Star Wars blew my socks off because it was like I was sitting watching what every sci-fi movie I'd seen since the 60s should really have been. The Empire Strikes Back meant that I simply had to see Return of the Jedi. To be honest, I never felt any of the others were in the same franchise. Yeah, they're fun and they have their good and bad bits, but really they're Return to Oz claiming to be a sequel (prequel, schmequel, whatever) to the Wizard. The Force Awakens was a move back towards some kind of form, but I didn't like the portentous scene setting that much. I did enjoy the Last Jedi - more than I thought I would - and that at least had some serious nods to the original three movies.
Rogue One was "OK", I suppose. I thought the acting and direction was below par and I genuinely believe that Felicity Jones delivers her lines like she's in an early read-through of a Tomb Raider game. I wasn't worried by the resurrection of Peter Cushing; I'm sure he'd have loved the idea. What I did object to, and where I differ with you, is that I thought it was awful. I've seen quite a few blends of CGI with live action where the aim isn't to produce demons and monsters, but to change age or portray disfigurement (or body size like Captain America) or Smeagul, and sometimes it's OK, sometimes not. They always have a tough time where the motion capture etc. is intended to produce a seamlessly normal human face. What really hit me, and I've looked at these scenes a few times now, is just how badly it's done. I think, for example, the way Tarkin's head changes shape quite wildly in some scenes to match the underlying actor is an issue. As is the fact that the look varies from Christopher Plummer to Morph depending on the angle.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsuvXHGCVXE
EDITED: 2 Jan 2018 23:25 by WILLIAMA