I think I prefer TFA's soundtrack overall but 'Your Father Would Be Proud' at least matches anything on there.
Best song IMO. It gets stuck in my head throughout the day.
I think I prefer TFA's soundtrack overall but 'Your Father Would Be Proud' at least matches anything on there.
I think I prefer TFA's soundtrack overall but 'Your Father Would Be Proud' at least matches anything on there.
It's underwhelming.Picked up the steelbook edition from Best Buy yesterday. Will have my fourth viewing this weekend. Hope the bts stuff is decent.
It's underwhelming.
Christ
Ahh piss. What happened to good bts features?
I appreciate you fighting the good fight. I've long given up at this point in trying to have any decent discourse on CG/VFX.
They take time and planning and cost a lot of money. This often conflicts with the practice of getting the film out within 3-4 months of its theatrical release.
Plus even with time and planning and money, they're still extras
Just saw it.
A completely serviceable film. Throwaway entertainment. Not terrible, not great. A tad underwhelming.
Better than the prequels is the best i can say about it.
The Droid was pretty fun. I liked him. Everyone else sucked.
Those CGI faces were horrendous and unnecessary.
Don't feel like I ever want to watch it again.
That's funny, the score was one of the weakest elements to me. Very bland and forgettable, was not feeling any of the new themes.
I don't see how this compares favorably to TFA. That film may have felt like a retread but at least the characters were likeable and entertaining. It was a much more fun film to watch than Rogue One.
Also, Rey and Kylo's musical themes >>>> any of the Rogue One themes.
I find it weird how huge a talking point the CGI thing is. It's just a special effect when you come down to it. Even if you found Tarkin completely unconvincing....like, who cares? His presence in the movie is basically just there to harass Krennic. It's a shame that he doesn't fool you and breaks the immersion a bit, but is it really THAT big a deal since he's at best a subset of a side character's storyline? Leia is even more bizarre because her scene is just a final touch that is barely important to the story. She could be entirely cut and the movie would be unchanged. So why is her not being convincing such a big deal?
It seems odd to fixate on what are ultimately pretty minor special effects when the movie is chalk full of great ones.
Ok, I totally agree that TFA is > Rogue One (for me TFA is tied with ANH behind ESB). But Rogue One is a damn good movie.
Yes, breaking the immersion is that big of a deal.
When watching a movie I like to sink in and forget about reality for a bit. And when I see, in an otherwise very well made movie, things that don't fit (and that could be in numerous ways other than what happened with Tarkin), that is just jarring and taking me out of the movie completely for a certain amount of time.
Tarkin is just such a minor note in the film though. So even if I were to agree with you that it is indeed immersion breaking, I find it odd that people are THIS fixated on it.
What made the characters interesting? As I said, most of the cast has no character arc. Character motivations are thin.
Sure, and I agree that breaking immersion is bad, so I sympathize with people who couldn't see past the CGI.
The thing is, I rarely see this sort of thing discussed to this extent. It's one of the central pillars of discussion about the movie.
I think the last movie I've seen a single element have this much spotlight shone on it was Talia's death scene in TDKR. Personally, that I think the focus on even that is overblown, I do understand it because it was the climactic finish of the battle and of the entire trilogy and it was a particularly bad note to end things on.
Tarkin is just such a minor note in the film though. So even if I were to agree with you that it is indeed immersion breaking, I find it odd that people are THIS fixated on it.
The thing that seems weird to me is the idea that Tarkin is immediate and jarring but Leia just flies right on by with not much problem.
Of the two, Leia's implementation is the worse.
I remember one review [of the edit] we did, a few weeks away from finishing. A whole bunch of us were at Skywalker Ranch, watching Tarkin on this big screen. [People were criticising the Cushing close-ups] and at the end of it, Kathy Kennedys assistant, who had never been involved in any of these meetings, said to someone, Why were they so hard on that actor? And [the Disney top brass] said, It wasnt an actor, it was CGI. The fact that she said that, we all looked at each other, and we like, Oh, maybe were closer than we think. We kept working on it until they prised it out of my hands and the film came out.
Just an interesting note... I have not been compelled to rewatch this now that it's out on home video like I was with The Force Awakens. I think a lot of it has to do with the messy first third and the fact that it doesn't seem like a movie my daughter would be interested in. She LOVES The Force Awakens, and we've watched it together a bunch, but I don't think she would have the same reaction to this. A little more heady and not so clear-cut "mean guy vs. good girl"
I took a party of 7 to a screening of Rogue One. 3 of them didn't make it back after seeing those abominations mocking life itself on the screen.
I lost good men in that theater.
good men.
Yes, breaking the immersion is that big of a deal.
When watching a movie I like to sink in and forget about reality for a bit. And when I see, in an otherwise very well made movie, things that don't fit (and that could be in numerous ways other than what happened with Tarkin), that is just jarring and taking me out of the movie completely for a certain amount of time.
What makes it worse with Tarkin in that regard for me is that his bits are intersected at various times of the movie from start to finish. I would also argue that the importance of a bad special effect* to the story is not an important factor in that discussion at all.
*that being a special effect easily identified as such and thus breaking the viewer out of the immersion
Also I found Leia, who I actually knew as a character prior to watching Rogue One in the cinema not at all jarring whereas Tarkin who I, as a casual Star Wars watcher did not recall at all, extremely easily spotted as CGI. And that can't be the goal of that particular CGI.
For me, Leia was part of a fleeting moment, but Tarkin was far more prominent throughout the movie. It's easier to forgive in the case of Leia because the moment itself is powerful enough and it's brief enough to override any weirdness (I mean, I kind of feel that way for Tarkin overall too, but he's still more distracting just because he's there more). It's also capping off emotional climax after emotional climax. Every main character dying, getting the plans out, Darth Vader unleashing, all that Giacchino music, etc. By the time you get to Leia you're riding such a high that you just keep gliding right past the uncanny valley.The thing that seems weird to me is the idea that Tarkin is immediate and jarring but Leia just flies right on by with not much problem.
Of the two, Leia's implementation is the worse.
Also, going back to earlier in the discussion, about Leia's demeanor in that last scene seeming incongruous compared to ANH, I don't know. I think it was probably the right call to end Rogue One on a lighter, happier moment with Leia considering what happened before that. I can certainly understand why the filmmakers landed there.
How so? How was it "damn good" from a writing perspective? What made the characters interesting? As I said, most of the cast has no character arc. Character motivations are thin. The two leads lack a compelling narrative. I found both of them to be uncharismatic.
It had some really great action sequences and a funny robot but I don't think it earned "damn good."
The thing that seems weird to me is the idea that Tarkin is immediate and jarring but Leia just flies right on by with not much problem.
Of the two, Leia's implementation is the worse.
I don't think that's necessarily a problem with a Men on a Mission movie. The plot itself is the focus, and how we move from plot point to plot point takes precedence over who is doing it. The hope is that characterizations get filled in along the way in how the actions are carried outyou learn about people's personalities as they're doing the things they need to do. This isn't a thing that's particular to war films/men on a mission films, of course. A good recent example is Fury Road, and that's definitely not a war movie.
But sometimes, the arc doesn't need to be all that lofty. It just needs to be defined.
I'm not going to say Jyn Erso is all that interesting. Or Cassian Andor (although he's probably more interesting than Jyn is, if I had to pick) but I don't think any of these characters are ciphers, either. Maybe I'm grading Edwards on a curve here - I probably am. But in that context, and even in the context of other Star Wars movies, there's more than a few moments that sketch in just enough of the characters that I feel a little something when they go. This doesn't always happen in Star Wars.
I don't need or want the movie to stop down for more back 'n' forths like the Cargo Hold fight after Eadu, really.
You make it sound like he is weird for calling it damn good. You realize Rogue One was very strong reviews from critics and had really good box office legs right?
Critically it was seen as a "damn good" movie.
Box office legs show audiences saw it as a "damn good" movie.
Fury Road is actually a great counter example to this film.
I'm pretty sure every Star Wars film has had BO legs, including the shitty prequels.
It has a 85% RT score with a 7.5 average rating. I think thats considered "damn good"? Strictly talking about critical consensus ofcourse.Well as long as were are taking critical consensus as a marker for quality I'll point out that the film sits at 65 on metacritic.
It has a 85% RT score with a 7.5 average rating. I think thats considered "damn good"? Strictly talking about critical consensus ofcourse.
I prefer it to metacritics weighing system and assigning scores to unscored reviews. And i think the person that submits the review to RT decides if its rotten or fresh, so a C can still be considered rotten.The problem with RT is that it's a binary system - Fresh or Rotten. The majority of reviews could grade it a "C" and it could still be at 85%. There is no gradient.
I prefer it to metacritics weighing system and assigning scores to unscored reviews. And i think the person that submits the review to RT decides if its rotten or fresh, so a C can still be considered rotten.
There was a whole thread about this recently, I'm pretty sure (at least I remember bloviating in it) but Metacritic is actually somewhat worse than RT for getting any real sense of the critical reception to a movie, and it also hides its work from people who wish to know how the score was arrived at.
Because this is a gaming forum, it makes sense that Metacritic would be the go-to for people considering how tightly ingrained into that industry it's become (stupidly, and unfairly, but nevertheless) but Metacritic doesn't work as well for films, and isn't objectively better an aggregate than RT at all.
You're basically arguing that Metacritic provides a better, more accurate aggregate because it's closer to the grade you'd have assigned. That's pretty much just confirmation bias.
I don't really think aggregators are much to go by
Metacritic is pretty much never widely used at all for movie scoring outside of GAF. Because of like you said the gaming culture aspect. RT is the standard pretty much every where else except this forum.You're basically arguing that Metacritic provides a better, more accurate aggregate because it's closer to the grade you'd have assigned. That's pretty much just confirmation bias.
I usually decide on seeing a film based more on the pullquotes
Give reading the actual reviews a try! Like, if a pullquote jumps out at you, click the full review.
I've said it before, but RT shouldn't really be a guide to which movie you're seeing that week. It should be a means by which you figure out which critics to pay attention to.
Yeah, that's what I do. Isn't that what most people do?
SO good, movie looks fantastic on blu.
Love the score, love how they handled Tarkin and Leia.
My ONLY small gripe is even the hint of a romantic thing.
It was not needed and was rushed.