Bandai release schedule
- Thread starter TazMan2000
- Start date
robn1
Master Member
I didn't mind the way the ships maneuvered in TFA so much as the fact that there was only one (and very brief) actual space battle in the movie. The Poe/Finn TIE escape scene. Every other battle was in an atmosphere. The Falcon Jakku escape, the Maz's castle battle, the Starkiller base battle -- all in an atmosphere. Maybe it's just me, but I like space battles in my Star Wars movies.
That was one of my gripes with the PT as well, very little space action.
Because it was done with the proper restraint, what little there was anyway. Although the close ups looked kinda cartoony, especially the Slave 1 during the asteroid chase.
astroboy
Master Member
At one point I'd heard JJ say that he doesn't story board action scenes. He just figures out a lot on the spot, using the experience of the crew to help work it out.
I'm sure that is probably how he approaches the cgi sequences, too. Which means that there are a lot of artists who are on a pretty long leash to make something cool, rather than working in continuity
Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
Richard Baker
Sr Member
Phil Tippett was great at animating CGI characters since he knew from is SFX background in stop motion animation how not only give mass and scale to a creatures motion, but give it character as well. Most people look a CGI as some sort of competition, trying to out do each other in dramatic motion and dynamic camera moves.
SFX shots are not in a film to show off how clever you are, but to support the story, blending in so you are not really aware that you are watching CGI at all.
A lot of movies these days I have to watch repeatedly on disc until I can make sense of all that motion thrashing around
SFX shots are not in a film to show off how clever you are, but to support the story, blending in so you are not really aware that you are watching CGI at all.
A lot of movies these days I have to watch repeatedly on disc until I can make sense of all that motion thrashing around
astroboy
Master Member
I completely agree. And it still comes down to directing. Miller, Lucas, and Speilberg were all notorious story-boarders. That counts for a lot
Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
I used to believe that totally, and still do to an extent. But damn if Gareth Edwards didn't craft a flawless space battle in Rogue One.
astroboy
Master Member
It was a fantastic space battle.
The ground assault, however......
Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
Those are examples of CGI done correctly and with some restraint
Most of the times when CGI is noticeable (not in a good way) is when things are over the top and they lack a sense of mass or scale.
astroboy
Master Member
The mass is what really bothered me about the falcon antics in TFA. The two moments when it hit the ground it looked like a frisbee bouncing off a sidewalk
That first moment when it dug into the dirt should have rendered it inoperable.
Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
That whole scene from take-off to the goofy TIE kill was straight out of a Michael Bay movie.
monsterpartyhat
Sr Member
I’ve always figured the starships in SW are made of some kind of hyper materials, otherwise such small vehicles shouldn’t be able to withstand the stresses of space flight and the accelerations involved. The falcon just doesn’t have ROOM for the internal bracing that should be necessary to avoid the engines tearing the ship apart, therefore it must be made of something far more durable than the alloys known to science in our galaxy.
To say nothing of containing the energies involved.
To say nothing of containing the energies involved.
Toadmeister
Sr Member
Yes and yes.
Some people apparently loose sleep over this.
Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
I think they have some kind of force fields that help keep it together. I think one of the Prequel cutaway books showed the Trade Federation lander and it said it has "tensor fields" (something like that) that help keep structural integrity.
Zombie_61
Master Member
Oh, absolutely. The slower camera movements used for practical effects give the impression that the ships actually have substantial mass even if they're only three or five feet long in real life. A lot of CG artists seem to overlook that element, and ships like the Falcon and the X-Wings end up looking like a dead leaves being blown around in a hurricane. They can invent all of the mysterious magical maneuvering technology they want to try to explain it away, but it still looks wrong.
astroboy
Master Member
The falcon also did one of those on Jakuu
Tell me about it! The only "drift" turn that ever worked was with those vipers in Galactica. But it was made very clear that they had the repulsors in all directions to make it work that way. They were attempting to acknowledge Newtonian physics in space.
Hunk a Junk
Sr Member
Getting briefly back to the subject of Bandai releases (and I love a good sidetrack): Building the sidewalls on the PF MF makes me drool at the idea of Bandai doing a PG star destroyer. I have no doubt that Bandai could make an exact replica, part for part, of the ANH devastator (and this version would be my preference) but I suspect most people would want the more detailed TESB version. Either way, I'd gladly pay another $370 for one!
astroboy
Master Member
That's a good question. I was thinking about this last night. After paying this much for a falcon, what model would I also pay this kind of money for? Probably a bandai star destroyer as well.
I could also be convinced to get a studio scale x-wing or a Buck rogers Starfighter.
But my quest for expensive models would probably end there
Hunk a Junk
Sr Member
I hesitated for a couple days about ordering the PG Falcon just because of my memories of spending $200 on a FM Falcon original release and then being disappointed when there were STILL proportional issues with the kit. Now that I have the PG in my hands, however, I wouldn't hesitate to pay $400 for a PG star destroyer (assuming it was a decent size -- 2'-ish). It's basically the ILM miniature... in miniature.
