Rebels lost me with the graffiti spraying chick with the pink Boba Fett outfit. I was done at that point. We've got nothing else to talk about. I'm calling for the check. This date is over.

Next 'Star Wars' Will Have Less CGI

Really? Can't say that bothered me much at all. Do all mandalorians have to Boba Fett clones (no pun intended)? She seems like she might be an interesting and fun character, if only they develop her more.

Yeah, judging from the teaser, that went straight out the window. Or air lock....

Graffiti, Boba Fett, and pink should not be allowed together in the same sentence... unless of course you are a mentally challenged teenage girl. If they want to inject more estrogen into the SW universe, I'm ok with it. Just please stop with the gender switching and castrating of traditional SW iconography. Hell, why not just retcon the whole series and make Darth Vader a woman? Or maybe make Lando a nerdy Asian? Or change R2D2's beeps and whistles into a more market friendly Spanish? Hey, sky's the limit... er, Skywalker is the limit, anyway.

It's clear that creators in Hollywood are running out of new ideas, so they just 'clone' old ones and change the wall paper or hairstyle of existing ones. I just think it's kinda dumb.

You are really overreacting. It has nothing to do with changing race or gender of established characters (something I personally hate, no matter which way it goes). It's just a new character, who happens to be wearing a mandalorian armor. Not Boba Fett turned into a girl. She painted her armor and paints graffiti beacuse she likes art. I actually find it welcome that they gave her such hobby while also showing her as a competent fighter. There is a potential for an interesting character here. At the very least she already has been given some unique characteristcs and look.

I don't want to insult you, but you really sound like an angry 8 year old Boba Fett fanboy.

With CGI all restrictions on your imagination a gone. You can create what ever worlds you want with the help of CGI, like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLzhlsEFcVQ

That is very likely because they ARE a 8 yr old (at least mentally) fan boy. I thought the pink armour was quite cool and the character Sabine isn't bad either.

And yet it still has the look of being fake. It's great for an all-animated feature or a video game where "graphics" are how well a title is judged, but doesn't work so well in a live-action movie.

At least its not as fake as "Props"

Have you seen the original death star battle in A New Hope before the Special Edition. The ships look increadibly static.

Stop Motion is even more fake looking than CGI.

The best practical effects are the animatronics of Stan Winston. Terminator and the Dinosaurs in Jurassic Park look amazing. But of course the mere fact that they are animatronics means they cannot act act that much with the human characters. Just stand still for the most part.

CGI HAS replaced makeup, I mean look at Davy Jones for goodness' sake:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zo-OYwh6KHA

Honestly looking back special effects in the old days are even more fake looking than CGI now.

Makeup HAS replaced CGI. I mean look at Hellboy. Or the orcs in Lord of the Rings.

Some are. Some look much better then any CGI.

If you go all CGI you get the laughable fakeness of Oz the Great and Powerfull. If you go all practicall, you get the awesomeness Dark Crystal or Labirynth.

The best way to go is to blend the two together, like Nolan does.

Only movies I like that are completely CG free are serious Drama movies. Martin Scorsese's work with Robert De Niro like Raging bull, Goodfellas, and Casino.

I have not seen Oz Great and Powerful. Never cared for it.

As to the Make-Up yeah but it goes both ways I guess. I like the Uruk Hai but I also like the look of Azog the Defiler.

I am also starting to find Nolan egregiously overrated now and spawning a new generation Batman fans thinking he is the ultimate super hero in that he has no powers and aswell as spawning a new generation of people who now Hates Superman. Only film I absolutly like of Nolan was The Prestige.

You mean Azog the Fake Looking? There is no comparison, the all-CGI Hobbit movies look far worse than the LotR trilogy.

All of which has nothing to do with Nolan, and even less to do with CGI/practical effects. All of that you might have written about Burton's movies, or Batman the Animated Series.

I like cgi as well as stop motion; films like coraline could have have been done in cgi, but it was literally hand-crafted, which made it even more awesome, not counting the story/model work. oddworld could have been hand drawn, but it wouldn't have the same wonder as it does in cgi. some properties need cgi, whilst others don't really need to.


This has nothing to do with star wars, i just felt like saying an opinion of mine.

I find the entire DC Animated Series the quinitiessential super hero cartoons of the modern era.

And bullshit that you think the entire Hobbit movies where all CGI Greenscreen. There were still locals and sets. And have you seen Lord of the Rings? Their CGI is already dated looking compared to the Hobbit. The Wargs come to mind.

In the end I just find you guy's dislike of CGI annoying as is your nostalgia of the Olden days of Practical effects were everything. IMO you guys should just grow up and accept that CGI has replaced practical effects, And anyone who makes new movies using cheap looking props just for the sake that it "Looks" real are just snobby film hipsters :P

I already accepted that Traditional 2D Animantion is forever dead and replaced by the cheaper Flash animation :P

(Though I still lament the death of Traditional 2D Animation)

EDIT: And yes there is some hypocrisy in my words. But so what everone has their bias and opinions.