Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker **Spoilers from post 2076**

Marje

Don't see a thread (delete or merge if there is one)

Star Wars: Episode IX will begin filming at London’s Pinewood Studios on August 1, 2018. J.J. Abrams returns to direct the final installment of the Skywalker saga. Abrams co-wrote the screenplay with Chris Terrio.

Returning cast members include Daisy Ridley, Adam Driver, John Boyega, Oscar Isaac, Lupita Nyong’o, Domhnall Gleeson, Kelly Marie Tran, Joonas Suotamo, and Billie Lourd. Joining the cast of Episode IX are Naomi Ackie and Richard E. Grant, who will be joined by veteran Star Wars actors Mark Hamill, Anthony Daniels, and Billy Dee Williams, who will reprise his role as Lando Calrissian.

The role of Leia Organa will once again be played by Carrie Fisher, using previously unreleased footage shot for Star Wars: The Force Awakens. “We desperately loved Carrie Fisher,” says Abrams. “Finding a truly satisfying conclusion to the Skywalker saga without her eluded us. We were never going to recast, or use a CG character. With the support and blessing from her daughter, Billie, we have found a way to honor Carrie’s legacy and role as Leia in Episode IX by using unseen footage we shot together in Episode VII.”

https://www.starwars.com/news/star-wars-episode-ix-cast-announced

Kerplunk124

All about dat Lando

Sad Professor

They are full of it. This is basically CGI Leia confirmed. The only other unseen footage of Leia from TFA that I'm aware of is Maz handing Luke's lightsaber to Leia. Even if they take the close-ups from that scene and that's the only scene she appears in, there will still be some serious CGI involved. Of course, they'll just lie and claim it was all from this mysterious unseen footage.

Abrams is going to screw this up. What was so hard about *scrolling text* "Star Wars: Episode 9..... General Leia has died...."?

pixelburp

Yeah, the use of the term "CGI character" is loaded; to me that'd imply something like Tarkin - or indeed the younger Leia in Rogue One - a fully digital actor, whereas I'd say they're going to reuse actual footage, embellished with CGI (maybe overdubbing ala Forest Gump) which could look just as bad.

Agree on the missed opportunity to just open with a punchy "General Leia has died..." they're gilding the lily here

Slydice

Total flop and a financial loss for Disney

The shround of the thread discontent has fallen.

Begun the Episode IX discussion has!



ref: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6aD-m7Cw84

Drumpot

Slydice wrote: »

The shround of the thread discontent has fallen.

Begun the Episode IX discussion has!



ref: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6aD-m7Cw84

I predict there will be plenty of respectful conversations with people calmly discussing the direction Disney are taking the franchise....

branie2

Runaway hit highest gross beating The force Awakens

I thought that Leia wouldn't be shown, out of respect to Carrie Fisher's family and her memory

Sad Professor

branie2 wrote: »

I thought that Leia wouldn't be shown, out of respect to Carrie Fisher's family and her memory

Kennedy was quite definitive about that, but I guess JJ felt otherwise.

It seems there was probably more unreleased TFA deleted scenes featuring Leia than I thought. In addition to Maz giving her the lightsaber, there was also a brief conversation between Leia and Rey at the end and possibly a speech after Starkiller's destruction. Quite a lot for them to work with, but it will obviously involve a lot of CGI augmentation. Hopefully it won't be awful.

johnny_ultimate

My first thought reading the announcement:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U58IdBjMeS4

nix

It worked in the Sopranos, can hardly notice it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pqk0-HrMQyo

Sad Professor

^ That's even worse than I remember it.

johnny_ultimate

Was absolutely baffled when I watched that back in the day, it was super shoddy even at the time.

It’s like those ****ty social media videos when a photo of someone’s face is put on a different video clip.

xper

Personally, I don't think Leia dying off screen and announcing it in the scroll meets the satisfactory threshold, she's too central a character to be treated that way. Presumably they will put in a minimal number of Leia scenes in order to tie off her story in whatever they regard as appropriate.

I would say its a comparable scenario to that faced by Ridley Scott when Oliver Reed snuffed it half way through filming Gladiator. Reuse of already shot scenes, overdubbing and stand-ins got them out of that fix without going full cgi (which would not have been up to the job anyway in 2000). Yes, you can see the joins. You always will no matter how clever the tricks uses - you know the actor is dead. Scott, by necessity, used the Reed character as little as possible in the remaining scenes. Hopefully, JJ will take the same attitude - though I am not sure if less-is-more is his or Disney's mantra.

I am far more concerned about how JJ is going to resurrect a coherent storyline following Last Jedi. But, hey, Lando is back!

judeboy101

Lando :-(

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=l4AmSVb6Hew

pixelburp

Holy god who made that Sopranos CGI and thought "yup, good enough!" Love the way the lightning kept changing from what I presume was the various footage used.

Sad Professor

Gladiator worked because Reed was alive for most of the film. By the time his character dies you don't care whether it looks right or not. It's like the xenomorph suddenly turning into a very obvious man in a suit at the end of Alien. It's dead at that point and the movie is over so you don't care. I also think they get away with CGI Leia in Rogue One for this reason. But with Episode 9, everyone knows Fisher didn't live to shoot any scenes for the film and will be looking for the seams. If they are smart they'll get around this by only having her in the end of the movie.

Goodshape

Disappointing box office take less than a billion

I suspect it'll be fine tbh. They've probably got a little bit more of a budget to work with than The Sopranos had 10+ years ago.

SimonTemplar

I don't think I can form an opinion about the Fisher footage until I see it in the film. But for it to work within the film, they need to either based the plot around some of her existing dialog or for that dialog to be some vague general stuff about the force, dark / light, etc...

Everyone can agree that Leia dying offscreen is not ideal but nothing is ideal about this situation. But everyone knows what happened so nobody would argue with a title crawl explanation or mentioned in dialog as the film makers were backed into a corner. However, existing footage incorporated badly could be risky.

Without knowing what that unseen footage is, my best guess is that she boards a ship and that ship will be attacked and destroyed by the first order prompting the rest of the plot. If that attack is a sudden and swift one, they don't even need a shot of Leia in the ship. Just the ship taking off and then exploding.

We'll see.

Sad Professor

If they are going to bring her back using CGI and deleted scenes, I certainly hope it isn't just to kill her off.

The post-Starkiller speech (if it exists) and her conversation with Rey could be used at the start of the film, while the footage of Maz handing her the lightsaber could be used very effectively at the end of the film. There's also the short deleted scenes from the Blu-ray, which she's quite good in.

Theboinkmaster

Total flop and a financial loss for Disney

Goodshape wrote: »

I suspect it'll be fine tbh. They've probably got a little bit more of a budget to work with than The Sopranos had 10+ years ago.

Like they did with Rogue One?! Looked atrocious TBH so I wouldn't assume it'll be OK.

The fact that they want to include her in the film as well as Lando isn't a good sign at all TBH :mad:

pixelburp

Has there yet been a single example of this sort of recycled footage, or fully CGI character, that has worked? They nearly always come across as false and as Sad Professor mentioned, the fact we know Fisher sadly passed before production began we're all going to be subconsciously looking for the cracks the moment Leia walks on screen.

It just feels like inviting more backlash and pedantry from what's already the most toxic fan community on the internet as it is.

Theboinkmaster

Total flop and a financial loss for Disney

pixelburp wrote: »

Has there yet been a single example of this sort of recycled footage, or fully CGI character, that has worked? They nearly always come across as false and as Sad Professor mentioned, the fact we know Fisher sadly passed before production began we're all going to be subconsciously looking for the cracks the moment Leia walks on screen.

It just feels like inviting more backlash and pedantry from what's already the most toxic fan community on the internet as it is.

It's just a stupid thing to do and smacks of pure arrogance. It's a situation that's impossible to win.

She'd dead, just leave her out of the film, note she dies in opening crawl and maybe even kick off the film with her funeral and move on. There are many ways you could do it effectively without her actually appearing on screen.

SnakePlissken

pixelburp wrote: »

Has there yet been a single example of this sort of recycled footage.

Brandon Lee in The Crow is the one that immediately jumps out, but difference being he had already shot 70% of the script before he was killed. The CGI and recycled footage used was to fill in the blanks not construct entirely new scenes such as was hilarious displayed by resurrecting Tony Soprano's mother for one final scene.

Goodshape

Disappointing box office take less than a billion

Star Trek: Deep Space Nine did a pretty good job of creating new(ish) scenes with old footage in Trials and Tribble-ations from 1996 – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trials_and_Tribble-ations

The scenes weren't drastically different but it was 20 years ago.

Wedwood

When everyone knows this was to be Leia's movie, then if they have enough material to give her a proper send off, then fair enough. After over 40 years as one of the main characters, a sudden off screen exit would be more jarring. You can only presume they've already shown the family how they will do it and have got their blessing.

PS, I read somewhere, all the main actors had their faces scanned in 3D for future use, so maybe there'll be a combination of real and cgi footage.

Goodshape

Disappointing box office take less than a billion

Wedwood wrote: »

got their blessing.

Kiith

I don't really have a problem with CGI Leah. Keep her screen time to a minimum, and only have here in the forefront of a few scenes. As said above, neither solution is ideal, but her character is pretty important to the series, so killing her off off screen wouldn't work.

McLoughlin

Does anyone feel like that Lando is being shoehorned into the film due to the success of Lando in Solo ?

Theboinkmaster

Total flop and a financial loss for Disney

Kiith wrote: »

so killing her off off screen wouldn't work.

Why not?!

judeboy101

McLoughlin wrote: »

Does anyone feel like that Lando is being shoehorned into the film due to the success of Lando in Solo ?

What success? The lando I knew was a man's man. The one Howard directed was feminazis' man, designed by a committee of females who shop exclusively at 'women and women first'.

Theboinkmaster

Total flop and a financial loss for Disney

McLoughlin wrote: »

Does anyone feel like that Lando is being shoehorned into the film due to the success of Lando in Solo ?

whatever the reason it's a really bad idea.

Kiith

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

Why not?!

I just don't think it would be a fitting end to one of the main characters in the story. If it was someone brought in during this trilogy, it woulnd't be as bad, but she was one of the main characters in this arc and holds a very important place in the hearts of a lot of fans (even after her awful scenes in the last one).

Call me sentimental, but it'd feel wrong to just have some text saying she's dead.

Sad Professor

judeboy101 wrote: »

What success? The lando I knew was a man's man. The one Howard directed was feminazis' man, designed by a committee of females who shop exclusively at 'women and women first'.

pixelburp

judeboy101 wrote: »

What success? The lando I knew was a man's man. The one Howard directed was feminazis' man, designed by a committee of females who shop exclusively at 'women and women first'.

The Lando I knew was a cameo character with a penchant for capes & a bald robot slave. Let's not get carried away because Billy Dee Williams is a charismatic actor. You could fit Lando's biography on a postage stamp.

Oh wait, sorry it's Star Wars. Go ahead, get carried away.

Unless you were being sarcastic, in which case, well done

judeboy101

pixelburp wrote: »

The Lando I knew was a cameo character with a penchant for capes & a bald robot slave. Let's not get carried away because Billy Dee Williams is a charismatic actor. You could fit Lando's biography on a postage stamp.

Oh wait, sorry it's Star Wars. Go ahead, get carried away.

Unless you were being sarcastic, in which case, well done

Rhett butler wore a cape and had slaves

Theboinkmaster

Total flop and a financial loss for Disney

Kiith wrote: »

I just don't think it would be a fitting end to one of the main characters in the story. If it was someone brought in during this trilogy, it woulnd't be as bad, but she was one of the main characters in this arc and holds a very important place in the hearts of a lot of fans (even after her awful scenes in the last one).

Call me sentimental, but it'd feel wrong to just have some text saying she's dead.

If the alternative is some crap scene leftover from TFA and some CGI I'd say having her die off screen is a lesser evil.

Also you wouldn't have just the opening crawl txt, you could have a very touching funeral scene etc. There are definitely ways around it.

Agent Coulson

Richard E Grant being linked to play

Thrawn

.

Spon Farmer

McLoughlin wrote: »

Does anyone feel like that Lando is being shoehorned into the film due to the success of Lando in Solo ?

No because we haven't seen Episode IX yet. Way too early to comment on it.

judeboy101 wrote: »

What success? The lando I knew was a man's man. The one Howard directed was feminazis' man, designed by a committee of females who shop exclusively at 'women and women first'.

Clearly you didn't "know" Lando very well because he is a ladies man, not a "man's man".

Sad Professor wrote: »

Spon Farmer

pixelburp wrote: »

The Lando I knew was a cameo character with a penchant for capes & a bald robot slave. Let's not get carried away because Billy Dee Williams is a charismatic actor. You could fit Lando's biography on a postage stamp.

Oh wait, sorry it's Star Wars. Go ahead, get carried away.

Unless you were being sarcastic, in which case, well done

Lobot wasn't a robot.;)

DivingDuck

I'll wait until I see how it's written and how competent the CGI is before giving a final verdict, but for now, I'm pleased they're not going with killing her off in the scroll— Leia was a central character who was beloved by the audience, and she deserves a good send-off.

...Of course, if they can't pull off a believable inclusion of her either with CGI or old footage or some combination, it doesn't count as "a good send-off", and they'd probably have been better to open the movie with her funeral or something.

It doesn't dampen my excitement for the movie any, though— if anything, I'm more excited to see how well it works.




(And even if it doesn't work, I'll probably still be glad they tried, because if they hadn't, I'd have probably complained about it for years.)

Inviere

The cynicism in this thread, its like a group of taxi drivers standing together in a taxi rank

Theboinkmaster

Total flop and a financial loss for Disney

Inviere wrote: »

The cynicism in this thread, its like a group of taxi drivers standing together in a taxi rank

Given how absolutely sh!te TLJ and Solo were I think we are 100% right to be cynical.

Inviere

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

Given how absolutely sh!te TLJ and Solo were

I loved TLJ, & felt Solo's biggest crime was that it was only ok. It's all very subjective.

I think we are 100% right to be cynical.

The Star Wars 'fanbase' has become a far greater threat to Star Wars than George Lucas or Disney at this stage.

pixelburp

Inviere wrote: »

The cynicism in this thread, its like a group of taxi drivers standing together in a taxi rank

Who's cynical? It's a fair point of discussion to worry / debate over the small matter of how the story's going to work in Carrie Fisher's passing. The announcement that they're using 'old footage' raises as many questions as it answers, and the shadow of CGI enhancement gives cause for concern - considering almost no movie has yet managed a convincing CGI human.

Star Wars fandom may be a toxic hive of scum and villainy, but doesn't mean every ... negatively infused discussion should be lumped in with the 'no black stormtroopers' or 'Last Jedi gave me herpes' crowd.

Inviere

pixelburp wrote: »

Who's cynical? It's a fair point of discussion to worry / debate over the small matter of how the story's going to work in Carrie Fisher's passing.

Of course, it's an important discussion point, but we don't know what unseen material Disney have of Fisher, there could be loads of unused footage for all we know...and yet, in post #3, we get "Abrams is going to screw this up", it's hard not to call that cynical.

The announcement that they're using 'old footage' raises as many questions as it answers, and the shadow of CGI enhancement gives cause for concern - considering almost no movie has yet managed a convincing CGI human.

Who said anything about a CGI character though? Abrams own words counteract this notion:

"We were never going to recast, or use a CG character. With the support and blessing from her daughter, Billie, we have found a way to honor Carrie’s legacy and role as Leia in Episode IX by using unseen footage we shot together in Episode VII"

I don't feel the above is ambiguous, or leaves wiggle room. They're going to use unseen footage, to close the door on Leia's story. They're not going to recast her, they're not going to recreate her using CGI, they are using unseen footage. They're acknowledging that Leia/Fisher need a sensitive, careful, and fitting conclusion, not one that can be achieved or that would be acceptable to use a CG replacement. Fine, cool, I look forward to seeing how they've chosen to see the saga out.

Star Wars fandom may be a toxic hive of scum and villainy, but doesn't mean every ... negatively infused discussion should be lumped in with the 'no black stormtroopers' or 'Last Jedi gave me herpes' crowd.

I get not everyone can be pleased, but calls of doom, failure, and all round misery before the first camera even rolls is out and out cynicism. It's unneeded, uncalled for, and frankly, awful to have to soft through.

pixelburp

Inviere wrote: »

Of course, it's an important discussion point, but we don't know what unseen material Disney have of Fisher, there could be loads of unused footage for all we know...and yet, in post #3, we get "Abrams is going to screw this up", it's hard not to call that cynical.

Who said anything about a CGI character though? Abrams own words counteract this notion:

Honestly, JJ Abrams is a bullsh*t artist and wouldn't trust a word he says. Between his dissembling with Lost, or outright lies over 'John Harrison' in Star Trek: Into Darkness, I take anything he says with a generous pinch of salt. He's the master of the 'Mystery Box' trope and I'd extend that predilection to his public statements.

He says they won't use a CG character, but how else but through dubbing and/or CGI can they fill the blanks? Unless they propose that she just stands in the corner saying nothing, or by a miracle of chance the Episode IX script perfectly overlaps some convenient footage shot for Episode VII. It asks questions.

Now who knows, maybe the sum total of her appearance is simply to be killed off during the movie, instead of off-screen before the credits roll, but that still feels like a needless inclusion.

Declaring opinions as cynicism and misery isn't particularly friendly or improve discussion over something people obviously feel is a bad idea. Yes, wait n' see is all well and good but the news was announced she'd be in the film - it's hard not to discuss something intentionally disseminated for discussion

Inviere

pixelburp wrote: »

Declaring opinions as cynicism and misery isn't particularly friendly or improve discussion over something people obviously feel is a bad idea.

What's a bad idea? We don't know anything though, and people are already writing off the film based on assumption, vague guesswork, and emotional bias..., it's entirely valid to call that behavior out as cynical, because it is. It shouldn't be dressed up as valid opinion, certainly not in the context of a mature debate anyway. Please don't misconstrue my posts as attacking peoples valid opinions, that's certainly not what at all what I'm doing. Opinions form the basis of discussion, that's what we're trying to establish here.

pixelburp

Inviere wrote: »

What's a bad idea?

Bringing back Leia. Full stop. I'd thought that was clear from most peoples' posts. I think the script should kill her off-screen and let the start of the film be the fallout of her death.

I should point out I actually LIKE Abram's work: MI:3 was great; Fringe remains one of my favourite TV shows; I even have fondness for his less celebrated work like Super 8; etc. But he has tired habits in his approach, and a precedent of waffling non-truths, that makes cynicism - heck, just basic caution - the smart play here.

Now, it's the third, 'final' part of a film series, so it'll take some work by Abrams to cram a Mystery Box into the script, but neither the franchise or director/writer is an unknown quantity here. It's not like people are immediately sh*tting on... say, a Yoda spin-off. Episode IX already has presence

Inviere wrote: »

We don't know anything though, and people are already writing off the film based on assumption, vague guesswork, and emotional bias..., it's entirely valid to call that behavior out as cynical, because it is. It shouldn't be dressed up as valid opinion, certainly not in the context of a mature debate anyway. Please don't misconstrue my posts as attacking peoples valid opinions, that's certainly not what at all what I'm doing. Opinions form the basis of discussion, that's what we're trying to establish here.

You say you're not attacking posters, yet the previous sentence claims our 'cynicism' isn't a valid opinion Cynicism is a perfectly valid position to take. You may not like it, its dark caution may rankle, but it's only another notch on the sliding scale between "rank negativity" and "unrealistic hype". Personally, I find hyperventilating "OMG this is going to be amazing!" tedious - the recent Comic Con was like Kryptonite haha - so I'm not unsympathetic to your POV

OBVIOUSLY it's all up in the air - given this is already the second director assigned to the production, clearly a lot can still change again - but doesn't mean we can't spitball

Inviere

pixelburp wrote: »

Bringing back Leia. Full stop.

There's definite scope for debate there, should it be done off screen, should they reuse unseen footage, and so forth.

You say you're not attacking posters, yet the previous sentence claims our 'cynicism' isn't a valid opinion

So writing off the film before shooting even begins is valid? In the Films forum? Has Disney taken over here too?

OBVIOUSLY it's all up in the air - given this is already the second director assigned to the production, clearly a lot can still change again - but doesn't mean we can't spitball

I'll stop rocking the boat, I personally find the constant "Disney ruined my childhood", "this is going to be crap", "JJ will ruin this", "they're lying, I bet they're going to use a full on CG Leia" stuff as not very worthy of discussion.

pixelburp

Inviere wrote: »

There's definite scope for debate there, should it be done off screen, should they reuse unseen footage, and so forth.

So writing off the film before shooting even begins is valid? In the Films forum? Has Disney taken over here too?

Uhm. Actually, TBH dude, I just had a quick flick across the thread and don't see anyone 'writing off' the film. In fact most related chat is broadly a "wait n' see" variation mixed with thoughts on how they'll use Leia in the story - a bit of snark all right with Sopranos comparisons, but I'm not now sure who you're actually angry at here?

By all accounts this thread has been quite tame and open ended; I mean have you seen the Last Jedi thread?

Inviere

pixelburp wrote: »

Uhm. Actually, TBH dude, I just had a quick flick across the thread and don't see anyone 'writing off' the film.

Post #3 below sets the tone (I've edited out the non misery bits :P)

Sad Professor wrote: »

They are full of it. This is basically CGI Leia confirmed...Abrams is going to screw this up.

I think Slydice and Drumpot hit the nail on the head

Slydice wrote: »

The shround of the thread discontent has fallen. Begun the Episode IX discussion has!

Drumpot wrote: »

I predict there will be plenty of respectful conversations with people calmly discussing the direction Disney are taking the franchise....

I'm not now sure who you're actually angry at here?

Who's angry?

By all accounts this thread has been quite tame and open ended; I mean have you seen the Last Jedi thread?

Nah, checked out of that thread a long time ago, something about a wretched hive of scum and villainy comes to mind