logo Sign In

If you need to C*mplain about the CGI Grand Moff Tarkin in Rogue One... this is the place — Page 2

Author
Time

He looked okay for the most part but had too many scenes.

The voice work for the character was inconsistent and CGI Tarkin was too tall.

The film would have worked better with more Vader and less Tarkin, imo.

Author
Time

moviefreakedmind said:

SilverWook said:

Not everyone is as sophisticated as we are, mentally dissecting every aspect of a film as we watch.

This does not describe me. I am not sophisticated, and I do not mentally dissect every aspect of films that I watch. I’m extremely forgiving of a lot of things, including the ending to The Stand. I don’t think my complaints about Tarkin are nitpicks.

You’re an OT.com member. Noticing CGI things is a prerequisite. 😉

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

moviefreakedmind said:

ZigZig said:

SilverWook said:

As for any ethical issue, Cushing’s estate gave it’s blessing.

OK, so there is no legal issue. But I am not sure that an estate’s blessing is enough to eliminate any ethical issue.

I think this is important because Peter Cushing definitely did not agree to star in a film made decades after his death, regardless of however much money his estate was given. I also am curious how you all would feel when and if they do CGI Mark Hamill, Carrie Fisher, Harrison Ford, Alec Guinness, and whoever else they want to recreate. I think it sets a very creepy precedent.

Dead celebrities have been pitching products for years they never signed up to do. The Audrey Hepburn commercial a few years back being a prime example. Recreating a character is less creepy than a dead actor shilling for a candy company.
I don’t see this being an issue for Star Wars as there’s only so many side stories they could do in the OT era where running into the original characters would be anything more than a stunt and more universe shrinkage. Rogue One would have been weird without Tarkin.

And I’ll still take CGI Tarkin over this guy.

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

This thread needs something…

Forum Moderator
Author
Time

I would have been happy if the only time you saw Tarkin was in the reflection on the glass looking out. How you first see him.

Author
Time

Well, had no one told me, I wouldn’t have noticed he’s CGI at all. I was mind blown while watching the movie about how they had found an actor that looks so much like Peter Cushing. I wouldn’t have noticed Leia either, but it was easier to believe that she’s CGI than that Tarkin’s CGI for me.

Author
Time

Jeez just that gif alone is awful, weird skin, weird eyes, and the head is too elongated.

Author
Time

paja said:

Is it just me or is Gollum from LOTR and The Hobbit the most realistic CG character?

I still go with Davy Jones from Pirates of the Caribbean as being the most photorealistic CG character even after 10 years, but I do understand that recreating a human (and one whose features we are already very familiar with) is extremely difficult and the final frontier in CGI.

Author
Time

There were many things wrong with Rogue One. CGI Tarkin was actually among the most minor compared to the fatal problems with the concept, structure, pacing, plot, tone, score, and above all character development of the film. But it was still a problem, and one of the easiest to fix. The only remotely compelling character in the film, or at least the only one with potential to be remotely compelling as he was written, was Krennic. He could have been made far more compelling by simply removing Tarkin from the film entirely and instead focusing solely on Krennic and his motives. The rivalry with Tarkin added nothing of substance and Tarkin was clearly only in the film at all solely as fan service and so Disney could demo their shiny new uncanny valley tech.

Krennic was the only villainous Imperial officer with a British accent we needed. Removing Tarkin to focus on him would have killed two birds with one stone – it would have provided an opportunity to at least have a decent villain actually played by a flesh-and-blood human AND it would have avoided the creepy CGI face of a dead man. And no, Tarkin was not needed for the plot – it makes sense that he would have been brought in to replace Krennic after he died at the end of the movie. We don’t need that spelled out for us. Every bit as much over-explaining fan service as the other prequels, frankly.

Author
Time

Density said:

There were many things wrong with Rogue One. CGI Tarkin was actually among the most minor compared to the fatal problems with the concept, structure, pacing, plot, tone, score, and above all character development of the film.

Is that all that was wrong with it?

Author
Time

I’ll be the odd one out and admit that CGI Tarkin didn’t annoy me past the first scene.

Author
Time

yhwx said:

I’ll be the odd one out and admit that CGI Tarkin didn’t annoy me past the first scene.

I think I’m the odd one - I wouldn’t even have noticed it.

Author
Time

Photorealistic CGI faces are hard. Photorealistic CGI performances are ten times harder, even with really good motion capture. An example from Blade Runner 2049: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fV34mT5m0bM

In the side-by-side comparisons, the digital double looks nigh indistinguishable from the original, but translating that into an entirely new performance leaves a lot to be desired. Look at the eyes - human eyes constantly shift and refocus in a dance of micromovements, and you can see the model shifting its eyes in a way that mimics how humans scan another human’s face, but it is still too slow and obvious. Similarly, there is a lack of coordination between the muscles of the face, and that same smooth animated feel. In reality, the muscles of the face are constantly twitching in close coordination to betray the extremely subtle emotions that may not even register to our conscious minds.

All of these problems were apparent in Tarkin and Leia from Rogue One.

You probably don’t recognize me because of the red arm.
Episode 9 Rewrite, The Starlight Project (Released!) and ANH Technicolor Project (Released!)

Author
Time

NeverarGreat said:

Photorealistic CGI faces are hard. Photorealistic CGI performances are ten times harder, even with really good motion capture. An example from Blade Runner 2049: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fV34mT5m0bM

In the side-by-side comparisons, the digital double looks nigh indistinguishable from the original, but translating that into an entirely new performance leaves a lot to be desired. Look at the eyes - human eyes constantly shift and refocus in a dance of micromovements, and you can see the model shifting its eyes in a way that mimics how humans scan another human’s face, but it is still too slow and obvious. Similarly, there is a lack of coordination between the muscles of the face, and that same smooth animated feel. In reality, the muscles of the face are constantly twitching in close coordination to betray the extremely subtle emotions that may not even register to our conscious minds.

All of these problems were apparent in Tarkin and Leia from Rogue One.

Exactly. Most living things, including humans, are twitchy. CGI motion is still too smooth. The visual fidelity is pretty much there though; once someone nails the motion, CGI characters will blend almost seamlessly with their real-life counterparts.

Forum Administrator

MTFBWY…A

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I bought the CG in Blade Runner; but that might’ve been because I didn’t know if it was CG or not, so I wasn’t analyzing it as hard. I knew Tarkin was CG, so I was absolutely looking for anything strange or out of place; I thought it worked for the most part, it wasn’t perfect.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Jay said:

NeverarGreat said:

Photorealistic CGI faces are hard. Photorealistic CGI performances are ten times harder, even with really good motion capture. An example from Blade Runner 2049: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fV34mT5m0bM

In the side-by-side comparisons, the digital double looks nigh indistinguishable from the original, but translating that into an entirely new performance leaves a lot to be desired. Look at the eyes - human eyes constantly shift and refocus in a dance of micromovements, and you can see the model shifting its eyes in a way that mimics how humans scan another human’s face, but it is still too slow and obvious. Similarly, there is a lack of coordination between the muscles of the face, and that same smooth animated feel. In reality, the muscles of the face are constantly twitching in close coordination to betray the extremely subtle emotions that may not even register to our conscious minds.

All of these problems were apparent in Tarkin and Leia from Rogue One.

Exactly. Most living things, including humans, are twitchy. CGI motion is still too smooth. >The visual fidelity is pretty much there though; once someone nails the motion, CGI >characters will blend almost seamlessly with their real-life counterparts.

And then we’ll be living in the Michael Crichton movie Looker. 😉

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

It worked perfectly in Blade Runner because it was supposed to be a bit uncanny valley.

Rogue One, on the other hand… I don’t mind it that much but I don’t really buy it.

Author
Time

paja said:

Is it just me or is Gollum from LOTR and The Hobbit the most realistic CG character?

Have seen Serkins in the new Planet of the Apes movies?

“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.”

Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death

Author
Time

Mike O said:

paja said:

Is it just me or is Gollum from LOTR and The Hobbit the most realistic CG character?

Have seen Serkins in the new Planet of the Apes movies?

Yep they are great. But every time i look at gollum he seems real. I can not think of him as just some guy who drinks ginger tea in a white suit. No i think of him as as Gollum Damit!

“Get over violence, madness and death? What else is there?”

Also known as Mr. Liquid Jungle.

Author
Time

All of Serkis’s work Gollum, Kong, Caesar - is never 100% perfect (maybe the last Apes movie) but it’s perfectly believable in terms of characterisation. That’s why Gollum holds up over 10 years later, the CGI isn’t that good today, it’s aged. But the personality, and performance makes it work.

Rogue One on the other hand is poor, and it’s made poorer because the surrounding story doesn’t support the inclusion of these creepy death masks. I wanted to see Krennick and Galen, that relationship. Or Jyn and Saw, that relationship. These are things that matter inside the plot, but we don’t get them. Instead, all that money wasted on pointless visuals.

Author
Time

Exactly.

“Get over violence, madness and death? What else is there?”

Also known as Mr. Liquid Jungle.

Author
Time

I enjoyed Tarkin in Rogue 1, but then I’m one of those crazies who really loves R1. It’s my third favorite Star Wars movie behind Star Wars and ESB.

I agree with those who never bought it as Cushing, but absolutely buys it as the character of Governor Tarkin. To me, it looks totally real as long as it’s relatively still. It’s when he talks that the veil falls away. As others have mentioned, CG just can’t seem to accurately recreate the subtle snappy twitches of real living things. I also think there’s possibly (probably?) some issues with animators who just can’t help themselves playing with their digital toys. I feel like many digital characters movements are too smooth, but also too exaggerated. They move too much, too far, and in too deliberate a manner in many cases where it’s not necessary.

I do think we’re getting very close to realism though. For example, I thought King Kong in Kong: Skull Island was almost entirely convincing. He has the benefit of being an impossible creature in a fictional world. But I thought they got his movement incredibly believable in most shots (especially the closeups of the face). It may also help that, being so enormous, his movements SHOULD be more dramatic and exaggerated due to the enourmous mass of a creature that size.

Author
Time

Is this better? 😉

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?