Star Wars: Episode VII - The Force Awakens (USE SPOILER TAGS!)

[Sweetmeats]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

My hunch is this is part of the marketing strategy.

It's really not.

[Braktastic]

Originally Posted by camper

I see nothing in that concept art which implies Luke turns to the Dark Side.

Can you explain what makes you think that's legit?

Its certainly possible for the Luke rumor to be false while the concept art is true.

As I said once already, the picture entitled Dark Knight & Daisy Ridley on millenniumfalcon.com looks like Hammil to me. Not to mention that the source for Making Star Wars original informed speculation said it was supposed to be Luke. I think Hammil's likeness was used for the concept art. Again, is the concept in the film is the million dollar question.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

I hate the idea of an evil Luke. Like down to my very bones.

Heh. Wouldn't it be something if JJ managed to piss off more SW fans than George Lucas could've ever dreamed of?

As for the art, there's glimpses of that big-ass giant lizard thingy we saw in the location photos from a while back (and I do believe it was mentioned somewhere that it's used to pull a ship out of the sand, which is exactly what the art shows), and there's also a piece depicting the outdoor 'Yavin' X-wing base which we saw in those drone photos of that old UK radar/missile complex.

They're going to an awful lot of trouble building entire sets and practical monsters just to throw us off the scent. Or is it the art that's been faked around what we know, or what we think we know, or what they think that we think we know? I love it.

[CinemaBlu]

Originally Posted by R3P0

and James Earl Jones you forget that

I think they kept it from him too until they were ready to record his lines after principal photography.

[jedilips]

No problems with Dark Luke concept whatsoever. There's enough pure heroes in film and literature these days. I like my characters with flaws and there's no reason to not explore Luke's potential dark side leanings.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by Sweetmeats

It's really not.

Yeah, cause people are risking civil damages and possible jail time while LucasFilm sits back and lets it all roll....

[Sweetmeats]

Actually they are. Lucasfilm tends to be mum on stuff like this. Don't acknowledge it and it dies down. The "leaker" can absolutely get in trouble. Luckily, these were not even the best pictures. And the person who shared the ones that showed up online does not have access to the others so hopefully it dies down.

But trust me this is not a coordinated leak from Lucasfilm or Bad Robot. These were not supposed to show up today.

[Booker Dewitt]

I would totally buy a print of this.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Booker Dewitt

I would totally buy a print of this.

It looks similar to the crashed TIE fighter in the fields in the pilot of STAR WARS: REBELS.

[StingingVelvet]

At least they're getting the junk-future aesthetic right, which Lucas pissed all over.

[Booker Dewitt]

Yeah, the grungy-weathered look of the OT is one of the most endearing qualities. The Millenium Falcon looks as slipshod as the dialogue details.

[Kryptonic]

Originally Posted by StingingVelvet

At least they're getting the junk-future aesthetic right, which Lucas pissed all over.

The Prequels took place at a time when it was still relatively peaceful, at least for the first half of the trilogy, so it's not going to look as grungy as the OT in terms of the ships being worn down and such. As you move into ROTS though, that does start to creep in naturally. Also, the OT just tends to take place in more run down locations - Mos Eisley, the trash compactor, Jabba's palace, etc.

[IndyMLVC]

Originally Posted by CinemaBlu

It's possible. They shot fake scenes for TESB. I think the only people who knew during principal photography that Darth Vader was Luke's father were Lucas, Kasdan, Kershner and Hamill.

That's not a "fake scene," though. That's just changing dialogue.

[toddly6666]

Originally Posted by Kryptonic

The Prequels took place at a time when it was still relatively peaceful, at least for the first half of the trilogy, so it's not going to look as grungy as the OT in terms of the ships being worn down and such. As you move into ROTS though, that does start to creep in naturally. Also, the OT just tends to take place in more run down locations - Mos Eisley, the trash compactor, Jabba's palace, etc.

The clean new look of the prequels "days of peace" was not the reason it didnt blend well with original trilogy. The problem is that the prequels looked like blue screen cgi sets while the original trilogy looked real. Very simple.

[Kryptonic]

Originally Posted by toddly6666

The clean new look of the prequels "days of peace" was not the reason it didnt blend well with original trilogy. The problem is that the prequels looked like blue screen cgi sets while the original trilogy looked real. Very simple.

I don't care if it's a digital set or one constructed of plywood. I don't care if it's a puppet or a digitally animated character. NONE OF IT IS REAL. Movies are an illusion. The only difference is the tool.

[Dreamliner330]

Originally Posted by Kryptonic

The only difference s the tool.

It's funny to see blue screen and not CGI.

Even though CGI looks very good, it also tends to looks very fake.

[iamsometal]

Originally Posted by Dreamliner330

It's funny to see blue screen and not CGI.

Even though CGI looks very good, it also tends to looks very fake.

Agreed. Compositing practical shots over footage of practical sets (like the redwood forest shot for the speeder-bike chase in ROTJ) is more convincing than purely CGI settings.

As beautiful as some of the matte paintings were in ROTJ, there were definitely some obvious shots that were mattes. The hangar scene before they depart for Endor look particularly obvious. But it still looks less cartoony than pure CGI. Even with the practical miniatures used in the AOTC and ROTS, it was all surrounded by so much CGI that it just all looked like CGI. One thing I'll say about TPM is that it is the least artificial looking of the 3 (with the exception of the Gungan vs. Droid battle at the end, that looked like 100% late 90's CGI).

The awkward manipulation of actors' movements was also something that screamed artificial in the PT films. Like some of the weird things they did with Obi-Wan and Dooku in the beginning of ROTS.

[Kryptonic]

Originally Posted by Dreamliner330

It's funny to see blue screen and not CGI.

Even though CGI looks very good, it also tends to looks very fake.

Please. The matte lines, transparency, and other anomalies of of optical blue screen photography is painful to watch.

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by Dreamliner330

It's funny to see blue screen and not CGI.

Even though CGI looks very good, it also tends to looks very fake.

Everything not real tends to look very fake...at least to me.
CGI just does a much better job of making the fake blend better, visually.

[Dreamliner330]

Originally Posted by rickah88

Everything not real tends to look very fake...at least to me.

CGI just does a much better job of making the fake blend better, visually.

Right. I still don't think I've looked at an obvious CGI shot like a spaceship and though oh, that looks real. Maybe Gravity.

With CGI there just isn't emotional investment because you know it's not real.