>have a fucking Disney-tier budget
>make AT-ATs CGI
what's even the point?
>>68195693
The more I watch SW movies the more I realize palm trees and trees in general are universal.
yeah they should've just went and bought one from the AT-AT store right?
>>68195693
takes less time to animate/create models. takes more time to stop motion plus make good environment.
stop motion is for toys now.
>>68195693
It would have probably been cheaper to do it with models but this actually looks fine
>>68195920
are you just pretending to be retarded?
"but but JJ was going to make everything practical like muh original trilogy"
>>68195983
are you?
>>68195693
will darth vader not go to the beach because he hates sand?
>>68196003
literally why shouldn't they use miniatures?
>>68195983
>Models were manipulated a frame at a time, animated in front of painted backgrounds instead of blue screen, with baking soda was used in place of snow. It was shot at 24 frames per second, resulting in about 5 seconds of footage per day of work. For explosions, high speed photography was used, and cutouts were used for background walkers.
http://laughingsquid.com/how-stop-motion-artists-animated-the-at-at-walkers-for-the-star-wars-battle-of-hoth-sequence/
Even if it would be fun, I would not waste that much time for a single scene.
>>68196026
looks bad
>>68195693
how can you tell it's CGI?
>>68195983
This looks like shit compared to OP' pic. Practical effects fags are retarded.
This literally looks like children's toy.
>>68195898
I think there's an encyclopedia entry on why some random guy yells "We're like sitting ducks out here!" in one of the New Trilogy movies, and explains how ducks are an intergalactic species of parasitic Avian lifeforms.
>>68195693
>>68195983
I knew there was something off about the AT-ATs in Rogue, the legs are way too thin and long
>>68195920
>>68195955
>>68195964
Money shouldn't even be a concern for Disney and Lucasfilm, this movie is easily going to make over 1 billion
>>68196076
because it's obviously too fantastical to be real and looks way too good to be a puppet/miniature
>>68196081
And CGI looks like a videogame, which is also a children's toy.
So would you rather have a children's toy made out of real material in your movie or children's toy that's some graphics awkwardly pasted onto a screen?
>>68196117
no, money isn't the concern, it's probably just time. It's probably more expensive to hire a team of 10+ model makers/animators than it is to hire 3 guys stop-motion one scene.
>>68196026
CGI these days looks better.
>>68196166
CGI desu.
>>68196138
no really, the water looks cgi but i saw more realistic toys than that, good painting do the job, who knows
>>68195983
Both look the same
>>68196049
>Incredible looking special effect.
>Waste of time.
This is why everything is cgi. Disneyfags have no appreciation for model stop motion effects and think uncanny valley bullshit is normal.
>>68196229
And that is why you'll always be a rotten pleb.
>>68196166
I prefer the one that doesn't look like plastic, thank you.
>>68195693
>Why even drive a car when I can just walk to my job and it'll only take 45 minutes longer and make me tired?
>>68196076
Because this is so poorly done that it is obviously a bunch of guys in front of a green screen. Disney could at least give us the courtesy of not making the cg effects look like a rush job done in a currynigger sweatshop.
It's because they are a different model of atat. Just like the ones in Star wars rebels.
>>68196297
>being lazy is ok when Disney does it
wasn't this the biggest complaint against George?
>>68196350
it looks fine, unlike this.
>>68196259
If there's a way to make the stop motion look smoother, then I'd love to have a scene like that.
>>68196405
At least that looks like professionals tried to make it look great but just didn't have the time or resources. And even though the prequels are shit there are certain special effects scenes that look far better than disneyshit.
>>68196405
I don't think making scenes like this is lazy. It's just the textures that make it look bad.
>>68196405
because look at this >>68196443 and your webm literally EVERYTHING (including the clone trooper armor) in that shot is CG, while Rouge One is filmed on location with real costumes and CGI vehicles.
>>68196443
Is the temple a matte painting?
>>68196230
in stills sure, toys and miniatures can look better, but not in motion, no way
it's the animation that's the problem not the look
>>68196536
>while Rouge One is filmed on location with real costumes and CGI vehicles.
Isn't the water and trees CGI also?
>>68196443
So how does this justify bajillion dollar disney movies looking like a cheap as fuck direct to dvd film?
>>68196026
-time consuming animation
-limits to shot composition due to the constraints of having to physically manipulate models
-there are simply some things you cannot do with physical objects in real life that you can do with a computer model
-stop motion will almost always look "jerky" because they simply do not have enough frames to make it smooth (stop motion jerkyness has its charm but looks weird when you put real actors in a composite shot with stop motion objects or creatures)
>>68196290
so you want a practical model and not cgi
>>68196573
we don't know that yet for sure.
>>68196593
because it looked better compared to the cgi at the time. it's aged horribly. Thankfully, CGI seems like it's gradually losing that weakness with better texture artists and lighting, but it hasn't gotten rid of that yet.
>>68196593
It doesn't look bad at all, you're using hyperbole.
what if they made an miniature animatronic AT-AT that mimics the movement perfectly so they don't have to do stop motion?
>>68196523
>disneyshit
Can you just admit youre being unreasonable and hate DA JOOWS and thats why youre mad?
The rebel base looks like it was made with more love and care than anything in the prequels. Using CGI for stuff thats more practical to do with CGI is okay.
>>68196597
>Time consuming animation.
This is fucking disney. Time consuming has never been a problem for them.
>stop motion will always look jerky
I.E. like a real object and not something from a video game cutscene. Do I need to post the legolas bullshit from the hobbit to prove my point?
>>68195693
You practical fags really need to fuck off
Just think about you are the main reason we got copycat Tatoine and Hoth in episode 7 cause they were forced to film on real locations otherwise the practical manchild would have started crying
Of course I don't want visual diarrhea like >>68196443 but still CGI is not inherently bad
>>68196677
it would be better to make a robotic at-at desu. plus details will probably be lost. Practical effects will probably work and move most realistically with robots like they tried to do in ROTS.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQcw_D8i0Po
Star Wars is a franchise that can't possibly be pressed for money for its budget, so I don't see why robotic models can't be used. They'll probably be just a tad less smooth than CGI.
>>68196691
No I'm pissed because Disney could totally make a visually stunning 21st century special effects masterpiece but they continue to churn out forgettable medicore cheap looking shit despite having massive budgets for their films.
>>68196654
what NES game is this?
>>68196731
>make CGI planet for Rogue One
>it's just a fucking tropical island like we have in real life instead of something actually fun and unique like Felucia
t-thanks Disney
Daily reminder Revan was never canon.
Daily reminder Revan is not canon.
Daily reminder Revan will never be canon.
>>68196657
When CG looks like a couple of guys in front of a green screen AT-AT, that is bad CG.
>>68196792
what do you consider visually stunning?
this is a movie and not a tech demo.
>>68196710
Good job ignoring all of his best points, dumbass. Miniatures are good for far away shots but how would they work with a close up scene like OPs pic? CGI simply looks better, take off the hipster glasses
>>68196523
>professionals
check that Jedi at the beginning
>>68196810
>Daily reminder Revan will never be canon.
JJ is a huge KOTORfag and he already made Rakata Prime canon so don't be so sure
>>68196691
Did The Force Awakens try to push the boundaries of special effects in both digital and practical effects like the prequels as shown by this anon>>68196776?
No. They just did it for nostalgia. They don't want to push the boundaries at all.
>>68196654
No it doesn't. That shot is just as uncanny valley as the prequel shot that was posted.
>>68196677
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNZPRsrwumQ
the wirrrring would get anoying
>>68196710
I.E. like a real object and not something from a video game cutscene. Do I need to post the legolas bullshit from the hobbit to prove my point?
A: that movie came out in 2000, that was 16 years ago.
B: do you see the world in lag vision because most stop motion has lower fps because of the lack of frames.
>>68196805
this looks like shit tb h
>>68196405
>Concentrate all fire on the nearest starship
Ok one, why isn't Yoda talking like a retard here? Does he choose to jumble his sentences to be an asshole the other times.
Two, why would you shoot down a ship that is A - right in front of your forces and B - it presenting no tangible threat to you because all it'll do it fucking crash and explode all over your troops and obscure the battlefield.
>Move all quadrants to sector 5 1 5.
What the fuck does this even mean? That's not even an order to fire. That's a mobilization order or some shit I don't even know. Why would the artillery emplacements (which aren't even capable of indirect fire) start shooting at the nearest testicle ship when ordered to MOVE QUADRANTS TO A DIFFERENT SECTOR
>Oh they shot it down
And look, a massive dust cloud that means no Clone can see SHIT while droids, who see in infrared and shit can just plink away as normal.
FUCK YOU YODA
>>68196835
It's called set design pleb.
>>68196867
>this is the Disney audience
we're fucked, enjoy rehashed locations for the next 9 movies
>>68196405
looks like the TV show, except without the styling
I haven't dropped rogue one yet. But that's because the word is Vader is in it and therefore James earl jomes. If Vader is cutting rebels down then I have to see it, for James earl James' voice alone I will pay admission
>>68196896
I was the op you replied to you fucking moron
This flower planet looks fucking shit
>muh practicools
Its looks great, please choke on a big black gentleman's penis
>>68196880
maybe yoda jumbles sentences so people will actually pay attention to his message when he's teaching?
>>68196855
>JJ is a huge KOTORfag
Today in lies, and the EUfags that tell them.
Stop perpetuating that myth. He has likely never heard of it.
And Pablo Hidalgo made Rakata Prime canon, and by canon, I mean it's in some picture in a visual dictionary and has no bearing on anything story related.
Lol, EU fans.
>>68196092
How depressing. Imagine something like that for Star Trek TOS. Every planet is Planet California. Imagine the wiki article explaining that.
>muh progenitors
Fuck
>>68196166
Movies and video games are children's toys, manchild.
>>68195693
...because practical effects simply don't look good compared to CGI?
>>68196943
>Oscar always means quality.
Disneyfags are really trying to justify this mediocre shit.
>>68197020
ok
why did they ever bother making Stormtrooper armor?
>>68197025
It deserved more awards than mad max. Of course they mean nothing
>>68197043
what game
>>68197043
I do love how war battles in Lucas' mind look and play out like they do in the mind of a 10 year old. Has a certain charm to it.
>>68196943
tfa was probably the least deserving out of all of them desu senpai. other movies definitely pushed their boundaries while star wars chose to stay the same.
only innovative thing was bb-8, but then the scene breakdown show that bb-8 was cgi for half of the shots.
>>68197025
>BAFTA Film Award [Winner]
Best Achievement in Special Visual Effects
BAFTA Awards 2016
>OFTA Film Award [Winner]
Best Visual Effects
Online Film & Television Association 2016
>VES Award [Winner]
Outstanding Visual Effects in a Photoreal Feature
Visual Effects Society Awards 2016
>>68196856
Well, at least TFA was a decent movie unlike that shitfest that were prequels
>>68197095
yeah, nobody is denying that. Unfortunately, we're talking about practical effects and special effects in general.
REALER THAN REAL LIFE
>>68196258
Yeah with 35 years difference.
>>68197133
that blends in well with the lighting desu.
>>68196856
And george wanted to "push boundaries" in making a movie almost entirely in front of a green screen and it looked like shit
Innovation is only good when its an improvement
>all the CGI fags in this thread.
Disney shills out in full force
Enjoy your video game cutscene
>>68196856
boundary pushing /= Film Quality
Jar Jar was technically a CGI innovation but that means nothing 5+ years later
>>68197127
>yeah, nobody is denying that.
Nigga, prequelfag contrarians are everywhere now days.
>>68197133
Those pulse lasers are cool as shit but they trigger the fuck out of me. All the tech in the prequels does, it looks so much more advanced than anything in the OT.
>>68195983
The CGI ones look better, I think. The originals look slightly more real, but they also look like real models more than anything else.
>>68197197
people aren't arguing they're good films, only that they had certain merits like lore and shit that captured the imagination of most people.
Do you heard prequel contrarians praise the dialogue?
>>68196092
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Duck
>>68197272
yeah
>>68197272
Sadly, yes.
>>68196890
You're right anon, you know more than the professional, big time movie developers that chose to go with CGI. I'm sure you would have made better decisions :^)
>>68197274
Cool xD
>>68196026
bc then they would need very tiny actors
It's 2016. CGI has surpassed practical effects. Get with the times gramps.
>>68197511
kek none of the CGI ones look any better
>>68196597
just make mini robot ones
>>68197547
>kek none of the CGI ones look any better
>>68197547
CGI is better in motion.
>>68197043
That movie was made 14 years ago without exactly the biggest budget. Yes the decision of having hero clone troopers be cgi in a shot was a really stupid one.
Star Wars fags, what's the advantage of using a AT-AT on the battlefield anyways? They are vulnerable to aerial assault, can be taken down by a rope, and probably vulnerable to a takeover by a small squad. Was this another one of Lucas' retarded creations?
>>68197511
Practical yoda looks better.
1999 ape looks like shit, but the original 1968 ones look great. Original series and reboot series are going for entirely different things anyway
>>68197577
>2005 was 14 years ago
>Disneyfags in charge of math
>>68197547
You're just pretending to be retarded right? I'll give you the monkey but the others?
>>68197075
>Star Wars: The Farce Awakens
>deserves more awards than mad max
Holy shit when did this board get such shit taste?
>>68197610
>900 years ago was tomorrow
>>68197598
height advantage. Plus, supposedly impenetrable armor. Height lets you see any tanks/people hiding from you in the mountains. Also, lets you shoot down aircraft. So they're anti everything.
>>68197601
He looks like a toy, his eyes literally can't focus on anything and are lifeless
>>68197598
>>68197598
>a rope
>>68197601
cgi yoda looks too young.
>>68197598
because the High Ground is important in this franchise.
>>68197644
Mad max fury road is fucking dogshit go back to R E D D I T . C O M
>>68195693
12 feet tall ATATs
>>68197511
Holy shit that cgi Arnie is realistic..
>>68197729
>Reddit boogeyman shitposting
>>68197729
>siding against the Disney-produced film makes me 'reddit'
You and I must have VERY different ideas as to what Reddit's taste is like anon.
And even if Fury Road was "dogshit" it still wipes the fucking floor with the generic, bland, rehashed bullshit that was The Force Awakens.
>>68196259
stop motion looks like shit faggot take your nostalgia goggles off
>>68196081
This.
Directors can fuck things up by choosing CGI just because they are short on time and opt to heap things on post production, but that doesn't mean CGI is always better.
It looks fine.
>>68196405
The scene with all the storm troopers shooting back and forth with the droids sums up the prequels
>>68196092
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Breast
>>68195983
But that looks bad, especially in motion. CGI looks better.
>>68195983
>they had to spin all of those leg joints constantly.
spinning must have been suffering.
>>68196405
what cartoon is this
>>68195693
What is it with you people?
They were stop motion in the original because of technical limitations. Why would you go back to something primitive? It would look really bad these days.
CGI is successful enough that its mostly unnoticeable in many films
>>68197043
>that fking lizard dashing around
>>68197791
Lol its you that needs to wipe your mouth of that shit taste
>>68197511
And yet i can't fucking wait which movies will be remembered and still talked about 20 years from now. I hope you fuckers are still alive to see it.
>>68196405
This was cutting edge when it was released. Name more films from that era that pushed CGI limits like this.
I remember people being shocked for no suits of clones being made.
There's a shit ton of CGI in the trailer. It's disgusting that hardly anyone is against now just because it's Disney. If this was Lucas, you'd see nitpicking everywhere outside of /tv/
>>68198327
The Two Towers came out the same year and looked infinitely better
>>68196776
This. Disney should use their infinite money to get a boston dynamics type AT-AT to shoot as a miniature. I want more movies with next gen animatronics.
>>68197720
This anon gets it.
Think about it: who wins the fight of Hoth? Well, the stormtroopers lose out against the turrets. Why? Because they have the high ground. But what beats the turrets? The AT-AT's, because the Imperials understand the importance of the high ground and thus, with their funds, build an artificial platform that gives them the high ground.
Then, the snow speeders beat the AT-ATs because the snow speeders are even higher, thanks to their propulsion systems, than the AT-ATs. But how they beat the is also important: they tie them up so that they fall down, thus losing the high ground advantage over everyone, and reaching he ground with the rest of the troopers.
But the overall victors of the battle are the Imperials, because they have the highest ground thanks to their fleet in low orbit.
It's like pottery, it shines.
>>68198338
those look like real explosions senpai
>>68197470
Just hire Robert Downy Jr.
![hqdefault[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/2zBGxzh.jpg "hqdefault[1].jpg")
>>68197020
>...because practical effects simply don't look good compared to CGI?
not when you put a little effort into the practical effects
>>68198258
>They were stop motion in the original because of technical limitations.
Who said anything about stop motion? Why not fully functional robotic AT-T's that walk, built on a smaller scale
>this was done in the early 90's
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4J9TBlFxAg
>>68198413
ill post more to spite>>68198401
>>68198413
The probably are.
They used real explosives for TFA because JJ thinks CGI explosions just don't capture what an explosions actually looks like. I assume Disney is carrying on with his idea on that in Rogue.
>>68198338
Theres a proper way to use CGI. Not use it on every single fucking thing in a scene.
>>68198470
literally the Hunger Games in space
>>68195983
we will never see the same quality that star wars was known for and made it famous. it used to be the pet project of an indie film company, now it's just another tool for corporate hollywood to pump out for profits, and in a hurry at that. why is it so hard for people to understand this simple logic? hate lucas and parrot all the memes you want, he was the reason star wars was special. tfa already proved it, and this new trailer alone is more of the same
>>68198401
Thats too autistic to not be true.
>>68196405
>there's a five minute battle scene that does not have a single real person in it the whole time.
also happened in episode 1
>>68198525
>>68196880
Yoda doesn't jumble his sentences constantly.
He does it once every few sentences in the OT, but literally every sentence in the prequels, aside from rare moments like that one.
>>68198358
As impressive as Gollum was he didn't really come close to what Attack of the Clones did and most of the Orc scenes were done at night. No real close ups or full screen battles like Attack of the Clones. They were both impressive films but Two Towers will always be second place in terms of digital imagery.
>>68196805
is this from the Alice in Wonderland sequel?
>>68198126
nah not realy. the way the lighting and post processing made it feel real. also te animation looked like they were heavy. animators just can't get the same scale with cg for some reason.
>>68198327
The Star Wars CG was never cutting edge, it was underwhelming even at the time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diLE4umndNM came out the same year as >>68197043
>>68196677
then your asking for a 500mill budget.
>>68198489
disney only markets.
>>68197043
>not a single live human
>>68198620
they're literally doing that for Avengers Infinity War
>>68195693
I find it really weird how they're all pretty much at the same angle except the one on the right which looks like it's been copy-pasted and flipped
I'm sure they wouldn't do that, but it looks that way
>>68195693
Because practical AT-AT's would look like some odd throwback if you used them today. The CGI is factually more convincing than the clunky mess we had in Empire.
>>68196792
The budgets on these are relatively small.
>>68198652
then they should use animatronics.
>>68198469
>Why not fully functional robotic AT-T's that walk, built on a smaller scale
What would the purpose be?
You're wasting valuable time and money on aesthetics. Not only would making a CGI model be cheaper but it would look much more realistic with movement. You can add subtle effects to the model that would be impossible with a real model. Your T-Rex example is a good point, it looked impressive but it's obviously an animatronic. Rexy in JW looks and moves much more fluidly and real.
>>68198596
Ay. King Kong I think is the first really CG heavy movie where I can still watch it and see that it's clearly aged but also not be taken out of the experience by it.
>>68197043
>why did they ever bother making Stormtrooper armor?
I've often asked myself this question
It doesn't seem to shield from attacks, they always die after one hit, and in the fight with the Ewoks it wasn't even very effective against falling stones
If anything, it's hard to see inside the helmets and they don't allow full range of movement.
>>68197615
The monkey is the best looking one you fucking blind dipshit. Dawn of the Planet of the Apes has possibly the most impressive CGI in any film.
>>68198741
i think both the clones and stormies have HUDs, but the armor seems to be more for explosion protection.
>>68198695
and yet the animatronic made people shit their pants in the theaters.
animatronic for JP was literally the best anything could ever hope to achieve, aside from making it actually walk.
>>68198596
>The Star Wars CG was never cutting edge
Only underage people say this. Especially when The Phantom Menace came out.
No one prior to TPM pulled off a character like Jar Jar. No studio would do that just for the sake of it. It was Lucas's vision pushingILM to suicide
>>68198580
>Two Towers
>worse than AotC in CGI quality
>One still holds up to this day, the other is literally worse than a Cartoon Network TV show
There's a difference between being ambitious and being stupid. Jackson knew the limits of CGI, so he used it sparingly with a lot of practical effects mixed in, and shot with CGI from far away and at night to make it blend better.
Lucas made a video game cutscene-tier film because he didn't understand to use it sparingly and to mix in practical effects, and he shot pretty much every scene with it.
That's not praiseworthily ballsy, that's stupid and lazy. part of being a good director is knowing the limits of the technology your working with, how you want to tell your story with it, and what accommodations will need to be made in the story for it. Jackson understood all three. Lucas understood none.
>>68198741
The question was "why did they ever bother making Stormtrooper armor props".
Props wasn't stated explicitly, but was obvious because of context.
>>68195693
I'm not sure OP but the design is clearly different from the ESB and ROTJ AT-AT's. There's some weird panels on the side that weren't on the originals.
I'm sure it's unfinished CGI work but I'm holding out hope that they clean it up and make it look decent. Two thing's I DO like about this shot though...1, the water work around the feet looks excelent and 2, the slight zoom and sense of scale as the characters run towards them.
I'm not putting my chips down yet but there's a chance it wont suck.
>>68198546
And yet Disney's Starshit will be successful and people will eat it up.
>>68198852
anyone else think the roger droids look pretty good still, and have aged well?
>>68198810
No, I dont think lucas was lazy, he was just overestimating its ability to wow the audience. So he used it in longer shots. He definitely worked ILM's ass off in CGI.
>>68198881
They're shit, mate.
>>68198881
TPM ones do because they used a lot of practical effects for them, in fact TPM effects holds up the best of the prequels.
>>68198881
actually, yes, they generally have.
I just wish they were less goofy. The stormtroopers have some goofiness in pretty much all the films, but it's laidback and subtle, for the most part. A line of dialogue here, and glance there, but it wasn't the totality of their character.
The trade federation droids, for me, embody what was wrong with TPM: great potential and quality workmanship with a great vision, squandered in an effort to pander.
>>68198881
yeah.
>>68198881
Metal and plastic are easy to render convincingly
>>68198810
Both films are dated. You have to be delusional to think they aren't.
>literally worse than a Cartoon Network TV show
>video game cutscene-tier film
This is an opinion. Star Wars has always been known for being cutting edge. The prequel trilogy is known for this aside from memes. Also, do you now what video game cutscenes looked like in the early 2000s and late 1990's?
>Jackson knew the limits of CGI
And Lucas wanted to push past those limits. Looking at the industry now, he succeeded beyond anyone's expectation. But when it comes down to it, Lucas and Jackson have vastly different styles.
>>68195693
There comes a time when building a model, and animating it by hand is harder work, with worse results than making a goddamn good CGI model.
Quit your fucking m-muh practicals.
>>68199022
Pablo is fucking delusional, or he is being a good corporate shill.
Daily reminder that the Battle Droids were supposed to look like Neimoidian skeletons but Lucas changed the Neimoidians to generic green ayy lmaos
>>68198972
>>68198881
This. TPM had the best droids...even R2-D2 looked best in TPM compared to the other prequels. Kinda weird tbqhwyfamila.
>>68196026
Because this happens
>>68199016
if only lucas kept the hivemind droid army in the rest of the PT. it would've contrasted well with the human-like army of the clones. Like instead of two human-like armies running at each other, it would be the wave of droids vs human mass army.
A reminder that those defending the cartoon effects are Disney marketers.
>>68199163
lucas was anti-disney. anti-corporation. defending tfa actually makes you a shill.
>>68199130
That looks fucking terrible. Even ignoring the shitty CG the composting looks dreadful.
>>68199099
I think they were just working to a higher standard. TPM doesn't have that much CGI in it compared to the other two. When they start literally filling an entire movie with CGI, the standards HAVE to drop, they just don't have the time or the money
>>68199199
thats a miniature.
>>68198945
Buddy, Lucas has literally done interviews where his justification for using CGI all the time was that he hated doing shooting in the field for the OT and Indie and thought CGI use could limit that.
The man did push boundaries, but don't act that it wasn't at least partially also motivated by sheer laziness on his part.
>>68199039
disney still deserves to be shit on for making butthole eyes a cgi alien.
>>68199228
Do you have a source?
Your opinion is not a source. Part of it wobbling doesn't mean it's a miniature.
>>68199228
your mom is a maxiature
>>68199228
Then it is a shitty miniature with extremely shitty artists doing the compositing.
>>68199075
The Japanese and Chinese thought the original trilogy was pretty meh.
>Pablo is fucking delusional,
>works for Lucasfilm
>Executive
>part of the storygroup
I'm pretty sure he has access to statistics that we don't. And is it really that surprising?
>>68199199
Checked.
I think it's one of the best shots in the trailer, I like the way the wings flex due to the explosion. It clearly needs some work, particularly lighting (those wings should be casting shadows) but I dig the overall feel of it.
>>68195693
anyone else think these look like the moth from this directors Godzilla? I feel like he likes the look of a tall, lumbersome creature with stilt-like legs.
>>68197043
what a fucking mess, JJ is a hack but thank god Lucas is no longer in charge
>>68198804
More like only a dumbass would say that. Star Wars' main claim to fame was basically cutting edge. Also not to mention the common knowledge that INDUSTRIAL LIGHT AND MAGIC is and always has been the industry standard in effects and cgi
>>68199299
>The Japanese and Chinese thought the original trilogy was pretty meh.
Which is how they feel about the prequels as well.
And I don't buy it, Disney is clearly showing they give little to no fucks about the PT
>>68199372
I have a feeling any other director would have done that scene exactly the same way.
>>68198469
>Why not fully functional robotic AT-T's that walk, built on a smaller scale
>there are autists so obsessed with practical effects, they want money thrown away on retarded bullshit, just cause.
>>68199372
it's so dense
>>68199090
shit that looks cool
I think costume design is the one and only department in which the prequels are actually better than the original trilogy.
>>68199423
wheres muh Gundam movie with full size functional Gundams!?
>>68199287
Probably the trees. They don't look real. Plus the painted background. But it looks like a good place for a miniature so I can't say anything until it's over.
>>6819938810/10
>>68199434
true that. love the designs of the PT.
the whole asthetic of it was really great. Really wish there was some more input from Lucas with the newer films. that way it wouldn't look all samey.
>>68199199
Thats mostly practical you dumbass...
>>68199471
Oh, so your source is your opinion.
>>68199419
>Which is how they feel about the prequels as well.
No the reception is pretty high for them. But again, there are equal numbers of fans. It mostly breaks down to who grew up with what. It doesn't matter though, they buy star wars merchandise so the company wins.
>Disney is clearly showing they give little to no fucks about the PT
You couldn't be further from the truth. Not only did TFA have reference to the PT but Rebels has Anakin, Ahsoka, Rex, Hondo, and all sorts of PT related items. Many of the comics prominently feature the Clone Wars. Tarkin and Lords Of the Sith bridge the gap between PT and OT. Star Wars: Commander has the Rebels using old Clone equipment too.
Also, there is a new comic about Anakin and Obi-Wan after Naboo.
>>68199478
what, you didn't know that? what's 10/10 about simple facts and truth?
>>68199423
Agreed, they should just use stick figures, aesthetics in a visual medium is irrelevant, Disney marketer scum.
>>68199640
>TFA referenced the prequels
Besides an offhanded mention of a clone army where did this happen? Thats not even strictly a prequel reference as the clone wars were mentioned in ANH.
And who cares about comic shit?
>>68199562
We have established that your source for it being practical is pulling it out of your post Tyrone prolapsed ass and that even if it is model work it is terrible compositing work i.e. awful CG, you utter simplistic twat.
>>68195693
Practical effects are cheaper than digital ones. This has nothing to do with money.
>>68199652
Lucas was pressing ILM past their limits with Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith.
It shows too. The battle courscant is magnificent looking.
>>68196805
That looks terrible. The lighting makes it look like a cartoon.
>>68197133
God, I fucking love those gunships.
>>68199625
I dont know for sure, but it seems like, based off of the leaks, they are emphasizing practical effects for buildings in battle. I know the leaks only cover one day, but it seems like they have most of their props available to them in a staging area. I don't really see the buildings next to the ship in the leaks, where they would usually put a green screen for the CGI. So the fake, but prop looking trees and painted background plus lack of buildings similar to that in the leaks lead me to believe it may be a miniature. the only CG part might be the explosion.
So yeah, it's opinion and speculative. I probably should have said it looks "like" a miniature, but that doesn't cause interesting discussion.
>>68199692
Rey lives in an AT-AT for one, and scavenges old Star Destroyers for two.
I could go father but I'll leave it at that.
>>68199837
>>68199625
here is the imgur link of the current leaks so far. http://imgur.com/a/qhbaW
>>68199692
>Besides an offhanded mention of a clone army where did this happen?
The flags at Maz Cantina are from the PT and TCW. Ewan McGregor voiced Obi-Wan for Rey's vision. The Sith are mentioned and so is balance in the Force.
>Thats not even strictly a prequel reference
It is. Are you just choosing not to listen? A popular fan theory was the Clones were the bad guys but we know they were the predecessors to modern Stormtroopers. It wouldn't make sense for Kylo to mention the Clone army when we've seen what they're capable of.
>And who cares about comic shit?
It's canon which means authors and directors have to obey these rules. This means the prequels/TCW cannot disappear.
>>68199853
Those aren't references to the prequels, have you had a stroke anon?
>>68199692
they didn't mention the clone wars, they mentioned the clone armies/soldiers. Plus, flags from the prequels.
>>68199897
Ah fuck. I messed up.
I guess in that case it would just be the voice of Ewan in the vision scene then right?
>>68199640
>But again, there are equal numbers of fans.
LOL
>You couldn't be further from the truth. Not only did TFA have reference to the PT but Rebels has Anakin, Ahsoka, Rex, Hondo, and all sorts of PT related items.
Yet Rebels exists and ties into the OT, and Clone Wars is dead.
> Many of the comics prominently feature the Clone Wars.
Yea, like 2 or 3, compared to the 10+ for OT.
>Tarkin and Lords Of the Sith bridge the gap between PT and OT. Star Wars: Commander has the Rebels using old Clone equipment too.
So more stuff that moves away from the PT into the OT?
Face it, the PT is dead, and Disney knows it. It has no real value to them anymore. PT fans got like 2 comics and a book. You won't get much more than a comic or a book from now on either. No cartoons, vidya, or especially not anthology movies.
Within a decade the PT will be completely irrelevant to Star Wars, as Disney fills the market with sequel era shit.
Can't complain myself.
>>68197565
That's exactly where CGI fails. Everything is weightless. What the fuck are you even talking about?
>>68198629
there's mcgregor running around on that lizzard
>>68196941
Pablo Hidalgo didn't make Rakata Prime canon, literally the company that made the book added it in to even out the galactic map. The book company trolled all of Disney by making numerous things canon such as the guy being from Taris and Rakata Prime canon.
>>68200126
source?
>>68200126
Taris was in a few of the new novels too
>>68200173
https://twitter.com/pablohidalgo/status/711755073747943424
>>68200187
Legends books or new canon?
>>68200212
new canon, its mentioned in the Tarkin novel
>>68200228
What abotu it?
>>68200263
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Taris
>>68200212
>https://twitter.com/pablohidalgo/status/711755073747943424
HAHAHA, HOLY SHIT.
Nu-canon confirmed for just as irrelevant and just as much as of a clusterfuck as EU.
Thanks bro, you made my evening.
>>68200276
Thanks
>>68200293
I know right? Between the HK shit with Galaxy of Heroes and book companies just making shit up, Disney is going to have to work harder to avoid becoming WoW-tier in terms of canon at this point
>>68200340
Honestly it's a bit depressing. I thought the whole "everything is canon" had so much potential. But Disney just doesn't care, they are doing the same thing Lucas did, and treating non movie stuff as borderline fan fiction. Which is too bad, they could have actually elevated the lore a bit.
>>68199976
>LOL
I sourced a Lucasfiilm executive. You just said LOL.
>Yet Rebels exists and ties into the OT, and Clone Wars is dead.
Nope. It bridges both together. Also, with Kanan, the war never really ended for em.
>Yea, like 2 or 3, compared to the 10+ for OT.
Which heavily feature events from the prequels.
>Face it, the PT is dead, and Disney knows it. It has no real value to them anymore.
You're wrong but I understand your point. We've had over 15 years of Clone Wars material, it's time they're moving on to setting up the series for the ST.
>PT fans got like 2 comics and a book.
All the comics, books and games feature the politics and events from the Clone Wars. Heavily. It's literally impossible not to. Have you even read the books to come to your asinine conclusion? Lords of The Sith has Vader thinking about Ahoksa to the point he almost crashes. Tarkin mentions moments from TCW many times.
>Within a decade the PT will be completely irrelevant to Star Wars
With how they're handling current canon, impossible.
>>68200340
>Between the HK shit with Galaxy of Heroes
tell me more
>>68200458
Don't have time to read, sorry. We'll see in a few years who is right.
Mark my words, Disney will phase out PT to almost completely irrelevance within a decade.
>>68199090
deepest lore
>>68196092
>it's a "george lucas forgets he's writing a fantasy flick where native earth animals don't exist" movie
>>68200486
HK-47 is a character in the freemium game Star Wars Galaxy of Heroes on mobiles. It has plenty of canon characters to the point that they're scraping the bottom of the barrel with fucking Ewoks and Tusken Raiders and characters like Eeth Koth and Ima-Gun-Di. But Pablo said that HK is not canon.
>>68200512
PT?
>>68200452
I think they intended to start out with making certain things canon, and then they realized it was such a clusterfuck that they just said fuck it, but now they're finding more and more things that they wish were canon so they're half-assing confirming things
>>68195983
I cant believe all them backgrounds were paintings
>>68195693
>Make the planet look like it could just be in the pacific on Earth
Why bother?
>>68200529
I never noticed this potter before
BRAVO GEORGE
>>68200684
get rid of the one-biome planet trope that is exclusive to star wars.
