• Most new users don't bother reading our rules. Here's the one that is ignored almost immediately upon signup: DO NOT ASK FOR FANEDIT LINKS PUBLICLY. First, read the FAQ. Seriously. What you want is there. You can also send a message to the editor. If that doesn't work THEN post in the Trade & Request forum. Anywhere else and it will be deleted and an infraction will be issued.
  • If this is your first time here please read our FAQ and Rules pages. They have some useful information that will get us all off on the right foot, especially our Own the Source rule. If you do not understand any of these rules send a private message to one of our staff for further details.
  • Please read our Rules & Guidelines

    Read BEFORE posting Trades & Request

STAR WARS: Rogue One

Masirimso17 said:

Thanks for that. I didn't think Giacchino's score was terrible and I thought he did a good job of weaving the classic themes in where appropriate (though I don't know why the Force Theme was used for Bail Organa). The only real issue I have with it is the main theme. I simply don't like it. It sounds like a latter day Star Trek series theme.  It's  the one place I really felt he didn't get to the tone right.
 
Moe_Syzlak said:
Thanks for that. I didn't think Giacchino's score was terrible and I thought he did a good job of weaving the classic themes in where appropriate 

I like Giacchino's score very much, especially considering he replaced Desplat at the last minute, it is very successful. Jyn's theme is my favorite.

Moe_Syzlak said:
(though I don't know why the Force Theme was used for Bail Organa)

Yeah, me neither :D 

Moe_Syzlak said:
The only real issue I have with it is the main theme. I simply don't like it. It sounds like a latter day Star Trek series theme.  It's  the one place I really felt he didn't get to the tone right.

I like it on paper, the basic notes and all, like explained in the video. But I feel like it wasn't used as bombastic or exciting as the classic theme, which is why it wasn't very memorable.
 
The bluray bonus disc is a joke.
I mean, I'm usualy not the guy complaining because "they didn't give me what I wanted", but come on.
I knew that there were no deleted scenes. That's not really my complain (although that for a movie well known for its major reshoots and with trailers filled with shots not edited in the final cut... finding deleted scenes would have been a piece of cake...).
No, the complain is that the bonus disc (exept for 5 minutes about the digital Tarkin and Leia) is nothing else than one hour "presenting the characters" with people telling how fun it was to do that movie.
Presenting the characters? Really? I thought it was the job of the movie not the bonu... wait...

I understand that Disney and Lucasfilm would not spent a lot of time telling about the difficulties with the editing, or the trouble with changing the music composer few months before the release date, but damn, one hour long featurette of eveyone kissing asses IS a joke.
 
TMBTM said:
The bluray bonus disc is a joke.

I'm not too bothered if this is a similar deal to TFA. e.g. A bare-bones release just a couple months after the film leaves cinemas and then a deluxe version next Christmas. LOTR did a similar thing each year (on a grander scale). As long as you know you are buying a quick cash in version, it's okay. The alternative is a 6-months-after average disc that pleases nobody...

...or maybe there is no deluxe release and this is all we get, in which case I totally agree and...

mad-as-hell-4.jpg
 
The Force Awakens was another thing.
It came only in 2D with an okay documentary.
Then in december in 2D+3D with the SAME bonus + very few new (but useless) deleted scenes.
So you knew that another edition (the 3D one) will eventualy be released later.

At least Rogue One comes with the 3D version without delay this time. That's a good point.

What I'm "complaining" about is the quality of the documentary on the Rogue One bluray, because it's not really a documentary. It's just actors and filmmakers telling you things about the characters that you already know since you watched the movie.
So it does not not have deleted scenes and to me there is no real documentary either.
And you don't know for sure if a deluxe edition will be released anytime soon.
 
Showbiz folks will kiss each others' asses - it's annoying, but a fact of life. What really ticks me off is when dvd/blu ray review sites review movies for paragraphs and paragraphs, adding to the multitude of reviews written when the movies came out in theaters, but then offer no judgement at all as to the quality of the extras.

And yeah, it sucks that the Rogue One extras aren't better, as even apart from the sensitive behind-the-scenes revisions, it sounds as though there were lots of cool technical processes to delve into.
 
Redlettermedia have released an audio commentary for Rogue One. It's free to stream. I haven't listened to it yet, but from what I understand, their commentaries are more of a round table discussion about the movie while occasionally commenting on what's occurring on screen.

http://redlettermedia.com/rogue-one-commentary-track-now-available/

Maybe their ripping the movie to shreds will help some faneditors?
 
skyled said:
Redlettermedia have released an audio commentary for Rogue One. It's free to stream. I haven't listened to it yet, but from what I understand, their commentaries are more of a round table discussion about the movie while occasionally commenting on what's occurring on screen.

http://redlettermedia.com/rogue-one-commentary-track-now-available/

Maybe their ripping the movie to shreds will help some faneditors?

I CLAPPED WHEN I SAW DARTH VAAAAAAAAAAAAADER!

I don't care if it's supposed to be a commentary track, it's only a podcast to me now.
 
RLM slaughtered this film in the commentary. Not with the insults, but with all the moments where they pitched a random idea and they were all more fun and interesting than what we got.

I don't harbour hatred for this film at all (though I do for the 4DX I witnessed it in, ugh) but it was profoundly uninteresting from start to finish. Well shot, looked great but I didn't care at all.
 
Even when I disagree and like something RLM hates, I still enjoy hearing their take on things. Those guys have entertainment down to an art.
 
henzINNIT said:
(though I do for the 4DX I witnessed it in, ugh)
Why on Earth would you put yourself through that?

addiesin said:
Even when I disagree and like something RLM hates, I still enjoy hearing their take on things. Those guys have entertainment down to an art.

They make points, provide evidence and elaborate. It's basic Socratic method. Something most YouTube reviewers aren't familiar with (Most I've seen tend to make a point, provide evidence, then restate the point). Mike and Jay have overtaken many actual "critics" for me. Their understanding of film is tremendous, yet they still don't take any of it too seriously. Which makes for a nice juxtaposition from my favourite film critic Mark Kermode, who treats most everything sincerely.
 
Well, I know everyone is talking about Wonder Woman this weekend, but a friend of mine on Facebook asked me for my opinion on Rogue One, so I thought I'd share it here too.

Frankly, I loved it. I don't know if it's a cinematic masterpiece, but as a Star Wars fan, I know that it's everything I wanted to see, and none of the things I disliked in the other movies of the last 20 years. (Admittedly, this one did have less expectation riding on it.)

(potential spoilers for all Star Wars movies follow)

This film was a great blend of adventure, mythology, pathos and humor. It also got the pacing right. Force Awakens got the pacing right, too, but I had to deal with the frustration that the filmmakers crafted a story where Luke, Han and Leia were never all onscreen together, and have no chance of ever being onscreen together again. No such frustration here.

I liked all the characters I was watching. In particular, Alan Tudyk's K-2SO character is now one of my all-time favorite Star Wars characters.

And after 3 movies of ruining Anakin/Vader, this movie made him an awesome and formidable villain again.

At the same time, I'm glad for a Star Wars movie that finally didn't focus so heavily on the Skywalker/Solo clan. It's a huge universe; not everything has to revolve around them.

Also, I'm glad that the movie went for the poignant ending that was the only logical conclusion to this story. (If any of these characters had survived, they would have been big heroes in the Rebellion, but we don't see any of them in A New Hope.) For a big studio with a major franchise, it was kind of a big risk to take, but I was glad for the honesty of the ending. It actually makes the victory over the Death Star even more important in A New Hope.

I should also note that Michael Giacchino's score was subtly brilliant, managing to make this score feel like Star Wars while making it stand alone and have its own identity, too. 

I also loved the fact that this move didn't open with a typical crawl, didn't do the customary wipes and so forth, did do things we've never seen in a Star Wars movie such as flashbacks, etc. What was daring in 1977 is old hat in 2016. By all means, the Episodic movies can have the normal stuff, and I don't mind fan edits adding that stuff back in. But if the franchise is to have any life going forward, it was absolutely essential for filmmakers to be allowed to think outside the box.

I suppose the film isn't necessary in the way that no prequels are really necessary to enjoy the main story. But it didn't wreck continuity in the way that the Episodic prequels did, and it's thoroughly enjoyable in its own right.
 
TomH1138 said:
I also loved the fact that this move didn't open with a typical crawl, didn't do the customary wipes and so forth, did do things we've never seen in a Star Wars movie such as flashbacks, etc. 

And minus a few things (tentacle monster and too much CGI OT cast,) these are the things I didn't like. And it seems a lot of people are split into these two camps.
 
TomH1138 said:
I also loved the fact that this move didn't open with a typical crawl, didn't do the customary wipes and i went for the phenq so forth, did do things we've never seen in a Star Wars movie such as flashbacks, etc.

I was also quite surprised to see flashbacks in the movie - never expected it. But I'm a die hard Star Wars fan and loved the movie.
 
Here’s an interesting post from Quora (which won’t let me link to it for some reason) by Hal Hickel, the animation director from ILM for R1:


Why does Tarkin’s CGI in Rogue One look so plastic-y? Could they have made it look more realistic?

Hal Hickel, Animation Director at Industrial Light and Magic (1996-present)

Hi, I was the animation supervisor on Rogue One, and as such I was intimately involved with the creation of Tarkin.

I’ve decided to chime in for one purpose only, to clarify the process we used. I have no interest in trying to convince anyone to like the results more than they do, or to argue with anyone about how “real” our work looked in the film. Again, I just want to clarify our process for informational purposes.
The broad plan was to hire an actor, film them on set in costume, and just replace the head with a CG Tarkin head, leaving the real body in the scene. The actor on set would be wearing a helmet with small cameras mounted to it, to record their facial performance (similar to what you’ve seen in the behind the scenes footage from Avatar, or Planet of the Apes).
That’s what we did, excepting that in about 30% of the shots, we opted for full replacement (head and body) with CG, because for certain shots it just made more sense.
Guy Henry was cast because he’s a terrific actor, and had the bearing and vocal quality we were looking for. It was helpful that he also had a certain physical resemblance (high cheekbones, etc), though that was not essential, given that the plan was to completely replace his head with our CG Tarkin. That said, when remapping the facial expressions of one person onto another (Henry to Cushing), the more similar they are, the easier it’s going to be.
The intention was never for Guy to do either a vocal, or physical “impression” of Peter Cushing, but rather to give us a performance that “felt” like Tarkin, both physically and vocally. So we never asked for, or expected a spot on vocal match, or for Guy to smirk, etc, like Cushing.
We didn’t do any modulation or any other audio tricks with Henry’s voice. We didn’t compare waveforms with Cushing audio, talk to his old manager, or any of that other stuff mentioned elsewhere in this thread. We just used Guy Henry’s voice. I’m sure Guy watched the Tarkin scenes from ANH endlessly, and did his best to find a tone and delivery that felt right.
Guy didn’t wear any prosthetics or makeup as part of the process, with the exception of the dots that help us track his facial movement. Someone in this thread talked about “makeup, cosmetics, physical altering”. No. Again, we just put dots on Guy’s face to track its movement, that’s all.
Guy was filmed on set, in the costume. The movement of the dots on his face, and his voice were recorded simultaneously during filming. I mention this, because some VFX companies prefer a method where Facial Capture is done separately, on a specialized stage at a later time. We prefer to capture an actor’s performance all at once (voice, body, face) whenever possible.
We also scanned Guy Henry on the ITC Light Stage, to give us a high resolution CG model of Guy Henry, and to capture his skin texture. Now why would we need a CG Guy Henry?
We needed it for a few reasons: One is that once we’ve tracked the motion of the dots on his face in a given piece of performance, rather than immediately applying that motion data to the CG Tarkin, we instead apply it first to the CG Guy Henry. This give us an apples to apples comparison to see if we’ve captured and processed the facial performance accurately. When we’re satisfied that we have, we then apply it to Tarkin.
Another reason, is that having the lighting data that is captured with Guy Henry on the Light Stage, gives us a sort of “ground truth” that we can compare our CG Tarkin to, to see if his skin is reacting to light realistically. Also, because there are many things about the fine details of Guy Henry’s skin that are appropriate for Tarkin’s skin (general tone, pores, etc), we can use the Guy Henry textures as a way to get a leg up on the Tarkin skin textures, rather than starting from zero.
Ok, so we’ve hired an actor, and shot them on location. We’ve built a CG copy of that actor in order to be able to check out facial capture data to see that it’s accurate, and to give us a “ground truth” for the skin texture and lighting.
Now we (obviously) have to build a CG Tarkin.
I noticed some comments in another answer in this thread about his mouth “not being aligned to his chin”, or the ears being “too long”. Again, I’m not here to argue the merits of our work, but I think it’s useful to point out that if you assembled hundreds of photographs of Peter Cushing (as we did), you would find that he can look vastly different from one photograph to another, depending on his expression, the lighting, the makeup, the focal length of the lens, the year the photo was taken, etc etc. So comparing a single frame of our Tarkin to a single photo of Cushing is not a particularly valid way to trouble shoot whatever issues there may be.
Luckily, we didn’t have to work from just photos. We had in our possession a life casting of Peter Cushing’s face. It was made not long after New Hope, so it was very accurate in terms of Cushing’s age, etc. Of course we know that sometimes the process of taking a life cast can slightly distort the face of the subject (the weight of the casting material can pull down on the skin), so we were mindful of that. That casting was a terrific starting point for us, and gave us very accurate information.
Starting from there, a very accurate CG model of Tarkin was created. As well, highly detailed textures, with pore detail, age spots, veins, etc etc. The CG hair groom was challenging, as the styling on Cushing for that role was a bit eccentric.
So taking one shot from the film as an example, let’s say a medium close up:
We track the movement of Guy’s head through space, so we can move the CG Tarkin head in the same way.
We track the dot motion on Guy’s face to extract his facial performance. We apply that motion to the CG Guy Henry, and if we’re happy with how it looks, we apply it to the CG Tarkin. By the way, someone in this thread theorized that perhaps the CG Tarkin was missing “micro expressions”. While we are always trying to increase the accuracy, and detail of our Facial Capture system, I have to say that even now, we are capturing very fine detail, including very tiny, barely perceptible micro movements. We are familiar with Paul Ekman’s work, and the importance of Micro Expressions, and have tried hard to be sure that level of fidelity exists in our work. If it was happening on Guy Henry’s face, it was happening on Tarkin’s face.
Now we have the real Guy Henry body, with the CG Tarkin head. We paint out any bits of Henry’s head that Tarkin doesn’t cover up.
We make adjustments to the facial performance to make it feel more “Tarkin”, since (unsurprisingly), Guy Henry doesn’t use his facial muscles the same way that Peter Cushing did. Guy doesn’t smile like Cushing, doesn’t form phonemes like Cushing, etc. So we have to do a sort of “motion likeness” pass. This is done by our animators, using a very light touch. Note: the point is NOT to change the acting choices made by Guy Henry, it’s just to adjust things so that when Guy chooses to smile, it looks like a Tarkin smile, not like a Guy Henry smile. Of course in doing so, we have to be very careful to maintain exactly what sort of smile it is. We don’t want to transform a mocking, insincere smile into a genuine, warm smile.
The Tarkin head with final facial performance is lit to match the lighting in the footage, and rendered.
The rendered CG Tarkin head is composited onto the real Guy Henry body.
There are of course many many steps to each one of the steps I’ve outlined above. Each one of these steps encompasses the highly skilled work of many many very talented artists and technicians.
So again, like it, don’t like it, that’s none of my business. I just wanted to get the facts out there, in terms of our process, because there was some inaccurate information being posted.
Thanks for reading
 
Rogue One reenacted in Star Wars Galaxy of Heroes

z68t6swjd6221.png
 
Moe_Syzlak said:
Here’s an interesting post from Quora (which won’t let me link to it for some reason) by Hal Hickel, the animation director from ILM for R1:


Why does Tarkin’s CGI in Rogue One look so plastic-y? Could they have made it look more realistic?

Hal Hickel, Animation Director at Industrial Light and Magic (1996-present)

Hi, I was the animation supervisor on Rogue One, and as such I was intimately involved with the creation of Tarkin.

I’ve decided to chime in for one purpose only, to clarify the process we used. I have no interest in trying to reading about the d bal max convince anyone to like the results more than they do, or to argue with anyone about how “real” our work looked in the film. Again, I just want to clarify our process for informational purposes.
So again, like it, don’t like it, that’s none of my business. I just wanted to get the facts out there, in terms of our process, because there was some inaccurate information being posted.
Thanks for reading

This was quite an interesting read. I'm always interested in behind-the-scenes information. And, by the way, I liked the animations in the movie.
 
Rileyu said:
the movie is awesom i am die heart fan of these stars

MMaXgk9.jpg
 

Thoughts, you guys? This guy is a pretty good youtube reviewer and is not very pretentious especially compared to a lot of other video essay-ists.
 
Back
Top Bottom