>DUDE PS3 QUALITY CGI IN A 2016 MOVIE LMAO
Why did they do this? Why did they do it for Leia? They're literally releasing a Han Solo film in 2 years where Han will look completely different, why bother with the shit CGI for this film if they're throwing visual continuity out the window anyway?
I was wondering the same
Tron 2 looked beter
Hell even the new Final Fantasy cutscenes look better
Why did the director or techs even think this looked good?
the execs clearly needed someone around to tell them "no"
Tarkin was integral to the plot and heavy makeup can be even worse than CG.
I'd honestly rather them do terrible CGI than somehow handwave Tarkin not being there. He has to be there, he's integral to the story of the Death Star.
Leia looked so bad. How did this look this bad?
They had real actors. Fucking shitty movie AntMan pulled this off a lot better.
>Tron 2 looked beter
>Hell even the new Final Fantasy cutscenes look better
Those are gross exaggerations and you know it
Because Han Solo is decades younger and can look different. Tarkin needed to be around the same age and look the same. Aka you're an idiot.
Lea did look not too good but Tarkin was the best CGI recreation of a real person we've seen in a feature film. People saying Tron was better, how long has it been since you've seen it? Bridges looks like shit compared to Tarkin and you guys are either trolling or delusional.
nothing looked wrong with him
De-aged Jeff Bridges is a million times better than the shite in Rogue One Carrie Fucking Fisher is still alive ffs they have no excuse and 4k FFXV cutscenes blow cartoon Tarkin away you need your eyes checked my mane
Haha! Nice bait!
>De-aged Jeff Bridges is a million times better
Out of your fucking mind.
Keep in mind that Clu was a character that was literally a digital clone of a person, so a lot of his uncanny valley-ness psychologically makes sense and feels less jarring.
Jeff looked melty and fake.
Tarkin wasnt horrible. it was bad. it was noticeable.
it almost looked like a caricature.
At least they used a guy who looks similar.
and it was better than the forced shit at the end of sith.
keep in mind that they showed a cgi young jeff bridges at the start of the movie outside of the computer shit
Jeff Bridges is still alive too
What's with disney needing to de-age someone every movie now?
Haven't seen R1 yet. Was it better or worse than this?
considering that Peter Cushing has been a corpse for 20 years, I wouldn't really call it de-aging
Way worse.
He looked like shit in the prologue as well.
Equally as shit and distracting.
Disagreed.
Integral to the story and the real guys been dead for decades.
Good point. I guess de-aging would have been for leia, along with digitally creating people like Tarkin.
He's one foot in the grave, but Michael Douglass isn't dead yet so all they had to do was remove his wrinkles
You don't need more than one thread for this pile of shit you dumbfuck redditor
ep 3 tarkin seemed serviceable to me, he was barely visible
>Because Han Solo is decades younger and can look different
He looks british now. Harrison Ford wasn't balding and he didn't have a potato face.
Digital Tarkin looked fine to me. (Except for a moment when we first see him.)
Young character doesn't need to look like young actor.
Wrong. It's not child hand. It's adult Han vs adult Han. Destroying Star Wars' symbol of masculinity is fucking ridiculous.
Yeah what I don't get is why they seem to think people have an aversion to different actors playing certain characters.
The theatre does it literally all the time. I guess it has something to do with the film being an index of a certain performance, which lends that one performance legitimacy over any potential copies.
Digital Tarkin is looks fine by himself but next to real actors he's obviously a cartoon character.
They should've only shown him in reflections and other indirect ways
>Implying they're not going to put Harrison Ford's face on the new guy
This was just to warm you goys up to the idea. This is the future of the blockbuster.
It was uncanny valley to the max. It would've been convincing in a full CGI movie, but the technology still isn't there and I doubt it ever will be
They should've just done his scenes as a hologram talking to everyone (with the same CGI base) because it would've hid the uncanny valley effect
Leia was just stupid, they could've easily just shot her scene from behind or done a reflection in a window like we got when Tarkin was first introduced in RO
>Not getting Terrance Stamp in as a Tarkin
Could have been a huge apology for the role he was giving in Episode one. It wouldn't have been hard to deage him either. Not Jeff Bridges level, but just 10 to 15 years
He'll be playing the ghost of count dooku.
He WAS computer program, mongoloid.
I think he would have been best shown through hologram or fuzzy view screen. That way the perceptible fakeness would have become imperceptible. The fact he shared on screen time with real people gave away the fact he looked fake
First of all none of the other computer programs in the movie looked like that you fucking idiot. And second of all it looked just as shit in the prologue that took place in the real world.
I thought cg leia looked great
I wasn't.
Apologie to what? Episode one is kíno.
He actually looked pretty good in a few shots but every time he opened his mouth it killed the illusion. The worst is that little smirk thing he does with his mouth at the end of the first scene with him.
Not the movie itself, but the small role he was given. He deserved more.
Stamp was angry about it for some reason I can't remember.
>the technology still isn't there and I doubt it ever will be
Because they weren't part of a man, but stand in whole piece, it was part of metaphor, mousekeeter, bet your bosses didn't tell you that.
Now piss off.
I thought the CGI for him was great
but maybe that's because I saw it in 3D, which made the movie as a whole look like complete shit anyway.
My girl said he looked like a Pixar character. I didn't even fucking notice it the first time I saw it.
Now explain why he looked like shit in the beginning. I'll wait.
I'm not sure I like the precedent that we can just recreate actors in CGI.
>mousekeeter
What company made Tron Legacy again? I always forget.
New Vincent Price movie when? Hopefully in the next Dracula reboot
I already explained.
...
I know. I'm surprised more people aren't skeeved out by this concept. I felt dirty watching these scenes. I feel like it's unethical. I don't know.
m.imdb.com
According to IMDB, Princess Leia was played by this actress in makeup, not a product of CGI.
I'd have to see it again to know for sure. It definitely seemed like CG to me but it did go by quick.
Leia and Tarkin had stand-in actors with CGI for the faces.
Why? Actors sign on to play characters knowing their physical appearance will forever define that character whether they like it or not
TFA used actors in heavy makeup for some of the aliens but they were touched up by CG. They could have done the same thing here, put an actress in makeup and then put CG over it.
Was this guy doing the voice as well? That was literally 10/10. They should never have shown his face.
I dont get whats wrong, it worked for what he was, I didnt even realize that it was CGI when I first saw Tarkin, but I was like 'isnt this guy supposed to be dead?'
I guess if you have it in your mind that hes CGI from the get go, then you wont stop noticing it, its definitely an improvement to Jarjar and all the other CGI from the past trilogies
Huh. So maybe only the eyes and nose were CG.
POST A PICTURE YOU FUCKING ASSMASTER
I understand that. In my head I can rationalize it that way and it's totally fine. But there's still a subconscious feeling that it isn't right to be seeing what I'm seeing. It takes me out of the movie more than it would have if they had just done makeup.
Usually that's for performances they actually perform though.
Maybe Cushing's estate gave their blessing.
This. If they had just done back shots with his reflection in the window and maybe some far away shots it would have worked perfectly.
Seems like they did
variety.com
>It was so impressive, in fact, that Cushing’s former secretary — Joyce Broughton, who oversees his estate and attended the film’s London premiere with her grandchildren — was taken aback emotionally when she saw the creation on screen.
>“When you’re with somebody for 35 years, what do you expect?” Broughton says. “I can’t say any more because I get very upset about it. He was the most beautiful man. He had his own private way of living.”
>Broughton, who was bequeathed Cushing’s estate when he died without an heir in 1994, was reticent to go into details about the situation due to a confidentiality agreement she signed with Disney and Lucasfilm. But despite the emotions, she said she was dazzled by the experience of the new film.
>“I have to say, I’m not a ‘Star Wars’ fanatic, but I did think whoever put it together were absolutely fantastic,” she says. “It’s not just a silly sort of thing. It’s really good!”
I'm guessing that in the contract for merchandising and stuff there was some kind of wording that allowed them to also use his likeness in future movies as well. Legally it's probably no different than having him in Rebels.
Did they do it for Leia? I actually didn't even notice.
BTFO
She looks fucking real in this one. Zero uncanny valley. Is Sup Forums memeing again?
Worse. It's blatant CGI surrounded by real actors and he has a ton of screen-time, often very front-and center. It's ridiculous. It's like they were proud of it or something and wanted to show it off.
I think it differs person to person. When I really focus on the movement of her mouth it's very obvious.
...
At least they're keeping the spirit of George Lucas alive.
...
I thought she looked fine. She was only on a couple seconds so you don't really have time to notice much in movement. And you expect her to be really smooth and shiny (because make-up, etc.), so it doesn't really stick out generally that she's CGI, but Tarkin is much more detailed and it just doesn't work. There's also the factor that Leia's clothes are fairly unique while Tarkin's suit looked plasticy.
holy fucking kek
She looks a little off here but not fake. Maybe in motion it's different.
I feel like this was just testing the waters for when they put CGI ghost Alec Guinness in one of the new main films.
I think many of you have to buy a new pair of glasses. CGI Leia was almost perfect and Tarkin was pretty good most all the time.
The Leia CGI was pretty decent, kinda wish they'd used 100 year old Carrie Fisher with the de-aging tech WestWorld used for Hopkins tho
Why didn't they just get Charles Dance?
Only way I'd improve it is to have her blink.
You know that was actually really quite nice to read
Robotic Leia a cute!
Tarkin actually looks great, probably because his face is already unnatural looking and its hard to spot the flaws
Leia on the other hand looks fucking awful especially when she smiled, they should of just had her in the background since she added nothing to the movie apart from saying "this is a new hope"
it's no different than Hayden's likeness being used all through the Clone Wars TV series
Yeah anyone who says she's uncanny valley is fucking memeing hard. She looks slightly different than ANH and the mouth movement is very slightly off but that's really fucking good. Zero sense of revulsion.
Can't wait for the day someone uses that CGI model for VR porn
My heart heart actually kind of skipped a beat when we first saw Darth Vader in the tub of water, I was kind of expecting to see Hayden as a surprise cameo and I would have loved it, but they cut away to it and it was fine.
Then this shit happened again with Leia, at first we only see her back and I thought its gonna be the same with the Darth Vader scene, but goddamn I was wrong, it actually caught me offguard, my brain couldnt process that shit for the few seconds that scene was running, I just appreciated that last bit
>can't tell real humans from computer graphics when they are side-by-side
>it's everyone else who needs glasses
Quick, which of these is the real actor? No cheating.
I would have liked a little more acting, emotion, out of the face. It was really good. A special effect, but a good one.
C3PO?!!
A blurry low res picture of a movie screen posted on a norwegian wood making forum is different than seeing it on a huge movie screen at 4k at buttery smooth 24fps
I genuinely can't tell.
Hi Sup Forums