Its all digital Brian

It would’ve been nice for the filmmakers if they were serendipitous enough to find any unused footage of younger Carrie Fisher rather than do CGI on her face.

She lied. You could tell it was CGI...I thought it all looked bad.

Yeah it will be better with time. imagine Star wars 1977 in cgi that looks exactly like original , but starting to tell different story in second half of the movie. That would be epic

Ultimate History of CGI Yeah, that would be something. :) Unfortunately many fans prefer the original trilogy just how they were originally released in the theaters in the 70’s and 80’s without CGI or any other changes..🙄 Well there are some Original Trilogy Special Edition changes that I like and some I dislike. The changes I liked were the new created CGI shots of the Spaceships, the new Mos Eisley Spaceport approach (except too many added CGI, should’ve been less) the new shot of the Jawa Scoundrel, some dialogues and lines restored, added Biggs Darklighter scene in the Rebel Hangar back in, and new improved Lightsaber blades (tho the blades effects look outdated and Vader’s saber color is more pink than red. Wish they should’ve went with the Revenge Of The Sith thick saber blades. I know the lightsaber blades are supposed to be thin based on the concept art of A New Hope, but the Prequel Trilogy and The Clone Wars series, the thickness of the blades gives the lightsabers more beauty) Anyway, those are the changes I can share with.

@@alejandrovelez6358 I actually like the thin sabers like in Rebels

@@tabbywarrior Yeah sometimes I do, sometimes I don’t lol So much how the art style animation for Rebels is based off of Ralph McQuarrie’s concept art for the first Star Wars movie “A New Hope” which makes sense :)

They tried their best but fell short

Deep fakes look more convincing.

Dame danee...

@@mattlm64 true, hilarious, and sad, taken into account the amount of effort put in to what amounts to what is certainly an impressive, but less convincing effect

Wait till you see Sarah Conner.

Yeah, CG-Leia is crap

Agreed!

@@SuperOrangeMan23 oh damn and John Connor

@@tabbywarrior Absolutely. The only CG humans that I think have fully got that true human look and feel.

You are aware that movies are made to make money right? There isn’t a producer, writer, director or anyone else involved with the movie that gives two shits if you like the movie or not. People like to think their entertainment level is most important to those creating a movie, but they are all 100% wrong. Some of the people that were involved in producing it havn’t seen it. Movies are made to make people rich not to entertain the all the Star Wars nerds out there.

you are so right, before rogue one, no star wars movie was made for profit. they were all made and released for free.

Well yeah dumbass, making movies and selling them is called business. 🤷🏻‍♂️

I thought it was when you finish the steps towards something and just say that as the end goal even if it’s not money.

yeah movies shoudlve stay black and white. i bet people understand what color is the sky

@@ultimatehistoryofcgi8897 I understand your point. Its great that filmmakers are pushing the technical boundaries of film, all Im saying is that the actors they picked looked really great for the part and would have brought the emotional element that is difficult to replicate with animation.

​@@kairozartstudio people often say - what the point of this kind of cgi? eventually it will become absolutely realistic - imagine new film with Marilyn Monroe completely done from scratch with cgi or Terminator 1984 that on the second half of the movie just go to absolutely different direction - with same actors like they played it in 1984. that will be incredible

maybe this - they made with computers?

It looked fake. You could tell and if you couldn't you need glasses

I was born in 84 so I've been able to see the progression of CGI throughout the years.... I will say that their vision of princess Leia, look gorgeous. The glossiness of her lips, the glow of her skin tone. CGI renditions of that year. However, there is something that computers will never be able to regenerate. It's this inherent knowledge of the human soul existing right in front of you. Or not. And it's really that simple.

if they hadnt have and you knew that Carrie Fisher was still alive and the age she was, you wouldnt think otherwise, its only that you know it has to be fake that gives it away... The cg for leia is actually very very good.

It looks great, way better than the Luke CGI.

Totally, the problem with Luke was his eyes and lack of facial expression... His eyes at times looked strange and he felt robotic. Leia worked mainly as a result of it being a very short shot and so you got away with it.

Other way arround buddy

it's because old face, especially if it is a male face, is more 'picturesque', therefore much more easier to work with, with numerous more reference points acting as visual distraction to the viewer.

@@ivaerak No

@@SaItyToad00 To me both characters looked like crap honestly

@@ivaerak No

Difd you compare makeup with CGI? what a moron

no its not. generative ai that released to public is still sucks

Fawzy Nahwi she didnt sound the same due to age.

@@jlistetson I wouldn't care We loved her all the same T_T

Justin Li Bullshit, she just didn't look like her role at all anymore

No, just about 50 years older.

didnt she die?

cgi is like painting - softer face features - harder to recreate -children faces is hardest

@@ultimatehistoryofcgi8897 exactly, that’s why tarkin looks more natural than leia