No word on whether this is Rian's trilogy, GoT show runner trilogy, or something else altogether. But there's a three year break between IX and the next, that much we do know.
The Walt Disney Studios wrote: has unveiled its upcoming slate following the recent acquisition of the Fox film studios, including changes to previously dated films and a number of major additions.
After kicking off with the record-setting success of Marvel Studios’ Avengers: Endgame, The Walt Disney Studios’ 2019 summer slate includes Disney’s Aladdin on May 24, Fox’s Dark Phoenix on June 7, Pixar’s Toy Story 4 on June 21, Fox’s Stuber on July 12, and Disney’s The Lion King on July 19. Fox 2000’s The Art of Racing in the Rain moves up to Aug. 9, and Fox Searchlight’s Ready or Not will release on Aug. 23, while three films move to later dates: Ad Astra (9/20/19), The New Mutants (4/3/20), and Artemis Fowl (5/29/20).
The Studios’ 2019 slate rounds out with Fox’s The Woman in the Window on Oct. 4 and Ford V. Ferrari on Nov. 15, Disney’s Maleficent: Mistress of Evil on Oct. 18 and Disney Animation’s Frozen 2 on Nov. 22, Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker on Dec. 20, and Blue Sky Studios’ Spies in Disguise, moving from September to Christmas. Among early 2020 titles are Fox’s Underwater on Jan. 10, a new Kingsman movie on Feb. 14, and Call of the Wild on Feb. 21, followed by Pixar’s Onward on March 6 and Disney’s Mulan on March 27.
The updated calendar also sets release dates for major franchises Avatar and Star Wars. With Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker bringing the original Skywalker Saga to its conclusion, three new as-yet-untitled Star Wars films will release on the pre-Christmas weekend every other year beginning in 2022. Four forthcoming Avatar films, expanding the vibrant world of Pandora, will release on the pre-Christmas weekend every other year beginning in 2021. In the holiday corridor for 2020, Fox’s West Side Story adaptation, directed by Steven Spielberg, will debut Dec. 18 in the pre-Christmas slot, with Disney’s Cruella opening Wednesday, Dec. 23, for the long holiday weekend.
“We’re excited to put in place a robust and diverse slate that lays the foundation of our long-term strategy, bringing together a breadth of films from Disney, Pixar, Marvel, Lucasfilm, Fox, Fox Searchlight, and Blue Sky Studios to create an extraordinary collection of cinematic experiences for audiences around the world,” said Cathleen Taff, President, Theatrical Distribution, Franchise Management, and Business & Audience Insights, The Walt Disney Studios. “With a strong summer already in place, we are eager to carry that momentum forward over the coming years thanks to a creative wellspring of bold and imaginative stories coming from our world-class studios – including several new chapters of two revered franchises, Avatar and Star Wars.”
I'll reserve judgement until we find out exactly which project these three will be, if indeed they are a single project.
Right now it really does seem like they're doubling down on the "franchise fatigue" angle, and as such I have zero confidence they've learned any actual lessons from recent events.
You mean 'Fern Gully....In Spaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaace'?
Visually stunning, but story was somewhat lacking. I mean, it's not bad by any stretch of the imagination, just a bit overrated. Will totally watch it if it's on, but am not inclined to put it on to watch.
Yea, three more Star Wars movies I have no intention of wasting valuable dollars on.
Ditto for Avatar. Unless they nuke the alien planet in the first scene, its just Ferngully II - The Stupiding.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: You mean 'Fern Gully....In Spaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaace'?
Visually stunning, but story was somewhat lacking. I mean, it's not bad by any stretch of the imagination, just a bit overrated. Will totally watch it if it's on, but am not inclined to put it on to watch.
No it wasn't just bad. It was horrible. I literally fell asleep.
The next three Star Wars films will premiere on the pre-Christmas weekends of 2022, 2024, and 2026, respectively (following the conclusion of the Skywalker saga in this year's Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker). Disney's press release doesn't specify whether this new trilogy is the one being developed by The Last Jedi's Rian Johnson, the one being developed by Game of Thrones' David Benioff and D.B. Weiss, or something else altogether. The staggered same-date release does suggest that the titles will be connected. (Lucasfilm boss Kathleen Kennedy recently suggested as much, telling Entertainment Weekly that “as [Benioff and Weiss] finish Game of Thrones, they’re going to segue into Star Wars. ... They’re working very closely with Rian.”)
It does suggest that the next SW trilogy is co-developed by Johnson and GoT writers.
This actually does somewhat make sense in light of the current Disney trilogy, in that people have suggested it is unbelievble that the Resistance could rise to defeat First Order in Ep. IX. But perhaps they don't? Maybe they only get some temporary respite and actual defeat of the FO takes place in the fourth trilogy. Would be more convenient, I suppose, rather than come up with all new baddies 3 years later.
timetowaste85 wrote: Meh, if Johnson is involved, then just consider it dead at 3 trilogies. The fourth will be hot garbage.
On a plus side, JJ Abrams seems to be out. Gotta take bad with the good.
I don't have high expectations from the GoT team, though. In my opinion, GoT is clumsily written whenever they venture outside what GRRM has laid down. I am not convinced they are any good when training wheels which was Martin comes out.
looking much like my cinema trips for new flims for the year is stopping with tomorrows trip to Endgame then (although my love of really bad films might drag me to Dark Phoneix to determine if Ginger Stark is the worst actor ever )
as for new Wars I've long had to concede they are not for me anymore,
Bring it on, as a life time fan I absolutely love everythingStar wars. Good and bad, except Jar Jar Binks. He should burn slowly in the center of the death star reactor.
What are they talking about? Original saga ended after 2 trilogies.
Ok, and a couple of animated series and a spin-off movie (maybe two; haven't seen Solo, so don't know if it's good).
Bran Dawri wrote: What are they talking about? Original saga ended after 2 trilogies.
Ok, and a couple of animated series and a spin-off movie (maybe two; haven't seen Solo, so don't know if it's good).
Yeah Solo’s good , not as good as rogue one mind but still a good film.
Solo is okay. It’s overloaded with unnecessary attempts to explain literally everything about Han in one movie and gets mired in superficial details but it has its moments. I rank it just ahead of the prequels.
LunarSol wrote: Solo is okay. It’s overloaded with unnecessary attempts to explain literally everything about Han in one movie and gets mired in superficial details but it has its moments. I rank it just ahead of the prequels.
Solo was so boring that I couldn't get through it. Such a beloved character...and it was dismal. Rogue One was great, so they proved they CAN make a good side-movie. Solo...boring. Very, very boring.
Turnip Jedi wrote: looking much like my cinema trips for new flims for the year is stopping with tomorrows trip to Endgame then (although my love of really bad films might drag me to Dark Phoneix to determine if Ginger Stark is the worst actor ever )
as for new Wars I've long had to concede they are not for me anymore,
Elbows wrote: Even though they won't acknowledge it there's zero chance Rian Johnson is actually going to get his planned trilogy, so that's a huge plus.
Sure, instead you'll get the guys currently steering GoT into a ditch.
Honestly, they'll probably keep the general masses of SW fans happy. I expect lots of cool spectacle and lightsaber fights, and nothing really new or challenging.
LunarSol wrote: Solo is okay. It’s overloaded with unnecessary attempts to explain literally everything about Han in one movie and gets mired in superficial details but it has its moments. I rank it just ahead of the prequels.
True although I still wonder why the left out any plot regarding han being dumped from flight training. Wasn’t he in the same training class as Soontir fel if i remember rightly.
James Cameron movies always end up being these movie making touchstones and cultural landmarks, which justify the fact that he tends to take ten years to make them. Avatar is this weird exception where it did one but not the other - the amount of people who repeat the 'nuke the site from orbit' line from Aliens in response to Avatar illustrates it well.
I really don't know how you generate enthusiasm for Avatar. It feels like the only person who's really excited for Avatar is Cameron himself.
As for the Star Wars movies I'm of two minds: Disney has been talking about this next trilogy being on the way for a good while now, the question remains if it's the Johnson trilogy or the GoT guys' trilogy. Or possibly both? I dunno.
On the one hand: Both parties know how to make a very pretty show with compellingly composited scenes and how to direct actors to say ridiculous things with passion and emotion.
On the other hand: Setting aside the suplurfluous complaints of an unpleasable fanbase both GoT and TLJ have noticeable problems with stressing the patience of the viewer in order to set up the logistics required for their beautiful visual scenes. Characters running off on side quests that go horribly wrong so that the villain can succeed without actually earning it themselves, etc.
So... I worry that they share common weaknesses, and that's going to be a problem because a lot of people see their strengths: the visually interesting shots, the sheer spectacle of the visuals are going to be ignored because people expect them as a given because it's Star Wars (whether or not that's a fair expectation in light of the prequels is a different question.)
James Cameron made some great films...the last of which was probably in the early 90's. He's just a ghost of his previous talented self. He's gone a bit whacko and is living in a kind of fantasy world of his own...so just...whatever.
There was a time this would have made me absolutely giddy, and the idea of so many star wars movies would have been music to my ears.
Unfortunately after ep 7 & 8, I just really no longer care about the story, it doesn't feel like the same thing I fell in love with as a wee lad, and the excitement is no longer there and the commercialism isn't even masked in the slightest anymore within the films themselves. Spoilers dont even bother me at this point. Just as important, between the MCU and SW franchises, they're starting to feel like a firehose of content, and that gets tiring.
The glut of Avatar stuff is mind boggling, I didn't think there was so much demand
There’s an interesting comment I read elsewhere about Avatar where Disney is concerned.
Second and third are pretty much in the can, and all on Fox’s dollar. So to their new owner, there’s relatively little cash risk, even if they utterly bomb.
Which means they’ve two attempts to gauge interest, and tweaks can be made from there - one presumes that includes cancelling four and five.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also, where’s the acknowledgement for my pun in the OP?
LunarSol wrote: Somebody had to care about Avatar. It didn’t sell nearly $3 billion in tickets because no one cared.
true but it was largely a visual cinema experience and I still blame it for nearly a decade of really shirt 3d needlessly hammered onto everything, Avatars 3d was good because jimbo spent ages figuring it out what with the high contrast(?) and colour being key everyone else bar maybe Toy Story and Tron just didnt get it at all right and led to the pure comedy 'look at the 3 deeee' shot library
Star Wars desperately needs good writers, why the feth have they hired D&D? Disney are aware that anything good they've done hasn't been from them, right? Somebody should write a book on the continued mismanagement of this franchise.
I'm also loving the fact that we're getting Avatar films. It's been over 10 years, the spectacle of the film was novel at the time but I doubt it'll carry over. Does anybody want this?
No word on whether this is Rian's trilogy, GoT show runner trilogy, or something else altogether. But there's a three year break between IX and the next, that much we do know.
Star Wars - anything assocaited with Johnson is now dead on arrival for me and Season 8 of GOT is bad so swing and a miss.
Avatar - silly but good fun, looked great - would watch more.
Looking forwad to seeing what happens with MCU stuff on the D Channel - I liked some of the Netflix stuff but alot was not great. Agent Carter was my fav tv show - far better than the Daisy/Skye show that was Agents of Shield.
Gael Knight wrote: Star Wars desperately needs good writers, why the feth have they hired D&D? Disney are aware that anything good they've done hasn't been from them, right? Somebody should write a book on the continued mismanagement of this franchise.
I'm also loving the fact that we're getting Avatar films. It's been over 10 years, the spectacle of the film was novel at the time but I doubt it'll carry over. Does anybody want this?
On the GoT screen writer blokes...
There is rumory mention, possibly confirmed, that Disney are keen to explore more of the old EU of Star Wars.
So far, we've seen dribs and drabs, notably Thrawn's genuinely menacing presence in Rebels, and a few ship designs. Stripped of the chaff (Yuuzhan Vong, or whatever. Honestly. People say the new trilogy is bobbins??), and only retaining the Good Stuff (I'll let you decide what qualifies there. Except if it's Yuuzhan Vong, because you'rzan wrong!) could be their forte. Adapt existing stories in a new, more canon friendly manner. And that includes Old Republic stuff.
As far as the Star Wars announcement goes? Well, people kept saying that we were going to get super hero fatigue. Endgame is now the number 2 film of all time in two weeks. So, that's not happening.
Star Wars fatigue? Yeah I think after TLJ and Solo we're certainly suffering from that. Rise of the Whatever might be the most important SW film ever released, as it will directly determine what happens with these three new films.
And as far as Avatar, I'm sure it's one of things that Disney were kinda happy to get a hold in the Fox merger, but probably wouldn't have greenlit 4 of the damned things back in the day, but they're stuck with them given they've been in production for so long.
Gael Knight wrote: Star Wars desperately needs good writers, why the feth have they hired D&D?
Why did they hire the two guys behind what might be the single most watched television show in history, a show so big that it has captured the cultural zeitgeist like no other show in living memory? Nah... you're right. I can't think of any reason why Disney would hire them.
Vaktathi wrote: Unfortunately after ep 7 & 8, I just really no longer care about the story
That's ok. The guy who made the 8th one didn't care much about the story either.
Gael Knight wrote: Star Wars desperately needs good writers, why the feth have they hired D&D?
Why did they hire the two guys behind what might be the single most watched television show in history, a show so big that it has captured the cultural zeitgeist like no other show in living memory? Nah... you're right. I can't think of any reason why Disney would hire them.
Game of Thrones started well, when it wasn't powered by D&D's creative steam. Everything they've done by themselves has been garbo. It gets watched but it's not good writing. Something being popular doesn't mean it's of quality. I asked for good writing, something D&D can't do on their own merit.
Good luck with vulgarity in Star Wars. At least they'll be able to teleport their characters logically in this universe.
Well, yes, that's a highly factual statement. It's a show that has increased its viewership every single season, which is unusual. It's a show so popular that it regularly appears on the news.
Gael Knight wrote: The last two truncated seasons, with the final being 6 episodes with some of them being longer.
And... ? Sorry, was there a point to be made here, 'cause that line's more of a statement.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: I'm wondering if Old Republic stuff is better suited to a GoT style show?
I suspect you could be right. I mean the Mandalorian looks great, and 10 episodes gives you more opportunities for storytelling than a 2 and a bit hour film (double-edged sword, gives you a lot of room to meander about doing nothing as well).
Heh, to re-use an old title, a Disney+ "Tales of the Jedi" anthology series set in the Old Republic could work.
Mando is already signed on for Season 2, according to Jon Favreau. So already, that character is getting 20 odd hours (well, 20 lots of 45 minutes), compared to Luke's 10 hours of films.
As it looks to be a lens to lesser explored areas of Star Wars, I really think it'll be a winner.
Old Republic should probably follow suit, if you ask me. Can always use the TV show to build up to a film or even a trilogy, after all. Just a big old climax.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gael Knight wrote: Are you saying Game of Thrones totally didn't get shortened because it waned in popularity when D&D had more of a creative role?
Everything is about money and popularity until it isn't convenient.
Did it wane in popularity? Did it though?
Pic because you're clearly flying in the face of facts.
You not enjoying it? Fair enough. Opinions are fine. But to say it's waning in popularity, when it's doing the exact reverse?
H.B.M.C. wrote: Why did they hire the two guys behind what might be the single most watched television show in history, a show so big that it has captured the cultural zeitgeist like no other show in living memory? Nah... you're right. I can't think of any reason why Disney would hire them.
The guy behind success of GoT is GRRM. Show is quite clumsily written (though many episodes are very well directed) outside of the stuff Martin has laid down.
Mate, you sure you haven't confused GoT for The Walking Dead by accident?
And "had a more creative role"... do you know how television shows are run? You know it's the writers that run TV shows right, unlike movies where it's the directors (big studios notwithstanding). D&D have had a massive creative role from day one because they're the guys who run the show. That's how it works.
H.B.M.C. wrote: And the man behind the success of the Lord of the Rings films was JRRT, right?
Yes. Jackson is a great producer, mediocre director and awful writer.
GoT's bread and butter are the characters. Every meaningful character and their traits and lines and styles were developed by GRRM. Take a look at Dorne and Sand Snakes angle of the series. Would that level of writing propel anything to success?
H.B.M.C. wrote: And the man behind the success of the Lord of the Rings films was JRRT, right?
Yes. Jackson is a great producer, mediocre director and awful writer.
GoT's bread and butter are the characters. Every meaningful character and their traits and lines and styles were developed by GRRM. Take a look at Dorne and Sand Snakes angle of the series. Would that level of writing propel anything to success?
GRm also wrote all the crap, dull and pointless ones to wonder around as well as his own super plot shielded avatar in the show.
Rian Johnson just ignored any concept of a character in his effort in favour of tedium and the odd effects shot
Characters in TLOTR are fine and for the most part consistant.
Was Wee Me particularly taken with the Ewoks? Yes, yes I was. As were many, many Wee Me equivalents. Hence the spin off show and toys....
Again, for sake of clarity. You not enjoying it? Not a problem. This isn't an opinion inquisition. But when peeps are just flying in the face of facts?
Was Wee Me particularly taken with the Ewoks? Yes, yes I was. As were many, many Wee Me equivalents. Hence the spin off show and toys....
Again, for sake of clarity. You not enjoying it? Not a problem. This isn't an opinion inquisition. But when peeps are just flying in the face of facts?
Hell yes, am with you on the Ewoks my friend. Go team Ewok. Couldn’t wait to get home after school and watch the Ewoks as a little kid.
Kind of a weird thread to throw rocks at Ewoks. The two Ewok spinoff movies, maligned as they are, gave us more Star Wars than the two Star Wars ST movies.
I'd posit hype and relentless best thing ever rhetoric from people who really should know better,(it is after all as Wednesday noted just bewbs and dragons, or mostly Dragons now) along with people just wanting to get to the end also played a big part
As for any new Star Wars just one movie without any annoying space wizards would be nice
BobtheInquisitor wrote: Kind of a weird thread to throw rocks at Ewoks. The two Ewok spinoff movies, maligned as they are, gave us more Star Wars than the two Star Wars ST movies.
I’ve still got a massive soft spot for those. Quite possibly because in term of age, I was just right.
Born in 1980, by the time I was aware of more than ANH actually existing (did wonder why my brother’s C-3PO had removable arms and legs, and a weird bag thing), they were all long out of the cinema.
Ewok movies? Random video store find. And they were fun. They have their market, and that’s to be respected. Even if you yourself aren’t a fan of them, or their subject.
I was the right age for Ewoks but I still don’t get the hate. Then again, I’ve never treated the Empire as seriously as many seem to. They always seemed in line with COBRA or the Foot Clan to me. Getting taken out by teddy bears really doesn’t bother me.
Without intending to insult anyone, there is the simple fact none of us are kids anymore. And it’s been a long time since we were.
I get the worship of the original trilogy. They were pretty superb, and a major part of pretty much all our childhoods.
But there seems to be an expectation in some quarters for the new films to have moved on in terms of content and stylings in-line with our ever evolving tastes and preferences.
And that’s a fool’s wish, if you ask me.
We’re simply the wrong people to ask if ‘sequel, prequel or spin-off X’ had the same impact as when we were first diddy and seeing Star Wars for the first time. Because of course it is. The Rose Tinted Glasses are strong with our kind. Very strong.
It’ll be a decade at least before we know how those of similar age to us at the time hold the prequels in the same high regard as we hold the original trilogy. Because they are the benchmark. Not us.
I mean, I’m 40 next year (no, I’m not sure how that happened either. But here’s to not looking it!). Who really gives a damn what I think of a film trying to draw a younger audience? What actual value is their in my opinion to the producing studio?
Like or loathe, and anything in between, TFA and TLJ made big, big money at the Box Office. Those claiming some kind of Nerd Pushback over Solo’s disappointing performance are frankly only fooling themselves. There’s lot of analysis from those with no horse in the race which explains stuff about that.
In short? It’s not about us. And frankly, it hasn’t been for a long, long, long time. It’s a nasty hill to get over, but we’re increasingly irrelevant as consumers. But that’s inevitable.
Solo is the movie overloaded with deep lore baggage aimed at “us” and it failed. TLA did not despite what people with the time to rant online might have you believe. If Disney is giving up on any part of the audience when it comes to Star Wars, it’s most certainly not “them”.
Original trilogy wasn’t particularly well written. Or directed.
That’s what I’m driving at.
But most of the complaints I see appear to come from ‘how dare this not be designed solely to satisfy me’.
Same with Trek.
We’re not young anymore. We’re old. We’ve been exposed to the same moral plays in different retellings.
It’s fine not to like them. Again, this isn’t an Opinion Inquisition. But the downright forensic analysis of new films is just boring. Not to mention fruitless.
Neither your childhood or mine is dented one iota by new films. And if a given persons was? Then I feel for them, because despite various real life horrors I’ve been through, I can still look back to a pretty happy and carefree childhood. And that’s despite Operation Yewtree exposing more than one person I adored as a kid being the worst kind of monster imaginable.
But most of the complaints I see appear to come from ‘how dare this not be designed solely to satisfy me’.
Same with Trek.
We’re not young anymore. We’re old. We’ve been exposed to the same moral plays in different retellings.
It’s fine not to like them. Again, this isn’t an Opinion Inquisition. But the downright forensic analysis of new films is just boring. Not to mention fruitless.
Neither your childhood or mine is dented one iota by new films. And if a given persons was? Then I feel for them, because despite various real life horrors I’ve been through, I can still look back to a pretty happy and carefree childhood. And that’s despite Operation Yewtree exposing more than one person I adored as a kid being the worst kind of monster imaginable.
Star Trek II and Empire Strikes Back would like to have a word with you around back.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Without intending to insult anyone, there is the simple fact none of us are kids anymore. And it’s been a long time since we were.
I get the worship of the original trilogy. They were pretty superb, and a major part of pretty much all our childhoods.
But there seems to be an expectation in some quarters for the new films to have moved on in terms of content and stylings in-line with our ever evolving tastes and preferences.
And that’s a fool’s wish, if you ask me.
We’re simply the wrong people to ask if ‘sequel, prequel or spin-off X’ had the same impact as when we were first diddy and seeing Star Wars for the first time. Because of course it is. The Rose Tinted Glasses are strong with our kind. Very strong.
It’ll be a decade at least before we know how those of similar age to us at the time hold the prequels in the same high regard as we hold the original trilogy. Because they are the benchmark. Not us.
I mean, I’m 40 next year (no, I’m not sure how that happened either. But here’s to not looking it!). Who really gives a damn what I think of a film trying to draw a younger audience? What actual value is their in my opinion to the producing studio?
Like or loathe, and anything in between, TFA and TLJ made big, big money at the Box Office. Those claiming some kind of Nerd Pushback over Solo’s disappointing performance are frankly only fooling themselves. There’s lot of analysis from those with no horse in the race which explains stuff about that.
In short? It’s not about us. And frankly, it hasn’t been for a long, long, long time. It’s a nasty hill to get over, but we’re increasingly irrelevant as consumers. But that’s inevitable.
Star Wars the origignal series was a fun actuion adventure - its not awesome, its not life changing (for me anyway) but it was good fun
The prequals were just bad films
TFA was ok - not great but watchable
TLJ was a pile of tedious, poorly wirtten and directed gak - its not just a terribel Star Wars film - its a terrible terrible film full stop.
I'm filled with a sense of dread, yet also curiousity. I guess I can just set my expectation as hoping that it will be at least a little better and more original/well thought out than the current sequel trilogy. Might help if they actually have a planned story arc instead of winging it as they go.
Thargrim wrote: I'm filled with a sense of dread, yet also curiousity. I guess I can just set my expectation as hoping that it will be at least a little better and more original/well thought out than the current sequel trilogy. Might help if they actually have a planned story arc instead of winging it as they go.
I'll watch it on sky etc when I am bored - far better things to do with my time than see anything associated with Rian Johnson
I am not actually sure what would be good - some of the Clone Wars stuff was good - when there were no "funny" stupid war robots, although best Star Wars stuff I have seen in years is the Lego ones.
It’s decently written. Decently acted. Decently shot and directed. The plot, to the casual viewer, holds up.
Compare to say, Justice League. That is awful. A genuine confused mess, where everyone just sort of farts around until Superman gets his act together, and does everything better than everyone else. Against a pretty much anonymous villain,
It’s decently written. Decently acted. Decently shot and directed. The plot, to the casual viewer, holds up.
Compare to say, Justice League. That is awful. A genuine confused mess, where everyone just sort of farts around until Superman gets his act together, and does everything better than everyone else. Against a pretty much anonymous villain,
Disagree entirely with every thing you just said
TLJ is dull, boring tedious, the plot is laughable and make zero sense to even the most casual viewer - summed up by the stupid, mind numbingly dull "chase" that is broken up by the pointless trip to casino world, the lack of any conceiavle reason for anything anyone does at any point. The writing is laugable - the characters are pathetic and have no heart, coherence or make any sense. It was written in crayon by blind monkeys
TLJ is a terrible movie. I don’t hate Rian. I can only imagine the kind of pressure he was under to both follow TFA, which was an incredible box office performer if a completely conventional film, as well as the pressure to transition SW from a George Lucas thing to a Lucasfilm (property of Disney) thing. But he didn’t handle the pressure well and his film is the disastrous result. That said, TLJ is nowhere near as bad as the people who hate it tend to claim. It is technically well made in the most formal senses, in terms of its lighting and wardrobe and the editing is mostly good and some of the acting is pretty good. This is more than can be said for the Prequels, honestly. But “better than the Prequels” is possibly the lowest bar imaginable for a SW movie, especially one following a very successful franchise (soft) reboot.
So now SW needs another soft reboot, after only two Disney films. It’s quite a shame.
I kind of wonder, if we could find someone around 40 who doesn't dislike sci fi, but has somehow never seen the original trilogy, what their opinion of it would be?
TLJ is similar to prequels in the sense that it would have immensely benefitted from one more review and rewrite cycle. It comes across as a draft of a script. TFA, by contrast, feels like it was fiddled with too much, I can imagine it went through so many committee meetings and viewer demographic analysis sessions that anything even remotely interesting or challenging was filtered out.
Any way, since the new trilogy is coming out almost right behind the current one, it seems to me it is likely to continue from where the old one ended, instead of another 20 years+ something timejump.
I predict Rise of Skywalker will end in cliffhanger of some kind.
Gordon Shumway wrote: I kind of wonder, if we could find someone around 40 who doesn't dislike sci fi, but has somehow never seen the original trilogy, what their opinion of it would be?
And that's another Galaxy Brain take. They're a benchmark for a reason.
But most of the complaints I see appear to come from ‘how dare this not be designed solely to satisfy me’.
Same with Trek.
Actually, to satisfy "us", ie the fans of the properties who have kept them alive all these years with our attention, our effort, our money. So err, who else should they be made for exactly? If you trade on the fandom for decades, then casually discard them with a "well, it's not for you anymore, get a life neerrrrrd", how on earth would you expect people to react? And don't kid-on that they're making some high minded principled choice to rework these IPs for a new audience because it's just time, or to bring them to a new generation - they're doing it because the whole entertainment industry is locked into the failing perpetual growth model that all aspects of our economy are, and making a decent amount of money isn't enough, they have to make all the money, they have to have their big RoI, they have to dazzle the shareholders.
There's no moral high ground over the fandom for "creators" motivated by cynical greed.
We’re not young anymore. We’re old. We’ve been exposed to the same moral plays in different retellings.
In. Different. Settings.
If a company wants to come along and make Star Battles, their subversive, modern take on a space-fantasy action adventure, fantastic, I applaud them. If they want to come along and make Stellar Wanderings, a gritty and drama-focused reworking of a utopian sci-fi future, on you go, nae bother. But they aren't doing that, they're taking existing settings, stories, worlds, and gutting them - ripping out all the bits they don't like, and cramming the flaccid skin with bits they do like, stitching the resulting Frankenstein back up and then labelling any fans who recoil from the monstrosity as hopeless nostalgics, obsessive nerds, or just outright bigots.
It’s fine not to like them. Again, this isn’t an Opinion Inquisition. But the downright forensic analysis of new films is just boring. Not to mention fruitless.
In your opinion. A lot of folk find discussing things they dislike as interesting as discussing things they do.
Neither your childhood or mine is dented one iota by new films. And if a given persons was? Then I feel for them, because despite various real life horrors I’ve been through, I can still look back to a pretty happy and carefree childhood. And that’s despite Operation Yewtree exposing more than one person I adored as a kid being the worst kind of monster imaginable.
And this sentiment perpetually annoys me. It's the same as those people who respond to fans of discontinued tabletop games with "nyeeeh, they've not burned your books or anything, stop whinging nyeeeh". When people use that "destroyed my childhood" phrase, you do realise it's just that aye? A phrase? Like when someone accuses someone else of lying with "pants on fire", they don't actually mean their trousers have burst into flames. What is meant, the feeling behind those words, is the opportunity cost. This is a thing a lot of people liked and enjoyed, and they were looking forward to getting more of it.
I'm going to actually break in here and really emphasise that, because it bears repeating over and over. OT fans were excited to see TFA. The result was OK, not great, bit disappointing, it doesn't hold up in the way the OT does, not because of nostalgia or rose tints, but because of the actual content and pacing of the movie. And OT fans were excited to see TLJ. Because people hoped that it would take what TFA did right and do more of that, while avoiding what TFA did meh. We all saw how that turned out.
But that's the point; "they ruined my childhood" is not a claim they reached back in time and stole your positive memories, or retroactively ruined the existing stories - those are caricatures put forward by people like MovieBob to allow them to dismiss the substance of the complaint without having to actually address it - it's a lament that they've taken away, or at least damaged, that sense of anticipation. That they've shifted you from a place where any announcement of new material in the setting you like prompts excitement and wonder like when you were a kid, to one where the best you can muster up is weary neutrality, and eventually just disappointment that another opportunity for you to enjoy the setting you liked will be lost.
Personally, I'm not there yet with Star Wars. I'm still quite anticipating the TV stuff, but I can absolutely imagine how a lot of SW fans feel because that's the way I feel about Trek now. I was hype back when they showed the first teasers for the JJprise, and in the 10 years since they've worn down the goodwill generated by the previous 20 years of me being a fan to the point where I can't bring myself to keep watching the only show on TV with the Trek branding, and feel only apprehension as to how they're going to further screw up the upcoming shows. And I'm one of those people who can even enjoy the mediocre episodes of Voyager and Enterprise.
You're free to dismiss that if you like, but it's nowhere near as simplistic as you're making out.
Gordon Shumway wrote: I kind of wonder, if we could find someone around 40 who doesn't dislike sci fi, but has somehow never seen the original trilogy, what their opinion of it would be?
That would be interesting indeed
it would given - especially if they can remain ojective unlike the offical reviewers....
I still maintain its not a bad Star Wars film its terible Film whatever the genre or style.
The whole new SW trilogy would have benefited most from a outline that plotted the actual trajectory and plot of all the characters through all 3 films instead of handing it off to the next director and telling them to do what they want with no end goal in mind.
The MCU works because they have a plan. There is wiggle room in each movie and pieces can shift around and move, but they know where all the pieces need to end up to tell the story they want to tell. Disney Wars has never had that thus far. RJ got saddled with JJs mystery boxes and more or less got told to come up with answers on his own while telling a new middle chapter story. What a gak job to be given.
Lance845 wrote: The whole new SW trilogy would have benefited most from a outline that plotted the actual trajectory and plot of all the characters through all 3 films instead of handing it off to the next director and telling them to do what they want with no end goal in mind.
The MCU works because they have a plan. There is wiggle room in each movie and pieces can shift around and move, but they know where all the pieces need to end up to tell the story they want to tell. Disney Wars has never had that thus far. RJ got saddled with JJs mystery boxes and more or less got told to come up with answers on his own while telling a new middle chapter story. What a gak job to be given.
Thats likely fair - although the first films also just seemed to chop up the original two films and recreate them in a slightly different order
So TLJ lazily just puts the Battle for Hoth at the end rather than the start and swaps an exciting chase through an asteroid field for a tediously drawn out trudge through space with little happening.
I am not sure if there was any gudiance at all butgiven how much he was paid - its not that bad a job - there are much worse!
Lance845 wrote: The whole new SW trilogy would have benefited most from a outline that plotted the actual trajectory and plot of all the characters through all 3 films instead of handing it off to the next director and telling them to do what they want with no end goal in mind.
The MCU works because they have a plan. There is wiggle room in each movie and pieces can shift around and move, but they know where all the pieces need to end up to tell the story they want to tell. Disney Wars has never had that thus far. RJ got saddled with JJs mystery boxes and more or less got told to come up with answers on his own while telling a new middle chapter story. What a gak job to be given.
In fairness, original trilogy also had no plan. First movie was designed as stand-alone in the case it flops commercially (and Lucas had backup story created for cheap sequel). Then they just made it up as they went along and twiddled it until pieces fit. "Darth Vader", for example, was meant to be a name, not a title. This is why Obi-Wan calls him "Darth".
JJA and Kasdan made TFA and its setting and characters vague enough so that whoever made the next movie could go to any number of directions. This is more or less what Lucas did, too. Only for Prequels he had a 'plan' and it went all horribly wrong.
It’s decently written. Decently acted. Decently shot and directed. The plot, to the casual viewer, holds up.
Compare to say, Justice League. That is awful. A genuine confused mess, where everyone just sort of farts around until Superman gets his act together, and does everything better than everyone else. Against a pretty much anonymous villain,
Disagree entirely with every thing you just said
TLJ is dull, boring tedious, the plot is laughable and make zero sense to even the most casual viewer - summed up by the stupid, mind numbingly dull "chase" that is broken up by the pointless trip to casino world, the lack of any conceiavle reason for anything anyone does at any point. The writing is laugable - the characters are pathetic and have no heart, coherence or make any sense. It was written in crayon by blind monkeys
This was very definitely my impression, and really destroyed my ability to care about the franchise going forward as anything but a SFX display.
But vague doesn't work when a sequel has to justify itself and explain why the epic conclusion of the previous trilogy was not the epic conclusion. Having no plan works when you can take the story anywhere--it does not work when you are boxed in, deliberately, with billions of dollars worth of existing lore that needs to maintain its value.
Automatically Appended Next Post: As for the prequels, having a plan is the beginning of a successful enterprise, not the end. Execution matters. If the plan is the skeleton, the execution is what makes the final creature live and breathe, makes it beautiful. They didn't liken following up the Star Wars OT to threading a needle or catching lightning in a bottle because it's supposed to be easy.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: But vague doesn't work when a sequel has to justify itself and explain why the epic conclusion of the previous trilogy was not the epic conclusion.
This was failure of TFA, yes. I actually like the backstory behind the new trilogy. It's kind of a take of Versailles treaty and rise of the Nazis. But nowhere in the movies they bother to properly explain it, thus leaving the viewer to believe it is like Empire vs Rebel Alliance from the OT, while it is more complicated than that.
Also, I don't think TLJ does poorly when resolving the 'mystery boxes' left by TFA. Rather, TLJ suffers from having a draft-like script and somewhat weird structure and pacing. Basic plot of the movie is hardly in any major violation of any potential 'plan' they might have had when they wrote up TFA. I am quite sure that the situation at end of TLJ is pretty much what they envisioned when they started planning the new trilogy. Because otherwise it would be too different from ESB and people would not like it...
Agreed - IF he had actually made a new kind of Star Wars movie or trod new ground then I could understand the blind worship that his defenders pour out to him - but thats not what he did.
All he did was rearrarange the key scenes from Empire Strikes back, make them and all the "characters" far less interesting and compelling and then pay off the critics. It must have taken those chimps with crayons minutes to write the whole thing.
Mr Morden wrote: Agreed - IF he had actually made a new kind of Star Wars movie or trod new ground then I could understand the blind worship that his defenders pour out to him - but thats not what he did.
All he did was rearrarange the key scenes from Empire Strikes back, make them and all the "characters" far less interesting and compelling and then pay off the critics. It must have taken those chimps with crayons minutes to write the whole thing.
The Last Jedi, is...objectively a bad film. In every sense of the word. There are copious borderline documentaries that have been made about how poorly written/constructed the entire film was. None of the other Star Wars main films can even touch TLJ for garbage story, gak writing, zero character development, wandering plot, inconsistent characters, lack of spectacle, world-breaking design choices, etc. From top to bottom it's absolute gak.
If it hadn't been a Star Wars film and had been a normal sci-fi film, it would have abysmal, toilet-level ratings. People give it a pass because Star Wars and the critics give it a glowing review because of Disney and corporate shilling.
It is a film that is so bad, that unfortunately it's become a litmus test for me. If someone says it was a good movie with a straight face, I unfortunately have to disregard every single opinion they have with regards to cinema going forward. It would be akin to someone saying Battlefield Earth was a quality, well-written film.
If you consider TLJ to be such a bad movie you waste 1000s of words and who knows how much time complaining about it, then you haven't really seen very many bad movies. I guess you've never seen the prequels.
Crimson Devil wrote: If you consider TLJ to be such a bad movie you waste 1000s of words and who knows how much time complaining about it, then you haven't really seen very many bad movies. I guess you've never seen the prequels.
Its one of the worst films I have seen when you factor in just how much money was thrown at this POS.
The prequals are not good in many ways - TLJ is worse (for many reasons that Elbows outlinned) - its much more lazy - they are least tried (and failed) to do something new, this depsite the desperate asertions that it is somehow subversive is heavily derative but apparently without any ability to understand, appreciate or use the previous source material.
There is nothing new in this film, no heart, no soul, no ideas, its just a badly made rehash of a few scenes in the 2nd film of the original triology. Far more time and effort was spent on the marketing/excuses campaign.
Maybe they will hire different monkeys with crayons next time or just maybe someone with some actual ideas and ability, either make a basic fun adventure film like the first three or actually do something new....
Mr Morden wrote: Agreed - IF he had actually made a new kind of Star Wars movie or trod new ground then I could understand the blind worship that his defenders pour out to him - but thats not what he did.
All he did was rearrarange the key scenes from Empire Strikes back, make them and all the "characters" far less interesting and compelling and then pay off the critics. It must have taken those chimps with crayons minutes to write the whole thing.
I am pretty sure Johnson's hand was forced there: TLJ was supposed to mirror ESB, just like TFA mirrored ANH. Because the whole idea of the new trilogy was a soft reboot rather than trying to create something truly new. Because creating new is risky. Lets stick what we know. At least this is how Disney execs envisioned them.
I disagree that RJ 'crapped' over anything JJA left him. There was not much to crap, really. One problem with Star Wars franchise is that fans have got used to everything being connected somewhat, even to the point where it hurts the overall story (like it did in prequels). So people immediately started figuring there must be some mysteries and relationships between Rey and Snoke and earlier lore which were not revealed yet. Because everyone in Star Wars is somehow related, right? But JJA and Kasdan really had not designed any such plans, they were in fanbase's minds only. They were 'meta mysteries'. RJ took one look at the fan theories, (rightly) decided they were crap and threw them into garbage bin, which is where they belonged.
Game of Thrones suffers from similar problem. The book series is full with various very intricate connections and relationships which are often hinted at. This encourages fans to look up for tiny hints and clues and device their own theories. But the TV series is much more simplistic and generally doesn't have these. So the hardcore fans take their lessons from the books, apply them to the series, and are disappointed because the series does not fullfill their expectations what the payoffs should be.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Elbows wrote: The Last Jedi, is...objectively a bad film. In every sense of the word. There are copious borderline documentaries that have been made about how poorly written/constructed the entire film was. None of the other Star Wars main films can even touch TLJ for garbage story, gak writing, zero character development, wandering plot, inconsistent characters, lack of spectacle, world-breaking design choices, etc. From top to bottom it's absolute gak.
TLJ, for whatever problems it has (and it does) is still miles better than any of the prequels. Only - absolutely only - thing the prequels had going for them was fresh new look, the environment. It was well designed, it seemed new and fresh yet distinctly Star Wars whereas by contrast, Disney trilogy is visually simply the original trilogy with a new hat. In every other respect they were much, much worse films than TFA or TLJ. They had no dynamics, all the dialogue was totally flat mostly with people sitting or slowly walking. Actors seemed irritated or indifferent all the time because they had no sets or extras to interact or react to, only greenscreens. Main characters were incredibly ill-defined with no distinguishing traits or motivations and none of them have any kind of on-screen chemistry. Non-human characters were lazy human-based racial stereotypes because this was 'funny' and nobody bothered to design actual alien races. Jedi lore was completely messed up with Lucas simply recycling his old hits from original trilogy and his only attempt to come up with new lore (Midichlorians) fell flat completely. Lets not even talk about the plots because they made no sense whatsoever.
TLJ at least have actors who look like they care about doing their job, some of whom have good chemistry together, directing and editing which is sometimes genuinely gripping, it has actual plot twists, scenes which have dynamics and interaction instead of 2 talking heads going blah blah in monotonous voice. It was first thing which jumped out on me when I began to watch TFA, how much it contrasted what the prequels had. Hey, these characters sweat, they bleed, they get dirty, they scream, they get excited...it's almost like in real world! Amazing...
If you think TLJ sucks, fine, but claiming it was objectively worse made movie than the prequels, c'mon now.
I won't deny that the prequels were bad, but I'm not sure I can agree that they're worse than the sequel trilogy. For all their faults, episodes I through III at least tried to do something different with the Star Wars universe. They were not re-treads of the OT, and however badly bungled their execution might have been I can at least respect them for exploring that universe in a different way.
The sequel trilogy? I can't even give those films credit for that. Force Awakens and Last Jedi are just chock full of needless throwbacks to the original trilogy, bend over backwards to restore the status quo from ANH so that they can do the whole underdogs vs. space Nazis thing over again (and, in the process, basically invalidating the end of ROTJ), and throw original cast cameos in our face because they're terrified of doing something new. They might be better executed, technically better made films, but they're so painfully lazy and derivative that I really can't bring myself to say that they're better films than the prequel trilogy. I just can't.
creeping-deth87 wrote: I won't deny that the prequels were bad, but I'm not sure I can agree that they're worse than the sequel trilogy. For all their faults, episodes I through III at least tried to do something different with the Star Wars universe. They were not re-treads of the OT, and however badly bungled their execution might have been I can at least respect them for exploring that universe in a different way.
The sequel trilogy? I can't even give those films credit for that. Force Awakens and Last Jedi are just chock full of needless throwbacks to the original trilogy, bend over backwards to restore the status quo from ANH so that they can do the whole underdogs vs. space Nazis thing over again (and, in the process, basically invalidating the end of ROTJ), and throw original cast cameos in our face because they're terrified of doing something new. They might be better executed, technically better made films, but they're so painfully lazy and derivative that I really can't bring myself to say that they're better films than the prequel trilogy. I just can't.
creeping-deth87 wrote: I won't deny that the prequels were bad, but I'm not sure I can agree that they're worse than the sequel trilogy. For all their faults, episodes I through III at least tried to do something different with the Star Wars universe. They were not re-treads of the OT, and however badly bungled their execution might have been I can at least respect them for exploring that universe in a different way.
The sequel trilogy? I can't even give those films credit for that. Force Awakens and Last Jedi are just chock full of needless throwbacks to the original trilogy, bend over backwards to restore the status quo from ANH so that they can do the whole underdogs vs. space Nazis thing over again (and, in the process, basically invalidating the end of ROTJ), and throw original cast cameos in our face because they're terrified of doing something new. They might be better executed, technically better made films, but they're so painfully lazy and derivative that I really can't bring myself to say that they're better films than the prequel trilogy. I just can't.
Jar Jar Binks
Slapstick Finn. Prankcall Poe. Luke Saberchucker. Vacuum-proof Leia.
Spreading the stupid out over multiple characters doesn't mean it goes away.
It's literally millions of fans who don't like it. I was looking at some numbers and came up with the below data specifically looking at middle entries of the SW trilogies compared to the first entry of their respective trillogy
TLJ captured the lowest percentage of the first film's box office out of the three trilogies
TLJ is the only of the three middle films to be liked less than the first film based on IMDB user scores
TLJ has the sharpest drop off of users who liked it compared to the previous film on Rotten Tomatoes
As Crimson Devil said, we know there is report manipulation going on.
Reading viewer reviews on RT, you can spot the 'just posting this as spam'.
Now, that is not to discount any and all criticism of the movie. If you didn't like, you didn't like it. That's obviously fine. But when there's evidence of sad neckbeards with an agenda, you need to be very careful about what you treat as reliable data.
Well, tiny Yoda levitates an X-Wing out of a Swamp.
The Emperor summons lightning from nowhere.
Objects flying to the hand.
In the Clone Wars mini-series, Yoda flinging massive ships around with The Force.
So to be objectively daft, I couldn't offer these points. But I can. That doesn't mean you therefore have to like that scene, or reassess your dislike for it. But it does show it's subjectively daft.
More directly to the point, Luke uses the force to jump out of the carbon freezing pit onto the tech-tech apparatus above it while Darth Vader has his back turned.
And that only really matters if you truly believe she's 'flying' and not merely pulling at an object that's way heavier than she is, therefore pulling herself through the weightless vacuum.
And here we are, quibbling about TLJ again instead of discussing the topic at hand. All thanks to the same people throwing up the same short essays about how totally over Star Wars they are.
To be honest, I was 10 when Phantom Menace came out and loved Jar Jar. He was in the film to appeal to children who hadn't seen Star Wars before like me.
Just like Ewoks and Porgs, I fully expect we'll get more comic characters that appeal to children in the next 6 films!
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: As Crimson Devil said, we know there is report manipulation going on.
Reading viewer reviews on RT, you can spot the 'just posting this as spam'.
Now, that is not to discount any and all criticism of the movie. If you didn't like, you didn't like it. That's obviously fine. But when there's evidence of sad neckbeards with an agenda, you need to be very careful about what you treat as reliable data.
if you did like it thats fine.
How many crictics posted favourable reports because they were paid or convinced to do so.....
Well, please show me evidence to support that any were? Actual evidence. Confessionals, leaks, that sort of thing.
They’ve no trouble ripping into crap Disney fare (Salazar’s Revenge, Lone Ranger, John Carter, Tomorrowland, A Wrinkle In Time) so it’s not that scared of The House Of Mouse.
In the Clone Wars mini-series, Yoda flinging massive ships around with The Force.
So to be objectively daft, I couldn't offer these points. But I can. That doesn't mean you therefore have to like that scene, or reassess your dislike for it. But it does show it's subjectively daft.
I have no idea why you think that. The examples you bring up are consistent with the setting, if exaggerated in the cartoon.. Surviving in vacuum and unaided flight are not.
Indeed we get to see trained Jedi making desperate efforts not to get blasted out into space, not treating it as a casual inconvenience or chance for a glamour shot.
Christ, are people still banging the 'Actually TLJ was really well received, I loved it, everyone I know loved it and there was definitely some sort of online campaign to make review sites mark it down' drum?
I will never understand the TLJ fans' refusal to admit that this was a deeply divisive film that a hugely significant number of SW fans couldn't get on board with.
There are loads of films I love that I realise are a bit naff, and that I'm in a minority in enjoying them. There are oscar-winning universally-feted films that I've switched off halfway through out of sheer boredom. I've never subsequently gone online and accused the world of 'neckbeard conspiracies' because the consensus doesn't agree with my taste.
Leia didn't fly, she used the Force to move the ship to her.
Seriously, moving objects with the force is a common practice. Moving yourself, in space would be a trivial use of the power.
The real reason it happened is Star Wars is now competing with Super Hero movies. Expect more displays of Force (Super) powers you havn't seen before.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Riquende wrote: Christ, are people still banging the 'Actually TLJ was really well received, I loved it, everyone I know loved it and there was definitely some sort of online campaign to make review sites mark it down' drum?
I will never understand the TLJ fans' refusal to admit that this was a deeply divisive film that a hugely significant number of SW fans couldn't get on board with.
It was divisive. The reasons for that is what we are dancing around because some people can't be honest with themselves and admit it. The hyperbolic bs excuses for why they hated it don't help at all.
Riquende wrote: Christ, are people still banging the 'Actually TLJ was really well received, I loved it, everyone I know loved it and there was definitely some sort of online campaign to make review sites mark it down' drum?
I will never understand the TLJ fans' refusal to admit that this was a deeply divisive film that a hugely significant number of SW fans couldn't get on board with.
There are loads of films I love that I realise are a bit naff, and that I'm in a minority in enjoying them. There are oscar-winning universally-feted films that I've switched off halfway through out of sheer boredom. I've never subsequently gone online and accused the world of 'neckbeard conspiracies' because the consensus doesn't agree with my taste.
Not sure anyone is saying anything of the like? Indeed, I’ve been abundantly clear that if someone didn’t like it, they didn’t like it. There’s no issue with that.
Indeed, it’s those claiming critics were bribed, threatened, paid off etc that are making distinctly suspect claims.
Go look at the audience reviews for TLJ on Rotten Tomatoes. For every constructive criticism, regardless of score, there’s a ‘muuuuhhhhhhhhh no like it’. So yes, the film was clearly divisive. I for one enjoyed it. Others I know also enjoyed it, others it left cold. But the evidence is there that an organised campaign of negative reviews have affected the score. And when people complain about stuff being objectively bad, and are shown they’re actually subjectively bad?
The worst thing is that peeps just don’t seem to be able to let it go. I enjoyed it. Others didn’t. Do we really need the same old commenters making the same old comments on every thread about Star Wars? It was 18 or so months ago. Move on. It’s just a film. There’s no need to tread the same old ground time and time and time again - particularly in a thread not entitled ‘What did you think of The Last Jedi’.
This thread? Well, the title is about three new films pencilled in for 2022, 2024 and 2026, with an update post, linking to an article confirming there are actually six films currently in some form of pre or outright production.
If peeps are done with Star Wars? Be done with it and move on. All you do here is harsh other people’s mellows, and clog up threads.
It was divisive. The reasons for that is what we are dancing around because some people can't be honest with themselves and admit it. The hyperbolic bs excuses for why they hated it don't help at all.
I don't doubt what you're driving at was a factor for an unfortunately large group of people who are looking to take offense at any perceived progressive agenda; but personally I'm an SJW-friendly bleeding-heart liberal and I hated it!
I can move on from The Last Jedi...I saw it, hated it, and that's fine.
What I feel compelled to comment against is people actually stating the film was objectively well made or written. That's not a matter of opinion. It's one thing if you say "yeah the film was a mess, but I enjoyed it!". Heck, my favourite film of all time was a massive blockbuster failure.
What's insulting is the continued "well they're just nostalgic fanboys who can't move on!' style of defense. It's akin to the use of the word "troll" and "hater" - an indication that you're unable to actually produce a cogent argument against things being said. I'm not a Star Wars nut. I think the original films were fine, but nothing particularly special. I critique The Last Jedi as a normal movie-goer.
Judging by some of the posts in this thread, I'd assume I watched a different film than some people - some very outlandish statements of praise have been made. You can like a bad movie, that's fine. That's the very reason cult classic films exist, etc. But to falsely defend something as a well-written and well made film is borderline silly.
Crimson Devil wrote: It was divisive. The reasons for that is what we are dancing around because some people can't be honest with themselves and admit it. The hyperbolic bs excuses for why they hated it don't help at all.
This is exactly part of the problem that isn't helping. "I liked it because it was good and you hated it because you are bad." Is the kind of white-knighting that doesn't help.
Anyway, with regards to the new Star Wars trilogies, I do not think Disney is currently capable of creating a good Star Wars series of films. They'd probably do fine making one-offs here and there (Rogue One was good and Solo wasn't terrible), but a solid multi-chapter tale is not something I have any confidence in Disney's ability to do.
Elbows wrote: I can move on from The Last Jedi...I saw it, hated it, and that's fine.
What I feel compelled to comment against is people actually stating the film was objectively well made or written. That's not a matter of opinion. It's one thing if you say "yeah the film was a mess, but I enjoyed it!". Heck, my favourite film of all time was a massive blockbuster failure.
What's insulting is the continued "well they're just nostalgic fanboys who can't move on!' style of defense. It's akin to the use of the word "troll" and "hater" - an indication that you're unable to actually produce a cogent argument against things being said. I'm not a Star Wars nut. I think the original films were fine, but nothing particularly special. I critique The Last Jedi as a normal movie-goer.
Judging by some of the posts in this thread, I'd assume I watched a different film than some people - some very outlandish statements of praise have been made. You can like a bad movie, that's fine. That's the very reason cult classic films exist, etc. But to falsely defend something as a well-written and well made film is borderline silly.
Agreed - its very sad that the critics of the film attack the film, whilst often the people defending it attack the person. Its not needed.
If the new films are actually going to be either a whole new thing or conversely go back to a fun adventure series - then it could be good or at least enjoyable.
If they go with the terrible writting, poor plots, pathetic characterisation and tedious pacing of TLJ with the only justiifcaiton beting "oh iits gak - yeah but wow that just so subversive" then its going to be awful.
The problem with Leia using the force to get back to the ship is that her ability comes out of nowhere. There is nothing earlier to establish she ever went anywhere with her abilities.
Space is actually not that big of a deal, people do not explode, nor would they go all Total Recall on Mars. Studies show you will die of asphyxiation before anything else, unless you can somehow hold your breath long enough to freeze to death. Other than the lack of air, space is just a much worse case of exposure to freezing temps, as far as your fragile membranes like the lips and eyes are concerned.
1) Hadn't it been established that the force is, in part, inherited?
2) Hadn't Yoda hinted at it with his "there is another"?
3) the amount of energy to pull yourself somewhere in a null gravity environment is pretty small. Think the amount of pressure you put on a pen when writing https://www.hq.nasa.gov/pao/History/SP-4026/noord29.html 4) when faced with near death experience trauma, people can do some pretty remarkable things. That paired with 1-3 above, says to me that people who point to "flying Leia" as a problem with the film have too much time and too little thought on their hands. There are many things to criticize the film about, that is a silly one.
Elbows wrote: I can move on from The Last Jedi...I saw it, hated it, and that's fine.
What I feel compelled to comment against is people actually stating the film was objectively well made or written. That's not a matter of opinion. It's one thing if you say "yeah the film was a mess, but I enjoyed it!". Heck, my favourite film of all time was a massive blockbuster failure.
What's insulting is the continued "well they're just nostalgic fanboys who can't move on!' style of defense. It's akin to the use of the word "troll" and "hater" - an indication that you're unable to actually produce a cogent argument against things being said. I'm not a Star Wars nut. I think the original films were fine, but nothing particularly special. I critique The Last Jedi as a normal movie-goer.
Judging by some of the posts in this thread, I'd assume I watched a different film than some people - some very outlandish statements of praise have been made. You can like a bad movie, that's fine. That's the very reason cult classic films exist, etc. But to falsely defend something as a well-written and well made film is borderline silly.
Crimson Devil wrote: It was divisive. The reasons for that is what we are dancing around because some people can't be honest with themselves and admit it. The hyperbolic bs excuses for why they hated it don't help at all.
This is exactly part of the problem that isn't helping. "I liked it because it was good and you hated it because you are bad." Is the kind of white-knighting that doesn't help.
No. You don't like it because it wasn't made for just you. I didn't like the prequels for the same reason. Let the new generation have THEIR Star Wars.
Having grown up with the original trilogy it’s funny as i seem to be in the minority camp due to the fact that I actually like the prequels.
The only one that i do struggle with is attack of the clones. Now I love me some clone wars and everything clone war related but just found the film very tiring at times.
Now getting back to the point of the thread, i really can’t wait to see where Star Wars is taken. Old republic would be cool, hell something base on the Rogue squadron novels would be unreal but the chances of that are slim.
xKillGorex wrote: Having grown up with the original trilogy it’s funny as i seem to be in the minority camp due to the fact that I actually like the prequels.
The only one that i do struggle with is attack of the clones. Now I love me some clone wars and everything clone war related but just found the film very tiring at times.
Now getting back to the point of the thread, i really can’t wait to see where Star Wars is taken. Old republic would be cool, hell something base on the Rogue squadron novels would be unreal but the chances of that are slim.
That response was...refreshing. Good on you for not taking internet spite as gospel and just watching them. They are what they are. You like them or you don't. There are objective qualities about them, but "good" or "bad" is never a quality one looks for with objectivity. Some people here evidently disagree. I guess that would be their subjective opinion on what "objectivity " means.
Personally I would like a political thriller based around the Gran of Malastare, set against a backdrop of guerrilla warfare against the bloodthirsty Dug to be the next Star Wars film, unfortunately Disney would never do something so interesting!
Biggest problem for me with TPM is Jar Jar and Anakin.
And that's not really on the actors, but the director. The way Jake Lloyd delivered his lines was just flat, and awful. You'd think someone would've got him a coach - or just recast him.
Given how young he was, I don't stand for anyone knocking the poor kid.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Biggest problem for me with TPM is Jar Jar and Anakin.
And that's not really on the actors, but the director. The way Jake Lloyd delivered his lines was just flat, and awful. You'd think someone would've got him a coach - or just recast him.
Given how young he was, I don't stand for anyone knocking the poor kid.
I feel so bad for Jake Lloyd. I think he did the best he could do, but I blame Lucas for that. Cast a little bit older so you can find someone with more experience and who you can use for the whole prequel trilogy and then maybe the result would have been better.
Crimson Devil wrote: It was divisive. The reasons for that is what we are dancing around because some people can't be honest with themselves and admit it. The hyperbolic bs excuses for why they hated it don't help at all.
This is exactly part of the problem that isn't helping. "I liked it because it was good and you hated it because you are bad." Is the kind of white-knighting that doesn't help.
No. You don't like it because it wasn't made for just you. I didn't like the prequels for the same reason. Let the new generation have THEIR Star Wars.
Thank you for telling me how I actually feel. That was incredibly insightful and touched me deeply...
That being said, I think you're just trolling at this point. Anyway, I have two kids who I would like to enjoy Star Wars, but I would also like the Star Wars they enjoy to be good (they don't enjoy movies, so it's been a losing battle). Disney is a massive company with decades of story telling experience.In all those years something they haven't done is make quality serialized entertainment (outside of some of their Disney Afternoon shows). This is massively on display with how they've handled Star Wars so far.
Back to the topic at hand and the new trilogy they are working on. Starting from scratch is a good idea. Getting people on board who have experience with massively popular serialized storytelling is a good idea. That being said, they have alienated a big section of their audience. They may have an uphill battle to recapture hearts and minds, but we'll see what they make. Given the way I've heard people complain about this last season of GoT, I wouldn't get too excited.
I also feel that TPM just started too far back in Anakin's history - or at least spent too long there.
It meant the next two movies had a lot of ground to cover. Had the Clones Wars series not been made, I think I'd still be mostly 'meh' about the prequels. But it was, and it did a bang up job of really showing Palpatine's rise, and Anakin's fall.
Automatically Appended Next Post: In terms of DD and GoT?
I'm minded to cut them a lot of slack. They started out their adaptation with solid groundwork done. But eventually, that dried up.
They're then left in the unpleasant situation of trying to finish someone else's story, whilst making it still broadly feel like that person's story. That's mighty tough. And whilst Season 8 isn't what I hoped? Well, I don't know that anyone could've done it any better, because of the core issue.
With Star Wars, it's their story from the outset. They're free to map out a three movie arc, and decided where each leaves off and picks up. That's far more creative freedom than adapting the works of A.N.Other.
Indeed, I'd urge people to look at what they do well - they can introduce politics to a situation. They do big battle scenes really well. And all on a relatively small budget, compared to Hollywood epics.
So without being simply mindless praise, I think they've shown they've got the chops for the job - and their failings so far aren't entirely of their own making.
Gordon Shumway wrote: Mr. Morden: attack all the "paid critics" who gave the film good reviews ad nauseum bs without any sort of evidence to support the claim
Mr. Morden: "it's a shame that the critics of the film attack the film and all the people defending it attack the person."
Uh huh. Good call, such a shame...
Just call it how I see it - given that the almost universal opinion of critics was undying worship and the reaction of viewers who pay to watch the film rather than being paid to watch it was highly polarised I do not believe that this is not highly suspicious hence my view that influence or bribary paid a part. I do not say anything about people who went to see it on their own bat adn their own expense. I will declare that I consider the whole idea of professional critics as a unpleasent parastical element.
In contrast - those who declare that they did not like TLJ AND give often comprehensive reasons relating to the various elements that they don't like are often told one or more of the following:
* You don't understand it - "we" do but your too blinkered or stupid to appreciate such glorious art - why do you even post about something your not worthy to view.
* You don't know why you hate it - I will tell why you hate it and why you are a bad person.
* You are [a [Neckbeard]] or other insults
* It has to be good because the crticis said so and you should just shut and be told what your should like or dislike
* I want to discuss the film but only if you like it - if not you should not post as thats destroying the good name fo such a godllike film.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: I also feel that TPM just started too far back in Anakin's history - or at least spent too long there.
It meant the next two movies had a lot of ground to cover. Had the Clones Wars series not been made, I think I'd still be mostly 'meh' about the prequels. But it was, and it did a bang up job of really showing Palpatine's rise, and Anakin's fall.
Automatically Appended Next Post: In terms of DD and GoT?
I'm minded to cut them a lot of slack. They started out their adaptation with solid groundwork done. But eventually, that dried up.
They're then left in the unpleasant situation of trying to finish someone else's story, whilst making it still broadly feel like that person's story. That's mighty tough. And whilst Season 8 isn't what I hoped? Well, I don't know that anyone could've done it any better, because of the core issue.
With Star Wars, it's their story from the outset. They're free to map out a three movie arc, and decided where each leaves off and picks up. That's far more creative freedom than adapting the works of A.N.Other.
Indeed, I'd urge people to look at what they do well - they can introduce politics to a situation. They do big battle scenes really well. And all on a relatively small budget, compared to Hollywood epics.
So without being simply mindless praise, I think they've shown they've got the chops for the job - and their failings so far aren't entirely of their own making.
Or they could go completely the opposite way as well - since the first few seasons of GoT show they evidently also have a great talent for adapting an existing work to screen, they could pick out a specific tale from the EU's Old Republic era and adapt it in its entirely, and since those tales are fully complete there wouldn't be a big shift in the middle when they're suddenly trying to adapt another writer's themes and tone rather than their actual words.
I don't have any issue with D&D, but I won't get excited for the new films until we know the extent Rian Johnson is involved in them - not because he's Satan or whatever, but because I don't care for his work in relation to Star Wars and given his reactions to criticisms of TLJ I don't think he's learned any lessons from it(indeed, I think polarising the audience is something he considers a good thing, he has that juvenile "artiste" attitude that if something isn't controversial it's not really art). I also don't think Kennedy will rein him in because her style is to enable directors not steer them, it's why she's so singularly unsuited to overseeing the kind of interconnected universe that Star Wars has become since they got rid of Lucas' "canon hierarchy" idea - she's the anti-Feige.
They said there were bits likely to divide existing fans, but it's otherwise a fun film, which tries something a little different.
That's not undying worship. Nor a sign of anyone being threatened, bribed or cajoled to say something nice?
While I don't go as far as Morden in my view of paid critics(I do think, as has been repeatedly demonstrated by the much more overt situation with games media, that critics can moderate their actual views - perhaps even unconsciously - when the price of a truly honest opinion shared would be access and ad revenues), if you really think most critics restricted themselves to such anodyne praise then you must only get your movie reviews from actual physical broadsheet newspapers. Online media(ie, the vast majority of it these days) frequently portrayed the film as a triumph, a revolution, an unqualified success, and any criticism of it from the fanbase as motivated by atavistic bigotry and nostalgia alone.
Mr Morden wrote: In contrast - those who declare that they did not like TLJ AND give often comprehensive reasons relating to the various elements that they don't like are often told one or more of the following:
* You don't understand it - "we" do but your too blinkered or stupid to appreciate such glorious art - why do you even post about something your not worthy to view.
* You don't know why you hate it - I will tell why you hate it and why you are a bad person.
* You are [a [Neckbeard]] or other insults
* It has to be good because the crticis said so and you should just shut and be told what your should like or dislike
* I want to discuss the film but only if you like it - if not you should not post as thats destroying the good name fo such a godllike film.
Fun list. I'm going to throw in another one. Just because I suspect that maybe, just maybe, it's relevant to this specific thread:
* The topic at hand is not The Last Jedi.
And... Yeah, if you're sensing a bit of resentment here on my part perhaps we can examine why: We aren't allowed to discuss Star Wars here, unless we're parroting your opinions on The Last Jedi. We can't talk about Disney's incorporating Star Wars into its theme parks without hearing someone's unsolicited top five hated scenes in the Last Jedi. No news related to Star Wars can pass by without yet another hot take on The Last Jedi. No faint praise, no errant comment can be allowed to pass without a pages long lecture about just how wrong they are to dare think it has any kind of merit at all.
I am speaking as someone who did not like The Last Jedi: you need to get over it.
If that means hashing out your complaints in a thread that's actually about The Last Jedi, go do it! If it means writing off the sequel trilogy and skipping out on the next movies, like I did after Attack of the Clones when I was in high school, do that! If it means walking away from the franchise forever, like so many TLJ critics insist they are doing, then do it! Its been a year and a half the time for derailing every tangently related thread is long over.
Frankly I would much rather discuss items related to the items outlined in the OP, such as the showrunners of this new trilogy appearing to gak the bed worse and worse with each episode of GoT.
Mr Morden wrote: In contrast - those who declare that they did not like TLJ AND give often comprehensive reasons relating to the various elements that they don't like are often told one or more of the following:
* You don't understand it - "we" do but your too blinkered or stupid to appreciate such glorious art - why do you even post about something your not worthy to view.
* You don't know why you hate it - I will tell why you hate it and why you are a bad person.
* You are [a [Neckbeard]] or other insults
* It has to be good because the crticis said so and you should just shut and be told what your should like or dislike
* I want to discuss the film but only if you like it - if not you should not post as thats destroying the good name fo such a godllike film.
Fun list. I'm going to throw in another one. Just because I suspect that maybe, just maybe, it's relevant to this specific thread:
* The topic at hand is not The Last Jedi.
And... Yeah, if you're sensing a bit of resentment here on my part perhaps we can examine why: We aren't allowed to discuss Star Wars here, unless we're parroting your opinions on The Last Jedi. We can't talk about Disney's incorporating Star Wars into its theme parks without hearing someone's unsolicited top five hated scenes in the Last Jedi. No news related to Star Wars can pass by without yet another hot take on The Last Jedi. No faint praise, no errant comment can be allowed to pass without a pages long lecture about just how wrong they are to dare think it has any kind of merit at all.
I am speaking as someone who did not like The Last Jedi: you need to get over it.
If that means hashing out your complaints in a thread that's actually about The Last Jedi, go do it! If it means writing off the sequel trilogy and skipping out on the next movies, like I did after Attack of the Clones when I was in high school, do that! If it means walking away from the franchise forever, like so many TLJ critics insist they are doing, then do it! Its been a year and a half the time for derailing every tangently related thread is long over.
Frankly I would much rather discuss items related to the items outlined in the OP, such as the showrunners of this new trilogy appearing to gak the bed worse and worse with each episode of GoT.
TLJ and people's opinions of it will continue to be relevant to discussions of the future of the franchise while the people responsible for making it continue to be the people in charge of the future of the franchise. You can find it as annoying as you like, but providing it's being discussed in that context it's on-topic and you'll just have to live with it.
Mr Morden wrote: In contrast - those who declare that they did not like TLJ AND give often comprehensive reasons relating to the various elements that they don't like are often told one or more of the following:
* You don't understand it - "we" do but your too blinkered or stupid to appreciate such glorious art - why do you even post about something your not worthy to view.
* You don't know why you hate it - I will tell why you hate it and why you are a bad person.
* You are [a [Neckbeard]] or other insults
* It has to be good because the crticis said so and you should just shut and be told what your should like or dislike
* I want to discuss the film but only if you like it - if not you should not post as thats destroying the good name fo such a godllike film.
Fun list. I'm going to throw in another one. Just because I suspect that maybe, just maybe, it's relevant to this specific thread:
* The topic at hand is not The Last Jedi.
And... Yeah, if you're sensing a bit of resentment here on my part perhaps we can examine why: We aren't allowed to discuss Star Wars here, unless we're parroting your opinions on The Last Jedi. We can't talk about Disney's incorporating Star Wars into its theme parks without hearing someone's unsolicited top five hated scenes in the Last Jedi. No news related to Star Wars can pass by without yet another hot take on The Last Jedi. No faint praise, no errant comment can be allowed to pass without a pages long lecture about just how wrong they are to dare think it has any kind of merit at all.
I am speaking as someone who did not like The Last Jedi: you need to get over it.
If that means hashing out your complaints in a thread that's actually about The Last Jedi, go do it! If it means writing off the sequel trilogy and skipping out on the next movies, like I did after Attack of the Clones when I was in high school, do that! If it means walking away from the franchise forever, like so many TLJ critics insist they are doing, then do it! Its been a year and a half the time for derailing every tangently related thread is long over.
Frankly I would much rather discuss items related to the items outlined in the OP, such as the showrunners of this new trilogy appearing to gak the bed worse and worse with each episode of GoT.
I am, as far as I am aware allowed to post here if it relevant to the subject - this is relevant.
I also sugested ways that the new three films could be good and interesting and would appeal - again relevant.
Complaining about what people post in a thread is more borderline relevance?
What I can't understand is why Disney pays a substantial amount of money for Star Wars, begins plans to put it in its parks but doesn't bother to lay the groundwork for the new trilogy. The OT was created after the surprising success of the first film. The PT was planned as a trilogy and had beats to hit, execution is another matter that I can't be arsed talking about again. The ST has absolutely no excuse to be in the mess only 2 films in. It's a complete non event.
AegisGrimm wrote: The problem with Leia using the force to get back to the ship is that her ability comes out of nowhere. There is nothing earlier to establish she ever went anywhere with her abilities.
Space is actually not that big of a deal, people do not explode, nor would they go all Total Recall on Mars. Studies show you will die of asphyxiation before anything else, unless you can somehow hold your breath long enough to freeze to death. Other than the lack of air, space is just a much worse case of exposure to freezing temps, as far as your fragile membranes like the lips and eyes are concerned.
Space isn’t even that “cold” in the normal sense. There’s no air or anything for your body heat to transfer to. You’ll suffocate Long before you freeze to death. You’ll actually get one hell of a sunburn depending on where you are in relation to the nearest star.
Gordon Shumway wrote: 1) Hadn't it been established that the force is, in part, inherited?
2) Hadn't Yoda hinted at it with his "there is another"?
3) the amount of energy to pull yourself somewhere in a null gravity environment is pretty small. Think the amount of pressure you put on a pen when writing https://www.hq.nasa.gov/pao/History/SP-4026/noord29.html 4) when faced with near death experience trauma, people can do some pretty remarkable things. That paired with 1-3 above, says to me that people who point to "flying Leia" as a problem with the film have too much time and too little thought on their hands. There are many things to criticize the film about, that is a silly one.
She also "sensed" Han's death in the last movie, letting us think that she could use the Force, at least a little bit.
Gordon Shumway wrote: 1) Hadn't it been established that the force is, in part, inherited?
2) Hadn't Yoda hinted at it with his "there is another"?
3) the amount of energy to pull yourself somewhere in a null gravity environment is pretty small. Think the amount of pressure you put on a pen when writing https://www.hq.nasa.gov/pao/History/SP-4026/noord29.html 4) when faced with near death experience trauma, people can do some pretty remarkable things. That paired with 1-3 above, says to me that people who point to "flying Leia" as a problem with the film have too much time and too little thought on their hands. There are many things to criticize the film about, that is a silly one.
She also "sensed" Han's death in the last movie, letting us think that she could use the Force, at least a little bit.
Isn’t she also the one who heard Luke calling for help from under Cloud City in the OT or am I misremembering that?
Gordon Shumway wrote: 1) Hadn't it been established that the force is, in part, inherited?
2) Hadn't Yoda hinted at it with his "there is another"?
3) the amount of energy to pull yourself somewhere in a null gravity environment is pretty small. Think the amount of pressure you put on a pen when writing https://www.hq.nasa.gov/pao/History/SP-4026/noord29.html 4) when faced with near death experience trauma, people can do some pretty remarkable things. That paired with 1-3 above, says to me that people who point to "flying Leia" as a problem with the film have too much time and too little thought on their hands. There are many things to criticize the film about, that is a silly one.
She also "sensed" Han's death in the last movie, letting us think that she could use the Force, at least a little bit.
Isn’t she also the one who heard Luke calling for help from under Cloud City in the OT or am I misremembering that?
Yup, she heard him calling out to her and knew exactly where he was and got Lando to turn atound and go get him (with some "encouragement" from Chewie).
Regarding TLJ: I still can't decided if I liked it or not. Visuals were good, Rey/Kylo fight was cool, Ghost Yoda was a nice cameo.
But all the "subverted expectations" were not good. They seemed to be there for their own sake rather than to give the story any deeper meaning.
But there are several way "Rise of Skywalker" can alter our perspective of what happened in TLJ, so I'll hold judgment until I see it.
Regarding Flying Leia: of all the unbelievable things in SW, this didn't bother me. It seemed totally believable within the established rules of the movies. Leia has force powers, even if under developed.
I did think it looked a bit goofy though and given Carrie Fisher's passing IRL, it seemed like they could have edited it to be the end for Leia and kept Luke alive at the end to round out the Trilogy.
But I suppose it's good they didn't since that wouldn't have seemed right to alter her last performance from what she actually did. And we'd miss out on the Luke/Leia interaction at the end, which was a tender moment.
Still not happy that Luke is gone, but if they can manage to have him in IX as a Force ghost WITH Yoda, Anakin and hopefully Obi-wan, it might be worth it.
I just really, REALLY wanna see an interaction between Force ghost Anakin and Kylo Ren.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: I also feel that TPM just started too far back in Anakin's history - or at least spent too long there.
I'll bring up the fan-made cut that reduces the Prequel films down to a single movie, is bizarrely better than all three movies combined for the effort, and only uses about 15 minutes of footage from TPM.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: I also feel that TPM just started too far back in Anakin's history - or at least spent too long there.
I'll bring up the fan-made cut that reduces the Prequel films down to a single movie, is bizarrely better than all three movies combined for the effort, and only uses about 15 minutes of footage from TPM.
TPM was literally a waste of a movie.
I've heard of this fabled fan-cut. I need to check this out. I've always enjoyed TPM, mostly for the colors and Darth Maul, but I could easily see it cut down to a 20-30min first act.
My biggest beef with the prequels is that that seem too disconnected from each other with no clear protagonist. IMO if they focused a bit more on Obi-wan as the central character, didn't kill Maul until the 3rd movie and built up the relationship between Anakin and Obi-wan, plus the rivalry between Maul, it would have been a better trilogy
Hopefully it’ll come to DVD soon, and I can catch up.
I would wait until more seasons are finished. I didn't bother watching, but I did keep up with the reviews to see if it was worth jumping in to and...yeah. Even the most avid Sequel Defender type reviewer had gotten pretty tepid by the end of the run, and those who were neutral or reasonably critical of the Sequels(people who hated them didn't seem to bother with Resistance at all) were outright slating several episodes.
Given the pattern of the previous shows - which all have a questionable first season to some degree - it still might turn out good, but the specific criticisms this time were a bit different and boiled right down to, essentially, "this is just boring most of the time".
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: I’ve heard mixed things, but have always been one of my own (often bloody, you may have noticed!) mind.
I fear the animation style may take some getting used to. Very bright, very ‘The not very good in my opinion’ Marvel Cartoons.
But hey, if it’s sucks, it sucks. Anything else, I’ll be ok with.
The animation style is something that did take some getting used to from what I read, but the main complaints seemed to be a lot of episodes just meandered about without any real point to them, then when stuff needed to happen they just kind of made it happen without the required buildup, so lots of things that were supposed to be emotional moments fell flat. It also seems to have been even more of a "kids show" feel than S1 of Rebels had, but as I said that seems to be a common theme of these shows so it may resolve itself later.
I guess it’s part of the creative crew finding their feet.
Don’t go too deep into plot and lore in case of cancellation maybe? I’ve had too many shows be cancelled in the middle of plot, and it honks me right off!
I guess it’s part of the creative crew finding their feet.
Don’t go too deep into plot and lore in case of cancellation maybe? I’ve had too many shows be cancelled in the middle of plot, and it honks me right off!
I think the main difference is Rebels mostly had things together by the end of its first season, while Resistance apparently kept having the same issues all the way through its season finale.
It's possible that the big issue is maybe in the timing? Both Clone Wars and Rebels happened "after the fact", while Resistance has kicked off before the trilogy it feeds in to is finished. That could make it harder for them to get approval for any plots that aren't pretty anodyne, or the apparent lack of a proper plan for the trilogy could just mean they didn't have much to work with.
Yeah it aimed at younger audiences for sure but it’s still fun to watch. I found the later episodes quite fun too but hey il happily watch Star Wars Lego cartoons with the lads. Best thing is I’m passing my love of all things Star Wars on to them which is never a bad thing.
Rebels is probably the highlight of Disney's version of SW other than R1.
It's better written and more coherent than the new trilogy on the whole.
Plus it has one of my favourite scenes from SW in general (Maul v Obi the rematch).
SeanDrake wrote: Rebels is probably the highlight of Disney's version of SW other than R1.
It's better written and more coherent than the new trilogy on the whole.
Plus it has one of my favourite scenes from SW in general (Maul v Obi the rematch).
That scene was fantastic, i truly wish maul had been in all 3 prequel films.
Honestly Rogue One and Solo have been great.
What these 3 films need is a PLAN to them. a rough outline.
I hope disney learns from the backlash to TLJ, while it did make money, Reception has been....mixed.
Disney produced good Star Wars TV shows. Both Rebels and Clone Wars were a success. Rogue One is considered one of the best Star Wars movie. Solo, while heavily criticised, was far from bad. It was mostly an average sci-fi adventure, but without Force user, the univers becomes extremely generic, like a blank slate. While I did liked both movies of the new trilogy. They could have used a more careful approach. They seem to follow the original trilogy method of basically making one movie after the other without careful consideration for an overall plot. The first trilogy was a success, but it was a few decision away from a disaster and some decision had a weird side-effect like Obiwan being some sort of liar. If they are to make another trilogy (and frankly why not), they should write it whole and then separate it in three part to make a more consistent series.
creeping-deth87 wrote: I won't deny that the prequels were bad, but I'm not sure I can agree that they're worse than the sequel trilogy. For all their faults, episodes I through III at least tried to do something different with the Star Wars universe. They were not re-treads of the OT, and however badly bungled their execution might have been I can at least respect them for exploring that universe in a different way.
The sequel trilogy? I can't even give those films credit for that. Force Awakens and Last Jedi are just chock full of needless throwbacks to the original trilogy, bend over backwards to restore the status quo from ANH so that they can do the whole underdogs vs. space Nazis thing over again (and, in the process, basically invalidating the end of ROTJ), and throw original cast cameos in our face because they're terrified of doing something new. They might be better executed, technically better made films, but they're so painfully lazy and derivative that I really can't bring myself to say that they're better films than the prequel trilogy. I just can't.
Well really, prequels were full of throwbacks (throwfronts?) to the OT as well. It is particularly notable in AotK and RotS, lots of mirrored scenes. And tons of characters from OT shown for no reason (C3PO, Chewbacca etc).
I went in to Phantom Menace having read stories how Jar Jar Binks really suck. Having prepared to this, I did not actually find him that bad. Annoying and unfunny, sure but a minor distraction. But I really did not like kiddie Anakin. He was awful, just terrible in idea and execution. Jake Lloyd has since grown to hate Star Wars because of all the crap he took from the fans, he was really depressed, burned all his memorablia etc. If Lucas ever deserves hate from something, it is writing and casting this role which was guaranteed to put the performer in terrible position.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AegisGrimm wrote: The problem with Leia using the force to get back to the ship is that her ability comes out of nowhere. There is nothing earlier to establish she ever went anywhere with her abilities.
Well, she only discovered she has (or is supposed to have) Force abilities in very end of RotJ. Next time we see her, she is leader of the Resistance busy doing leader stuff. There is very limited screentime for her to show off her Force stuff.
EU stories of course had her as full-blown Jedi.
LunarSol wrote: Somebody had to care about Avatar. It didn’t sell nearly $3 billion in tickets because no one cared.
I wonder if there's a correlation to hating it if you're from an imperialistic nation and liking it if you're from a nation with a history of being invaded and plundered.
LunarSol wrote: Somebody had to care about Avatar. It didn’t sell nearly $3 billion in tickets because no one cared.
I wonder if there's a correlation to hating it if you're from an imperialistic nation and liking it if you're from a nation with a history of being invaded and plundered.
LunarSol wrote: Somebody had to care about Avatar. It didn’t sell nearly $3 billion in tickets because no one cared.
I wonder if there's a correlation to hating it if you're from an imperialistic nation and liking it if you're from a nation with a history of being invaded and plundered.
I am form the Uk and liked it.....we were invaded a bit and did rather more of it ourselves but most nations have been equally successfuly at invading someone at some point.....
Crimson Devil wrote: If you consider TLJ to be such a bad movie you waste 1000s of words and who knows how much time complaining about it, then you haven't really seen very many bad movies. I guess you've never seen the prequels.
Prequels are bad yes but they are still better. Both are bad BUT at least they tried to create something new. TFA and TLJ I basically saw 20 years ago already. Better written. Nothing new in the TFA and TLJ.
Never bothered with Resistance after the 3rd or 4th episode. Just didn't see the point.
Then again I did give up on Rebels during its first season, until people kept telling me "No! It gets good once Tarkin shows up!", so I gave it another go and never looked back.
Crimson Devil wrote: If you consider TLJ to be such a bad movie you waste 1000s of words and who knows how much time complaining about it, then you haven't really seen very many bad movies. I guess you've never seen the prequels.
Prequels are bad yes but they are still better. Both are bad BUT at least they tried to create something new. TFA and TLJ I basically saw 20 years ago already. Better written. Nothing new in the TFA and TLJ.
No, they really weren't. Read the scripts sometime. Lucas himself said his entire script came from The Hidden Fortress. The editing style: Flash Gordon serials. The music: Williams freely admits to cribbing from Wagner. Not to knock it (hell, half of Shakespeare's stuff came from the Italians). Just about every shot from every Tarantino film was taken from somewhere else, like a Family Guy episode, but done well. Just to say, "create something new" isn't really in the artistic lexicon. It's how the stories are told, not the stories themselves.
Just to give my two cents on the quality of the original trilogy.
They’re not well written. The direction of the first is terrible and of the second and third is competent, but no better.
The acting of the three lead actors is embarrassingly bad in A New Hope. I put that down to a combination of their lack of experience and the poor direction. Their acting is so much improved in the later films once they have a competent director to guide them.
However, the things that are amazing are the editing (which saved the first movie), the sound design, the cinematography and the effects.
Most of all though, the aspect that still stands up and one of the greatest examples of its execution in movie history, is the production design. Even after all these years, I still get goosebumps at the sight (and sound) of a TIE Fighter screaming through the frame.
Still not happy that Luke is gone, but if they can manage to have him in IX as a Force ghost WITH Yoda, Anakin and hopefully Obi-wan, it might be worth it.
I just really, REALLY wanna see an interaction between Force ghost Anakin and Kylo Ren.
It would probably be Anakin passing a hand over his head and saying "seriously, dude, whoosh". Then again, one of the things I do like about the prequels is how Ren's arc moves from him being an in-universe Vader fanboy to actually exceeding him by the standards of the Sith.
I sometimes wish they made a Star Wars movie which doesn't take place in some damn desert. But I suppose the galaxy has seen so many environmental disasters that most of the habitable planets have been desertificated. Makes sense I guess.
Backfire wrote: I sometimes wish they made a Star Wars movie which doesn't take place in some damn desert. But I suppose the galaxy has seen so many environmental disasters that most of the habitable planets have been desertificated. Makes sense I guess.
They have a new screenwriter(Laeta Kalogridis) writing the first installment, so this isn't the Benioff & Weiss trilogy. It's also, interestingly, nothing to do with Rian Johnson so far as the news mentions, so assuming they stick with the "every other year" thing starting in 2022, and these plus the B&W trilogy constitute the six movies Iger confirmed were in development back when Disney's slate for the next few years came out, it's possible the future might be looking up a bit for Star Wars, with them going back to a fan-favourite era and either dumping Johnson or at least relegating him to some producer-level behind the scenes stuff.
I'd have more faith in a KotR movie series if they got Drew Karpyshyn to write it honestly. All other things aside, that guy can spin a good yarn, and he's already shown an ability to do it across multiple mediums.
Certaintly, it would be better than the person whose consistency as a writer is best described by noting she co-wrote Terminator Genisys and Shutter Island...
They'll certainly have more of a free hand with this than sequel stuff.
Me, I'm not at all familiar with that era, as I never owned the right console to play them on. But I am aware they're held in almost universal high regard.
That may be a double edged sword. Ditching the old EU was the same. Whilst it cut out a lot of absolute Guff, they have brought back some of the favourites, albeit somewhat rejigged (Thrawn is superb in Rebels).
There's some good successful work there. Alita is a recent scifi fit, and Shutter Island I think is a very good film (just a very niche one) and Altered Carbon was great.
But then there's one of the worst Terminator movies ever, Alexander and the giant mixed bag that film was, two failed TV series, and the mess that was Pathfinder.
Night Watch could honestly go in either category, but for me what made Night Watch passable was the camera work and acting that was too good for a mediocre film, so...
gorgon wrote: That seems like a perfectly fine resume for a Star Wars spinoff film.
Yup. How many writers are there in Hollywood without a mixed bag of quality? Even greats like the Coen brothers have some not great stuff in their filmography.
Whatever. The important part is that it's 'pew-pew' material. She's got some solid genre stuff on the resume, and as Malus notes the nature of the work means that most screenwriters end up with a mixed bag of work anyway.
Besides, the combined powers of Orson Welles, Billy Wilder, Woody Allen, Stanley Kubrick and Francis Ford Coppolla couldn't make a SW film that would make *everybody* happy these days. I can't wait for more calls of 'ruined childhoods' from some corner of the fanbase.
The sequel trilogy feels pointless because the bad guys are just a copy of the Galactic Empire in the original trilogy.
The Old Republic’s bad guys are the Sith Empire who are just like the Galactic Empire in the original trilogy but with more Darth (insert evil sounding name) characters.
MonkeyBallistic wrote: The sequel trilogy feels pointless because the bad guys are just a copy of the Galactic Empire in the original trilogy.
The Old Republic’s bad guys are the Sith Empire who are just like the Galactic Empire in the original trilogy but with more Darth (insert evil sounding name) characters.
It’ll take a lot to win me round at this point.
KotOR, not TOR. I agree they went too far aesthetically in terms of similarity with the OT for the MMO, but the original games can't really be accused of that.
I'm personally hoping that this new trilogy is a straight-up adaptation of the first game(you can map the story pretty well onto the OT template, down to the big twist in the second movie, plus it seems like the writer they've hired is reasonably good at adaptations), and the Benioff & Weiss trilogy dives into the *really* wonko Tales of the Jedi stuff with the original philosophical split of the Jedi order's precursor, or the subsequent stuff about the original Sith species & the Great Hyperspace War. Or if they want to do something "dark & subversive", do the Star Wars version of Infinity War with Thanos as the protagonist and adapt the Darth Bane novels.
I hope they stay far, far away from TOR, because the only really unique part of that setup from a non-superfan perspective(ie, most of the folk who watch the movies) is the whole Zakuul arc which...is not good.
Yodhrin wrote: I hope they stay far, far away from TOR, because the only really unique part of that setup from a non-superfan perspective(ie, most of the folk who watch the movies) is the whole Zakuul arc which...is not good.
I think the overarching plot of TOR is god awful and properly derided by fans.
At the same time though, one of the great tragedies (or boons, depending on how you look at it) is that the class storylines were mostly pretty good. To this day the Sith Warrior, Imperial Agent, and Sith Inquisitor storylines are applauded as some of the best Star Wars stories to ever make it into a video game (to the point I'd say it's worth playing ToR just to play those three character classes to 50 and then drop the game entirely when you finish), and all three would actually make stellar moives in the right hands. Parts of the Smuggler, Trooper, and Bounty Hunter storylines too. I could see the Great Hunt arc being a good popcorn flick if nothing else. Sadly, everything having to do with the actual Jedi in TOR is either horrifically bad, or too tied into the awful main plot to be any good.
Besides, the combined powers of Orson Welles, Billy Wilder, Woody Allen, Stanley Kubrick and Francis Ford Coppolla couldn't make a SW film that would make *everybody* happy these days. I can't wait for more calls of 'ruined childhoods' from some corner of the fanbase.
Woody Allen and ruined childhoods kind of go hand in hand.
gorgon wrote: Whatever. The important part is that it's 'pew-pew' material. She's got some solid genre stuff on the resume, and as Malus notes the nature of the work means that most screenwriters end up with a mixed bag of work anyway.
Besides, the combined powers of Orson Welles, Billy Wilder, Woody Allen, Stanley Kubrick and Francis Ford Coppolla couldn't make a SW film that would make *everybody* happy these days. I can't wait for more calls of 'ruined childhoods' from some corner of the fanbase.
This kind of thing is just nonsense though. That there will always be some non-zero number of people who don't like a given iteration of a thing doesn't mean you can't make that thing more appealing to more people than an existing iteration, nor does the presence of a tiny minority of unreasonable people negate entirely reasonable criticisms.
Besides which, the reason why those people couldn't make a Star Wars film that would make "everybody" happy is they're not suited to directing that style of film, any more than Johnson was. Any more than Tarantino likely is to direct a Star Trek film. Hire the right kind of director(and writers), ones who grasp they're making a space-fantasy action adventure and not some pretentious film festival piece, and you'll get Star Wars movies that make almost everybody happy.
I am not particularly big on 'lets try to please (almost) everyone' line of moviemaking. TFA was like that, and while it was an okay movie, it is not particularly memorable. Rewatches of that movie are just kind of boring. They took no risks and stuck with the formula ANH estabilished and as a result it feels more like a re-enactment where you go through the motions of the old movie than a new movie of its own.
TLJ, for all its faults, has more rewatch value because while I know that some parts of the movie suck, it also has scenes which rock, so I can patiently wait through the suck parts. TFA is just kinda 'meh' all around, it's emotionally quite flat movie.
I never got the feeling from TLJ that Johnson was trying to swerve me, or subvert my expectations. Only thing which genuinely surprised me was offing Snoke. But Snoke was not built much in TFA. In TLJ Johnson's job was to either make him interesting, or get rid of him. If he wasn't able to do the first, then second one was the right choice. Only issue with this was that they would have needed someone more villanous to step in right away to lead First Order. Somewhat ambiguous Kylo Ren is clearly not that person. They should have estabilished Hux as more effective or evil, or whipped out Knights of Ren. Or say, bring in Grand Admiral Thrawn! Now that could have been quite awesome.
Problem with TLJ was that they rushed it out. Script was clearly draft-level in many places and many of the fanbases annoyances come from scenes or dialogue which could have been great if executed better, but come off as clumsy and unrefined. Existence of clear placeholder names is surefire sign of this. For example: "We need some kind of codebreaker. -Hey! I know a guy! He's called the Codebreaker!" I mean, seriously?? Nobody had time to flesh THAT angle up even a little bit? I have seen Power Rangers episodes more subtle.
I do agree. I honestly can’t decide whether I like TLJ or not, I keep changing my mind, but it was a far more interesting movie than TFA. It’s almost impossible to hate TFA because it was so utterly bland. TLJ took risks and some paid off while others fell flat.
Backfire wrote: I never got the feeling from TLJ that Johnson was trying to swerve me, or subvert my expectations. Only thing which genuinely surprised me was offing Snoke. But Snoke was not built much in TFA. In TLJ Johnson's job was to either make him interesting, or get rid of him. If he wasn't able to do the first, then second one was the right choice. Only issue with this was that they would have needed someone more villanous to step in right away to lead First Order. Somewhat ambiguous Kylo Ren is clearly not that person. They should have estabilished Hux as more effective or evil, or whipped out Knights of Ren. Or say, bring in Grand Admiral Thrawn! Now that could have been quite awesome.
This is probably the only nice thing I'm ever going to say about The Last Jedi, but putting someone in charge of an evil galactic empire who is clearly not ready for the job but still too powerful and feared to easily be overthrown himself is actually interesting as far as ideas go.
MonkeyBallistic wrote: I do agree. I honestly can’t decide whether I like TLJ or not, I keep changing my mind, but it was a far more interesting movie than TFA. It’s almost impossible to hate TFA because it was so utterly bland. TLJ took risks and some paid off while others fell flat.
Again though, it's a false choice. You don't need to "take risks" or "subvert expectations"(and whether that's what you got from it or not Backfire, that's what the guy set out to do) in order to avoid making a bland, boring retread. People keep associating quality of execution with willingness to deviate from the established norms of a franchise, and that's nonsense.
MonkeyBallistic wrote: I do agree. I honestly can’t decide whether I like TLJ or not, I keep changing my mind, but it was a far more interesting movie than TFA. It’s almost impossible to hate TFA because it was so utterly bland. TLJ took risks and some paid off while others fell flat.
Again though, it's a false choice. You don't need to "take risks" or "subvert expectations"(and whether that's what you got from it or not Backfire, that's what the guy set out to do) in order to avoid making a bland, boring retread. People keep associating quality of execution with willingness to deviate from the established norms of a franchise, and that's nonsense.
Mate, I couldn’t agree more. I don’t think TLJ is a better film for taking risks or “subverting expectations”, just a more interesting film. It’s certainly one of the most visually striking Star Wars films, but has a terrible plot and ropey characterisation. I just find a movie with some amazing aspects and some utterly awful parts to be more interesting as a piece of cinema than something which is uniformly, blandly ok.
And just to be absolutely clear, when I say interesting, I don’t mean good or even enjoyable. By interesting, I mean worthy of discussion, even if all there is to discuss for some people is, why was it so bad? I’m certainly not associating quality of execution with anything at all.
MonkeyBallistic wrote: I do agree. I honestly can’t decide whether I like TLJ or not, I keep changing my mind, but it was a far more interesting movie than TFA. It’s almost impossible to hate TFA because it was so utterly bland..
Trust me; it's possible.
Just as important as the type of director is the competence of the director. A director who could build tension, develop characters, and set up a story with earned payoffs could have made a TFA-like Star Wars movie that wasn't garbage.
I think we can all agree that TFA could have been better.
For me the most fascinating thing about Star Wars is that, now we are at a point where the number of bad and mediocre Star Wars films outnumber the good ones, why are so many people still invested in it? For me, I definitely like the idea of Star Wars far more than the reality of Star Wars. I honestly think (though I may just be speaking for myself here) that it’s because the original trilogy still holds up as one of the greatest examples of production design in the history of cinema.
There's some good successful work there. Alita is a recent scifi fit, and Shutter Island I think is a very good film (just a very niche one) and Altered Carbon was great.
But then there's one of the worst Terminator movies ever, Alexander and the giant mixed bag that film was, two failed TV series, and the mess that was Pathfinder.
Night Watch could honestly go in either category, but for me what made Night Watch passable was the camera work and acting that was too good for a mediocre film, so...
While not a massive sample size by any means her best work was all adaptations of existing novels/stories like Altered Carbon, Battle Angel and Nightswatch. So given the large amount of source material available for the Kotor period I feel comfortable in being at least a little excited.
I personally preferred the Altered Carbon show to the books and I liked the books quite a bit, she never made any changes just for the sake of change mostly stuff that just would not have moved from book to show easily. Also she made the main character less of a douche because in the books he sales past anti hero straight into massive bell end territory quite often to the point there’s a couple of times we’re you stop caring if he actually survives.
I have to disagree about Altered Carbon/change for the sake of it, they straight up gutted the implicit anticapitalist element of the books by completely rewriting Quellcrist's motivation and philosophy, plus combining with the Envoys, and in the process made the them seem either illogical ideologues, or just plain dumb.
I mean, they specifically establish that the scarcity of the immortality tech is artificial, so Quellcrist & Co were either too stupid to draw the obvious conclusion(if the problem is the rich holding on to the tech in order to perpetuate their power and relative privilege, overthrow them and nationalise it), or they did draw the obvious conclusion but believe that rampant inequality and superwealth are fine so long as the wealthy also die in the end, or that restoring the "natural order" is more important than bringing down a corrupt and unjust social regime.
The little detour into trying to wield the tech as a cudgel to drive home a "sex work is inherently misogynist violence" message was also clumsy and ill-judged.
Still, the first KotOR game doesn't delve into such weighty themes, so you'd hope her work on Alita will be more representative of how this will turn out.
Would much rather they just get Episode 9 out the door and make another Story-movie, like the Obi-Wan film they mentioned before.
It would be nice if Ewan McGregor got a fair crack of the whip under a more engaged director, which wasn't the case with the prequels. They are good films but the actors - some of them Academy Award winners - looked mostly bored and uninterested beyond the initial excitement of being in a Star Wars movie. For example, compare Natalie Portman's performance in Leon(1994) to Phantom Menace(1999) - five years younger and a big difference.
Not sure we really need a second Solo movie, but I'd definitely go see it if it were made! Solo was fantastic in 4DX and I actually felt like part of the Falcon's crew in the kessel run scene. Definitely one of the better SW movies.
For what is on the horizon, I'm just glad The Mandalorian is a thing and starts this year. Dave Filoni is all the reassurance I need.
There's some good successful work there. Alita is a recent scifi fit, and Shutter Island I think is a very good film (just a very niche one) and Altered Carbon was great.
But then there's one of the worst Terminator movies ever, Alexander and the giant mixed bag that film was, two failed TV series, and the mess that was Pathfinder.
Night Watch could honestly go in either category, but for me what made Night Watch passable was the camera work and acting that was too good for a mediocre film, so...
While not a massive sample size by any means her best work was all adaptations of existing novels/stories like Altered Carbon, Battle Angel and Nightswatch. So given the large amount of source material available for the Kotor period I feel comfortable in being at least a little excited.
I personally preferred the Altered Carbon show to the books and I liked the books quite a bit, she never made any changes just for the sake of change mostly stuff that just would not have moved from book to show easily. Also she made the main character less of a douche because in the books he sales past anti hero straight into massive bell end territory quite often to the point there’s a couple of times we’re you stop caring if he actually survives.
Ohhh hell no - Altered Carbon TV show (which I mostly enjoyed as a fun adventure) destroys and twists the entire central message of the books. The "freedom fighter" BS as a background rather than spec ops that it invents is awful
Living forever was never the problem - the problem was power and wealth being controlled by a few and that tech being exploited only for their advantage ....but the show was more interested in T+A
IMO the last epsiode is terrible - the conclusion making zero sense in the context of the world - the wealthy man suddnely can't buy his way out? Really cos thats how its portrayed up till that very moment, thats even without the technicality that he is neither in his right mind at the time of the murder or even the same person.... bad bad ending.
Back on Star Wars - MCU have no problem making interesting, clever, fun films full of great charaacters where they explore new ideas - are nto totally tied to the comics. having someone come in make something that "subvert expectations / write crap" repeatedly for the sake of it is a wierd choice for a action advneture series.
Star Wars (for me and many others I suspect) has never been more than action adventure in space = maybe giving that overarching theme as a memo would help the next film maker
Then again, one of the things I do like about the prequels is how Ren's arc moves from him being an in-universe Vader fanboy to actually exceeding him by the standards of the Sith.
