Star Wars, The Force Awakens -- *SPOILERS*

[BlobVanDam]

This just in from Finn

Much darker. works for me

https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/entertainthis/2016/01/12/john-boyega-says-star-wars-episode-viii-darker/78684296/

First Order Strikes Back...

I've read a couple of things about the upcoming films, and I'm excited by them.
I'm not generally into darker, but in the context of Star Wars dark, I think it's a good thing.

[TioJorge]

I'm excited as well, and am also anticipating the usual nitwits making the "no shit" comparisons to the OT despite that this is a trope used in nearly every 'act' of every story and movie as well as many if not most trilogies since the beginning of stories. I expected this one to be dark as such but am still excited to hear it and am interested in what is to come.

I also agree on the whole 'darker' movie cliche that has just absolutely blown up out of the reborn superhero genre (seemingly) starting with Batman Begins. But I don't think we'll be hearing Finn scream in a guttural evil clown voice "WHY YOU WANNA KILL ME!?" to Kylo so I'm good to go. Bring on the dark side.

[BlobVanDam]

Yeah, given the wide target audience, I don't expect anything gritty or adult, so I'm all good with it.
And it's great to hear how closely the directors of VIII & XI are working together to form the broader narrative too.

Now that they've brought in so many fans both old and new, and established a lot of goodwill by bringing it back to the OT style, they'll have a lot more freedom to explore new ideas in this one, and be given the benefit of the doubt by a much less cynical audience.

[PowerSlave]

Yup, you paid more money for a movie in 3d yet didn't really notice you were watching it in 3D.  Seems like a rip off to me. 

You paid more money for a movie shot in 2D that they were forced to convert to 3D only so they could charge you an extra $3+. Seems like a rip off to me too.

I understand what you guys are saying, but the point that I was trying to make (and probably failed) was that the 3d didn't seem like it was done poorly. If it had looked bad to me then it probably would have stuck out (no pun intended), or hurt my experience. The fact that I didn't notice it that much is probably a good thing. I'm sure that I would have enjoyed the movie either way.

[ariich]

I've never found any positives about seeing films in 3D, but definitely find negatives. At times it's quite distracting, and because it's all artificial perspective, I find that it without fail gives me a headache afterwards. I also generally find that it looks less real. I know it's meant to be "immersive" and whatever, but it looks artificial because it's simulated. Whereas I find myself far more engaged and convinced by a good quality 2D image.

[Kotowboy]

All post converted 3D does is gives things in the foreground a drop shadow.

[ariich]

I'm sure it's worse with post-converted, but I found the same with Avatar, maybe even more so actually, had a really bad headache after that.

And frankly I don't buy the "at least Avatar was shot in 3D" argument, because the CGI wasn't "shot", in 3D or otherwise. If a film is as CGI-heavy as that, I can't see what the difference would be.

[kaos2900]

So I finally got around to listening to the soundtrack and the music is much better than it comes off in the film. The Rey, Resistance, and Kylo Ren themes are typical John Williams brilliance. I hope he lives long enough to do the scores for the next two films if not bring in Howard Shore!

[BlackInk]

Yeah, the score is not getting enough love I'd say. I've heard several people say that it's disappointing, but I think it's great.

[kaos2900]

I listened to the scores for the prequels as well and while there are some great themes, the Force Awakens is much more consistent through out.

[ZirconBlue]

I've never found any positives about seeing films in 3D....

The only one I can think of where the 3D really added to the movie was Coraline.  In that movie, they deliberately screwed with the perspective (and color) in the real world, so the Other world would feel more inviting.

[Kotowboy]

I'm sure it's worse with post-converted, but I found the same with Avatar, maybe even more so actually, had a really bad headache after that.

And frankly I don't buy the "at least Avatar was shot in 3D" argument, because the CGI wasn't "shot", in 3D or otherwise. If a film is as CGI-heavy as that, I can't see what the difference would be.

It was about half and half live action and motion capture. Chino will explain...

[Orbert]

Too much 3-D blabbing in The Force Awakens thread.

[Enigmachine]

Too much 3-D blabbing in The Force Awakens thread.

That is brilliant. 

[BlobVanDam]

Here's a VFX comparison for TFA for anyone else who's interested in this kind of thing. While this isn't one of the better breakdowns I've seen, I love seeing the raw shots vs the completed shots with VFX, and seeing what is CGI and practical. A lot of it is obviously CG such as the space battles, but there's also a lot in there that you wouldn't notice.

https://vimeo.com/151719063

[Kotowboy]

If I was filming an X wing battle scene in a tiny prop cockpit with people shaking it and surrounded by blue screen - I think i'd feel 50% i'm in an actual star wars movie !

And 50% I feel so stupid

[cramx3]

Here's a VFX comparison for TFA for anyone else who's interested in this kind of thing. While this isn't one of the better breakdowns I've seen, I love seeing the raw shots vs the completed shots with VFX, and seeing what is CGI and practical. A lot of it is obviously CG such as the space battles, but there's also a lot in there that you wouldn't notice.

https://vimeo.com/151719063

This is awesome.  The downed tie fighter looked so great on the big screen because IT WAS REAL, not CGI.  I can't say how much I love this, it made a huge impact on me while watching this film.  It was not like episodes 1-3 where everything was so obviously CGI.

[BlobVanDam]

Here's a VFX comparison for TFA for anyone else who's interested in this kind of thing. While this isn't one of the better breakdowns I've seen, I love seeing the raw shots vs the completed shots with VFX, and seeing what is CGI and practical. A lot of it is obviously CG such as the space battles, but there's also a lot in there that you wouldn't notice.

https://vimeo.com/151719063

This is awesome.  The downed tie fighter looked so great on the big screen because IT WAS REAL, not CGI.  I can't say how much I love this, it made a huge impact on me while watching this film.  It was not like episodes 1-3 where everything was so obviously CGI.

This movie knew when to use CG vs practical, and used the CG in situations where it excelled and wouldn't be noticeable to most people. The PT was a pioneer in a lot of this CG usage, but the technology just wasn't there by a mile, and a lot of it was 100% green screen. It was too much too soon. You can see here that there's always at least a bare minimum of practical set in TFA for the actor to interact with, and the VFX are blended much better.
The sad part for me is that the anti-CG crowd don't even realize that most of the CG has passed them by, because good CG is seamless when done properly.

[kaos2900]

Here's a VFX comparison for TFA for anyone else who's interested in this kind of thing. While this isn't one of the better breakdowns I've seen, I love seeing the raw shots vs the completed shots with VFX, and seeing what is CGI and practical. A lot of it is obviously CG such as the space battles, but there's also a lot in there that you wouldn't notice.

https://vimeo.com/151719063

Very cool! Thanks for sharing! Is it May 2017 yet?

[Kotowboy]

The sad part for me is that the anti-CG crowd don't even realize that most of the CG has passed them by, because good CG is seamless when done properly.

Indeed. Same with pitch correction on vocals. Most people think of the Cher effect. But don't know when they're listening to subtly tuned vocals.

[BlobVanDam]

The sad part for me is that the anti-CG crowd don't even realize that most of the CG has passed them by, because good CG is seamless when done properly.

Indeed. Same with pitch correction on vocals. Most people think of the Cher effect. But don't know when they're listening to subtly tuned vocals.

Yep.
And both are great tools when used properly, and both can be easily abused because they're so accessible to use these days. The problem is that people only notice it when it's done badly!

[bosk1]

The sad part for me is that the anti-CG crowd don't even realize that most of the CG has passed them by, because good CG is seamless when done properly.

Indeed. Same with pitch correction on vocals. Most people think of the Cher effect. But don't know when they're listening to subtly tuned vocals.

Yep.
And both are great tools when used properly, and both can be easily abused because they're so accessible to use these days. The problem is that people only notice it when it's done badly!

And the flipside:  Many people would-be experts complain about it being there when it isn't there. 

[BlobVanDam]

The sad part for me is that the anti-CG crowd don't even realize that most of the CG has passed them by, because good CG is seamless when done properly.

Indeed. Same with pitch correction on vocals. Most people think of the Cher effect. But don't know when they're listening to subtly tuned vocals.

Yep.
And both are great tools when used properly, and both can be easily abused because they're so accessible to use these days. The problem is that people only notice it when it's done badly!

And the flipside:  Many people would-be experts complain about it being there when it isn't there. 

And the flipside: The experts who actually can notice these things cop shit from the people who are too ignorant to notice them.

[bosk1]

I've never seen that happen.

[BlobVanDam]

I'd say the same about your scenario.

[ariich]

I'd say the same about your scenario.

There was the whole auto-tune thing in TGOM.

[Implode]

*tumbleweed passes while a hawk calls in the distance*

Edit: DANG IT, ariich. You ruined the moment by posting before me.

[BlobVanDam]

I'd say the same about your scenario.

There was the whole auto-tune thing in TGOM.

It was melodyne actually, and it's all a matter of perspective depending on which side of the equation you're on.

But we're getting off topic from what was actually posted.

[Kotowboy]

Quantum jokes. You ruined the joke by explaining it

[bosk1]

I'd say the same about your scenario.

There was the whole auto-tune thing in TGOM.

It was melodyne actually, and it's all a matter of perspective depending on which side of the equation you're on.

But we're getting off topic from what was actually posted.

Yes, THAT one was melodyne.  But it was the same as some exact same comments about autotune where you have people insisting that it absolutely, unequivocally was used and that they can hear the artifacts from it being used, and there is no way they are wrong.  Then I check with the band, and lo and behold, they were wrong.

And, yeah, we're getting off topic.  Carry on.

[BlobVanDam]

I'd say the same about your scenario.

There was the whole auto-tune thing in TGOM.

It was melodyne actually, and it's all a matter of perspective depending on which side of the equation you're on.

But we're getting off topic from what was actually posted.

Yes, THAT one was melodyne.  But it was the same as some exact same comments about autotune where you have people insisting that it absolutely, unequivocally was used and that they can hear the artifacts from it being used, and there is no way they are wrong.  Then I check with the band, and lo and behold, they were wrong.

And, yeah, we're getting off topic.  Carry on.

Because bands know everything about audio production. I wouldn't expect a musician to know what pitch correction was applied any more than what gating was applied to the snare drum. Most vocal producers probably wouldn't even tell vocalists they're fixing it up, especially one particular tiny detail. I've seen bands insist many things that have been proven absolutely wrong.

But yes, very off topic.

[Orbert]

I'll just say that at no time during The Force Awakens did I notice any CGI and have it take me out of the moment.  As far as I'm concerned, a ship crashed in the desert, and later it sank into the sand.  I had no idea that the sinking into the sand was all CGI.

Things like the fight on board the Millenium Falcon with the aliens trying to catch and eat the humans, that's obviously CGI, but I was engrossed in the story and it didn't bother me at all.  As far as I'm concerned, they were being chased through the ship by aliens.  It looked great.  I didn't think "Oh this is so bad, so obviously fake."

So I guess what I'm saying is that yeah, CGI is only noticeable when it's bad and/or takes you out of the moment.

[cramx3]

I'll just say that at no time during The Force Awakens did I notice any CGI and have it take me out of the moment.  As far as I'm concerned, a ship crashed in the desert, and later it sank into the sand.  I had no idea that the sinking into the sand was all CGI.

Things like the fight on board the Millenium Falcon with the aliens trying to catch and eat the humans, that's obviously CGI, but I was engrossed in the story and it didn't bother me at all.  As far as I'm concerned, they were being chased through the ship by aliens.  It looked great.  I didn't think "Oh this is so bad, so obviously fake."

So I guess what I'm saying is that yeah, CGI is only noticeable when it's bad and/or takes you out of the moment.

Like The Hobbit films, so easily noticed as CGI that it took away from the enjoyment of watching it.  Especially compared to the LotR which looked much better IMO.

[Zantera]

The Rathtars was one of my few complaints mainly because I didn't feel the scene needed them. The point of it was Han Solo getting out of yet another tricky situation and ending up with Rey/Finn on their quest, but you could have played out those events without having to use CGI creatures IMO.

[Orbert]

Yeah, but it's Star Wars.  Gotta have the aliens.  The Rathtars didn't bother me at all.

To be honest, dudes like General Ackbar ("It's a trap!") take me out of the scene just as much because it's so obviously a guy wearing a rubber mask.  The tech didn't exist at the time to make him a convincing fish-person, so they went with what they had, but compare him to -- for example -- Davy Jones from the Pirates of the Carribean movies.  Full-on seafood-faced dude with moving tentacles and everything, and somehow when I watch him, it never occurs to me that it's CGI.