RIP Carrie Fisher

[Blarghagh]

While personally I find rebuilding a dead person for a film to be icky and ethically problematic, I expect there'd be less fuss than if they recast. I know people who are still mad that they recast The Oracle in the last Matrix film.

[Guard Dog]

Whatever they do it's going to be three of four years down the road before we see it. A lot can change in that time and as we get farther away from her passing maybe we'll be ok with it.

[Malcador]

I did notice you could see the lights through Tarkin when he and Krennick have their meeting.

[Hurlshort]

I was kind of excited to see Moff Tarkin. They barely develop his character in episode 4, and I read his book (one of the few SW books I've read) so it made me happy to see him get some screen time. It wasn't any worse than CGI Tom Hanks in Polar Express.

[Blarghagh]

Well... Wikipedia on THAT movie's reception:

 

The character design and animation were criticized for dipping into the uncanny valley.^%5B14%5DPeter Travers of Rolling Stone gave the film 1 star out of 4, and called it "a failed and lifeless experiment in which everything goes wrong".^%5B15%5D Stephanie Zacharek of Salon gave the film 1.5 stars out of 5 and said, "I could probably have tolerated the incessant jitteriness of The Polar Express if the look of it didn't give me the creeps."^%5B16%5DGeoff Pevere of the Toronto Star stated, "If I were a child, I'd have nightmares. Come to think of it, I did anyway."^%5B17%5DPaul Clinton from CNN called it "at best disconcerting, and at worst, a wee bit horrifying".^%5B18%5D

Not exactly high praise.

Edited December 29, 2016 by TrueNeutral

[majestic]

I know people who are still mad that they recast The Oracle in the last Matrix film.

 

There is only one Matrix movie, hence there is no way anyone has been recast. Anything else is a lie told by the machines.

[Hurlshort]

I probably should have added a smiley to my Polar Express comment. Yes, that was a creepy use of CGI. After watching that I was more forgiving of Disney's efforts in Rogue One.  

[teknoman2]

as many critics said

it would be best if they made Tarkin's CG presence a holographic projection. due to the blurry and transparent form of a hologram the fact that he is in CG would go unnoticed and even if people did notice, they would just say "it was a hologram"

in the case of Leia, they could just keep her with her back turned on the camera. she was an easily recognizable character without showing her face.  

Edited December 30, 2016 by teknoman2

[Rosbjerg]

Star Wars is as much about pushing technological barriers in cinematography, as it is about lightsabers, knights and princesses.

 

I could'vebeen done better, but I thought they did a great job with it tbh.

[Gorgon]

Or just use an actor who looks vaugely like them. The scenes were OK but generally actors tend to do better with other actors and someone must have read out the lines. Why not just give him the actual part and you know we can all pretend together. That way they can do reshoots and generally have more options. 

[Blarghagh]

That's what they did, though. Tarkin's face is placed over the actor's face in most shots. Guy was in full costume and did the lines but had mocap points all over his face and collar.

[Zoraptor]

Pretty sure that's even (essentially) what they did with Jar Jar all those years ago. Ahmed Best walked around holding a Jar Jar lollipop as well as delivering the lines, then Jar Jar was CGIed in over him. It's certainly how Gollum was done in LOTR with whole body replacement rather than just face. If there's a problem with the system it's that expectations have moved on from Who Framed Roger Rabbit? and there's definitely an inherent difficulty in acting well in front of blue/ green screens where the surroundings and what is happening are being described to you rather than you seeing them.

Edited December 30, 2016 by Zoraptor

[Blarghagh]

Actually, Ahmed Best wasn't so much holding a prop as he was in full costume.