Rogue One (Gareth Edwards, 2016)

Discussions of specific films and franchises.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
bdsweeney
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 7:09 pm

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#176 Post by bdsweeney » Wed Aug 02, 2017 7:30 pm

knives wrote:
bdsweeney wrote:
knives wrote: To be fair, what, about ten minutes of footage he was actually involved in is in the movie.
Genuine question: what do you mean?
The film was massively reshot and to my understanding almost none of Edwards' footage ended up in the final product.
Oh, sorry! I thought you were referring to Monsters as having only 10 minutes' worth of his footage left and was confused.

User avatar
carmilla mircalla
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2015 9:47 pm

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#177 Post by carmilla mircalla » Wed Aug 02, 2017 7:47 pm

Didn't Edwards say that he also shot scenes just for the trailer because they would look good in a trailer? at least that's something I heard. I never knew how little of his own footage actually ended up in the final film or if he in fact shot whole cohesive scenes

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#178 Post by knives » Wed Aug 02, 2017 11:32 pm

It's in this thread, but I believe the skinny is that he finished principle and did some of the reshoot a before getting replaced following a major rewrite which changed the lead's motivation and the whole final act.

User avatar
R0lf
Joined: Tue May 19, 2009 7:25 am

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#179 Post by R0lf » Thu Aug 03, 2017 12:20 am

carmilla mircalla wrote:Didn't Edwards say that he also shot scenes just for the trailer because they would look good in a trailer? at least that's something I heard. I never knew how little of his own footage actually ended up in the final film or if he in fact shot whole cohesive scenes
I think that was Spiderman?

User avatar
warren oates
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 12:16 pm

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#180 Post by warren oates » Thu Aug 03, 2017 12:44 am

All the Rogue One bashing is starting to bore me. Count me as one who much prefers the termite art of Rogue One with its nose in the trenches to the overthought overwrought precious white elephantiasis of The Force Awakens. I've read enough about how the sausage was made in both cases that I couldn't care less. What I wanted from Rogue One was the kind of Star Wars story we'd get if we just hung out with a sampling of the sort of rebels who, for example, defended the Hoth base in The Empire Strikes Back, which remains the best of series. That Rogue One makes it all a team effort in a way that hadn't felt authentically so since Empire and that it manages to make us care about a cast it has the guts to kill off completely makes it all even better. There's no spectacle in The Force Awakens that comes close to thrilling me the way the shield gate in Rogue One does. And I'll take K-2SO over BB-8 any day.

User avatar
whaleallright
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 12:56 am

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#181 Post by whaleallright » Thu Aug 03, 2017 2:44 am

you're talking about a Star Wars franchise film as "termite art"???

User avatar
tenia
Ask Me About My Bassoon
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#182 Post by tenia » Thu Aug 03, 2017 5:06 am

warren oates wrote:What I wanted from Rogue One was the kind of Star Wars story we'd get if we just hung out with a sampling of the sort of rebels who, for example, defended the Hoth base in The Empire Strikes Back, which remains the best of series. That Rogue One makes it all a team effort in a way that hadn't felt authentically so since Empire and that it manages to make us care about a cast it has the guts to kill off completely makes it all even better. There's no spectacle in The Force Awakens that comes close to thrilling me the way the shield gate in Rogue One does. And I'll take K-2SO over BB-8 any day.
Yet, Rogue One is a 2h20 movie where the first half is basically an awful circonvoluted bore that could have easily lost a whole chunk of scenes (the whole Saw Guerreira part, especially) with close to no loss for the viewer.

While I agree that Rogue One probably is the best of the 2, both actually are deeply flawed, they just have different flaws and in both cases are far from the quality displayed in the OT.

User avatar
All the Best People
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2017 7:08 pm
Contact:

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#183 Post by All the Best People » Thu Aug 03, 2017 11:13 pm

R0lf wrote:
carmilla mircalla wrote:Didn't Edwards say that he also shot scenes just for the trailer because they would look good in a trailer? at least that's something I heard. I never knew how little of his own footage actually ended up in the final film or if he in fact shot whole cohesive scenes
I think that was Spiderman?
It may have been Spider-Man also, but it was definitely true of Rogue One, as well. The shot of Jyn looking back above the camera in her Imperial disguise which closed the first trailer/teaser was such a shot, for instance, and the money shot of the TIE Fighter coming up to her on the platform was also an effects shot created for the trailer alone.

We're probably a decade or two away from some Peter Biskind coming along and writing the Raging Bulls of the Kathy Kennedy/Lucasfilm years, so right now we have a lot of speculation. We know that the third act of the film was reworked and streamlined -- it used to be that the team got the plans then sprinted across the beach to a different facility to beam them up, but now of course that tower is in the same edifice from which the plans are seized. The Forrest Whitaker scenes were clearly all reshot; Alan Tudyk's droid appears to have first met Jyn on Scarif in the initial conception. This is all gleaned from early trailers and interview comments. What we don't know is how involved Edwards was with these reshoots; it was reported that Tony Gilroy was brought into "help oversee" (or similar phrasing) the reshoots, but I personally haven't seen article that implies Edwards was not present or uninvolved.

My speculation is that the reshot scenes may have been, to oversimplify, Gilroy's scenes but Edwards' setups; there is a consistent shooting style throughout the film. It also seems clear that Edwards was still the primary force behind the spectacle and effects work. Furthermore, it would also seem that the removal of Lord & Miller from the Solo film stems in part from their refusal to "play along" with Lucasfilm's desired reshoots; Edwards staying on Rogue One implies he played ball and was still a participant in what was going on. We'll see one day when an expose is written if this is right or wrong.

calculus entrophy
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2014 11:32 am

Re: Star Wars

#184 Post by calculus entrophy » Wed Sep 13, 2017 7:02 am

calculus entrophy wrote:Regardless of the name in the credits, all Star Wars activity is clearly done by committee at this point. And it reflects that.
...more

Post Reply