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.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
It's about how much of a hard core fan you are. It's the hard core fans who hate the film. Everyone else is fine with it.

I'mm 55, my wife is 51, my daughter is 18. We all liked the film. I probably liked it most.

Having previously watched all the first three films and TFA in the cinema on first release, Ive got more nostalgia built up in them.

I've never been a super fan, though, and I didn't come into the new films with any strong preconceptions about them. I had an image of what Star Wars looks like, and the Force, and quips in the dialogue, general stuff like that. These were fulfilled from my viewpoint.

The super fans expected something different. I think that is the key point.

Rubbish - complete and total.

Of more than 10 people I know that saw it and said how crap it was - several of them had only ever seen TFA. I liked TFA and hoped for nothing more than a fun film - instead I got occasional bits that were ok and mostly boredom.

The problem for many of us is not that its not Star Wars - its that we find almost every element is bad - writing, pacing, direction, characters

and then to top it off - we are told by the high and might critics that - no it s a cinematic gem and we should be privileged to even be allowed to watch it.

The film has sold 1.3 billion dollars of tickets in 6 weeks.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=starwars8.htm

It simply is not a piece of crap that everyone hates except a tiny proportion of weirdos like me.

Now you have to separate how much of that was name from quality. The Star Wars brand puts butts in seats... for now.

Where do you get that distance estimate? SW ships are supposed to have hundreds or thousands of gees of acceleration. Remember how quickly the X-Wings semi-circumnavigated Yavin?


Edit: about Crait being closer than the moon is to Earth the whole chase scene.

And yes, I'm being somewhat facetious because we all know RJ and every other person working on the film has no idea how space, scale, or acceleration work.

Yeah the trope Sci-Fi writers have no sense of scale is why I started taking what movies tell me at face value. Thinking too much about it makes my head hurt. Honestlly they should avoid hard numbers.

Don't say "18 hours of fuel", say:" fuel reserves at 5% , 2% etc."
I hate to sound like a broken record but once again BSG was really good at this.

Or be Doctor Who: "It's a timey whimey detector that goes ding when there's stuff".

 Kilkrazy wrote:
It's about how much of a hard core fan you are. It's the hard core fans who hate the film. Everyone else is fine with it.

I'mm 55, my wife is 51, my daughter is 18. We all liked the film. I probably liked it most.

Having previously watched all the first three films and TFA in the cinema on first release, Ive got more nostalgia built up in them.

I've never been a super fan, though, and I didn't come into the new films with any strong preconceptions about them. I had an image of what Star Wars looks like, and the Force, and quips in the dialogue, general stuff like that. These were fulfilled from my viewpoint.

The super fans expected something different. I think that is the key point.

I think you are mistaken. I believe the difference may lie in how you approach films in general and how others do. For example, my best friend will often love films that are pretty terrible; when asked about it all he can remember are the fifteen good minutes in a given film and how they made him feel. He watches for the good and retains it. The bad just passes him by. It's an alien mindset to me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Earth127 wrote:
Quick question what would you say is a wel written movie Mr. Morden?

Because while I don't think TLJ's writing should win any awards I don't think it's bad either.

At this point, please, please, please just read the whole thread. There have been tens of thousands of words written about this. It has been exhaustively covered. TLJ's writing is its weakest feature.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Where do you get that distance estimate? SW ships are supposed to have hundreds or thousands of gees of acceleration. Remember how quickly the X-Wings semi-circumnavigated Yavin?


Edit: about Crait being closer than the moon is to Earth the whole chase scene.

And yes, I'm being somewhat facetious because we all know RJ and every other person working on the film has no idea how space, scale, or acceleration work.

I happen to know that they weren't travelling a significant fraction of the speed of light, because they measured their fuel reserves in time. 18 hours at .99c is going to look like 126 hours to a stationary frame of reference, or just over five days. This means that when Rose and Finn get to Canto Bight, they have time to park, rent a room, play some games, chat some people up, maybe buy some new bombers that aren't ass or something, then find the hacker, have a drink with him, go to sleep, wake up, find the hacker again, tell him Maz sent them, and then get to their legally-parked shuttle and return to the fleet.

Based on how panicked and fast Rose and Finn seem like they feel they have to go, and they actually use a real 18 hour time limit, that tells me that they're probably not moving at any considerable fraction of C, and are moving much closer to the speed of conventional modern space ships (which ironically still do suffer from time dilation a bit, but I digress).

Also, Leia is blown out of the ship and has to Superman her way back to it. If it was travelling at some crazy velocity then the necessary Force mastery to perform this act goes from 'eye roll' to 'nope, that's me done'.

Unless of course she's blown directly in front of it and just waits for it to catch up, but I'm pretty sure that's not how the scene is presented.

Yeah the trope Sci-Fi writers have no sense of scale is why I started taking what movies tell me at face value. Thinking too much about it makes my head hurt. Honestlly they should avoid hard numbers.

Don't say "18 hours of fuel", say:" fuel reserves at 5% , 2% etc."
I hate to sound like a broken record but once again BSG was really good at this.

Unit you probably put more thought into this then Ryan Johnsson did.

 Earth127 wrote:
Unit you probably put more thought into this then Ryan Johnsson did.

And that is why it is a bad movie.

Because some random jerk on the internet like me literally out-thought the director about the movie's own story.

 Riquende wrote:
Also, Leia is blown out of the ship and has to Superman her way back to it. If it was travelling at some crazy velocity then the necessary Force mastery to perform this act goes from 'eye roll' to 'nope, that's me done'.

Unless of course she's blown directly in front of it and just waits for it to catch up, but I'm pretty sure that's not how the scene is presented.

Except Leia would be going at that speed to. There is no 'air resistance" in space, so she would continue moving in the same direction as the ship.

But all this is beside the point. Star Wars is NOT true sci-fi. It does not claim to adhere to scientific principles. it adheres to the "sounds good enough for the story" principle.
If you try to pull the strings, they will unravel. So don't pull the strings and enjoy the movie.

-

Riquende wrote:Also, Leia is blown out of the ship and has to Superman her way back to it. If it was travelling at some crazy velocity then the necessary Force mastery to perform this act goes from 'eye roll' to 'nope, that's me done'.

Unless of course she's blown directly in front of it and just waits for it to catch up, but I'm pretty sure that's not how the scene is presented.

Galef wrote:

 Riquende wrote:
Also, Leia is blown out of the ship and has to Superman her way back to it. If it was travelling at some crazy velocity then the necessary Force mastery to perform this act goes from 'eye roll' to 'nope, that's me done'.

Unless of course she's blown directly in front of it and just waits for it to catch up, but I'm pretty sure that's not how the scene is presented.

Except Leia would be going at that speed to. There is no 'air resistance" in space, so she would continue moving in the same direction as the ship.

But all this is beside the point. Star Wars is NOT true sci-fi. It does not claim to adhere to scientific principles. it adheres to the "sounds good enough for the story" principle.
If you try to pull the strings, they will unravel. So don't pull the strings and enjoy the movie.

-

Yeah to be fair space isn't water so she'd get blown out of the ship and then continue travelling away from it at the initial velocity she left the ship at, bringing it out of range in literal seconds given that she was accelerated out of the vessel due to an explosion and atmospheric decompression.

I mean, it still doesn't make any goddamn sense, because she should go flying off with no way of stopping, but eh. What can you do.

 Galef wrote:

 Riquende wrote:
Also, Leia is blown out of the ship and has to Superman her way back to it. If it was travelling at some crazy velocity then the necessary Force mastery to perform this act goes from 'eye roll' to 'nope, that's me done'.

Unless of course she's blown directly in front of it and just waits for it to catch up, but I'm pretty sure that's not how the scene is presented.

Except Leia would be going at that speed to. There is no 'air resistance" in space, so she would continue moving in the same direction as the ship.

-

Would she be moving in the same direction? If the bridge is on the side of the ship and she's blown out in a roughly perpendicular direction to the ship's forward momentum then no, she really wouldn't.

It's almost like I briefly addressed in this in the post you quoted. Please read what you're replying to in future, thanks.

 Galef wrote:

 Riquende wrote:
Also, Leia is blown out of the ship and has to Superman her way back to it. If it was travelling at some crazy velocity then the necessary Force mastery to perform this act goes from 'eye roll' to 'nope, that's me done'.

Unless of course she's blown directly in front of it and just waits for it to catch up, but I'm pretty sure that's not how the scene is presented.

Except Leia would be going at that speed to. There is no 'air resistance" in space, so she would continue moving in the same direction as the ship.

But all this is beside the point. Star Wars is NOT true sci-fi. It does not claim to adhere to scientific principles. it adheres to the "sounds good enough for the story" principle.
If you try to pull the strings, they will unravel. So don't pull the strings and enjoy the movie.

-

It's not speed but acceleration that is the issue. I propose that Leia was still within the shield bubble or gravity effect of the ship, and thus still accelerating with it. Such effects would also explain why fighters seemingly need to slow way down when they approach a Death Star or Star Destroyer (or their frame of reference), so they aren't destroyed.

But, yeah, the real answer is because the big ships are standing still until they're not because hiring anyone who knows anything is hard I guess.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
It's about how much of a hard core fan you are. It's the hard core fans who hate the film. Everyone else is fine with it.

I'mm 55, my wife is 51, my daughter is 18. We all liked the film. I probably liked it most.

Having previously watched all the first three films and TFA in the cinema on first release, Ive got more nostalgia built up in them.

I've never been a super fan, though, and I didn't come into the new films with any strong preconceptions about them. I had an image of what Star Wars looks like, and the Force, and quips in the dialogue, general stuff like that. These were fulfilled from my viewpoint.

The super fans expected something different. I think that is the key point.

Rubbish - complete and total.

Of more than 10 people I know that saw it and said how crap it was - several of them had only ever seen TFA. I liked TFA and hoped for nothing more than a fun film - instead I got occasional bits that were ok and mostly boredom.

The problem for many of us is not that its not Star Wars - its that we find almost every element is bad - writing, pacing, direction, characters

and then to top it off - we are told by the high and might critics that - no it s a cinematic gem and we should be privileged to even be allowed to watch it.

The film has sold 1.3 billion dollars of tickets in 6 weeks.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=starwars8.htm

It simply is not a piece of crap that everyone hates except a tiny proportion of weirdos like me.

Ah so the number otf tickets sold = the quality of the film? Interesting - that applies ot all films does it?.

I and my firends are part of that ticket take - and wish we had not spent the money on crap.

Or is your argument that only "wiedo's" hate it?

Quick question what would you say is a wel written movie Mr. Morden?

Because while I don't think TLJ's writing should win any awards I don't think it's bad either.

If its not exceptionally well written why has it got almost universal praise from all those critics?

Lots of different ones in different genre's, this was the worst I have watched for quite some time - even Geostorm was better.

Goodfella's
Avengers
Schinderls List,
Dr Strangelove
Apocalypse Now
The Longest Day
Jaws
Black Hawk Down
Love and Freindship
Jurasic World
Pulp Fiction
Batman (Burton not Nolan)
Wonder Woman
The Itlaian Job (the Original obviously)
Get Cater (as above)
Life of Brian

Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Earth127 wrote:
Unit you probably put more thought into this then Ryan Johnsson did.

BobtheInquisitor wrote:But, yeah, the real answer is because the big ships are standing still until they're not because hiring anyone who knows anything is hard I guess.

And that is why it is a bad movie.

Because some random jerk on the internet like me literally out-thought the director about the movie's own story.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Earth127 wrote:
Unit you probably put more thought into this then Ryan Johnsson did.

BobtheInquisitor wrote:But, yeah, the real answer is because the big ships are standing still until they're not because hiring anyone who knows anything is hard I guess.

And that is why it is a bad movie.

Because some random jerk on the internet like me literally out-thought the director about the movie's own story.

They just thought - "its Star Wars - it sell no matter what we do, just make sure the critics do what they are told before it launches and we are golden." and they were right.

I don't believe the critics were paid off or part of a conspiracy. More likely, they learned about film instead of things like logic and physics. For some, writing is seen as a minor concern in the overall construction of a film. Those people are wrong, but still persist.

Yeah. I won't deny that TLJ is certainly artistic and visually very interesting. It's also pretty good about staying visually distinct from the rest of Star Wars while still fitting in (barely. It stretches it a bit with the battering ram cannon).

The problem is that it's like a whole bunch of awesome paintings and set-pieces with excellent visuals tied together with a rotting string and called a "movie".

I am ok with physics being wonky in SW, I have bigger problems with horrible characters in a character-driven fairy tale.
About the critics there is no conspiracy, just different priorities, a lot of political complacency, and Disney giving you crap and fear of losing premieres for the wrong review - this is documented and caused protests in the past.
As Gordon says, still they are not all the same.

 Kaiyanwang wrote:
I am ok with physics being wonky in SW, I have bigger problems with horrible characters in a character-driven fairy tale.
About the critics there is no conspiracy, just different priorities, a lot of political complacency, and Disney giving you crap and fear of losing premieres for the wrong review - this is documented and caused protests in the past.
As Gordon says, still they are not all the same.

The problem is physics affects the characters.

If you can see Crait out the goddamn window, then Poe's "WHAT IS THE PLAN" panic attack looks even more childish and stupid (like screaming about not being there yet while in the parking lot). And Hux & Co. look stupider because they can easily see the planet out the goddamn window that the Resistance is heading straight for...

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Yeah. I won't deny that TLJ is certainly artistic and visually very interesting. It's also pretty good about staying visually distinct from the rest of Star Wars while still fitting in (barely. It stretches it a bit with the battering ram cannon).

The problem is that it's like a whole bunch of awesome paintings and set-pieces with excellent visuals tied together with a rotting string and called a "movie".

Which bits were artistic?

The effects are ok - but they had how much money to throw at that aspect. Effects are always good in a blockbuster.

There was a couple of ok action scenes and Rey and Ben were good enough to keep me awake throuhg the tedium of the Ship of Fools and Casino Wordl Adventure!!!!!!!!!!

I think it's more along the lines of audiences and critics wanting different things. The inverse happened to the last showman: it was a criitical bomb but liked by audiences.

If I recal correctly this video kind of explains it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CSonz-GfgHs

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Yeah. I won't deny that TLJ is certainly artistic and visually very interesting. It's also pretty good about staying visually distinct from the rest of Star Wars while still fitting in (barely. It stretches it a bit with the battering ram cannon).

The problem is that it's like a whole bunch of awesome paintings and set-pieces with excellent visuals tied together with a rotting string and called a "movie".

Which bits were artistic?

The effects are ok - but they had how much money to throw at that aspect. Effects are always good in a blockbuster.

There was a couple of ok action scenes and Rey and Ben were good enough to keep me awake throuhg the tedium of the Ship of Fools and Casino Wordl Adventure!!!!!!!!!!

The hyperspace ram scene struck me as a cinematic moment I will remember for a long time because of the neato visuals, and Crait's red & white pairing was visually far more interesting and imo awesome than Hoth. Being able to see the shields shimmer when the enemy shot them with lasers was cool (if a bit different from usual Star Wars). Canto Bight, whatever people might say about it, certainly looked like what I would expect a huge, opulent, overwrought resort to look like.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Yeah. I won't deny that TLJ is certainly artistic and visually very interesting. It's also pretty good about staying visually distinct from the rest of Star Wars while still fitting in (barely. It stretches it a bit with the battering ram cannon).

The problem is that it's like a whole bunch of awesome paintings and set-pieces with excellent visuals tied together with a rotting string and called a "movie".

Which bits were artistic?

The effects are ok - but they had how much money to throw at that aspect. Effects are always good in a blockbuster.

There was a couple of ok action scenes and Rey and Ben were good enough to keep me awake throuhg the tedium of the Ship of Fools and Casino Wordl Adventure!!!!!!!!!!

The hyperspace ram scene struck me as a cinematic moment I will remember for a long time because of the neato visuals, and Crait's red & white pairing was visually far more interesting and imo awesome than Hoth. Being able to see the shields shimmer when the enemy shot them with lasers was cool (if a bit different from usual Star Wars). Canto Bight, whatever people might say about it, certainly looked like what I would expect a huge, opulent, overwrought resort to look like.

Fair enough - none of that impressed me tbh.

I think it's more along the lines of audiences and critics wanting different things.

Critics are paid to watch films they may or may not like and tell you what they thought of it. Audiences go to watch something they hope to enjoy - for one group its a just a job, for the rest its a night out.

Both are biased - only one group admits it.

A good critic will admit it and express his/her taste.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
this is mildly horrifying: and I like game of thrones.

http://www.starwars.com/news/game-of-thrones-creators-david-benioff-and-d-b-weiss-to-write-and-produce-a-new-series-of-star-wars-films

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
I don't believe the critics were paid off or part of a conspiracy. More likely, they learned about film instead of things like logic and physics. For some, writing is seen as a minor concern in the overall construction of a film. Those people are wrong, but still persist.

I think critics were more happy to see a racially diverse cast in a movie with a strong female lead more than anything.

If I could find faults in the obvious technical failures of the film, I am sure they can as well.

They just chose to ignore them all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

The hyperspace ram scene struck me as a cinematic moment I will remember for a long time because of the neato visuals

Same. I think it was the best moment of the movie, and one of the better in most sci-fi films I have seen. But the before it and after.... ehhh

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Yeah. I won't deny that TLJ is certainly artistic and visually very interesting. It's also pretty good about staying visually distinct from the rest of Star Wars while still fitting in (barely. It stretches it a bit with the battering ram cannon).

The problem is that it's like a whole bunch of awesome paintings and set-pieces with excellent visuals tied together with a rotting string and called a "movie".

Which bits were artistic?

The effects are ok - but they had how much money to throw at that aspect. Effects are always good in a blockbuster.

There was a couple of ok action scenes and Rey and Ben were good enough to keep me awake throuhg the tedium of the Ship of Fools and Casino Wordl Adventure!!!!!!!!!!

The camera work and editing and connective tissue between scenes all stood out for me on my second or third viewings. There's a lot of "cinematic" stuff going on that I am too ignorant to describe accurately, and it elevates the film above the mediocre writing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
KTG, I think you have a particular cross to bear on diversity and it is affecting your objectivity.

You mean camera work like the matrix-style Luke's dodge, or editing like when they feth up Rey's positioning in the infamous lightsaber toss scene?

Is true that there is very much good, too, I concede to the movie this. The "red" scenes in general were very aesthetic.

I mean when characters are talking. The scenes on the Fulminatrix for example feel very dynamic for dialogue because of the way the camera tracks the conversation. Also, the scene where Luke stumbles on the kids Force canoodling has a really old but effective camera trick that is just refreshing to watch in the age of CGI. RJ remembers how much you can "tell" with just a camera...until he doesn't. Space Leia was a particularly embarrassing fumble.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
It's about how much of a hard core fan you are. It's the hard core fans who hate the film. Everyone else is fine with it.

I'mm 55, my wife is 51, my daughter is 18. We all liked the film. I probably liked it most.

Having previously watched all the first three films and TFA in the cinema on first release, Ive got more nostalgia built up in them.

I've never been a super fan, though, and I didn't come into the new films with any strong preconceptions about them. I had an image of what Star Wars looks like, and the Force, and quips in the dialogue, general stuff like that. These were fulfilled from my viewpoint.

The super fans expected something different. I think that is the key point.

Actually i'm not that big of a fan of star wars. I think the whole thing is ok and i've never gotten the love of the franchise to the degree everybody has it.

The Last Jedi just sucks. Sides that same justification could go for the prequels as well.

It's always the less normal people who dislike things you like.