|
I never noticed Green Bobblehead Crypt Keeper. He owns.
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 20:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 10:18 |
|
|
Jewmanji posted:I think the thing that TFA is missing most, more than a younger John Williams, or George Lucas' originality, is Ralph McQuarrie. I know that some of the designs here and there were cribbed from unused designs (and of course any legacy elements from the OT that carried over). But you can really feel it Han's freighter, Leia's transport, the entire look of Maz's cantina/castle (?), and other forgettable sets and designs that McQuarrie had a huge and incredibly under-rated role in the OT. The fact that Han and Kylo's meeting occurs in an exhaust shaft that is basically the exhaust shaft from Cloud City (my single favorite set piece in the series), but octagonal, shows just how bereft of good design ideas this movie had. McQuarrie was a really singular talent. For all their flaws, the prequels had some really tremendous sound design. TFA's effects felt like they were just there because they needed sound. Kylo's saber noise was dope though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 20:14
|
|
|
When I first saw this scene I was confused why it was included:    Rewatching i realise it's to establish that Finn also inherits a part from the earlier movies, just like Kylo Ren and Rey do:   And let's not forget:  
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 20:14
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:When I first saw this scene I was confused why it was included: Woooooooooooooooooow gently caress you. Finn's scene actually tells you something about his character, situation and mindset. It would be the equivalent if the pig alien farted in Finn's face and he gave an 'eww poopy' look to the camera.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
Steve2911 posted:Woooooooooooooooooow gently caress you. Your hatred of Jarjar is unnecessary.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 20:25
|
|
|
Cnut the Great posted:Why would you want to draw attention to the fact that they're not real? Doesn't that completely defeat the purpose? Puppets are real, physical things. CG creatures are just tennis balls on sticks or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
Cnut the Great posted:People also don't realize how closely Lucas collaborated with McQuarrie. He didn't just give McQuarrie vague prompts and then use whatever McQuarrie came up with on his own. Usually they went through a bunch of preliminary sketches, which Lucas would critique and modify, before McQuarrie would produce the final concept painting: Where did this come from, the making of books? It's pretty cool.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:When I first saw this scene I was confused why it was included: Good comparison! I pointed out earlier in the thread that I was of the opinion that FN/Finn is very much the heir of Jar Jar as well. I'll give Abrams a lot of credit for going with that kind of characterization for him after the backlash the last fool of Star Wars got. It's certainly at least one part where they did not take an extremely safe approach that TFA is criticized for. Finn and Jar Jar are both somewhat cowardly (their fear tends to generally be played for humor against the rest of the cast) but both also manage to overcome their fear and stand up for their friends and help fight after providing critical information to the matter at hand. (I'll dig around later but I think the shot of Jar Jar and the fart joke at the pod race might be an even closer shot comparison) I'm actually very curious to see where they take FN. Despite the fact that he is wielding a lightsaber in this and probably other movies I don't think he's a midichlorian freak. He's a fool and that means that he wields the power of the Force - against which video game powers are insignificant.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 21:14
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/HamillHimself/status/719239858087182336
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 21:20
|
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 21:22
|
|
|
Hamill is the best dude. I wonder who's idea was it to have him grow out a beard; He looks waaay better with it. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 21:35
|
|
|
Steve2911 posted:Woooooooooooooooooow gently caress you. Jar Jar's scene also tells you a lot about his character, situation,and mindset. As a character, he's associated with excrement, and with all the other low, vulgar things in the universe which none of the other characters in the films are ever required to acknowledge. Poop doesn't seem to exist in the Star Wars universe, except when it comes to Jar Jar. There's no particular reason for such a large and culturally significant part of the human experience to be so completely glossed over at every turn, except for the fact that the subject is a cultural taboo. But the whole point of Jar Jar is that he's a creature of pure instinct whose role is to break apart the highly ordered facade of the contrived society around him and reveal the base human silliness lying underneath all the pretension. Finn's scene with the pig actually is quite similar in both tone and function. The humor is in the fact that the universe is forcing him to drink the gross stinky water. The universe is making GBS threads on him by making him confront the reality of existence in all its crass vulgarity, even though he's a larger-than-life character living in a fairy tale. It sounds pretentious, but that really is why it's funny. It's the same reason people think farts are funny: We're not supposed to talk about them, because they're at odds with our cultural conception of ourselves as beings made in the image of God acting out some kind of divinely preordained drama. No one wants to think about Jesus making GBS threads himself on the cross. That's sacrilegious for some reason, even though it probably happened. Anyway, I don't really like the eopie scene. But the reason I don't like it is because it's not very funny, not because it's a fart joke. Who cares if it's a fart joke? There's nothing wrong with fart jokes. There's no meaningful difference between the scene where an eopie farts in Jar Jar's face for no reason and the scene in TFA where Finn sits down and the holochess display turns on in his face for no reason. Neither is particularly laugh-out-loud funny. Both are inconsequential, three-second-long throw-away gags which are, realistically, only capable of doing minor damage to the film, if any at all. The fact that people do seem to care so much is actually extremely funny though, and almost redeems the scene in my eyes. ("Oh my goodness gracious! Did that animal just f-f-f-fart?" *faints dead away*) Farts make certain people really anxious, because they remind them of poo poo, and poo poo brings with it the risk of disease, and that was a big scary deal to our ancient ancestors, and so talking about it became a deeply entrenched taboo in human society. What this means is that people who seem to be horribly affronted as a matter of principle about a three-second fart gag in a Star Wars film are, by and large, literally afraid of poop on a very deep and primal level. That's why they're still complaining about it 16 years later. In a way, it traumatized them. The only reason it sounds weird when it's all put this way is because it's very rare that we are ever compelled to articulate why exactly we find potty humor funny. But, you know, the first ever recorded joke was a fart joke. There's a reason for that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 21:40
|
|
|
AndyElusive posted:Puppets are real, physical things. CG creatures are just tennis balls on sticks or whatever. Puppets are not real, actually. They are fake, just like CGI creatures. They are simply fake in a different way. Cnut the Great fucked around with this message at 22:09 on Apr 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 21:42
|
|
|
movies are fake
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 21:46
|
|
|
Cnut the Great posted:Puppets are not real, actually. They are fake, just like CGI creatures. They are simply fake in a different way. Puppets are real in that they exist in a solid state, take up space, cast real shadows, and realistically interact with actors and environments. I've even defended the use of CGI (in this movie in this thread, in fact), but you need to be willfully dense to not understand the significant advantages puppetry brings.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 21:47
|
|
|
Puppets can look better than CGI if they're really good.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 21:50
|
|
|
No longer canon. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 21:55
|
|
|
Cnut the Great posted:
I wouldn't agree that the Eopie farting in Jar Jar's face completely inconsequential at least in theme terms, though I will agree that it's not a particularly funny gag in itself. It comes right in the middle of all this ridiculous pomp and circumstance as the pod race tension keeps building. It's another way of undercutting this epic Ben-Hur moment by reminding you this is all just a bunch of gross space hicks about to get down for some NASCAR. Everyone in the crowd is losing their minds with excitement while Jabba is bored and Jar Jar is being farted on.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 21:56
|
|
|
Cnut the Great posted:The fact that people do seem to care so much is actually extremely funny though, and almost redeems the scene in my eyes. Same except the entire Prequel Trilogy
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 22:00
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Puppets are real in that they exist in a solid state, take up space, cast real shadows, and realistically interact with actors and environments.  This creature may look like a real, physical thing. But it looks like a real, physical prop, and painfully so. When I look at it, the first thing I notice about it is that it's obviously a big rigid rubber animatronic thing that probably had to be dragged into position on a board by a bunch of crewmembers. Its legs clearly can't move. It can't walk around like a real animal. It's stuck in place like the heavy, inanimate object that it is. For this reason, the movie conspicuously avoids showing you a clear shot of it ever walking around under its own power, instead resorting to obvious camera and editing tricks. If it was a real animal, the director wouldn't have to do this, and indeed would have no reason for even wanting to do this. It isn't filmed like a real animal would be. That's supposed to be the goal, though: to convince the audience that they're actually watching documentary footage of a real live pack animal living out its life on an exotic alien world. Instead, the goal seems to be to make sure the audience explicitly notices the fakery--so long as it's real, authentic, practical fakery. The good kind of fakery. The kind that makes you feel like you're in the Jim Henson Creature Shop. They want you to see that everything's made of rubber and that there are guys inside operating it. That's the kind of thing that stands out as fake to me, especially in this age when we have the technology to create such amazing, ambulatory creatures with CGI. Your mileage may vary.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
People dont care if a joke involves farts, so long as it's funny. Just like with any other potentially offensive topic, a good joke is well received regardless of the material. It's like the difference between Dave Chapelle and Carlos Mencia.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
Cnut the Great posted:
Thanks for the quotes re: McQuarrie and Lucas, I didn't realize that. And I do agree with you that some of the puppetry and practical effects seemed like obvious fan-service. On the other hand, Snoke is still my least favorite part of the movie due in no small part to the fact that he seems inserted in the same way Jar Jar and Watto do in Episode I (and Dex in II)- it is kind of jarring. I would've rather he just be a human. Or a large jabba-esque puppet. Though from what I hear, Snoke not looking top-notch has as much to do with the fact that it took them too drat long to come up with a design (same as Maz). If they had planned for that from the outset, maybe he'd look a little better.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 22:19
|
|
|
Cnut the Great posted:
And like any good design, these inadequacies are taken into account, which is why the creature is a massive cybernetic mammal, with a face that displays apathetic lethargy. It does not move much, but you also don't expect it to move much, so its flaws are only evident when you're looking for flaws. quote:For this reason, the movie conspicuously avoids showing you a clear shot of it ever walking around under its own power, instead resorting to obvious camera and editing tricks. If it was a real animal, the director wouldn't have to do this, and indeed would have no reason for even wanting to do this. It isn't filmed like a real animal would be. There's no guidelines for how a real cyborg pack mule would be filmed. You're applying a double-standard that is ignoree in other posts defending CG. Clever camera tricks are not indictive of a bad or lacking prop (outside of Tammy and the T-Rex situations); Nobody would suggest that Yoda was a bad design for being on rocks or Luke's back. quote:That's supposed to be the goal, though: to convince the audience that they're actually watching documentary footage of a real live pack animal living out its life on an exotic alien world. Instead, the goal seems to be to make sure the audience explicitly notices the fakery--so long as it's real, authentic, practical fakery. The good kind of fakery. The kind that makes you feel like you're in the Jim Henson Creature Shop. They want you to see that everything's made of rubber and that there are guys inside operating it. The former makes little sense to me; if the creature cannot impose a realistic presence, then the belief that you're watching real aliens fails to be upheld. It's easier to believe in a slow beast of burden than a shadowless, overly motion-blurred, weightless beast of burden. The second half is pure unprovable/disprovable conjecture. quote:That's the kind of thing that stands out as fake to me, especially in this age when we have the technology to create such amazing, ambulatory creatures with CGI. Your mileage may vary. If a hyper-active inhuman creature is required, then I would 100% agree that CGI should be used. Luckily, Jakku is defined by its lack of life or active society. Maz is a good example of CGI done right in the same film, while Snoke is an example of CGI used wrong/for time constraints. If you'd like a point of reference for my opinion on CGI.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 22:22
|
|
|
Jewmanji posted:Thanks for the quotes re: McQuarrie and Lucas, I didn't realize that. And I do agree with you that some of the puppetry and practical effects seemed like obvious fan-service. On the other hand, Snoke is still my least favorite part of the movie due in no small part to the fact that he seems inserted in the same way Jar Jar and Watto do in Episode I (and Dex in II)- it is kind of jarring. I would've rather he just be a human. Or a large jabba-esque puppet. Though from what I hear, Snoke not looking top-notch has as much to do with the fact that it took them too drat long to come up with a design (same as Maz). If they had planned for that from the outset, maybe he'd look a little better. Well he's obviously a hologram in his every appearance in VII. Ideally the compositing will look like Maz's if/when he shows up in the flesh.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 22:23
|
|
|
jivjov posted:Well he's obviously a hologram in his every appearance in VII. Ideally the compositing will look like Maz's if/when he shows up in the flesh. I'm sure he'll look better in VIII, just like everything else will. But I couldn't suspend my disbelief for Maz for even a second either. The CGI in TFA is on the whole pretty top notch (I couldn't believe it when I found out Kylo Ren's mask is CGI in certain scenes), but it's amazing how some things don't seem to have advanced much since ROTS, which is I think a testament to how good ROTS was in this department. For instance, there's a shot in ROTS that is an extreme close-up of Grievous' eye/mask, and I don't think it looks noticeably worse than Maz at all.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 22:30
|
|
|
I'l also point out (and I am not at all saying Cnut intended this) that the outline of the fallen staff in that particular shot gives the impression of a rounded base (similar to those used for unstable models and figures), which may be contributing to that impression of inauthenticity. I'd chalk that up to poor staging than a flaw of the prop.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 22:31
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:People dont care if a joke involves farts, so long as it's funny. Just like with any other potentially offensive topic, a good joke is well received regardless of the material. It's like the difference between Dave Chapelle and Carlos Mencia. We're going to live long enough to see both Dave Chapelle and Carlos Mencia cast in Star Wars movies. We're on the precipice of infinite Star Wars.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 22:34
|
|
|
Toilet Mouth posted:We're going to live long enough to see both Dave Chapelle and Carlos Mencia cast in Star Wars movies. We're on the precipice of infinite Star Wars. Finally, a remake of the Daffy/Donald duck scene in stunning 4K.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 22:36
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Puppets are real in that they exist in a solid state, take up space, cast real shadows, and realistically interact with actors and environments. Absolutely, and those are be tremendous benefits, because they help sell the illusion that the puppets are what they're pretending to be. But purposely calling attention to the fact that the puppets are puppets defeats this. It stops being a real alien, and instead becomes a realistic depiction of an alien. Having said that, I'm not convinced that the film makers were deliberately drawing attention to the fact that the aliens are puppets.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 22:39
|
|
|
Jewmanji posted:I know this is a well-intentioned post but come on. In case you need a geography lesson go see how many Middle Eastern countries border the ocean. Here is a picture of the Middle East:
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 22:58
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:People dont care if a joke involves farts, so long as it's funny. Just like with any other potentially offensive topic, a good joke is well received regardless of the material. It's like the difference between Dave Chapelle and Carlos Mencia. They do care, though. You're kidding yourself if you don't think people were and are deeply, deeply offended by the eopie fart joke, not because it was a lame joke, but because it was a childish fart gag in a movie that was "supposed" to be for serious adults. No one would focus on it so much otherwise. Picard Day posted:I wouldn't agree that the Eopie farting in Jar Jar's face completely inconsequential at least in theme terms, though I will agree that it's not a particularly funny gag in itself. It comes right in the middle of all this ridiculous pomp and circumstance as the pod race tension keeps building. It's another way of undercutting this epic Ben-Hur moment by reminding you this is all just a bunch of gross space hicks about to get down for some NASCAR. Everyone in the crowd is losing their minds with excitement while Jabba is bored and Jar Jar is being farted on. Yeah. Notice that Jar Jar denigrates the Force at one point by telling the Jedi it "smells stinkowiff." This is an intentional part of the way Jar Jar is written. He reduces the sacred to the level of the profane. Like Chewbacca, he thinks primarily with his nose and with his stomach, and conceptualizes everything in terms of the most basic sensory stimuli. Like a child or an animal, he's a creature of instinct. He's the thematic embodiment of the Force in all its purposeful clumsiness. Jar Jar is the Force given bodily form. That's why Anakin, the literal embodiment of the Force within the actual plot of the film, is strongly associated with Jar Jar, and ends the film by accidentally destroying the droid control ship in an act of childish clumsiness. TPM is essentially a celebration of the innocence of childhood. Its message is that accidents are okay. Being clumsy is okay. Being a kid is okay. Anakin outwits the evil adults (with their centrally-controlled army of robotic slaves) simply by being a kid and, thus, clumsy and unpredictable. Whereas Luke triumphs over a Death Star at the end of ANH by putting all his faith in a life-force, Anakin triumphs over a Control Ship by disobeying the adults and making a series of naive mistakes, leading to a novel outcome none of the adults could have predicted. This is also why the clumsy and unpredictable Jar Jar is so effective in battle against the rigidly programmed battle droids. It's also why the "young and naive" Amidala is able to triumph in the end only after breaking from established convention and ignoring the advice of all the older and more experienced men who surround her. Society can't progress unless its younger members are occasionally allowed to defy their elders and make "mistakes." This is what Qui-Gon understood better than others. It's why he was able to recognize Jar Jar's value. It's why he had faith in Anakin despite his clouded future--and, as we come to see, all the mistakes Anakin makes over the course of his circuitous life end up leading to another novel outcome none of the adults could have predicted: the return of balance to the Force.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 23:01
|
|
|
Cnut the Great posted:They do care, though. You're kidding yourself if you don't think people were and are deeply, deeply offended by the eopie fart joke, not because it was a lame joke, but because it was a childish fart gag in a movie that was "supposed" to be for serious adults. No one would focus on it so much otherwise. You're referencing the RLM reviews, which did not complain that it wasn't serious enough, but rather the inconsistency in what group the film was meant to focus (hence the skits of the trade scenes/senate scenes/horrendous dismberment or incineration superimposed onto a picture of kids watching the TV).
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 23:07
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:You're referencing the RLM reviews, which did not complain that it wasn't serious enough, but rather the inconsistency in what group the film was meant to focus (hence the skits of the trade scenes/senate scenes/horrendous dismberment or incineration superimposed onto a picture of kids watching the TV). I don't believe he was. I certainly recall that scene being mocked and criticized long before the RLM reviews.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 23:16
|
|
|
Has there been any confirmation of them exploring the Wilfred Brimley storyline?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 23:29
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:You're referencing the RLM reviews lol
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 23:55
|
|
|
Schwarzwald posted:Absolutely, and those are be tremendous benefits, because they help sell the illusion that the puppets are what they're pretending to be. But purposely calling attention to the fact that the puppets are puppets defeats this. It stops being a real alien, and instead becomes a realistic depiction of an alien. Not even a realistic depiction. In the 70s and 80s people used puppets because they're the best thing they had at the time. These days people use puppets because they want the puppet aesthetic.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 23:56
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Not even a realistic depiction. In the 70s and 80s people used puppets because they're the best thing they had at the time. These days people use puppets because they want the puppet aesthetic. Is this such a bad thing? I love CG but I also have some love for the old school puppetry. It's a preference thing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 23:57
|
|
|
Blistex posted:Has there been any confirmation of them exploring the Wilfred Brimley storyline? I haven't seen the Ewok movies since the mid 90s. Am I correct in remembering that the first movie ends with the rescue of a girls kidnapped family, and that the second movie begins with that family being unceremoniously killed?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 23:58
|
|
|
Whack posted:Is this such a bad thing? I love CG but I also have some love for the old school puppetry. It's a preference thing. Sure, just don't pretend people watched those old movies because they loved puppets so much. It's because that's all they had at the time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 00:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 10:18 |
|
|
Schwarzwald posted:I haven't seen the Ewok movies since the mid 90s. Am I correct in remembering that the first movie ends with the rescue of a girls kidnapped family, and that the second movie begins with that family being unceremoniously killed? More like traumatizing Stormtrooper attack, but yeah.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 00:15
|
|