are getting better and better at it
I get why they did CGI rather than another actor as he's pretty distinctive (mom mothma is a bit more generic but they still managed to find someone that did a great job), they couldnt do it with han because there is probably huge difference between people tolerance for a few minutes (tarkin) and carrying a whole film
I think they had to get permission from Peter Cushings family to have him on there ? Apparently they were all for it and said the man himself would have loved the idea of him being recreated on screen long after he was dead.
Moff Tarkin is up there in terms of awesome Star Wars characters that’s for sure, his back story indicates he was a ruthless badass.
-
@mn5 id be interested in what the deal was there, to what extent do they sign away their likeness to the character etc, where they have made animated versions of characters, do they get a royalty?
-
@kiwiwomble said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@mn5 id be interested in what the deal was there, to what extent do they sign away their likeness to the character etc, where they have made animated versions of characters, do they get a royalty?
No idea but you’d certainly hope his family got a slice of the pie. Peter Cushing was part of history when he made the original.
….then again and as if to totally contradict the previous sentence ( in fact in typical fern fashion it does ) whilst I loved Alec Guinness as Obi Wan I think Ewen McGregor nailed the role EVEN better…..so there won’t be any issues there when the Kenobi show airs on Disney……I’m definitely eating humble pie on that one cos I hated the idea of that junkie loser from Trainspotting taking over such a beloved role, I think I spat coffee all over the room when I read about it in the Sunday News. If the internet was more widely available in the late 90s it would have gone into meltdown with all my complaining.
-
@mn5 yeah, its really got me thinking, to what extent could they CGI up old character, maybe change enough so as to not need to compensate them, im sure there would be an actors strike or something if they took the piss
-
@kiwiwomble said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@mn5 yeah, its really got me thinking, to what extent could they CGI up old character, maybe change enough so as to not need to compensate them, im sure there would be an actors strike or something if they took the piss
If they look too old or they’re dead I have no issue.
But I guess when they want Salma Hayek to look closer to 40 than 50 and her tits to look perkier there might be a few grey areas.
-
@kiwiwomble said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@mn5 its awesome but it also makes me even more annoyed they just threw it all away
why couldn't the sequels be about a new dark side rising, luke and his padewans tracking it down or something...keep building on things rather than CNTL+ALT+DEL
Because the idiots in charge are morons who farked it up royally. It still astonishes me that there wasn't a fixed plan for the 3 films. They literally just made it up as they went along.
They could have gotten a room full of fan boys who would have come up with better ideas and would happily have paid Disney for the privilege. I don't know who they had writing but it was clear they knew sweet fa about SW.
But yeah, the potential for cool shit was endless, and we didn't even get to see Luke, Han and Leia together on screen. I know it's a vain hope but God I wish they'd retcon that shit and just pretend it never happened. All the ingredients are there for some epic tales. It just needs to be in the hands of someone who can tell a compelling story and develop good characters.
-
I reckon the CGI/de-aging or whatever has improved significantly since Rogue 1. I recall Leia being a little dodgy looking in that one. I was a bit apprehensive about Luke this time but forgot all about the tech after a while it was that good. Tbh I'd have no problem with them going forward with that and I'm 99% positive they will. Anything with Luke breaks viewing records. Makes the decision to destroy his character in TLJ even more baffling. After all, he's the character that the franchise was mostly built upon.
-
@rancid-schnitzel said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
I reckon the CGI/de-aging or whatever has improved significantly since Rogue 1. I recall Leia being a little dodgy looking in that one. I was a bit apprehensive about Luke this time but forgot all about the tech after a while it was that good. Tbh I'd have no problem with them going forward with that and I'm 99% positive they will. Anything with Luke breaks viewing records. Makes the decision to destroy his character in TLJ even more baffling. After all, he's the character that the franchise was mostly built upon.
Yeah I dunno, one of them yes but Han was on just as many lunch boxes as Luke was in the 70s and 80s and of course they realised what an iconic villain Darth Vader was hence they gave him a trilogy back story.
But yeah, Lukes grumpy old man efforts tarnished his legacy massively in my opinion.
-
we all know it was built on the back of R2 and c3po...only characters to be in all nine main continuity but also made it into rogue one
-
@kiwiwomble said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
we all know it was built on the back of R2 and c3po...only characters to be in all nine main continuity but also made it into rogue one
And all of the canon animated stuff as well.
-
Chopper's my fav...little psychopath
-
In all honesty, I'd prefer they just use Sebastian Stan than any CGI options.
On IMDB I think we have to be wary about the accuracy. I was listening to a podcast and Edgar Wright was saying that he had to name a character otherwise someone else would and that would be a spoiler.
-
@mn5 said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
@rancid-schnitzel said in Star Wars VII ****contains spoilers****:
I reckon the CGI/de-aging or whatever has improved significantly since Rogue 1. I recall Leia being a little dodgy looking in that one. I was a bit apprehensive about Luke this time but forgot all about the tech after a while it was that good. Tbh I'd have no problem with them going forward with that and I'm 99% positive they will. Anything with Luke breaks viewing records. Makes the decision to destroy his character in TLJ even more baffling. After all, he's the character that the franchise was mostly built upon.
Yeah I dunno, one of them yes but Han was on just as many lunch boxes as Luke was in the 70s and 80s and of course they realised what an iconic villain Darth Vader was hence they gave him a trilogy back story.
But yeah, Lukes grumpy old man efforts tarnished his legacy massively in my opinion.
Of course the other characters were huge but Luke was the guy all the kids wanted to be. At least I did. Or Wedge. Fark Wedge is the unsung hero of the Rebellion.
-
I’d say Han and even Vader were much bigger, at least with me and my friends
-
