FX Artist Adds Jar Jar To TFA Trailer

Troll hard, Jar Jar:

Tags: ,

54 Responses to “FX Artist Adds Jar Jar To TFA Trailer”

  1. M. Marshall Says:

    That was hilarious. By the way did you hear about the Rogue One director? He’s off the project.

    • lazypadawan Says:

      Josh Trank, who was doing the second unnamed spinoff, is the one off the project.

      • M. Marshall Says:

        Either way, this is further proof that Disney is struggling to keep this franchise under control. No one can do it like George.

      • lazypadawan Says:

        One thing’s for sure, it’s not as easy as they thought it was going to be.

  2. bansheegun Says:

    I guess this is the most ironic timing ever. JJ came out as an avid Jar Jar hater in Vanity Fair:

    “For some Star Wars fans, there’s no May the Fourth news finer than this: director J. J. Abrams revealed that he’s thought about killing off the very controversial Jar Jar Binks. Sitting in an edit bay at his Bad Robot production office and pointing to a frame of Star Wars: The Force Awakens, Abrams told Vanity Fair contributing editor Bruce Handy, “I have a thought about putting Jar Jar Binks’s bones in the desert there. I’m serious! Only three people will notice, but they’ll love it.””

    He sounds like such a smug little nerd.

    • bansheegun Says:

      It’s been 16 years. If a character like Jar Jar can cause these people so much emotional distress that they’ll continue their vendetta against him, even after all these years, then they need some serious emotional help.

    • bansheegun Says:

      Here’s a link to that “gem”.


      • blade57hrc Says:

        I loved the ”practical” bluescreens all over the sets, LOL!

        Anyone else also notice Kylo Ren unmasked?
        How did that slip by?

      • lazypadawan Says:

        I saw that…anyone reading the spoilers knew all along Driver was playing Kylo Ren, who appears to be some kind of Vader fanboy.

      • Frida Nyberg Says:

        Yes, all those bluescreens.
        Also, if that crashed Star Destroyer we see in the trailer is not a REAL prop built on set, I and my hoard of hateboys will boycott this movie! 😡

      • M. Marshall Says:

        They’re drooling over “practical” effects, yet Lupita will be a CGI character. That kinda bothers me.

    • Stefan Kraft Says:

      Not sure whether he is really a hater… Something like that could also be interpreted as just an easter egg. However, JJ is at least catering to the hateboys here (IMHO), no matter what he really thinks about the Gungan.
      Vanity Fair describes Jar Jar Binks as “controversial” and not the most hated character or something similar. A progress, if you will.

    • Adam D. Bram (The Nilbog) Says:

      Haha! That’s funny. But, you know, if it were me, I’d actually show a long, close-up slow-motion shot of a very old very alive Jar Jar relieving himself into Boba Fett’s helmet.

      Now imagine if someone said THAT.

    • Anonymous Says:

      That honestly felt more like a joke rather than him being sincere about it. A bad joke, sure. Still, just a joke.

      • lazypadawan Says:

        We’ll see about that. Even Eric Geller and Bryan Young didn’t like that VF went with that angle in the story.

    • yellow12 Says:

      What ? Star Wars is doomed , I guess I stict to the Real Saga and TCW along with Rebels and some other material .

    • Steve Bragg Says:

      Frida, no one said there wasn’t bluescreen for EP7, they just meant there are a LOT less of them than with the prequels. And I am a prequel fan.

      • Branislav Marček Says:

        Are there really? Do you have any actual evidence of this?

      • blade57hrc Says:

        Nope. What they’ve repeatedly been saying is that they’re returning to ”oldschool” practical effects & sets that are actually there.
        As for less bluescreens, digital compositing is at a level now where it doesn’t need so many blue/greenscreens. Only the ”edges” of something have to be bluescreen now, not everything which will be replaced.
        The mere fact that they had BLUEscreens instead of greenscreens on location (where the sky is also…blue) speaks volumes.
        Also, a film which takes place on earth…*cough* i mean ”earthly environments” *cough* will inherently use less blue/greenscreens. It will also use less practical effects like models & bigatures/miniatures to create fantastical environmens, inherently… 😉

      • Branislav Marček Says:

        Abrams kept saying for months that there wasn’t going to be Khan in Into Darkness. Quess what happened then.

      • Stefan Kraft Says:

        Well, it is indeed possible that Abrams is more hesitant to use digital composition than GL. At the same time, we should also not forget that GL wanted to stretch the possibilities of special effects so that GL may also have been more inclined to use green/bluescreens in scenes where other directors would have chosen a real set – at least back then when the PT was shot.

        I have the impression that the use of “real sets” and “practical effects” is over-emphasized at the moment and also done to please those who believe the “only CGI in the prequels” meme. Unfortunately, these people are normally haters, and this catering to them is what bugs me. Honestly, when I became a SW fan, I did not care whether a scene was CGI or not.

        Anyway, I recently wrote a letter to the editor: our university newspaper had an article that praised the “return of practical effects.” Actually, the article was maybe not that negative towards GL, but when it praised Abrams for his use of practical effects and claimed that the special effects in the PT went over the head of the fans (and it was more or less implied that GL only used digital creatures, bluescreens and the like), I could not help to write that
        a) the PT made a lot of people SW fans, and b) the PT was also shot on location and did use practical effects etc.

      • Stefan Kraft Says:

        One caveat: Whatever we think about the use of CGI/practical effects in the ST or PT, let’s be respectful to other fans. Steve may be right, or Frida is, but we should not turn against each other.

      • Bob Clark Says:

        If other fans are respectful, then sure. Return that respect. But if they’re the ones who take the gloves off, there’s no reason not to do the same. I’d like to believe that turning the other cheek will win friends, but it hasn’t in the past fifteen years. Peaceful protest might work on real issues, but when it comes to BS like this online, it’s probably for the best to fight fire with fire. Maybe.

      • blade57hrc Says:

        I’m sorry…
        JJ will use digital compositon. Optcal compositing is not even an option in 2015 for a 200 million$ movie with VFX by ILM.

        Can you give me an example in which GL used blue/greenscreen instead of a set?
        Before doing that, try counting each & every set in ex.ROTS. then compare that to any movie of 2005. Heck, compare it The Dark Knight (2008). You’ll be very surprised…

  3. Eduardo Vargas Says:

    I’m not sure how I feel about JJ’s idea of Jar Jar’s bones being in the sand ( they did kind of the same thing with Jaxxon in TCW, and it wasn’t really a hater thing against that character)

    Is it him being a hater against the character or having some kind of reference to the beginning, without being too explicit about either side?

    Anyway, good thing he made up his mind to not include it, since he figured it would probably be controversial

    • lazypadawan Says:

      Jaxxon was sort of a punchline about how silly the old Marvel comics were (a big green talking bunny), not exactly a lightning rod for the uncivil war in fandom. And in any case, Jaxxon couldn’t have possibly been dead years before he’s supposed to be alive in the Marvel comics.

  4. Sergey Holod Says:

    This is an excerpt from aforementioned Vanity Fair article that suddenly killed all my desire to watch Episode VII:

    Handy saw it for himself in the footage Abrams screened for him, including a scene that featured a Jawa-like creature popping up out of the desert. Abrams called it “a classic, old-school seesaw puppet. We just buried it in the sand, and Neal Scanlan, the creature guy, pushed down on one side and the thing came up on the other side.” When his team offered to smooth out the effect digitally, Abrams responded, “It’s so old-school and crazy. We could improve this thing, but at some point do we lose the wonderful preposterousness?”

    Yes, let’s do things that are obviously puppetry – not because it’s cheaper or more realistic but because it’s unrealistic and wonderfully old-school. After 40 years of pushing visual effects boundaries Star Wars has finally came to this nonsense. But the saddest thing is their lying: because in the end of the day they will improve this thing digitally but this won’t be in the papers.

    My opinion of upcoming Episode VII is this: there’s Tolstoy’s “War and Piece” and there’s all those pathetic books about what happened with those characters and their descendants till present time, there’s Mitchell’s “Gone with the Wind” and there’s all those pathetic sequels and prequels, there’s Lucas’s “Star Wars” and there is no “Star Wars” without Lucas.

    Time will pass and true art will survive, and feeble imitation will perish. As I see it, Lucas has become some sort of Erich von Stroheim of modern era. Ungrateful crowd heap dirt upon him yet in year’s time his name will still be shining in annals of cinema alongside with the greatest innovators and visionaries, and nobody will remember his disrespectful contemporaries.

    • lazypadawan Says:

      Well said, Sergey.

      • Steve Bragg Says:

        You guys are the other side of the extreme in here. The point they’ve made is they are going to do LESS digital work. And have LESS bluescreen work. No one said that there would be no digital work or bluescreens at all. Just quite a bit LESS than people were used to with the prequels. I am saying this as a prequel and overall fan of the entire saga who is excited about EP7.

    • madmediaman Says:

      I love the Von Stroheim reference. A brilliant director and a visionary. There’s a great documentary about him on the Young Indianan Jones and the Hollywood Follies DVD.

      To me this trilogy, without the involvment of Lucas, and more specifically without the use of Lucas’ outlines, is really kind of pointless. It’s like United Artists and Blake Edwards’ decision to continue the Pink Panther series after Peter Sellers death… Both Trail of the Pink Panther, and Curse of the Pink Panther felt unnecessary. Heck TFA seems to be going the Trail of the Pink Panther route…

      Those familiar with that 1982 film might recall that another Pink Panther sequel was in development shortly before Sellers death. UA asked director Blake Edwards if he could come up with a film idea around people searching for Inspector Clouseau. Edwards contrived a fairly weak story and used some flashbacks from previous movies, and even worked in new scenes which were actually cut scenes from the earlier films… the movie was a mess, but it made enough money to warrant another sequel… this one completeely Clouseauless.

      TFA is really beginning to feel like nothing more than a rehash of the OT using a bunch of discarded concepts from the OT and ST. Stormtrooper with lightsaber… check. Stormtrooper with shield… check. “Girl” Luke Skywalker… check. Oh, but hey… we’ve got PRACTICAL effects!

      Don’t get me wrong, I have no real problem with more Star Wars movies without the involvement of Lucas but I’m very hesitant about labelling the film “Episode VII” in the crawl when he’s not involved in the continuation of his Saga. I’d have ZERO issue jumping way ahead in the timeline to a whole new era… a la Dark Horse’s Star Wars Legacy, which would certainly have ties to the Star Wars Saga, but would be its own unique thing.

      • Steve Bragg Says:

        Lucas allowed it.

      • madmediaman Says:

        Point of clarification. Lucas submitted his treatments, and I suspect he had some confidence they would use them. However if Disney has gone their own way (as Lucas claims), that’s completely fine from a business perspective, but again, I think it’s disingenuous to actually call this Episode VII then… it would probably be more appropriate to call it Star Wars 2.0.

      • Bob Clark Says:

        I keep hoping that, if this reall is a Lucas-less story, they’ll drop the Episode number and just call it “The Force Awakens”. That will never happen, of course, but whatever.

      • Stefan Kraft Says:

        I see it this way: Will it be called Ep VII? Yes. Will it have “earned” this number because it is a valid contribution to and continuation of the Saga created by GL? I hope so, but only time will tell.

        Anyway, I am not happy that they have dropped GL’s story treatments. I do not know what to make out of it.

  5. lovelucas Says:

    LP – sent you an email about a new defender who is majorly pissed at JJ. Enriching, it is.

  6. Jacobesico Says:


  7. Slicer87 Says:

    It is better than the real trailer.

    That linked article has me thinking even more that JJ is the wrong guy for a Star Wars film.

  8. Steve Bragg Says:

    This forum/message board is more proof that no matter what they do with SW, there will be message boards somewhere with people that won’t be happy.

    • blade57hrc Says:

      Should we be happy they’re lying & pandering to the misconceptions of the hating crowd? Are you seriously suggesting this?

    • lazypadawan Says:

      Hi Steve,

      Speaking for myself, I wish I was happier about what has been going on with fandom and I’m sure most of us here were too. I hope TFA turns out to be worthy of its predecessors; I even perm banned a guy who kept using different socks to keep posting “ep 7 sucks” over and over as though he had Tourette’s of the keyboard. This is a pro-prequel site not an anti-ST one, at least that’s not what I intend.

      That said, I find the whole “we’re using practical effects,” “we’re using real sets,” and “we’re using real locations” pitch for TFA to be thoroughly obnoxious because they are playing on misconceptions/criticisms leveled at the prequels. It’s the cinematic version of that Weezer song “Back To The Shack;” woo hoo Back-To-Basics Star Wars!!!1! There are people out there who really believe this is a move back to 1970s special effects. There’s even an implication in the new Vanity Fair interview with J.J. Abrams he’s doing some low tech effects for the kitsch or nostalgic factor. What should drive what’s used for effects should be what serves the story/look of the film/budget best, not anything else. Maybe that’s the reality but it certainly isn’t the PR. It also doesn’t help when the same VF interview opens with Abrams kidding (?) about whacking Jar Jar in the film. Seriously? That kind of thing was actually what worried me the most about this film…that they will break the fourth wall even in the smallest way to flip off the prequels and/or the Special Editions (brace yourself for Han getting to say, “Ha ha I shot first” or some b.s. like that). Yesterday on Twitter some guy responded to Eric Geller’s tweet about this quote with something along the lines of, “Good! I hope they kill the prequels!” Can you understand why this wouldn’t exactly have me waving my pom poms? I have other concerns about the movie that might be alleviated once I see the finished product, but stepping on the prequels as the main selling point of the film will always leave a bad, bad taste in my mouth.

      Anyway, I hope you’ll stick around because there is a lot more to SWPAS. You might not agree with everyone’s perspectives and that’s okay as long as you’re an honest player.

  9. Steve Bragg Says:

    They think keep MORE things tangible will give haters less to hate. Their point is there is LESS bluescreen, LESS reliance on CGI. That’s what they are saying. We are following ROTJ. They never said there would be no digital effect or bluescreen, just a lot less. There is a significant percentage of the fanbase that complains endlessly about that (Too much CGI.). To ignore that percentage would be mistake. There we many practical models used for the prequels, I full well know that. But there are things people believe could have been shot practical that were not, like making all the clonetroopers CGI and not building a few suits and such. I love the prequels & the originals, and am falling in love with what I have seen with EP7. Don’t make it and “us vs them” thing. It’s all SW that Lucas allowed. Some of you are as dogmatic as some of the prequel haters are. I come into this from the POV of a happy medium. Ready to enjoy Star Wars, it should be a great year and more to follow. Too many pessimists all around. Life is too short, people.

    • Stefan Kraft Says:

      Steve, I think you are absolutely right that we should not turn into haters, and I have probably more often than not already judged EP VII – which I shouldn’t because I have (obviously) not watched the full movie. So you are right that we should “cool down a bit” if necessary.

      Now, I have some (more or less) serious reasons why I am not overly excited for EP VII (some have been stated by LP above). However, you are excited, and it is GOOD that you are! Do not let your enthusiasm be ruined because of me.

    • blade57hrc Says:

      Sorry, but they never said what’you’re saying.
      They’re saying we ”return to practical effects & have real sets that are there” ad nauseum!
      FFS…there’s not as much CGI in the PT compared to most of todays blockbusters! Digital compositing of actors in bigatures (just like LOTR) is NOT cgi!
      They’re shamelessly pandering to a misconception which, as it seems, not only haters have but even people who like the PT!

      Clonetroopers performing the actions they did could NOT be practical! Same thing why they mo-cap’ed RDJr’s Iron Man suit!He couldn’t move in that thing!
      If it were extras they would not look identical & they would stumble around like the STs in the OT. Simple as that.

      We are not making it an ”us VS them”.
      JJ/KK/LFL/Iger/Disney (whoever decided this PR route) is doing a damn good job at it!
      Imagine if JJ ”joked” about having a minor scene in which Boba Fett is implied to be peed upon his head by someone on the edges of the Sarlaac…Try…

    • Anonymous Says:

      My issues are less with the actual movie (because duh, it still isn’t out yet, it’s impossible to have an opinion about it at this time), but rather, the PR has been tremendously tedious. Whether the whole thing was in CGI, or very little CGI was used, doesn’t matter to me quite honestly. If I like the movie, I like it, and if I don’t, oh well. If they wanna announce that they’ll use practical effects, fine, make an announcement just one time, don’t repeat it over and over and over and over again! I seriously hate listening to the words “practical effects” thanks to the damn PR. Personally, it’s something that would actually drive me away from the movie (which I still intend to see btw, and will judge solely on content, and not how it was marketed).

    • Andrew Weaver Says:

      Agreed. Stumbling into this blog was a pleasure to see I wasn’t alone in my opinions, but some of the folks here seem a little alarmist about this part of the saga being brushed over and fanatic about Lucas. A happy medium is good, not just liking everything, but avoiding a fanboy level of decrying anything spoken against these films. No person or film is perfect, no matter how good it is there’s bound to be some flaws from one person’s point of view or another. I think we could at least be a bit accepting of how the prequels are disliked, and understanding why people do. Disagreeing with them is fine, but let’s not ravage on them as much as they do with the films. I’d rather not get that upset with the reputation of these things when i’d rather be simply enjoying them.

  10. blade57hrc Says:

    On another note…https://storify.com/Astojap/wehdon-twitter-hate
    Remind you of anyone?
    Is it also a little glimpse into the future?

    Maybe JJ should take this into concideration when pandering to the ”unsattisfied no matter what” crowd? Just sayin’…

    • Stefan Kraft Says:

      LP has written a blog post here that addressed the (overblown) expectations some fans (or hateboys) seem to have. If they are disappointed, the reaction of these fans (fans?) will be worse than Order 66.
      If this indeed happens, I will only feel sorry for Abrams because, well, no one deserves something like that, and he was probably not really aware that he risked such a backlash.

      • M. Marshall Says:

        I don’t agree with what people are saying about Joss Whedon, but I kind of have to smile to myself because for years I was unimpressed with Whedon’s “feminism” and I often pointed out some of the hypocrisy in his work. Now he’s being called out for it and I’m like: “I told you so.” I always thought men like Lucas and Rob Tapert were the better feminists.

        But once again, I would never go that far with my choice of words.

  11. Obi-Rob Says:

    I have said this before but ill say again here, its just funny because BOTH trailers released seemed RIGHT AWAY to have WAAAAAY TOO MUCH CGI in them after all the phony hype about “practical” effects.

    Every single scene/shot of the falcon flying looked like it was 100% cgi……is that even a real millennium falcon??? Because it looked more cgi than Padmes ships from the PT it looked so “fake”.

    Not that I even care because I already know there will be a big MIX of CG and practical.

    I really think he is just being smug this whole time and when he says “practical effects” he just means there are going to be a lot of Labyrinth style puppets used when it comes to creatures…..which itself is canclled out by the FACT that we know know that there will be a 100% cgi main character in the film. WOW.

    After all the shit they gave Jar-jar and CGI we got a new fully CGI main character in this new movie. And so far EVERYTHING except “some” of the planet scenery and labyrinth like puppets for creatures look to be 100% CGI.

    Listen…if the millennium falcon really is a model then it mine as well have been CG because it REALLY looks fake. If not…meaning if the millennium falcon itself is really as cgi as it looks after all that anti-cg bull than every single one of the hateboys has been not only PROVEN DEAD WRONG but they have been really HUMILIATED.

    If it really is real fine…but it doesn’t at all look like or match up to the OT millennium falcon which you can look at and tell is a model.

  12. Steve Bragg Says:

    You even mean the newer Falcon shots in the SE’s where it blasts out of Mos Eisely and the CG shots of it going into Cloud City don’t look CG? And that CG of the Falcon does NOT look fake to me in the 2 teasers. Extremists here.

    • lazypadawan Says:

      Steve, please read the RULES OF THE HOUSE page on the right side of the main page. Referring to other posters as “extremists” is baiting and name-calling, particularly since in the media it’s a political hot-potato (i.e. you don’t agree with me so you’re an extremist) and it’s often used in reference to terrorists. I don’t necessarily agree with the idea that the Falcon looks fake in any incarnation…but I know it’s all fake.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: