There is no "might be" here. It's a known fact.
The Mandalorian and Grogu (2026)
- Thread starter Booji
- Start date
I accept that it is a known fact.
I won't be satisfied until Plif and the Hoojib make an onscreen appearance.
A TV movie couldn't afford nearly that many aliens.
Of course. I only said it kind of bugged me, not seriously bugged me.
It's always been the way that voice actors have been given lower billing and pay than onscreen actors, though fortunately that's changed somewhat in recent years -- the most immediate example, obviously, being Pedro Pascal as Din Djarin.
It's different in Japan, where seiyuu (voice actors) are celebrities in their own right and have big fan followings. But Americans have this hangup that a performer only "counts" if you can see their face.
Of course not, because you've only seen a 2-minute trailer that tells you practically nothing about the storyline or narrative structure of the film. Obviously you can't find something you haven't been shown yet.
The purpose of a teaser trailer is not to tell you everything about the film. On the contrary, it's to tease you by showing you as little as possible, just enough to whet your curiosity and raise questions you'll want to see answered. So obviously you can't judge the entire film based on the teaser. You're not supposed to.
There was still a big difference between what could be done with a weekly syndicated TV budget and a movie budget in the late '90s and '00s, it's really only in the last decade or so that TV series, and especially streaming or cable series effects have really been able to rival movies.
I think it's mainly that effects are getting cheaper and easier to do, and many of these series, especially big franchise series like the Stars, Marvel, DC, LOTR, or Dr. Who, are getting budgets that pretty much rival a movie now.
Partly -- both effects and editing/post-production, which are easier in the digital era. Not to mention subtle digital embellishments that viewers don't even notice, like set extensions and shot cleanups, which make the scenes look better.
But I think a bigger factor is that streaming seasons have so few episodes, so each episode can have a lot more money devoted to it. A modern "season" is what we used to call a miniseries. Also, the studios own their own streaming services now and want to promote them by investing in prestige content, so they spend more on the shows than they might have under the conventional network model.
I was shocked a while back when I was watching a behind video for a very modern grounded series a while back, the kind of show I assumed how almost no special effects, and it turned out that almost every shot where they were outside had a CGI skyline and buildings added to the background.
That's a good point, I didn't think about the shorter seasons.
Actually, a common complaint about the TNG movies is that they often felt like padded out TV episodes presented on the theatre screen. Which is especially true of Generations and Insurrection.
There was only the bare minimum so that it still felt like it was taking place in the Star Wars universe. I don't even think I saw a single alien in the first episode of season 2. Maybe there was one somewhere in the background of the Chandrila scenes out of focus. Sometimes you can't tell if it's an alien or just questionable fashion choices.
I know what an average TNG episode is like. Movies are definitely not like that. movie's they're action-oriented movies. That's why it doesn't feel like an extended version of a TV episode.
Also, I think the trailer for The Mandalorian and Grogu is a little poorly constructed.
Is The Budget Of The Mandalorian And Grogu Lower Than Expected? Don't Count On It - SlashFilm
Reports are circulating about the cost of The Mandalorian and Grogu, but how accurate are they? Here's what we know about the Star Wars movie's budget so far.
www.slashfilm.com
According to the California Film Commission, the film's budget is $166 million.
I think it's fair to say that the gap between movie quality and TV quality has shrank rather drastically over the last few decades, to the point where it's entirely possible for the two to be interchangeable.
Indeed, that was the goal of ILM developing Stagecraft in the first place, and it was something Lucas was driving towards while they were developing Underworld alongside Clone Wars. The reason Underworld never got made is because they could do it on a TV budget until the technology caught up.
I don't see that as a criticism of a movie. Indeed, I'll take a fun and well made mid-budget movie that looks more or less like a prestige streaming show, over a massive over-budget work of pure epic scale spectacle, yet bereft of soul or substance any day!
ETA: You know I just realised something; the Buff Hutt (whomever he turns out to be) spoke Basic! That seems like a first for live action. High ranking Hutts generally don't lower themselves to speak anything other than Huttese (though they understand basic just fine), Ziro being the only real outlier. Lower ranking Hutts are another matter of course, and we've seen a few that do speak basic (most Resistance and the Lego animations leap to mind.)
Also noted that Buff Hutt doesn't have mechanical legs, so probably not Grakkis after all.
Indeed, that was the goal of ILM developing Stagecraft in the first place, and it was something Lucas was driving towards while they were developing Underworld alongside Clone Wars. The reason Underworld never got made is because they could do it on a TV budget until the technology caught up.
I don't see that as a criticism of a movie. Indeed, I'll take a fun and well made mid-budget movie that looks more or less like a prestige streaming show, over a massive over-budget work of pure epic scale spectacle, yet bereft of soul or substance any day!
ETA: You know I just realised something; the Buff Hutt (whomever he turns out to be) spoke Basic! That seems like a first for live action. High ranking Hutts generally don't lower themselves to speak anything other than Huttese (though they understand basic just fine), Ziro being the only real outlier. Lower ranking Hutts are another matter of course, and we've seen a few that do speak basic (most Resistance and the Lego animations leap to mind.)
Also noted that Buff Hutt doesn't have mechanical legs, so probably not Grakkis after all.
Last edited:
This film's budget is rumored to be $166 million. But that might not be true. I hope they've narrowed it down to a mid-range budget of $100-120 million. I don't think it'll gross more than $400-500 million.
Even the most mundane show is full of invisible digital effects these days. When you watch older shows, it can be surprising how often a boom mike drops into the top of the shot by mistake (though that's partly because older TV screens had curved frames that were expected to cut off the edges of the full rectangular picture we see today). These days, they could have a mike right in frame the whole time and just erase it digitally.
The two examples that immediately come to mind for me are Vin Diesel as Groot, and Bradley Cooper as Rocket (with Sean Gunn as Rocket mocap receiving lesser billing), and Groot's motion capture and on set presence was portrayed by several actors across the 6 films. Andy Serkis and Alan Tudyk do voice and motion capture for a lot of roles, but you still don't see their face in many movies.
Yes, the credits are getting more equal in recent years thanks to performers like them. Though one can argue that the trend toward casting big-name onscreen actors in voice roles is taking jobs away from career voice artists like Steve Blum or Tara Strong, say. But if it helps earn better credits and therefore better pay for VAs in general, it's cumulatively a good thing.
They also used DS9 uniforms in Generations!
Of course, one of the reasons they look so good is the changes made to the VHS, DVD, and Blu-ray versions. I think they used the same locations as Discovery in Star Trek Section 31.
Ah, more right wing fantasies from you. Color me shocked.
