Discussion in 'Star Wars: Episode VII and Beyond (Archive)' started by BOBAFLEXX, Jan 23, 2013.
SO THEM CG ALIENS AND THE ONES IN THE SUITS HUH GAIZ?!
Isn't CGI used in his character though? That isn't just makeup or a mask is it?
It's just make-up and a mask. They have behind the scenes footage showing him walking around in full costume and make-up. There's no CGI (or, if there is, it's extremely minor, but I doubt even that).
Check at about 4:10 in this video:
I think his face has some CGI. Minor I am sure, but it looks lit up in a way I don't think you can do with just makeup. Maybe one of these movie people on this site knows (mods that work in the industry); I'd be interested in knowing. Funny, you can see the resemblance in the actor's face to the alien. Boy, that blond actress (who is a redhead in the movie) sure is gorgeous. Thanks for vid.
To be honest, I very much doubt it's CGI. It's most likely the lighting. Don't forget that the lighting on the stage/set is going to be very different than in a dressing room. At the very most, I'd think it might be post-produciton tweaking (such as color correction), but not CGI.
That video, interestingly enough, shows just how many aliens in the PT were people in costumes and masks, which I think is cool.
My rule of thumb is that they should go with whatever looks most realistic.
I've always loved the Kaminoans in AOTC, for example, even though they're completely CGI, but I also like the Wookies who are just guys in suits (even in ROTS).
There was one of the mods who works in the industry that was saying people think there is more CGI in the PT than there really is, that they mixed it so seamlessly, you often can't tell. Pretty cool.
The other day, my roommate (who knows nothing about Star Wars) saw the fight between Yoda and Palpatine in the senate chamber, etc. Seeing Yoda jumping all over the place, my roommate laughed, saying that was the dumbest thing he'd ever seen. Obviously, he speaks for nobody but himself, but to someone without any Star Wars prejudices, I think his viewpoint says a lot. The problem with CGI aliens is that they look like a flat picture. The sense of depth isn't 100% right.
The last prequel came out more than seven years ago. Technology has improved.
Something tells me your roommate wasn't necessarily saying that because Yoda was CGI.
The guy who does the aliens in The Men In Black films would be worth a shout.
I'm on OT guy, so no flaming please but....
while the original Jabba is great, I wish they would fix his eyes with CGI. There are certain shots where they don't move properly and it temporarily distracts (me) from the story.
Also, original Yoda puppet was fantastic, but again there are certain shots where the eyes don't work properly and again I think they could be fixed with CGI.
And for any humanoid alien in the ST, that is the route I'd like them to go. Masks, make up - finished off with CGI.
So in reply to the OP, I like a mixture of both well done as opposed to practical vs CGI.
Wasn't it like 6-8 Actors in wookiee suits, then multiplied with CGI? Otherwise it would have got REALLY spendy, really quickly considering the amount of detail put into those costumes...
My roommate saw wolfman and was so scared by the realism he ran out of the room.
Yeah, that's true, but I don't know whether it's 6-8 guys in a suit with the rest of the Wookiees in CG, or whether those other Wookiees are just digitally composited in (that is, the same few actors over and over again).
BTW, anybody notice how some of those Wookiees were wearing double bandoliers, same as the original Chewbacca concept are did? pretty cool.
Tion Medon is a guy in a suit and prosthetics. Accept it people, you don't know what's real and what's not, that's how good ILM is.
Weren't the VFX in Men in Black movies ILM's work? BTW?
I don't know why I bother with this but...
All the aliens in both trilogies can't be grouped as being the same.
If you want to see non-humans looking like more than just Star Trek aliens with facial differences doing a lot of action, getting chopped by lightsabers without cut-away shots, you're going to see them realized in CGI, just like the droids will be realized in CGI. That's just the way it is done now. Take the Ithorian, for example. Hammerhead looked perfect sitting in the cantina for just one or two shots (and as an action figure) but his kind really stupid and clunky as a mask in the crowd scenes of the podrace. If more were done with them, they would have to be computer generated. I'm tired of the jaded nostalgia where people crying about modern techniques ruining the Classic Trilogy seem to ignore that it used state-of-the-art modern techniques and seeming to downplay how its effects were done. The way some people whine about it, you'd think the original OT was as clunky and cheap-looking as Plan 9 from Outer Space, or an original Star Trek episode. It was far better than that, and if the CGI were around then, that would have been employed. I'm sure some of you have seen the 1978 CGI test footage of X-Wings.
As people like Lord Chazza said, I think Yoda's "mad lightsaber skillz" just look fundamentally ridiculous. It's not a CGI issue as such.
All things considered, OT Chewbacca, Ackbar and others were pretty incredible.
I far prefer them to the perfect sterility of CGI.
CGI Yoda and so forth did give them more options for action scenes however.
That makes sense. The scene wouldn't have been possible without CGI. So even though the scene was imagined in a ridiculous way, it was made possible by CGI.
I am growing a little tired about the whole practical vs CGI debate to be honest. I grew up with the golden age of practical effects in the late 70's and 80's and to be honest they hit the ceiling on what they could accomplish. Like any tool in the artists box, it is how you use it that counts. Bad CG can looks as awful as a puppet with the wires showing or jerky stop motion. The key is using it effectively either way. To this day I still can't believe how well the T-Rex holds up in Jurassic Park. The mix of CG, animatronics, and good old fashioned sound design make that one of the most believable movie creations to this day. The liquid metal effect of the T-1000 is another good example.
Love or hate the prequels, there are some stunning shots there that could not have been done with CG and some that would have benefited from a little less. Even in the much maligned Special Editions I will say things like the Jedi Rocks segment and Greedo shooting first add NOTHING to the story and I hate them, and the Jabba scene in A New Hope should never have seen the light of day. But I do love the new Death Star Trench Run additions, the cleanup of the Landspeeder smudge, the expansion of Cloud City so it actually looks like a city, etc.Someone who can do a digital matte painting has just as much artistic merit as someone who did a matte painting on glass. The whole argument seems silly to me when I hear the newer movies are nothing but green screen. Do you think they actually built the entire death star hangar outside of a few practical pieces? I don't even think people realize how much model work went into the newer Star Wars movies.
As long as they can strike a balance between practical and CG effects I am happy. The only thing I would like to see more of is more location shooting with a few digital enhancements to make it seem more otherworldly.
I should. She would probably laugh at "Guido" too
BTW. It does if I'm actually older than you
That would be pretty pathetic if true. Someone older than me who's self-esteem is still built on infantile little games of correcting people about meaningless spelling errors on the internet is way late in the game to still be acting like that. Anyway, I'm done with this conversation.
Me too Guido.