Spoilers The Mandalorian season 2 discussion

[lightspeedbear]

Leia was pretty much flawless for the first 50% of the sequence and then they did a prolonged close up of her face and the illusion vanished.

I’m still glad they went the CG route for her, Tarkin and Luke though. Can’t wait to see the behind he scenes on chapter 16

 

[fireproof78]

No it isn't. They couldn't be further apart.

One scene relies on the technology being at its absolute best to sell an illusion.
The other was a needless and jarring addition, added just because, that completely alters the scene.

No, it was added due to dissatisfaction with the outcome initially.

 

[Reverend]

Yeah, the Jabba's Palace party scene was always conceived as being an elaborate musical number (which George did finally get to do much better in TCW.)

It never really came off like that though. Between the complications and limitations of the puppetry tech of the day, the Palace set itself being nightmarishly hot to work on for many of the performers, schedule problems and basically everyone's dissatisfaction with the 'Fancy Man/Lapti Nek' number that was kinda thrown together as a temporary thing so they have *something* to synch to during the shoot with the intent to replace it in the edit...but never really managed to come up with anything with everything else going on, they just sort of made so that it was "good enough" and abandoned it for more important things.

People rail against the SE additions, but understand that was 100% designed to be a dress rehearsal for the PT; to gear the company up for a full production for the first time in years, and field test some of the new tech they intended to use for Phantom Menace. So yes, it's dated poorly from a technical standpoint and there are some questionable shot choices (again, likely picked to stress test the tech more than serve the scene), but tonally it seems to jibe perfectly well with what the palace is supposed to be. I means it's the personal mansion/nightclub for one of the more powerful kingpins in the galaxy. Why wouldn't he have some more extravagant entertainment than say the dive bar that is the Mos Eisley Cantina?

 

[lightspeedbear]

No, it was added due to dissatisfaction with the outcome initially.

Tweaking and mildly improving existing CG in a scene that relies on flawless CG is very, very different to completely changing the tone of a scene, adding tons of brand new CGI, and using a new song.

I don't know how you can argue otherwise, but here we are.

 

[fireproof78]

Tweaking and mildly improving existing CG in a scene that relies on flawless CG is very, very different to completely changing the tone of a scene, adding tons of brand new CGI, and using a new song.

I don't know how you can argue otherwise, but here we are.

I don't see the difference in principle. More so I am incredibly amused at the championing after the grief Lucas received for wanting to change parts of his films he felt needed improvement but couldn't be done due to technical limitations.

I don't see a huge difference. Only that one is considered acceptable and the other is not. Mileage will vary, etc.

 

[lightspeedbear]

How very robotic, to completely ignore context and nuance. Bizarre.

 

[fireproof78]

How very robotic, to completely ignore context and nuance. Bizarre.

Oh, no, the context is perfectly clear. One fix makes people happy, the other didn't. It is incredibly amusing to me how this all unfolds, where as Lucas altering his films to fix technological limitations and deal with his "unfinished movie" (as he described it) was altering a masterpiece and should never be done.

Again, to me, it is the same in principle just a difference in execution. The fact that one is being championed as "So great!" and applauding the person being hired on, while Lucas was lampooned constantly makes even more bizarre to me.

Fan reactions rarely make sense though, so I guess I'll just toss this one in that pile.

 

[Tuskin38]

I know of some people who didn't even realize Tarkin was CG.

 

[fireproof78]

I know of some people who didn't even realize Tarkin was CG.

Tarkin was great. Though, honestly, I missed seeing Wayne Pygram from Revenge of the Sith reprising the role. I thought he was visually great. The voice maybe might not have matched.

 

[Reverend]

Wayne Pygram isn't as good a match as one might think. The make-up made him look passable for a wide shot, but in close-up he looked like Scorpius tore the skin off a human and is wearing it as a disguise...and it may fall off at any moment.
By which I mean it's very clearly a mask and probably wouldn't emote terribly well. Plus a human wearing a human mask is always going to set off uncanny valley alarm bells.

Indeed I wouldn't mind if they went back into RotS and replaced his head with a de-aged version of the CG model they built for RO as the shot where he turns to leave always did make his head seem...odd.

 

[cooleddie74]

I could definitely go for a new CGI/Deepfake head for the ROTS Tarkin, assuming Disney wants to make changes in the way George did before he sold his films.

 

[jackoverfull]

I know of some people who didn't even realize Tarkin was CG.

guilty as charged. I came in the cinema without having watched any trailer and when I saw him from behind I though “oh, cool, a cameo, but clearly they can’t do more and that’s why they put krennik in”...and then he turned! I knew it couldn’t be the actual actor but for the first time in my life I couldn’t recognize it as CGI, something I’m usually very good at even with landscapes and vehicles.

Leia on the other hand was jarringly fake.

 

[CorporalClegg]

Oh, no, the context is perfectly clear. One fix makes people happy, the other didn't. It is incredibly amusing to me how this all unfolds, where as Lucas altering his films to fix technological limitations and deal with his "unfinished movie" (as he described it) was altering a masterpiece and should never be done.

Again, to me, it is the same in principle just a difference in execution. The fact that one is being championed as "So great!" and applauding the person being hired on, while Lucas was lampooned constantly makes even more bizarre to me.

Fan reactions rarely make sense though, so I guess I'll just toss this one in that pile.

No.

One is adding a little cinnamon and nutmeg to an otherwise tasty bolognese.

The other is replacing the rigatoni with gluten-free elbow macaroni.

 

[fireproof78]

No.

One is adding a little cinnamon and nutmeg to an otherwise tasty bolognese.

The other is replacing the rigatoni with gluten-free elbow macaroni.

No. The principle is fully the same. Whether or not a person like the outcome is another story altogether. And that's fine. But I'll not applaud just because.

 

[CorporalClegg]

I suppose I could talk about how changing the cantina song from an obvious nod to the background vibe of 40s noir to a cheap Disney knock-off completely alters the ambiance of the scene -- and shifts the narrative focus from the Twi'lek dancer to the singer, altering the foreboding (and foreshadowing) ramifications of the former's impending doom. Or I could talk about how changing Han to acting in self-defense completely changes the course of his character arc and, in turn, the entire meta text of the film. Or I could talk about how changing Shaw to Christensen negates the visually symbolic gesture of the older 'three-wise men' generation passing the torch to the new kids. Heck, I might even point out that replacing a composite of two people and a monkey with Ian McDiarmid is generally seen as a positive change, despite people taking issue with the dialog changes that add unneeded obfuscation to the scene. But I suppose my time would be better served trying to explain physics to someone who's just decided the sky-is-pink-and-that's-final because confirmation bias reasons.

 

[fireproof78]

I suppose I could talk about how changing the cantina song from an obvious nod to the background vibe of 40s noir to a cheap Disney knock-off completely alters the ambiance of the scene -- and shifts the narrative focus from the Twi'lek dancer to the singer, altering the foreboding (and foreshadowing) ramifications of the former's impending doom. Or I could talk about how changing Han to acting in self-defense completely changes the course of his character arc and, in turn, the entire meta text of the film. Or I could talk about how changing Shaw to Christensen negates the visually symbolic gesture of the older 'three-wise men' generation passing the torch to the new kids. Heck, I might even point out that replacing a composite of two people and a monkey with Ian McDiarmid is generally seen as a positive change, despite people taking issue with the dialog changes that add unneeded obfuscation to the scene. But I suppose my time would be better served trying to explain physics to someone who's just decided the sky-is-pink-and-that's-final because confirmation bias reasons.

And that's completely missing my point.

Good day.

 

[CorporalClegg]

k

 

[Reverend]

Or I could talk about how changing Shaw to Christensen negates the visually symbolic gesture of the older 'three-wise men' generation passing the torch to the new kids.

Now see this change I'm actually on board with. Anakin never looked like Sebastian Shaw when he was himself, there was never and "Old Man Anakin". So seeing him restored to the good person he was makes more thematic sense IMO.

Also from a logical perspective, Sebastian Shaw was about 10 years older than Guinness (and I think the original actor cast was even older!), and was around 77 when they filmed that scene...Yet he's supposed to be playing a person in his 40s' and from the generation *after* Kenobi, so presumably his aged appearance is the unnatural result of being steeped in the dark side all that time. So one can't really argue the logic "well that's what he *would* have looked like by now" either since it's not his natural appearance.

It's also a subtle way to echo back to the cave vision and see that in a sense, Luke's face (or one quite like it) was inside that helmet...metaphorically. And that both he and his father started off down the same path.

 

[lightspeedbear]

I suppose I could talk about how changing the cantina song from an obvious nod to the background vibe of 40s noir to a cheap Disney knock-off completely alters the ambiance of the scene -- and shifts the narrative focus from the Twi'lek dancer to the singer, altering the foreboding (and foreshadowing) ramifications of the former's impending doom. Or I could talk about how changing Han to acting in self-defense completely changes the course of his character arc and, in turn, the entire meta text of the film. Or I could talk about how changing Shaw to Christensen negates the visually symbolic gesture of the older 'three-wise men' generation passing the torch to the new kids. Heck, I might even point out that replacing a composite of two people and a monkey with Ian McDiarmid is generally seen as a positive change, despite people taking issue with the dialog changes that add unneeded obfuscation to the scene. But I suppose my time would be better served trying to explain physics to someone who's just decided the sky-is-pink-and-that's-final because confirmation bias reasons.

Bravo.

You could do all that, but a brick wall isn't a worthwhile outlet.

 

[fireproof78]

Now see this change I'm actually on board with. Anakin never looked like Sebastian Shaw when he was himself, there was never and "Old Man Anakin". So seeing him restored to the good person he was makes more thematic sense IMO.

Also from a logical perspective, Sebastian Shaw was about 10 years older than Guinness (and I think the original actor cast was even older!), and was around 77 when they filmed that scene...Yet he's supposed to be playing a person in his 40s' and from the generation *after* Kenobi, so presumably his aged appearance is the unnatural result of being steeped in the dark side all that time. So one can't really argue the logic "well that's what he *would* have looked like by now" either since it's not his natural appearance.

It's also a subtle way to echo back to the cave vision and see that in a sense, Luke's face (or one quite like it) was inside that helmet...metaphorically. And that both he and his father started off down the same path.

I've always been undecided on the change. On the one hand, I don't know if Luke would recognize Hayden Anakin, and on the other hand it's the Force and showing him being redeemed back to his former self carries a lot of weight. As a change it does its thematic job well enough.

But, I still prefer Shaw.