• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Star Wars The Force Awakens Trailer

Status
Not open for further replies.
Violet_0 said:
the druid head could just be hovering over the ball using advanced magnetic technology or something
would make a terrible toy though, so probably not
Click to expand...

I also thought it must have been some sort of magnetic design for the droid, everything other explanation doesn't seem to fit.
However now that you mention the toy thing, I don't know what to believe because it wouldn't make sense for Disney to make something strange that you can't turn into a toy.

Trailer is sweet though and it's the perfect teaser trailer. I don't know any of the story, but I want to.
 
Looks fantastic. The CGI looks so crisp, and the overall tone looks dark and foreboding (which helped Revenge of The Sith).

The X-Wing scene is stellar, love the framing.

Can't wait! Really wasn't expecting much.
 
Fliesen said:
of course, you just make the inner (static) part as thin as possible and the wheel parts as big as possible (duh.) but it's the same principle.

But i do believe we both agree that: this droid is neither "impractical" nor could it only be CGI because it's a physical impossibility of creating a machine that moves like this.
Click to expand...

If it's a practical droid and not CG then the head would also have to be 'loose' horizontally where it joins the neck, as it has a great amount of movement and doesn't strictly align to the center.

pZOSZNG.jpg
 
Naked Snake said:
He's not?? I was under the impression that he's booked for all three. Now I don't know what to think.
Click to expand...

The good thing is that Rian Johnson is directing the next films. I thought his work on Breaking Bad (he arguably directed the best episode of the entire series) and Looper was one of my favorite movies of 2012.
 
Coreda said:
If it's a practical droid and not CG then the head would also have to be 'loose' horizontally where it joins the neck, as it has a great amount of movement and doesn't strictly align to the center.

pZOSZNG.jpg
Click to expand...

which is still in the realm of possibility.

oZpARf3.gif

(we're looking at it from the front, "head" facing forward")

the "static" mount of the head stays static, the head itself shifts around freely. should be perfectly possible to give him enough "wiggle room" to have the head not needing to be perfectly aligned with the central construction.

all i am saying is: it IS possible.

i feel some people just lack the imagination. you could totally build this Robot, it'd be super expensive.
I'd just presume it's a practical effect, a model that's carried by a wire on the top of the head with the bottom part just spinning in a speed according to the distance it's moving to make it look self-propelled. Remove the wire in post and, voila, funny ball robot that's not entirely CG.
 
sappyday said:
The good thing is that Rian Johnson is directing the next films. I thought his work on Breaking Bad (he arguably directed the best episode of the entire series) and Looper was one of my favorite movies of 2012.
Click to expand...

Oh I'm totally relieved now. I thought they might have not decided on who's directing the next two yet.

I loved BB (which episodes did he direct?) and I liked Looper a lot.
 
Its kinda funny how people are picking apart that clip of the droid trying to explain how it might work and unrealistic it is.

It is a sci-fi movie. If it was realistic it wouldn't be sci-fi.
 
Discotheque said:
considering we got lightsabers out the ass in the prequel trilogy they sort of lost their effectiveness to me. like it ceased being an intimidating weapon by the end of attack of the clones.

i welcome this messy looking flame. looks menacing.
Click to expand...

Completely agree. Even the non combat moments in the OT where lightsabers made appearances (Luke's first demo, Vader's inspection) had far more impact than half of the fights in the PT. The scenes with 200 Jedi on screen in AoTC were just sad, seeing so many on screen at once they started to feel like glowing bats akin to a police baton rather than a knight's sword. They felt so much more dangerous in the OT, I'm hoping the new movies can wash that bad PT taste out and make lightsabers special again.
 
My first thought with the droid is that the center of the droid say has a ball that is gyroscopically configured to always point up. The head is then set to hover over the top of it using some sort of hovery technology, works for me.
 
SuperEpicMan said:
Its kinda funny how people are picking apart that clip of the droid trying to explain how it might work and unrealistic it is.

It is a sci-fi movie. If it was realistic it wouldn't be sci-fi.
Click to expand...

proving whether or not it's "unrealistic" isn't the point, proving whether or not it could be an actual model that has been filmed as opposed to "just more pointless CGI" was.
If you're referring to us, that is.

I believe the people working on this movie could create this robot sequence with barely any CGI (apart from hiding wires or adding dust effects on the ground)

also, people were calling it "impractical"

you wann know what's impractical? a robot that gets scared by a wookie and needs to do a three point turn to run away :P
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLqNmMH4hsg
 
Whats with the discussion about the droid? It´s obviously CG and just a head hovering over a ball via a magnetic connection. Its actually a pretty smart design. Rotating ball, gyroskop adjusted tech inside, hovering head above to have a fixed point of view of your environment. No problem here.
 
I just got the idea that this sith could have been Vader's apprentice whose training was cut short by Vader's death.
Because of the fact that he hasn't completed his training he's still a n00b at making his own light saber and that is why the laser beam looks a bit funky!
 
SuperEpicMan said:
Its kinda funny how people are picking apart that clip of the droid trying to explain how it might work and unrealistic it is.

It is a sci-fi movie. If it was realistic it wouldn't be sci-fi.
Click to expand...

More I think some are curious how it was achieved if it was practical, considering to me at least it's photo realistic in appearance. That diagram keeps popping up in this thread so it's worth discussing. It's Star Wars after all.

obin_gam said:
Does it exist an archive of screenshots from the trailer? The three x-wings could be a cool cover pic on facebook.
Click to expand...

You could download the Quicktime 1080p version and make a frame capture. Would be better quality compared to the Youtube version.
 
Interceptor said:
Whats with the discussion about the droid? It´s obviously CG and just a head hovering over a ball via a magnetic connection. Its actually a pretty smart design. Rotating ball, gyroskop adjusted tech inside, hovering head above to have a fixed point of view of your environment. No problem here.
Click to expand...

that's the part i disagree with. There's nothing that makes it being CG "obvious" to me. It's perfectly doable with wires and some fairly basic engineering.

Coreda said:
More I think some are curious how it was achieved if it was practical, considering to me at least it's photo realistic in appearance. That diagram keeps popping up in this thread so it's worth discussing. It's Star Wars after all.
Click to expand...

so you're okay with the "rolling" part being doable with an actual model and it's just the off-axis tilt of the head that seems off to you?
have you taken a look at my illustration? the head doesn't need to be stiffly mounted onto the "spine", it could have some motors inside so the head tilts by moving shifting itself along the spine/neck.
 
Fliesen said:
that's the part i disagree with. There's nothing that makes it being CG "obvious" to me. It's perfectly doable with wires and some fairly basic engineering.
Click to expand...

Its not about if its doable or not. It looks CG as hell. Thats why. Toy Story is doable with puppets as well. But its obviously CG, Same with this droid.
 
Interceptor said:
Its not about if its doable or not. It looks CG as hell. Thats why. Toy Story is doable with puppets as well. But its obviously CG, Same with this droid.
Click to expand...

agree to disagree on it being "obviously" CG.

Abrams likes himself some actual models. Also the blur and shakiness makes it look very real to me (as it's really hard to imitate these effects PROPERLY with cg)

if it's CG, it's really good CG. I still don't think it's as "obvious" as you make it out to be. Which is why i don't mind talking about the feasibility aspect.
 
Fliesen said:
proving whether or not it's "unrealistic" isn't the point, proving whether or not it could be an actual model that has been filmed as opposed to "just more pointless CGI" was.
If you're referring to us, that is.

I believe the people working on this movie could create this robot sequence with barely any CGI (apart from hiding wires or adding dust effects on the ground)

also, people were calling it "impractical"

you wann know what's impractical? a robot that gets scared by a wookie and needs to do a three point turn to run away :P
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLqNmMH4hsg
Click to expand...

My bad, I thought people meant the design in the movie opposed to the practical effects/cgi usage.

Anyhoo, I firmly agree about using practical effects when possible. There is a period of movies between the mid 90s to mid 2000s where movies started using CGI instead of practical effects and if you look back, a lot of them look worse for it and more dated than movies with practical SFX which are older such as Alien, The Fly etc.
 
The trailer was quite good, but rather underwhelming, even for a Teaser.

It just didn't have the emotion, tone, or tantalizing euphoria of the original Phantom Menace teaser.
 
Fliesen said:
agree to disagree on it being "obviously" CG.

Abrams likes himself some actual models. Also the blur and shakiness makes it look very real to me (as it's really hard to imitate these effects PROPERLY with cg)

if it's CG, it's really good CG. I still don't think it's as "obvious" as you make it out to be. Which is why i don't mind talking about the feasibility aspect.
Click to expand...


We have to disagree then. ^^

I liked the trailer as a whole, especially the return to a used look of the universe but i had to cringe at two moments: Another stupid comic relief cgi droid (the ball) and the claymore lightsaber. Not just because of the design of the robot but the (for me) really bad and obvious cgi.
 
SuperEpicMan said:
My bad, I thought people meant the design in the movie opposed to the practical effects/cgi usage.

Anyhoo, I firmly agree about using practical effects when possible. There is a period of movies between the mid 90s to mid 2000s where movies started using CGI instead of practical effects and if you look back, a lot of them look worse for it and more dated than movies with practical SFX which are older such as Alien, The Fly etc.
Click to expand...

not just that.

i do believe acting happens more naturally, if you can actually SEE the things you're acting a scene with. You can't build a relationship to a dude holding a green stick with a sign saying "here's where we're going to put your little green droid buddy"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7oGf-a1Dqlc#t=50
(timecode 00:50)
the robot guards are activating their weapons and Obiwan doesn't even flinch)
of course he doesn't because McGregor had no idea what the CG generated robots he's surrounded by would be doing.

Since this ball robot is most likely the new "droid sidekick", i think Abrams would choose to go with actual models here, at the very least.
 
If the saber hilt is utilised in the film I'm good but if it's just for show, ugh.

Also Boyega is gonna kill it, he was awesome in Attack the Block.

I'm excited to have more Star Wars, love it.

And of course it didn't show much, it's a fucking teaser.
 
Fliesen said:
so you're okay with the "rolling" part being doable with an actual model and it's just the off-axis tilt of the head that seems off to you?
have you taken a look at my illustration? the head doesn't need to be stiffly mounted onto the "spine", it could have some motors inside so the head tilts by moving shifting itself along the spine/neck.
Click to expand...

It might well be practical or it could be convincing CG, my posts were simply observations from frame stepping the shot and what the practical droid needs based on what that diagram is suggesting. Would be ingenious if real.
 


I find it funny he's the single reason why I'm moderately excited for Star Wars again. Not excitement from that trailer but the idea of him writing and directing a Star Wars film.
 
Coreda said:
It might well be practical or it could be convincing CG, my posts were simply observations from frame stepping the shot and what the practical droid needs based on what that diagram is suggesting. Would be ingenious if real.
Click to expand...

yeah, if it's CGI then it's REALLY WELL DONE and (imho!) not as obvious as Interceptor claims.

As i said, this isn't just a droid, this will most likely be a character(!) like R2D2 and i just don't believe Abrams would be so foolish as to make this character entirely CG.

DeSo said:
Wow that looks gorgeous.
Click to expand...

http://i.imgur.com/BCaLR6a.jpg
in case you were wondering / about to ask
 
It is a sci-fi movie. If it was realistic it wouldn't be sci-fi.
Click to expand...

This isn't at all true. Many works of sci-fi strive to have grounding in reality. Star Wars is more science fantasy than true science fiction.

Also that droid, if its necessary for any of you to have a scientific explanation in a world where there is actual magic, could have a gyroscopically-stabilised superconductive mechanism to keep it in place without needing a physical connection to an axle.
 
Fliesen said:
not just that.

i do believe acting happens more naturally, if you can actually SEE the things you're acting a scene with. You can't build a relationship to a dude holding a green stick with a sign saying "here's where we're going to put your little green droid buddy"
Click to expand...

wetatop.jpg


it's most likely just cgi, dude
 
liquidtmd said:
This annoys me. He sold the thing for $4billion.

He should be done with it. If I sell my car I dont still get to drive it.
Click to expand...

OH please dude.

That credit is likely just for some ideas and points that Lucas kicked in.

Its most likely an honorary thing given just to give Lucas some sense of involvement.

I am sure 90% of that script is going to be Johnson.
 
Rogue_Ledr said:
OH please dude.

That credit is likely just for some ideas and points that Lucas kicked in.

Its most likely an honorary thing given just to give Lucas some sense of involvement.

I am sure 90% of that script is going to be Johnson.
Click to expand...

My point stands. 'Sense of involvement'? Oh please dude indeed.
 
BCaLR6a.jpg
Click to expand...

So whats the point of the little minisabers? If it would act like a real Claymore the opponents beam would just melt through the handle.. This is when Scifi goes bad - when it follows form over function. Abrams is doing it again.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Star Wars: Eyes Like Stars announced
2
75
1K
AJUMP23 replied
Star Wars: Visions Volume 3
5
355
RagnarokIV replied
Original trilogy characters are coming to Star Wars: Galaxy’s Edge
10
184
Fbh replied
Star Wars Original Trilogy Theatrical Version restoration in the works
2
75
1K
mitch1971 replied
George Lucas and James Cameron on Star Wars Rebels and Terrorists
2
56
1K
kevboard replied
Top Bottom