Star Wars: The Force Awakens

[Delargey]

[p1nseeker]

This can't be as good as it looks like it's going to be can it?! I mean dear god it looks like the best thing ever!

[jonamok]

Yes. It. Can.

[The Disco]

Aww yiss! A Gonk!

[Padster]

I can actually hear George Lucas doing this.

http://gph.is/10fxca5

[ryodi]

This can't be as good as it looks like it's going to be can it?! I mean dear god it looks like the best thing ever!

What makes me hopeful is that there are actual props on a set, it's not just green screen with a load of green boxes and some guy with a tennis ball on a stick giving Ewan McGregor a sight line. It might be awful but at least it should look good. I haven't seen any lens flare either, I was worried Abrams might have introduced it to Star Wars.

[gizmo1990]

God Damn! That gave me tingles!!

[Fusty Gusset]

It smells like Star Wars.

That bit with Anthony Daniels looking round the falcon is melting.

[Jumble Jumble]

Lucas put lens flares in the special editions, didn't he?

[Delargey]

Im fine with a bit of lens flare.

[Jumble Jumble]

Me too, in fact I barely ever notice it.

[Capwn]

I honestly think this will be even better than Jurassic World!

[glb]

"Chewie... we're home."

It really, really looks like it.

[Nespresso]

Looks shit lol!

Cheap effort and all that!

[Ivanho]

So, we can get excited about this now?!

(Also, Simon Pegg is a jammy git!!)

[El Pibe]

Someone put forward the idea of Ian Glen in the role if they go for an older Kenobi.. I could live with that...

Standby for some amazing combat rolls with lightsaber in hand!

[krenzler]

So good to see proper special effects craftsmanship again (in a big budget movie) in these days of soulless unimaginative CGI-a-thons. Hadn't really kept up with this (other than the teaser a while ago) but now I'm seriously stoked.

Can it really be??

Edit: Thought I saw a Minion at 3:03

[dataDave]

So good to see proper special effects craftsmanship again (in a big budget movie) in these days of soulless unimaginative CGI-a-thons. Hadn't really kept up with this (other than the teaser a while ago) but now I'm seriously stoked.

Can it really be??

Edit: Thought I saw a Minion at 3:03

Yep. Hopefully with Mad Max, and now this, it will spark a renaissance in the field.

[Nick R]

I don't think practical stuntwork has ever disappeared from blockbuster cinema - the Bond and Mission: Impossible films make it a big selling point. (And maybe it's no coincidence that JJ Abrams directed one and has produced two of those.)

But when it comes to creature effects, there's definitely been a move away from rubber masks and puppets and towards CGI. The ultimate example of this was probably The Hobbit, in which shooting started (and was maybe even completed?) with the main Orc villain played by a man in make-up, before the character was completely replaced with a CGI equivalent.

So yes, the emphasis on practical effects in this behind the scenes reel is lovely to see.

[superfunk]

In retrospect, George Lucas filming the prequels in the way he did seems like a master stroke, because the huge reaction that has swung so violently the other way has allowed this new film to be made the way it is being made.

[krenzler]

SEEMS being the operative word here.

Hobbit was truly dreadful. Especially compared to the first film in the LotR trilogy.

[superfunk]

Oh of course SEEMS. I chose that word very deliberately. But think about it - the way Abrahms and his team are falling over themselves to make this movie seem like a direct sequel to the OT is as a direct result of the reaction to the PT. That's appears as though that is going to be a great thing.

[Capwn]

I think this year more than any there has been alot of buzz around physical effects and the damning of overusing CG with this and MadMax, wonder if this will have any impact in the future. It probably all comes down to costs and can imagine that CG is cheaper than physical fx these days.

[krenzler]

I really hope I get the opportunity to see this in 2D IMAX.

[jonamok]

Oh God yes. I will never watch this in 3D, no matter if I have to travel to see it in a galaxy far, far away.

[Nespresso]

Meh, Mad Max in 3D IMAX was great. I wouldn't say it added a whole lot but it certainly distract either.

I get that for some there might be issues with the eyes but I imagine this will be just fine, if not great in 3D.

[krenzler]

I don't care. Spaceships flying out towards you/me in the foreground completely disconnects from the background and messes up the sense of relative size/proportion. Makes it look cheap and toy-like.

At least to these eyes.

Seems like this is filmed on good old 35mm so just give me that unspoiled all the way.

[Jumble Jumble]

CG is still way more expensive than physical effects. I think some of the reason it gets overused is because it's easy to change after the fact, and possibly because some of it can be done simultaneously with the main shoot.

[Pob]

CG is still way more expensive than physical effects. I think some of the reason it gets overused is because it's easy to change after the fact, and possibly because some of it can be done simultaneously with the main shoot.

Really? I totally assumed the main reason for CGI taking over was because it reached a point where it was cheaper than practical effects.

[Alex W.]

I thought it was because it lets you leap straight from a deranged director's stupid daydream to a finished shot without having to go through a whole process of planning things out, creating hardware, figuring out what'll look good on camera, what sort of moves you can do, etc. etc. So you can basically pull a movie out of your arse.