Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.
Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker **Spoilers from post 2076**
Comments
-
-
Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,668 CMod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 21548
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'.
0 -
Join Date:Posts: 33867
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
0 -
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 slaves0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
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: »0 -
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.;)0 -
-
The cynicism in this thread, its like a group of taxi drivers standing together in a taxi rank
0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
Join Date:Posts: 33867
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.0 -
-
Join Date:Posts: 33867
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 0 -
-
Join Date:Posts: 33867
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 presenceWe 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 spitball0 -
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.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 33867
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? 0 -
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 headThe shround of the thread discontent has fallen. Begun the Episode IX discussion has!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 0 -
Advertisement
-
Join Date:Posts: 33867
-
Total flop and a financial loss for DisneyWhat's a bad idea? We don't know anything though, and people are already writing off the film based on assumption,
You sound like David75 :eek:
I haven't seen anyone write off this film yet.
However I do see people disagreeing with bringing Leia and Lando back and expressing doubt over the potentially quality of the story and execution of the film.
Perfectly OK IMO, this is a discussion forum isn't it, for a film that's not out for 18 months 0 -
Snarky, not scarcely the trough of despair you seem to think it is.
Perhaps not, yet. Though sure as the force being with a Skywalker, this thread will rival a Mos Eisley canteena before long...:oTheboinkmaster wrote: »You sound like David75 :eek:
Interesting, who is this David75 chap? He sounds like a nice person to have a reasoned debate with 0 -
-
-
Total flop and a financial loss for DisneyI reckon they'll do the smart thing, and construct a scene that plays to the strengths of whatever footage they have left, and it'll be short, meaningful, and sweet. I honestly can't see them going down any other path.
All recent evidence to the contrary
I wouldn't have confidence that's what they'll do.
Smarter thing would be to have her die in opening crawl and kick off film with touching funeral scene etc. Maybe opening shot being her coffin in space shooting out of a spaceship and then amazing sweeping shot with music through ship etc. You could do it in a really great way and then get on with the story.
Remember the fan outrage and dismay when they announced Solo?! Look what happened...0 -
-
Interesting, who is this David75 chap? He sounds like a nice person to have a reasoned debate with
Wouldnt get much of a debate, you could have Darth Vader reading the newspaper on a toilet seat for 2 hours and he would say its the best movie ever. :pac:
But eh, i think hes banned now
Oh and opening a star wars movie with a funeral wouldnt be the Disney thing to do 0 -
Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,668 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Join Date:Posts: 21548
Why though? Do you mean to digitally take Leia out of the physical surroundings of the unseen footage shots, and place her in a more fitting environment? Or do you mean they'll actually alter her appearance? The former is probably a given (and perfectly fine imo), but what evidence suggests the latter is probable? There'd be almost universal backlash for messing with the appearance of Fisher, I find it hard to believe they'll do it.
They'll have to alter her appearance otherwise she'll be wearing the exact same outfit and hairstyle as TFA and it will be obvious as hell that they are just using deleted scenes. They'll also be integrating her footage into new scenes featuring the main characters and that may require CGI to change her mouth movements, etc. Even if they cut around that, there's still going to be a lot of CGI involved and the audience will be watching for it.
I'll remind everyone of what the last attempt to CGI augment an actor looked like:
0 -
Advertisement
-
Advertisement