Manchu wrote: It’s not my idiosyncratic opinion, it’s the actual impact of TLJ. TFA had detractors but there was a general sense of unity among fans. TLJ quite explicitly made fun of a substantial portion of its audience. Whether you want to cll it what it is or use marketing euphemisms (“subverting expectations”), the result is the same: a huge mess.
The fact that people are still in denial about this is astonishing. The reason Disney is backing off Star Wars is obviously not because things are going too well.
Even people who didn’t dislike TLJ can see how this movie disrupted the new trilogy. Whether JJ would have made something worthwhile had his vision been borne out in Episode VIII is highly debatable but TLJ being a huge mistake is beyond question.
Especially after TRoS, it's extremely easy to see how TLJ botched the pacing of the trilogy, particularly with the "wtf" plot points that directly contradict TLJ and also just come out of left field. TLJ completely drops the slow reveal that Finn is force sensitive and does nothing to advance his story. Rey's background being important is completely dismissed in what is now a blatant case of "lying to audience" about something that ends up being really fething important to her character. Poe... I've bitched about everything involving him in TLJ enough. Don't care to do it again. I can't help but notice how Palpatine and Rey's parentage could have been more potently foreshadowed and revealed in the second film, rather than made bloody obvious within the first few minutes of the third like JJ was rushing to get important details out of the way.
TLJ was a pile of bad ideas with worse execution that left the entire flow of the sequel story fluttering in the wind without direction and tore the fan base apart so badly that it's visibly effected sales of subsequent films. TLJ has demostratably damaged it's franchised, made clear in the performance of Solo (<400mil) and TRoS (<800mil). For context, TFA banked a massive 2 billion at the box office, more that TLJ or TRoS combined. It's especially hard not to attribute Solo bombing at the box office to swirling rumors of it's troubled development and how easily fans believed them after the bitter pill of TLJ. This isn't comparable to whiny babies bitching about Brie Larson's face and how Captain Marvel would fail because it "angered fans" and then the rest of us just shake our heads as the film banks a billion at the box office to ride MCU hype to glory. Something "broke" Star Wars and that something is very obviously TLJ.
As an aside to this line of talk, for my part, I liked Luke in TLJ. Kind of a bummer to see him as a defeated hermit, but I thought that oddly fit Luke's self-sacrficing and idealistic nature in a way, cutting himself off and hiding because it keeps the galaxy safe (unaware that Palpatine is manipulating things behind the scenes). The way he died would have been really cool if the rest of the movie wouldn't have been such a fething mess from start to finish, and a capstone to the story's first hero (the bit about Luke always looking toward Tomorrow was a wonderfully fitting line, completely out of step with RJ pissent attempts at characterization). It's also the only part of TLJ that felt to me like Star Wars, so part of me kind of suspects it's the only part of JJ's original ideas that RJ kept.
Yeah, I kinda agree with you. I liked the Rey-Kylo plot, though I was unhappy with how it ended in the movie, and I did like TLJ Luke Skywalker and his perspective that the Jedi order was not worth saving (a point of view I agree with!). I always thought the point of Luke was that he was not really a very good Jedi, because he was a good person. Jedi are not good people, on the whole. They are too distant from what makes people tick.
I also liked the last scene with force projection, it was pretty satisfying and I think cooler than if he had shown up for a laser sword fight - Luke had never been an amazing swordfighter. I never read any EU stuff about Luke so to me it was not jarring to see this stuff.
The only problem I have with it is that it gaks on the original trilogy by basically making every victory meaningless. All the beloved characters end up sad failures, and I think that was poor storytelling and not very generous to the original movies or characters. I genuinely think it would have been better to set the movies further in the future, and only have the older actors show up in flashbacks or something rather than being central to the plot.
But TLJ does not commit to it's idea that the Jedi are harmful and goes back on it, with Luke already accepting he was wrong before the end of the film. And then by the end we are back to the duopoly between Sith and Jedi which I think is really boring and played out by now.
However I totally agree that everything outside of Luke, Rey and Kylo is a mess in that film. Finn should have been the one giving the speech about the cost of war, and he should have had more to do rather than re-threading his arc from TFA. Poe learning a lesson is not a bad arc, but the way it was done was boring, frustrating and dumb. The entire space chase section and the stupid casino planet are just not enjoyable to watch at all, and watching the Resistance get utterly destroyed from their own incompetence is not a very satisfying experience. That is why I think it is such a deeply flawed film. It challenged some ideas about Star Wars in ways I thought were interesting, but JJ Abrams was NOT interested in doing that (which is also a fair choice) and the resulting disconnect just leaves everything up in the air. It also has some beautifully concieved visuals and shots, I think the best in the sequel trilogy.
Considering these are producer created movies rather than director lead, I have to put the blame at Kathleen Kennedy's door for that. I hate to say that, because I think she gets a lot of weird hate from people who have seemed to miss out on the fact that Star Wars has always had "SJW" themes and messages, but it seems like she was just not competent at her job this time. Really weird, because she is an industry veteran who has worked on lots of successful stuff.
No should ever assume that.
Fans, like customers, tend to be clueless jerks.
Perhaps, but without our money your product fails, PERIOD.
I'm not sure who 'our' and 'your' are in this scenario, but in terms of the new star wars films, getting money from fans apparently isn't a problem-- $725 million so far, which is roughly two hundred million dollars past the projected costs (production+advertising). Hardly anything to scoff at. The scorn of 'fans' seems irrelevant, and that's speaking as someone who thinks these movies are garbage (still haven't seen this one).
An indifferent Chinese audience, yeah, that's a problem (just $20 million). But not from fans.
No should ever assume that.
Fans, like customers, tend to be clueless jerks.
Perhaps, but without our money your product fails, PERIOD.
I'm not sure who 'our' and 'your' are in this scenario, but in terms of the new star wars films, getting money from fans apparently isn't a problem. ($725 million so far)
An indifferent Chinese audience, yeah, that's a problem (just $20 million). But not from fans.
To be honest, I think Disney is showing it's own lack of foresight thinking a story about young idealistic heroes fighting a tyrannical regime would ever do well in China
No should ever assume that.
Fans, like customers, tend to be clueless jerks.
Perhaps, but without our money your product fails, PERIOD.
I'm not sure who 'our' and 'your' are in this scenario, but in terms of the new star wars films, getting money from fans apparently isn't a problem. ($725 million so far)
An indifferent Chinese audience, yeah, that's a problem (just $20 million). But not from fans.
To be honest, I think Disney is showing it's own lack of foresight thinking a story about young idealistic heroes fighting a tyrannical regime would ever do well in China
Yeah, a people's revolution against imperialism and dictatorial tyranny is just so... unChinese.
No should ever assume that.
Fans, like customers, tend to be clueless jerks.
Perhaps, but without our money your product fails, PERIOD.
I'm not sure who 'our' and 'your' are in this scenario, but in terms of the new star wars films, getting money from fans apparently isn't a problem-- $725 million so far, which is roughly two hundred million dollars past the projected costs (production+advertising). Hardly anything to scoff at. The scorn of 'fans' seems irrelevant, and that's speaking as someone who thinks these movies are garbage (still haven't seen this one).
An indifferent Chinese audience, yeah, that's a problem (just $20 million). But not from fans.
Bear in mind the trilogy started with a $2 BILLION dollar film, and was well over $1 billion in sales at this point in it's theater run. Now tell me how this is anything but disappointment on Disney's part.
Yeah, I'm only imagining RJ's disdain. Drink that green titty milk Luke!
I can also see we've checked "star wars has always been dumb" off the bingo card. We're now trawling up 40 year old internet posts to prove these new SW movies aren't uniquely dumb, but its always been the fandom. Or something. I'm not exactly sure how my grandpa being a twit makes JJ not a hack. Or RJ not cancer for the franchise.
The original starwars movies were never released in cinemas in china. No SW movie does well there because they have no nostalgia for them. Their first cinema exposure to SW was the phantom menace. They see the movies unclouded by rose tinted glasses for the dumb action they are.
Da Boss wrote: Finn should have been the one giving the speech about the cost of war, and he should have had more to do rather than re-threading his arc from TFA. Poe learning a lesson is not a bad arc, but the way it was done was boring, frustrating and dumb.
Something that could have fixed TLJ, and made Canto Bight just that bit better - have it be Finn and Poe who go to Canto Bight, and Finn is the one who points out to Poe about war not being all fun and games, you can't just hop in an X-Wing and blow stuff up. It makes no sense that it's Rose who points out how children are affected by war to a literal former child solider.
Change Canto Bight so that it's Finn teaching Poe the cost of war and that it's not as simple as "fly around in X-Wing", and maybe Poe is able to teach/encourage Finn to feel like he truly belongs in the Resistance, doesn't feel like an outsider, and feel genuinely wanted and loved for who he is, despite his past traumas.
There, two character arcs rewritten, making far more sense, and allows us to consolidate characters. Scrap Rose and Holdo (I didn't like Rose's character in TLJ, but I hate that they essentially wrote her out - either give her a more defined role beyond teaching the former child soldier that war is bad, or just write her out), don't blow Leia up, leave her in charge of the ship as the gang go to Canto Bight *under her orders*, and do one of the many other solutions to "how do we stop the First Order fleet" than the Holdo Maneuver.
Some time ago, Reds8n brought up how he assumed from the OT that the Jedi were more like the knights of the Round Table, as opposed to some kind of monks. I had the same idea. The Prequels really screwed up the Jedi. But even without the Prequels, the notion that Yoda and Kenobi could say, well the only answer is for a son to murder his father, this makes them seem pretty blinkered and the lesson seems to be that it took someone pure hearted and naive rather than someone old and cynical to save the day.
The notion that Luke eventually became old and cynical isn’t especially terrible in itself but we definitely needed some explanation of why. Did he ever have conversations with Force ghost Anakin? How did he figure out that the Jedi need to end? How did he go from heroically throwing aside his weapon rather than murdering his own father to contemplating murdering his own nephew?
And given all this about how the Jedi are really deeply flawed, how am I am suppose to relate to all these buttmunch Jedi encouraging Rey?
The real bummer about TRoS is that Palpatine's entrance was rushed as all hell (as with everything in the first 15 minutes). Everything would have been much cooler going into this movie if the end of TLJ would have been a variation of his reveal message interrupting the Resistance's call for help, ending with the trademark Palpatine laugh, Leia's horrified face as only she truly gets the weight of it, and then credits.
The only problem I have with it is that it gaks on the original trilogy by basically making every victory meaningless. All the beloved characters end up sad failures, and I think that was poor storytelling and not very generous to the original movies or characters..
The thing is, a fairytale, 'Happily Ever After' ending doesn't create a compelling setting for a sequel. The EU had this problem - after defeating the Empire, there was never a particularly impressive opponent until the Yuuzhan Vong came along, because the New Republic always had the upper hand. Even Thrawn, the most impressive of the post-RotJ warlords, was still an underdog. It's the good guy who is supposed to be the underdog.
I'm a big fan of David Gemmell. As predictable as his plots get, most of his books follow an ongoing timeline covering several cultures as their star waxes and wanes. That recurring idea that any victory is only ever temporary, and quite often the good guys in this story are the villains in the next one is something that I really enjoyed.
Which is a long way of saying that I'm totally fine with the fact that the victory at the end of RotJ wasn't a permanent win. It doesn't make the original movies any less awesome, but does, for me, make for a far more interesting setting than 'here's a bad guy challenging the New Republic, which is just like the Empire but not evil'.
AegisGrimm wrote: The real bummer about TRoS is that Palpatine's entrance was rushed as all hell (as with everything in the first 15 minutes). Everything would have been much cooler going into this movie if the end of TLJ would have been a variation of his reveal message interrupting the Resistance's call for help, ending with the trademark Palpatine laugh, Leia's horrified face as only she truly gets the weight of it, and then credits.
Exactly. That was such a missed opportunity that it alone completely undermines Kennedy's claim that Palpatine's return was always planned. Rian Johnson was hired for Episode 8 with nothing more "here's Episode 7, do something preferably based on it".
Bear in mind the trilogy started with a $2 BILLION dollar film, and was well over $1 billion in sales at this point in it's theater run. Now tell me how this is anything but disappointment on Disney's part.
Though, in original trilogy there was similar dropoff. ESB made only about half what ANH did.
Manchu wrote: Some time ago, Reds8n brought up how he assumed from the OT that the Jedi were more like the knights of the Round Table, as opposed to some kind of monks. I had the same idea. The Prequels really screwed up the Jedi. But even without the Prequels, the notion that Yoda and Kenobi could say, well the only answer is for a son to murder his father, this makes them seem pretty blinkered and the lesson seems to be that it took someone pure hearted and naive rather than someone old and cynical to save the day.
The notion that Luke eventually became old and cynical isn’t especially terrible in itself but we definitely needed some explanation of why. Did he ever have conversations with Force ghost Anakin? How did he figure out that the Jedi need to end? How did he go from heroically throwing aside his weapon rather than murdering his own father to contemplating murdering his own nephew?
And given all this about how the Jedi are really deeply flawed, how am I am suppose to relate to all these buttmunch Jedi encouraging Rey?
None of it makes any sense, even superficially.
I also thought that, and I thought it was interesting that Yoda was basically wrong about what Luke should do, for all his wisdom. I filled in the blanks with what I knew already, which is really the neat trick Lukas does with those first films. The problem is then he went back to fill in all the detail and you realise that Jedi are weirdos and Sith are all psychos. I think it says more about Lukas and his hangups than anything else. But now we are stuck with that, and it does make the Jedi less interesting and definitely a less likeable protagonist faction.
The real bummer about TRoS is it makes TFA completely unwatchable and shows TLJ isn't exceptional in it's disdain for the fans.
They seem to think we'll take any old dreck so long there are lightsabers and megalasers and force powers. Which, they may be right enough about to support a franchise.
Going to keep this really simple for you. Consider how ANH wraps up compared to how TFA wraps up. World of difference.
Ah... ANH: Death star blew up. TFA: Death star planet blew up.
Yeah. Huge difference.
Are you for real?
I mean, are you also a fan of Star Wars: Krull? It ends with them blowing up the Death Star castle. Same thing, right?
Then tell me what this oh-so-enormous difference is between the two. Rather than be insulting, try being convincing.
eD.
Over the last couple pages, people more invested than I am spelled it out for you quite clearly. One is a stand alone film which tells a complete story. The other is incomplete and (although the side quest is completed) the main goal for the protagonists is left on a cliffhanger, with many questions left unanswered and character arcs left undecided. The tones of the endings are different. The details are different. The plot functions are different.
For ANH to have the same kind of ending, the film would need to stop when the heroes get R2 to Yavin and the tech plugs in the doohickey that downloads the Death Star plans—directed by George Lucas, do dadoot dadoot dadoodoodoodoot Dah Duh Dah Duh duh DUH Dah duh duh DUH DunDunDunDun!
They said from the start that they didn't, and that each of the directors would be doing their own thing. So while that approach is somewhat baffling, it's not really a surprise by this point.
d-usa wrote: Watching Episode 5 where Kenobi tells Luke to find Yoda, aka “the Jedi master who trained me”.
Isn’t that inconsistent with who trained him?
That one was explained as Yoda training all of the apprentices before they are assigned to a Master - see the class that Obi-Wan interrupts when he's looking for Kamino in Ep2.
d-usa wrote: Watching Episode 5 where Kenobi tells Luke to find Yoda, aka “the Jedi master who trained me”.
Isn’t that inconsistent with who trained him?
That one was explained as Yoda training all of the apprentices before they are assigned to a Master - see the class that Obi-Wan interrupts when he's looking for Kamino in Ep2.
That's how I saw it, yeah. It's not that Yoda was his only teacher, but that Yoda, at some point, was a learning influence for Obi-Wan. Could have have said "a" instead of "the"? Possibly, but the gist is fundamentally the same.
It's an inconsistency, I suppose, but it's literally so minor, so harmless to the flow of the story and the plots therein that it literally affects nothing. Hyperspace ramming and other such things do not have that luxury, IMO.
The rest of the dialogue, Kenobi talking about being as angeh. as Luke when he was being trained, doesn’t imply one of many teachers. The script shows that Yoda and Kenobi were Master/Apprentice, not Homeroom Teacher and Student #2746.
It’s an inconsistency that has always been there, but that somehow newer existed until Disney fethed it all up.
Indeed. The fact that they didn't explain exactly how long Yoda trained Obi-Wan for, what they did on every second Thursday, and where Obi-Wan went after class means that the entire movie series is ruined.
It’s a fethup, same as Luke completing just how much training to almost become a complete Jedi in the time it takes Han to hide in a comet worm and escape to meet Lando.
Star Wars is full of screwups like that, half hearted retcons to attempt to fix those continuity mistakes, and logical inconsistencies.
Pretending that this started with Disney and that they somehow ruined Star Wars because of it is stupid, and that’s my point. Episode 7-9 is full of the same logical errors, inconsistencies, and continuity screwups that the series always had. Disney’s Star Wars isn’t really any different than Lucas’ Star Wars. I enjoyed them all for the same reason.
That was one thing that the EU was good for - finding creative ways to explain away the plot holes. Although their efforts were hindered somewhat by their tendency to introduce as many as they fixed...
d-usa wrote: The rest of the dialogue, Kenobi talking about being as angeh. as Luke when he was being trained, doesn’t imply one of many teachers. The script shows that Yoda and Kenobi were Master/Apprentice, not Homeroom Teacher and Student #2746.
It’s an inconsistency that has always been there, but that somehow newer existed until Disney fethed it all up.
What are you talking about? It’s only been an inconsistency since the prequels existed, it was remarked upon instantly and constantly, and doesn’t matter because everyone hates the prequels anyway. I am baffled by your attempt to use hated, not-considered-Star Wars movies to justify why we should like the Sequels and consider them real Star Wars.
“Just as viable as the prequels, guys” is the worst defense you could make for a new Star Wars movie.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
insaniak wrote: Indeed. The fact that they didn't explain exactly how long Yoda trained Obi-Wan for, what they did on every second Thursday, and where Obi-Wan went after class means that the entire movie series is ruined.
You have it backwards. The movie is crap, and that’s why these inconsistencies don’t get a pass. “Less than 12 parsecs” gets a pass* because Star Wars was a good movie.
*Yes, everyone makes jokes about the stupid line, but no one seriously argues that it ruined the movie, ruined continuity or ruined the rules and stakes of the setting.
Indeed. I'm starting a petition to ask Disney to replace the first half of TLJ with an hour of Palpatine buying shares in a transparisteel manufacturer and conducting job interviews for shipyard laborers.
insaniak wrote: Indeed. I'm starting a petition to ask Disney to replace the first half of TLJ with an hour of Palpatine buying shares in a transparisteel manufacturer and conducting job interviews for shipyard laborers.
You jest, but that would probably make for a more entertaining movie.
d-usa wrote: He probably used POW droid labor to build the things.
The setting “should” be crawling with von Neumann style droid fleets. If we want to extrapolate the Empire’s industrial capacity from what we’ve seen, especially if we include the prequels and other media, the problem isn’t that the second Death Star was built so quickly but rather that the hundredth Death Star wasn’t built quickly enough.
Hell, add in in-atmo hyperskipping, hyperramming, and droid automation, and Star Wars warfare should look like the Culture fighting the Lensmen.
What are you talking about? It’s only been an inconsistency since the prequels existed, it was remarked upon instantly and constantly, and doesn’t matter because everyone hates the prequels anyway.
It was popular to bash the prequels, but the truth is that both critic and audience opinions were and still are divided. ROTS is actually considered one of the better movies...because it has the highground.
What are you talking about? It’s only been an inconsistency since the prequels existed, it was remarked upon instantly and constantly, and doesn’t matter because everyone hates the prequels anyway.
It was popular to bash the prequels, but the truth is that both critic and audience opinions were and still are divided. ROTS is actually considered one of the better movies...because it has the highground.
It’s likely that the same people who have problems with the sequels had problems with the prequels, so please mentally add an appropriate disclaimer to my statement limiting it to the appropriate segment of the fandom. That is, one can’t convince fans who don’t uncritically accept the prequels that the prequels are a good reason to uncritically accept the sequels.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also, a lot of people liking a thing does not make that thing actually good. See: Transformers movies.
They were movies with giant robots beating each other up, and some eye candy thrown in to top it off. Same as the TMNT movies were good. Sometimes a good movie just has to entertain people enough to shut of their brain for a while and enjoy a movie that delivers exactly what is says on the poster. Some people expect more than what they were ever promised, but that’s not the fault of the movie.
For Star Wars, that has always been “space fantasy tropes loosely tied together with a half-baked storyline.”
*based on certain definitions of good
Automatically Appended Next Post: Edit: but that just brings me back to my original argument, so we’re just gonna circle around over and over I would think.
d-usa wrote: The EU explaining away plot holes was like writing code to fix bugs.
99 bugs in the code, 99 bugs in the code, you change a line and take one out, 107 bugs in the code.
Hehe well done
And yeah, they did tend to raise several issues for each one they addressed. It didn't bother me much, though. Still wishing Thrawn had made it into the movie!
d-usa wrote: The EU explaining away plot holes was like writing code to fix bugs.
99 bugs in the code, 99 bugs in the code, you change a line and take one out, 107 bugs in the code.
Hehe well done
And yeah, they did tend to raise several issues for each one they addressed. It didn't bother me much, though. Still wishing Thrawn had made it into the movie!
They also had a habit of filling in blanks that didn't actually exist - like Han's 'Bloodstripes' to explain that time he had red stripes down the leg of his pants, or Luke's grappling hook which some EU writers thought he brought with him from Tatooine, because they apparently missed the part where he pulled it out of the Stormtrooper belt he was wearing...
d-usa wrote: The EU explaining away plot holes was like writing code to fix bugs.
99 bugs in the code, 99 bugs in the code, you change a line and take one out, 107 bugs in the code.
Hehe well done
And yeah, they did tend to raise several issues for each one they addressed. It didn't bother me much, though. Still wishing Thrawn had made it into the movie!
They also had a habit of filling in blanks that didn't actually exist - like Han's 'Bloodstripes' to explain that time he had red stripes down the leg of his pants, or Luke's grappling hook which some EU writers thought he brought with him from Tatooine, because they apparently missed the part where he pulled it out of the Stormtrooper belt he was wearing...
The Kessel Run was cool, though.
Yeah, I think the biggest issue SW has had since it's inception is this pathological need to explain and write history for every single detail and relationship no mater how minor. Background characters with no lines in the movies have entire stories written about them. It's done a LOT of bad.
d-usa wrote: The Transformers movies were good*
<snip>
*based on certain definitions of good
They'd have to be definitions that factor in the idea that what people want out of Transformers movies is less giant robots and more generic B-list actors yakking and hiding from background footage of an actual movie happening somewhere else.
saw it last night, I'll give it the s'alright and I liked they largely kept the main characters together this time (and very good news for any FO and Resistance X-Wing players )
So, when I watched Episode IX, I didn't really think too much about Emperor Palpatine's plans, but then afterwards took a look back and it seemed rather inconsistent. First he had Rey's parents killed via Ochi, a Sith assassin, told Kylo Ren that he wanted her dead, then when Palpatine meets up with her, he said he never wanted her dead and told her to strike him down and become Empress Palpatine, then tries to suck the life force out of her. So in short, he wanted her dead, then not, then he did. Or am I missing something here?
And then she kills him, which is what he wanted to happen a few minutes before, right after, puzzlingly, he attempts to kill her, but no worries, although she did kill him like he wanted I guess it wasn’t quite in the way he wanted because what he said would happen when she killed him didn’t.
Psionara wrote: So, when I watched Episode IX, I didn't really think too much about Emperor Palpatine's plans, but then afterwards took a look back and it seemed rather inconsistent. First he had Rey's parents killed via Ochi, a Sith assassin, told Kylo Ren that he wanted her dead, then when Palpatine meets up with her, he said he never wanted her dead and told her to strike him down and become Empress Palpatine, then tries to suck the life force out of her. So in short, he wanted her dead, then not, then he did. Or am I missing something here?
Darkside man tells fibs,surely not, the parents died because they refused to hand little Rey over, dangling King of the Universe in front of Kylo gets him to use FO resources into finding her and I suspect he knew Kylo couldn't / wouldn't kill her and with a bit of luck she'd kill his Skywalker butt, I'm assuming he wanted to possess Rey as whatever Sith tech cloned him a new body seemed shonky at best as he's barely little more than a corpse in 20-25 years, then lost his temper when she didnt serve his plans and went all sparkle hands crazy
Manchu wrote: And then she kills him, which is what he wanted to happen a few minutes before, right after, puzzlingly, he attempts to kill her, but no worries, although she did kill him like he wanted I guess it wasn’t quite in the way he wanted because what he said would happen when she killed him didn’t.
Palpatine also sees to be pretty chill with Snoke and/or Kylo potentially killing Rey in the previous two movies, despite apparently basing his plan on Rey needing to kill him.
Manchu wrote: And then she kills him, which is what he wanted to happen a few minutes before, right after, puzzlingly, he attempts to kill her, but no worries, although she did kill him like he wanted I guess it wasn’t quite in the way he wanted because what he said would happen when she killed him didn’t.
When Palpy asked Rey to kill him (to make the spirit transfer or whatever) he was attached to the Zombie-crane-lifesupport-thingy machine.
Palpy drained Reys and Bens life force to heal himself. He removed himself from the crane/machine thingy after being healed.
Rey kills Palpy, but nothing happens, no spirit transfer. Maybe the crane/machine thing was needed to be attached to Palpy to make the transfer possible?
Also, hyperspace ramming and Deathstar (and why the two newer met). Maybe Deathstar was equipped with the gravity well generators that the Interdictor had
A massive and experimental craft, the Imperial Interdictor was equipped with a gravity well. It could pull other ships out of hyperspace, making it a dangerous tool for the Empire.
So any ship approaching the DS will be pulled out of Hyperspace and be at the mercy of it's turbolasers? No Hyper ram is possible against DS (yes, I know, this is just a head canon).
Sith fleet at the Sith planet? Planets are big places, so there is plenty of room and resources in the planet itself for the shipyard(s). We weren't really shown the Sith planet at all, just the Palpys temple. So maybe the planet had lots of those Sith cultists for a work force. They seemed to live there with Palpy after all.
I took it that the Sith fleet was ready, but undermanned. Only skeleton crew on board most of the ships. That is why they needed the beacon to guide them out of the Sith planet?
The New Order officers were talking about needing to recruit lots of new people to crew the Sith fleet, so I don't think those ships were fully crewed. They were just pulled out of mothballs after all.
It didn't look like the Sith fleet were doing much fighting. Mostly some Ties flying among the Rebels and the New Order command ship doing any fighting. I didn't get any impression that the Sith fleet was battle ready at all.
85% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes.
$700+ million worldwide.
#1 non-sequel film of 2007.
It was a good film.
It wasn’t deep. It wasn’t meaningful. It didn’t have any life lessons. But the vast majority thought it was good and fun.
Like Star Wars.
1. You’re talking only about the first one, whereas I specifically quoted the second.
2. Rotten Tomatoes measures the percentage of people who thought the film was “okay” or better. The score is not the same thing as a quality rating.
3. Many fast paced films score well immediately after viewing and only later come into their legacy of awfulness. It took too many people a whole year to realize how bad Star Trek I to Darkness was, for example, and by then it had goosed its RT score to look like not a flaming sack of dog vomit. So, yeah, RT is unreliable. People often score movies while still coming down from the rush, especially JJ movies, and you can’t just point to box office as an indicator of quality.
4. Did you really watch TF and think “This is the level of quality films should aspire to.”? Really?
The first Transformers genuinely was a good film. Surprisingly good mix of action, humor and heart for a Michael Bay movie. The rest...were not so surprising.
Lance845 wrote: Yeah, I think the biggest issue SW has had since it's inception is this pathological need to explain and write history for every single detail and relationship no mater how minor. Background characters with no lines in the movies have entire stories written about them. It's done a LOT of bad.
Which leads to people demanding that the Knights of Ren get significant screen time in a 400ish-minute trilogy with too many characters and already full of holes, inconsistencies, and stuff that just plain should have been explained better.
Been thinking that the Mandalorian format might be the best path forward for the franchise. Gives creators more time to tell their story and more creative space to focus on and explore particular aspects and events in that universe.
I just can't get my head around the idea that they are going to spend hundreds of millions on talented actors, amazing effects artists, set designers, costume designers, film on location around the world...and they can't be arsed working on the scripts for long enough to make them actually good.
I am sure it is all to do with hollywood bs, but don't the money people realise that crap scripts tank movies that are good in all other respects really reliably?
Lance845 wrote: Yeah, I think the biggest issue SW has had since it's inception is this pathological need to explain and write history for every single detail and relationship no mater how minor. Background characters with no lines in the movies have entire stories written about them. It's done a LOT of bad.
Which leads to people demanding that the Knights of Ren get significant screen time in a 400ish-minute trilogy with too many characters and already full of holes, inconsistencies, and stuff that just plain should have been explained better.
If you're talking about my comments earlier, I couldn't give a crap about the Knights of Ren specifically, I was just pointing out the absurdity of them not existing in the 2nd film then coming back in the 3rd, and lamenting that they could have been used to create a story arc that actually cut through the entire series.
Instead we get characters like Rose, who only popped up in the 2nd film for a side quest that didn't need to happen, she might as well not have existed in the 3rd film, and who's removal would have had no effect on the overall story (actually maybe would have had a positive effect if Finn got more attention in her absence). And we get fetch quests like C3PO's that again doesn't need to be there and the only consequence of it (wiping his memory) is almost immediately rectified.
I'm not desperate to have the Knights expanded, from what I understand they are expanded in the books and whatnot (I haven't read any of that, but it's my understanding at least). They could be dropped entirely for all I care, I just used them as an example of how badly the trilogy as a whole has been managed.
The 400ish-minute trilogy was packed with stuff that didn't need to be there, I'm not asking for them to make it longer, but rather hack out some of the pointless crap in favour of some scenes that link the movies and create broader arcs.
Manchu wrote: And then she kills him, which is what he wanted to happen a few minutes before, right after, puzzlingly, he attempts to kill her, but no worries, although she did kill him like he wanted I guess it wasn’t quite in the way he wanted because what he said would happen when she killed him didn’t.
When Palpy asked Rey to kill him (to make the spirit transfer or whatever) he was attached to the Zombie-crane-lifesupport-thingy machine.
He also said that she would strike him down with her hate and anger (or something along those dark side lines). When she kills him (debatable that she technically did as she was directing his own lightning back at him), she is not drawing on the dark side, but the light.
Her emotional state and using the dark side was probably important to the transfer ritual.
Instead we get characters like Rose, who only popped up in the 2nd film for a side quest that didn't need to happen, she might as well not have existed in the 3rd film, and who's removal would have had no effect on the overall story (actually maybe would have had a positive effect if Finn got more attention in her absence).
The Knights of Ren also might as well have not existed in the third film. They never interact with any of the main characters on screen except for Kylo Ren. And their main interaction with him is to die.
Rose actually had stuff to do on screen in TLJ, even if that stuff wasn't vitally important when you look back on it from after the ending of the film (though it is important for contributing to Poe's development as it is his dangerous plan which gets the fleet killed). The KoR just kinda walk around with their big weapons, doing nothing but standing in shadows and then get killed by their boss.
If that was all that JJ could think to do with them then RJ was absolutely correct to ignore them completely in TLJ.
A Town Called Malus 781649 10675884 47baf75c699644f41ce48a92a5ea1340 wrote:Her emotional state and using the dark side was probably important to the transfer ritual.
This is almost certainly the case but what we can guess about the implications* is not really at issue when one is watching the film in the moment, thinking, uhhh wat. TROS shows us scene after scene of Rey frustrated to the point of rage and losing control of her actions as she lashes out. If there was a coherent emotional through-line for her conflict in the movie, the Palpatine scene would make more sense. But like everything, it is hyper rushed. Rey is just suddenly not angry anymore because of some Jedi voices
*for example, Palpatine’s actual motive in killing Rey’s parents could have been to immerse her in a lifetime of painful isolation, setting her up to hate him like a megaton blast when she finds out
Instead we get characters like Rose, who only popped up in the 2nd film for a side quest that didn't need to happen, she might as well not have existed in the 3rd film, and who's removal would have had no effect on the overall story (actually maybe would have had a positive effect if Finn got more attention in her absence).
The Knights of Ren also might as well have not existed in the third film. They never interact with any of the main characters on screen except for Kylo Ren. And their main interaction with him is to die.
Rose actually had stuff to do on screen in TLJ, even if that stuff wasn't vitally important. The KoR just kinda walk around with their big weapons, doing nothing but standing in shadows and then get killed by their boss.
Sure, whatever, my whole point in that post was that I didn't care specifically about the Knights.
Alternatively they could have made Rose a more meaningful character, introduce her sister in the first film perhaps, then expand Rose's role in the 3rd, drop that whole speeder stupidity.
I just used the Knights as an example because they existed from the beginning and at the end and clearly have some backstory that could have been explored.
They should have more leveraged the fact they were making a trilogy.
The Knights of Ren had one great scene in TROS: there is a moment in the film where we get a helicopter shot of a bunch of cosplayers standing awkwardly at the top of some rock they were airlifted climbed on for some reason accompanied by an over the top Williams dramatic chipmunk flourish, duh-da-DUN. That gave me at least five minutes of chuckles.
Manchu wrote: And then she kills him, which is what he wanted to happen a few minutes before, right after, puzzlingly, he attempts to kill her, but no worries, although she did kill him like he wanted I guess it wasn’t quite in the way he wanted because what he said would happen when she killed him didn’t.
When Palpy asked Rey to kill him (to make the spirit transfer or whatever) he was attached to the Zombie-crane-lifesupport-thingy machine.
He also said that she would strike him down with her hate and anger (or something along those dark side lines). When she kills him (debatable that she technically did as she was directing his own lightning back at him), she is not drawing on the dark side, but the light.
Her emotional state and using the dark side was probably important to the transfer ritual.
That was my read too. Killing him in the first instance would have been an act of revenge/vengeance and therefore motivated by dark side, when she does finally do it, it was in defence of the lives of her friends and the rest of the Resistance.
Motivation matters in these cases, that's why Obi Wan puts up his saber, and why the throne room fight pans out how it does in Jedi.
Lance845 wrote: Yeah, I think the biggest issue SW has had since it's inception is this pathological need to explain and write history for every single detail and relationship no mater how minor. Background characters with no lines in the movies have entire stories written about them. It's done a LOT of bad.
Which leads to people demanding that the Knights of Ren get significant screen time in a 400ish-minute trilogy with too many characters and already full of holes, inconsistencies, and stuff that just plain should have been explained better.
If you're talking about my comments earlier, I couldn't give a crap about the Knights of Ren specifically, I was just pointing out the absurdity of them not existing in the 2nd film then coming back in the 3rd, and lamenting that they could have been used to create a story arc that actually cut through the entire series.
That wasn't specifically aimed at you. The Knights seem to have a following in some corners, and I was addressing that. I think their story is being told in a comic series now anyway...?
I just used the Knights as an example because they existed from the beginning and at the end and clearly have some backstory that could have been explored.
They should have more leveraged the fact they were making a trilogy.
Alternately, they should have been cut to ease the bloated run times. I could go either way with the knights as a concept, but given the way they were used, they should have been cut. In a different story (Kylo trying to found a dark legacy, with no first order, just the lurking menace of a dark side threat, and the legacy of vader or something), they could have been used well.
There are lots of oversight moments that should have resulted in either:
A) we should do more with this element
or
B) we should cut this entirely because it serves no purpose and just muddies the storytelling in favor of a fleeting visual.
Probably the biggest gripe I have with the new trilogy is almost everything on screen fits into A or B and almost nothing fits into C: useful and necessary for an interesting story the films are actually trying to tell.
A Town Called Malus wrote: If that was all that JJ could think to do with them then RJ was absolutely correct to ignore them completely in TLJ.
Which I think points to JJ never really having a plan for what came next. It wasn't his plan to make anyway, since Johnson and Trevorrow were tasked with writing and directing the next installments.
I don't think JJ picked up TFA threads in TROS because he was restoring anything that was derailed by TLJ. He just didn't have any better ideas. Had JJ directed TLJ, it probably would have had lots of whiz-bang action, introduced a bunch of kewl stuff just for the kewls, and involved the good guys trying to eliminate a bad guy superweapon. *shrug*
To be clear, I don't take SW seriously and had a fine time at TROS. My kids liked it, and that was cool. Seeing what looks like a pretty large creative process fail just frustrates me as a creative professional.
Going to keep this really simple for you. Consider how ANH wraps up compared to how TFA wraps up. World of difference.
Ah... ANH: Death star blew up. TFA: Death star planet blew up.
Yeah. Huge difference.
Are you for real?
I mean, are you also a fan of Star Wars: Krull? It ends with them blowing up the Death Star castle. Same thing, right?
Then tell me what this oh-so-enormous difference is between the two. Rather than be insulting, try being convincing.
eD.
Over the last couple pages, people more invested than I am spelled it out for you quite clearly. One is a stand alone film which tells a complete story. The other is incomplete and (although the side quest is completed) the main goal for the protagonists is left on a cliffhanger, with many questions left unanswered and character arcs left undecided. The tones of the endings are different. The details are different. The plot functions are different.
For ANH to have the same kind of ending, the film would need to stop when the heroes get R2 to Yavin and the tech plugs in the doohickey that downloads the Death Star plans—directed by George Lucas, do dadoot dadoot dadoodoodoodoot Dah Duh Dah Duh duh DUH Dah duh duh DUH DunDunDunDun!
You make some valid points there. But since TFA and ANH hit all the same plot points with almost exactly the same timing, my point is equally valid.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
d-usa wrote: It’s a fethup, same as Luke completing just how much training to almost become a complete Jedi in the time it takes Han to hide in a comet worm and escape to meet Lando.
Star Wars is full of screwups like that, half hearted retcons to attempt to fix those continuity mistakes, and logical inconsistencies.
Pretending that this started with Disney and that they somehow ruined Star Wars because of it is stupid, and that’s my point. Episode 7-9 is full of the same logical errors, inconsistencies, and continuity screwups that the series always had. Disney’s Star Wars isn’t really any different than Lucas’ Star Wars. I enjoyed them all for the same reason.
To be fair, Han is going from the asteroid belt of the Hoth system to a gas giant in a completely different system WITHOUT A HYPERDRIVE.
He could have been in transit for years, for all we know, although it's unlikely he had enough food to go that long. But weeks to months is certainly not out of the question given that limitation. Even if it puts Hoth and Bespin EXCEEDINGLY close, on an astronomical scale...
You have it backwards. The movie is crap, and that’s why these inconsistencies don’t get a pass. “Less than 12 parsecs” gets a pass* because Star Wars was a good movie.
The line confused me for a while, then I realized what was going on. "You've never heard of the Millennium Falcon?" 'Good,' Han thinks to himself. 'I can lie to them and jack up the price! It's just an old man and an ignorant farm boy, what do they know about smuggling?'
Also, hyperspace ramming and Deathstar (and why the two newer met). Maybe Deathstar was equipped with the gravity well generators that the Interdictor had
Except TFA showed gravity fields had no effect on hyperspace travel.
And TROS shows ships entering and exiting hyperspace I the midst of tall buildings and cubic miles of atmosphere. Setting rules and limitations don’t matter to some ‘storytellers’.
Automatically Appended Next Post: This reminds me of something I wanted to address earlier. Someone said that the movies never explained hyperdrive, so hyperramming and hyperskipping weren’t against the rules, and not seeing them happen before doesn’t make them impossible.
Dude, it’s called “show, don’t tell”. The previous movies SHOWED us how hyperdrive works. By not showing hyperramming or hyperskipping numerous times when intelligent or experienced characters would clearly have used those techniques, the setting has “told” us the limitations of hyperspace travel. Remember that a hero is only as clever as the obstacles (including rules of the setting) are difficult to overcome. When a filmmaker changes the rules for convenience, he is actively making his characters less clever.
The Sequels have consistently made the villains less threatening and the rules less limiting, which makes the heroes less heroic and more stupid in turn.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Voss, Star Wars was all about destroying the Death Star, and they did it. TFA was all about finding Luke so he could help the Resistance, and they didn’t fit that in the movie. Even though the movies look alike in bullet point form, the actual character motivations and developments are completely different. The actual meats of the movies—the parts that make films resonate with the audience—are very different.
Manchu wrote: And then she kills him, which is what he wanted to happen a few minutes before, right after, puzzlingly, he attempts to kill her, but no worries, although she did kill him like he wanted I guess it wasn’t quite in the way he wanted because what he said would happen when she killed him didn’t.
Initially, she was supposed to kill him, at which point his spirit and the combined spirits of the Sith would pass into her.
Instead, he drained the twin-life energy from Rey and Kylo, which healed him and allowed him to take on the spirits of the Sith himself. At that point, he no longer needed Rey, and so was free to kill her.
So far as killing of Kylo goes, to me that was the only sensible outcome. Either he was going to stay evil, in which case someone was going to kill him, or he would return to the light... which is great, and all, but he's still done some pretty horrible things. One of the things that bugged me in the EU was the frequency with which Jedi turned to the Dark Side, did horrible things and then came back to the Light, and everyone just went 'S'awright, he's good again now. All is forgiven, nothing to see here...'
Having him sacrifice himself for Rey completes his redemption while also not leaving him awkwardly hanging around.
What are you talking about? It’s only been an inconsistency since the prequels existed, it was remarked upon instantly and constantly, and doesn’t matter because everyone hates the prequels anyway.
It was popular to bash the prequels, but the truth is that both critic and audience opinions were and still are divided. ROTS is actually considered one of the better movies...because it has the highground.
It’s likely that the same people who have problems with the sequels had problems with the prequels, so please mentally add an appropriate disclaimer to my statement limiting it to the appropriate segment of the fandom. That is, one can’t convince fans who don’t uncritically accept the prequels that the prequels are a good reason to uncritically accept the sequels.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also, a lot of people liking a thing does not make that thing actually good. See: Transformers movies.
Oh, I see what you mean, Bob. Fair play.
Regarding your second point...what makes a good film is subjective - "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" and all that jazz. However, if a film is positively recieved by both critics and audience alike, then thats where a film gets its recognition.
The Transformer movies - box office aside - has had its ups and downs with both critics and audiences. First one was well recieved(obviously not without its faults), but the series gradually gradually fell out of favour with both camps. Bumblebee, on the other hand, proved that less is more and is well regarded by both critics and audience alike. Bumbleebee also focused on its target audience - the young at heart.
Today we have lost sight on what is good or bad. When someone says Justice League or The Phantom Menace are bad movies then they clearly haven't been exposed to the horrors of King Kong Lives or The Neverending Story Part 3. As much as I think the MCU is overrated and question why we need 3-5 films a year, I honestly cannot say I have seen a bad Marvel movie.
gorgon wrote: The first Transformers genuinely was a good film. Surprisingly good mix of action, humor and heart for a Michael Bay movie. The rest...were not so surprising.
This.
Lance845 wrote: Yeah, I think the biggest issue SW has had since it's inception is this pathological need to explain and write history for every single detail and relationship no mater how minor. Background characters with no lines in the movies have entire stories written about them. It's done a LOT of bad.
This is fair.
Which leads to people demanding that the Knights of Ren get significant screen time in a 400ish-minute trilogy with too many characters and already full of holes, inconsistencies, and stuff that just plain should have been explained better.
I disagree with this solely because the lead up materials to the first film seemed to be setting the Knights of Ren up as an important group of bads, only for none of them to ever matter. They got Phasma'd harder than Phasma. Maybe that's just a case of deceptive marketing, or imo I think the Knights were intended by JJ to be a bigger part of the films than they ended up being.
Just got back from the cinema, I have not read the thread up to this point because I have been avoiding spoilers. I am glad I decided not to spoiler myself because despite all the negativity I rather liked it. I can see why some dislike it and the film has its flaws, and do believe it would have been best split into two films or given an half hour for better pacing. However I do not believe it deserved the reputation it has garnered. Episode 8 left things in a mess and to fix that and finish the trilogy was a hard job. I don't rate Jar Jar Abrams as a director but he did a passable job here.
I did turn up at the cinema willing to just watch it and enjoy it for what it was, with low expectations, so I set the bar low enough to enjoy it. Maybe that was the difference and casualization is the key..
Orlanth wrote: Just got back from the cinema, I have not read the thread up to this point because I have been avoiding spoilers. I am glad I decided not to spoiler myself because despite all the negativity I rather liked it. I can see why some dislike it and the film has its flaws, and do believe it would have been best split into two films or given an half hour for better pacing. However I do not believe it deserved the reputation it has garnered. Episode 8 left things in a mess and to fix that and finish the trilogy was a hard job. I don't rate Jar Jar Abrams as a director but he did a passable job here.
I did turn up at the cinema willing to just watch it and enjoy it for what it was, with low expectations, so I set the bar low enough to enjoy it. Maybe that was the difference and casualization is the key..
I avoided the thread till I saw it and felt the same. I rather liked it and it had a few good surprises for me because I avoided spoilers. I'll enjoy sitting down with my kiddos and watching it at home once it comes out to stream.
I disagree with this solely because the lead up materials to the first film seemed to be setting the Knights of Ren up as an important group of bads, only for none of them to ever matter. They got Phasma'd harder than Phasma. Maybe that's just a case of deceptive marketing, or imo I think the Knights were intended by JJ to be a bigger part of the films than they ended up being.
Agreed. Being the "Master of the Knights of Ren", he practically spends two movies having nothing to do with them, yet the flash backs suggest they are a bit of a biker gang.
First viewing of Last Jedi was a bit confusing as I assumed the red-clad dudes in Snoke's room were the Knights of Ren. It seemed like the same number of them with individual suits(turned out they were in pairs). When Snoke knocked Kylo to the floor, I assumed they were threatening Snoke and a look from Kylo was to say "Don't worry about it". To enforce that assumption it was said that the Knights of Ren were "Darth Vader fanboys", so maybe Kylo had them looking after Snoke as part of a pact - in return helping Kylo to realise his destiny as the next vader. I assumed the red suits were their First Order uniforms...
I think it would have been cool if Kylo sent the Knights with Phasma to hunt down Finn and Rose - no one escapes.
Da Boss wrote: I just can't get my head around the idea that they are going to spend hundreds of millions on talented actors, amazing effects artists, set designers, costume designers, film on location around the world...and they can't be arsed working on the scripts for long enough to make them actually good.
I am sure it is all to do with hollywood bs, but don't the money people realise that crap scripts tank movies that are good in all other respects really reliably?
Except for the fact that Kylo looks like Young Anakin PT. 2.
Rey has no facial expressions and all the personality of a brick sitting underneath my porch.
Finn is just there because "black dude points" and so on.
The white rebel fighter pilot...what's his name? Can't remember, super who cares about him.
Po's Power Ranger girlfriend...you know, because Toys.
Babu Frick...you know, more toys. He Heyyyy!!
Seriously name me one character from the Force Awakens to the Rise of Skywalker that you cared about.
Just cap this franchies in the head and leave everything to the Mandelorian, which is so far superior to the rest of the franchise movies, that it makes them all look like amateur college films.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Voss, Star Wars was all about destroying the Death Star, and they did it. TFA was all about finding Luke so he could help the Resistance, and they didn’t fit that in the movie. Even though the movies look alike in bullet point form, the actual character motivations and developments are completely different. The actual meats of the movies—the parts that make films resonate with the audience—are very different.
I have no idea why this is directed at me. Did you mean Vulcan? Because thats who you were arguing with a couple pages back about TFA vs New Hope.
Seriously name me one character from the Force Awakens to the Rise of Skywalker that you cared about.
To be fair, we cared enough to want to know more about them, its just that they took too long to get around to telling us enough about them, and probably too little at the end.
I went to a second viewing again this afternoon...and I wonder if the sequel trilogy is going to get an animated series to explore things they didn't have enough time for in the movies - much like the Prequels had Clone Wars.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Voss, Star Wars was all about destroying the Death Star, and they did it. TFA was all about finding Luke so he could help the Resistance, and they didn’t fit that in the movie. Even though the movies look alike in bullet point form, the actual character motivations and developments are completely different. The actual meats of the movies—the parts that make films resonate with the audience—are very different.
I have no idea why this is directed at me. Did you mean Vulcan? Because thats who you were arguing with a couple pages back about TFA vs New Hope.
Probably got confused by the V’s. Apologies.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AegisGrimm wrote: Was it just me, or when the Ewoks look up to see a Destroyer exploding, does it look like it was Hyperspace-rammed?
Yes. Apparently that is officially what happened. That shot was 2 in a million.
Scrabb wrote: "Your Snoke theory sucks"-Rian Johnosn.
Yeah, I'm only imagining RJ's disdain. Drink that green titty milk Luke!
Johnson was right, though. When I watched TFA, I did not find Snoke particularly gripping villain. He came out cookiecutter and boring, evil person for sake of being evil. But there was one thing going for him - he was his own thing. He was not a Sith, he wasn't clone of Palpatine or any of that stupid crap. Lots of people gushed about his 'mystery', but there was never any actual mystery around him. Protagonists of the movie seemed to know about him and nobody ever acted like Snoke was some kind of mystery to be solved.
So when Johnson began writing TLJ, he had inherited this fairly boring main villain. What to do with him? Well, the obvious - kill him off to set up something better. I wholly applaud the decision in principle, though result maybe left something to be desired as the franchise was left without a big scary villain. Then TRoS drops out and JJ half-heartedly 'reveals' that Snoke was Palpatine's creation - completely contradicting two previous movies and extended canon. Such a reveal has only value if it was somehow set up, fitting into previous events and plot points so that viewer connects the dots in his/her mind. Nothing like that was ever done with Snoke in Episodes 7 & 8. JJ's Snoke 'reveal' was tepid, and served further to underline chief problem of the post-OT Star Wars writing - huge galaxy which feels small and inbred as everyone is connected or related to each other.
Snoke was invented to fill a gap. Or rather two gaps.
TFA introduces Kylo Ren as a villain but characterizes him throughout as a tertiary protagonist. This was a really great idea and clearly meant to echo (RotJ) Vader, like everything else about Kylo.
But it was also quite daring because it left the new Star Wars trilogy with no clear antagonist at its outset. And we can all agree that Disney wanted guardrails around everything with TFA.
So we get Snoke, a clear parallel to the (RotJ) Emperor. Usefully, this also pads the Kylo/Vader parallel theme.
The second gap Snoke fills is, an explanation for why Kylo Ren has any standing in the FO.
I think TFA, and the Disney Trilogy at large, would be significantly better without Snoke. Having a main antagonist pulling double duty as protagonist from the start of the saga is risky but also interesting. As for explaining his status in the FO, all that was needed was a tiny bit more explanation of the FO. Just make it clear that, unlike the Empire, the FO is essentially a cult and the Grandson of Vader is the cult figurehead. This would have raised the core conflict within Ben/Kylo to greater heights while also setting up the FO as the eventual real villain (an idea, rather than just a single person) of the trilogy, sort of inverting the way that in the OT this massive Empire we see in ANH somewhat disappointingly collapses into one man, the Emperor, by RotJ.
So... was this Sheev Palpatine the original or a clone? The reason why I ask is because his hands were missing the tips of fingers, looked like he was blind with milky white eyes, etc. If he is a clone, then why did he turn out that way? Cloning isn't a new practice during Episode IX.
Psionara wrote: So... was this Sheev Palpatine the original or a clone? The reason why I ask is because his hands were missing the tips of fingers, looked like he was blind with milky white eyes, etc. If he is a clone, then why did he turn out that way? Cloning isn't a new practice during Episode IX.
I'm assuming a failed clone of some sort. Obviously the cloning techniques they were using were grimdark, or Snoke wouldn't have looked like he did, not would there be a pickle barrel of (assumed) failed Snoke clones. He could be that old if he transferred into a force-aged clone after the Death Star fall, and then got 30-some years older between Endor and the current time.
I mean, he essentially exploded into power during his fall, and then there's no way that he survived the explosion of the Death Star.
It would have made the tension between him and General Hux better, instead of a petty fight about leadership it would be a more central fight about the survival of the cult if Hux felt that Kylo was betraying their values.
Also, regarding General Hux. Was there any real explanation why the New Order (Empire 2.0) abandoned Admirals for Generals?
I just assumed he was the original...from the DS2...incarnating incompletely like some kind of early-book Voldemort. I got a strong Army of Darkness vibe from him, so whatever seems like the cheesiest way to bring a villain back to life is probably the correct explanation.
If he’s a clone, they didn’t use enough Baby Yoda juice.
Automatically Appended Next Post: @D-USA, It’s probably because JJ understands military ranks about as well as he understands science. It might just be that he thinks Admirals belong in Star Trek and Generals in Star Wars.
Looking through some Wikis it seems like the Empire has actually used Generals in the past, so that would be less unusual then. Maintaining the difference between ground troops and airline crew.
Scrabb wrote: "Your Snoke theory sucks"-Rian Johnosn.
Yeah, I'm only imagining RJ's disdain. Drink that green titty milk Luke!
Johnson was right, though. When I watched TFA, I did not find Snoke particularly gripping villain. He came out cookiecutter and boring,
He was, and I'd be surprised if you found a brief hologram aping the Emperor's hologram in Empire Strikes Back anything but cookiecutter and boring.
But that doesn't make Johnson 'right' in any way. He had free reign to develop the character in any direction he chose, and opted to kill him off and NOT set up something better. Just did nothing instead. The wheels just kept spinning through TLJ so Abrams stuffed more nonsense into the RoS hamster cage, because Johnson left Episode 8 in exactly the same situation that it started out in: rebels need to escape the first order to go do... something. The fact that the number of rebels is smaller isn't important, because the listed actors for the next film are still around.
d-usa wrote: It would have made the tension between him and General Hux better, instead of a petty fight about leadership it would be a more central fight about the survival of the cult if Hux felt that Kylo was betraying their values.
Yes, absolutely. We could even have Hux be a simple militant authoritarian who just tolerates the cult aspects.
Most importantly, I think JJ and Kasdan misjudged the defining trait of Darth Vader that has emerged after all these years since RotJ: he is a prisoner — a prisoner of his choices, his armor, his past, his destiny. This is the key aspect of Vader and the bridge between Vader and Kylo.
It should been clarified in TLJ why Ben Solo turned to the Dark Side. I don’t mean that he “became” a bad guy, I mean he turned to darkness in the sense of turning to a friend when you are in need. Ben had to deal with this tremendous pressure to be the first Knight of the revived Jedi Order. And they could have made it clear, he just wasn’t getting it as quickly as everyone (including Luke and Leia) expected. And how do you get more powerful faster when it comes to the Force? Well back in 1980, Yoda told us that the Dark Side = fast gains.
This would also have been an opportunity to explain the Han/Leia break-up. You just have Han not on board with all this pressure on his son from Luke and Leia. This also means Ben and Han can have a substantive father/son connection.
Anyhow, Ben starts using the Dark Side and then develops a complex about being a prisoner of destiny, just like grandpa. So he joins an Empire-worshipping cult that needs a Vader analog.
Except, the core cult members are aware that Vader ultimately betrayed the Empire and fear Kylo will eventually do the same to them. So they give him a “bodyguard” who are actually his prison guards, the Knights of Ren.
It’s a pretty cool idea, what if the cult leader is actually a hostage?
LordofHats wrote: It would make sense with the Palpatine reveal as well; Kylo was never the real cult leader, just the stand in.
Exactly, I seem to remember Allegiant General Pryde stating that he serves Palpatine as he did during the days of the Empire. So it looks as if the generals, or at least some of them, knew about the emperor's survival and were just waiting for him to arise again.
I'm assuming a failed clone of some sort. Obviously the cloning techniques they were using were grimdark, or Snoke wouldn't have looked like he did, not would there be a pickle barrel of (assumed) failed Snoke clones. He could be that old if he transferred into a force-aged clone after the Death Star fall, and then got 30-some years older between Endor and the current time.
I mean, he essentially exploded into power during his fall, and then there's no way that he survived the explosion of the Death Star.
Very true. Dominic Monaghan, who plays Beaumont Kin in TRoS stated during the spy intel debriefing that they were rumors of cloning and Sith experimentation going on. That and Palpatine wasn't as disfigured as he was in RotS and RotJ.
I wonder what Rey "Skywalker" is going to be end up doing. Do you think she will go on to create a new Jedi order, like what Luke was doing before Ben Solo and the soon to be Knights of Ren killed everyone and destroyed the place?
Seriously name me one character from the Force Awakens to the Rise of Skywalker that you cared about.
To be fair, we cared enough to want to know more about them, its just that they took too long to get around to telling us enough about them, and probably too little at the end.
I went to a second viewing again this afternoon...and I wonder if the sequel trilogy is going to get an animated series to explore things they didn't have enough time for in the movies - much like the Prequels had Clone Wars.
I will agree with you on that.
Also to be fair...I did love Babu Frik. He and Baby Yoda need to get together and have some adventures with those two scout troopers from Mandelorian EP 8.
Da Boss wrote: I just can't get my head around the idea that they are going to spend hundreds of millions on talented actors, amazing effects artists, set designers, costume designers, film on location around the world...and they can't be arsed working on the scripts for long enough to make them actually good.
I am sure it is all to do with hollywood bs, but don't the money people realise that crap scripts tank movies that are good in all other respects really reliably?
Except for the fact that Kylo looks like Young Anakin PT. 2.
Rey has no facial expressions and all the personality of a brick sitting underneath my porch.
Finn is just there because "black dude points" and so on.
The white rebel fighter pilot...what's his name? Can't remember, super who cares about him.
Po's Power Ranger girlfriend...you know, because Toys.
Babu Frick...you know, more toys. He Heyyyy!!
Seriously name me one character from the Force Awakens to the Rise of Skywalker that you cared about.
Just cap this franchies in the head and leave everything to the Mandelorian, which is so far superior to the rest of the franchise movies, that it makes them all look like amateur college films.
Sorry what? Saying John Boyega was only included for "black dude points" is pretty racist, the guy is a great actor, very charismatic and great comic timing. Finn was my favourite character from the first movie, and I cared about what happened to him in each subsequent one (I was disappointed!).
Daisy Ridley absolutely acts the part well, and saying she has no facial expressions has me wondering if you have watched the films?
Oscar Isaacs as Poe Dameron was a fun and pretty classic star wars character, and I enjoyed him in all three movies. Again, I think he was misused but there was nothing wrong with the character or the performance.
Babu Frick and Power Ranger I will give you, but ffs, this is Star Wars. It has always had lots of characters that were merchandisable.
Psionara wrote: So... was this Sheev Palpatine the original or a clone? The reason why I ask is because his hands were missing the tips of fingers, looked like he was blind with milky white eyes, etc. If he is a clone, then why did he turn out that way? Cloning isn't a new practice during Episode IX.
Film wise we only have the "unnatural" theme to work with as its not clear how the Emperor survived. The Clone Wars enforces this with Darth Maul surviving a death where he was a) cut in half and b) falling a great hight, supposedly finishing the job.
However, if we use the EU as a guide, the emperor's spirit transferred to his "dark side planet" of Byss after slain by Darth Vader in ROTJ. I think thats what the big blue hissy-fit flame was all about. He wakes up in a fresh clone body inside a cloning cylinder. Digging a bit deeper into the EU, we discover that cloning jedi comes with its problems; Joruus C'Baoth, the clone of the jedi master Jorus C'Baoth***, is insane.
We also know that the dark side can corrupt one's visual appearance. In Revenge of the Sith, Anakin's eyes change soon after turning...
*** for all you fellow geeks out there, the extra "u" indicates a clone in Timothy Zahn's Empire trilogy.
Also to be fair...I did love Babu Frik. He and Baby Yoda need to get together and have some adventures with those two scout troopers from Mandelorian EP 8.
Sadly I haven't seen a single episode of The Mandelorian yet. But I think Babu was that little guy who hacked C-3PO? He was quite funny in a Jim Henson kinda way.
Psionara wrote: I wonder what Rey "Skywalker" is going to be end up doing. Do you think she will go on to create a new Jedi order, like what Luke was doing before Ben Solo and the soon to be Knights of Ren killed everyone and destroyed the place?
I got the impression she had plans for a career in moisture farming.
Da Boss wrote: Sorry what? Saying John Boyega was only included for "black dude points" is pretty racist, the guy is a great actor, very charismatic and great comic timing. Finn was my favourite character from the first movie, and I cared about what happened to him in each subsequent one (I was disappointed!).
Daisy Ridley absolutely acts the part well, and saying she has no facial expressions has me wondering if you have watched the films?
Oscar Isaacs as Poe Dameron was a fun and pretty classic star wars character, and I enjoyed him in all three movies. Again, I think he was misused but there was nothing wrong with the character or the performance.
Babu Frick and Power Ranger I will give you, but ffs, this is Star Wars. It has always had lots of characters that were merchandisable.
I liked Finn in Episode 7 and I thought his character made an otherwise bad reboot of Episode 4 at least fun to watch.
I can't agree there's nothing wrong with Poe, though. He goes on vacation for half of Episode 7 but is treated as super relevant when he does show up, he's sidelined and constantly bashed in Episode 8, and in Episode 9 he appears to be a fully fleshed out character that bears little resemblance to what i saw in the previous two movies. The character's a mess.
Since I like Finn seeing his character take a (non-literal) beating in Episode 8 affects me more, but objectively I think the messy absence of concrete plans for the trilogy hits Poe the hardest of all the main cast.
Sorry what? Saying John Boyega was only included for "black dude points" is pretty racist, the guy is a great actor, very charismatic and great comic timing. Finn was my favourite character from the first movie, and I cared about what happened to him in each subsequent one (I was disappointed!).
Daisy Ridley absolutely acts the part well, and saying she has no facial expressions has me wondering if you have watched the films?
Oscar Isaacs as Poe Dameron was a fun and pretty classic star wars character, and I enjoyed him in all three movies. Again, I think he was misused but there was nothing wrong with the character or the performance.
Babu Frick and Power Ranger I will give you, but ffs, this is Star Wars. It has always had lots of characters that were merchandisable.
Yeah, not really. John Boyega is a passable actor. Didn't help that his character was utter garbage from a character design perspective. I'm an indoctrinated stormtrooper who had a change of heart. But I'm also a complete coward despite at least a decade of mental conditioning and training.
Fynn's character was completely wrong. He needed to be a grizzled veteran who had done his share of killing, but began to question his actions when they started killing civilians in large numbers. Making him a yellow bellied Stormtrooper janitor was a terrible choice. It would also have excused him knowing so much about Starkiller Base's weakspot and the finer details of the First Order's hyperspace tracking. A janitor would NEVER know those things. A grizzled veteran who was once a fairly trusted individual might. Great comic timing is not a good choice for his character. It just fails to be funny.
Daisy Ridley got better, but in the first two movies she had the acting depth of a potato. She wasn't getting any help from the story, but her performance wasn't contributing anything. Her expressions always seemed forced and exaggerated. Like watching an Opera where every character is exaggerated. She didn't seem like a real character, she seemed like an actress playing a character. Its never good when the actor bleeds into the performance. Good actors make you forget they are there. With most of the main cast in this movie, the ineptitude of the actor was bleeding through at uncomfortable levels.
Oscar Isaacs was fine I do agree. Good job considering what he was given.
I have to disagree on John Boyega. He has above average charisma for an actor and ability to make his characters like able that lesser actors wish they had. There's a scene in Pacific Rim 2 where he is making a sundae, and he makes it surprisingly compelling. He may not have worked miracles in the SW sequels, but look at what he was given to work with.
You can disagree with the plot that Finn was part of (I do, I think he was misused in TLJ and TROS) but that is not my argument. I am arguing he was not hired for being a black man, but was hired because he is a great actor with a lot of charisma.
I disagree on Ridley also. Her performances were perfectly fine. Not every actor just disappears into their roles -- many leading men fit this category -- and I don't think that's what Rey really called for anyway. She's the hero, and a certain amount of straightforward earnestness comes with what. I think critics were also generally positive about her as well...?
Let's not forget that SW fans had it in their heads that Natalie Portman was a terrible actress before she went off and got three Academy Award nominations (with one win). Better material makes a wee bit of difference.
Let's not forget that SW fans had it in their heads that Natalie Portman was a terrible actress before she went off and got three Academy Award nominations (with one win). Better material makes a wee bit of difference.
Whilst I'm not Natty P's biggest fan I think after the first prequel she figured she'd signed to a lame duck and decided 'I've only got to out-act Mannakin here, so the main thing is to stay awake"
Even HC isn't as bad as he seemed in the prequels. Turns out that lines you can't say combined with a director who barely understands human emotion don't set up any actor for success.
Just saw the movie, haven't seen ep 7 or ep 8. I'd rate my previous Star Wars knowledge as "more than an average person, less than a dedicated Star Wars fan".
I think I agree with the notion that the movie felt a bit disjointed. The whole "we've got less than a day to fix this, get on it, stat!" part felt a bit silly. We zoom between vistas that just feels forced into a very short span of time. There's this attempt to build a sense of urgency, but it just doesn't feel plausible to have the main cast being everywhere they are within the alotted time.
As a side-note, do Rey and Ren fight like they're going at each other with baseball bats in the two other movies too?
gorgon wrote: Even HC isn't as bad as he seemed in the prequels. Turns out that lines you can't say combined with a director who barely understands human emotion don't set up any actor for success.
Agreed. The one missing ingredient in the prequels was an experienced director. Hayden Christiansen proved his worth as a decent actor in Shattered Glass(2003), and for a moment, lets just have another look at the cast of the prequels...
Liam Neeson.
Ewan McGreggor
Natalie Portman
Frank Oz
Samuel Jackson
Ian McDiarmid
Terrance Stamp
...even for the time, that was a very strong cast. Even the youngest, Natalie Portman, had impressed audiences with her role in Leon(1994)...
George had not directed a film in donkey's years and should have had a warm up before he tackled Phantom Menace - a small tv mini series perhaps. Unfortunately the SW: Special Editions were only an exercise in vfx and post production, not substantial direction of actors. Still, thats in the past now.
I can't agree there's nothing wrong with Poe, though. He goes on vacation for half of Episode 7 but is treated as super relevant when he does show up, he's sidelined and constantly bashed in Episode 8, and in Episode 9 he appears to be a fully fleshed out character that bears little resemblance to what i saw in the previous two movies. The character's a mess.
He doesn't go on vacation. The character dies in the script.
Then Abrams decided he like the guy (the actor), so plopped him into an X-wing for the last arc, with no functional explanation why he isn't dead in the tie fighter wreckage.
Its the same reason several people he worked with before have bit parts in RoS. Poe's girlfriend in the helmet and either Pippin or Merry (whichever was in Lost), show up for just long enough to fill a contract, but not enough to be a meaningful part of the story. Its just a favor to get his friends some star wars money (and waste runtime)
Da Boss wrote: I just can't get my head around the idea that they are going to spend hundreds of millions on talented actors, amazing effects artists, set designers, costume designers, film on location around the world...and they can't be arsed working on the scripts for long enough to make them actually good.
I am sure it is all to do with hollywood bs, but don't the money people realise that crap scripts tank movies that are good in all other respects really reliably?
Except for the fact that Kylo looks like Young Anakin PT. 2.
Rey has no facial expressions and all the personality of a brick sitting underneath my porch.
Finn is just there because "black dude points" and so on.
The white rebel fighter pilot...what's his name? Can't remember, super who cares about him.
Po's Power Ranger girlfriend...you know, because Toys.
Babu Frick...you know, more toys. He Heyyyy!!
Seriously name me one character from the Force Awakens to the Rise of Skywalker that you cared about.
Just cap this franchies in the head and leave everything to the Mandelorian, which is so far superior to the rest of the franchise movies, that it makes them all look like amateur college films.
Sorry what? Saying John Boyega was only included for "black dude points" is pretty racist, the guy is a great actor, very charismatic and great comic timing. Finn was my favourite character from the first movie, and I cared about what happened to him in each subsequent one (I was disappointed!).
Daisy Ridley absolutely acts the part well, and saying she has no facial expressions has me wondering if you have watched the films?
Oscar Isaacs as Poe Dameron was a fun and pretty classic star wars character, and I enjoyed him in all three movies. Again, I think he was misused but there was nothing wrong with the character or the performance.
Babu Frick and Power Ranger I will give you, but ffs, this is Star Wars. It has always had lots of characters that were merchandisable.
John is a good actor. It's a shame that they didn't let him act or give him anything of interest to do. Three movies and I still don't know why he is even there, what his views are, etc. Finn might be the most underdeveloped character of the whole franchise.
Yes, I've seen all three films multiple times. Daisy is a gak actress. Sorry but I find the actress and the character to be dull as bricks. Kylo could have done us all a favor and just not healed her.
Oscar was absolutely misused. I blame a lot of the actors being misused on the stupid constant fanservice nonsense they kept trying to shove in our faces.
Compare the two action figures sales pitch characters to baby yoda, who is also a toy seller. But, Baby Yoda has a purpose, is part of the story, is interested and intriguing. They couldn't have done this with the other two from the new movie?
I think Daisy could be great in the right role, but she is not great at communicating her characters’ inner life. Unfortunately, Rey’s arc is only compelling with the internal conflict I assume we are supposed to know she feels. She’s great bouncing off the other actors, though.
I wonder how much better received the character of Rey would have been if given to an actress with a richer pool of ...er, thinking faces.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I think it’s delightfully meta how much black market demand there is for Baby Yoda merchandise.
Yes, I've seen all three films multiple times. Daisy is a gak actress. Sorry but I find the actress and the character to be dull as bricks.
Funny, I thought Daisy gave us the best perfomance in a Star Wars movie since Han Solo which remains the best performance in Star Wars movies so far. I think she did a great job. In fact I would say that if there is one place where the sequel did very well was the acting overall better than the original and prequal though the best performance of the sequel doesn't match the best performances of the original though there is less terrible performance. Only Boyega was a bit off, especially in the first instalment, but I think that's more of a script than a performance issue. As far as lead role is taken, the sequel had a significantly more interesting and well played character than "nothing boy" Luke Skywalker or "angsty man-child" Anakin Skywalker.
Seriously name me one character from the Force Awakens to the Rise of Skywalker that you cared about.
I can name two, Poe and Finn. Sadly they were underused, as was their bromance.
I hoped that Phasma would also turn up interesting but she was also wasted. I could list her as a character I cared about because I was anticipating her potential being unlocked. Rian Johnson had other ideas though, though calling what vacuous dogmas run through his head 'ideas' is too generous though.
In honesty though Phasma was disappointing and Poe, while he did have his moments was trying too hard to be Han Solo but didn't have the charisma. That leave me with Finn, frankly they set him up as a very interested character, and he was the first persistent character we get introduced to, and didnt manage to foul that up too much in the three films that followed. Yes I was interested in his story arc and character development.
In hindsight Kylo Ren is the only character other than Finn that shows any character development, and that is mainly a fill in in the last act of Rise of Skywalker, so we have nothing to ride with. Frankly he is the opposite of Finn, who has all his character development in the first act of Force Awakens, at leas we could follow Finn and look for more . I don't include Rey in this despite her evident 'progression' as Mary Sue's finding they can do everything is not character development but an inherent part of the trope. Rey was hollow but Daisy Ridley is not to blame for this.
Just got out from watching this. Haven’t read anything on this thread or any reviews. Still digesting it but how 40k is that emperor on the strings? John Blanche himself could have styled that stuff. Crazy stuff.
Sorry what? Saying John Boyega was only included for "black dude points" is pretty racist, the guy is a great actor, very charismatic and great comic timing. Finn was my favourite character from the first movie, and I cared about what happened to him in each subsequent one (I was disappointed!).
Well, yes, it's racist... but on Disney's part, not ours. Yes, John Boyega is a good actor and could have done SO MUCH MORE with the character... had he been allowed to. The conflict between him and Phasma, his potential Force sensitivity, his background as a defecting stormtrooper... SO much potential for the character. And Disney squandered it ALL.
Unfortunately, the part they gave him was part "Woo Guy!" (seriously, every scene he's shouting 'Woo!' about something), and part token comic relief black guy. And yes, I consider that to be VERY racist of them to do to him. I mean, if that's all they wanted out of Finn, switch Boyega over to play Poe instead.
Yes, I've seen all three films multiple times. Daisy is a gak actress. Sorry but I find the actress and the character to be dull as bricks.
Funny, I thought Daisy gave us the best perfomance in a Star Wars movie since Han Solo which remains the best performance in Star Wars movies so far. I think she did a great job. In fact I would say that if there is one place where the sequel did very well was the acting overall better than the original and prequal though the best performance of the sequel doesn't match the best performances of the original though there is less terrible performance. Only Boyega was a bit off, especially in the first instalment, but I think that's more of a script than a performance issue. As far as lead role is taken, the sequel had a significantly more interesting and well played character than "nothing boy" Luke Skywalker or "angsty man-child" Anakin Skywalker.
Are we all watching a different actress? Never once did I feel any kind of connection with her character. I watched her mary sue her way from one end of the galaxy to the other, with little to no explanation as to how she could do all the things she did. There is no way in heck her performances were anywhere near that of Ford or Tarkin from the original trilogy. She is dull, emotionless with all the facial expressions of a brick. When she "died" in the end of the latest movie, I actually cheered. Too bad it didn't last.
Da Boss wrote: You can disagree with the plot that Finn was part of (I do, I think he was misused in TLJ and TROS) but that is not my argument. I am arguing he was not hired for being a black man, but was hired because he is a great actor with a lot of charisma.
And then Disney used him for a role any of the Wayans brothers would have done equally well for. Such a waste....
Lots of the actors from the Prequels and Sequels get too much of a bad wrap for what is a crap script/directing.
Hell, when Natalie Portman previously does a better job as a girl who has a baby in a Walmart (Where the Heart is) than as Padme in freaking STAR WARS it's not her.
AegisGrimm wrote: Lots of the actors from the Prequels and Sequels get too much of a bad wrap for what is a crap script/directing.
Hell, when Natalie Portman previously does a better job as a girl who has a baby in a Walmart (Where the Heart is) than as Padme in freaking STAR WARS it's not her.
Togusa wrote: There is no way in heck her performances were anywhere near that of Ford or Tarkin from the original trilogy. She is dull, emotionless with all the facial expressions of a brick. When she "died" in the end of the latest movie, I actually cheered. Too bad it didn't last.
I don't think she was better or on par with Ford though she did a better job overall than the guy who played Tarkin (who while certainly better had a lot simpler job to do, his only expression and dialogues was that of a perpetually smug officer). Only Ford had to run through a range of emotions and various scenarios and managed to do a better job than her. She was definitely better than Hamil, of Fisher. The former was actually better in the sequel than the original. I would even say she was better than the guy who played Obi-Wan in the prequel though I might be biased by the fact the dialogue and direction were atrociously terrible.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AegisGrimm wrote: Lots of the actors from the Prequels and Sequels get too much of a bad wrap for what is a crap script/directing.
Hell, when Natalie Portman previously does a better job as a girl who has a baby in a Walmart (Where the Heart is) than as Padme in freaking STAR WARS it's not her.
Even the best actors with poor direction and script can't do anything. The prequel biggest problem was with the script and the direction. The only unintended effect was to grant us Palpatine the First, Emperor of one liners and ham, the most corny and ridiculous romantic dialogue ever written and Obi-Wan Master of self contradiction.
Grey Templar wrote: While the role of Tarkin might have been less strenuous than a main lead, to say that Daisy is on par with Peter Cushing is simply asinine.
Indeed, but I'm comparing one role against another and I think that if you consider that Tarkin is an easy part compared to Rey and that Tarkin isn't Cushing at his best either (I would say his best was when he played doctor Frakenstein). For those reasons I would give Daisy's performance as better than that of Cushing, but they are closely matched I must admit. I think comparing the career of one of Holywood great actors with that of basically a rookie actress is a bit faulty. In 30-40 years, maybe we can compare Cushing with her and actually see if they match. If we were to compare careers in general, I think it would still go for Ford probably followed by Portman as "best actors in Star Wars".
Togusa wrote: There is no way in heck her performances were anywhere near that of Ford or Tarkin from the original trilogy. She is dull, emotionless with all the facial expressions of a brick. When she "died" in the end of the latest movie, I actually cheered. Too bad it didn't last.
I don't think she was better or on par with Ford though she did a better job overall than the guy who played Tarkin (who while certainly better had a lot simpler job to do, his only expression and dialogues was that of a perpetually smug officer). Only Ford had to run through a range of emotions and various scenarios and managed to do a better job than her. She was definitely better than Hamil, of Fisher. The former was actually better in the sequel than the original. I would even say she was better than the guy who played Obi-Wan in the prequel though I might be biased by the fact the dialogue and direction were atrociously terrible.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AegisGrimm wrote: Lots of the actors from the Prequels and Sequels get too much of a bad wrap for what is a crap script/directing.
Hell, when Natalie Portman previously does a better job as a girl who has a baby in a Walmart (Where the Heart is) than as Padme in freaking STAR WARS it's not her.
Even the best actors with poor direction and script can't do anything. The prequel biggest problem was with the script and the direction. The only unintended effect was to grant us Palpatine the First, Emperor of one liners and ham, the most corny and ridiculous romantic dialogue ever written and Obi-Wan Master of self contradiction.
No. There is no way in hell she was better than Hamil or Fisher. What are you smoking?
No. There is no way in hell she was better than Hamil or Fisher. What are you smoking?
Well, obviously I think you are the one high on his own farts. Hamil was both underacting and overacting in the same movies while Fisher had the emotionnal range of a stone. Even the destruction of the home world and the death of her entire familly and friends barely phased her. Luke, whome she kissed and might have dated announced to her that she is his sister (and has been tortured by her own father) and she reacts with barely enough surprise to raise an eyebrow. Compare with Ridley who is enraged by Luke's lies to her; in tears at the idea of being without any answers about her passed; seething at the reveal of her ancestry and I am skipping some. I personnaly think she hardcarried the last movie and was a strong point of the Last Jedi.
Yeah I would say Daisy Ridley is better than young Mark Hamil as an actor. Hamil got better with age, and by the Last Jedi is doing a great job, but in the first trilogy it was basically upper tier B movie acting.
Whenever someone complaints about a prequel or sequel actor acting like a whiny teenager, I have PTSD flashbacks to Luke bitching about wanting to go to Toshi Station.
Da Boss wrote: Yeah I would say Daisy Ridley is better than young Mark Hamil as an actor. Hamil got better with age, and by the Last Jedi is doing a great job, but in the first trilogy it was basically upper tier B movie acting.
Hamil is actually a lot better playing villains than playing heroes too. His work as a voice actor is excellent and mostly on villains like the Joker or the Fire Lord in the Last Airbender. A also saw him in a few indy movies playing a mobster and a crooked art collector and he was chilling in both.
Finally saw Rise of Skywalker. It was stupid, but not terrible. I didn't hate it.
As far as the sequel trilogy goes, I dont feel like I ever need to watch it again. This whole thing will go down as an epic failure of brand management.
Since the Special Editions were released in the late 90s I've seen the last 10 Star Wars movies at either midnight screenings or at least opening weekend. Now after more than two weeks since it was released I finally got around to see it, but felt no excitement or anticipation leading up to it.
Grey Templar wrote: While the role of Tarkin might have been less strenuous than a main lead, to say that Daisy is on par with Peter Cushing is simply asinine.
Any particular reason why? Not defending any other actors or attacking Cushing, but literally the only roles I've seen him in have him standing, reciting the script in a distinctly British way that's probably his natural accent and cadence. (Which seemed to be true since he talked in the same fashion in the 'history (defense?) of wargaming' video I saw him in).
I liked the first 2 movies. Seeing Adam Driver: Emo Sith Lord, after watching the series Girls was worth it on it's own.
But this 3rd movie was dull the whole way through. At no point did it even picked up my interest. I ended up checking my phone. Left for the bathroom. Considered walking out a few times, but I'm glad I caught Ghost Luke.
I saw it - enjoyed it quite a bit. I feel like if the previous movie had been spent actually setting up for RoS it would have been even better. I know in some ways they couldn't of course, because no one knew Carrie Fisher would pass, but even so...
Overall I felt like the acting was more expressive, especially Daisy Ridley and Adam Driver. Adam Driver seemed hotter in this than when he had his shirt off in TLJ, he had much more intensity.
I loved Billy Dee Williams, he seemed like he was genuinely having fun and enjoying being in the film.
A lot of the Force stuff seemed poorly explained (almost like it should have been handled in Ep. 8...), but overall it was ok.
Initially I thought Hux being killed off was stupid, but thinking about it later it does make sense that everyone saw through the "they overpowered me I dunno what happened" ploy since that wouldn't work on anyone irl.
I really liked that the ending didn't have the compulsory "must pair male protagonist and female protagonist", Rey Poe and Finn are last seen as a triad and it works. It doesn't need to be some stupid love triangle, it doesn't need any of that junk so the end didn't have any.
gorgon wrote: Actually, that’s the voice I imagine internet posters speaking in when they complain about Rey and Daisy Ridley.
Yeah, complaining that the character is a bit too good at everything makes someone seem pathetic.
Ridley isn't a bad actress. Rey is a bad character.
Togusa wrote: Well, obviously I think you are the one high on his own farts. Hamil was both underacting and overacting in the same movies while Fisher had the emotionnal range of a stone. Even the destruction of the home world and the death of her entire familly and friends barely phased her. Luke, whome she kissed and might have dated announced to her that she is his sister (and has been tortured by her own father) and she reacts with barely enough surprise to raise an eyebrow. Compare with Ridley who is enraged by Luke's lies to her; in tears at the idea of being without any answers about her passed; seething at the reveal of her ancestry and I am skipping some. I personnaly think she hardcarried the last movie and was a strong point of the Last Jedi.
The one thing that the sequels and classic trilogy have in common- they were making this gak up as they went along.
Ridley isn't a bad actress. Rey is a bad character.
I hate getting into Star Wars discussions as I generally have grown to greatly dislike Star Wars fans. But I finally got round to seeing this on the weekend.
I gotta say I enjoyed it quite a bit. Although I will admit that the film ultimately suffered from the fact that they had to spend half the movie retconning the last one for the story to work. I really hoped they would just go with what was left them but, LOL! Nope!
Sad thing is this story just reminds me of the Fan Fiction Star Wars Episode 7, 8, 9 I wrote when I was in College.
That being said I liked it and do want to see it again but I probably wont drop more money on it.
Grey Templar wrote: While the role of Tarkin might have been less strenuous than a main lead, to say that Daisy is on par with Peter Cushing is simply asinine.
Any particular reason why? Not defending any other actors or attacking Cushing, but literally the only roles I've seen him in have him standing, reciting the script in a distinctly British way that's probably his natural accent and cadence. (Which seemed to be true since he talked in the same fashion in the 'history (defense?) of wargaming' video I saw him in).
Certainly nothing that proves acting chops.
its a fair point but I suspect he got the minimal Lucas direction of "y'know a sort of cultured Nazi"
whereas Daiz most likely got got "you know, a hero", "ok, what sort ?" "errm a heroic one ?"
Nothing says ‘no good at his profession’ like a near 50 year career. Starting in 1939, with his final role in 1986.
Yep. Only the truly rubbish can stick in any career for that length of time,
Automatically Appended Next Post: For further watching, I recommend ‘Dr Who & The Daleks’, ‘The Skull’ and ‘Island of Terror’.
Dude had range.
Not exactly the resume of Laurence Olivier though, right? Gotta respect a career that long, and surely he was a real pro. But ultimately he was more of a working actor in genre films, plenty of them low-budget and bad.
Man, people's taste are all over the board. I get the feeling that some of you just flat out do not like Star Wars anymore (and barely ever did). And that's ok, I suppose. It just seems odd to me when I heard comments like "Worst movie ever", "Boring" "No interest at all" or "Gak story". That does not describe the movie I watched at all.
Maybe for the sake of my own enjoyment of RoS (and Star Wars as a whole) I just need to stop reading this thread? Some of the comments here make me feel sad to be a Star Wars fan.
Maybe for the sake of my own enjoyment of RoS (and Star Wars as a whole) I just need to stop reading this thread?
Some of the comments here make me feel sad to be a Star Wars fan.
-
That's been my opinion of Dakka for a while now. I sometimes read the last comment in a thread to see if its worth my time at all, but following the discussion is just misery.
FWIW, I found the movie okay. My least favorite of the new trilogy but enjoyable none the less. I'd put it a bit above Revenge of the Sith overall.
Galef wrote: Man, people's taste are all over the board. I get the feeling that some of you just flat out do not like Star Wars anymore (and barely ever did).
And that's ok, I suppose. It just seems odd to me when I heard comments like "Worst movie ever", "Boring" "No interest at all" or "Gak story".
That does not describe the movie I watched at all.
Maybe for the sake of my own enjoyment of RoS (and Star Wars as a whole) I just need to stop reading this thread?
Some of the comments here make me feel sad to be a Star Wars fan.
-
That's fair. After all, the recent movies have made me feel quite sad to be a Star Was fan.
Galef wrote: Man, people's taste are all over the board. I get the feeling that some of you just flat out do not like Star Wars anymore (and barely ever did).
And that's ok, I suppose. It just seems odd to me when I heard comments like "Worst movie ever", "Boring" "No interest at all" or "Gak story".
That does not describe the movie I watched at all.
Maybe for the sake of my own enjoyment of RoS (and Star Wars as a whole) I just need to stop reading this thread?
Some of the comments here make me feel sad to be a Star Wars fan.
-
If it sounds strange to you that people don't love the same movies you do, maybe instead of tacitly suggesting they didn't watch the same film, you could just stop guzzling the kool aid? Shocking as it may seem, there really are legit issues with this movie. No, I'm not joking.
Galef wrote: Man, people's taste are all over the board. I get the feeling that some of you just flat out do not like Star Wars anymore (and barely ever did).
And that's ok, I suppose. It just seems odd to me when I heard comments like "Worst movie ever", "Boring" "No interest at all" or "Gak story".
That does not describe the movie I watched at all.
Maybe for the sake of my own enjoyment of RoS (and Star Wars as a whole) I just need to stop reading this thread?
Some of the comments here make me feel sad to be a Star Wars fan.
-
Yeah, I mean I think two of the movies are fantastic, one is pretty good and the rest are average or bad. I would not say I am a fan. But that is okay, right? Don't hate the new trilogy, they are just okay. The first one was quite good and the second flawed but interesting. This latest one I would rank above any of the prequels, which are very bad and not entertaining at all.
But I am interested in it because it is the biggest Sci Fi property in the world, and I like sci fi. Like the charge of the ex-troopers across the top of the star destroyer is the most 40K thing I am gonna see in a cinema for years, and scenes like that are worth going to see the films for. I am just baffled that with so much creative talent on the visual design side, and a fairly talented cast of actors, that they messed up the writing with what seem like rushed scripts 2 out of 3 times for the newer films.
creeping-deth87 wrote: ... you could just stop guzzling the kool aid? Shocking as it may seem, there really are legit issues with this movie. No, I'm not joking.
As someone else in this thread wrote, regardless of the legit issues, you can choose to like it or not.
Granted a perfectly crafted adventure story will certainly make that choice easier to like than a boring slog-fest spectacle movie, but what I am arguing it that the sequel trilogy is "good enough" to not merit some of the negativity, IMO.
It seems like some of the opinions here are that if they aren't as good or better than the Orig Trig, then by default, they must be gak. THAT is the mentality that I don't get.
They are fun movies with a coherent story. Even the Orig Trig had some head-scratching moments, but most of us forgive those because of nostalgia. But since the sequel and prequel trilogies are newer, and many of us are older, we critique them far more harshly than the originals.
I personally don't think that's fair. And if I'm honest, it seems to reek of a "I'm too old for Star Wars now" mentality, whether that is what is intended or not.
I hope I'm never "too old" to enjoy Star Wars. In fact, having kids of my own has reinforced that for me. I feel young and therefore I can watch these movies, flaws and all, and still be incredibly entertained and inspired.
I CHOOSE to continue to like Star Wars even if the quality is SLIGHTLY less than the originals. Maybe that's why I liked the ending of RoS so much, as the "moral" of the story was they you can choose who you want to be, regardless of your origin.
The reason I am "sad" is because I feel sorry for those of you that do not feel the same enjoyment that I do and I wish you could all feel it too.
It seems like some of the opinions here are that if they aren't as good or better than the Orig Trig, then by default, they must be gak. THAT is the mentality that I don't get
Problem is, that's a strawman, or at least I haven't seen anyone actually advocating that position.
Personally its more that, at least personally I find that this:
They are fun movies with a coherent story.
Isn't true. They aren't particularly fun. They're mostly a slog. And they definitely don't strike me as coherent, and become even less so when put together.
It isn't about nostalgia. It isn't about ''too old' to enjoy star wars' (whatever that is supposed to mean).
Its that these movies are just... fairly bad, with characters that don't accomplish anything, and muddy, incoherent plots that don't go anywhere. (literally so with TLJ, as the end state of the film is the same as the starting state: desperate rebels must escape the first order)
At their best, they manage rise from bad to indifferent, and 'feeling sorry' for people because they don't share your opinions is fairly insulting. It not only denies their opinions, it tells them they don't have the agency to have opinions of their own.
Galef wrote: Man, people's taste are all over the board. I get the feeling that some of you just flat out do not like Star Wars anymore (and barely ever did).
---
Some of the comments here make me feel sad to be a Star Wars fan.
The Star Wars fandom is highly diverse, and we all get what we can out of it. I'm very happy that, in recent years, we've had Rebels, Rogue One, the new Thrawn books, and now the Mandalorian. Each of these is something I enjoy far more than anything that came out of the prequel era. So, despite there not being a 'saga' film I consider worthy of the name, we're still doing pretty okay right now. I've been a fan for as long as I can remember, I was hugely excited as a young child when I opened a huge boxed Millennium Falcon for Christmas in the early 80s. As a high schooler I discovered the new EU novels and devoured them, rekindling my love of the galaxy. I bought RPG sourcebooks before I even knew what an RPG was, because I wanted to know more about the Alliance and the Empire. Eventually I ended up running campaigns etc. I think I've always been a few levels above 'barely ever' liking Star Wars.
And yet (and believe me when I say I'm not trying to be insulting to you personally) when I see people dressing up as Jedi to go see the movies, that's when I feel sad to be a Star Wars fan. I remember seeing footage of the Phantom Menace opening night, hordes of cloaked folk waving lightsabers around in a movie theatre. For all the years I've lived and breathed the Star Wars galaxy, that's when I mutter 'nerds' under my breath (ironically!).
Voss wrote: (literally so with TLJ, as the end state of the film is the same as the starting state: desperate rebels must escape the first order).
It's also the case with the Empire Strikes Back. It pretty much starts with the Rebel Alliance must find a new base of operation and ends with...the Rebel Alliance must find a new base of operation. Stuff, even important stuff, did happen in both movies, but they do end up pretty much at the same spot. It's actually even more true for the Empire Strikes Back than for the Last Jedi. It's a common issue with movie 2 of trilogies. They have a tendency of ending pretty much where they began and be the place where a lot of subplots are created and will only find their ending early into the third instalment.
If it sounds strange to you that people don't love the same movies you do, maybe instead of tacitly suggesting they didn't watch the same film, you could just stop guzzling the kool aid? Shocking as it may seem, there really are legit issues with this movie. No, I'm not joking.
It's just frustrating when all you hear from "Star Wars fans" is how much they hate Star Wars. It just leads to the conclusion that...well, most people just Like Space magic, Laser Swords and Space Ships. Not the Star Wars universe per-se.
I can freely admit when it comes to the medium of Cinema, the Prequels and the Sequels are all poorly done based on the criteria of how movies are general made/critiqued. Buts that's a Cinema critique, not a Star Wars critique. I can separate the two and one does not effect the other.
It's also the case with the Empire Strikes Back. It pretty much starts with the Rebel Alliance must find a new base of operation and ends with...the Rebel Alliance must find a new base of operation. Stuff, even important stuff, did happen in both movies, but they do end up pretty much at the same spot. It's actually even more true for the Empire Strikes Back than for the Last Jedi. It's a common issue with movie 2 of trilogies. They have a tendency of ending pretty much where they began and be the place where a lot of subplots are created and will only find their ending early into the third instalment.
Yup! Empire Strikes back is a very good movie for a film where nothing really happens.
Commodus Leitdorf wrote: Yup! Empire Strikes back is a very good movie for a film where nothing really happens.
In my opinion the Empire Strikes Back did the two important thing for a movie number 2, have a spectacular openning and a big ending, if possible with a major plot twist that will make the overall plot more "touchy". The battle on Hoth and the duel on Bespin perfectly fit the bill. The rest of the movie is actually a lot of filler and disjointed. The Last Jedi had an excellent openning and ending though they lacked a twist that would make the main plot more "touchy" and had a really bad subquest. Small mistake in the execution of it all made a big difference between a famous and beloved movie and a divisive and overall fairly average movie.
Really enjoyed the movie overall, it was fun, fast paced, and had some of the best acting I think I have seen in a SW movie. Ridley and Driver in particular were fantastic. I would give the movie a solid 7.5/10
Pros:
Zombie Palps
Rey doing the lightning, probably the scene that stuck with me the most.
Luke character was fixed from TLJ (and in fact TLJ was all but retconned)
Chase through hyperspace was great
Kylo's redemption, while predictable was really well done
Hux being super slimy and betraying the FO just to get back at Kylo
Cons:
Not too impressed with the soundtrack, I'll have to give it a listen but I didn't notice anything too new. I love the music so I was sad to hear nothing but rehashed old themes.
Sad that C3P0 didn't get all his memories restored ie.clone wars stuff. Seems like a missed opportunity for an emotional moment.
Lazy design on the Star Destroyers, they literally took the same model they made from Rogue 1 and made it bigger+a gun.
Final battle between Rey and Palpatine was a bit of an anti climax, he fell for the old reflect the lightning trick again? Where were my army of force ghost Jedi??
Commodus Leitdorf wrote: Yup! Empire Strikes back is a very good movie for a film where nothing really happens.
In my opinion the Empire Strikes Back did the two important thing for a movie number 2, have a spectacular openning and a big ending, if possible with a major plot twist that will make the overall plot more "touchy". The battle on Hoth and the duel on Bespin perfectly fit the bill. The rest of the movie is actually a lot of filler and disjointed. The Last Jedi had an excellent openning and ending though they lacked a twist that would make the main plot more "touchy" and had a really bad subquest. Small mistake in the execution of it all made a big difference between a famous and beloved movie and a divisive and overall fairly average movie.
Yup! Exactly. Then, since all the plot points from TFA were dropped in TLJ they had to spend the first part of Rise of Skywalker basically doing what the last movie failed to do and setup the grand conclusion. So much so that the whole movie suffered for it.
But, again, that's a movie writing/production issue. Not Star wars problem.
It's just frustrating when all you hear from "Star Wars fans" is how much they hate Star Wars. It just leads to the conclusion that...well, most people just Like Space magic, Laser Swords and Space Ships. Not the Star Wars universe per-se.
I think you're misconstruing the argument a little here. I think most people are arguing that the sequel trilogy is bad, not Star Wars as a whole.
I'm a Star Wars fan myself, I enjoy consuming all sorts of content, from the original trilogy and sequels, to EU books and all the Old Republic era stuff (KOTOR, TOR), and I really enjoyed the Mandalorian and Rogue One (which proves good Star Wars content can be made).
But this new trilogy just leaves me feeling hollow. It just seems like Disney is trying to cash in on the hype by making sci-fi movies masquerading as Star Wars, instead of... actual Star Wars movies.
I'll always be fan of the universe, that will never change regardless of the gak they put out. I will just choose to not subject myself to this trilogy again. I don't begrudge anyone who likes it, I am simply not one of them.
It's just frustrating when all you hear from "Star Wars fans" is how much they hate Star Wars. It just leads to the conclusion that...well, most people just Like Space magic, Laser Swords and Space Ships. Not the Star Wars universe per-se.
I think you're misconstruing the argument a little here. I think most people are arguing that the sequel trilogy is bad, not Star Wars as a whole.
I'm a Star Wars fan myself, I enjoy consuming all sorts of content, from the original trilogy and sequels, to EU books and all the Old Republic era stuff (KOTOR, TOR), and I really enjoyed the Mandalorian and Rogue One (which proves good Star Wars content can be made).
But this new trilogy just leaves me feeling hollow. It just seems like Disney is trying to cash in on the hype by making sci-fi movies masquerading as Star Wars, instead of... actual Star Wars movies.
I'll always be fan of the universe, that will never change regardless of the gak they put out. I will just choose to not subject myself to this trilogy again. I don't begrudge anyone who likes it, I am simply not one of them.
Well yes and no. I personally don't find the Sequel Trilogy bad, just like I dont find the Prequel trilogy bad. All the issues with them are mostly production/writing issues. The stories in each trilogy are fine but they were so poorly done that it leaves to harsh criticisms that ultimately lead to a type of Gatekeeping I loathe (Example being people who praise Empire Strike Back as THE BEST! and everything after that has sucked. Especially when I already mentioned that not a lot happens in that film and its mostly people flying away from each other for 2 hours.)
I lived and breathed the old EU. What choice did I have? There was, like, no Star Wars when I was a kid but the Ewok Movies. As a Canadian those films were shown in theatre and I saw both of them in the Cinema and I will defend them to the death...To the death I say!!. Were all the stories in the EU good? No...the Crystal Star is a good Star Trek story but not a Star Wars one (Vonda McIntyre is a Star Trek writer after all and is the one who gave Sulu his first name). Children of the Jedi was boring as hell and there was no reason the Black Fleet Crisis had to be a trilogy when it could have been told in one book...maybe two.
And don't get me started on the timeline stuff. Your telling me the Thrawn trilogy happens 5 years after Endor, followed immediately by the Dark Empire story, and then the Jedi Academy Trilogy happens right after that? All within one year? Come on.
I just think that the Star Wars being produced right now is not for me. Its for my kid or my nephew. Its hard to accept that but in 10 years the Sequel memes will be absolute fire. I guarantee it.
(and while I do enjoy the Mandalorian...lets be real. It's at best Season 2 Farscape good...so lets not go to crazy here people.)
This one leaves me scratching my head every time I see it. Did people walk out of TLJ or something? The whole point in TLJ was that Luke's character was fixed IN the movie. The Luke we see in RoS is very much the same one we see in TLJ after his pep talk from Yoda.
Galef wrote: Man, people's taste are all over the board. I get the feeling that some of you just flat out do not like Star Wars anymore (and barely ever did).
And that's ok, I suppose. It just seems odd to me when I heard comments like "Worst movie ever", "Boring" "No interest at all" or "Gak story".
That does not describe the movie I watched at all.
Maybe for the sake of my own enjoyment of RoS (and Star Wars as a whole) I just need to stop reading this thread?
Some of the comments here make me feel sad to be a Star Wars fan.
-
I posted many pages ago - I love Star Wars I-VI and I've watched each one of them 10-20 times each.... but man this movie killed the entire franchise for me. I'm sick of it, the director drama, the new characters, everything. They killed a part of my childhood and I wish I could redact it and never have watched Rise of Skywalker.
Mando has been a great show and it's sad to see what could have been and this feeling might be temporay. Rise of Skywalker made... everything feel cheap and worthless. It's had to explain how disconnected seeing that movie made me feel. This does feel like Star Wars. Maybe I can't accept the evolution of the series but this is a cheap grab for cash from Disney.
Maybe if I smoked a joint, had a better attitude, and went for a rewatch by myself - it would have a great action film. I went with a group of friends who loved it and I wanted to leave the theatre the entire time. Man that killed any desire I had to touch Legion/the tabletop and I recently sold my Xwing stuff.
Galef wrote: As someone else in this thread wrote, regardless of the legit issues, you can choose to like it or not.
Granted a perfectly crafted adventure story will certainly make that choice easier to like than a boring slog-fest spectacle movie, but what I am arguing it that the sequel trilogy is "good enough" to not merit some of the negativity, IMO.
Totally disagree. In fact, I actually feel like most people are far too easy on the sequel trilogy.
It seems like some of the opinions here are that if they aren't as good or better than the Orig Trig, then by default, they must be gak. THAT is the mentality that I don't get.
Who said that? When?
They are fun movies with a coherent story. Even the Orig Trig had some head-scratching moments, but most of us forgive those because of nostalgia. But since the sequel and prequel trilogies are newer, and many of us are older, we critique them far more harshly than the originals.
I personally don't think that's fair. And if I'm honest, it seems to reek of a "I'm too old for Star Wars now" mentality, whether that is what is intended or not.
That's cool that you find them fun. I find them fun too, in a 'so bad it's good' sort of way. They're a lot funnier than most of what's meant to be deliberately funny nowadays. I also take great issue with the idea that nostalgia is why the flaws with the OT are overlooked. I think they're overlooked because the OT films were actually good, which makes the issues easier to forgive.
The reason I am "sad" is because I feel sorry for those of you that do not feel the same enjoyment that I do and I wish you could all feel it too.
That's cute. I feel sorry for kool aid guzzlers like yourself that will eat up anything with the Star Wars label on it.
That's cute. I feel sorry for kool aid guzzlers like yourself that will eat up anything with the Star Wars label on it.
Why would you feel sorry for people enjoying what they like?
Here's the thing - I'm a massive Star Wars fan. I have been since I first saw ANH way back before home VHS was even a thing yet. I can choose to by critical of all of the movies' flaws, at which point there will be, I dunno, probably two of them that are actually 'good' - (although, ironically, those are the two that I'm currently least likely to rewatch when I'm just looking for something to throw on). Instead, I choose to accept that at the end of the day, they're visual spectacles full of mythical archetypes, playing out battles between good and evil accompanied by laser swords and spaceships, with a bit of magic and amusing one-liners thrown in for fun, ignore the flaws as irrelevant to enjoying the spectacle, and have 11 (so far) movies that I enjoy watching over and over again.
Meanwhile, you're on the internet complaining about the 'worst movie ever'...
Galef wrote: Man, people's taste are all over the board. I get the feeling that some of you just flat out do not like Star Wars anymore (and barely ever did).-
I don't think you should be trying to cred-check people for not liking one component of a fictional universe that's been around since before most people on this page were born. You're entitled to agree or disagree, but you're gatekeeping when you try and claim they never liked Star Wars.
I liked the classic trilogy, and a bit of the Expanded Universe. A lot of the video games I still play to this day, still subbed to the MMORPG I have figure collections, miniatures, the D20RPG, and all manner of Star Wars merch and I love the Mandalorian.
Now I'm not sure what part of this needs to be lazily red-lettered, and it's quite obvious that "Rule #1" isn't being applied universally, but hey-
I'm glad you liked the movies, and didn't feel you wasted your money. Liking or disliking the movie won't make you stupid, but wasting your money will... so you aren't stupid, apparently.
I just happen to think Disney had no idea what the hell they were doing, made this trilogy up on the fly, and we ended up with a mess.
Scrabb wrote: "Your Snoke theory sucks"-Rian Johnosn.
Yeah, I'm only imagining RJ's disdain. Drink that green titty milk Luke!
Johnson was right, though. When I watched TFA, I did not find Snoke particularly gripping villain. He came out cookiecutter and boring,
He was, and I'd be surprised if you found a brief hologram aping the Emperor's hologram in Empire Strikes Back anything but cookiecutter and boring.
But that doesn't make Johnson 'right' in any way. He had free reign to develop the character in any direction he chose, and opted to kill him off and NOT set up something better. Just did nothing instead. The wheels just kept spinning through TLJ so Abrams stuffed more nonsense into the RoS hamster cage, because Johnson left Episode 8 in exactly the same situation that it started out in: rebels need to escape the first order to go do... something. The fact that the number of rebels is smaller isn't important, because the listed actors for the next film are still around.
No disagreement, this was one of my main criticism of TLJ: Johnson did not leave enough for next director to work with - especially given the short time to develope next movie. I think his idea was that next guy would make Kylo Ren a main villain and build some sort of scenario where he could be partly redeemed. But this was not a good concept since TLJ had already estabilished that First Order was now Kylo Ren: Snoke was dead, Hux was a joke and Knights of Ren never made an appearence. The error was not killing Snoke (a right call, especially within the context of a single movie) but not following it up with something which could be used as a hook for next movie.
JJ then went cheap route, ripped off every crappy fan theory and old EU storyline and decided that Palpatine was alive, created Snoke as a puppet, and Rey was his granddaughter. I was literally yawning my way through these 'shocking' revelations which made everything which had happened before to seem less interesting and meaningful.
But the main blame is laid not on JJA, not on Johnson, but Kennedy who apparently had no oversight whatsoever for the project.
Before I saw ROS I saw a few articles saying that the movie was a fan pleaser...Kind of like that would have been a bad thing. Then I saw the movie and like - what the heck? How could this possibly be a fan pleaser? The plot was utterly terrible IMO.
Like...this whole time palpatine has been hiding in a secrete system building 500 star destroyers with planet destroying lasers? Like...that should have been the original plan right? 500 deathstars is a lot better than 1. Never mind the fact how the heck do you even man 500 star destroyers in without anyone knowing about it? Etherway this makes the entire story a complete waste of time. Starkillerbase? Nah...500 planet killing star destroyers.
Jezz...It wasn't TLJ bad but it had other faults of it's own. TLJ at least looked amazing I just don't care too much about that. This film though looked really Janky at times...especially the strobe effects on palpatine. Also Palpatine looked pretty terrible. Plus what the heck kind of idea is it to fight on foot on top of a star destroyer...couldn't they just turn ever so slightly to knock all the people off? It just bites man. The whole homing beacon thing was also really stupid...ESP the part when the SD command ship becomes the beacon....They literally are like...we will just guide them out! But...I thought the idea was none of these ships can tell which way is up? LOL.
Just friggen terrible. Also the utter waste of the opportunity to make kylo do something interesting...and they just knock him out of the scene....AHHHHHHH. So bad!
Like...this whole time palpatine has been hiding in a secrete system building 500 star destroyers with planet destroying lasers? Like...that should have been the original plan right?
And likely would have been, if Palpatine had known where Rey was. Instead, he sent Snoke out to keep the galaxy destabilised until he was ready to reveal himself.
It's not like we haven't been shown Palpatine playing the long game in the past.
And, really, the existence of the Sith fleet doesn't make Starkiller base a waste of time, any more than the second Death Star did for the first, despite being bigger and more powerful. Or maybe it does, and Starkiller base was never intended to be particularly successful, instead just being a giant distraction to keep the Resistance and/or New Republic busy.
Because, as we saw, that giant fleet was still vulnerable to a concerted resistance from the galaxy at large.
Plus what the heck kind of idea is it to fight on foot on top of a star destroyer...
Not a good one, but the best they could do when the changing situation required the plan to be adapted?
...couldn't they just turn ever so slightly to knock all the people off?
Like...this whole time palpatine has been hiding in a secrete system building 500 star destroyers with planet destroying lasers? Like...that should have been the original plan right?
And likely would have been, if Palpatine had known where Rey was. Instead, he sent Snoke out to keep the galaxy destabilised until he was ready to reveal himself.
What was the threat to his return anyway though? The New Republic practically demilitarised and was unwilling to go after the First Order*, seemingly out of pacifism. Luke had been long gone, and unless the scant years between the First Order's arrival and his revealing himself was when he built all of those ships, there really wasn't a reason to not strike.
*Speaking of, did we get an explanation for Starkiller Base? If Palpatine/the First Order built it, why? Surely if they were building a fleet of Death Stars, the Starkiller Base was redundant?
It's not like we haven't been shown Palpatine playing the long game in the past.
During the Clone Wars, which have explicit reasons for drawing out the conflict:
To foster ideas of "decisive" government control
To weaken the control/illusion of control the Senate held
To cause people to question the morals of the Jedi Order (in that they took up the mantle of generals instead of peacebrokers)
To put an army of his own control in position to remove Jedi not slain by the war, emboldened by people wanting a swift resolution to the war
Basically, slowly eroding the people's faith in anything but himself.
On the flip side, he seems to be playing the long game here so that the Good Guys can rush in and save the day!
And, really, the existence of the Sith fleet doesn't make Starkiller base a waste of time, any more than the second Death Star did for the first, despite being bigger and more powerful.
But the second was built as a reaction to the first being destroyed, and them being able to build it makes sense because the Empire have demonstrated that their economy allows and supports the construction of such things.
The Sith Fleet makes less sense, because it's orders of magnitude bigger (well, in terms of how many Death Star cannons they have), and was constructed without the resources of the Empire.
If the Second Death Star had been destroyed, but somehow Palpatine was still in control of the galaxy (or, if we retcon that Palpatine made a Second Death Star, and made his Sith Fleet instead), that would make far more sense, because he's still Emperor, he still has those resources to draw from. But for this, he just seems to materialise stuff better than he ever had before, with no explanation.
Or maybe it does, and Starkiller base was never intended to be particularly successful, instead just being a giant distraction to keep the Resistance and/or New Republic busy.
Starkiller Base, if I recall correctly, was never even a blip on the radar of either the Resistance or the New Republic (who were, again, completely unwilling to fight the First Order anyway, hence why the Resistance was named such) until it fired, achieving... something?
What would have been more sensible was if Palpatine had literally done *nothing*, and waited the few years or so between Starkiller firing and his "reveal", then just deployed a Star Destroyer from hyperspace above every New Republic planet, demand fealty, or destroy the planet with Death Star rays. As the New Republic demonstrated, they weren't exactly a military force to be feared, or even concerned about.
...couldn't they just turn ever so slightly to knock all the people off?
Evidently not, given that they didn't.
Yeah, that works for me. I don't actually have any flack with the idea of them fighting on a hull of a ship, actually, I liked the idea. My actual issue was "why did they have the cavalry on hand to deploy them anyway if they weren't expecting to make a cavalry charge?"
I think I might have suggested a quick fix to that, but in case I didn't, it was basically an addition to the whole "gearing up to fight Palp" scene. You'd see the ex-Stormtroopers leading their cavalry on board a ship, and Finn running up saying something along the lines of "you're leaving us?" "No, of course not - we're coming with you to fight." "Why are you taking those? They won't be much good in a fleet battle." "Perhaps not, but we're not leaving them behind - they're our lucky mascots, and I think we need all the luck we can get."
Or something to that extent. Hell, perhaps even reshoot the actual hull fight where the infantry (plus Finn) deploy first, but get pinned down badly by Stormtroopers. Then, we see Stormtroopers getting flung aside and start firing away from the infantry, and a massed cavalry charge from the ex-Stromtroopers saves the infantry temporarily.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: My actual issue was "why did they have the cavalry on hand to deploy them anyway if they weren't expecting to make a cavalry charge?".
They were originally supposed to deploy on the ground.
For the rest of it, it is what it is. I'm done trying to discuss this all with people who are determined to dislike the movie. You can choose to poke holes in it and demand answers, or you can do what we all did back when we were kids, and fill in the blanks yourself.
insaniak wrote: For the rest of it, it is what it is. I'm done trying to discuss this all with people who are determined to dislike the movie. You can choose to poke holes in it and demand answers, or you can do what we all did back when we were kids, and fill in the blanks yourself.
Star Wars is my favorite saga for kids that has a bunch of kids getting killed.
Like...this whole time palpatine has been hiding in a secrete system building 500 star destroyers with planet destroying lasers? Like...that should have been the original plan right? 500 deathstars is a lot better than 1. Never mind the fact how the heck do you even man 500 star destroyers in without anyone knowing about it? Etherway this makes the entire story a complete waste of time. Starkillerbase? Nah...500 planet killing star destroyers.
Planet killer trope has really got tired in Star Wars and sequels make it even worse to the point of self-parody. It is now like LEXX where the crew eventually began to blow up planets just to amuse themselves.
Jezz...It wasn't TLJ bad but it had other faults of it's own. TLJ at least looked amazing I just don't care too much about that. This film though looked really Janky at times...especially the strobe effects on palpatine. Also Palpatine looked pretty terrible.
Well with (un)life history of his, understandable he wouldn't be a looker.
My problem was that he SOUNDED terrible. Palpatine was always awesome speaker. Even in the prequels where everyone else sounded like a robot, he had always great lines and good delivery. But here, he was just banal, like they brought Dr Evil as a serious villain for James Bond movie.
After watching it again last night (I know I said I wouldn't but the ticket was 6 bucks and a friend asked me to go). I gotta say the story flowed better but, again, it still suffers from the fact there was really no flow or overall story in the "Trilogy". Like, Prequels are about the fall of Anakin Skywalker. The OT are about the redemption of Anakin Skywalker and the Sequels should be about the Legacy of Anakin Skywalker (Which, I guess it was kinda in a roundabout way)
Instead of having that play out through 3 films they speed ran it through the last movie. I had hoped that Big Poppa Palpatine would have been the big bad ultimately but the fact there were no hints of it in the earlier films shows they really, really should of had this all planned out from the get go. Instead of have a rough outline that each director were allowed to "tweek".
Instead we got was, essentially, a really weird retelling of Dark Empire. Which of all the EU stories is one of the last ones I would do on the big screen.
That being said my final verdict is 7.8 /10. Good, but not great. Now I'm going to go back and watch Revenge of the Sith again so I can enjoy Ian McDiarmid chewing the scenery again.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: My actual issue was "why did they have the cavalry on hand to deploy them anyway if they weren't expecting to make a cavalry charge?".
They were originally supposed to deploy on the ground.
I got the impression it was sort of a "take us with you!" moment when Finn left the Water Moon, followed by "and don't forget our livestock!".
Redoing Dark Empire was fine. There's honestly a lot of ideas I liked in the film. Having Palpatine back as a mutual problem for Kylo and Rey works pretty well and taking it as far as the Dark Side being a possessing entity fills in a lot of RotJs "something something Dark Side" dialog fairly well. The main issue is just that it doesn't do anything interesting with that idea. A big part of that is just that Rey Palpatine isn't really a compelling motivation for it. It's exactly why any sort of lineage reveal for her was destined to feel a little pointless. Had Kylo been faced with the same choice; the full power of the Dark Side at the cost of his own autonomy and power, it would have made for a more compelling conflict. A lot of my issues with the end of the film come down more to wanting some bigger ideas out of it; particularly post TLJ.
Which is why all the "revealing" should of been done in the last film. That's just basic writing when it comes to a Trilogy.
1st Film - Introduce the Heroes/Villains
2nd Film - Put them in the worst possible situation ever! OMG there is not hope of getting out!
3rd Film - They get out
Commodus Leitdorf wrote: Which is why all the "revealing" should of been done in the last film. That's just basic writing when it comes to a Trilogy.
1st Film - Introduce the Heroes/Villains
2nd Film - Put them in the worst possible situation ever! OMG there is not hope of getting out!
3rd Film - They get out
They revealed plenty. JJ just decided to waste his time revealing more to the benefit of nothing. Rey Palpatine would have been just as underwhelming in the 2nd for the same reasons its underwhelming the 3rd. It feels obligatory. It was a cool surprise 40 years ago because it was a surprise. There was never going to be an answer that was satisfying in the same way. It was always going to be a "father's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate" because the surprise was mainstream enough to be a parody 33 years ago. That's why Kylo is ultimately the best character in the new trilogy. By owning his role as a pale imitation of Vader, we get something as compelling as the original. Rey's initial reveal was as disappointing as Kylo; had they owned up to it, there would have been potential to make something just as interesting.
insaniak wrote: I'm done trying to discuss this all with people who are determined to dislike the movie.
You make it sound that I want to dislike it. I don't. I truly wish I enjoyed it, that I could see it as a good movie, but I can't, in the same way I don't find the latest Transformers film a good movie. I'm happy you enjoy it yourself, and I have no interest in saying "you're wrong for enjoying this" or "you're just determined to enjoy it", but on the flip side, if I'm talking about things that didn't work for me, and my potential solutions, you saying "you're determined to dislike it" feels very reductive.
I dislike the film not because I want to dislike it, but because the film isn't enjoyable for me.
You can choose to poke holes in it and demand answers, or you can do what we all did back when we were kids, and fill in the blanks yourself.
When I was a kid, we had the prequels, and both then and now, I've never felt a need to "fill in the blanks" myself, or demand answers. I've never felt narratively cheated or left scratching my head about space logistics because of them. Did they have their problems, yes, but they never made me think "hold on, if they can do this, why didn't X do Y later?" or "hang on, how did this happen?"* The faults of the prequels aren't the same faults as the sequels. And, for what it's worth, I'd rather watch the prequels any time over the sequels, because I enjoy them a great deal more.
*even in the scene in RotS where those words are literally said verbatim.
They revealed plenty. JJ just decided to waste his time revealing more to the benefit of nothing. Rey Palpatine would have been just as underwhelming in the 2nd for the same reasons its underwhelming the 3rd. It feels obligatory. It was a cool surprise 40 years ago because it was a surprise. There was never going to be an answer that was satisfying in the same way. It was always going to be a "father's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate" because the surprise was mainstream enough to be a parody 33 years ago. That's why Kylo is ultimately the best character in the new trilogy. By owning his role as a pale imitation of Vader, we get something as compelling as the original. Rey's initial reveal was as disappointing as Kylo; had they owned up to it, there would have been potential to make something just as interesting.
That's not what I mean. I mean any reveal should of happened in the 2nd film because that is how you write 3 act plays. Whether it was a smart decision or not is irrelevant. I was quite happy with Rey just being a nobody who was awakened in the force to help balance it against Kylo and the First Order. Any 2nd act Reveal (whatever that reveal ended up being) should of been the main plot point for the third film. Instead we got nothing which is why they had to speed run plot points in the first 40 minutes of the movie to setup what the whole conflict the trilogy is suppose to be about.
Yes and I agree Kylo going "I'm not Vader, I will never be Vader. I'm me." is very compelling and makes his character arc the most interesting in the whole serious because, funnily enough, unlike Vader he had the guts to actually kill his Master and take control. That's something in an apprentice Palpatine had been looking for for ages.
They revealed plenty. JJ just decided to waste his time revealing more to the benefit of nothing. Rey Palpatine would have been just as underwhelming in the 2nd for the same reasons its underwhelming the 3rd. It feels obligatory. It was a cool surprise 40 years ago because it was a surprise. There was never going to be an answer that was satisfying in the same way. It was always going to be a "father's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate" because the surprise was mainstream enough to be a parody 33 years ago. That's why Kylo is ultimately the best character in the new trilogy. By owning his role as a pale imitation of Vader, we get something as compelling as the original. Rey's initial reveal was as disappointing as Kylo; had they owned up to it, there would have been potential to make something just as interesting.
That's not what I mean. I mean any reveal should of happened in the 2nd film because that is how you write 3 act plays. Whether it was a smart decision or not is irrelevant. I was quite happy with Rey just being a nobody who was awakened in the force to help balance it against Kylo and the First Order. Any 2nd act Reveal (whatever that reveal ended up being) should of been the main plot point for the third film. Instead we got nothing which is why they had to speed run plot points in the first 40 minutes of the movie to setup what the whole conflict the trilogy is suppose to be about.
Yes and I agree Kylo going "I'm not Vader, I will never be Vader. I'm me." is very compelling and makes his character arc the most interesting in the whole serious because, funnily enough, unlike Vader he had the guts to actually kill his Master and take control. That's something in an apprentice Palpatine had been looking for for ages.
It depends. Palp would still make for a fine 3rd act reveal. He's teased in 7 and reinforced in 8 and works well as a continuation of Kylo's story as well as something of an ultimate totem for the themes of both of the first two films. There's actually a lot I really love about how he's inserted into 9, but ultimately rewinding the cast to vastly less interesting versions of themselves means Palpatine doesn't get to be as compelling as he could be. In many ways, its like we got a version of RotJ where Palpatine toys with the emotions of the "awwwww, but I don't wanna turn to the Dark Side" Luke from A New Hope.
Like...this whole time palpatine has been hiding in a secrete system building 500 star destroyers with planet destroying lasers? Like...that should have been the original plan right? 500 deathstars is a lot better than 1. Never mind the fact how the heck do you even man 500 star destroyers in without anyone knowing about it? Etherway this makes the entire story a complete waste of time. Starkillerbase? Nah...500 planet killing star destroyers.
Planet killer trope has really got tired in Star Wars and sequels make it even worse to the point of self-parody. It is now like LEXX where the crew eventually began to blow up planets just to amuse themselves.
Jezz...It wasn't TLJ bad but it had other faults of it's own. TLJ at least looked amazing I just don't care too much about that. This film though looked really Janky at times...especially the strobe effects on palpatine. Also Palpatine looked pretty terrible.
Well with (un)life history of his, understandable he wouldn't be a looker.
My problem was that he SOUNDED terrible. Palpatine was always awesome speaker. Even in the prequels where everyone else sounded like a robot, he had always great lines and good delivery. But here, he was just banal, like they brought Dr Evil as a serious villain for James Bond movie.
I repeat, a lot of this blame falls on Kennedy, who really should have done a better job, yes he made a LOT up on the fly but Lucas had some rough ideas for each trilogy, Kennedy seemed to be very "ohh whatever you think works" Disney absolutely should have had a lose outline for the trilogy planned. it didn't need to be anything major but some rough data points would have been good.
but sort of a guide as to where they're going would be important. Rey's parentage should have been figured, even if not set in stone. and she definatly should have had a herritage, it's part of the theme of star wars.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: George Lucas in 1977 also didn't have to follow up on the original trilogy or fit his new films into a larger cinematic universe...
and despite winging things did have a rough plan for the saga.
It depends. Palp would still make for a fine 3rd act reveal. He's teased in 7 and reinforced in 8 ...
Is he? I never got that impression at all. Everything in those movies points towards Snoke being the new Emperor figure until he's unceremoniously offed, then Kylo takes over, which incidentally is a much more compelling story to tell than the one we eventually got. Brining the Emperor into the final film was one of my biggest gripes for a while host of reasons. He's not been set up beforehand at all. The whole "Rey is his granddaughter" reveal is annoying because as far as anyone who's seen all the SW films knows Palps never had any kids and his whole involvement is completely out of the blue in the first place. Also, let's not forget the convenient handwave of "yeah, he totally survived that fall down that shaft and the total destruction of the Death Star as well". TBH, it's a typical JJ reveal: unexpected because it's completely unearned and in many way illogical.
I thought the movie as a whole was vaguely enjoyable in parts but things seemed to happen for little reason and the plot was pretty much nonsensical. Overall I'd describe the movie as unsatisfying and well below average. It seemed to favour spectacle over any form of coherent writing and while I get that it's basically a big-budget blockbuster, what set the OT apart from other similar movies was that the story was actually compelling and the characters interesting. Having said that, I'd give a shout-out to Adam Driver who I thought did a great job with Kylo. I'd have greatly preferred a trilogy with him as the central character rather than Rey.
Slipspace wrote: Having said that, I'd give a shout-out to Adam Driver who I thought did a great job with Kylo. I'd have greatly preferred a trilogy with him as the central character rather than Rey.
By this you mean him as the main protagonist, I assume. Because he was certainly a central character of the trilogy.
Slipspace wrote: Having said that, I'd give a shout-out to Adam Driver who I thought did a great job with Kylo. I'd have greatly preferred a trilogy with him as the central character rather than Rey.
By this you mean him as the main protagonist, I assume. Because he was certainly a central character of the trilogy.
Yes, basically switch him and Rey in terms of screen time and importance to the story. It's the kind of creative risk you won't get out of a Disney movie though so it was always going to be unlikely. In a similar vein, the brief glimpse we got of Darkside Rey seemed infinitely more interesting as a character arc than what we ended up with for her but, again, you're not going to get Disney to sign off on that story.
It depends. Palp would still make for a fine 3rd act reveal. He's teased in 7 and reinforced in 8 ...
Is he? I never got that impression at all. Everything in those movies points towards Snoke being the new Emperor figure until he's unceremoniously offed, then Kylo takes over, which incidentally is a much more compelling story to tell than the one we eventually got. Brining the Emperor into the final film was one of my biggest gripes for a while host of reasons. He's not been set up beforehand at all.
In 7, Maz comments about the secret darkness from the beyond the outer rim. It's not necessarily Palpatine but its implied to be the source of the Sith. I actually wondered if they were going to bring in the Star Forge (and they kind of did), but the idea of the master of the Sith being a collective power of sorts could work as well if it was handled better. Luke specifically calls out Palp in 8 and while it could have been hinted further, the two are fine enough threads for me. It just needed to be handled better in a lot of ways.
The one dumb bit about it is trying to make something of the "strike me down in anger". If that had been the goal in 6 it would have already happened. Luke snaps and takes a swing that Vader blocks. Palpatine had no intention of being killed by Luke. He was just goading him to lose control.
Slipspace wrote: The whole "Rey is his granddaughter" reveal is annoying because as far as anyone who's seen all the SW films knows Palps never had any kids and his whole involvement is completely out of the blue in the first place. Also, let's not forget the convenient handwave of "yeah, he totally survived that fall down that shaft and the total destruction of the Death Star as well". TBH, it's a typical JJ reveal: unexpected because it's completely unearned and in many way illogical.
I don't disagree with this. I was terrified when they brought JJ back entirely because while I think he's a great pitch man, he's just not the guy to finish off a story.
I thought the movie as a whole was vaguely enjoyable in parts but things seemed to happen for little reason and the plot was pretty much nonsensical. Overall I'd describe the movie as unsatisfying and well below average. It seemed to favour spectacle over any form of coherent writing and while I get that it's basically a big-budget blockbuster, what set the OT apart from other similar movies was that the story was actually compelling and the characters interesting.
^That sums up my feelings too. TRoS was a spectacle movie and it offered plenty of it. I have been listing its faults here (and I'm not even halfway through but I think I will give up because meh) but I won't say that movie was torture or worst thing ever, or even worst Abrams film. It had many good scenes and nice lines, but when you string them up together, they do not make up a coherent or meaningful story.
TRoS is like when you ask your kid what kind of birthday cake she wants, and she lists absolutely every ingredient which she likes and result is a gross mountain of sugar nobody can eat more than a spoonful without barfing.
It depends. Palp would still make for a fine 3rd act reveal. He's teased in 7 and reinforced in 8 ...
Is he? I never got that impression at all. Everything in those movies points towards Snoke being the new Emperor figure until he's unceremoniously offed, then Kylo takes over, which incidentally is a much more compelling story to tell than the one we eventually got. Brining the Emperor into the final film was one of my biggest gripes for a while host of reasons. He's not been set up beforehand at all.
In 7, Maz comments about the secret darkness from the beyond the outer rim. It's not necessarily Palpatine but its implied to be the source of the Sith. I actually wondered if they were going to bring in the Star Forge (and they kind of did), but the idea of the master of the Sith being a collective power of sorts could work as well if it was handled better. Luke specifically calls out Palp in 8 and while it could have been hinted further, the two are fine enough threads for me. It just needed to be handled better in a lot of ways.
.
Eh. That's problematic at best.
For someone who's only familiar with the movies 'beyond the out rim' is a meaningless reference.
For people who are familiar with various books and games, its actively a red herring (assuming JJ had even thought of Palpatine during TFA, which I'm honestly dubious about). If you're familiar with the Thrawn stuff, Palpatine was terrified of whatever was out in the Unexplored Regions (not the Outer Rim, which is the other direction), to the point that he put his Better than Bestest Admiral out there on patrol with an entire battlefleet. KotoR era stuff has the 'True Sith' out there that the lesser sith who bother the Old Republic are terrified of, because there is an actual immortal/godlike Sith Emperor and the Sith species (which isn't actually that big a deal because game balance).
So that sort of reference isn't a thread, but a problem. It refers to people and things that specifically aren't Palpatine.
Got around to seeing this last Monday.
Considering I thought the first film was ok and the second trash I was actually pleasantly surprised.
I thought it was pacier than the previous films, tied up some loose ends without being too cheesy and again had some nice homages to the originals.
Was it a brilliant end to a great trilogy? Not on your nelly but taking it for what it simply is - Star Wars - it wasnt bad.
As an aside, Im not a huge fan of the SW lore etc so if they were to go on and make another trilogy what/who would be the big threat now that the Empire, Order, Sith and Palpatine are fish food?
Eh. That's problematic at best.
For someone who's only familiar with the movies 'beyond the out rim' is a meaningless reference.
For people who are familiar with various books and games, its actively a red herring (assuming JJ had even thought of Palpatine during TFA, which I'm honestly dubious about). If you're familiar with the Thrawn stuff, Palpatine was terrified of whatever was out in the Unexplored Regions (not the Outer Rim, which is the other direction), to the point that he put his Better than Bestest Admiral out there on patrol with an entire battlefleet. KotoR era stuff has the 'True Sith' out there that the lesser sith who bother the Old Republic are terrified of, because there is an actual immortal/godlike Sith Emperor and the Sith species (which isn't actually that big a deal because game balance).
So that sort of reference isn't a thread, but a problem. It refers to people and things that specifically aren't Palpatine.
Sure, but Palpatine is also quite capable of carrying that mantle. We also really, really, really, really don't need what Thrawn was out there to stop being reintroduced into cannon.
What we NEED is a KOTOR era trilogy so there is no baggage from any of the trilogies to taint it. Just some really cool Jedi vs. Sith action, with both ground battles and fleet battles galore.
Ratius wrote: As an aside, Im not a huge fan of the SW lore etc so if they were to go on and make another trilogy what/who would be the big threat now that the Empire, Order, Sith and Palpatine are fish food?
If they were to hand such a trilogy to J.J. Abrams it'd be Palpatine again who is now all the Sith plus one. And he has a giant death laser dangling between his legs.
Sure, but Palpatine is also quite capable of carrying that mantle.
He isn't, particularly.
Per the prequels, he's just some guy from Naboo who turned out to be an evil wizard, and got an Evil Magic Scars makeover from the backlash of his own lightning. And then goes to the OT to die.
Per the OT, he's an evil wizard that died rather conclusively. Fell multiple stories, exploded, and then the space station he was in exploded even more. So he fell to his death and exploded, twice. That isn't 'you should've checked the body territory,' that's we watched him die, get atomized, and then pieces of the place he died were scattered across local muppet space. He was even more dead than a Norwegian Blue.
As a 'secret threat' for the new trilogy, he's non-present and then a pure wtf moment built on gibberish and whistled out of the emptiness that comes from lacking an overarching plot.
AegisGrimm wrote: What we NEED is a KOTOR era trilogy so there is no baggage from any of the trilogies to taint it. Just some really cool Jedi vs. Sith action, with both ground battles and fleet battles galore.
I'd rather Disney not contaminate the Old Republic era. Leave that alone, let the fans have this. Disney already changed the Expanded Universe elsewhere and changed the canon and setting rules enough there. The Old Republic should be the sacred playground, the big sandbox.
AegisGrimm wrote: What we NEED is a KOTOR era trilogy so there is no baggage from any of the trilogies to taint it. Just some really cool Jedi vs. Sith action, with both ground battles and fleet battles galore.
The ToR cinematics made by Blur prove that this would be an awesome spectacle to see. Whether or not the writing is good is a separate issue.
Adeptus Doritos wrote: I'd rather Disney not contaminate the Old Republic era. Leave that alone, let the fans have this. Disney already changed the Expanded Universe elsewhere and changed the canon and setting rules enough there. The Old Republic should be the sacred playground, the big sandbox.
I kinda agree with this sentiment. I'm not sure Disney is willing to take the risks this franchise needs in order to make a good trilogy. They obviously want to play it safe (made evident by their first saga), and a KOTOR trilogy done wrong would sour a lot of fans, possibly even more than they currently have so far.
As much as I like RoS and the sequel trilogy as a whole (which seems to be in the EXTREME minority on this site), I do agree that moving away from the Saga era would be a good idea. There's TONs of material to mine from for inspired stories.
I've got my fingers crossed for Keanu Reeves as Darth Revan
Galef wrote: As much as I like RoS and the sequel trilogy as a whole (which seems to be in the EXTREME minority on this site), I do agree that moving away from the Saga era would be a good idea. There's TONs of material to mine from for inspired stories.
I've got my fingers crossed for Keanu Reeves as Darth Revan
-
I think Revan would make for an excellent movie (not sure if trilogy is the way to go, but who knows). I think there's less chance for them to muddy the story line with extraneous content, since it is hyper-focused on one character.
It would obviously have darker themes than the traditional Star Wars, which I believe is a good thing. Not sure if Disney is willing to go that route though.
While the original game is fantastic, I think everything that came after is kind of a mess as a result of trying to honor player choices as to make the character not really worth trying to adapt unless you've got a really strong plan in mind.
Supposedly a synopsis of the original version of Ep IX by Colin Trevorrow before he was let go for creative differences. It's in progress right now so I don't know how long the stream will end up being.
As always, add salt as needed. This youtuber, unlike most, has worked in Hollywood as a director and editor for decades in case that matters for veracity.
Per the OT, he's an evil wizard that died rather conclusively. Fell multiple stories, exploded, and then the space station he was in exploded even more. So he fell to his death and exploded, twice. That isn't 'you should've checked the body territory,' that's we watched him die, get atomized, and then pieces of the place he died were scattered across local muppet space. He was even more dead than a Norwegian Blue.
TESB though... wasn't CYNICAL. Dark yes, cynical no.
Exactly. - Compare and contrast Lando versus Benicio Del Toro's character.
Yoda versus TLJ Luke.
Bespin versus Canto Blight
Most importantly, you see the resistance in TLJ put out a call for help.. no one answers. ROS contrasted that VERY nicely.
I guess this is the difference for me. The call for help failing is fine... in the middle chapter. Everyone coming for help is also fine in the finale. The problem is just that ROS didn't spend any time building up the idea of a symbol for everyone to rally around to make that piece really land so it comes off as a little pandering. On the flip side, I didn't find Luke chiding Rey for tossing the saber nearly as pandering because we'd already seen Luke break through his cynicism in TLJ. The character that catches it from the fire is the one that left Kylo rolling in salt.
That sort of explains my feelings on ROS as a whole. It's not that I dislike any of it; I just wish it had earned its big moments more. It has that RotS "this happens because it needs to happen" feel. I am genuinely curious about the 40 minutes or so that are reportedly cut. They could legitimately make all the difference, though they wouldn't help with my biggest gripe with both ROS and TLJ, in that they're entirely too long.
Per the OT, he's an evil wizard that died rather conclusively. Fell multiple stories, exploded, and then the space station he was in exploded even more. So he fell to his death and exploded, twice. That isn't 'you should've checked the body territory,' that's we watched him die, get atomized, and then pieces of the place he died were scattered across local muppet space. He was even more dead than a Norwegian Blue.
Can you do that? Can you explode twice?
Given that sig, I am unsurprised you got that reference.
TESB though... wasn't CYNICAL. Dark yes, cynical no.
Exactly. - Compare and contrast Lando versus Benicio Del Toro's character.
Yoda versus TLJ Luke.
Bespin versus Canto Blight
Most importantly, you see the resistance in TLJ put out a call for help.. no one answers. ROS contrasted that VERY nicely.
I guess this is the difference for me. The call for help failing is fine... in the middle chapter. Everyone coming for help is also fine in the finale. The problem is just that ROS didn't spend any time building up the idea of a symbol for everyone to rally around to make that piece really land so it comes off as a little pandering. On the flip side, I didn't find Luke chiding Rey for tossing the saber nearly as pandering because we'd already seen Luke break through his cynicism in TLJ. The character that catches it from the fire is the one that left Kylo rolling in salt.
That sort of explains my feelings on ROS as a whole. It's not that I dislike any of it; I just wish it had earned its big moments more.
I thought something was odd about Episode 9 - no bloomin "Art of" book!
March 2020? Good grief!
In other news, Rise of Skywalker is about to take a billion at the box office and yet its being treated as a "disappointment". Sigh. Yes, Disney, we get it - you are doing this for the money, and for two hours entertainment we will oblige you. But we are not funding your scheme to build a fully armed and operational battle station to hide behind the moon. Last time that happened we had send Sir Roger Moore to sort things out...
SamusDrake wrote: I thought something was odd about Episode 9 - no bloomin "Art of" book!
March 2020? Good grief!
In other news, Rise of Skywalker is about to take a billion at the box office and yet its being treated as a "disappointment". Sigh. Yes, Disney, we get it - you are doing this for the money, and for two hours entertainment we will oblige you.
It is. It's also profitable already without crossing that metric. As alluded to in your post, corporate/investor expectations typically involve minimal levels of profitability. With a company the size of Disney, they want all the money and not just some of it.
Truth is, due to expansion of movie markets and inflation, billion dollar line is no longer that magical. Disney alone has SIX other movies from 2019 which grossed over billion dollars. Whereas TROS is hardly box office flop, given the notability and prestige of Star Wars brand, numbers are on bit of a disappointing side. It's actually behind Rogue One in inflation adjusted gross.
TESB though... wasn't CYNICAL. Dark yes, cynical no.
Exactly. - Compare and contrast Lando versus Benicio Del Toro's character.
Yoda versus TLJ Luke.
Bespin versus Canto Blight
Most importantly, you see the resistance in TLJ put out a call for help.. no one answers. ROS contrasted that VERY nicely.
I guess this is the difference for me. The call for help failing is fine... in the middle chapter. Everyone coming for help is also fine in the finale. The problem is just that ROS didn't spend any time building up the idea of a symbol for everyone to rally around to make that piece really land so it comes off as a little pandering. On the flip side, I didn't find Luke chiding Rey for tossing the saber nearly as pandering because we'd already seen Luke break through his cynicism in TLJ. The character that catches it from the fire is the one that left Kylo rolling in salt.
That sort of explains my feelings on ROS as a whole. It's not that I dislike any of it; I just wish it had earned its big moments more. It has that RotS "this happens because it needs to happen" feel. I am genuinely curious about the 40 minutes or so that are reportedly cut. They could legitimately make all the difference, though they wouldn't help with my biggest gripe with both ROS and TLJ, in that they're entirely too long.
true but a lot of the issues with ROS can be traced back to Rian Johnson spent an entire movie destroying when he should ahve spent a movie building.
I don't think Johnson destroyed all that much, if anything. He can be rightly blamed for not setting up anything for the next movie, but it's pretty much the situation he inherited from the first.
Backfire wrote: I don't think Johnson destroyed all that much, if anything. He can be rightly blamed for not setting up anything for the next movie, but it's pretty much the situation he inherited from the first.
disagree TFA set things up fine. we where introduced to Rey, Finn and Poe, we where told what Han and Leia ahd been up to. we where introduced to the first order. Kylo Ren and Snoke.
we where given, to a degree the motivation of the characters (Rey was looking for a family, Finn wanted freedom from the first order and friendship, Poe was pretty much "vive le resistance") this was all that was reaaally needed.
in the second act of the trilogy we needed to set the characters up a bit more as to where they where going, what their destinies where etc. we should have been given some indication as to what Snoke WANTED. etc. Johnson didn't really set up anything, hence my comment about him not building. by destroying I mean he attempted to subvert expectations and tear things down in, a to be blunt, unsastifying way. he killed off Snoke, and phasma (who really should have been kept around and used better, she should have been a foil for Finn, instead she was made the "sequal trilogy boba fett")
I think, looking at episode 9 and where it was going, If I could go back in time and do TLJ myself, I'd have made the entire second movie about the search for Exogol. Luke and Rey would slowly travel the galaxy unraveling the trail of Bread crumbs. at the very end, yeah Snoke would die (likely at Luke's hands) and Palpatine would be revealed as the "big bad"
then ROS woulda worked a biit differant. I woulda proably had Luke be insturmental in defeating Palpatine (perhaps alongside Rey and Ben) and have LUKE die in the final clash with Palpatine. leaving Rey and Ben to rebuild the jedi
warboss wrote: Supposedly a synopsis of the original version of Ep IX by Colin Trevorrow before he was let go for creative differences. It's in progress right now so I don't know how long the stream will end up being.
As always, add salt as needed. This youtuber, unlike most, has worked in Hollywood as a director and editor for decades in case that matters for veracity.
Was just coming to post this! Here's an article describing it:
Figured some of you might find this cathartic, like the article mentions . Although I liked the movie as-is, this does sound good - especially the title, "Duel of Fates"!
Backfire wrote: I don't think Johnson destroyed all that much, if anything. He can be rightly blamed for not setting up anything for the next movie, but it's pretty much the situation he inherited from the first.
He set up plenty. He actually gave us a real setting to play in for a change, with the First Order's conquest of the galaxy in full swing as the surviving members of the resistance try to bring together those who would still fight. It gave us a villain alone in his victory, literally plagued by the specter of his failure that inspires those who still stand against him. More than anything, he gave us a chance to tell a new story in the world, which is sadly an opportunity completely squandered. If there's anything I'm CRUSHINGLY disappointed in with ROS, its not getting to see Force Ghost Luke laugh at Kylo for his failings all movie. That's like the only thing I really wanted. :(
Figured some of you might find this cathartic, like the article mentions . Although I liked the movie as-is, this does sound good - especially the title, "Duel of Fates"!
I just read this after my last post.
I think the script starts a lot stronger than a lot of what we got. It definitely follows a lot smoother and builds on the setting. Also gives me the one thing in the world I wanted from the film, so there's that. It's hard to tell if it would have stuck the landing or not. It definitely isn't finished and switches from a real script to a draft. I think there's some good ideas there, but its all in the execution. Some of the bits toward the end need to be rethought and don't really track, but the overall arc works well. More the movie I wanted to see after TLJ though.
As written the script can't have been done without a CGI Carrie Fisher, I wonder how much that factored into the 'creative differences' that got the project dropped into JJ's lap.
Captain Joystick wrote: As written the script can't have been done without a CGI Carrie Fisher, I wonder how much that factored into the 'creative differences' that got the project dropped into JJ's lap.
The most obvious example is the lightsaber. I had initially chalked it up to Abrams obsession with "Luke's" saber, but after seeing ROS, I'm wondering how much of it has to do with her holding it in the unused footage of Leia. It's still more than a little maddening that that point is completely tossed aside and then we get the new saber we want for a second at an ending that doesn't make any sense at all (has Leia ever actually been to Tatooine?).
The loss of Carrie Fisher certainly had a huge impact on the film. She's pretty central to it as is; one can only imagine how much screen time she was supposed to have.
Seems like JJ was absolutely petrified of/perplexed by writing for Rey and Kylo with all the agency they were granted at the end of TLJ. We witness the two principals emphatically seizing control of their destinies, only to have it revealed that more-or-less their every move was manipulated and preordained by the big bad from the other trilogy. Um...okay.
I feel like there's some meta commentary to be had there too.
Backfire wrote: I don't think Johnson destroyed all that much, if anything. He can be rightly blamed for not setting up anything for the next movie, but it's pretty much the situation he inherited from the first.
Well, he pretty much destroyed continuity in space battles over all the films with his silly hyperspace ram, for reasons already explained upthread.
He CERTAINLY destroyed the Resistance in the chase of fools, and the only reason anyone got away was because the First Order were even BIGGER fools... also for reasons explained upthread.
EDIT: And with it, he destroyed the credibility of either side as a genuine threat. Fools are to be laughed at, not feared or respected.
gorgon wrote: Seems like JJ was absolutely petrified of/perplexed by writing for Rey and Kylo with all the agency they were granted at the end of TLJ. We witness the two principals emphatically seizing control of their destinies, only to have it revealed that more-or-less their every move was manipulated and preordained by the big bad from the other trilogy. Um...okay.
I feel like there's some meta commentary to be had there too.
That seems a stretch. I saw two kids arrive back where they began, with no clue how to move on, and no plot elements left to take them anywhere.
gorgon wrote: Seems like JJ was absolutely petrified of/perplexed by writing for Rey and Kylo with all the agency they were granted at the end of TLJ. We witness the two principals emphatically seizing control of their destinies, only to have it revealed that more-or-less their every move was manipulated and preordained by the big bad from the other trilogy. Um...okay.
I feel like there's some meta commentary to be had there too.
That seems a stretch. I saw two kids arrive back where they began, with no clue how to move on, and no plot elements left to take them anywhere.
Like... what? Some random cloaked bad guy mumbling dark side nonsense?
You don't need sequel bait to write a sequel. All you need is a story. A New Hope didn't need to end with "we'll have to find a new base for when the Empire retaliates" to use that as the basis of its story. The bits of RotJ that wrap up the end of Empire in the first act are almost entirely disconnected from the rest of the film. TLJ left more story writing tools in the hands of the writers than we've seen since the Thrawn trilogy. Ep 9 had plenty to work with.
I don't see how anything interesting could be done with a son of heroes who turned his back on his family and their ideals because of the pressure created by his name and gifts (but still feels conflicted by that decision), who killed his own father to try to quell his nagging doubts (but is tortured by that action), and who grew to idolize his evil grandfather for his perceived strength but ultimately decides to seize full control of his destiny as his grandfather never did, thereby surpassing him (but leaving him even lonelier and emptier?).
This character is also played by the best actor you have. Yeah, nothing to mine there...
Edit: This is just good human story stuff. Good gangster stories are built out of the kind of character I just outlined there. The human elements are what made TESB so good.
gorgon wrote: I don't see how anything interesting could be done with a son of heroes who turned his back on his family and their ideals because of the pressure created by his name and gifts (but still feels conflicted by that decision), who killed his own father to try to quell his nagging doubts (but is tortured by that action), and who grew to idolize his evil grandfather for his perceived strength but ultimately decides to seize full control of his destiny as his grandfather never did, thereby surpassing him (but leaving him even lonelier and emptier?).
This character is also played by the best actor you have. Yeah, nothing to mine there...
Edit: This is just good human story stuff. Good gangster stories are built out of the kind of character I just outlined there. The human elements are what made TESB so good.
And Ghost Luke makes all of this sooooooo much better
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Riquende wrote: Two years on from TLJ and people are still defending a film they've re-edited in their heads... sad to see.
I only edit it in my head because its too long. It's got enough of my favorite scenes in the franchise to rewatch, but I sure do with it was closer to the runtime of the originals.
No, was completely serious, just didn't think of that as it wasn't an official visit so to speak.
Either way, doesn't alter the fact that if Rey were to bury Leia's sabre on the planet she'd grown up on like she does with Luke's then she'd need to go extra vehicular in some space rubble.
gorgon wrote: Seems like JJ was absolutely petrified of/perplexed by writing for Rey and Kylo with all the agency they were granted at the end of TLJ. We witness the two principals emphatically seizing control of their destinies, only to have it revealed that more-or-less their every move was manipulated and preordained by the big bad from the other trilogy. Um...okay.
I feel like there's some meta commentary to be had there too.
That seems a stretch. I saw two kids arrive back where they began, with no clue how to move on, and no plot elements left to take them anywhere.
Like... what? Some random cloaked bad guy mumbling dark side nonsense?
You don't need sequel bait to write a sequel. All you need is a story. .
Right. The part that was missing. The loosely connected series of vignettes in TLJ are reasonably resolved by the ship of survivors wandering off to become smugglers on Hutta while Kylo crowns himself king of the galaxy the First Order conquered off-screen. (which gets mentioned offhandedly like its no big deal)
Sure, there was a third film contracted with the same actors, so they needed to go a different way, but there weren't any story elements worth pursuing. They were alone in a hostile universe against a force with apparently infinite resources. No one wanted to help, and everyone was somehow morally the same as the First Order anyway, so it didn't matter.
Watching RoS a second viewing... ( the first time off too much cognac)
Wow, Palpatine is one ignorant SOB. How many times that guy gonna be betrayed?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Its definitely better on second viewing. The foil between evil Skywalker and good palpatine was weak... but at least they tried to make it emotional if not convoluted and "forced".
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also,what a case of "supervillain revealing their master stroke...." if Palpatine would have just been a menacing spooky marionette, Rey would have cut him down all as planned. Explaining how evil it is ruined the whole plan.
Riquende wrote: Two years on from TLJ and people are still defending a film they've re-edited in their heads... sad to see.
I wouldn't be surprised if Episode 8, despite its flaws, gains a cult following in a decade or two since of all Star Wars movies, it's the one that delve the most into foreign territory and tries to explore the idea of destiny or the dualism of the entire franchise.
Riquende wrote: Two years on from TLJ and people are still defending a film they've re-edited in their heads... sad to see.
I wouldn't be surprised if Episode 8, despite its flaws, gains a cult following in a decade or two since of all Star Wars movies, it's the one that delve the most into foreign territory and tries to explore the idea of destiny or the dualism of the entire franchise.
I am hoping its used in film making classes as a scene by scene examination of how NOT to make a film.
Sadly they might take from it that having a nothing more than few flashy effects scenes is ok when you are subverting a narrative, plot does not matter, characters do not matter and any and all bad reactions by viewers should always be chalked up racist, sexist or evil people rather than any possible flaw with the total POS that you made..
Also,what a case of "supervillain revealing their master stroke...." if Palpatine would have just been a menacing spooky marionette, Rey would have cut him down all as planned. Explaining how evil it is ruined the whole plan.
ACHWSCHUALY
If you read supplementary materials 139 and 45-48 (and play fortnite between the hours of 4:00 am and 5:00 am) you'll understand that the dark sith magiks Palpatine was using (and learned on ****** from ******* ****** *) could only be used on someone who was aware of the technique being used on them.
So it actually makes perfect sense.
Sorry about the censored part. I don't want to lose my fortnite account for leaking.
gorgon wrote: Seems like JJ was absolutely petrified of/perplexed by writing for Rey and Kylo with all the agency they were granted at the end of TLJ. We witness the two principals emphatically seizing control of their destinies, only to have it revealed that more-or-less their every move was manipulated and preordained by the big bad from the other trilogy. Um...okay.
I feel like there's some meta commentary to be had there too.
That seems a stretch. I saw two kids arrive back where they began, with no clue how to move on, and no plot elements left to take them anywhere.
Like... what? Some random cloaked bad guy mumbling dark side nonsense?
You don't need sequel bait to write a sequel. All you need is a story. .
Right. The part that was missing. The loosely connected series of vignettes in TLJ are reasonably resolved by the ship of survivors wandering off to become smugglers on Hutta while Kylo crowns himself king of the galaxy the First Order conquered off-screen. (which gets mentioned offhandedly like its no big deal)
Sure, there was a third film contracted with the same actors, so they needed to go a different way, but there weren't any story elements worth pursuing. They were alone in a hostile universe against a force with apparently infinite resources. No one wanted to help, and everyone was somehow morally the same as the First Order anyway, so it didn't matter.
The script establishes that help is out there -- they just didn't respond at that time. The implication is clear -- the rest of the galaxy is scared of the FO, and they don't want to back what obviously looks to be a losing horse in the Resistance. But the ending shows us how the story of Luke's sacrifice spreads throughout the galaxy. Even those grubby slave children have heard the tale, right?
It's a layup for the next step to be about the galaxy rising up, inspired by Luke's actions. Luke *tells Kylo* that's what will happen. And that's *exactly how* Trevorrow's script starts! This isn't hard.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Nightlord1987 wrote: Also,what a case of "supervillain revealing their master stroke...." if Palpatine would have just been a menacing spooky marionette, Rey would have cut him down all as planned. Explaining how evil it is ruined the whole plan.
He does the same thing with Luke in RotJ. Been saying that for years. If Palpatine quits all the "strike me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete" gak and lets Luke's anger take over naturally, he gets his new apprentice. Palpatine is one of the all-time greatest and yet absolute worst movie archvillains.
Scrabb wrote: If you read supplementary materials 139 and 45-48 (and play fortnite between the hours of 4:00 am and 5:00 am) you'll understand that the dark sith magiks Palpatine was using (and learned on ****** from ******* ****** *) could only be used on someone who was aware of the technique being used on them.
So it actually makes perfect sense.
See, I pretty much gathered that from context the first time I watched the movie. Only my kids play Fortnite in my house and there's no way in heck I'd let them play from 4am-5am. That would make me a monster.
I can certainly agree that it's frustrating to have to piece together the story from supplemental materials, and is a clear cash-grab from Disney. But honestly? How could that NOT have been the reason? And Palpatine's body was absolutely destroyed in RotJ. Him being back does not HAVE to be explicitly explained in the movie. The throw-away lines about cloning, sith magic, etc were good enough.
And seeing as Palpatine wasn't truly exposed as the villain in the prior trilogies, him showing up for this trilogy fits just fine and fairly consistent. Heck, if we didn't already know Palps was the baddie from the orig trig, him being the baddie in Revenge of the Sith would have been almost as surprising as coming back for Rise of Skywalker
Nightlord1987 wrote: Also,what a case of "supervillain revealing their master stroke...." if Palpatine would have just been a menacing spooky marionette, Rey would have cut him down all as planned. Explaining how evil it is ruined the whole plan.
He does the same thing with Luke in RotJ. Been saying that for years. If Palpatine quits all the "strike me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete" gak and lets Luke's anger take over naturally, he gets his new apprentice. Palpatine is one of the all-time greatest and yet absolute worst movie archvillains.
Most of it works. Honestly, the point he loses Luke is when he actually switches over to praising him instead. Up to that point, his goading works just fine, though no part of that sequence sees him actually wanting to be struck down as implied by ROS. He's just forcing Luke to fight his father by making it seem like doing so will allow him to put an end to all of this. The goal is to strip Luke of everything. Make him kill his father, watch his friends and any hope of Rebellion die along with him and see all the power he's gained amount to nothing compared to the Emperor.
Mr Morden wrote: I am hoping its used in film making classes as a scene by scene examination of how NOT to make a film.
Sadly they might take from it that having a nothing more than few flashy effects scenes is ok when you are subverting a narrative, plot does not matter, characters do not matter and any and all bad reactions by viewers should always be chalked up racist, sexist or evil people rather than any possible flaw with the total POS that you made..
Considering that the filmography of Episode 8 was highly praised your wish might actually happen...in reverse. As for your comment on subverting a narrative that's actally considered "a good thing" since it actually brings something new. The narrative of the other Star Wars movie isn't special or high quality or original or an essential quality.
Mr Morden wrote: I am hoping its used in film making classes as a scene by scene examination of how NOT to make a film.
Sadly they might take from it that having a nothing more than few flashy effects scenes is ok when you are subverting a narrative, plot does not matter, characters do not matter and any and all bad reactions by viewers should always be chalked up racist, sexist or evil people rather than any possible flaw with the total POS that you made..
Considering that the filmography of Episode 8 was highly praised your wish might actually happen...in reverse. As for your comment on subverting a narrative that's actally considered "a good thing" since it actually brings something new. The narrative of the other Star Wars movie isn't special or high quality or original or an essential quality.
Then I hope they at least include a caveat that if you're going to do a big, flashy swordfighting scene, bring in some stunt coordinators who can teach the actors that you don't use a sword the same way you use a baseball bat.
And having to use CGI to edit out a dagger so the hero doesn't get stabbed in the back means you screwed up your fight choreography something ferocious.
Vulcan wrote: Then I hope they at least include a caveat that if you're going to do a big, flashy swordfighting scene, bring in some stunt coordinators who can teach the actors that you don't use a sword the same way you use a baseball bat.
And having to use CGI to edit out a dagger so the hero doesn't get stabbed in the back means you screwed up your fight choreography something ferocious.
As far as movie swordfighting goes, I think the sequels were fine despite the few mistakes here and there like the reverse grip that Kylo Ren sometime uses or the edit-out dagger, but it's rare to see a movie without a few such mistake. Episode 8 probably had the best one in the sequel if only thanks to the multitude of weapons used by the guards. The Phantom Menace probably had the best stuntman and stunt choregrapher and they still had a miss chronographed kick and a pretty weird final move to cripple Darth Maul (though that's not a suntman error that's a script error). There was also some strange decisions in terms of fighting moves in Revenge of the Sith like Yoda jumping at the Emperors face whose holding his sword overhead instead of chopping off his legs for example (or even the Emperor holding his sword overhead in the first place), or Obi-Wan and Anakin forgetting that their laser sword can also be used to stab (or that side step are a thing). Considering that a lightsaber cannot lose its sharpness or break its blade, you can hammer away your opponent as much as you want even though considering the "sharpness of such a blade" a fencing style should be favored. A more "realistic" lightsaber fight would last less than four seconds considering no armor can protect you and the blade can slice through a man with basically no effort.
Mr Morden wrote: I am hoping its used in film making classes as a scene by scene examination of how NOT to make a film.
Sadly they might take from it that having a nothing more than few flashy effects scenes is ok when you are subverting a narrative, plot does not matter, characters do not matter and any and all bad reactions by viewers should always be chalked up racist, sexist or evil people rather than any possible flaw with the total POS that you made..
Considering that the filmography of Episode 8 was highly praised your wish might actually happen...in reverse. As for your comment on subverting a narrative that's actally considered "a good thing" since it actually brings something new. The narrative of the other Star Wars movie isn't special or high quality or original or an essential quality.
Yeah "Critics" praised it and then cashed their check.
as you will note I never said the other Star Wars movies were original - they are not - essential - they are quite fun action flicks but thats it. Don;t turn this into a "Only superfans hate this film" bull gak.
This (IMO and many many other people) was a boring, badly written, worse directed POS from start to finish, it would get my vote as worst film I watched this decade regardless of what franschise it did or did not belong to.
Mr Morden wrote: This (IMO and many many other people) was a boring, badly written, worse directed POS from start to finish, it would get my vote as worst film I watched this decade regardless of what franschise it did or did not belong to.
This has got to be an exaggeration. There were several abysmal boxoffice bombs in 2019 alone that were worse than ROS by a long shot, much less the laundry list of complete trash over the last decade.
I feel statements like this only exist because of the scale of Star Wars. If this were any other Franchise (aside from the universally praised MCU), I would image you, or at least a good portion of the "many many other people" would have at least given RoS a solid "meh" But because it is SW, it seems to have either become fashionable to bash it, or too easy to be disappointed with it due to high expectations
Mr Morden wrote: This (IMO and many many other people) was a boring, badly written, worse directed POS from start to finish, it would get my vote as worst film I watched this decade regardless of what franschise it did or did not belong to.
This has got to be an exaggeration. There were several abysmal boxoffice bombs in 2019 alone that were worse than ROS by a long shot, much less the laundry list of complete trash over the last decade.
I feel statements like this only exist because of the scale of Star Wars. If this were any other Franchise (aside from the universally praised MCU), I would image you, or at least a good portion of the "many many other people" would have at least given RoS a solid "meh"
But because it is SW, it seems to have either become fashionable to bash it, or too easy to be disappointed with it due to high expectations
-
I was talking about TLJ - I have not watched the new one - I just can't be bothered - I might watch it when its on Sky or whatever...
Mr Morden wrote: I was talking about TLJ - I have not watched the new one - I just can't be bothered - I might watch it when its on Sky or whatever...
That's fair. I feel my comment can apply to either "side" of the debate, whether you liked TLJ but hated RoS, or vice versa. Personally, I like RoS much better than TLJ, but I don't hate TLJ by any means
And having to use CGI to edit out a dagger so the hero doesn't get stabbed in the back means you screwed up your fight choreography something ferocious.
Thats been a common practice in post production for years.
Sure, a professional stuntman will tell you it can be done better but when it comes to shooting footage a director will tell you that time is money. The later is something they'd better teach in film school...
tyhe subversion of expectations I think is why so many people bash TLJ myself. Look, star wars will never be a best picture film, ut's not that type of movie, what it is those is comfortable, it uses elements from many of the favorite stories of the past (the whole monomyth) to generate a new story that feels, old, familer, like a pair of comfortable shoes.
Star Wars is, to use a meal analogy, not that fancy novue dish custom crafted by an artisan master chief that combines flavors together in some new and strange cominbation to win awards (55 dollars a plate, portions are tiny!). Star Wars is your box of Mac and Cheese, it's that thing you ate growing up, you know it's not the best thing in the world, but it's comfortable, and sometimes you just want comfortable.
Scrabb wrote: If you read supplementary materials 139 and 45-48 (and play fortnite between the hours of 4:00 am and 5:00 am) you'll understand that the dark sith magiks Palpatine was using (and learned on ****** from ******* ****** *) could only be used on someone who was aware of the technique being used on them.
So it actually makes perfect sense.
See, I pretty much gathered that from context the first time I watched the movie. Only my kids play Fortnite in my house and there's no way in heck I'd let them play from 4am-5am. That would make me a monster.
I can certainly agree that it's frustrating to have to piece together the story from supplemental materials, and is a clear cash-grab from Disney. But honestly? How could that NOT have been the reason? And Palpatine's body was absolutely destroyed in RotJ. Him being back does not HAVE to be explicitly explained in the movie. The throw-away lines about cloning, sith magic, etc were good enough.
And seeing as Palpatine wasn't truly exposed as the villain in the prior trilogies, him showing up for this trilogy fits just fine and fairly consistent. Heck, if we didn't already know Palps was the baddie from the orig trig, him being the baddie in Revenge of the Sith would have been almost as surprising as coming back for Rise of Skywalker
-
Since I'm not 100% sure if you were playing along or not, I'm going to put it out there: my post was satirical and any relation the information I gave has to the facts is purely incidental.
Mr Morden wrote: I am hoping its used in film making classes as a scene by scene examination of how NOT to make a film.
Sadly they might take from it that having a nothing more than few flashy effects scenes is ok when you are subverting a narrative, plot does not matter, characters do not matter and any and all bad reactions by viewers should always be chalked up racist, sexist or evil people rather than any possible flaw with the total POS that you made..
Considering that the filmography of Episode 8 was highly praised your wish might actually happen...in reverse. As for your comment on subverting a narrative that's actally considered "a good thing" since it actually brings something new. The narrative of the other Star Wars movie isn't special or high quality or original or an essential quality.
"new" is not term you can apply to any sequel films. I had essentially seen them(with less good CGI) decades ago already. Nothing new, no surprises. What this shows is no need for disney to spend money on creating new stories when simply cut&paste old ones does same thing Only matter of time before SW film starts doing same within same film! Second half of movie copy of first half. Why waste time and money writing one copied script when one can write half a script and copy it! Easy money!
So now the cluster feth that is mouse wars is over and the knives are being sharpened for kk, busses are being eyed carefully and contracts are finished Inthink gak is about to get interesting.
I have been thinking is R Johnson racist? I ask this as he basicly took the first black person to star in starwars and turned him into a janitor and even worse Jar Jar Finn? It may have been subconsciously but he did relegate him to the "help".
Finn's character is the biggest loss/miss step of the giant turd that is the new trilogy, he was literally the only original character in the trilogy and Jhonson relegated him to comedy relief.
The actor did a ama and someone asked him was the character he played the one pitched fo him when he was hired? All he said was No and he would not be drawn on more details.
Everyone is subconsciously racist, so yeah Johnson probably did have some unhelpful biases that caused poor choices. Finn's sections in the Last Jedi were definitely the worst part of the movie and should have been completely re-written. I think part of the problem was trying to get some fairly heavy handed messaging into the sequence.
SeanDrake wrote: So now the cluster feth that is mouse wars is over and the knives are being sharpened for kk, busses are being eyed carefully and contracts are finished Inthink gak is about to get interesting.
I have been thinking is R Johnson racist? I ask this as he basicly took the first black person to star in starwars and turned him into a janitor and even worse Jar Jar Finn? It may have been subconsciously but he did relegate him to the "help".
Finn's character is the biggest loss/miss step of the giant turd that is the new trilogy, he was literally the only original character in the trilogy and Jhonson relegated him to comedy relief.
The actor did a ama and someone asked him was the character he played the one pitched fo him when he was hired? All he said was No and he would not be drawn on more details.
well we know that he was secretly force sensitive so perhaps the original plan was that would come to head in episode 8 and by episode 9 he'd be swinging a saber along side rey?
but yeah Johnson... I dunno I honestly think he didn't really know what to do with the characters, thought their inital concepts where dull so...
BrianDavion wrote: tyhe subversion of expectations I think is why so many people bash TLJ myself. Look, star wars will never be a best picture film, ut's not that type of movie, what it is those is comfortable, it uses elements from many of the favorite stories of the past (the whole monomyth) to generate a new story that feels, old, familer, like a pair of comfortable shoes.
Star Wars is, to use a meal analogy, not that fancy novue dish custom crafted by an artisan master chief that combines flavors together in some new and strange cominbation to win awards (55 dollars a plate, portions are tiny!). Star Wars is your box of Mac and Cheese, it's that thing you ate growing up, you know it's not the best thing in the world, but it's comfortable, and sometimes you just want comfortable.
Nope I bash TLJ becuase it is such a awful film, not a bad "Star Wars" film its simply a terrible film - its dull, tedious, badly written, worse directed and with zero interest in characters or plot.
Backfire wrote: I don't think Johnson destroyed all that much, if anything. He can be rightly blamed for not setting up anything for the next movie, but it's pretty much the situation he inherited from the first.
disagree TFA set things up fine. we where introduced to Rey, Finn and Poe, we where told what Han and Leia ahd been up to. we where introduced to the first order. Kylo Ren and Snoke.
we where given, to a degree the motivation of the characters (Rey was looking for a family, Finn wanted freedom from the first order and friendship, Poe was pretty much "vive le resistance") this was all that was reaaally needed.
How about a protagonist who has interesting backstory or motivations, or main villain who is either intimidating or mysterious, or setting which makes tiny bits of sense? (Well actually background setting for TFA makes great deal of sense, we just never see it in the movie because they were afraid of exposition).
RJ did his best to make Rey more interesting and symphatetic. He saw that Snoke was unfixable, so he offed him. He also tried to expand the setting - didn't do particularly good job there though.
in the second act of the trilogy we needed to set the characters up a bit more as to where they where going, what their destinies where etc. we should have been given some indication as to what Snoke WANTED. etc. Johnson didn't really set up anything, hence my comment about him not building. by destroying I mean he attempted to subvert expectations and tear things down in, a to be blunt, unsastifying way. he killed off Snoke, and phasma (who really should have been kept around and used better, she should have been a foil for Finn, instead she was made the "sequal trilogy boba fett")
I really didn't think back then that Phasma was killed and I doubt it was RJ's intention. Her 'end' was ambiguous enough so that she could have plausibly survived it (much more plausibly than in TFA in fact). I was disappointed when she didn't feature in TRoS. Though, the movie was so crammed with stuff there was no room for any more characters.
I think, looking at episode 9 and where it was going, If I could go back in time and do TLJ myself, I'd have made the entire second movie about the search for Exogol. Luke and Rey would slowly travel the galaxy unraveling the trail of Bread crumbs. at the very end, yeah Snoke would die (likely at Luke's hands) and Palpatine would be revealed as the "big bad"
then ROS woulda worked a biit differant. I woulda proably had Luke be insturmental in defeating Palpatine (perhaps alongside Rey and Ben) and have LUKE die in the final clash with Palpatine. leaving Rey and Ben to rebuild the jedi
This would have been OK if the plan was that Palpatine was 'big bad' behind the scenes all the time. Unfortunately, it was a terrible plan.
What I would have done in TLJ would have introduced Knights of Ren as secondary enemies in the Casino World sequence (or whatever equivalent for 2ndary Hero Team). I would have shown that one of them was really disturbingly evil, to the point making Kylo Ren look like a choirboy. Then in Ep 9, you could have played out bit like Trevorrow script, though with interal conflict within FO which would have given chance for some degree of redemption for Kylo, if that was to be desired.
BrianDavion wrote: tyhe subversion of expectations I think is why so many people bash TLJ myself. Look, star wars will never be a best picture film, ut's not that type of movie, what it is those is comfortable, it uses elements from many of the favorite stories of the past (the whole monomyth) to generate a new story that feels, old, familer, like a pair of comfortable shoes.
Star Wars is, to use a meal analogy, not that fancy novue dish custom crafted by an artisan master chief that combines flavors together in some new and strange cominbation to win awards (55 dollars a plate, portions are tiny!). Star Wars is your box of Mac and Cheese, it's that thing you ate growing up, you know it's not the best thing in the world, but it's comfortable, and sometimes you just want comfortable.
Nope I bash TLJ becuase it is such a awful film, not a bad "Star Wars" film its simply a terrible film - its dull, tedious, badly written, worse directed and with zero interest in characters or plot.
Says the guy who was over the moon for Thor 2, the movie equivalent of store-brand mac and cheese.
BrianDavion wrote: tyhe subversion of expectations I think is why so many people bash TLJ myself. Look, star wars will never be a best picture film, ut's not that type of movie, what it is those is comfortable, it uses elements from many of the favorite stories of the past (the whole monomyth) to generate a new story that feels, old, familer, like a pair of comfortable shoes.
Star Wars is, to use a meal analogy, not that fancy novue dish custom crafted by an artisan master chief that combines flavors together in some new and strange cominbation to win awards (55 dollars a plate, portions are tiny!). Star Wars is your box of Mac and Cheese, it's that thing you ate growing up, you know it's not the best thing in the world, but it's comfortable, and sometimes you just want comfortable.
Nope I bash TLJ becuase it is such a awful film, not a bad "Star Wars" film its simply a terrible film - its dull, tedious, badly written, worse directed and with zero interest in characters or plot.
Says the guy who was over the moon for Thor 2, the movie equivalent of store-brand mac and cheese.
Yep a far superior film to the POS that is TLJ - it had everything that TLJ did not. but then what film doesn't
BrianDavion wrote: tyhe subversion of expectations I think is why so many people bash TLJ myself. Look, star wars will never be a best picture film, ut's not that type of movie, what it is those is comfortable, it uses elements from many of the favorite stories of the past (the whole monomyth) to generate a new story that feels, old, familer, like a pair of comfortable shoes.
Star Wars is, to use a meal analogy, not that fancy novue dish custom crafted by an artisan master chief that combines flavors together in some new and strange cominbation to win awards (55 dollars a plate, portions are tiny!). Star Wars is your box of Mac and Cheese, it's that thing you ate growing up, you know it's not the best thing in the world, but it's comfortable, and sometimes you just want comfortable.
Nope I bash TLJ becuase it is such a awful film, not a bad "Star Wars" film its simply a terrible film - its dull, tedious, badly written, worse directed and with zero interest in characters or plot.
Says the guy who was over the moon for Thor 2, the movie equivalent of store-brand mac and cheese.
which gets back to my earlier comparison. Mac and Cheese movies aren't always a bad thing, they're comfortable, they're familer, they remind us of our childhood.
Vulcan wrote: Then I hope they at least include a caveat that if you're going to do a big, flashy swordfighting scene, bring in some stunt coordinators who can teach the actors that you don't use a sword the same way you use a baseball bat.
And having to use CGI to edit out a dagger so the hero doesn't get stabbed in the back means you screwed up your fight choreography something ferocious.
As far as movie swordfighting goes, I think the sequels were fine despite the few mistakes here and there like the reverse grip that Kylo Ren sometime uses or the edit-out dagger, but it's rare to see a movie without a few such mistake. Episode 8 probably had the best one in the sequel if only thanks to the multitude of weapons used by the guards. The Phantom Menace probably had the best stuntman and stunt choregrapher and they still had a miss chronographed kick and a pretty weird final move to cripple Darth Maul (though that's not a suntman error that's a script error). There was also some strange decisions in terms of fighting moves in Revenge of the Sith like Yoda jumping at the Emperors face whose holding his sword overhead instead of chopping off his legs for example (or even the Emperor holding his sword overhead in the first place), or Obi-Wan and Anakin forgetting that their laser sword can also be used to stab (or that side step are a thing). Considering that a lightsaber cannot lose its sharpness or break its blade, you can hammer away your opponent as much as you want even though considering the "sharpness of such a blade" a fencing style should be favored. A more "realistic" lightsaber fight would last less than four seconds considering no armor can protect you and the blade can slice through a man with basically no effort.
True. But the fight in VIII is nothing BUT clumsy choreography. There is a spot about ten seconds in where the guard closest to the camera has a clean shot at Rey's back and he baseball-swings WELL OVER HER HEAD. She didn't dodge it, he wasn't threatened by either Rey or Kylo Ren, he didn't miss by inches either, we're talking a good two feet or so over her head while her back was turned.
It's pretty clear someone missed their cue on that take, and I'm pretty sure it was Ridley. Not a big deal; this happens all the time when making a big action sequence like this. It takes multiple shots to get it right. But for Rian Johnson to LEAVE IT IN... sheer laziness on his part. Ridiculous.
And that's right at the beginning of the fight, and the miscues continue on throughout the whole fight. It's beyond clumsy. Even a cheap 70's Hong Kong martial arts director would balk at releasing a fight scene that bad.
And having to use CGI to edit out a dagger so the hero doesn't get stabbed in the back means you screwed up your fight choreography something ferocious.
Thats been a common practice in post production for years.
Sure, a professional stuntman will tell you it can be done better but when it comes to shooting footage a director will tell you that time is money. The later is something they'd better teach in film school...
True. But then, 70s Hong Kong action directors would do whole films in a couple weeks. In the time it took to make TLJ they'd make a dozen movies or more. And STILL get the fight choreography done right...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Backfire wrote: I really didn't think back then that Phasma was killed and I doubt it was RJ's intention. Her 'end' was ambiguous enough so that she could have plausibly survived it (much more plausibly than in TFA in fact). I was disappointed when she didn't feature in TRoS. Though, the movie was so crammed with stuff there was no room for any more characters.
No reason to bring her back.
Face it, her whole point was to be the foil for Finn. She was his polar opposite. Her role was to be his opponent. Once Finn beat her in TLJ the conflict arc between Finn and Phasma was over, and with the arc over there was no point in shoehorning her into the already overcrowded TROS.
Vulcan wrote: Face it, her whole point was to be the foil for Finn. She was his polar opposite. Her role was to be his opponent. Once Finn beat her in TLJ the conflict arc between Finn and Phasma was over, and with the arc over there was no point in shoehorning her into the already overcrowded TROS.
Ironically, with a tiny bit of work (and by casting someone who actally had time to star in movie at that point), you could have made a redemption ark for her, but that might have been a lot of remdemption ark for a single movie.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: Are you suggesting Disney hire Jackie Chan and Cynthia Rothrock for the next Star Wars movie? Because that's not a bad suggestion.
On one of my (completely sober and not sarcastic) brain storm sessions about Trek fan films, I actually imagined Jackie Chan playing a strong, silent type of Starfleet admiral and doing a good job of it. I haven't thought of Cynthia Rothrock since passing on her VHS movies at blockbuster in the dawn of the 1990's.
warboss wrote: On one of my (completely sober and not sarcastic) brain storm sessions about Trek fan films, I actually imagined Jackie Chan playing a strong, silent type of Starfleet admiral and doing a good job of it.
That's a good idea. I think he would do good. Jacky Chan has flexed into drama and historical drama in China and does a good job. I loved him in 1911 (even though it seems I'm the only human being to have liked this movie).
BrianDavion wrote: tyhe subversion of expectations I think is why so many people bash TLJ myself. Look, star wars will never be a best picture film, ut's not that type of movie, what it is those is comfortable, it uses elements from many of the favorite stories of the past (the whole monomyth) to generate a new story that feels, old, familer, like a pair of comfortable shoes.
Star Wars is, to use a meal analogy, not that fancy novue dish custom crafted by an artisan master chief that combines flavors together in some new and strange cominbation to win awards (55 dollars a plate, portions are tiny!). Star Wars is your box of Mac and Cheese, it's that thing you ate growing up, you know it's not the best thing in the world, but it's comfortable, and sometimes you just want comfortable.
Nope I bash TLJ becuase it is such a awful film, not a bad "Star Wars" film its simply a terrible film - its dull, tedious, badly written, worse directed and with zero interest in characters or plot.
Says the guy who was over the moon for Thor 2, the movie equivalent of store-brand mac and cheese.
Lmao omg... Dude, you're like the biggest DCEU white knight on this board and you're seriously going to take a shot at him for liking Dark World? Get real.
warboss wrote: On one of my (completely sober and not sarcastic) brain storm sessions about Trek fan films, I actually imagined Jackie Chan playing a strong, silent type of Starfleet admiral and doing a good job of it.
That's a good idea. I think he would do good. Jacky Chan has flexed into drama and historical drama in China and does a good job. I loved him in 1911 (even though it seems I'm the only human being to have liked this movie).
I haven't seen it but I looked forward to him in The Foreigner. The final movie wasn't very good but I was happy with his performance. In regards to my trek daydream, I imagined him to be a quieter Chinese Tywin Lannister in demeanor and tone.
Face it, her whole point was to be the foil for Finn. She was his polar opposite. Her role was to be his opponent. Once Finn beat her in TLJ the conflict arc between Finn and Phasma was over, and with the arc over there was no point in shoehorning her into the already overcrowded TROS.
She was his nominal boss and they barely interacted. She wasn't a foil or an opponent. She was a throw away actor who was stuffed into a shiny suit because Game of Thrones. There was never any point to the character. Her falling down a hole in TLJ was a lot less meaningful than random melee stormtrooper flipping out on the traitor in TFA and fulfilled the same narrative purpose less effectively.
Face it, her whole point was to be the foil for Finn. She was his polar opposite. Her role was to be his opponent. Once Finn beat her in TLJ the conflict arc between Finn and Phasma was over, and with the arc over there was no point in shoehorning her into the already overcrowded TROS.
She was his nominal boss and they barely interacted. She wasn't a foil or an opponent. She was a throw away actor who was stuffed into a shiny suit because Game of Thrones. There was never any point to the character. Her falling down a hole in TLJ was a lot less meaningful than random melee stormtrooper flipping out on the traitor in TFA and fulfilled the same narrative purpose less effectively.
That's why she will be known as the Boba Fett of the sequel; cool character design and potentially interesting, but in the end completely pointless.
BrianDavion wrote: yeah except unlike Boba fett the fanbase doesn't seem to have fallen for the cool char design and the "they're a abd ass we assure you"
I honestly think that remains to be seen. Stories about Boba Fett didn't come out immediately after Empire Strikes Back, it took some time.
There is a spot about ten seconds in where the guard closest to the camera has a clean shot at Rey's back and he baseball-swings WELL OVER HER HEAD. She didn't dodge it, he wasn't threatened by either Rey or Kylo Ren, he didn't miss by inches either, we're talking a good two feet or so over her head while her back was turned.
It's pretty clear someone missed their cue on that take, and I'm pretty sure it was Ridley. Not a big deal; this happens all the time when making a big action sequence like this. It takes multiple shots to get it right. But for Rian Johnson to LEAVE IT IN... sheer laziness on his part. Ridiculous.
well maybe.
Or maybe the guys under the control of Snoke/Palpatine didn't kill her as that was kind of the whole point of Palpatine's plan.
Her actually being killed might've thrown a bit of a spanner in the works here eh ?
Same way as the 'troopers on the deathstar aren't incapable of hitting their foes, they want them to get away and killing Han and Co. would scupper things immensely.
Biggest issue I've always had with the Emperor guard types is why they have melee weapons as their primary means of attack at all.
Given the jedi are dead/extinct surely it'd make more sense for them all to be packing master-crafted supedupdethray guns etc etc
Or whatever.
Rule of coll etc etc though eh ?
edit : lost a bunch of text ?
I mean I'm sure it's more likely to be something of an error than a hidden easter egg for those who want to spend ages analyzing choreography, but I still think the fights in this series of films were, generally, better done than any in the original trilogy -- notable exception of Luke and Vader final battle and then only really works when Luke has his epiphany and I much prefer them to those in the prequel trilogy.
reds8n wrote: Or maybe the guys under the control of Snoke/Palpatine didn't kill her as that was kind of the whole point of Palpatine's plan.
Her actually being killed might've thrown a bit of a spanner in the works here eh ?
So why was Snoke goading Kylo into killing Rey, if he didn't want Rey dead? It definitely seems that Snoke didn't intend/expect to die.
So, unless Snoke's guard weren't actually working for Snoke, and were working for Palpatine more directly, why didn't they intervene when Snoke wanted Rey dead at Kylo's hands?
As you say below, it's way way way more likely that it's just bad fight choreography - such sucks in a fight that has some good moments in it (one of the guards rushing to save another from Kylo using his gauntlets as a shield). Actually, it's most of Kylo's fight choreography that is good - his combat scenes I really enjoy watching. For whatever reason, Rey's just doesn't work for me (and no, that's not a comment about women fighting - quite a few of the SW combat scenes I love the most, from TCW, involve female combatants).
Same way as the 'troopers on the deathstar aren't incapable of hitting their foes, they want them to get away and killing Han and Co. would scupper things immensely.
Why bother sending troops after them in the Death Star at all then?
For what it's worth, I interpret that whole encounter as "quick, let's stop them escaping!" "oh no, they're getting away on board their ship!" "hang on, call off the fighters - why don't we track them instead?" "tarkin, you're a genius!"
Quick, let's make ANOTHER addition to ANH with that scene in!
Biggest issue I've always had with the Emperor guard types is why they have melee weapons as their primary means of attack at all.
Given the jedi are dead/extinct surely it'd make more sense for them all to be packing master-crafted supedupdethray guns etc etc
Or whatever.
Rule of coll etc etc though eh ?
Almost certainly. Could well be ceremonial too. Plus, I *think* they have pistol sidearms, but I'm not so sure on that.
I mean I'm sure it's more likely to be something of an error than a hidden easter egg for those who want to spend ages analyzing choreography, but I still think the fights in this series of films were, generally, better done than any in the original trilogy -- notable exception of Luke and Vader final battle and then only really works when Luke has his epiphany and I much prefer them to those in the prequel trilogy.
But, obvs, MMV.
I prefer the prequel fights a lot more (okay, maybe by Duel of the Fates and any of the ones in RotS), but the best ones are definitely from Clone Wars. So much more emotion, more character displayed in the animation, spectacle, and in many places, far more character driven, such as
Spoiler:
Anakin vs Ventress, and vs Bariss, in the Jedi Temple Bombing arc, Kenobi vs Maul (both in TCW and their encounter in Rebels), Dooku vs the Nightsisters, Maul and Savage vs Palpatine etc etc
Not SFX wise but actually controlled by him all along ?
So the guards are working for Palpatine.. whether or not they know that of course..... ?
Why bother sending troops after them in the Death Star at all then?
For what it's worth, I interpret that whole encounter as "quick, let's stop them escaping!" "oh no, they're getting away on board their ship!" "hang on, call off the fighters - why don't we track them instead?" "tarkin, you're a genius!"
It's been a LONG time since I read it but I'm reasonably sure i read somewhere or other -- a novel or maybe even a comic book ? -- that their escape was entirely allowed and the fighting was to convince them it was genuine and it also showed quite how... committed ? .. mindless ? .. controlled ? .. the troopers were in following orders like that.
Of course the real question is that if Leia is so sure they were allowed to escape why they -- presumably -- flew straight back to the hidden rebel base rather than, I dunno, stopping off somewhere else and "radioing"/equivalent the Alliance and suggesting they skedaddle pretty sharpish.
One assumes the deathstar file was a bit too large to "email" or whatever , hence the need to physically transport the plans around in a droid/similar.
Of course all of that could well be a later.... addition/retcon to what was going on too.
One would assume, with the best will or pilots in the world, that the TIE fighters that followed the Falcon would've had trouble not doing serious damage.
Carrie Fisher's audition tape for "A New Hope" indicates that, at least in that draft, Leia knew they were being tracked, and decided to lure the Death Star to Yavin, as Colin Q. Bang's answer said.
Leia's lines read:
I know they'll follow, and they'll bring the Death Star. Our only hope is to destroy it before it destroys us. Look, hiding is useless now! With the Death Star they'll continue destroying systems until they've found us. We have no alternative but to process the information and use it while there's still time.
then again ti could just be that the initial trilogy were not perhaps terribly well thought out either if one really thinks about it
BrianDavion wrote: yeah except unlike Boba fett the fanbase doesn't seem to have fallen for the cool char design and the "they're a abd ass we assure you"
The advantage is that Phasma was actually seen doing some actual fighting on screen for more than two seconds and actually knocked down Finn only to be cheap shoted unlike Boba Fett whose death is the result of a stupid accident. The only thing Phasma need to reach Boba Fett's hight is to have a fanboy or fangirl write books or comics about her.
ScarletRose wrote: Stories about Boba Fett didn't come out immediately after Empire Strikes Back, it took some time.
There was also no world wide web, cell phones, or any other number of innovations that have allowed people to communicate much quicker and easier when the OT came out; the time between something being introduced and discussed is far, far quicker.
BrianDavion wrote: yeah except unlike Boba fett the fanbase doesn't seem to have fallen for the cool char design and the "they're a abd ass we assure you"
The advantage is that Phasma was actually seen doing some actual fighting on screen for more than two seconds and actually knocked down Finn only to be cheap shoted unlike Boba Fett whose death is the result of a stupid accident. The only thing Phasma need to reach Boba Fett's hight is to have a fanboy or fangirl write books or comics about her.
Not really as he said Boba had a char design that caught peoples imagination, Phasma was a shiny chrome storm trooper and a pretty piss poor attempt at a char design. Even if she fought for a few moments she was still just a faceless mook whose main claim to fame was the actress being in GoT.
reds8n wrote: Wasn't Snokes a literal puppet of Palpatine ?
Not SFX wise but actually controlled by him all along ?
So the guards are working for Palpatine.. whether or not they know that of course..... ?
Not sure if Snoke was literally being controlled by Palpatine. Honestly, the only connection we seem to have, as far as I remember, is just those Snoke-clones in Palpatine's lair on Exogol.
But, if Snoke WAS being controlled by Palpatine - why was he asking Kylo to kill Rey?
That's my problem with the whole "they knew all along to keep Rey alive!" - they don't try swaying her to the Dark Side. Snoke just sees her as an obstacle to wiping out the Resistance and Luke Skywalker. They try to execute her aboard Snoke's flagship.
I know Star Wars films aren't narratively watertight, and if you go digging, you can easily find inconsistencies and plot holes and stupid decisions by characters (your Leia example is a good one!). However, this is one of those issues that you don't really need to go digging to think "hang on, what?"
BrianDavion wrote: yeah except unlike Boba fett the fanbase doesn't seem to have fallen for the cool char design and the "they're a abd ass we assure you"
The advantage is that Phasma was actually seen doing some actual fighting on screen for more than two seconds and actually knocked down Finn only to be cheap shoted unlike Boba Fett whose death is the result of a stupid accident. The only thing Phasma need to reach Boba Fett's hight is to have a fanboy or fangirl write books or comics about her.
Not really as he said Boba had a char design that caught peoples imagination, Phasma was a shiny chrome storm trooper and a pretty piss poor attempt at a char design. Even if she fought for a few moments she was still just a faceless mook whose main claim to fame was the actress being in GoT.
I dunno, Phasma had some pretty cool design. The pike, the shoulder cloak - even had she not been Christie, I'd still think she was pretty cool looking. My only wishes are that we got a better idea of her ranking/station within the First Order (are all First Order Captains dressed like that? Is she a unique Captain? Is she the ONLY Captain?) and that she actually has more of a personal stake/connection, or that it just gets played up more.
Secretly an artificial creation of Darth Sidious, Snoke was engineered on Exegol, a legendary Sith-affiliated planet hidden in the Unknown Regions, where loyalists of the Sith Eternal awaited the return of the Sith.
......
Ultimately, Snoke's entire existence was built for this moment: to serve as a final test for Ren. He not only tested Ren's worthiness as a disciple, but also his capacity to inherit the Sith legacy. His role had been designed by the Sith Eternal cultists to act as a final crucible, to groom and mold Ren into a master of attack and cunning. Ren became the new Supreme Leader of the First Order, but after encountering a revived Sidious on Snoke's homeworld of Exegol, he aspired to rule the galaxy as Emperor of the Final Order.
In the context of the story, Snoke was created by Palpatine.[39] According to The Rise of Skywalker: The Visual Dictionary (2019), Snoke's physical appearance was purposefully designed by Palpatine to ensure his species remained unidentifiable.[1] Furthermore, Snoke's reluctance to meet in person with his First Order underlings helped conceal the fact that he was an artificial being.[1] General Pryde was one of the few characters who knew Snoke was subservient to a higher power (Palpatine).[
The Rise of Skywalker (2019)
Main article: Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker
In The Rise of Skywalker, Kylo Ren finds several clones resembling Snoke at Palpatine's lair on the Sith world Exegol. Snoke's voice is briefly used by Palpatine when talking to Ren.[44] It is revealed that Palpatine had created Snoke as a puppet to lure Ren towards the dark side, and to reclaim the galaxy through the First Order.[39]
Related works
Snoke appears in the 2015 novelization of The Force Awakens by Alan Dean Foster.[45] In the novel, Leia tells Han in more detail how Snoke, aware that their son would be "strong with the Force" and possess "equal potential for good or evil", had long watched Ben and manipulated events to draw him to the dark side.[46] An unplayable Lego minifigure version of Snoke appears in cutscenes in the 2016 video game Lego Star Wars: The Force Awakens. In the spring of 2018, Snoke was added to the mobile MOBA Star Wars: Force Arena as a playable Dark Side squad leader.[47] Canon works reveal that Snoke acquired Palpatine's Senate office.[16]
Prior to the release of The Rise of Skywalker, the 2019 comic book Star Wars: Age of Resistance – Supreme Leader Snoke implied a direct connection between Snoke and Palpatine. In the book, Snoke speaks of Luke Skywalker to Kylo Ren, stating, "If I had your uncle by my side instead of you, the galaxy would have been mine a long time ago"
TBF though the visual guide has all sorts of odd stuff :
His species has been enslaved, what, three times in his lifetime alone? He fought in brutal wars against both droid and stormtrooper occupation. He's seen the direct impact of the power the Empire can have (Alderaan) and the First Order (Hosnian Prime). He's watched his best friends killed, frozen, betrayed, and outcast all around him. How on earth could Chewbacca be apolitical?
"Well, yes, my people were enslaved and used for labour by the Empire. Oh, I don't really mind. No, I'm not involved in politics, why do you ask?" - Chewbacca, without the arrrrrrrgh-ing.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: Are you suggesting Disney hire Jackie Chan and Cynthia Rothrock for the next Star Wars movie? Because that's not a bad suggestion.
Either one would do a better job than... whoever worked on TLJ.
It's worth noting, there is no head fight choreographer for TLJ listed in the credits. There's an ASSISTANT listed, but no head. Which makes me wonder if the head fight choreographer demanded his name be removed when RJ cut filming the big fights short, WELL before getting even a half-decent shot in the can.
BrianDavion wrote: yeah except unlike Boba fett the fanbase doesn't seem to have fallen for the cool char design and the "they're a abd ass we assure you"
I honestly think that remains to be seen. Stories about Boba Fett didn't come out immediately after Empire Strikes Back, it took some time.
The reason Boba Fett got so much love from the fans comes down to one thing. Vader had to pointedly tell him "No disintigrations." And Fett's response? Utter nonchalance. When you can act THAT calm when the Dark Lord of the Sith scolds you, there's a story worth hearing there.
And wouldn't it be nice if we eventually got to see it?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
reds8n wrote: Of course the real question is that if Leia is so sure they were allowed to escape why they -- presumably -- flew straight back to the hidden rebel base rather than, I dunno, stopping off somewhere else and "radioing"/equivalent the Alliance and suggesting they skedaddle pretty sharpish.
It's worth remembering just how small the Yavin base was. A dozen or so snub fighters and their ground crew under the command of General Dodonna. How much MORE stuff do we see when the Empire overruns the (at the time) primary rebel base on Hoth? Quite a bit, as I recall. Several freighters worth, anyway.
So... I'd bet Yavin was one of many satellite bases. Leia took them there because a) they would have had the gear to decode the Death Star plans, b) had a small strike force with which to - hopefully - exploit any flaws found, and c) worst comes to worst, they load R2 onto an X-wing with a trusted pilot and send him off to the main Rebellion base while the Empire blows up this relatively minor base.
Of course, this is 'after the fact' analysis that doesn't hold water until after ESB...
His species has been enslaved, what, three times in his lifetime alone? He fought in brutal wars against both droid and stormtrooper occupation. He's seen the direct impact of the power the Empire can have (Alderaan) and the First Order (Hosnian Prime). He's watched his best friends killed, frozen, betrayed, and outcast all around him. How on earth could Chewbacca be apolitical?
"Well, yes, my people were enslaved and used for labour by the Empire. Oh, I don't really mind. No, I'm not involved in politics, why do you ask?" - Chewbacca, without the arrrrrrrgh-ing.
I suppose they thought being apolitical was a quality. Someone forgot that the balance fallacy is...well...fallacious.
His species has been enslaved, what, three times in his lifetime alone? He fought in brutal wars against both droid and stormtrooper occupation. He's seen the direct impact of the power the Empire can have (Alderaan) and the First Order (Hosnian Prime). He's watched his best friends killed, frozen, betrayed, and outcast all around him. How on earth could Chewbacca be apolitical?
"Well, yes, my people were enslaved and used for labour by the Empire. Oh, I don't really mind. No, I'm not involved in politics, why do you ask?" - Chewbacca, without the arrrrrrrgh-ing.
Fiscally he's conservative though.
Empire/First Order both pro very low tax rates so...
.. if only they'd given him a medal with Han and Luke ...
Incidentally :
That was what was given to him when they got back and found out about Leia's death right ?
Or was it something else ?
I know that over the years in books, comics etc it had been clarified that he had indeed been honoured and the reason we hadn't seen it was for ...reasons from the ridiculous to the sublime.
Yeah "Critics" praised it and then cashed their check.
Guess critic bribing budget was cut for TRoS, huh.
Critics liked TLJ because it was distinctly different from earlier installments, had powerful emotional moments and well-set up climatic scenes, presented a new, more mystical take on Force and had defined character arc for main protagonist. This was in strong contrast with TFA, which was well done and evenly paced movie but very soulless, flat, took no risks, corporate committee work at its best and worst. Critics were not hardcore fans and did not care whether Holdo maneuver made any kind of sense in-universe, or whether Luke even briefly contemplating killing his student while he was asleep was in-character, or whether it was even remotely plausible that one X-Wing could clear out turrets from a dreadnought sized ships.
For me, movie is usually as good as its best scenes. If the movie has scenes I want to seek out from Youtube and watch again just to relive the moment, it counts as a success in my books, glass half full. TLJ had plenty of stuff done bad and the weird four-act pacing deflated the end of movie somewhat. But it still had good scenes which I would want to watch again. TFA doesn't. Prequels mostly don't. TRoS, iffy.
the bit about chewie being apolitical I always saw as being intended to mean more "he has opinions and views, but generally when he gets involved it's because of his friends, he doesn't fight for abstract concepts, he fights for his friends" and yeah thats NOT apolitical but sometimes words get misused.
BrianDavion wrote: the bit about chewie being apolitical I always saw as being intended to mean more "he has opinions and views, but generally when he gets involved it's because of his friends, he doesn't fight for abstract concepts, he fights for his friends" and yeah thats NOT apolitical but sometimes words get misused.
I mean, that's still paints him a pretty bad light.
"These guys blow up planets and kill countless millions/billions of people. But I'm not fighting them because of that, I'm fighting them because my friends don't like them, and I'll do whatever they tell me to."
While that's interesting concept for an anti-hero style character, it makes the 'hero of the Rebellion' Chewbacca into a bit of a dick, and not really a heroic figure at all.
Han Solo is only in it for the money *at the start*, but even he has a change of heart and comes back because fighting the Empire is the "good" thing to do, and by the end, he's full on in it for the cause. But apparently Chewbacca's just following along with Han for all of this, and doesn't really feel anything strong about the Empire/First Order.
It sadly fits with their backstory for the new trilogy. Han wants to abandon family and friends and go smuggle illegal monsters? Chewie is down for that.
Ignore the First Order and just putter around? That's fine too.
)
Literally a hero of the resistance but hey-ho ! 