Rogue One CGI

They should have used a real actor and added CGI prosthetics - that way the facial movement would be 100%

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=MCkZr5k6ZjA
youtube.com/watch?v=ohmajJTcpNk
twitter.com/AnonBabble

That's what they did.

Seeing Tarkin up close on Blu-Ray is fucking jarring. The eye and mouth movements are terrible

If anything, they OVER-animated the faces.

They're basically 90-95% there already, but they try too hard to add all these little ticks and nuances that they think make the faces more realistic. If you notice during actual OT scenes with these actors, the faces (especially eyes and mouth) don't really twitch and move around all that much.

These would be way more accurate if they actually held back on trying to fully render every blink and dimple.

Agreed. They do the same to CGI dogs and other animals/monsters as well all the time

>CGI big bad appears
>it lunges to camera like a serpent with a deafening roar, every individual scale/hair/appendage wobbles in this perfectly captured and feat of posturing
>looks faker than slimer in ghostbusters

Am I the only one who isn't entirely offput by Leia. Tarkin is awful but Leia is tolerable.

The CGI was really damn good. Me thinks the only reason people bitch is because the know these characters can't be real so they are over thinking it. If they had never seen Star Wars or these actors before in their life, would they really realize they were CGI?
By far the best CGI characters I've ever seen.

someone explain me why leia wich is there for only a second looks worse than Tarkin wich has a minute of screentime

no one gives a fuck what you think you blind little faggot

wow nice shoop

They exaggerate it too much, real people don't move like that. Not even Jim Carrey could pull some of those mouth movements.
It's like they animate realistic characters with the mindset of a Dreamworks CG movie.

This.

Saw it with people who didn't grow up with Star Wars. They had no clue it was CGI. They knew Carrie Fisher died recently (since it was such big news) but thought it was just footage from the old movie or something.

they fucked up with both but it doesn't matter to them because all the plebs will defend it anyway.

well normies don't have a clue about anything desu

Dude, most people, specially older people won't be able to recognize CG to save their lives. My mom used to think all those PS2 CG cutscenes where with real actors.

were they all vision impaired or playing on their phones?

Are you? That's easily the best CGI to date.

Leia was alright mostly because she's only on screen for a few seconds and does nothing. Tarking should have only been in one scene filmed from the back and covered in shadow and only for a brief second do you see his face

you wouldn't know the best cgi to date because you're a retarded 90's born queer.

Nothing Pre-90s is any better and I'd ask you to produce your idea of better CGI but you'd just being a contrarian hipster.

>Tarking
Didn't need to be in the movie at all and if he had to be should have been a hologram

It's actually decent CGI when it isn't moving. Usually these things look fake as shit even in static screenshots, but these look a lot more convincing.

No.

They were in their 20's.

Thing is, if a special effect fools most people, it's pretty good. I'd say most people didn't notice the CGI, while the few who looked for something to bitch and cry about found stuff to bitch and cry about. Objective, it was good CG.

you missed my point retarded little faggot, you wouldn't even notice good cgi but you in your fucking ignorance call this video game cgi the best ever. you should kill yourself.

This is easily the best CGI to date. If you're saying I don't know good CGI and this isn't as good as whatever you're referring to then you can provide an example. But you're just a memer with ad hom insults.

>while the few who looked for something to bitch and cry about found stuff to bitch
It was clear as day user, all these people who didn't notice are blind or have something else wrong with them.

>They were in their 20's.
Again, most people. Not everyone pay attention to details, so it's easy to dismiss CGI for the real thing. I went out with some mid 20s friends to watch Life of Pi back then and every single one was amazing at how the filmmakers were able to train the tiger and meerkats.

Did you say anything or did you wait to get home to confirm if it was actually CGI?

It wasn't noticeable for most people. Therefore, it's a good special effect and good CGI.

>most people won't notice good special effects
Yes. I agree.

It was obvious CGI for people that pay attention to detail, that's my whole point.

>This is easily the best CGI to date.
the fact that it was so noticeable means that it wasn't. why cgi is done well you don't notice it. he looked like something out of a cutscene from a game, a well done cutscene but still clearly not real.

If it isn't the best to date then you must have at least one example of something better.

Your friends are retarded.

It's obvious that Yoda is a puppet in Star Wars, and not just to people who "pay attention to detail" but to just about everyone, even little children.

Guess Yoda was a bad special effect.

You're friends are oblivious fools user. I still don't believe they're not blind.

Most people really didn't notice, though. By your logic, that means it was good.

Yeah, I won't discuss anything further with someone that need to resort at false equivalency.

Is it just me, or CGI Tarkin looks older than the Tarkin in ANH?

You're going to believe whatever you want because you're so convinced you're right, but fact is, you aren't.

Most people voted for Hillary, most people enjoy Justin Bieber and Rihanna, I guess both of them are gods among men.

youtube.com/watch?v=MCkZr5k6ZjA
this is from almost 20 years ago and its way less noticeable that that tarkin monstrosity.

Good, because there's nothing more to discuss. It was good CGI because most people didn't even notice it was CGI. End of discussion.

You're joking, right?

your friends aren't most people user

You're equating what people didn't notice to people's personal preferences in politicians and music when those things aren't related.

proximo doesn't look like a cartoon character.

You aren't most people.

I did notice that he was CGI because I knew beforehand that Peter Cushing is dead. It is impossible for my brain to see the CGI and simply forget that's not the real actor, no matter how good the simulation may be.

OTOH, people who had no idea who Tarkin is or who played him probably didn't notice in the theaters, but most will notice while watching at home since they will be able to pay more attention to the details.

He looks like a cutout, it's barely better than the Bruce Lee thing in Game of Death.

This is much better than tarkin or leia, disney really fucked up and you should be ashamed calling that bullshit the best cgi ever.

I'm saying that what most people perceive from reality doesn't equate to objective quality.

>the facial movement was bad

Did we all see the same fucking film? Why is everyone crying about Tarkin. It was fucking fine.

youtube.com/watch?v=ohmajJTcpNk

At the end of the day, cgi or no cgi, this "movie" is still a stinking pile of shit. The only good thing is all the characters are fucking dead so they'll never appear in another SW movie again.

I admit it didn't look too bad on a giant screen but maybe that was just me. Cuz I have seen webms of the space battles and the CGI looks way worse than I remember. Anyone have clips of Tarkin?

That's pretty comparable but the scenes they used look like they mapped the same face from previously shot scenes which seems quite easier. Even so you can still barely tell it's CGI just like the star wars example. You must really be exaggerating if you want to act like Tarkin and Leia was bad cgi while praising this. IMO they are both very good.

Tarkin was too obvious, but Proximo is straigh out badly a cutout. If much Paul Walker was a better cgi face than Tarkin.

can't wait until their cgi faces look like cartoon faces, just like all cgi after ten years

>The only good thing is all the characters are fucking dead so they'll never appear in another SW movie again.

You aren't. You're trying to make the claim that, just because something is popular doesn't make it good. That claim, true as it is, isn't relevant here. What you replied to wasn't "most people loved the CGI" but rather "most people didn't notice."

If you don't think that people noticing/not noticing CGI makes it good or bad, then it's wrong to argue that this CGI was bad because it was "so noticeable" in the first place.

I couldn't tell what scenes Walker wasn't there for. I just went in knowing the latter half of the film wasn't him. But it's hard for me to tell. I'm blind, I guess, cuz apparently it was pretty bad.

Because they need something to hate and CGI is always an easy target.

resurrection isn't outside SW lore, so don't celebrate so soon

tarkin looks like a cartoon now, leia looks a madame tussauds

Who cares. It's Star Wars it'll be CGId over in 10 years or so.

nah there will be another 15 star wars movies by then and the retards will claim each and every one is the best ever until the next one comes out

>it just occurred to me that we'll probably never see galen erso again

I was warned for calling these characters worth less nobodies, what the fuck?

Tarkin's voice was what killed it for me. The guy doing him had some of it right but I'm a big Cushing fan and he has such an unmistakable softness that just wasn't there. I could have ignored the odd face if that was spot on.