Crikey, that looks good...


And that music gives me the shivers. Definitely a soundtrack to pick up.

I heard Disney were initially worried about the music, because John Williams wasn't going to be involved with it. Well it now looks as if those worries were unfounded. The score's perfect!

To me the music sounds like typical post 2010s movie fare. It's good but not particularly memorable. YMMV of course.

I will echo what other people have said. This movie looks a lot better than the TFA. I can't wait to see it!

 Future War Cultist wrote:
I heard Disney were initially worried about the music, because John Williams wasn't going to be involved with it. Well it now looks as if those worries were unfounded. The score's perfect!

They did replace the composer very late in the process. IIRC, the particulars of the switch had people thinking that Disney wanted to move away from something 'different' and toward a more traditional SW soundtrack. Guess we'll see.

I think that also fueled rumors that the same dynamic was going on with the film...Edwards shot something that was kinda different, and Disney wanted traditional, hence the reshoots. Who knows?

http://io9.gizmodo.com/new-force-awakens-deleted-scene-demonstrates-why-you-sh-1787925963?rev=1476804898276&utm_campaign=socialflow_gizmodo_facebook&utm_source=gizmodo_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow


good grief eh ?!

I have to say, I'm looking forward to this far more than TFA. The trailers suggest that it will be a far superior movie. Don't get me wrong, I liked TFA just fine, but it did have some issues.

Not my cup of tea, but I hope StarWars fans let down by TFA will enjoy it.

The trailer looks promising, I'm definitely looking forward to this one. It will be nice to revisit the time frame of the Rebel Alliance vs. the Empire again on film.

Still bittersweet about the whole EU revamp...

In fact, originally I was going to avoid TFA altogether... I'm glad I did watch it in the theaters...

I'm having the same feelings with this movie as well... I'll watch the trailers and feel a mix of awe and frustration... It looks cool and Star Wars-y... but its not the EU I learned to love.

Maybe in time this 'Disney/Lucas' approved Star Wars universe will grow on me... but I didn't see anything wrong with how the EU was.

 messhallcook wrote:
... but I didn't see anything wrong with how the EU was.

It was messy, and full of contradictions, and got even messier and contradictionier after the Prequels came out and they suddenly had to try and work in all of George's retcons into the existing EU... While I enjoyed the EU, I'm vastly more in favour of a full universe that's built as a single continuity from the get-go, rather than the layered approach.

Then again ... i'm one of the few Karen Traviss fans in existence so my taste... and sanity are suspect...

I actually quite enjoyed her books as well, although I felt that turning Boba Fett into the noble martyred hero was a little unnecessary.


I'm kind of hoping that, if the rumoured Boba Fett movie turns out to be true, that they go for 'Screw Up who just manages to maintain a big reputation' instead... I mean, he never actually accomplished anything in the original movies other than tailing the Millennium Falcon (and then capturing his bounty with the help of Darth Vader rather than on his own merits) and then getting kicked into a sarlacc by a blind guy... The Clone Wars series also sets him up as a bit of a fall guy - the other clones dislike him, his attempts to become a big-time bounty hunter all go awry. It would be awesome to see that continued as the story progresses... have him be a continual failure who everyone thinks is a badass, but who is always trying, and failing, to live up to his dead father's achievements and expectations.


That's much more interesting that the cookie-cutter hero that Traviss turned him into.

There's a few things that are cool about him though. Like he's the only guy that spotted Luke and R2 sneaking about

few new little clips

Very cool

Is that necklace holding a Kyber crystal?

Would make sense as a plot point if the rumors of her dad having to help fix an energy problem are true. Is the whole "Death star is powered by Kyber crystals" thing still canon?

Okay, it's been a month since the d-usa's post but the movie is out now in places that are not the USA so I wanted to ask if anyone has seen it and if so, is it an original story or is it an amalgam of previous material like Abrams' movie was?

 Breotan wrote:
Okay, it's been a month since the d-usa's post but the movie is out now in places that are not the USA so I wanted to ask if anyone has seen it and if so, is it an original story or is it an amalgam of previous material like Abrams' movie was?

Is it out elsewhere in the world? I was pretty sure the worldwide release wasn't until Wednesday but I could easily be mistaken.

I thought the USA was a week behind everyone else.

 messhallcook wrote:

Spoiler:

Then again ... i'm one of the few Karen Traviss fans in existence so my taste... and sanity are suspect...

Make that two of us, I'd be so friggin happy if a movie made from Stormtroopers point of view had her involved in some way. Maybe skip/tone down the Mandalorian worship which gets grating from to time and I'd be pretty happy.

As for the movie, saw the trailer where Stormtroopers stand around getting beaten up by a blind dude with a stick, they never fired a shot, not even a pulse thing they used to subdue Leia, so meh, I've lost interest.

Edit: I'd also enjoy it if those black armored troopers (Death Troopers I think they're called) don't go the way of Captain Phasma, but Star Wars being Star Wars, I have absolutely no hope.

 Breotan wrote:
I thought the USA was a week behind everyone else.

I was curious as well so I checked Wikipedia page on the movie and it said the world premier was on Friday but it is being released in "certain European" countries on December 14.

http://uproxx.com/movies/star-wars-rogue-one-screening-reactions/4/


.. I'm somewhat optimistic then.

Hope to catch it next week some time, probably.

We get it on general release thursday (15th) because that's movie opening day down under. It's been that way for as long as I can remember.
Red carpet releases, when we have them, tend to be the Wednesday night.

As I understand it, movies are more likely to release on the friday in the US for the weekend.

Thursday afternoon is the new Friday night.

My boss has tickets for the 15th.

Initial reports are that it is the best Star Wars film ever. I take that with a pinch of salt but I think it could be a good change of pace, a more adult war film set in the SW universe, less space fantasy and more 'realistic' action.

The first reviews of Rogue One are coming in and they've all been good to great, which gives me high hopes!

I'm a little worried because all of the reviews I've read have said it's "intense" and "mature" with one saying specifically not to take young children. My girls are 5 and 7 (almost 8) and while I'm not overly concerned with about what they watch (within reason, or course), I think I'm going to reschedule our Sunday movie time so I can see it first to make sure it's okay for them.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:
The first reviews of Rogue One are coming in and they've all been good to great, which gives me high hopes!

I'm a little worried because all of the reviews I've read have said it's "intense" and "mature" with one saying specifically not to take young children. My girls are 5 and 7 (almost 8) and while I'm not overly concerned with about what they watch (within reason, or course), I think I'm going to reschedule our Sunday movie time so I can see it first to make sure it's okay for them.

The Boy is 10, and a major Star Wars fan. He’s chomping at the bit to see this, but I need to get reliable reviews before I let him. Would love to catch it in the theater with him, but if it is too “adult” he can wait. My brother is going opening night to review it for his boys (9 and 8ish) so I’ll get one opinion from someone with their parent eyes on.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:
The first reviews of Rogue One are coming in and they've all been good to great, which gives me high hopes!

I'm a little worried because all of the reviews I've read have said it's "intense" and "mature" with one saying specifically not to take young children. My girls are 5 and 7 (almost 8) and while I'm not overly concerned with about what they watch (within reason, or course), I think I'm going to reschedule our Sunday movie time so I can see it first to make sure it's okay for them.

Thats probably a good thing. Plus its an excuse to see it twice.

We're waiting until the week of the 27th so things can calm down a little. I think it will be a blowout for the next two weeks.

Reviews seems to be trending just kind decent overall. Metacritic has it at a 67. Sounding a little like some of the 'seams' are showing from the reshoots and Disney's involvement?

http://www.avclub.com/review/rogue-one-adventure-star-wars-dark-side-247345

82% rotten tomatoes.

Metacritic isn't much use for things. Rotten Tomatoes tends to be a better guide as it uses the critics, not just whatever. There could be crazy #DumpStarWars idiots posting bogus 1% reviews somewhere to drag it down.

And I'm seeing it Saturday, and probably Sunday. Friend of mine from work saw the midnight screening and said it was everything we wanted from a SW movie. Can't wait!

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:
I'm a little worried because all of the reviews I've read have said it's "intense" and "mature" with one saying specifically not to take young children. My girls are 5 and 7 (almost 8) and while I'm not overly concerned with about what they watch (within reason, or course), I think I'm going to reschedule our Sunday movie time so I can see it first to make sure it's okay for them.

It is a PG-13 movie after all.

Just back from seeing this, absolutely loved it

Just back from seeing it tonight, its a really enjoyable Star Wars film. I'm surprised its been getting great reviews as I'm not sure that its amazing, but from a nerdy Star Wars fan perspective this is much more the kind of film I hoped to be getting than the Force Awakens. For the old EU canon folk its essentially a Hollywood re-imagining of Operation Skyhook and the Battle of Toprawa with a similar outcome for the Rebel Alliance.

I really loved it, it is better than the "Force Awakens" crap.
However, it is far from perfect.



A good 7/10 for me.

How scary or traumatizing would it be for young children?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Metacritic isn't much use for things. Rotten Tomatoes tends to be a better guide as it uses the critics, not just whatever. There could be crazy #DumpStarWars idiots posting bogus 1% reviews somewhere to drag it down.

The 48 critics listed by Metacritic for Rogue One are all fairly legit, so I'm not sure where you get the idea that random yahoos get to vote and skew their numbers. It's Tomatoes that's listing 200+ "reviewers" right now.

Metacritic is kinda dumb, but Rotten Tomatoes makes movie criticism far dumber than it already is. It reduces reviews to a binary 'thumbs up or down' and tells you how many critics voted that way. At least Metacritic tries to present some kind of scale.

Anyway, having read some reviews, they tend to support the Metacritic score for this one...good, but not great.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
How scary or traumatizing would it be for young children?

I'm a young man, not a father, so it's a bit difficult to say.
But Rogue One is in deed a bit darker than others SW.
What do you think about SW III, when the clones betray the jedis and kill them all, and when Anakin kill the children ? SW III is dark too. If you think your child can see the III, I think Rogue One is ok.

I wouldn't say it is traumatizing, but maybe he won't enjoy it ?

Thanks for the heads-up. It's going to be a tough call.

Ever check Common Sense Media? It breaks things down pretty well.

https://www.commonsensemedia.org/movie-reviews/rogue-one-a-star-wars-story

Just saw it. I really do think it is my favourite Star wars film.

It very much is 'the wargamers' Star Wars film too. Fantasy Flight will be running their hands with glee too.

There are few films it is like but naming them would be very much into spoiler territory.

One thing that I'm kinda annoyed about, is the location and plotline of the first quarter of the film is required similar to the setting for my hypothetical star wars RPG campaign

 Compel wrote:
There are few films it is like but naming them would be very much into spoiler territory.

I mention it in the spoiler thread.

EDIT: Which has now been closed. So apologies for anyone in the future who gets spoiled by the thread previews not hiding spoiler tags.

Anyone else think Jane should have kept her stormtrooper figure in the box so it appreciates in value?

My only complaint about the film is the hentai monster the rebels had. That thing was just ugly and unessery. Too simmilar to the needless CGI monsters/aliens in the prequels

I really enjoyed it. The start was a bit jumpy heading from planet to planet but once it got going it was great. And unusually for me I got a bit emotional with the last few scenes, especially those on Scariff.

A few thoughts:

What I thought would have made a great scene would have been the Mon Calamari admiral promoting an escaping junior officer Akbar to Admiral

 godardc wrote:
I really loved it, it is better than the "Force Awakens" crap.
However, it is far from perfect.

Spoiler:

-How could they destroy the AT-TTs with X wing weaponry when they couldn't do it in The Empire Strikes Back ???

A good 7/10 for me.

Well...



I thought it was great. Rogue One is now my second favorite SW movie, behind Empire.

K-2SO is droid of the year.

Oh that was one thing that I had trouble with. They really weren't clear on who everyone's names was. - it's quite a common thing I found on various ensemble films.

 Bobthehero wrote:

Spoiler:

Aren't AT-AT able to carry cargo as well? Its in the name... unless its even more cargo-y than the normal AT-AT

I first saw "Star Wars" before it was called "A New Hope" at the age of 6, at a Drive-In movie theater astride a 1977 Corvette T-top. It was 1979 and I remember that I didnt want to go play at the playground. I didnt ask for candy, or soda or popcorn. Enthralled.

Later, all my friends and I could talk about was the rumor that Luke was Vaders son. I dont know how it got leaked to children before the internet and before Empire came to our little town's "Mall Twin Cinema," but I remember seeing the back of a SW trading card and it made me think... "yeah... I bet he is." I have loved all the Star Wars movies. I even didnt mind JarJar or the Ewoks, but they distracted the story a bit... but I didn't care. It was Star Wars. When I go... Im on the T-top again under a stary canopy in the South's warm summer.

Empire or A New Hope has been the reigning champ for most of us including myself.... the reflexive "go to" whwn someone asks whats your favorite Star Wars movie? Tonight, for the first time since the summer of 1979, I felt truely transported.

Tonight, I can confidently say... Rogue One is my new favorite. I feel weird about it, but its true. It had all the good and none of the bad. My only regret was that I am not 6 again.

Just got back from it. Opinions:

 Ctaylor wrote:

 godardc wrote:
I really loved it, it is better than the "Force Awakens" crap.
However, it is far from perfect.

Spoiler:

-How could they destroy the AT-TTs with X wing weaponry when they couldn't do it in The Empire Strikes Back ???

A good 7/10 for me.

Well...

Spoiler:

Those weren't AT-ATs, they were AT-ACTs, the cargo variant. Presumably not as heavily armored.

The weakest part was the use of the digital actors for Tarkin and Leia. Better than past attempts. But still not quite there.

The Vader scene was almost too badass and overshadowed the other imperials. I want to see more of this Vader.

I loved the fact that this explains why there is a weak point on the Death Star and how the movie ends just as ANH starts.

I thought it was great. Rogue One is now my second favorite SW movie, behind Empire.

K-2SO is droid of the year.

Ok ! So this movie is even better for me, eventually Thanks for explaining. A good 7.5/10 then.

Second best Star Wars film after Empire for me.. amazing film.. just gave answers to questions I didn't even realise I wanted/needed to know the answers to.. excellent stuff.

 Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:

Spoiler:

Also, Rebels references for the win. Really glad they gave a nod to the TV show. My eldest shouted out 'The Ghost!' when he saw it..

where was that then? in the end battle, i presume?
i must've missed it. grrr.
however, i did notice:

 Nicky J wrote:

 Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:

Spoiler:

Also, Rebels references for the win. Really glad they gave a nod to the TV show. My eldest shouted out 'The Ghost!' when he saw it..

where was that then? in the end battlr, i presume?
i must've missed it. grrr.
however, i did notice:

Spoiler:

when they were on yavin there was message over the tannoy in the background for a captain syndulla...

I guess I should also say I really enjoyed the film, I like it as much as or a little less than Empire.

It was entertaining, but it fell so far into the abyss of wasted potential.

It was adaquate in telling the story it wanted to tell, entertaining when it tried too be but it lacked almost any sort of tangible weight. A good fan survice movie stained by the fact it didn't survice the fans enough to distract me from the short comings. 6/10

I enjoyed it for sure but the lack of threat that the stormtrooper presented kept taking me out of the film. We keep hearing how scary stormtroopers are but they just die in droves while very obviously just bumbling about like they are not aware of their surroundings. They don't come off as threatening and more or less just comical goons to be dispatched until the heroes decide they are done "fighting."

Only one movie they live up to their reputation and Emprie Strikes Back still stands as the best Star Wars movie to date without a contender.

But still its worth seeing and is easily better than Return of the Jedi and all the prequels. I liked it honestly as much as New Hope though.

The stormtroopers did pretty well in a New Hope intro, considering they had to go through a small man sized hole and into a tunnel where 5-6 men had their guns pointed at the door, either that or the Alderan troopers were really badly trained.

Did the Death Troopers end up being another Captain Phasma?

 Bobthehero wrote:
The stormtroopers did pretty well in a New Hope intro, considering they had to go through a small man sized hole and into a tunnel where 5-6 men had their guns pointed at the door, either that or the Alderan troopers were really badly trained.

Did the Death Troopers end up being another Captain Phasma?

No, the were fairly effective.

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
The stormtroopers did pretty well in a New Hope intro, considering they had to go through a small man sized hole and into a tunnel where 5-6 men had their guns pointed at the door, either that or the Alderan troopers were really badly trained.

Did the Death Troopers end up being another Captain Phasma?

No, the were fairly effective.

Spoiler:

Minus the part where Donnie Yen is praying to the force and they all miss him.

Which is kind of the whole point.

 LunarSol wrote:

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
The stormtroopers did pretty well in a New Hope intro, considering they had to go through a small man sized hole and into a tunnel where 5-6 men had their guns pointed at the door, either that or the Alderan troopers were really badly trained.

Did the Death Troopers end up being another Captain Phasma?

No, the were fairly effective.

Spoiler:

Minus the part where Donnie Yen is praying to the force and they all miss him.

Which is kind of the whole point.

Spoiler:

My issue with it was that it took too long to play out and robbed a lot of its tension and impact. It either needed to play out faster or he needed to take some hits along the way and have to will himself to keep going.

I'm not a big fan of the Rebels myself.



Basically I can't knock the movie for lacking a military attention to details because they are not a "war movie", really its my own fault for being unable to not have that stuff annoy me. Kids won't notice and most people without military backgrounds won't either so its not actually a big deal.

Same could be said for space combat. Its much less exciting once you know what space combat should actually look like (and BSG gave glimpses of on their limited budget).

I happen to have some military background, which is why seeing stormtroopers being more incompetent than even a new recruit bothers me.

 Bobthehero wrote:
I happen to have some military background, which is why seeing stormtroopers being more incompetent than even a new recruit bothers me.

Same, but its hardly the only series where it happens, heck the much lauded (for some reason) BSG has Pilots better than Marines in ground combat.

Never saw BSG, so I am fine on that front

Star Wars in general has always had a problem with Stormtroopers. It ultimately comes down to creating a villain that is supposed to be super elite that vastly outnumbers the heroes. There's no real way to depict the heroes winning that situation with any consistency that doesn't erode the elite status placed on the villain. Actually, its essentially a problem with any long running story involving lethal conflicts. The villain's binary win condition simply doesn't allow for the kind of give and take wins and losses that can keep them a credible threat for long against heroes that the audience will stick behind.

Bobthehero wrote:I happen to have some military background, which is why seeing stormtroopers being more incompetent than even a new recruit bothers me.

At all points stormtroopers look like extras wearing costumes doing their best to pretend soldier.
There is at least two scenes where stormtroopers look less like a military threat and more like bowling pins.

VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
I happen to have some military background, which is why seeing stormtroopers being more incompetent than even a new recruit bothers me.

Same, but its hardly the only series where it happens, heck the much lauded (for some reason) BSG has Pilots better than Marines in ground combat.

I served after I saw BSG so I'm sure it would be annoying now lol but showes that it isn't an issue for most movie goers.

I always figured the stormtroopers were more of a police force than an actual fighting unit.

Saw the film today, was decent. Needed more Vader.

 Ctaylor wrote:

Spoiler:

AT-ATs are troop transports (they hold 40 stormtroopers plus gear).

AT-ACTs are larger, true cargo variants, used for construction and munitions transport.

Far as i'm concerned this is a much better Star Wars movie than Episode 7 and possibly better than at least one movie of the original trilogy (as heretical as some might consider that).

The few issues i had with the movie.



Things that i'm mixed (dislike and like) on.



Things i really liked:



As i said for the most part i enjoyed it. It was much better than Episode 7 and may actually top one of the movies in the original trilogy but i'm not the best judge here and definitely not the biggest star wars fan.

-----------

 LunarSol wrote:

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
The stormtroopers did pretty well in a New Hope intro, considering they had to go through a small man sized hole and into a tunnel where 5-6 men had their guns pointed at the door, either that or the Alderan troopers were really badly trained.

Did the Death Troopers end up being another Captain Phasma?

No, the were fairly effective.

Spoiler:

Minus the part where Donnie Yen is praying to the force and they all miss him.

Which is kind of the whole point.

Spoiler:

My issue with it was that it took too long to play out and robbed a lot of its tension and impact. It either needed to play out faster or he needed to take some hits along the way and have to will himself to keep going.

About the Death Star.

 welshhoppo wrote:
About the Death Star.

Spoiler:

They make it clear they aren't firing this thing on full power, they were going to blow up a moon originally, but Tarkington instead used Tactical Nuclear mode instead of planet wiping mode apparently.

On "the whole point"

 flamingkillamajig wrote:

Spoiler:

Not sure how i felt about the death star killing planets not being instantaneous and rather becoming a 'good guys run away from an explosion that slowly happens behind them rather than all at once'. The death star may have been fixed in the small amount of time between this and 'A New Hope' but somehow i doubt it.

Our female heroine killed a rebel tossing a grenade for some reason (was it because it might kill civilians?).

But this is a vastly better film that TFA. Jyn is an infinitely better character than Rey, having to actually struggle and Cassian is actually competent, as opposed to Finn.

It's still far better than TFA though.

Bothans stole the plans for the second Death Star

Rogue Two

Bothans were for the 2nd Death Star

 welshhoppo wrote:

Spoiler:

I think the final shot with the Death Star was so that it could get a good angle through the damaged shield gate. Maybe they were worried about it bouncing off the shield and just damaging the space station?

I'm interested to see if Jyn becomes as divisive as Rey. I don't believe she will, despite being the central character in a SW film and female. If the problem with Rey was indeed she's female, that should also crop up for Jyn.

For most people i don't believe it will be. There were 2 main characters (guy and girl) and nobody was too mary-sue. I myself have more issue with inserting certain characters into certain positions to fulfill a quota and then putting them on a pedestal for a cause of equality. Nobody ever feels equal when people put certain types of people on a pedestal and tell them to treat those people equally after giving them special positions which is why it needs to be done in a concealed matter. Oddly the Star Trek movie was better at this than Star Wars: TFA. If you watch the last Star Trek movie Sulu being gay was shown far less than Sulu being a more central character that did more meaningful things for some reason. In fact Sulu's husband could've even been mistaken for his brother. Had nobody brought it up and just watched the movie they'd probably have never known.

The other issue was the fact Rei was Mary Sue. Jyn was not and shared her main role with a dude she would've banged if they both lived after. If anything people will nag more about the romance sub-plot.

It might also be sad to say but sometimes the whole GG and feminism issue just ruined everything for everybody. If it never happened 2 sides wouldn't have formed up and most likely nobody would care to have women, men, etc in one thing or another. I don't believe media is doing it now because of personal opinions or good will. They want advertisement and something that'll get clicks for people to complain about. Interesting how the most divisive things tend to come from news sites and media rather than the actual people on both sides.

I mean think about it. When 'The Thing' got a prequel how many people complained about the female lead and how many complained because it ruined a beloved franchise?

------

If it's any indication for you i was mixed on TFA and don't like feminism and i really liked this movie enough to say it may have topped one of the original trilogy movies in Star Wars. That's a very good sign. Then again i'm not the biggest Star Wars fan and hardcore fans are known to be a very unsatisfied bunch esp. to very popular and old franchises.

 flamingkillamajig wrote:
It might also be sad to say but sometimes the whole GG and feminism issue just ruined everything for everybody. If it never happened 2 sides wouldn't have formed up and most likely nobody would care to have women, men, etc in one thing or another. I don't believe media is doing it now because of personal opinions or good will. They want advertisement and something that'll get clicks for people to complain about. Interesting how the most divisive things tend to come from news sites and media rather than the actual people on both sides.

No...Those two sides existed long before GamerGate. GamerGate was a flash-point, a symptom of issues that been simmering for a very long time. SJW's and misogyny and 4chan internet trolling and unethical journalism and industry corruption didn't suddenly spring into existence with GamerGate, GamerGate simply exposed that ugly undercurrent to the world.


As for Rogue One...I've not seen it yet but I've read the plot and it sounds like Jyn is the female protagonist that Rey should have been. I.e. not a Mary Sue put on a pedestal. And for the record, I didn't hate TFA, it just felt unoriginal and fairly shallow to me. Better than the prequels at least.

 flamingkillamajig wrote:
For most people i don't believe it will be. There were 2 main characters (guy and girl) and nobody was too mary-sue.

 flamingkillamajig wrote:
I myself have more issue with inserting certain characters into certain positions to fulfill a quota and then putting them on a pedestal for a cause of equality.

 Kojiro wrote:

 flamingkillamajig wrote:
For most people i don't believe it will be. There were 2 main characters (guy and girl) and nobody was too mary-sue.

Spoiler:

The biggest Mary Sue was the blind guy, if anyone. Jyn was raised by a extremist military commander so her fighting skills- while perhaps ham fistedly first demonstrated- aren't beyond belief (there's no reason to violently lash out at people rescuing you and even then she ends up flat on her back). But Jyn's undoubtedly the star, as much as Rey, but feels to me far more like the whole affair was difficult and above all, costly for her.

 flamingkillamajig wrote:
I myself have more issue with inserting certain characters into certain positions to fulfill a quota and then putting them on a pedestal for a cause of equality.

Spoiler:

If anything, this is a mild complaint from me only for incongruity. Great pains are taken to show that the Rebellion is super diverse in both gender and race- which is fine, it would be. But then it's also bleeding apparent every Imperial is not only white, but male. Which is fine, they can be space white supremacists but it's made incongruous when the one Imperial that becomes a Rebel just happens to be not white and leaves you wondering just how Cassian got anywhere as a brown skinned, unshaven guy parading around as an officer. In Ep IV everyone but Leia is a white man, Rebel and Imperial. Clearly they fixed that for the Rebels but elected not to alter the Imps. But this is a minor thing overall, and had identity politics not been so prevalent lately something I'd likely not have noticed.

Silly thing is the only female bad guy i remember seeing in TFA was Captain Phasma and she's awful as a bad guy. They immediately threw her in the garbage which while funny ruined her as a character. She's basically the Boba Fett of the New Trilogy minus the jetpack but female in this case. Seriously everybody thought Boba Fett was cool and somehow some still do. Name me one thing he does cool in the movies. Just one. That's what i thought. She's the exact same thing as Boba Fett.

Also Phasma does a grand total of nothing evil. She talks and that's about it. Name one evil act she did. Same goes for Finn. Ugh that movie.

Rogue One is a much better film but the shared central character thing is more tolerable. I can also sorta get behind that mixed race for good guys vs the racist bad guys.

Not British myself but i still don't get why Brits always gotta be evil even if it's a central thing with Star Wars. I think i saw a few in Rogue One as the rebels though. Hard to say as i'm not good at exactly placing accents.

Boba outsmarts the heroes, talks back to Vader, that's a whole lot more than Phasma ever did.

Meh. That's nothing new. The old premise was that the empire was all white male and excluded alien races. The rebellion has always intentionally been diverse in comparison.

 LunarSol wrote:
Meh. That's nothing new. The old premise was that the empire was all white male and excluded alien races. The rebellion has always intentionally been diverse in comparison.

I see no reason to not include imperial women though. Also they're less racist and more speciest if there is such a word. It's more human superiority than white male superiority. That's actually the accepted theme. Aliens are barely tolerated if that. That's why Mr. Smurf (Thrawn) was such a big deal (because normally a non-human couldn't get such a high rank).

 LunarSol wrote:
The rebellion has always intentionally been diverse in comparison.

I beg to differ. Hence why I call it incongruous. These are the same Red/Gold/Blue teams in Rogue One and Episode IV, yet here they're suspiciously devoid of the clearly present females of Rogue One.

Just to be clear, the issue is not the presence of women in R1's Rebels, but rather the lack of them in R1's Imperials.

The original film is certainly far from the kind of diversity in the latest film, but so was the culture at the time in general. Certainly by Jedi they'd pushed the rebel diversity quite a bit.

The point is, the Empire was designed from the start to be Space Nazis and there's just not a lot of priority in making them more diverse or sympathetic in any way.

 BrotherGecko wrote:

Spoiler:

I still think the character deaths were just tacked on rather than part of the story. A artificial means to wrap up their story arcs for A New Hope. You could take out their deathsand the story actually doesn't change at all which is bothersome. Except for K2, every character dies after completing their mission and not even as a result of the mission being complete but rather it just happens after they complete it. The imperial pilot is killed by a grenade as a random effect after his mission is done. The blind guy was a bomb (if I remember right) after his mission is done. The machinegun guy is a grenade once his mission is done. The girl and the rogue are killed after their mission is done so we don't have to ask where they were in the trilogy. K2 at least dies completely his mission and securing the mission, his is the only one that has any dramatic sense to it.

 flamingkillamajig wrote:
It might also be sad to say but sometimes the whole GG and feminism issue just ruined everything for everybody. If it never happened 2 sides wouldn't have formed up and most likely nobody would care to have women, men, etc in one thing or another.

The issue of representation in fiction is one that has been ongoing for a long time before 4chan decided to take a all over the internet. And "keep doing things as they are, where women/LGBT people/etc are rare and white men are the default for everything" is not really an improvement. All gamergate did was make it public knowledge that there are people who will whine and cry about "SJWs" any time anyone dares to suggest that there might be a problem somewhere.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 flamingkillamajig wrote:
Rei though with small help beat a significantly better trained and better experienced individual in her first movie.

No, she really didn't. She beat a whiny emo kid with daddy issues, whose primary experience in lightsaber combat was probably hacking apart his computer every time he got bad news. This is the same guy who has to resort to begging his grandfather's hat to help him figure out how to win. Sure, he obviously had some power, but he was no Vader. And we see very early on that Rey had experience in melee combat, in the scene of her beating up the thugs with her staff. Having her transfer that experience to a different weapon is in line with similar "because plot" skill acquisitions by other characters.

And Luke and Anakin are also Mary Sues by that standard. FFS, Anakin's introduction starts with "he is the special snowflake who will be the plot device we desperately need", and who can forget the cringe-worthy scene of him winning a major space battle purely by accident ("let's try spinning lololololol!!!!!!"). Luke is less painful to watch, but he picks up lightsaber use well enough to block laser shots with his eyes closed with a brief lesson, and miraculously turns skill at flying the family space-Cessna into out-dogfighting veteran TIE pilots in his first flight in a high-performance military fighter and even survives pursuit by Vader himself better than any of the rebel pilots with far more combat experience. Then because of plot the force he makes the impossible torpedo shot that his squadron leader couldn't match. Luke should have been lucky to make it out of the hangar without crashing, and been shot down effortlessly by the first TIE fighter to get behind him. But hey, he's the main character, so he gets to win!

AHHHHH IT'S SO AWESOME!!!

Definitely go see it, I'm kind of beside myself absorbing it after the fact now. It builds up slowly (and well imo) and the end is just fantastic!

 LunarSol wrote:
The point is, the Empire was designed from the start to be Space Nazis and there's just not a lot of priority in making them more diverse or sympathetic in any way.

That explains the white, but not the male.
Granted there's a black guy or two in there but I'd hardly call it remotely diverse, certainly not gender diverse. I think there's a sort of dishonesty in revising the Rebels only if you're going to also claim that representation matters. Either it does or it doesn't- it can't matter only when it's a group you like being represented.

No, she really didn't. She beat a whiny emo kid with daddy issues, whose primary experience in lightsaber combat was probably hacking apart his computer every time he got bad news.

By the time of TFA Ren has been receiving training in the ways of the Force for at least six years. That's not a trivial amount of time to study something. It certainly should be enough to give one an edge over someone who has had a few hours at best. He seemed pretty confident blocking blaster bolts so I'm going say he's had some prior experience besides terminals.

This is the same guy who has to resort to begging his grandfather's hat to help him figure out how to win.

In a movie where an object belonging to the exact same person gives out visions- 'show me again grandfather'- hardly seems like a bad idea. I'm still betting it was a vision from the helmet that tipped Ren over in the first place.

It'd make sense that Ren was practised against blasters though. - I mean, after what happpened on the big night, he probably never saw another lightsaber except for his own, nevermind fought in a duel.

Getting shot at, and dealing with being shot at though? That he probably had a LOT of experience with. But some lunatic charging into melee with a guy wielding a lightsaber? Who'd be dumb enough to do that...

In saying that, I don't really subscribe to the whole "Rey is a Mary Sue" thing. - Or at least, more than any of the other thousands of heroes in film and television. I will say this though, and I don't think it's spoilery, Jyn is an improvement. She's goodish at scrapping with people and good at shooting people and that's her focus and that's pretty good. As opposed to, being ace mechanic, and pilot, and melee expert, and marksman and jedi. On the other hand, that's what jedi do.

 Kojiro wrote:
By the time of TFA Ren has been receiving training in the ways of the Force for at least six years. That's not a trivial amount of time to study something. It certainly should be enough to give one an edge over someone who has had a few hours at best. He seemed pretty confident blocking blaster bolts so I'm going say he's had some prior experience besides terminals.

But that doesn't necessarily mean lightsaber combat training, especially in a context where the jedi are the only people with lightsabers and they're all on the same side. Nor does it mean that he had any interest in keeping up the practice to maintain whatever skills he happened to learn. It's quite possible that he learned a token bit of lightsaber combat and that was it, and by the time of TFA Rey actually had more skill and experience in melee combat. In fact, given Luke's concerns over losing students to the dark side, it would be plausible that he deliberately minimized training in anything remotely related to killing people to keep his students as far as possible from the path towards those dark side emotions.

And yeah, he had the ability to block blaster bolts, but mastering one trick doesn't necessarily mean having any skill at something entirely unrelated. It's not like Rey pulled out a blaster and shot him to death, magically ignoring this demonstrated ability to stop blaster shots.

In a movie where an object belonging to the exact same person gives out visions- 'show me again grandfather'- hardly seems like a bad idea. I'm still betting it was a vision from the helmet that tipped Ren over in the first place.

Sure, I'm just laughing a bit at the image of Kylo Ren standing in front of his precious hat, tears starting to smudge his emo makeup, begging the force to let him be as evil as his grandfather was. But if we grant the idea that the helmet has power then we have to also consider the idea that the lightsaber has power and Rey was not alone in standing against Kylo Ren.

 Peregrine wrote:
But that doesn't necessarily mean lightsaber combat training, especially in a context where the jedi are the only people with lightsabers and they're all on the same side. Nor does it mean that he had any interest in keeping up the practice to maintain whatever skills he happened to learn.

That seems dubious at best since his goal is to find Luke whom we can be reasonably sure has a lightsaber.

It's quite possible that he learned a token bit of lightsaber combat and that was it, and by the time of TFA Rey actually had more skill and experience in melee combat. In fact, given Luke's concerns over losing students to the dark side, it would be plausible that he deliberately minimized training in anything remotely related to killing people to keep his students as far as possible from the path towards those dark side emotions.

If it weren't for the fact the bulk of his known training is under Snoke, that might make sense. But as someone who wants to exterminate the last Jedi Master I'd wager it's more likely he's put significant effort into his saber skills than simply let them rot.

And yeah, he had the ability to block blaster bolts, but mastering one trick doesn't necessarily mean having any skill at something entirely unrelated.

I'd argue that using the Force to guide your blade in your defense has cross over between blaster bolts and lightsabers. Fundamentally you're allowing the Force to guide your movements. Certainly if we're to allow Rey's melee skills to cross over from stafff to lightsaber we should allow Ren's 'Force Defense' to do so.

It's not like Rey pulled out a blaster and shot him to death, magically ignoring this demonstrated ability to stop blaster shots.

No, she pulled out a blaster and shot several professionally trained soldiers to death, before they could shoot her. Which echos how she fixes the Falcon before Han, learns the Force on the fly and goes from grinding the Falcon against the ground to speeding through a wrecked ISSD- while dodging fire from elite pilots no less. Nothing is hard for her, she just 'gets it'. Which is the biggest reason people don't like her that I've come across.

But the problems with Rey just don't seem present in Jyn, at least to me. Jyn has some fighting skills- because she was raised by a militant nutjob (though I still detest the utter ineffectiveness of Stormtrooper armour). But we don't see her pull off any piloting shenanigans, she doesn't appear to be a polyglot or have any special technical skills. Despite not showing any of these things she's compelling and interesting and you (well me at least) ended up rooting for her and a bit sad we won't be seeing her again (that is, I suppose, the nature of sacrifice though).

I want to see if Jyn is welcomed by the fandom, as I believe she should be because I want to see it plain as day spelled out that it was the character of Rey that caused arguments, not her gender. Of course, perhaps Jyn won't be welcomed and we can discuss that if/when it happens. But if it doesn't I hope that people can acknowledge not all the flak Rey caught was 'because girl'.

 Kojiro wrote:
That seems dubious at best since his goal is to find Luke whom we can be reasonably sure has a lightsaber.

Sure, Luke has a lightsaber, and Kylo Ren has a superweapon that makes the death star look like a pretty fireworks show. If his goal is to kill Luke there are much easier was of doing it than going off to engage him in a sword fight.

I'd argue that using the Force to guide your blade in your defense has cross over between blaster bolts and lightsabers. Fundamentally you're allowing the Force to guide your movements. Certainly if we're to allow Rey's melee skills to cross over from stafff to lightsaber we should allow Ren's 'Force Defense' to do so.

Sure, Kylo Ren obviously has some skills, which is why Rey didn't just hack him to death in a few seconds. I just dispute the idea that he's some kind of master at sword fighting who couldn't conceivably lose a duel against a lesser opponent.

No, she pulled out a blaster and shot several professionally trained soldiers to death, before they could shoot her. Which echos how she fixes the Falcon before Han, learns the Force on the fly and goes from grinding the Falcon against the ground to speeding through a wrecked ISSD- while dodging fire from elite pilots no less. Nothing is hard for her, she just 'gets it'. Which is the biggest reason people don't like her that I've come across.

IMO this has more to do with the pacing of TFA, which is just plain bad all around, than Rey being a Mary Sue. We do see Rey struggle, the movie just rushes past it to the next big CGI spectacle before the struggles can mean anything. She gets scared, runs off, and is immediately captured. She fumbles with her gun when enemies show up. She tries to fix the standoff by letting the monsters out of their cages, and nearly kills everyone. Etc. Just like the premise of the movie seems to be that the Empire has re-conquered the galaxy and the resistance is the last remaining opposition, until halfway through we get some random throwaway line that by the way the Republic is still around and the new Empire is off in some tiny corner of the galaxy. That important background information is left for some novel that most of the audience will never read, because why explain the background details when you can just blow up some more stuff?

But if it doesn't I hope that people can acknowledge not all the flak Rey caught was 'because girl'.

Not all of it, but IMO it's pretty clear that a large part of that was "because girl" when male Mary Sue characters don't receive the same level of hate.

 Peregrine wrote:
Sure, Kylo Ren obviously has some skills, which is why Rey didn't just hack him to death in a few seconds. I just dispute the idea that he's some kind of master at sword fighting who couldn't conceivably lose a duel against a lesser opponent.

I don't know anyone has ever claimed he's a master swordsman but there's certainly a large area of skill between 'had some basics' and 'the new Mace Windu' that 99.99% of trained force users would all into. Certainly if he's to be any sort of villain for the trilogy he needs must be competent, which thus far he's failed to prove. But that again is a strike against Rey because a hero is judged on what they overcome. If indeed he's just a 'whiny emo brat who beats up computers' then her achievement is correspondingly unimpressive. You beat up a whiny emo brat with poor skills- good for you I guess? Jyn on the other hand has no impressive knowledge, no technical expertise, certainly no force attunement and for it comes across as much more believable, heroic and memorable IMO.

Not all of it, but IMO it's pretty clear that a large part of that was "because girl" when male Mary Sue characters don't receive the same level of hate.

I think the comparison to Luke is always going to miss because it's Luke from Star Wars. It got into us (like religion) when we were little and it's really difficult to peel back the rose tint and see it as it is. But I feel that for many young people, Rey will have the privilege too (in 30 or so years). But that's not a defense of either, nor is it indicative of sexism any more than the future defenders of Rey are sexist against men. Luke's 'pass' (if you want to call it that) doesn't stem from his masculinity but from his period, from when he won us over. Even then I'd argue he's nowhere near as hyper competent as Rey but that's another topic. If Jyn is widely accepted though I think you need to reassess that claim of 'a large part' (or at least define it).

Ultimately R1 stands on it's own as a very good story, connected with the SW universe but also expanding on it (and cleaning up that annoying 'why is there an super weakness!?! issue) which is something EpVII failed to do utterly.

Exec interference is all too obvious in this film. About 10% of a thoughtful, ambitious film made it to the screen. It almost feels like the rest was lost in a fire. And then Disney hired a team of accountants to reconstruct the missing parts.

When Cassian kills the informant at the beginning, I was really impressed: that scene says "this film is going to tackle some tough realities about war and rebellion." Just like how it has been marketed! But nope, not even close. The rumors that Disney demanded reshoots to pull back to the Saturday morning cartoon sensibility of the larger franchise turned out to be true. The Empire is as comically ineffectual as Cobra mooks in an episode of G.I. Joe.

This is fine for the usual SW picture, the ones that start with the purposefully cheesy serials-inspired John Williams overtures and scrolling texts. It falls totally flat in a picture set up as a "dark and gritty war film." But before anyone says, hey it's for kids, consider the sudden shift back to visceral violence when Vader shows up like Jason in a Friday the 13th sequel.

I would like to read a candid interview with Gareth Edwards about his experience with Disney while making Rogue One. Judging by the look of the picture, which is really very inspiring, he was certainly capable of making a much more tonally consistent film. The film Disney released feels choppy and rushed through Act 1 before becoming an entirely different - and increasingly preposterous - movie in Act 2.

Considering what apparently happened here and that the next non-trilogy movie is slated to be the adventures of teenage heart throb Han Solo, I guess Disney has decided that SW sells better as a cartoon. It's certainly tempting to think Edwards's original Rogue One would have been a better movie - the "dark and gritty war movie" everyone is talking about. But maybe SW really is better off as a soaring romance with no pretense of "realism."

Mushing the two together was an unfortunate mistake.

 Manchu wrote:
words

Kinda shocked i'm saying this for a mod but spoiler tag some of that.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
How scary or traumatizing would it be for young children?

Fairly to very. This is very much a more adult Star Wars.

Gonna spoiler tag my description of this but i think it's the best way to describe it.

How are you shocked? The thread title has a spoiler warning. And if you thought it needed spoiler tags, why would you quote the whole thing?

I changed it and i only felt like one sentence needed a spoiler tag.

Thread is labeled as containing spoilers. That warning obviously suffices.

I really disliked some of the heroes of TFA (Rey included, of course). But I enjoyed Jynn a lot, being a, woman or not is not important. What is important is to be a well written character.

Ok well i won't argue with a mod. I just thought maybe it slipped your mind at first. I just felt that there's a general courtesy to spoiler tag spoilers regardless. It's no big. Not like anything you said was too huge of a spoiler.

I avoided this thread before seeing the film - considering it had a spoilers tag - out of courtesy to people who had seen the film and wanted to talk about it as well as to, you know, avoid spoilers. That's what the spoiler tag on the thread is for.

 godardc wrote:
I really disliked some of the heroes of TFA (Rey included, of course). But I enjoyed Jynn a lot, being a, woman or not is not important. What is important is to be a well written character.

Agreed. Jyn Erso being a woman is totally irrelevant to the plot EXCEPT the sudden, pointless, obligatory love scene or pseudo love scene at the end. Other than that foible, you could CGI in a male actor playing "Jon Erso" and the story would not change at all. Whether she is well-drawn or consistently-characterized is a separate matter.

 godardc wrote:
I really disliked some of the heroes of TFA (Rey included, of course). But I enjoyed Jynn a lot, being a, woman or not is not important. What is important is to be a well written character.

Absolutely. A good movie or video game or whatever can have various types of characters and people will get over their personal issues (if they have them) and still love the movie or game. I mean i know one feminist on dakka that wanted to not play deus ex: human revolution for not having much in the way of female leads but got over it and was glad he did. The game was still a fantastic game and a work of art.

Actually i disagree Manchu. A man could've played the part exactly the same. It just would've ended up with a gay ending love scene (though i'll admit some might not be comfortable about that). That or they could have switched the characters of who was male or female in the pair.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Thanks for the heads-up. It's going to be a tough call.

Other than the Vader horror movie scene, which is not gory or anything but it is meant to be relatively shocking, the violence isn't the problem so much as the film introducing the idea that good guys sometimes must do bad things, temporarily problematizing that (are bad guys and good guys really that different), and then totally brushing it off with empty propaganda. I think an intelligent kid would be troubled by that and it would be good to discuss it with them after the film.

Ok, well, if no spoiler tags... then away we go!

I thought it was great. Tons of things in there for SW fans to find, and a good story overall. I disagree with Manchu that only 10% of the original film made it to screen. The re-shoots were likely only to affect the ending ie. having Andor and Jyn end up on the beach - that probably wasn't in the film and he probably originally died in the archive room, and having Krennic show up on top of the tower was another reshoot (he was on the beach originally - watch the first trailers).

This is a darker film. To say that it's a SW film made into a Disney cartoon is incredibly blind. Everyone dies.

 flamingkillamajig wrote:
Not sure how i felt about the death star killing planets not being instantaneous and rather becoming a 'good guys run away from an explosion that slowly happens behind them rather than all at once'. The death star may have been fixed in the small amount of time between this and 'A New Hope' but somehow i doubt it.

That's because they specifically weren't 'killing the planet'. They were firing low-level blasts intentionally, both because Tarkin wanted to send a message and because the Death Star was still unknown by the Imperial Senate, and could pose a political problem that saw planets switching to the Rebellion. Remember that the Emperor only dissolves the Imperial Senate part-way through ANH. Up until that point they were important.

 Kojiro wrote:
I'm interested to see if Jyn becomes as divisive as Rey. I don't believe she will, despite being the central character in a SW film and female. If the problem with Rey was indeed she's female, that should also crop up for Jyn.

The problem with Rey wasn't that she was female, but that she could do everything without having to try.

Personally that never bothered me - I thought Rey was fun. I always saw it as her being someone with an immense (yet unknown) connection with the force, manifesting itself mostly through being excellent with technical things and piloting skills (just like Anakin!).

 flamingkillamajig wrote:
Not British myself but i still don't get why Brits always gotta be evil even if it's a central thing with Star Wars. I think i saw a few in Rogue One as the rebels though. Hard to say as i'm not good at exactly placing accents.

This is one of those things that people seem to forget about movie-making. All the bad guys being English men who all spoke in posh accents wasn't some sub-text laden exploration of gender or nationalism or whatever. It's because they filmed the movie in England! You hire what's available.

 flamingkillamajig wrote:
A man could've played the part exactly the same. It just would've ended up with a gay ending love scene (though i'll admit some might not be comfortable about that).

The part in parantheses is exactly the problem - Disney has yet to take that step and let's just be honest not doing it is a conscious choice. That weak ass "love scene" is almost certainly the product of test screenings. We know the general audience often feels like a movie is incomplete unless "the guy gets the girl." (Of course, I could bend over backwards to gin up some tortured rationalization for that scene but why bother.) I think if it was Cassian and "Jon Erso" rather than Jyn Erso, that is the only scene that would have changed - again, specifically because of the audience expectations.

There was no 'love scene'. You're overstating it.

HBMC

Everyone dies because the script kills them. They are completely safe from all danger until the script has no further use for them. That's a cartoon version of war.

RE: love scene - you're splitting hairs, I even typed "love scene or pseudo-love scene" and then referred to it as a "love scene" using quotation marks and even described it as "weak ass"

RE: British accents - most of the Rebels in R1 have British accents

 Manchu wrote:
Agreed. Jyn Erso being a woman is totally irrelevant to the plot EXCEPT the sudden, pointless, obligatory love scene or pseudo love scene at the end. Other than that foible, you could CGI in a male actor playing "Jon Erso" and the story would not change at all. Whether she is well-drawn or consistently-characterized is a separate matter.

Of course you could substitute in Jon Erso in the love scene as well and nothing changes.

As explained above, agreed the plot does not change in that case - just the scene would change because it is a different thing relative to the audience's expectations.

 Manchu wrote:
Everyone dies because the script kills them. They are completely safe from all danger until the script has no further use for them. That's a cartoon version of war.

No, it's a fictional description of war. Characters only dying when necessary for the plot is standard for fiction. You don't introduce characters we're supposed to care about and then kill them off at random just because that's how war works, you keep them alive to do their part in the story and you kill them off if/when their deaths are necessary for the story.

Disagree. There is a difference between a story about war and war as a setting for a story. R1 - like all other Star Wars movies - falls into the latter category, despite marketing patter. R1 is no more a war film than ANH or ESB. ESB depicts warfare in an arguably more serious and dark manner than R1, even considering ESB ultimately is not about war generally or even really the GCW specifically. R1 is an adventure story shot with a certain style of lighting and some far-less-than-half-realized ruminations on the "gray areas" of political conflicts.

 Manchu wrote:
Disagree. There is a difference between a story about war and war as a setting for a story. R1 - like all other Star Wars movies - falls into the latter category, despite marketing patter. R1 is no more a war film than ANH or ESB. ESB depicts warfare in an arguably more serious and dark manner than R1, even considering ESB ultimately is not about war generally or even really the GCW specifically. R1 is an adventure story shot with a certain style of lighting and some far-less-than-half-realized ruminations on the "gray areas" of political conflicts.

What exactly are you disagreeing with? Your post immediately follows mine with no other reference made, but the difference between "a story about war" and "war as a setting for a story" has nothing to do with what I said.

If that's so then your original objection also has nothing to do with what I said.

I just got back from Rogue One.

Rogue One is the movie we were all hoping for when TFA was announced. Some critics were saying it's a heist movie and while there is a component of that, it doesn't feel like a heist movie. It feels more like the French Resistance versus Space Nazis (this is a good thing, trust me). The only real criticism I have is that there were a couple of cameos (characters from A New Hope) in there that weren't needed. In fact, they only cause confusion after you leave the theater because you're left wondering how they got from point A (in RO) to point B (in ANH) in the amount of time available to them. Another minor nitpick is that the CGI of two characters' faces was just a bit off. It came across as a little creepy. CGI just can't master skin (flesh, tones, and movement) yet. Still, it's much better than what's come before and serviced the plot appropriately so it's forgivable.

I think this is easily right behind A New Hope as my favorite, with Empire Strikes Back in third. I really hope Disney/Lucasfilm take note and give us more good, original stories.

 Compel wrote:
In saying that, I don't really subscribe to the whole "Rey is a Mary Sue" thing.

I'm sorry to argue but she really is a Mary Sue, I'm not exaggerating. If you've got some time, this video covers exactly what makes her a Mary Sue (in addition to everything else the video covers). 8:03 is the spot where the narrator points it out. Well, the first spot. There are a few others, too.


My God, Abrams is a complete hack.

Very much agree RE: CGI Tarkin and Leia - really tripped into the uncanny valley for me and I doubt these effects will hold up over time, either. I wish they had just recast the parts or worked around showing these characters somehow.

Anyone else dislike the squid monster thing? That thing was ugly, needless, too reminiscent of the bad cgi in the prequels AND TOO suggestive

I'm also confused over Jyn's stormtrooper toy. Is there an in-universe toy factory that makes toys of key players? Will Hasbro have to make a version of Jyn which comes with a stormtrooper toy. Is it morally wrong to make an action figure FOR an action figure oh no, I've gone cross-eyed

Of course there's an in-universe toy factory that makes Stormtrooper toys. - That's propaganda 101.

Cgi Leia wasn't so bad

cgi Tarkin however, he looked way too thin.

Also, why was Vader chilling out in Baradur? I get he rests in a cooling tank for his burns, but why then place that cooling tank on a lava world.

I guess Vader is on Mustafar as it is the site of his defeat by Obi Wan, a kind of self torture or discipline to learn from his past mistakes? And where better for a Sith Lord to reside than a lava planet?

 Manchu wrote:
the problem so much as the film introducing the idea that good guys sometimes must do bad things, temporarily problematizing that (are bad guys and good guys really that different), and then totally brushing it off with empty propaganda.

I am fine with them showing a bit darker side to things and had no issues with them doing so, but then I also find your latter interpretation somewhat facetious so I imagine we are viewing it differently anyway. So in true internet parlance: you're wrong.

 welshhoppo wrote:
Also, why was Vader chilling out in Baradur? I get he rests in a cooling tank for his burns, but why then place that cooling tank on a lava world.

As far as I know Vader has used that as his base of operations for a long time. At the very least Palpatine did as I am sure others will recall that is where he sent Anakin to meet up and deal with the Trade Union and then afterwards he hung out there until Obi-wan arrived and gave him a paddlin'.

About the "Love Scene" at the end...

Man and woman, just went through Hell together, they think they are going to be OK, and then a Super Laser goes off (presumably several hundred KM's away), and suddenly, they know they are going to die. It's human nature to reach out for comfort in those last few moments, and anyone that has ever been in such a situation knows exactly what I'm talking about. I have more than once and the fact that I lived makes me totally understand where that scene came from.

Love scene. Heh.

I think I would like to see the movie that was before all the reshoots, and see how it originally ended. It makes sense that everyone dies, but then again, it would have been nice to see them live and have a tangent adventure to the other Hero's in the franchise. It is interesting to note that Felicity Jones is under contract for another Star Wars film.

Maybe in the Special Edition Blu Ray, we'll see those deleted senses and maybe even an alternate ending.

Maybe her granddaughter will appear in episode 8. Or maybe in Solo or the Fett movies.

I figured it was Mustafa (although the film stopped telling us what planet was what after a while.) But wasn't Mustafa on the edge of the galaxy? Must be annoying if he has to travel.

Embracing in the face of imminent death = a love scene?

 Thraxas Of Turai wrote:
I guess Vader is on Mustafar as it is the site of his defeat by Obi Wan, a kind of self torture or discipline to learn from his past mistakes? And where better for a Sith Lord to reside than a lava planet?

In Rebels, Mustafar was being used as an internment camp for captured Jedi. It's not explicitly stated, but I assumed it's the HQ of the inquisition.

Luke is quite literally the definition of a Marty Stu. He's quite probably the most well known author avatar ever, with a name that should make that bleedingly obvious. I hold about as much concern over this as I'm concerned about Rey, which is to say, not at all. The thing about Mary Sue's is that the avatar sense is what pulls people into the universe as well and seeing this Halloween the number of girls invested in the SWU the way I was as a kid tells me job well done.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Embracing in the face of imminent death = a love scene?

It wasn't just the atomic hug, but also the elevator ride. The fact Cassian survived to that point at all was typically dumb, on top of Krennic needlessly arguing with Jyn rather than just killing her, so the loevy dovey looks and embraces were at that point all just par for the course. It's not just one thing is isolation, like a hug, but a whole web of dumb, prefictable cartoon nonsense that kept getting worse.

I don't think I want any of my future kids to watch the cartoons that Manchu watches...

You don't want them to watch Rogue One?

Just saw it with my wife, I think it was pretty good.
Had some weak points, but overall the action and more grit than in the other Star Wars movies made totally up for it. Looking forward to the other solo movies, as I don't have high hope for Episode VIII after Episode VII.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Embracing in the face of imminent death = a love scene?

That and being terminally injured, as he seemed to be, is not allowed. Being incredibly hurt and fighting through the pain is a "no no" that ruins things.

I will admit their body language suggested slightly more than just comfort to me, especially in the elevator ride down. That said, I'm sure both of them were seeing well past each others flaws at that point.

I'm curious though, being that the base was essentially a bunch of landing platforms, if there wasn't *something* Jyn could have escaped on? There was at least one Rebel U-Wing there which we know can land and drop off/pick up troops so there could be more. Perhaps it'd have been nice to see, post the shield going down, to see a rescue crew try to make it's way down and find them, only to have to pull out as the devastation approached. I suppose though they had their hands full with the Imp fleet.

I really want to know though what was the 'too dark' ending they reshot. I guess we'll have to wait for the Blu-Ray.

 Kojiro wrote:
I will admit their body language suggested slightly more than just comfort to me, especially in the elevator ride down. That said, I'm sure both of them were seeing well past each others flaws at that point.

It's almost like they were releived and happy to have done something really important which could save the entire galaxy.

Spoiler warning!
Ponda Bubba and Dr Evezan survive

So, I saw this even though I'm not really a Star Wars fan. I thought it was pretty solid but there were some things I didn't like.

I agree with Manchu that the movie was tonally inconsistent, in exactly the same way: when that guy got executed, I thought it was going to be a much harder film, but no. I think it was more like when Han shot first - to establish a character's street cred and then shoehorn that character into being a hero anyway.

CGI Grand Moff Tarkin was a huge mistake. It looked terrible and was distracting as hell.

When the intelligence guy looked like he was dead and then suddenly appeared to save that day, that felt a bit weak and contrived.

There was lots of stuff I did like. The scene where the rebels 9/11nd the shield generator was pretty good. The Darth Vader action scene was no gak the best Darth Vader scene in the series. The Imperial Robot guy was pretty good too.

It's probably my favorite star wars movie. I'll watch it again when it comes out on video.

 Breotan wrote:
I think this is easily right behind A New Hope as my favorite, with Empire Strikes Back in third. I really hope Disney/Lucasfilm take note and give us more good, original stories.

I'm right there with you . Can't wait to see it again!

A small thing I especially liked was the pilot call ins from the original movie, sheer genius! And the new pilots blended in great and had that oldschool style. Loved it!

I really enjoyed Rogue One as a film. I thought it was leagues better than Force Awakens. Though, one of the few things I didn't care for was how many Imperials died. It felt like the movie had a "Stormtroopers killed per minute" quota it had to fill. I understand that this is a movie about good guys versus bad guys but the amount of Stormtroopers getting smoked got comical at times.

And they still fought better than the First Order Stormtroopers!

Also, I wish Director Krennic had shot the main character lady at the end instead of just letting her talk and then he watches the Death Star blow blow up the base. It would have fit the dark tone of the ending a lot better. The rest of it was awesome, though. One of my favorite scenes was when Darth Vader was hacking up those rebel troopers. It was one of the most brutal action scenes I've ever seen in Star Wars.

I don't get the hate for CGI Tarkin. He only felt fake to me once in all of his scenes. For the rest of his screen time, I didn't even realize he wasn't really an actor in scary-good makeup (Wayne Pygram played him in his cameo in Ep 3 and I thought that was him the whole movie long).

CGI Leia, on the other hand, was crap. They should've avoided that one, or not had her talk. When her mouth moved was when she looked like a Real Doll somebody wired with animatronics.

This movie was better than TFA, in my opinion, because of how much it tried to be Star Wars, but not be a Star Wars movie.

There was no opening narration crawl. The movie didn't use music from the other films, and even when the soundtrack hinted at established themes, like the Rebel Alliance theme, or the Force theme, or the Imperial March, the music quickly went in a different direction. Actual Star Wars music didn't show up until halfway through the end credits. There were no fancy screen wipes to transition between scenes. There were no Jedi (just a guy who might have some Force sensitivity, or might just be a crazy cranked up martial artist) and the only lightsaber we see is Vader's in the last scene. The movie barely involved anyone from the Skywalker family, and the ones who showed up were ancillary to the plot. It didn't pull from the Hero's Journey, or a Cliff's Notes version of it; this was the Dirty Dozen In Space, or a feature-length Blake's 7 movie.

It was a better Suicide Squad movie than the actual Suicide Squad movie.

It was the prequel we deserved.

I will say that I was disappointed in the cameo of the two guys from the Mos Eisley cantina. That scene was the worst part of the movie to me, because for a moment I thought George Lucas was directing again. It was such a prequel-era George Lucas move, that it detracted from the film. The rest of the cameos made sense (The droids on Yavin would likely be there, as they were owned by Jimmy Smitt's driver; Red and Gold Leaders were obviously based on Yavin and so would be involved in any attack launched from Yavin, Jimmy Smitts was a founding member of the Alliance, so of course he would show up for the meetings, etc, etc) but those two clowns dropping by to get snarly at the heroes was so absurdly unnecessary that it was, to me, the nadir of the film.

The rest of it was pretty decent, though. I mean, apart from CGI Leia. That was some angry Uncanny Valley gak right there.

Definitely not a movie you take your younger kids to, though. Not unless you want to explain to them that sometimes the good guys die, and sometimes they don't win. And sometimes, even when they die, they don't lose.

Oh, and an addendum: There were Y-wings in this movie. Not just that: they *did* stuff. The only thing I wanted from this film was Y-Wings, and the movie not only delivered, but it gave me Y-Wings going on bombing runs, crapping on a star destroyer's day, and actually suffering *fewer* casualties than the X-Wings. I can toss that Viagra prescription my doctor wrote; I won't be needing that ever again.

I really liked the spliced in 70s pilots, too.

A lot of people are sort of turning on FA in the wake of seeing R1 and I'm wondering if in a year's time the flaws of R1 will be more apparent/admittable as well.

I figured R1 would make FA look really bad but actually there are some comparisons where FA comes out ahead. Although FA's plot was totally contrived, it felt like a smoother journey. FA was genuinely fun throughout, whereas R1 leans hard on the droid character for humor and IMO never once felt fun (maybe fun was ejected as too childish).

I also think the First Order comes off as a lot scarier than the Empire as depicted in R1. I liked the "evil radio noises" of the Death Troopers and how precisely drilled they seemed at first. But when it came time to actually fight, they turned out to be no more effective than their ewok-whupped cousins. Contrast this to the fanaticism of the show-stealing FO stormtrooper who goes nuts on Finn in FA.

Which is worse: Mas Kanata and Starkiller Base or the Empire in its prime being absolutely worthless in a supposed war movie? Tough call. Hope Disney will allow the Empire to be somewhat competent in future films.

 Manchu wrote:
A lot of people are sort of turning on FA in the wake of seeing R1 and I'm wondering if in a year's time the flaws of R1 will be more apparent/admittable as well.

I think it will hold up better. TFA was obviously a badly flawed movie about an hour after the nostalgia wore off, and I think people "turned on it" right away. I know I had some very critical things to say in those early days, and didn't have to wait until Rogue One gave an excuse to move on to the next big thing. The most I can see is that Rogue One is good enough for people to finally let go of the idea of Star Wars movies being a spectacular success if they manage to be even mediocre, now that the first decent movie since ROTJ has shown that it's possible, and raise their standards for calling TFA a success. But I don't think that will happen with Rogue One unless a truly great movie comes out and forces a similar reevaluation. I think, short of that, the initial impressions of "good, but not great" will probably stand.

Although FA's plot was totally contrived, it felt like a smoother journey. FA was genuinely fun throughout, whereas R1 leans hard on the droid character for humor and IMO never once felt fun (maybe fun was ejected as too childish).

I don't think this is true at all. TFA didn't just have plot issues, it had massive pacing issues. It's just one giant demo reel for the CGI artists, with a token few characters involved to sell action figures. If it was ever fun it was a really superficial kind of fun, where if you take even a moment to ask what's going on the illusion falls apart. Rogue One stumbles a bit when it jumps around too quickly early on, but once it settles down it feels like a journey and not just a bunch of random explosions. And I don't know about you, but I certainly had a lot of fun with it.

Contrast this to the fanaticism of the show-stealing FO stormtrooper who goes nuts on Finn in FA.

Also got to disagree here, I think that was an incredibly overrated bit if you want to talk about credible opponents. It was so blatantly a case of using stupid tactics to give the hero character an opportunity for a melee fight. IMO it's one of those Boba Fett things, where a character is declared to be "cool" by the fans and gets hyped way out of proportion

I agree about the FO trooper wanting a melee fight just as soon as someone put a lightsaber into Finn's hands. That was straight out of a video game. But that trooper posed actual danger to Finn, something no Imperial managed to do in R1 - short of Vader himself showing up. And that was just as video gamey as anything in FA. Really reminded me of the demo level of Force Unleashed, where you stroll around Kashyyk as Vader overwhelmingly kicking ass.

As far as the "honeymoon," audiences were super generous to FA when it first came out as well; other than the arguments over Rey being underdeveloped/overpowered. R1 could avoid some of the hyperbolic blowback because there just isn't nearly the same level of hype. But I think R1 will suffer once audiences can spend more time with the film and start taking it apart.

I saw plenty of rebels being killed? I mean, they got reinforced with fresh troops by a U-Wing which is why there were so many, but they were showing rebels being killed regularly. I mean, yeah, the Stormtroopers were typically incompetent and died in droves, but that's just Star Wars. But they took those rebels down with them.

The heroes obviously had plot armour, and killed lots of Stormtroopers, but that's just Star Wars as well. Krennicks bodyguard Stormtroopers just cut down all the rebels they came across until Baze and Chirrut had their moments in the sun, and they even took both of them out.

I though the FO Stormtroopers had at least some sort of training to deal with Jedis/they were aware of the danger of shooting a Jedi with a lightsaber, and that<s why he went for the lightsaber proof stick.>

Yeah, I don't get this idea that the Rogue One imperials were never a threat to anyone. There were plenty of no-name rebels getting killed, and every single main character dies. Sure, the heroes are heroic and survive until it's time to die for plot reasons, but that's true of any movie. It's not like anyone actually expected the stormtrooper with the weird stick thing to kill Finn with half a movie left.

Any rebels that landed on Skariff were almost certainly killed. By the Death Star. By AT-ATs. By the Deathtroopers. He'll a dozen odd were killed by Vader in the final minutes. I think it helped to sum up the general futility of war very well, hell even the comic relief droid got destroyed. I think there was plenty of threat evident in the movie. A rarity as well in that grenades tended to do their job rather than being thrown back at the baddies, K-2SO excepted.

Just in case this hasn't been covered yet
Vader residing on Mustifar is an old idea from the late 70's or early 80's. Early drafts of ROTJ had the Emperor living on Mustifar. Much like most of what was planned for ROTJ, it was dumped due to filming complications.

Aside from the main cast superheroes, 30ish Rebels landed on Scarif in the stolen Zeta-class. U-Wings carry 8 passengers, and maybe three or four made it through the gate. So something like 60-100 Alliance soldiers fought groundside against an entire Imperial garrison at a super secure installation, including two elite formations (shoretroopers and death troopers). The Rebels encountered no real obstacles to achieving their operational goals, thanks to tactics like slowly walking in the open while under fire from augmented super soldiers a few dozen yards distant. That happened twice, by the way. I also noted that the two Imperial-class Star Destroyers in orbit never deployed and barely fired any weaponry. Guess the British-accented crew was on a tea break. Thankfully, Darth Vader showed up in time to do with one ISD what two couldn't manage, but of course his brutal scene was yet another empty show considering all the Rebels needed to do was hand a small object past a semi-blocked door.

Fired their weapons through that planetary shield, you mean? Also, presumably firing heavy artillery right next to a critical facility might have caused more damage than otherwise. After all, only Jyn, Cassian and K-2SO got anywhere near the main facility. The X-Wings could have been a serious threat, but the only reason they were shooting anywhere near the main tower was if there was a TIE Fighter near it.

Someone mentioned a few pages ago that it was odd that the AT-ACTs got blown up by X-Wings here, but that the AT-ATs in Empire were immune to the same. In Empire, they were being fired at by snowspeeders armed with blasters, not by X-Wings armed with lasers powerful enough (as we are not shown until Jedi, admittedly) to poke holes in Star Destroyers (and smaller bits of the Death Star).

Regarding the two X-Wings that crashed into the closed shield gate, was there a similar shot in Return of the Jedi? I'm sure I remember seeing a couple of Rebel fighters fail to pull up in time there, but in the version I have on DVD, they all make the turn. Maybe I imagined that.

Through a planetery shield? No - at the Rebel fleet.

Oh, right. Yes, I wondered at that too.

 Manchu wrote:
Aside from the main cast superheroes, 30ish Rebels landed on Scarif in the stolen Zeta-class. U-Wings carry 8 passengers, and maybe three or four made it through the gate. So something like 60-100 Alliance soldiers fought groundside against an entire Imperial garrison at a super secure installation, including two elite formations (shoretroopers and death troopers). The Rebels encountered no real obstacles to achieving their operational goals, thanks to tactics like slowly walking in the open while under fire from augmented super soldiers a few dozen yards distant. That happened twice, by the way. I also noted that the two Imperial-class Star Destroyers in orbit never deployed and barely fired any weaponry. Guess the British-accented crew was on a tea break. Thankfully, Darth Vader showed up in time to do with one ISD what two couldn't manage, but of course his brutal scene was yet another empty show considering all the Rebels needed to do was hand a small object past a semi-blocked door.

So, kind of like ROTJ where the stormtroopers were defeated by outnumbered rebels and some teddy bears, and the imperial fleet's capital ships apparently forgot that they could do more than launch fighters? Clearly Rogue One is not a lesson in good military tactics, but let's not act like anything else in Star Wars (or movies in general) is much better.

Anyone else notice the similarities to video games? I.E Dark forces?
The...thingy Jyn and what's-his-face use to get the plans seems to be inspired by a stage in one of the old Dark forces game.
Y-wings using ion weapons to immobilise a star destroyer was also prominent in the X-WING and TIE fighter games.
A droid with an obvious hatred for humans also assists two hero's in thwarting the villain [KOTOR]

There's also this
Jyn Urso: Jan Ors
Cassian Andor: Kyle Katarn
Director Krennic: General Rhom Moc/ Bevel Lemelisk
K2S0: HK-47
Saw Gerro: Qu Rhan/ Jolee Bindo

Oh man that reminds me, I forgot to mention my other favorite part - the suicide mission Corvette that accelerates the disabled Star Destroyer into crashing. I don't think it pulled up, right? Their willingness to do that (and the commanders to clearly order that), along with all the troopers on the ground willingness to go on essentially a one-way mission, nicely showed the desperation of the rebellion / war to me.

But yeah, that Corvette was awesome - everything about the space battle was really, I only wish they'd shown more!

I wouldn't draw too many parallels with the games when it comes to characters. That was more like them filling traditional character roles. Except maybe K2SO being inspired by HK-47.

However, I would agree with you very much on the feel for the base and facility designs. The first time it really jumped out at me was the lift platform on Eadu.

The walker that gets downed by the x-wing had it's cargo doors open which you can see in the shot as they pull away, which would indicate that the walker shields were down as they need to lower shields in order to deploy their troops in the various games. Fighters and Y-wngs are able to knock out the walkers they just have to work at it pretty hard if their shields are active.

The other gets dropped from being hit repeatedly in the knee by the door gunner using Ion weaponry which they weren't shown to be using on Hoth aside from the giant boob cannon to disable the star destroyer. Ion weapons are specialized in knocking out shields so IMO it makes sense that sustained fire from a heavy blaster could cripple a walker since their legs are the weakest point. It'd likely take a combination of luck and skill but we only see one walker brought down in such a fashion and they aren't facing dozens of them.

Tarkin and Leia seemed good when they were still, but the lack of movement of their upper lips is where I had some difficulty with. They did a very good job of capturing the overall look but it's the lack of small refined movements in the upper lip and corners of the mouth that betray it as being artificial CG. The sync was off with their speech and since we're so attuned to facial movements when speaking to others it's an instant red flag as being seen as not real. The face shot of Leia they could have left out and it would have been fine as we all know who it is simply based on the dress and profile, no matter how they approached it Tarkin would have been tough. It didn't disrupt my enjoyment of the film but CG characters are always a little jarring IMO.

 Manchu wrote:
Aside from the main cast superheroes, 30ish Rebels landed on Scarif in the stolen Zeta-class. U-Wings carry 8 passengers, and maybe three or four made it through the gate. So something like 60-100 Alliance soldiers fought groundside against an entire Imperial garrison at a super secure installation, including two elite formations (shoretroopers and death troopers). The Rebels encountered no real obstacles to achieving their operational goals, thanks to tactics like slowly walking in the open while under fire from augmented super soldiers a few dozen yards distant. That happened twice, by the way. I also noted that the two Imperial-class Star Destroyers in orbit never deployed and barely fired any weaponry. Guess the British-accented crew was on a tea break. Thankfully, Darth Vader showed up in time to do with one ISD what two couldn't manage, but of course his brutal scene was yet another empty show considering all the Rebels needed to do was hand a small object past a semi-blocked door.

That was my biggest issue with the end of it. Were the two ISDs on lunch break? Were the engines turned off? Were they holding back? Why were they just standing there? And why the hell didn't the second move out of the way as soon as the other one began getting pushed towards it?

One of the ISDs was fighting, the other was the one that got the **** kicked out of it by the Y-Wing bomber assault.

Saw it today and loved it.

It definitely ends better than it starts, but I like how the "team" comes together. The space battle at the end was just perfect and I loved seeing Vander's Gold Leader and Dreis' Red Leader. The shining jewel of the movie is Vader's throwdown of the rebel soldiers when they board their ship. I've been waiting to see Vader do that on the big screen my entire life.

Saw it yesterday, probably my favourite Star Wars film. Its a shame none of the characters survived, because I would have liked to see some of them again in future films. Jyn Erso in particular. (and I don't mean films set prior to Rogue One, I mean films that continue the timeline). Hopefully Jyn Erso shows up in the young Han Solo stand alone film. They'd be similar ages prior to Rogue One (Han Solo ~ 30 years old, Jyn Erso ~ 25 years old). Isn't Felicity Jones contracted with an option for one more film?

Matpat of the Film Theory Youtube channel had a cool theory that the main rebel characters of Rogue One could be...

I was completely entertained by this movie. Best I have seen since guardians of the galaxy.

Were the CGI cameos of Tarkin and Leia motion capped? If not, perhaps they should have been.

They weren't mocapped - they were cg composited over the existing performers though (face mapping).

Unlike Tarkin of ep3, played by Wayne Pygram (who played Scorpius in Farscape), where it was prosthetics and some CGI touch-ups (but he didn't say anything).

I enjoyed it. More than ep4, to be honest (because it really hasn't aged well).
I don't know if I like it more than ep5 yet (only seen r1 once, but empire I have seen about 30 times over the years.)

 chromedog wrote:
They weren't mocapped - they were cg composited over the existing performers though (face mapping).

Unlike Tarkin of ep3, played by Wayne Pygram (who played Scorpius in Farscape), where it was prosthetics and some CGI touch-ups (but he didn't say anything).

I enjoyed it. More than ep4, to be honest (because it really hasn't aged well).
I don't know if I like it more than ep5 yet (only seen r1 once, but empire I have seen about 30 times over the years.)

This guy?



Wow, thats bad. Looks like a walker on the Walking Dead.

Too bad they couldn't do something more like this incredibly lifelike and awesome bust.








http://www.geeksofdoom.com/2011/05/25/scary-realistic-life-size-bust-of-star-wars-villain-grand-moff-tarkin

It was alright, it looked and felt liked Star Wars but I found a lot of the characters dull so it was hard to get emotionally invested. Preferred Force Awakens despite being highly derivative it at least had good characters.

 Manchu wrote:
Everyone dies because the script kills them. They are completely safe from all danger until the script has no further use for them. That's a cartoon version of war.

Oh please! You could say the same of any scripted media.

http://www.history.com/news/the-real-history-that-inspired-star-wars

Although there are parallels between Emperor Palpatine and dictators such as Hitler and Napoleon Bonaparte, the direct inspiration for the saga’s evil antagonist was actually an American president. According to J.W. Rinzler’s “The Making of Star Wars: Return of the Jedi,” when asked if Emperor Palpatine was a Jedi during a 1981 story conference, Lucas responded, “No, he was a politician. Richard M. Nixon was his name. He subverted the senate and finally took over and became an imperial guy and he was really evil. But he pretended to be a really nice guy.” In a 2005 interview published in the Chicago Tribune, Lucas said he originally conceived “Star Wars” as a reaction to Nixon’s presidency. “It was really about the Vietnam War, and that was the period where Nixon was trying to run for a [second] term, which got me to thinking historically about how do democracies get turned into dictatorships? Because the democracies aren’t overthrown; they’re given away.”

On topic :


3.5- 4 stars out of five.

Fun enough.

So glad Disney took over, I can't tell if Lucas is all there anymore

The Ewoks from RoTJ are actually supposed to be the Vietcong. And the Empire was the nasty Americans.

Might I just say that I'm glad the rebels were able to knock out the walkers with conventional fighters INSTEAD of tripping them up with tow cables. Tow cables have become a cliché as EVERY vehicle based star wars game usually features a sequence of that.
If any of the game developers were listening they'd have noticed the rebels HAD to use snowspeeders on hoth as it was too cold for their other vehicles to work properly.

And with the rebels desperate gambit in the finale, I kept remembering the 'Good day to die' song from one of the starship troopers movies. To pinch a quote from the 'other' space franchise. "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few"

Blind mystic force guy must've been livid that the Gm wouldn't let him put any ranks in move object eh ?

For me it never hit the heights of the best parts of Force Awakens... but was never as bad as the bad parts of any of the other films either.

... It was pretty much like 90% of the Star wars RPGs I've played

Hallway scene needed to have gone one a good...30 more minutes. Haha

 Skymate wrote:
Might I just say that I'm glad the rebels were able to knock out the walkers with conventional fighters INSTEAD of tripping them up with tow cables. Tow cables have become a cliché as EVERY vehicle based star wars game usually features a sequence of that.
If any of the game developers were listening they'd have noticed the rebels HAD to use snowspeeders on hoth as it was too cold for their other vehicles to work properly.

And with the rebels desperate gambit in the finale, I kept remembering the 'Good day to die' song from one of the starship troopers movies. To pinch a quote from the 'other' space franchise. "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few"

which is silly because X wings and Y wings and every other ship in the universe fights in the cold dark vacuum of space.

 Peregrine wrote:
So, kind of like ROTJ where the stormtroopers were defeated by outnumbered rebels and some teddy bears, and the imperial fleet's capital ships apparently forgot that they could do more than launch fighters?

Yes, this is exactly what I have been getting at: R1's "dark, gritty" battle scenes are actually as dumb/cartoonish as the Ewok battle in RotJ.

 reds8n wrote:
For me it never hit the heights of the best parts of Force Awakens... but was never as bad as the bad parts of any of the other films either.

That's pretty accurate for me, too (if we exclude ANH and ESB).

I loved this. Although quite different from FA, it needed to be.

My only complaints are the jarring beginning and the CGI Leia. The beginning should have said "A Star Wars Story" right after "a long time ago...".
It didn't necessarily need a text crawl, but an acknowledgment that it wasn't a Saga film would have been nice, but instead it just jumps right in.

While I think CGI reconstructions of past actors will probably never reach perfection (humans are just too good are recognizing fake faces) I think Tarkin was done well. Maybe he was there a bit too much, but he NEEEEEDED to be in this movie. His role in ANH is too important for him not to be here.

But Leia did not need to be seen so close up. We could have been fine with a shot from behind, or the side, or even just a few feet farther away, with other stuff in the shot to distract our eye from the "waxy" look of her face.

9 out of 10 for me. I'll never be able to watch ANH the same again (which is a good thing since I've seen it over 50 times)

-

Probably could have gotten away with a Tarkin cameo, perhaps via holonet a la the Emperor's first appearance in ESB.

 welshhoppo wrote:

which is silly because X wings and Y wings and every other ship in the universe fights in the cold dark vacuum of space.

If it hasn't been made exceedingly obvious by now, the Star Wars universe has no concept of how space works.

Now that I think about it, is there even a scene outside of TFA without completely normal gravity in all the films?

Watched it, enjoyed it, more of a prequel than the other three combined.

It also reminded me how "clean" everything was in the prequels. Episodes IV-VI were dirty and grimy, and even the clean areas (Death Star, Cloud City) looked like actually lived in places. The Prequels even managed to make a desert planet feel clean and orderly.

Nope, there is always gravity.

I kind of understand the trench run from a new Hope. The death star probably has its own gravitation field.

 Galef wrote:
a. The beginning should have said "A Star Wars Story" right after "a long time ago...".
It didn't necessarily need a text crawl, but an acknowledgment that it wasn't a Saga film would have been nice, but instead it just jumps right in.
-

I thought that the "A long time ago, in a galaxy far far away..." established it as a Star Wars film, but that the lack of the Star Wars Fanfare, Star Wars title, and text crawl was enough to establish it as not being one of the "Episodes".

Wasn't there some various scenes in Revenge of the Sith where they activate gravity boots or something?

I've kinda blotted out the first half of that film from my memory.

 welshhoppo wrote:
Nope, there is always gravity.

I kind of understand the trench run from a new Hope. The death star probably has its own gravitation field.

being the size of a moon, yep it does.

The lack of overture/scrawl was IMO to avoid the romance/serials association. This film billed itself as more grown up.

 Manchu wrote:
Disagree. There is a difference between a story about war and war as a setting for a story. R1 - like all other Star Wars movies - falls into the latter category, despite marketing patter. R1 is no more a war film than ANH or ESB. ESB depicts warfare in an arguably more serious and dark manner than R1, even considering ESB ultimately is not about war generally or even really the GCW specifically. R1 is an adventure story shot with a certain style of lighting and some far-less-than-half-realized ruminations on the "gray areas" of political conflicts.

You get that by that standard, most war movies aren't war movies? Certainly almost none of the WW2 war films qualify for your definition - characters dying in service of the plot or at the conclusion of their meaningful participation in it is a standard in fiction generally, only rarely subverted, and certainly not that often in war movies.

Frankly I think anyone who went into this expecting Game of Throne Wars or Star Wars: Platoon was fooling themselves. It is an adventure story(so are many war movies, fundamentally), but it's hardly a cartoon as you claim.

It's not a perfect movie, but it is a pretty great one and it's certainly the best Star Wars film since the OT.

Yes I think most films set during wars that do not explicitly deal with war itself are actually adventure movies. R1 like ANH is a good example. So are a lot of the WW2 pictures, which of course helped inspire Star Wars to begin with.

It's not just "walking in and expecting" a dark, serious movie; it's a movie that presents itself as dark and complicated but actually is just another morally facile adventure flick.

Clearly you watched a different movies to the rest of us.

It's possible. Maybe the rest of you didn't see the movie where the good guy suddenly murders his erstwhile ally. But that is what happens near the beginning of Rogue One. And then later on, after the main character has called him out on this because it is the central theme of the movie up to that point, it turns out that good guys who do terrible things aren't bad buys because after all they do it for a good cause. You may have not seen Rogue One, if you missed these parts.

 Manchu wrote:
It's possible. Maybe the rest of you didn't see the movie where the good guy suddenly murders his erstwhile ally. But that is what happens near the beginning of Rogue One. And then later on, after the main character has called him out on this because it is the central theme of the movie up to that point, it turns out that good guys who do terrible things aren't bad buys because after all they do it for a good cause. You may have not seen Rogue One, if you missed these parts.

It was very obvious from Cassians mannerisms that he didn't like doing what he was doing. When he saw Galen stand in front of the Stormtroopers to protect his people, something snapped inside him. He didn't kill Galen, and he didn't trudge all the way up there with a sniper rifle to take in the sights. After that, he started to support Jyn. He wasn't a good person. That was the point of his character. But he had a change of heart towards the end and decided to do soemthing good.

Maybe you missed it, but this is also Han Solo. A smuggler and killer. He, however, didn't have and qualms shooting people, just look at how he wasted Greedo (Han didn't shoot first, Han shot. And Greedo died. Then Lucas decided he didn't like Han being so cold blooded). Throughout A New Hope he's a complete mercenary, and doesn't give a gak about anyone else, he just wants his money. His about face to having a heart of gold was much more abrupt than Cassians.

But because it's in a film nerds have adored for twenty years, he's allowed to be a bad guy that's also good.

Cassian is not an an analog for Han. They are actually direct opposites. Han was a selfish criminal who disavowed responsibility for anyone and anything but himself, maybe Chewbacca aside. Cassian by total contrast is supremely committed to the Rebellion, even to the point of sacrificing his own personal judgment and values. Whereas Han starts to care about the Rebellion because he starts to care about people who care about it, Cassian cares about the Rebellion over and above any individuals - most of all, himself.

Cassian defends himself against Jyn's accusations by saying he didn't pull the trigger but she correctly sees through this deflection and compares him to a storm trooper. ANH never asks what separates the good guys from the bad guys; it never pretends to deal with anything even remotely ambiguous.* R1 sets up that theme and carries it for a while but sort of abandons it in favor of an increasingly preprosterous"epic" adventure, completely dropping the issue of moral grayness for the simplistic notion that Cassian and others who have done evil in the name of good are justified because of their willingness to self-sacrifice. Unlike on the shuttle leaving Eadu, Jyn buys this bs on Yavin - maybe because she doesn't care anymore, maybe because the studio execs didn't care anymore.

* One possible exception - Leia's willingness to sacrifice Dantooine.

 Manchu wrote:
* One possible exception - Leia's willingness to sacrifice Dantooine.

Maybe Leia didn't think she was sacrificing anything, it was an abandoned base, after all. I think she expected the Empire to search in and get back to her after they came up empty, not blow up the whole planet.

Just based on the film itself, we don't know whether Dantooine is inhabited - hence calling it out as a potential ambiguity. If we assume that Dantooine is bereft of life, and that's why Leia chose ot, then she hasn't really made a difficult moral choice at all, which is consistent with the rest of ANH.

On the subject of Dantooine. I wonder if the 'rebel base' mentioned in the original movie could be the Jedi convent from the KOTOR games?

Dantooine was a previous, now abandoned, rebel base (prior to them relocating to Yavin4).
The Empire DID send scouts to check it out - and they returned, reporting it abandoned "for some time" (it's in ANH ... Followed by "she lied to us ..." ).

Leia was willing to sacrifice an otherwise abandoned planet in order to save the rebellion - it was purely a delaying tactic, but Dantooine (and Yavin 4) were otherwise abandoned planets. The rebels preferred to use otherwise unoccupied worlds to limit collateral damage from potential Imperial punitive strikes.

No-one knows what actually happened to the previous occupants who built the temple ruins in Tikal Yavin4 but they weren't around when the rebels moved in.

In the defunct EU, they were Sith temples.

As to Dantooine - whether or for how long a Rebel base has been abandoned doesn't answer whether the rest of an entire planet is uninhabited. Similalry, we only see one location on Yavin IV. My point is not to argue that Leia necessarily did make a tough call when she said Dantooine. Rather, the issue is that it could have been a tough call if you stick to only what we see and hear in the film. But I can well believe that Dantooine was uninhabited, Leia knew as much, and that there was nothing whatsoever morally ambiguous about directing Tarkin to that planet; if so, it's an entirely heroic action undertaken to save the people of Alderaan. And that is consistent with the morally uncomplicated nature of ANH, which is such a contrast to the direction R1 halfheartedly goes.

 Manchu wrote:
Yes I think most films set during wars that do not explicitly deal with war itself are actually adventure movies. R1 like ANH is a good example. So are a lot of the WW2 pictures, which of course helped inspire Star Wars to begin with.

OK, so you are just inventing your own more restrictive definition of "war movie" as a way to bash this one.

It's not just "walking in and expecting" a dark, serious movie; it's a movie that presents itself as dark and complicated but actually is just another morally facile adventure flick.

And you're doing it because otherwise, this criticism would be hilarious nonsense. It is, by the way. Hilarious nonsense, that is. Again, it's not perfectly executed, but to brand a film "morally facile" just because it's not a relentlessly grinding docufiction about the horrors of war and you thought the closing shot for two of the characters was a bit sappy is just bizarre. The main characters are criminals and assassins, pretty much all the "good guys" die, the Rebel leadership are shown to be perfectly willing to order people killed and their operatives willing to silence informants or kill off even members of other Rebel cells when it's expedient, the film presents an outright collaborator as a sympathetic character, crikey they have a Rebel corvette go 9/11 on a Star Destroyer. Again, it's not Platoon, but if you went in expecting something truly dark and twisted the problem was your expectations, because the advertising promised a dark and complicated Star Wars film, and it delivered on that.

Dantooine is not an uninhabited planet - its a farming planet.

I saw it on Saturday. I thought it was great. In the black and white universe of Star Wars this movie managed to be an interesting shade of grey. Greatly enjoyed the characters too, and how they managed to recreate the aesthetics of the originals.

A big highlight was finally getting to see Vader in his armour being terrifyingly dangerous in one of the movies. That corridor scene makes me giddy.

Best Star Wars movie outside of the original trilogy.

The final 15 minutes were perfect. Bringing back Tarkin and Leia and Vader was awesome. It was terrifying seeing Darth Vader cut his way through the rebels, while they scream and pound on the doors.

The space battle reminded me of episode 4, with similar trench runs.

I'm not sure if the star destroyer shot in the beginning of the movie was a model or not, but almost all big space ship shots looked real, they looked like the models used in the original trilogy.

The movie showed something no other Star Wars has done: it showed the people, those who fought. The actual war that was being fought on the ground. Rebels dieing. I liked it.

Easily a 9/10.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Dantooine is not an uninhabited planet -

damn right : my Mon Calamari tech specialist/soldier is there right now with the rest of his crew.


We left Tatooine just as some big ships went overhead, sure we'll be fine.

LOL OK define "war movie" as a movie set during a war, it's not really relevant to my larger point. That just means that all Star Wars movies are war movies when the only reason this term "war movie" has come up is because marketing people want to differentiate R1 from Eps I - VII. But whether you cut it finely or coarsely, R1 doesn't stand apart from the others along those lines. Nor does it stand apart as more thematically "serious" or "grown up" than the others, at least by the finale. R1 starts off by raising troubling questions but ultimately shrugs them off, as described in detail above.

I went in not expecting much after TFA but R1 really surprised me. For me this is the best starwars movie ever made. Visually it was stunning - loved the plot - loved the characters. Felt like a star-wars movie too.

10/10

Apparently there was a scene cut from the film when Darth Vader pursues 3 of the main cast Heroes, not just nameless Rebels. I would have loved to see that at the end of the film, Jynn and Cassian desperately trying to escape Vader and deliver the plans to Tantive IV.

 Manchu wrote:
Aside from the main cast superheroes, 30ish Rebels landed on Scarif in the stolen Zeta-class. U-Wings carry 8 passengers, and maybe three or four made it through the gate. So something like 60-100 Alliance soldiers fought groundside against an entire Imperial garrison at a super secure installation, including two elite formations (shoretroopers and death troopers). The Rebels encountered no real obstacles to achieving their operational goals, thanks to tactics like slowly walking in the open while under fire from augmented super soldiers a few dozen yards distant. That happened twice, by the way. I also noted that the two Imperial-class Star Destroyers in orbit never deployed and barely fired any weaponry. Guess the British-accented crew was on a tea break. Thankfully, Darth Vader showed up in time to do with one ISD what two couldn't manage, but of course his brutal scene was yet another empty show considering all the Rebels needed to do was hand a small object past a semi-blocked door.

A lot of what you see in star-wars clips isn't actually the whole picture and the timing isn't right ether. Looks like only 5 X-wings and a few U-wings made it through the gate but probably more made it off scene. 2 ISD honestly might have been no match for an assorted rebel fleet of 15+ ships with a bunch of fighter support. Also much like today - A single fighter packs enough punch to cripple a capital ship - perhaps the ISD chose to engage the rebel fighters away from the Rebel fleets guns. As the Rebels main objective was not to destroy star destroyers but to disable the shield gate - they went along with it. Vader was only able to crush the rebel fleet because he caught them off guard in a retreat with most rebel fighters docked or destroyed. On the ground We saw a lot of rebels getting obliterated. They had the initiative but once they lost it they were toast. I think this was a great scene. We had never seen rebels getting their asses canned so hard really.

In comparison in ROTJ (my favorite) Something like 50 ISD and a superstar destroyer catch a fleet maybe twice the size of the R1 fleet in a trap and are utterly annihilated even with death-star support. The only conclusion that can be draw is. Rebel fighter tech/skill is more powerful that star destroyers. The real question is - the empire being as strong as it is - why don't they stock their hangers with more advanced fighters? The standard Tie-fighter just isnt cutting it for these guys.

@ Xenomancers

I'm not sure that that imperial fleet was completely annihilated. What's to say that they didn't just retreat when the Death Star blew up?

 Future War Cultist wrote:
@ Xenomancers

I'm not sure that that imperial fleet was completely annihilated. What's to say that they didn't just retreat when the Death Star blew up?

As a young nerd I believe I read that the entire fleet was destroyed. Ether from the deathstar blast or the rebels follow ups after the deathstar 2- probably a combo of both.

If something is important to the plot, it needs to be shown. There is no excuse worse than, well if you read the comic book ... If I have to read the comic book or the tie-in novel or play the video game or wait for the next film two years later in order to understand something important in the movie then the movie has made a mistake. R1 showed how many fighters made it through the gate. That's that.

As to the ISDs: if two ISDs are no match for the Rebel fleet then why does one ISD (the Devastator, with Vader aboard) decisively end the battle? It cannot be because three is better than two because, by the time it arrives, the Devastator is the only ISD left in the fight. And it cannot be because the previous ISDs had sufficiently "weakened" the Rebel fleet for Vader to wipe them up because they do not even deploy before being crippled.

One of the biggest weaknesses of R1 is everything happens "because the script says so" - i.e., plot developments are insufficiently explained, relying on the audience to just accept that whatever happens in the film is supposed to happen at this point in this kind of film. The Rebel forces on Scarif are successful because of course they are, until they're not. The film doesn't actually show us why the battle is progressing the way it is; it's just "there are X minutes left in the movie so at X minus Y minutes, we need a hero to accomplish his goal and at X minus Z minutes we need that hero to die."

R1 was always up against the problem of creating tension when the conclusion is foregone. The much-praised horror movie scene with Vader is actually a great example of why R1 didn't succeed in this regard. Vader is murdering his way down a corridor of Rebel mooks. The mook at the end of the corridor has the Death Star plans and all he has to do is hand them through a semi-closed blast door. There is absolutely zero tension here as to the fate of the Death Star plans, which by the way is the whole point of this film. So the scene just becomes a kind of demo reel for showing off Vader's baddassery. Yes, it looked really cool. No, it was not good storytelling.

And that sums up R1 - a really cool-looking movie that doesn't quite tell an interesting story. Somebody, whether Gareth Edwards or Kathleen Kennedy, decided that they couldn't generate sufficient tension about the fate of the Death Star plans, given everyone already knows the mission succeeds, so instead they focused on making the mission as "EPIC" as possible, incidentally dwarfing the much more important Battle of Yavin. This was the wrong choice. It is possible to tell an interesting story, even when the audience already knows the outcome. No one watches ANH thinking that Luke will fail to blow up the Death Star.

 Manchu wrote:
If something is important to the plot, it needs to be shown. There is no excuse worse than, well if you read the comic book ... If I have to read the comic book or the tie-in novel or play the video game or wait for the next film two years later in order to understand something important in the movie then the movie has made a mistake. R1 showed how many fighters made it through the gate. That's that.

As to the ISDs: if two ISDs are no match for the Rebel fleet then why does one ISD (the Devastator, with Vader aboard) decisively end the battle? It cannot be because three is better than two because, by the time it arrives, the Devastator is the only ISD left in the fight. And it cannot be because the previous ISDs had sufficiently "weakened" the Rebel fleet for Vader to wipe them up because they do not even deploy before being crippled.

One of the biggest weaknesses of R1 is everything happens "because the script says so" - i.e., plot developments are insufficiently explained, relying on the audience to just accept that whatever happens in the film is supposed to happen at this point in this kind of film. The Rebel forces on Scarif are successful because of course they are, until they're not. The film doesn't actually show us why the battle is progressing the way it is; it's just "there are X minutes left in the movie so at X minus Y minutes, we need a hero to accomplish his goal and at X minus Z minutes we need that hero to die."

R1 was always up against the problem of creating tension when the conclusion is foregone. The much-praised horror movie scene with Vader is actually a great example of why R1 didn't succeed in this regard. Vader is murdering his way down a corridor of Rebel mooks. The mook at the end of the corridor has the Death Star plans and all he has to do is hand them through a semi-closed blast door. There is absolutely zero tension here as to the fate of the Death Star plans, which by the way is the whole point of this film. So the scene just becomes a kind of demo real for showing off Vader's baddassery. Yes, it looked really cool. No, it was not good storytelling.

And that sums up R1 - a really cool-looking movie that doesn't quite tell an interesting story. Somebody, whether Gareth Edwards or Kathleen Kennedy, decided that they couldn't generate sufficient tension about the fate of the Death Star plans, given everyone already knows the mission succeeds, so instead they focused on making the mission as "EPIC" as possible, incidentally dwarfing the much more important Battle of Yavin. This was the wrong choice. It is possible to tell an interesting story, even when the audience already knows the outcome. No one watches ANH thinking that Luke will fail to blow up the Death Star.

You make a good point about the corridor scene. What if the door was always closed and malfunctioning and at the last second a brave rebel gets the door to open just enough to stick the plans through? It would have created more tension maybe. About Vadrers star-destroyer merking the rebel fleet though - I think we are to assume that the fleet was diminished by tie-fighter harassment and was caught off gaurd - it's a good enough explanation for me. Would be great if they added a few more scenes to that battle to tie things together better. Maybe to come in an extended scenes blue ray release. (which I will buy the day it comes out).

"Caught off guard" is a hell of an understatement. They'd just fought a vicious and costly battle taking lots of casualties and damage, had all fighters docked and were jumping to hyperspace, probably with their shields down and all power devoted to the engines. Some of them even crashed into Vader's Star Destroyer when it jumped into their path.

Is it any wonder why they were annihilated?

No, the only wonder is why they weren't annihilated before Vader arrived.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@Xenomancer - Yeah I agree there should be lots of really fascinating deleted scenes. All in all, I think a less "epic" movie with more tension would have been a lot better.

Really didn't like the Captain's sunk cost fallacy speech right before their attack on the archives.

He should also have stayed dead when he fell down the shaft.

Jyn should have already succeeded and then been shot by Imperial officer guy.

The mind eating monster was way too big and awkward. Why not start with that procedure anyway?



Apart from that, it was good fun and I liked the characters. Especially crippled "rebel extremist" guy and Jyn's dad.

I agree with all of those points Scrabb. The mind monster was really out of place and it was almost like they got drunk and high, came up with that and shot it, and then their hangover was so bad they forgot it was in the movie. But eh feth it, right? Just leave it in.

The fleet wasn't annihilated. The fleet retreated after their only objective was complete, get the Death Star plans.

Half the rebel fleet already made the jump when Darth Vader suddenly appears, causing some of the retreating rebels to run into his ship.

The main rebel ship was disabled, that's the main rebel casualty that was shown. And they were already working on downloading the plans into portable storage to transport it on the smaller ship by the time Vader boarded.

The "fleet" Vader managed to "annihilate" were leftover fighters that didn't make the jump and one disabled capital ship.

 d-usa wrote:
The fleet wasn't annihilated. The fleet retreated after their only objective was complete, get the Death Star plans.

Half the rebel fleet already made the jump when Darth Vader suddenly appears, causing some of the retreating rebels to run into his ship.

The main rebel ship was disabled, that's the main rebel casualty that was shown. And they were already working on downloading the plans into portable storage to transport it on the smaller ship by the time Vader boarded.

The "fleet" Vader managed to "annihilate" were leftover fighters that didn't make the jump and one disabled capital ship.

Only like 3 rebel ships managed to jump out before Vader showed up. Besides even if that Rebel Fleet got annihilated, there are presumably still "Fleets" that weren't there.

Good point about the Rebel Fleet's partial escape. With that in mind, we have to conclude that the Rebel fleet was simply more powerful than the Imperial forces guarding one of the most secure installations in the Empire.

 Manchu wrote:
Good point about the Rebel Fleet's partial escape. With that in mind, we have to conclude that the Rebel fleet was simply more powerful than the Imperial forces guarding one of the most secure installations in the Empire.

perhaps they had a larger force there that was rerouted to deal with an uprising elsewhere. They did just destroy a city with the death-star. Word travels fast in hyperspace.

You know the thing that really bothered me - was that the Rebel council actually cared about anything Jyn had to say. She is a nobody. She wouldn't be giving speeches to the head officials in the alliance.

Good point. But at least she wasn't able to convince them, which was a bit more realistic than her haranguing them. Although that makes you wonder what the point of the scene actually was. Her speech changed no one's mind, right? Or was Raddus on the fence beforehand?

That whole scene was really troubling. It seems like the majority of the Alliance's leadership was against military action (at least 3 of 5 against). But the Rebel military disregarded their decision. The resulting operation was poorly coordinated (somehow a big plot driver in the third act was radioing the fleet to do what it was already doing?) but still completely successful. I thought the key objection against the Empire was oppression of the democratic system through military force. But whatever.

I think Raddus was always wanting to attack, even before the speech. He just needed an excuse and opportunity to do so. I think what Jyn's speech did do was provide the fire to get things going. - Ultimately, Mon Mothma and Organa agreed with her, plus they did have some corroborating evidence, so they knew she wasn't talking complete tosh, they just didn't know how much they could believe.

I counted Mon Mothma and Bail Organa as for military action, even though I'm not sure they explicitly said so. But the Council definitely rejected taking military action so Raddus was certainly acting against orders barring some off-screen change of policy.

Saw it and enjoyed it, but that I'd like it more.

This:

 Manchu wrote:

And that sums up R1 - a really cool-looking movie that doesn't quite tell an interesting story.

is pretty much how I feel about it.

Makes me a bit nervous for future films set in the 'past'!

I think the prequels establish that in no way is the Senate and the Republic any better than the Empire. Sure they were tolerant of the various species but still horribly corrupt and over ridden but a lawless army of space wizards that did as they see fit.

So really thr Rebel Alliance has never been the good guys just different guys really.

 BrotherGecko wrote:
So really thr Rebel Alliance has never been the good guys just different guys really.

Whew as a long-time SW fan, this is news to me

Just saying, religious fanatics trying to install an ineffectual aristocratic legislative body that is overtly controlled by a lawless shadow government/army wouldn't be good guys to me. Different guys but not the good guys.

Or are you just being sarcastic because I pointed out nothing new?

Are you describing the Rebel Alliance? Based on the original trilogy or just R1?

Saw it, really enjoyed it. For me, it had the right amount of grit to give the action some weight and feeling of consequences, but avoided being the sort of Dark Dekonstruchun that some people on the internet seem to want everything to be.

One thing that occurs to me--I think Bodhi (if that's the right name--the Imperial pilot guy who sets the whole thing in motion) might be the most heroic character in the film, possibly in any Star Wars film. He wasn't chosen by destiny, and he didn't hate the Empire because they'd blown up his planet or killed someone he loved. He had a comfortable, fairly safe life, he was on the winning side. And then he gives it up and risks (and loses) his life because a prisoner had a talk with him and asked him to do the right thing.

 Elemental wrote:
because a prisoner had a talk with him and asked him to do the right thing

Is that what happened? It wasn't shown in the film. IIRC we just know that Galen sent Bodhi. And I guess they had some kind of special connection because Bodhi's last words or nearly last words are something like, "this is for you Galen." But it came off as another "off-screen" thing to me, probably something that happened in a comic book.

 Manchu wrote:
Are you describing the Rebel Alliance? Based on the original trilogy or just R1?

More or less the whole series including R1 and the prequels.

I don't think the OT portrays the Alliance as anything other than heroic freedom fighters opposing an evil tyranny.

 Manchu wrote:
I don't think the OT portrays the Alliance as anything other than heroic freedom fighters opposing an evil tyranny.

I don't either, actually.

Is BrotherGecko trying to lay down a "Hot Take" here?

It's not THAT surprising she was allowed to speak. She wasn't a total nobody. After all, the whole reason she's even involved is because the Rebellion found her important enough to rescue/kidnap at the beginning of the movie.

 Manchu wrote:
(somehow a big plot driver in the third act was radioing the fleet to do what it was already doing?)

They had to send out a broad radio message the fleet to establish a direct point to send the plans to. It was basically a call for a someone to respond with a valid FTP address to send it to.

 Manchu wrote:
I don't think the OT portrays the Alliance as anything other than heroic freedom fighters opposing an evil tyranny.

The theme he is talking about is much more prevalent in the I-III. The senate is an inoperable body incapable of doing the right thing (ofc it was under palpatine's complete control). This also reminds me of the scene in ep III where Supreme canceler palpatine was talking to Anakin about how the Jedi and Sith are essentially the same thing. I can see where he is coming from. The Rebellion is not the senate though. The Rebellion is a group of people who oppose the empire because the empire is an evil thing.

I've been a part of the star wars fandom for more than half my life. Over the years I have come across a surprising amount of people who genuinely believe that the Empire are the "Good Guys" and that if the various authors and script writers weren't so rebel biased, they'd show that.

They never seemed to pick up the whole concept of, "the scriptwriters and the authors decide who the Empire are.... Because they're writing the story."

There's strong correlations with these people of this viewpoint and, in the wargaming sphere, those complaining about the PC brigade stopping them from putting swastikas on their Waffen SS Flames of War armies.

There's toothless and ineffective and then there's exterminating planets to keep other people from questioning your authority. The Republic had crippling flaws, but calling "neither good guys" is a ridiculous simplification of the color grey.

 Compel wrote:
Over the years I have come across a surprising amount of people who genuinely believe that the Empire are the "Good Guys" and that if the various authors and script writers weren't so rebel biased, they'd show that.

Oh yes I have seen it as well and commented on it several times around here in the past, most recently regarding Thrawn:I really liked the portray of Krennic in R1 - up until he didn't just kill Jyn WTF man - because although there was no doubt he was an evil guy he was still pretty interesting, or at least interesting enough to fulfill his role of Sole Competent Villain.

Yup, I think I participated in that thread too (but I still like Thrawn )

Manchu wrote:I don't think the OT portrays the Alliance as anything other than heroic freedom fighters opposing an evil tyranny.

Right but there are 5 other movies now, plus hundreds of video games, book, cartoons, comics..etc etc etc. The OT doesn't really give us much on the Empire or the Alliance. Just red/green and good/bad. Hell, this thread is about R1 and what it adds to the story. So if the Rebels don't look so good anymore, it probably just bad writing I guess.

Alpharius wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
I don't think the OT portrays the Alliance as anything other than heroic freedom fighters opposing an evil tyranny.

I don't either, actually.

Is BrotherGecko trying to lay down a "Hot Take" here?

Honestly, I have no idea what a "hot take" means.....nevermind Googled. No I do not think describing SW is provocative lol, its a series of mostly watchable space operas that depend on visuals over actually thinking about its plot. Thinking that pointing out how silly the whole series is, isn't provocative lol.

LunarSol wrote:There's toothless and ineffective and then there's exterminating planets to keep other people from questioning your authority. The Republic had crippling flaws, but calling "neither good guys" is a ridiculous simplification of the color grey.

They kill plenty of people in the movies we have to regain their authority. Calling neither good guys is saying exactly what Lucas did to the series. Had we been left with just the OT and non of the expanded universe and movies, you would be hard pressed to argue the alliance is nothing but the goodest of good.

 Manchu wrote:

 Compel wrote:
Over the years I have come across a surprising amount of people who genuinely believe that the Empire are the "Good Guys" and that if the various authors and script writers weren't so rebel biased, they'd show that.

Oh yes I have seen it as well and commented on it several times around here in the past, most recently regarding Thrawn:

Spoiler:

 Manchu wrote:
LOL directly murdering children is not the threshold for evildoing. Morality in the Star Wars cinematic experience, especially in the Original Trilogy, is fairly black and white. If you wear a Nazi Imperial uniform, you are a bad guy. EU authors, beginning with Zahn, started to problematize this probably because, as novelists, they wanted fuller, more sympathetic characters. (By contrast, Imperials and their analogs - initially - remained much more starkly and simply evil in the Dark Horse comics.) But it was also something to do with the 90s, a burgeoning love of anti-heroes, because SW novels before Heir to the Empire are content with the moral clarity of the film(s). There is no question whether Piett is "evil" because the movie doesn't trade on those terms; he's a bad guy, and that is all that matters. You need a character like Thrawn to come along before you get to the question of whether Captain So-and-so is really evil deep down, or just a bloke doing his job the best he can. When you look back on the OT and you start dividing up the bad guys between the really evil ones and the ones who ... er, just totally went along and enjoyed all the privileges that being a leader in the Galactic Empire entailed ... wait, I mean, the ones who aren't really and truly evil, then you are already involved in apologetics. This is why I said I "despise" Thrawn - not merely dislike or find irritating (like Rey from Force Awakens).

I really liked the portray of Krennic in R1 - up until he didn't just kill Jyn WTF man - because although there was no doubt he was an evil guy he was still pretty interesting, or at least interesting enough to fulfill his role of Sole Competent Villain.

My problem with that argument is that people will use it to excuse every link in the chain below the very top. I mean, someone will argue with me the guy in the black helmet is just doing what he's told, pulling the lever when ordered and watching the big green light go by. Just some blue collar work. Nothing evil...

 BrotherGecko wrote:
So if the Rebels don't look so good anymore, it probably just bad writing I guess.

It's worse than that. It's a combination of good and terrible writing. R1 wants to tackle a complicated theme. But for whatever reason, it gives up at the end of Act II.

 LunarSol wrote:
I mean, someone will argue with me the guy in the black helmet is just doing what he's told, pulling the lever when ordered and watching the big green light go by. Just some blue collar work. Nothing evil...

There is literally an EU (defunct canon) story about how the Death Star gunner ended up sabotaging the destruction of Yavin IV because of moral paralysis.

 BrotherGecko wrote:

LunarSol wrote:There's toothless and ineffective and then there's exterminating planets to keep other people from questioning your authority. The Republic had crippling flaws, but calling "neither good guys" is a ridiculous simplification of the color grey.

They kill plenty of people in the movies we have to regain their authority. Calling neither good guys is saying exactly what Lucas did to the series. Had we been left with just the OT and non of the expanded universe and movies, you would be hard pressed to argue the alliance is nothing but the goodest of good.

They don't have to be the goodest of good to still be good in the face of the evil they face.

Manchu wrote:

 BrotherGecko wrote:
So if the Rebels don't look so good anymore, it probably just bad writing I guess.

It's worse than that. It's a combination of good and terrible writing. R1 wants to tackle a complicated theme. But for whatever reason, it gives up at the end of Act II.

 LunarSol wrote:
I mean, someone will argue with me the guy in the black helmet is just doing what he's told, pulling the lever when ordered and watching the big green light go by. Just some blue collar work. Nothing evil...

There is literally an EU (defunct canon) story about how the Death Star gunner ended up sabotaging the destruction of Yavin IV because of moral paralysis.

I agree to the weird back and forth indecision to the Rebel Alliances writting that gets exasperated by the confused story R1 wanted to tell.

When everybody cheers to the destruction of two stardestroyers in R1 because of TFA and oddly Battlefront 2, I can't help but think of all the people on board those ships that believed they were doing the right thing and have no left thousands of families without.

This is really just my problem with the series as a whole. People can enjoy SW to the fullest, it doesn't bother me lol, I love the video games.

LunarSol wrote:

 BrotherGecko wrote:

LunarSol wrote:There's toothless and ineffective and then there's exterminating planets to keep other people from questioning your authority. The Republic had crippling flaws, but calling "neither good guys" is a ridiculous simplification of the color grey.

They kill plenty of people in the movies we have to regain their authority. Calling neither good guys is saying exactly what Lucas did to the series. Had we been left with just the OT and non of the expanded universe and movies, you would be hard pressed to argue the alliance is nothing but the goodest of good.

They don't have to be the goodest of good to still be good in the face of the evil they face.

You are right but nothing is any less than idealized in SW. So while the Rebel Alliance is supposed to be the goodest of good, they obviously are not. Which they puts them in a category of less than good but of course not as bad as the Empire. In other words the Rebels are a upgrade for most of the galaxy but still it is less than ideal. The Alliance has no intention of answeing its own sins.

There's a difference between believing you're doing the right thing and actually doing the right thing though. No one sees themselves as the villain after all. Seryu Ubiquitous probably being one of the more entertaining versions of this.

 LunarSol wrote:
There's a difference between believing you're doing the right thing and actually doing the right thing though. No one sees themselves as the villain after all. Seryu Ubiquitous probably being one of the more entertaining versions of this.

Which is why many of the rebels actions reflect the same as the empires lol. The old because we are doing the right thing we don't have to think about what we are doing.

Honestly, the problem is likely to be because we see a lot of what the rebels do or think but little on why the those that fight for the empire do what they do. So the rebels are the only ones who can lose face, the empire almost literally lacks a face. So it is easier to point out if the rebels are being hypocritical but not the hypocrisy of the empire.

For me, one of the bigger problems with Star Wars is that there's never been 'enough time' between Ep 3 and Ep 4.

R1 doesn't help with this problem...

 Manchu wrote:
I agree with all of those points Scrabb. The mind monster was really out of place and it was almost like they got drunk and high, came up with that and shot it, and then their hangover was so bad they forgot it was in the movie. But eh feth it, right? Just leave it in.

I suspect it was added in later due to the studio demanding some kind of monster appear in the film. I could be wrong, but it felt tacked on to me.

Saw it again and loved it, need to watch A New Hope now

On the second time, I especially liked seeing the turn in the main two characters as the movie progressed. Wish they had more movies to develop them, but they knew they wouldn't and clearly developed them with that in mind. CGI was a lot less noticeable to me on the second round, too, since I knew it was coming. Still think the final scene is absurdly well done, and my wife actually didn't know either were CGI until I told her afterwards

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
I agree with all of those points Scrabb. The mind monster was really out of place and it was almost like they got drunk and high, came up with that and shot it, and then their hangover was so bad they forgot it was in the movie. But eh feth it, right? Just leave it in.

I suspect it was added in later due to the studio demanding some kind of monster appear in the film. I could be wrong, but it felt tacked on to me.

Several of the monsters were put in by the FX people as references to Edwards' previous work. (Because SFX people are huge nerds, too).
He had a monster movie before Godzilla and elements of monsters from both were used.

Obviously, the rebels in the corridor were able to pass on the info. I was bitting my nails through the whole scene though.

Anyone else notice the blind Jedi guy had what appeared to be a lightsabre at the end of his staff? I wonder if there were scenes of him using it that got cut? I just don't like 'sticks' being used as weapons in star wars

Oh weird, I didn't think of that. I was wondering what the metal end cap of his staff was for, since it didn't seem to do anything.

His stick wasn't just a stick.
He did "tase" people with it - it did seem to spark a bit when he fought the troopers, and it was part of his weird jedi crossbow gun too.

I did like the way he could see where the shot would "be" and not be there (so it looks like he's dodging the shots) - but he also timed one of those shots of his own, so that the arc of the crashing ship would do more damage - so he may not be jedi but he did have some skillz.

Seen it today and it was alot better than I thought it would be. Didnt expect much tho after TFA.

It did seem to drag on at first but once it got going, it was excellent. I need time to think it over but it might be my favourite star wars film to date. Definitely my top 3 along with ESB and ROTJ.

I was slightly put off by the kung-fu monk at first with the over the top swinging of his stick but he merged in nicely as the movie progressed.

The cameos were handled better than I expected too, bar the cantina guys who didnt need to be in it. Tarkin was handled great and having him be around to steal the glory in person definitely added more to the setting than a hologram could of. Vader showing up and being a phantom menace was good too.

In the novel of ANH, Vader is only around because he's been given the job of RECOVERING the stolen plans. (Tarkin is plainly in charge of the DS, and Leia knows that Tarkin is in charge.). Yes, he's the emperor's bully-boy, but he's not there as general arse-kicker.

Not to kill jedi, not to kill rebels (but should he happen to do any of those whilst doing his main job, it's all good). So it makes sense that he would turn up and do something AFTER the heist and get to be badass. After all, Krennick is dead, and Tarkin is now in charge of the DS, where he will remain until the Battle of Yavin.

It also places his Star Destroyer, the Devastator, at the battle of Scarif. Devastator was the ship that pursued, captured and destroyed the Tantive IV over tattooine.

Pig Nose and Scrotum Chin didn't really need to be in the movie. That was a dumb cameo even though it did make me laugh. But apart from that, I'm pretty happy with the whole movie over all.

The good news is that it's better than A New Hope, which isn't saying much.

The bad news is that it's a bad film and I'd like my money back! Technically, it was free becuase it was 2 for 1, but that's another story.

Anyway, It's caught between this no man's land of war is hell, and Disney bosses trying to reign it in to make it more family friendly for the big bucks, and sadly, this results in the film dying in the cross-fire between this creative tension.

Vader needs to go. Quickly. he adds nothing to the film. I'm reminded of Stephen King's writing advice about adverbs i.e when you feel the need to include an adverb, replace it with a swear word, your editor will delete it and the text will be fine and you'll thank your editor.

A similar approach should be taken with any Star Wars film: if a scriptwriter feels the need to keep the fanboys happy, leave it out and the film will continue on its merry way.

Characters. Dull. Nothing more to say. Wasn't expecting much. The natural charm and charisma of Harrison Ford and Billy Dee Williams is hard to replicate. These characters are just too good at what they do compared to the average guy.

Finally, the aesthetics. I know this will be unpopular, but hell, Star Wars needs George Lucas back. Now!

Yes, the Phantom Menace was a bad film, but its heart was in the right place. It was poorly executed, but damn, Lucas tried to give us a new look, a new feel, new planets, new visions. That's one thing I'll never fault Lucas for, he tried for that aesthetic. New planets, new designs, new stuff.

Rogue 1 is familiar, too familiar, and like TFA, it adds nothing new. There's a whole galaxy out there, millions of stories, but we get this, which feels nothing more than another cash in. And the CGI characters. Meh.

Final Rating: 2/5.

Wow, I think I feel opposite to you on just about everything, DINLT . I'd like to stay as far away from current-Lucas and the 1-3 movies (although I did enjoy Phantom Menace) as possible! I also can't believe you dislike A New Hope... I guess we'll never be catching a movie together then

I gotta say DINLT, I disagree with a lot of what you said but I respect you for saying it.

I mean, K2S0, dull? Come on!

 RiTides wrote:
Wow, I think I feel opposite to you on just about everything, DINLT . I'd like to stay as far away from current-Lucas and the 1-3 movies (although I did enjoy Phantom Menace) as possible! I also can't believe you dislike A New Hope... I guess we'll never be catching a movie together then

Made a major error there with New Hope.

Got it mixed up with The Force Awakens

Nah, New Hope is a good film, Force awakens, is terrible.

One the issue of episodes 1-3, yeah, they're not good films. I don't mind them, but the dialogue is bad, the acting wooden, and the execution is poor.

But for all their faults, they look like Star Wars films, they feel like what a Star wars film should look like. We had the aesthetic of the Old Republic and various other odd looking planets.

George Lucas deserves criticism for a lot of things, but at least he tried to give us something new with the visual look of episodes 1-3.

New Hope = Desert Planet. Empire = Ice World. ROTJ = Forest World. Episodes 1-3 gave us Naboo, and yeah, they went back to the desert, but we had lava world and of course, we had a capital city that was the entire planet. The urban setting was good.

In force awakens we got desert again, and in rogue one, we got a new hope again. Not good.

Rogue One, just doesn't do anything new for me. Like the Force awakens, it plays it safe, plays the familiar.

There are millions of stories out there in that galaxy, and Disney know that whatever film they put out, people will watch it because it's SW.

They could have gambled on something different, a new look, but they won't because the priority is not film-making or aesthetics or even entertainment, it's money.

And for me, the franchise will slowly decline because of the reluctance to take risks.

We don't think about it now, but the massive risk they took to make Vader Luke's father, when you compare Vader in New Hope to Empire, changed so much for the better. That's what I'm talking about.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
I gotta say DINLT, I disagree with a lot of what you said but I respect you for saying it.

I mean, K2S0, dull? Come on!

It was the comedy relief that unfortunately didn't provide any comedy. A huge Nil points from me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
I gotta say DINLT, I disagree with a lot of what you said but I respect you for saying it.

I mean, K2S0, dull? Come on!

The comedy sidekick has to provide comedy. Unfortunately, this one didn't. Nil points from me.

Oh come on...Rogue One is an order of magnitude better than the unoriginal gak show that was The Force Awakens.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Oh come on...Rogue One is an order of magnitude better than the unoriginal gak show that was The Force Awakens.

Yeah, it's better, no question, but the bar wasn't exactly set high!

 Skymate wrote:
Anyone else notice the blind Jedi guy had what appeared to be a lightsabre at the end of his staff?

It wasn't a lightsaber but it did contain a kyber crystal. He could hear the resonance of the crystal, allowing him to know where the end of his staff was when fighting.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Made a major error there with New Hope.

Got it mixed up with The Force Awakens

Ah that makes a bit more sense then

I loved K2SO and even thought the humor of the blind character was great once I saw where they were going with him. I think he's my favorite character of the film now

Good to know about the crystal in his staff, that makes sense!

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

Yeah, it's better, no question, but the bar wasn't exactly set high!

I second this emotion.

Its an OK film, to be honest one of the better Star Wars films (that isn't much of an accolade though) but it was definitely lacking the spark of greatness.

I liked the use of '70's' technology, despite it being spectacularly impractical, and the slightly more realtistic tone. The nods to the original film were generally quite good (CGI Tarkin didn't look right to me though). Unfortunately this film was just filled with stupid. From the genius weapons scientist hiding out in a completely undefended farm to troops thinking that the best way to hold a defensive position is to charge lemming like across open ground into 'machine gun' fire. The script really need some sanity checking.

My wife now includes this film on her list of 'so bad its good' films, she spent most of the film laughing...

I feel the need to address some things DINLT brought up. Not everything, just a few items.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Vader needs to go. Quickly. he adds nothing to the film. I'm reminded of Stephen King's writing advice about adverbs i.e when you feel the need to include an adverb, replace it with a swear word, your editor will delete it and the text will be fine and you'll thank your editor.

I thought Vader was used quite well. He was mostly a background character until the very end and his role there perfectly transitions into the start of A New Hope. Why was Princess Leia going to Tatooine and why was Vader hot on her heels? That last bit not only explained it but it set up that ANH opening scene expertly.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
A similar approach should be taken with any Star Wars film: if a scriptwriter feels the need to keep the fanboys happy, leave it out and the film will continue on its merry way.

I agree. R2D2 and C3PO were shoehorned in for fan service and they looked out of place. It's one of those cameos where you're left wondering how they got from Yavin to Leia's blockade runner in the amount of time that was available to them.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Characters. Dull. Nothing more to say. Wasn't expecting much. The natural charm and charisma of Harrison Ford and Billy Dee Williams is hard to replicate. These characters are just too good at what they do compared to the average guy.

A few were dull, yes. Others were okay. I thought the Imperials were well done with the exception of Uncanny Valley Tarkin. But, if you can get past the CGI, Tarkin's character was actually very well written. The rebels were less engaging but at least there were no Mary Sue's in this film.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Rogue 1 is familiar, too familiar, and like TFA, it adds nothing new. There's a whole galaxy out there, millions of stories, but we get this, which feels nothing more than another cash in.

Rogue One needed to be close to ANH in aesthetics since it takes place literally weeks before it and leads directly into it. We also saw a bunch of new planets in this film, though most of that was in the first 20 minutes. As for other stories that don't revolve around the Skywalkers, yes there are many options available but that complaint is better reserved for Episode 7 which literally recycled everything just to make some coin.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Final Rating: 2/5.

To each their own but I think you're being too hard on this movie. I'd give it a 4/5 at least. It's isn't perfect but it's still a good story, fits into the events of the first trilogy, and explains some glairing issues without retconning everything.

I've been really tough on R1 but consistently praised its look. I would never want to go back to the sterility of the Prequels. Those movies - like CGI Tarkin and Leia - are doomed to look increasingly terrible over time, and - again like CGI Tarkin and Leia - many of them did not look great to begin with. If there is anything I would say Lucas did better than Edwards it's having the wisdom to only show battles as backdrops; that is, where the progress/mechanics of the battles themselves had no real bearing on the plot. But R1 definitely looks better than any and all of the prequels and will stand up over time much better as well, minus the afore-mentioned CGI characters. Yes, R1 did not look groundbreaking (which is partly why RedS8n can accurately say it felt like a SW RPG session) but it did look authentic and, more importantly, interesting.

 Manchu wrote:
I've been really tough on R1 but consistently praised its look. I would never want to go back to the sterility of the Prequels. Those movies - like CGI Tarkin and Leia - are doomed to look increasingly terrible over time, and - again like CGI Tarkin and Leia - many of them did not look great to begin with. If there is anything I would say Lucas did better than Edwards it's having the wisdom to only show battles as backdrops; that is, where the progress/mechanics of the battles themselves had no real bearing on the plot. But R1 definitely looks better than any and all of the prequels and will stand up over time much better as well, minus the afore-mentioned CGI characters. Yes, R1 did not look groundbreaking (which is partly why RedS8n can accurately say it felt like a SW RPG session) but it did look authentic and, more importantly, interesting.

Re: aesthetics.

I agree that it really handled it well. Darth Vader being there, and fitting in asthetically, really shows that well.

I thought that the few scenes with Vader really showed just how many (real) decades actually separated Episode III from ANH. Darth "Big Red Buttons On His Chest" Vader really seemed completely out of place in the sleek and modern bridge standing next to the emperor. The costumes and set just seemed very incompatible. R1, while still modern, managed to combine new effects and old looks in a way that made Vader at least look like he came from the same costume department.

I don't understand the whole revisiting thing for Rogue One.

We have Eadu - Rain World and Scarif - Tropical World.

The only real comparison is Jeddha as a desert world, but you spent most of the time there inside the city anyway.

I'm not sure if this has been shared yet, but the poster for the Rogue One sequel was leaked:

 Manchu wrote:
I've been really tough on R1 but consistently praised its look. I would never want to go back to the sterility of the Prequels. Those movies - like CGI Tarkin and Leia - are doomed to look increasingly terrible over time, and - again like CGI Tarkin and Leia - many of them did not look great to begin with. If there is anything I would say Lucas did better than Edwards it's having the wisdom to only show battles as backdrops; that is, where the progress/mechanics of the battles themselves had no real bearing on the plot. But R1 definitely looks better than any and all of the prequels and will stand up over time much better as well, minus the afore-mentioned CGI characters. Yes, R1 did not look groundbreaking (which is partly why RedS8n can accurately say it felt like a SW RPG session) but it did look authentic and, more importantly, interesting.

The Star Wars battles post ROTJ are lacking something and for me, they're lacking menace and emotion.

The Assault on Hoth had a real WW2 feel about it, and there was a real sense that the AT-AT walkers were not only dangerous opponents, but really hard to stop. It felt in the balance from the moment it started the way swung from the rebels to the imperials. And the retreat at the end was done well.

Even in ROTJ, the Death Star assault had good drama, and even the Endor battle had its moments, especially when the Ewoks got killed.

But the SW prequels and Rogue One seemed to be lacking that element of menace of danger.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Breotan wrote:
I feel the need to address some things DINLT brought up. Not everything, just a few items.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Vader needs to go. Quickly. he adds nothing to the film. I'm reminded of Stephen King's writing advice about adverbs i.e when you feel the need to include an adverb, replace it with a swear word, your editor will delete it and the text will be fine and you'll thank your editor.

I thought Vader was used quite well. He was mostly a background character until the very end and his role there perfectly transitions into the start of A New Hope. Why was Princess Leia going to Tatooine and why was Vader hot on her heels? That last bit not only explained it but it set up that ANH opening scene expertly.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
A similar approach should be taken with any Star Wars film: if a scriptwriter feels the need to keep the fanboys happy, leave it out and the film will continue on its merry way.

I agree. R2D2 and C3PO were shoehorned in for fan service and they looked out of place. It's one of those cameos where you're left wondering how they got from Yavin to Leia's blockade runner in the amount of time that was available to them.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Characters. Dull. Nothing more to say. Wasn't expecting much. The natural charm and charisma of Harrison Ford and Billy Dee Williams is hard to replicate. These characters are just too good at what they do compared to the average guy.

A few were dull, yes. Others were okay. I thought the Imperials were well done with the exception of Uncanny Valley Tarkin. But, if you can get past the CGI, Tarkin's character was actually very well written. The rebels were less engaging but at least there were no Mary Sue's in this film.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Rogue 1 is familiar, too familiar, and like TFA, it adds nothing new. There's a whole galaxy out there, millions of stories, but we get this, which feels nothing more than another cash in.

Rogue One needed to be close to ANH in aesthetics since it takes place literally weeks before it and leads directly into it. We also saw a bunch of new planets in this film, though most of that was in the first 20 minutes. As for other stories that don't revolve around the Skywalkers, yes there are many options available but that complaint is better reserved for Episode 7 which literally recycled everything just to make some coin.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Final Rating: 2/5.

To each their own but I think you're being too hard on this movie. I'd give it a 4/5 at least. It's isn't perfect but it's still a good story, fits into the events of the first trilogy, and explains some glairing issues without retconning everything.

I get why they went for the New Hope look, even though I disagree with it, but I think they ended worrying more about the look than the substance.

A New Hope is a good film, not as good as Empire or Jedi in my book, but at least a New Hope had heart and humour to it.

Rogue One feels like a well made film that ticks a lot of boxes, but for want of a better word, it's lacking some 'soul.'

It's too cold for me, something which a lot of modern films seem to suffer from IMO.

On reflection, I think Rogue One would have been a great idea and story for a Star Wars video game, much like Shadows of the Empire was (shadows being one of my favourite games of all time)

but as a film? Nah. Shadows wouldn't work as a film, and neither did Rogue One IMO.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

Yeah, it's better, no question, but the bar wasn't exactly set high!

I second this emotion.

Its an OK film, to be honest one of the better Star Wars films (that isn't much of an accolade though) but it was definitely lacking the spark of greatness.

I liked the use of '70's' technology, despite it being spectacularly impractical, and the slightly more realtistic tone. The nods to the original film were generally quite good (CGI Tarkin didn't look right to me though). Unfortunately this film was just filled with stupid. From the genius weapons scientist hiding out in a completely undefended farm to troops thinking that the best way to hold a defensive position is to charge lemming like across open ground into 'machine gun' fire. The script really need some sanity checking.

My wife now includes this film on her list of 'so bad its good' films, she spent most of the film laughing...

Yeah, I don't like the way they tried to take on AT-AT walkers. It goes completely against the standard that was set in Empire Strikes back.

You run from these things, you don't take them on unless you're Skywalker.