#DumpStarWars The new hashtag boycott

[DOOM GUY]

The last one wasn't very good, so it's not like I was going to watch this one anyway.

 

[Zontar]

The last one wasn't very good, so it's not like I was going to watch this one anyway.

It also has an even lower critic score then the last one, and given how much some of those critics are squealing over it (re: buzzfeed being buzzfeed) it's pretty clear this is another quality dud that'll make money.

 

[DOOM GUY]

It also has an even lower critic score then the last one, and given how much some of those critics are squealing over it (re: buzzfeed being buzzfeed) it's pretty clear this is another quality dud that'll make money.

It's a shame really, the franchise is almost guaranteed to make money no matter how terrible it gets, for a while anyway.

 

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

I hope they didn't see the production of the film as a spring-board for some hacky political posturing...

This is the internet though. There's no shortage of people desperate to read into something uncharitably so they can have their moment in the whine-light.

I'll reserve judgement.

I said it before, I'll say it again: saw the film yesterday, there's no commentary whatsoever on current US politics.

Oh, that's good to hear. I skimmed the thread since I'm not interested in reading 5 pages of the usual bile, and missed your post in the process.

 

[happyninja42]

Dont defend it.

I'll defend it if I feel like it.

Humans are boring. Plus its Star Wars.

And? That doesn't change the practicality of having people in ridiculously elaborate costumes, trying to do extreme physical actions doesn't work well. Hell the original movies, the stormtroopers, just guys in armor and a helmet, were famous for not being able to see shit while they were on set. And you want a person in a costume as big and bulky as a mascot's outfit to do the same? And speaking of mascots, have you seen how goofy and silly mascots look when they do, or try to do elaborate physical actions? It looks unrealistic in the extreme. The same will happen with the people in the movie. That's just a reality that fans, no matter how rabidly fanatical they are, have to deal with.

Sure, I get it in Star Trek which is primarily TV shows with much smaller budgets, but Star Wars, especially now should be more than capable of dealing with this well.

Part of the fun of Sci-Fi is aliens. I have been watching Star Trek TNG lately, and when an alien looking alien shows up, its usually better for it. Same for Star Wars.

Sure, aliens are great, but aliens just for the sake of aliens isn't interesting. And I guarantee there will be plenty of aliens in scenes that don't involve very high paced, technical physical acting. A political scene, or military strategy scene, sure, the Rebellion will probably be 50/50. But when you've got actors running around a set, with explosions going off at specific locations, and they have to be able to know their marks, and navigate safely to avoid injury, no, they're not going to put the guy in the rubber suit with a field of vision of like 5% of normal in that situation. It's called liability, and practicality.

Didn't even need text.

What is your point? Those are both fights that involve heavy CGI, which isn't what we're talking about here. And you've presented two clips that many fans thought looked stupid, because the CGI was so lame. So since you felt no need to provide text, how about you clarify if you are trying, and failing, to counter my argument, or trying in some weird way to support it. Because I'm talking about practical effects, something Rogue One is focusing on, and you are posting images of CGI. Which is kind of pointless.

 

[Avnger]

Dont defend it.

I'll defend it if I feel like it.

Humans are boring. Plus its Star Wars.

And? That doesn't change the practicality of having people in ridiculously elaborate costumes, trying to do extreme physical actions doesn't work well. Hell the original movies, the stormtroopers, just guys in armor and a helmet, were famous for not being able to see shit while they were on set. And you want a person in a costume as big and bulky as a mascot's outfit to do the same? And speaking of mascots, have you seen how goofy and silly mascots look when they do, or try to do elaborate physical actions? It looks unrealistic in the extreme. The same will happen with the people in the movie. That's just a reality that fans, no matter how rabidly fanatical they are, have to deal with.

Sure, I get it in Star Trek which is primarily TV shows with much smaller budgets, but Star Wars, especially now should be more than capable of dealing with this well.

Part of the fun of Sci-Fi is aliens. I have been watching Star Trek TNG lately, and when an alien looking alien shows up, its usually better for it. Same for Star Wars.

Sure, aliens are great, but aliens just for the sake of aliens isn't interesting. And I guarantee there will be plenty of aliens in scenes that don't involve very high paced, technical physical acting. A political scene, or military strategy scene, sure, the Rebellion will probably be 50/50. But when you've got actors running around a set, with explosions going off at specific locations, and they have to be able to know their marks, and navigate safely to avoid injury, no, they're not going to put the guy in the rubber suit with a field of vision of like 5% of normal in that situation. It's called liability, and practicality.

Didn't even need text.

What is your point? Those are both fights that involve heavy CGI, which isn't what we're talking about here. And you've presented two clips that many fans thought looked stupid, because the CGI was so lame. So since you felt no need to provide text, how about you clarify if you are trying, and failing, to counter my argument, or trying in some weird way to support it. Because I'm talking about practical effects, something Rogue One is focusing on, and you are posting images of CGI. Which is kind of pointless.

Going to second this. Hasn't one of the largest complaints against the prequels (other than shoddy writing) been the ridiculous overuse of CGI? The use of practical effects over CGI was praised as The Force Awakens was coming out.

 

[Metalix Knightmare]

Dont defend it.

I'll defend it if I feel like it.

Humans are boring. Plus its Star Wars.

And? That doesn't change the practicality of having people in ridiculously elaborate costumes, trying to do extreme physical actions doesn't work well. Hell the original movies, the stormtroopers, just guys in armor and a helmet, were famous for not being able to see shit while they were on set. And you want a person in a costume as big and bulky as a mascot's outfit to do the same? And speaking of mascots, have you seen how goofy and silly mascots look when they do, or try to do elaborate physical actions? It looks unrealistic in the extreme. The same will happen with the people in the movie. That's just a reality that fans, no matter how rabidly fanatical they are, have to deal with.

Sure, I get it in Star Trek which is primarily TV shows with much smaller budgets, but Star Wars, especially now should be more than capable of dealing with this well.

Part of the fun of Sci-Fi is aliens. I have been watching Star Trek TNG lately, and when an alien looking alien shows up, its usually better for it. Same for Star Wars.

Sure, aliens are great, but aliens just for the sake of aliens isn't interesting. And I guarantee there will be plenty of aliens in scenes that don't involve very high paced, technical physical acting. A political scene, or military strategy scene, sure, the Rebellion will probably be 50/50. But when you've got actors running around a set, with explosions going off at specific locations, and they have to be able to know their marks, and navigate safely to avoid injury, no, they're not going to put the guy in the rubber suit with a field of vision of like 5% of normal in that situation. It's called liability, and practicality.

Didn't even need text.

What is your point? Those are both fights that involve heavy CGI, which isn't what we're talking about here. And you've presented two clips that many fans thought looked stupid, because the CGI was so lame. So since you felt no need to provide text, how about you clarify if you are trying, and failing, to counter my argument, or trying in some weird way to support it. Because I'm talking about practical effects, something Rogue One is focusing on, and you are posting images of CGI. Which is kind of pointless.

Going to second this. Hasn't one of the largest complaints against the prequels (other than shoddy writing) been the ridiculous overuse of CGI? The use of practical effects over CGI was praised as The Force Awakens was coming out.

And The Force Awakens still used more CGI than practical effects, especially after they left Jakku.


They've gotten better with the whole thing. Why NOT use more aliens? Heck, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle did good action scenes with man sized puppets!


Are you really gonna sit there and tell me that in the 20 years of special effects development we've made since then, that we can't have alien main characters in these movies because of complexity and cost!?

 

[Avnger]

Dont defend it.

I'll defend it if I feel like it.

Humans are boring. Plus its Star Wars.

And? That doesn't change the practicality of having people in ridiculously elaborate costumes, trying to do extreme physical actions doesn't work well. Hell the original movies, the stormtroopers, just guys in armor and a helmet, were famous for not being able to see shit while they were on set. And you want a person in a costume as big and bulky as a mascot's outfit to do the same? And speaking of mascots, have you seen how goofy and silly mascots look when they do, or try to do elaborate physical actions? It looks unrealistic in the extreme. The same will happen with the people in the movie. That's just a reality that fans, no matter how rabidly fanatical they are, have to deal with.

Sure, I get it in Star Trek which is primarily TV shows with much smaller budgets, but Star Wars, especially now should be more than capable of dealing with this well.

Part of the fun of Sci-Fi is aliens. I have been watching Star Trek TNG lately, and when an alien looking alien shows up, its usually better for it. Same for Star Wars.

Sure, aliens are great, but aliens just for the sake of aliens isn't interesting. And I guarantee there will be plenty of aliens in scenes that don't involve very high paced, technical physical acting. A political scene, or military strategy scene, sure, the Rebellion will probably be 50/50. But when you've got actors running around a set, with explosions going off at specific locations, and they have to be able to know their marks, and navigate safely to avoid injury, no, they're not going to put the guy in the rubber suit with a field of vision of like 5% of normal in that situation. It's called liability, and practicality.

Didn't even need text.

What is your point? Those are both fights that involve heavy CGI, which isn't what we're talking about here. And you've presented two clips that many fans thought looked stupid, because the CGI was so lame. So since you felt no need to provide text, how about you clarify if you are trying, and failing, to counter my argument, or trying in some weird way to support it. Because I'm talking about practical effects, something Rogue One is focusing on, and you are posting images of CGI. Which is kind of pointless.

Going to second this. Hasn't one of the largest complaints against the prequels (other than shoddy writing) been the ridiculous overuse of CGI? The use of practical effects over CGI was praised as The Force Awakens was coming out.

And The Force Awakens still used more CGI than practical effects, especially after they left Jakku.


They've gotten better with the whole thing. Why NOT use more aliens? Heck, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle did good action scenes with man sized puppets!


Are you really gonna sit there and tell me that in the 20 years of special effects development we've made since then, that we can't have alien main characters in these movies because of complexity and cost!?

I'm just saying that its odd to hear the use of practical effects being praised then having calls for more big budget all CGI scenes. There is probably a center between straight practical but obtrusive effects and computer generated with its own issues effects. That would take exploration though. This is an annual Disney blockbuster; safe is the key word for production.

 

[Creator002]

What do I think?
I'm Australian, so I'm seeing it tomorrow with a friend then going back to his place to get shit faced and play video games all night.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

For those who have seen it now, what did they replace the opening crawl and John William's theme with?

"Star Wars" zooms in with the classic intro music and that's it. There's a prologue and the title "Rogue One" shows up.

 

[CrazyBlaze]

For how much the Left gets mocked for needing "Safe Spaces" and having thin skin, Trump supports seem to get awfully butthurt easily about...well....everything.

Although I suppose Trump gets all butthurt from Alec Baldwin's SNL skits so maybe they're just taking a page from their fearless leader?

Whats even funnier is when you realize they don't even know how to protest or boycott. Like the whole Starbucks debacle where Turnip was written instead of Trump and they started buying starbucks just to get the workers to write Trump on the cups. Like its the opposite of a protest and boycott.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

So the special snowflakes got all het up about an insult to their "great leader" that didn't actually happen? Well, hopefully now they'll go see the movie to feel better- after all, Trump himself said that the theater should be a "safe place".

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

Whats even funnier is when you realize they don't even know how to protest or boycott. Like the whole Starbucks debacle where Turnip was written instead of Trump and they started buying starbucks just to get the workers to write Trump on the cups. Like its the opposite of a protest and boycott.

Back in my day, these were the guys who'd buy California wine to dump into the streets on camera because the French didn't want to support the US's post 9/11 military excursions. A decade before that it was the witchcraft-exposing Harry Potter books, and a decade before that it was buying satanic D&D books to burn.

They've never been good at the whole boycott thing.