Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Oh for heavens sake.

Other than 'a film I didn't enjoy got good reviews' there's not a shred of evidence that Disney are bribing critics.

Please, just stop with such baseless nonsense.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Oh for heavens sake.

Other than 'a film I didn't enjoy got good reviews' there's not a shred of evidence that Disney are bribing critics.

Please, just stop with such baseless nonsense.

The overwhelming evidence is the reviews themselves - we don't need anything more. Coercion or corruption - likely some of both.

Oh just stop.

YOU didn't like a film. That doesn't mean the film isn't enjoyable.

You're not wrong to dislike it. The next man isn't wrong for liking it.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Oh for heavens sake.

Other than 'a film I didn't enjoy got good reviews' there's not a shred of evidence that Disney are bribing critics.

Please, just stop with such baseless nonsense.

Presuming that was directed at me, well my thoughts are that critics are paid for their job. They get advanced viewings based upon their reviews. if they say this was gak they wont get asked back, so they skirt the edges or don't rock the boat in order to have the ability to review films in the future. It is pretty obvious and basic business. I am not going to discount the film but would like to know the credentials of the people reviewing the film. if they are unbiased, established fans I am more likely to trust their opinion. As you MDG referred to to people who didn't like TLJ as edgelords for not liking the film, regardless of why they didn't like it, your opinion carries no weight at all.

They slagged off the Prequels.

They slagged off the DC universe.

They ripped into Tom Cruise's Mummy film.

If every blockbuster got favourable reviews - you may be on to something. But they don't. At all. Marvel get good reviews because slap my cheeks and Call Me Deirdre, they make good movies. Critics clearly enjoyed TLJ. They were no more wrong to than I am, and no more right than you not enjoying it.

Seriously. Just knock it off. Someone enjoying something you didn't does not a bribery/coercion case make.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Oh just stop.

YOU didn't like a film. That doesn't mean the film isn't enjoyable.

You're not wrong to dislike it. The next man isn't wrong for liking it.

See the response below for many good reasons to simply not to trust film critics.

I hated it - you liked it - means nothing either way.

They slagged off the Prequels.

- Not that I recall they didn't - loads of good reviews at the time - later they backtracked when its was safe

They ripped into Tom Cruise's Mummy film -

for no good reason - it was certainly better than TLJ but then so was paint drying.

Comments about SW TLJ belong in the SW TLJ thread.

Thanks in advance for your co-operation...

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
They slagged off the Prequels.

They slagged off the DC universe.

They ripped into Tom Cruise's Mummy film.

If every blockbuster got favourable reviews - you may be on to something. But they don't. At all. Marvel get good reviews because slap my cheeks and Call Me Deirdre, they make good movies. Critics clearly enjoyed TLJ. They were no more wrong to than I am, and no more right than you not enjoying it.

Seriously. Just knock it off. Someone enjoying something you didn't does not a bribery/coercion case make.

Not in any way trying to suggest it is bribery, but when your bread is buttered..

I cant attest to the specifics you mention but I have no desire to spend my money based upon the word of people I don't know and have not heard of. I judge no man for enjoying films I don't, but I do feel that the sequels could do much better. I loved Rogue One, thought it was a cracking film, the slow start didn't bother me at all as I grew up with old fashioned British war films, but the sequels I thought were utter dross. Even worse than the EU books and if you have read all the full horror of the Vong war and the new Jedi rubbish you know how bad that got. I hope Solo doesn't go that way, but as it stands I have seen no evidence either way, refer to my last post of I think could be good,

I have just about lost interest in Star Wars. There are more movies I dislike than like. The original characters are such classics to me, but I don't have any interest in this movie. Its not really Solo to me. And I don't understand what the heck Disney is doing. 'Hey we just killed Solo, but here is a movie about a younger Solo! Keeping the legend alive.' Sometimes I think its best to just leave origin stories untold. Like the Fett movie. The best part about Fett, was that you didn't know who was under the mask. You could put anyone. Even yourself. Now some hacks are going to make a BS story about him . Just leave him alone.

If they just instead did 'Character X: A Star Wars Film' instead of 'Solo', I would actually be more interested. They are just bleeding everything to death. I think Rogue One was really surprisingly good, and I imagine its possible that Solo could be too, but I feel like I got enough from Solo that I needed to from the original movies. I don't like how he just shows up in TFA, and then dies is a ridiculously way.

I guess I just don't want to support this anymore. Understand if others do, that's cool. But to me its Solo and Lando in name only. If they were introducing new characters into the TFA/TLJ timeline, then great! It would be a nice break from the rebellion no one seems to care about.

I just think that while Disney is doing such an amazing job with Marvel, they are behaving like DC with Star Wars. There doesn't seem to be a real plan.

So I'll see it when it comes out on demand if I am bored, but will skip the theater.

I loved the second half of Rogue One - if its like that but more of a crime caper as the trailers suggest it will be great. I'll wait till its on tv though

Marvel does seem to have a understanding of what they want to do. Star Wars not so much.

I think making a heist movie in the Star Wars universe is a great idea. They should use templates from other movie genres to make more Star Wars films in the wider galaxy. I truly support that idea.

However, I have no interest in seeing this. TMP made my love of Star Wars pretty shaky, but TLJ killed it. I don;t want more Nihilism in my life. I have Real-life for that.

 KTG17 wrote:
I have just about lost interest in Star Wars. There are more movies I dislike than like. The original characters are such classics to me, but I don't have any interest in this movie. Its not really Solo to me. And I don't understand what the heck Disney is doing. 'Hey we just killed Solo, but here is a movie about a younger Solo! Keeping the legend alive.' Sometimes I think its best to just leave origin stories untold. Like the Fett movie. The best part about Fett, was that you didn't know who was under the mask. You could put anyone. Even yourself. Now some hacks are going to make a BS story about him . Just leave him alone.

If they just instead did 'Character X: A Star Wars Film' instead of 'Solo', I would actually be more interested. They are just bleeding everything to death. I think Rogue One was really surprisingly good, and I imagine its possible that Solo could be too, but I feel like I got enough from Solo that I needed to from the original movies. I don't like how he just shows up in TFA, and then dies is a ridiculously way.

I guess I just don't want to support this anymore. Understand if others do, that's cool. But to me its Solo and Lando in name only. If they were introducing new characters into the TFA/TLJ timeline, then great! It would be a nice break from the rebellion no one seems to care about.

I just think that while Disney is doing such an amazing job with Marvel, they are behaving like DC with Star Wars. There doesn't seem to be a real plan.

So I'll see it when it comes out on demand if I am bored, but will skip the theater.

I will say Solo is both a good and bad choice for what they are trying.

Disney is looking to explore something other than Rebels vs Evil Empire's Death Star. Solo is a popular character, who will draw people in on name recognition, but enable them to look at branching out somewhat. The problem, as you note, is he's dead and killed off in a lack luster fashion. There is sort of no point to the story, we already know he/Lando/Chewie make it out just fine, it cannot really go in any great direction. It would have been good to go with new characters or characters we know but current (where is Wedge perhaps?). Rogue One hit the tried and true motif of Rebel vs Empire, and even the Death Star. However, they were all new characters who could die at any point (and did).

But then, this is normal for Hollywood. Go to the same well until it is exhausted for this generation, walk away, and then come back to see if it has refilled any.

I've heard its a really good version of something that still doesn't really need to exist. It sounds fun, if a little forgettable. Better than I'm expecting; worth seeing in theaters if I get the chance, but not a huge deal if I wait and see it on the home release.

Yeah I don't want to sound like I wont sit down and watch a pointless movie. There are lots of pointless movies I'll watch on a Sunday afternoon. But to me Star Wars left a legacy in my brain from my time as a youth. I appreciate the stories that will add to it, as Rogue One did. However, the prequels and more recent films really wanted me to just lock what I loved about Star Wars in a box, and keep the rest of what I didn't like out. Yes, the universe is a huge place and there are many, many stores that could be told, just would prefer with new characters.

You know what one of my favorite parts of all of Star Wars is? The Cantina on Tatooine. The original scene mind you (Han shot first). I imagined all the stores about those characters as a kid, and the trouble they would have made. I don't really need all of their stories told, but exploring some of guys like them, in the backdrop of the Empire, would be cool. Yet everything in the universe still centers around a small group of individuals like the rest of them don't matter.

They have to do be able to do better than this. I would hope.

For me, it has more need to exist than the mainline Star Wars sequels, and I hate the idea of a prequel explaining a character's backstory.

The original Star Wars trilogy was a complete story. It was done, finished, a painting that needed the artist to step away. The prequels and the sequels can only do harm. However, side stories that exist elsewhere and elsewhen can tell their own contained stories. R1 and Solo exist somewhere in the middle ground for me, each being enough of a side story to take it or leave it, although connected to the main story in an unobtrusive way (well, I hope Solo is unobtrusive). Basically, I'd rather see Disney make another Ewok Adventure instead of another The Force Awakens/The Last Jedi.

Even in movies I really don't like, there are moments I like - Krennic visiting Vader in his Mustafarian castle in R1, Kylo Ren telling Rey to face facts about her parents in TLJ. I'm sure there will be something to like in this Solo film. I'm not at the point yet where I feel sick thinking about going to see a SW film. (I do feel sick, however, at the prospect of buying into a SW miniatures game.)

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
For me, it has more need to exist than the mainline Star Wars sequels, and I hate the idea of a prequel explaining a character's backstory.

The original Star Wars trilogy was a complete story. It was done, finished, a painting that needed the artist to step away. The prequels and the sequels can only do harm. However, side stories that exist elsewhere and elsewhen can tell their own contained stories. R1 and Solo exist somewhere in the middle ground for me, each being enough of a side story to take it or leave it, although connected to the main story in an unobtrusive way (well, I hope Solo is unobtrusive). Basically, I'd rather see Disney make another Ewok Adventure instead of another The Force Awakens/The Last Jedi.

What's bizarre is that does seem to be their plan, though they decided they had to ease the fanbase into it with the Sequels carrying on the saga storyline first, but allowed that concept to be executed in two such discordant ways(unrepentant nostalgiafest followed by deconstructionist "let the past die" teardown) that they've completely undermined that intent.

I really do wish they had just skipped right to the new story stuff. No new "episode" films, or hell just do one solitary direct Sequel where you wrap things up with Old Man Luke and Senator Organa and Deadbeat Dad Han etc while setting up the New Republic era, then get right on with something different - no Apple iStormtroopers vs Store Brand Rebellion, just get out there and show us the galaxy. Or with something safe but fun, like Solo, or an Obi Wan film, or give us side-stories set during the GCW where we see Rebel plebs rather than the Big Damn Heroes, or we get to spend time with the thugs and scum.

I'd rather have new stuff(or even old stuff, I wouldn't say no to a KotOR-era film or trilogy), but I think you're right that the key thing about films like Solo is there's no real obligation attached to them to consider them equivalent in importance to the OT(or PT, despite the films being a bit off a lot of the folk who grew up over those years regard them as fondly as some of us regard the OT).

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
For me, it has more need to exist than the mainline Star Wars sequels, and I hate the idea of a prequel explaining a character's backstory.

The original Star Wars trilogy was a complete story. It was done, finished, a painting that needed the artist to step away. The prequels and the sequels can only do harm. However, side stories that exist elsewhere and elsewhen can tell their own contained stories. R1 and Solo exist somewhere in the middle ground for me, each being enough of a side story to take it or leave it, although connected to the main story in an unobtrusive way (well, I hope Solo is unobtrusive). Basically, I'd rather see Disney make another Ewok Adventure instead of another The Force Awakens/The Last Jedi.

You know, I was not big on Episode 1. Episode II I used to think was okay (other than the whinging scenes), and I kind of like Episode III. However, I saw them as an adult and my opinions were affected by that.

Watch Episodes 1-2 with kids, and the movies are entirely different. My 6 and 8 year old were spell bound by them. All the bits that grated they absolutely loved. I had to fast forward through the Tusken Raider massacre, but my kids were still teary eyed by Shimi Skywalker's death. Pod racing was AMAZING. R2 was spell binding, and 3PO made them laugh. My son laughed at all of the cornball battledroid lines and antics...

At some level, Star Wars is a 1930s-1950s radio or movie serial. That is what it is intended to be in many respects (well, not the TFA and TLJ so much). Watching Episode I and II again with kids made me realize that Lucas wasn't crazy and I've heard the same thing from other parents who have watched them with their kids. They have the over the top adventure with goofy side kick and now with added kid involvement (Dick Tracy and Junior Tracy, Captain Midnight and Chuck, Terry and the Pirates, Batman and Robin, Superman and Jimmy Olsen...). Jar-Jar might make an adult groan, but kids think he's hilarious and cheer for him.

 Yodhrin wrote:

I really do wish they had just skipped right to the new story stuff. No new "episode" films, or hell just do one solitary direct Sequel where you wrap things up with Old Man Luke and Senator Organa and Deadbeat Dad Han etc while setting up the New Republic era, then get right on with something different - no Apple iStormtroopers vs Store Brand Rebellion, just get out there and show us the galaxy. Or with something safe but fun, like Solo, or an Obi Wan film, or give us side-stories set during the GCW where we see Rebel plebs rather than the Big Damn Heroes, or we get to spend time with the thugs and scum.

Living in the middle of something is very different from experiencing it once complete. It's easy to forget that there were 6 years in which audiences didn't have the end to the original Star Wars trilogy. We're basically living in that now. I see a lot of similar reactions from people reading Doomsday Clock. People who ready the original Watchmen issue by issue have a different view of it than people that only picked up the collected graphic novel once it was complete.

 Manchu wrote:
Even in movies I really don't like, there are moments I like - Krennic visiting Vader in his Mustafarian castle in R1

That is interesting, and the only flaw I saw in the movie. Vader was not the second in command to decide who would run the Death Star. In a New Hope he answered to Tarkin. No doubt a powerful guy, but even he was talked back to by other Imperial Officers (referencing the choke scene here). There is nothing to say that Tarkin, who's position was a military one, didn't have peers managing other projects or groups. Vader was like a Commissar, making sure the Emperor's work got done. Later on he seems to rise to the position of a high rank, but even in the cut film of Return of the Jedi, the guy running the second Death Star (forgot his name) keeps Vader out of the Emperor's quarters when Vader demanded to see him. So Vader is not even a real 'second in command' in the original Trilogy, and that scene is more like fan service to me. Looks cool, I agree. But doesn't seem to match the canon.

Kylo Ren telling Rey to face facts about her parents in TLJ.

I agree with this too, as well as the force connection convos. Thought those were the few cool things in the movie.

R1's depiction Vader seems spot on to me. He's clearly outside of the military hierarchy proper in ANH and yet the supreme commander of a huge fleet in ESB - although he does kill some people to make that clear. In R1, he seems mothballed and sees an opportunity to launch a power play vis-a-vis the Death Star security breach. That's (the) one thing I really liked about R1.

I wonder if the Solo movie will also clarify or shed light on some early Empire politics.

There is no reason to not assume he wouldn't have been tasked by the emperor to crush the rebellion at Hoth and pursue the rebels/Skywalker. But he is not a general, admiral, or anything else of that title, so therefore out of the military hierarchy.

The loss of Tarkin could have moved Vader up, sure, and being a trusted follower of the emperor be given special tasks from time to time. But to decide who was going to work or manage what project? I don't think that fits into the canon at all. How does he go from deciding Tarkin isnt going to be in charge to taking orders from him? Doesn't make any sense.

Imperial politics would be intriguing. So much is explained about the Empire in ANH than is stated in any other film. You understand there is a bureaucracy and how the Empire will be managed, so how resources are managed, taxes collected and all that. What TFA and TLJ dont really explain is how the First Order not only just pops up out of nowhere from the remains of the Empire, but where it gets its money to buy all those wonderful toys. Starkiller Base is going to cost some serious cash to build!

Of all the throwbacks to the original, I really feel like the biggest mistake in TFA was putting Rey on a desert planet in the middle of nowhere. Had she been an orphan on a planet more akin to the one we are introduced to Cassian on that was occupied by the First Order; there would have been some fantastic options to establish the setting. Jakku just didn't give them anything to do with the villains after the village massacre scene.

I think Krennic just wanted Vader to get him in front of the Emperor. And Vader was willing to, under his own vague authority, order Krennic to track down the security breach. The tacit bargain seemed to be, Vader and Krennic will work together to sideline Tarkin.

With Solo, we have the opportunity to see some low-level Imperial politics. How do governors rule, for example?

That’s shown in Rebels

One thing I really really hate. Staggered release dates for different countries. I especially hate that everybody outside the US seems to get the new movies first.

 Maniac_nmt wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
For me, it has more need to exist than the mainline Star Wars sequels, and I hate the idea of a prequel explaining a character's backstory.

The original Star Wars trilogy was a complete story. It was done, finished, a painting that needed the artist to step away. The prequels and the sequels can only do harm. However, side stories that exist elsewhere and elsewhen can tell their own contained stories. R1 and Solo exist somewhere in the middle ground for me, each being enough of a side story to take it or leave it, although connected to the main story in an unobtrusive way (well, I hope Solo is unobtrusive). Basically, I'd rather see Disney make another Ewok Adventure instead of another The Force Awakens/The Last Jedi.

You know, I was not big on Episode 1. Episode II I used to think was okay (other than the whinging scenes), and I kind of like Episode III. However, I saw them as an adult and my opinions were affected by that.

Watch Episodes 1-2 with kids, and the movies are entirely different. My 6 and 8 year old were spell bound by them. All the bits that grated they absolutely loved. I had to fast forward through the Tusken Raider massacre, but my kids were still teary eyed by Shimi Skywalker's death. Pod racing was AMAZING. R2 was spell binding, and 3PO made them laugh. My son laughed at all of the cornball battledroid lines and antics...

At some level, Star Wars is a 1930s-1950s radio or movie serial. That is what it is intended to be in many respects (well, not the TFA and TLJ so much). Watching Episode I and II again with kids made me realize that Lucas wasn't crazy and I've heard the same thing from other parents who have watched them with their kids. They have the over the top adventure with goofy side kick and now with added kid involvement (Dick Tracy and Junior Tracy, Captain Midnight and Chuck, Terry and the Pirates, Batman and Robin, Superman and Jimmy Olsen...). Jar-Jar might make an adult groan, but kids think he's hilarious and cheer for him.

Okay, so Star Wars should aim to be Minions. At least the money will be good.

 Manchu wrote:
I think Krennic just wanted Vader to get him in front of the Emperor. And Vader was willing to, under his own vague authority, order Krennic to track down the security breach. The tacit bargain seemed to be, Vader and Krennic will work together to sideline Tarkin.

https://www.rollingstone.com/movies/news/george-lucas-and-the-cult-of-darth-vader-20050602

He's so overwhelming in that first film, but you get to the point where you say, "Wait a minute, if he's so powerful, why doesn't he run the universe?" He even gets pushed around by the governors! They know the Emperor is the final word, so what happens is the same thing that happens in any corporation: Everybody worries about the top man, they don't worry about his goon. And by the time the Death Star is finished, it gives them the sense that they have a bigger, better suit than Darth Vader. In a standoff between the Death Star and Darth Vader, they have no question about who would win, and it's not this mumbo-jumbo Sith guy. So it's even more tragic, because he's not even an all-powerful bad guy, he's kind of a flunky.

You are suggesting that Vader would have the authority to order someone reporting to Tarkin to do something other than what Tarkin was ordering him to do, while Tarkin was taking his orders directly from the Emperor, which Vader wouldn't do. Vader wouldn't go against the Emperor's decisions. At least not at that time.

The scene just allows fans to drool over Vader in his tank and act like a boss. I'm pretty sure Vader could have cared less about the construction of the Death Star and essentially says just that by knocking it, so Krennic going to him also seems silly.

If Darth Vader gives you an order, that is pretty good cover to go do whatever that thing is. If Tarkin wants to countermand an order given by Vader, that's not a simple question because Tarkin may be in charge, during the plot of ANH, on the Death Star but Vader has his own authority and so, at the very least, Tarkin is going to have to settle this by going to the Emperor, if he wants to make a direct conflict out of it. More likely, Tarkin would not want to bother the Emperor with this kind of petty feuding so he would find some other way - but, in the meantime, Krennic has the opportunity to close the loop on the security breach and he and Vader can then present the issue to the Emperor as their accomplishment.

Vader cares about the Death Star because he understand this is how the Emperor plans to get rid of the Senate. If it works, Vader will have basically nothing to do and will be totally sidelined from power while men like Tarkin take over. This is probably why Vader is so contemptuous of the Death Star in the briefing scene in ANH. Vader represents a different path to power for the Emperor, which the Emperor ultimately has to go with, at least until the Second Death Star is ready. And by that point, the Emepror is relying on Vader to make sure DS2 is complete on time.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Oh for heavens sake.

Other than 'a film I didn't enjoy got good reviews' there's not a shred of evidence that Disney are bribing critics.

Please, just stop with such baseless nonsense.

ya it's hard to make a case for bribing critics when they only gave the film a 70% on RT as opposed to the 91% TLJ got. If even the critics are starting to say how bad this movie is, it might end up being the first start wars movie I don't see in a theater.