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.

Those bombers; I love them, but not in this era. I said before, that if the clone wars had the likes of those then it would have been both awesome and clever (showing the technology progressing from lumbering carpet bombers to nimble fighter bombers).

They also took out a Dreadnought. Clearly, that's quite the achievement. That shows The First Order aren't all powerful.

Think about it alongside Starkiller Base. Two super weapons, both wrecked by a small group of brave fighters.

And as Leia said, they have allies in the Outer Rim. And we can infer from the hope of 'get to the surface, radio for help', likely enough Allies to give the First Order present at the time a good shoeing.

Now, why did their allies not respond? We don't know for sure at the moment. It could be that with the fall of the New Republic (only a few hours before), there was just too much turmoil to get things organised. Maybe The First Order had them all tied up in terms of resources.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Those bombers; I love them, but not in this era. I said before, that if the clone wars had the likes of those then it would have been both awesome and clever (showing the technology progressing from lumbering carpet bombers to nimble fighter bombers).

But that shows the limited resources The Resistance had to work with quite nicely. No real high end equipment. Mix of shiny new-ish X-Wings, a single Heavy Cruiser, and a bunch of outdated but still useable ships.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I thought it was cool and dramatic.

There's lots of cool and dramatic scenes of people doing stupid things and losings wars and battles. Any of the general custers movies come to mind, or more recently infinity wars, so cool and dramatic and the good guys lost there as well. But done so much better than TLJ and with characters that had depth to them.

sirlynchmob wrote:
Leia cared.

That's because Leia was an idiot in that scene. Her fleet spent some expendable munitions to destroy a vastly more powerful and expensive target. If you aren't willing to use a weapon then why have it at all? It's pretty clear that Leia is sad because people died, not because she was saving those bombers to spend them on a different target and Poe used up too much of her resources at the wrong time.

Sure, if you have infinite resources and manpower, that strategy works. It doesn't work when your ships don't have enough fuel for more than 1 jump, and those funding you and buying the bombers just had their planets & factories blown away, not forgetting your advisory does have infinite resources and manpower.

Then, again, those ships are useless and there's no point in having them. If you won't use your bombers against the perfect target for them then when will you use them? It's like having a gun but declaring that bullets are precious and you will never use them.

If they had taken the fuel from the bombers the ships could have made a second jump each in different directions, then they'd at least pass for a gorilla army.

You're assuming that a handful of tiny bombers have any meaningful fuel to add to a ship with engines bigger than those bombers. This is almost certainly wrong.

And no, they wouldn't pass for a guerilla army because their leadership is not willing to use their weapons. What target that is more valuable than the dreadnought are you going to engage with your "guerilla army"? Merely having a few small ships still in existence doesn't accomplish anything, and the general population clearly wasn't supporting the resistance and giving it the secure home that a guerilla army requires to function.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

And as Leia said, they have allies in the Outer Rim. And we can infer from the hope of 'get to the surface, radio for help', likely enough Allies to give the First Order present at the time a good shoeing.

Leia thought she had allies, but no one answered her call. It's like everyone really, you think you have friends til you call them to help you move. Then like with Leia your "friends" don't answer the phone and don't show up. If they won't even talk to her, they're not likely to join her in some damn fool idealistic crusade.

sirlynchmob wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

And as Leia said, they have allies in the Outer Rim. And we can infer from the hope of 'get to the surface, radio for help', likely enough Allies to give the First Order present at the time a good shoeing.

Leia thought she had allies, but no one answered her call. It's like everyone really, you think you have friends til you call them to help you move. Then like with Leia your "friends" don't answer the phone and don't show up. If they won't even talk to her, they're not likely to join her in some damn fool idealistic crusade.

Bit of a leap there fella. There's definitely going to be a reason they didn't show up. Could be cowardice, could be they were up to their necks in their own trouble. Could be anything in between.

 Peregrine wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:
Leia cared.

That's because Leia was an idiot in that scene. Her fleet spent some expendable munitions to destroy a vastly more powerful and expensive target. If you aren't willing to use a weapon then why have it at all?

Sure, if you have infinite resources and manpower, that strategy works. It doesn't work when your ships don't have enough fuel for more than 1 jump, and those funding you and buying the bombers just had their planets & factories blown away, not forgetting your advisory does have infinite resources and manpower.

Then, again, those ships are useless and there's no point in having them. If you won't use your bombers against the perfect target for them then when will you use them? It's like having a gun but declaring that bullets are precious and you will never use them.

If they had taken the fuel from the bombers the ships could have made a second jump each in different directions, then they'd at least pass for a gorilla army.

You're assuming that a handful of tiny bombers have any meaningful fuel to add to a ship with engines bigger than those bombers. This is almost certainly wrong.

And no, they wouldn't pass for a guerilla army because their leadership is not willing to use their weapons. What target that is more valuable than the dreadnought are you going to engage with your "guerilla army"? Merely having a few small ships still in existence doesn't accomplish anything, and the general population clearly wasn't supporting the resistance and giving it the secure home that a guerilla army requires to function.

The used the bombers against the minions, they didn't even try to get hux & kylo, so whats the point of having bombers just to throw them away at meaningless targets, you might as well not have them.

When you have no more supplies, bullets do become precious, and you shouldn't be wasting them shooting at anything that moves.

3 ships and people in them is magnitudes better than 10 people on one freighter.

right they had no support, so throwing away ships, is just throwing them away for nothing, with nothing gained from doing so.

As was said, who knew if they'd get another crack at the Dreadnought?

It was there, and they were in a position to take it out.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
As was said, who knew if they'd get another crack at the Dreadnought?

It was there, and they were in a position to take it out.

cool, they got that one, now they have nothing, and the first order has more dreadnoughts.

so they took out a big ship, lost the war and the rebellion died.

And I love that analagy of moving, it sounds so much better then they were being jammed

 Kilkrazy wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I'd say in this day and age the difference between 68 and 81 is quite large because the range over which most people rate stuff is small.

Ideally 50 would be average, but realistically most people wouldn't rate something 50 unless it was compete junk.

Without having spent a lot of time researching it, I'd guess 75 is close to average for folks rating movies, TV shows and games these days.

And whilst I agree people rating exceptionally low can pull an average down, the same is the other way especially on user reviews. You don't have to scroll far through user reviews to find 90-100 given to stuff that clearly doesn't deserve it.

The range is 0-10 on Metacritic, 1-10 on IMDB and 1-5 on Rotten Tomatoes.

This may not fit the narrative of Users hated TLJ and Critics are all paid shills as demonstrated by their radically different marks. Those are the marks, though, and that's the factual evidence to measure, otherwise why not just make stuff up?
.

Personally my criticicism of critics had little to do with alignment with user reviews; my criticism of film critics with TLJ is they failed to be critical.

You can say a movie was personally enjoyable whilst also pointing out it's technical flaws, that's what a critic should be doing otherwise why the feth do we call them critics, might as well just ask some random dude or dudette walking out of the cinema whether they liked it.

I have no problem with a person, whether they be a user or a critic, saying they liked the movie. I think there's lots of reasons to like the movie. But there's also a plethora of technical flaws that should be blatantly obvious to a critic and might lead others to not enjoy the movie.

It's almost as if people take it as an insult when you tell them a movie they liked is bad, people shouldn't take it so personally, there's heaps of movies that I think are bad for whatever reasons or others have pointed out reasons they are bad but I still enjoy them and don't feel the need to defend the movies other than to point out why I still like them in spite of the flaws.

sirlynchmob wrote:
The used the bombers against the minions, they didn't even try to get hux & kylo, so whats the point of having bombers just to throw them away at meaningless targets, you might as well not have them.

Hux is symbolic (and probably helps the resistance more by living), the dreadnought is a major capital ship and by far the biggest military threat on the field. That's far from meaningless.

3 ships and people in them is magnitudes better than 10 people on one freighter.

No, it's exactly the same: utterly worthless. Neither will accomplish anything, so why consider that possibility? And remember, when they launched the bomber attack they didn't know they could be tracked through hyperspace or that fuel supplies would be an issue.

sirlynchmob wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I thought it was cool and dramatic.

There's lots of cool and dramatic scenes of people doing stupid things and losings wars and battles. Any of the general custers movies come to mind, or more recently infinity wars, so cool and dramatic and the good guys lost there as well. But done so much better than TLJ and with characters that had depth to them.

I thought TLJ was done very well and had characters with depth.

Even if the rest of the movie was good (it wasn't) TLJ would still be mired by the most terrible character ever written in starwars (worse than jar jar) - Holdo.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I thought it was cool and dramatic.

There's lots of cool and dramatic scenes of people doing stupid things and losings wars and battles. Any of the general custers movies come to mind, or more recently infinity wars, so cool and dramatic and the good guys lost there as well. But done so much better than TLJ and with characters that had depth to them.

I thought TLJ was done very well and had characters with depth.

Are you serious? Well done - sure. It had good visual effects. The story is terrible though. The side plot is terrible. I see no character depth - Snoke dies without any real development. Luke develops into something he never would have. Rey gets no backstory - or the story is there is no backstory (stunning). Finn might as well not even be in the movie. Phasma - same deal. Ruby gets some development...but why? Kylo is the only character I see getting meaningful development. Poe - the one new character they made who doesn't suck - half the movie is him fighting with Holdo, a husk of worthlessness - the Resistance would have done better on auto pilot.

I think opposite to you on all those points.

The interesting thing is why? As far as I can see, everyone who hates TLJ is a deep fan of Star Wars and came to the film with a lot of ideas of what the film should contain.

Who was Snoke? Where does Rey get her Force powers? Why doesn't Luke join the Resistance? All that sort of thing. None of this was resolved, and made you very disappointed.

I had no such expectations. I didn't expect in-depth background references coupled with precise details about this and that. I hoped for an exciting Star Wars film full of easy-breezy grand space action and drama, and that's exactly what I got.

 Peregrine wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:
The used the bombers against the minions, they didn't even try to get hux & kylo, so whats the point of having bombers just to throw them away at meaningless targets, you might as well not have them.

Hux is symbolic (and probably helps the resistance more by living), the dreadnought is a major capital ship and by far the biggest military threat on the field. That's far from meaningless.

3 ships and people in them is magnitudes better than 10 people on one freighter.

No, it's exactly the same: utterly worthless. Neither will accomplish anything, so why consider that possibility? And remember, when they launched the bomber attack they didn't know they could be tracked through hyperspace or that fuel supplies would be an issue.

trading your fleet for 1 ship is meaningless. Everyone knows you cut the head off the snake to create discord in the ranks and show those on the fence that victory is possible.

Taking out hux & kylo means they would have gotten away and not been tracked directly. Everyone knows you can figure out destinations, like we saw in empire, calculate all known trajectories. Hey there's habitable planet here, let's go check it out. Jump straight to their destination is another failure on the rebellions part. they talked about it on rebels a few times. Not keeping enough fuel on the ship, especially while at your base while it's being financed, is just ridiculous, let alone enough fuel for 2 or 3 jumps. At the start of TFA they had supporters and resources, yet no one thought to refuel the ships. Maybe Holdo was the supply officer, that's why she wasn't good with plans and had no people skills.

But we do agree, as of right now the rebellion is dead and the war is lost. I'd say having a capital ship with bombers and fighters is a lot better then just 1 freighter. Or as you'd put it, having a 9 mil with no bullets.

At least at the end of empire the rebels still had a fleet and ended on a hopeful scene, TLJ didn't.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I think opposite to you on all those points.

The interesting thing is why? As far as I can see, everyone who hates TLJ is a deep fan of Star Wars and came to the film with a lot of ideas of what the film should contain.

Who was Snoke? Where does Rey get her Force powers? Why doesn't Luke join the Resistance? All that sort of thing. None of this was resolved, and made you very disappointed.

I had no such expectations. I didn't expect in-depth background references coupled with precise details about this and that. I hoped for an exciting Star Wars film full of easy-breezy grand space action and drama, and that's exactly what I got.

I didn't care about snoke, nor rey parents. I was curious about luke as he was the focus of TFA, and what role he would play in the film but the payoff was Meh at best.

I wanted to be entertained, and about 1/2 way through I was checking my watch wondering how much longer til it was over, because I just didn't enjoy it.

We must have different definitions for "grand space action and drama" because that's what I wanted to see as well.

Then the nerd in me had to wonder, how did R2 get back to the rebellion? how did luke get his xwing to that planet with no droid? is there still a droid on his ship sitting at the bottom of the ocean? who drove R2 home? Then the theme of the movie sunk in, nothing matters, it's all pointless. so in the grand scheme TLJ is pointless and easily skipped in any viewing marathon. there's going to be a big time jump for the last movie, so the whole of 8 could have been summed up on one sentence of the crawl at the beginning of 9. After the destruction of the death moon, the rebellion was crushed and luke died.

The interesting thing is why? As far as I can see, everyone who hates TLJ is a deep fan of Star Wars and came to the film with a lot of ideas of what the film should contain.

SERIOUSLY stop this BS about "only hard core fans hate TLJ" Its a total Strawman.

I went with three friends:

One is a hard core fan - he hated it
I like me as fun sci-fi flicks - nothing special - I hated it
Another friend who she had seem most of the previously once =- she hated it.
Several teenage sons of a friend went - second Star Wars film - they hated it

A few friends of different ages and interest liked it - lots hated it.

Two of us came to it thinking - hey its Star Wars - should be a bit of fun and found it tedious, irritating with a nonsense narrative and piss poor characters - now you loved it we didn't and no we are not massive star wars films

Again for us it was not a bad Star Wars film it was a bad Film full stop - poor pacing, poor characters, poor plot, etc etc.

Who was Snoke?

Dunno - Director could not be bothered to tell us - seemed vaguely interesting but hey

Where does Rey get her Force powers?

Not bothered - she just does like any space wizard

Why doesn't Luke join the Resistance?

Cos he has become a recluse - that was obvious, now a decent direct might have explored this but not the shambles of a team we were stuck with.

All that sort of thing. None of this was resolved, and made you very disappointed.

Nope - I had a problem with plot, pace, characters and narrative.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I think opposite to you on all those points.

The interesting thing is why? As far as I can see, everyone who hates TLJ is a deep fan of Star Wars and came to the film with a lot of ideas of what the film should contain.

Who was Snoke? Where does Rey get her Force powers? Why doesn't Luke join the Resistance? All that sort of thing. None of this was resolved, and made you very disappointed.

I had no such expectations. I didn't expect in-depth background references coupled with precise details about this and that. I hoped for an exciting Star Wars film full of easy-breezy grand space action and drama, and that's exactly what I got.

Starwars is more to a lot of people than an easy breezy space drama. I expect more from it and I expect the people making the movie to know that. What's worse is - ofc they know that - they just don't care. It's readily apparent that they don't care. When you trash every character from the original trilogy - trivialize all their achievements - have them go against their core values...it's just really sad.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I think opposite to you on all those points.

The interesting thing is why? As far as I can see, everyone who hates TLJ is a deep fan of Star Wars and came to the film with a lot of ideas of what the film should contain.

Who was Snoke? Where does Rey get her Force powers? Why doesn't Luke join the Resistance? All that sort of thing. None of this was resolved, and made you very disappointed.

I had no such expectations. I didn't expect in-depth background references coupled with precise details about this and that. I hoped for an exciting Star Wars film full of easy-breezy grand space action and drama, and that's exactly what I got.

Starwars is more to a lot of people than an easy breezy space drama. ... ...

That probably is the source of the issue.

Take a spy film. Take a Bond film. Take a John le Carre film. Star Wars is the Bond film not the le Carre film.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I think opposite to you on all those points.

The interesting thing is why? As far as I can see, everyone who hates TLJ is a deep fan of Star Wars and came to the film with a lot of ideas of what the film should contain.

Who was Snoke? Where does Rey get her Force powers? Why doesn't Luke join the Resistance? All that sort of thing. None of this was resolved, and made you very disappointed.

I had no such expectations. I didn't expect in-depth background references coupled with precise details about this and that. I hoped for an exciting Star Wars film full of easy-breezy grand space action and drama, and that's exactly what I got.

Starwars is more to a lot of people than an easy breezy space drama. ... ...

That probably is the source of the issue.

Take a spy film. Take a Bond film. Take a John le Carre film. Star Wars is the Bond film not the le Carre film.

Not to me - bond is just another spy film - especially now that it is actually more like a Bourne film and Mission Impossible resembles a old style Bond film.

Star Wars is just to me a fun sci-fi flick - or it was.....

There are 50 years of Bond films so you can take one or another individually but the core point is true, Bond is dramatic and fun, but it's not intricately plotted like a le Carre or Len Deighton film. The objective is action and spectacle, not exposition of a carefully drawn plot.

Mission Impossible is a good example of this type of spy film.

Now compare Star Wars with 2001 A Space Odyssey.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I think opposite to you on all those points.

The interesting thing is why? As far as I can see, everyone who hates TLJ is a deep fan of Star Wars and came to the film with a lot of ideas of what the film should contain.

Who was Snoke? Where does Rey get her Force powers? Why doesn't Luke join the Resistance? All that sort of thing. None of this was resolved, and made you very disappointed.

I had no such expectations. I didn't expect in-depth background references coupled with precise details about this and that. I hoped for an exciting Star Wars film full of easy-breezy grand space action and drama, and that's exactly what I got.

Starwars is more to a lot of people than an easy breezy space drama. ... ...

That probably is the source of the issue.

Take a spy film. Take a Bond film. Take a John le Carre film. Star Wars is the Bond film not the le Carre film.

The new bonds were excellent though - they do the previous bonds justice by being great films. I personally feel that Craig is the best bond.

I can't agree that that is the issue. The issue is that TLJ is trash from every cinematic angle you can take. If the film was good but I didn't like it's conclusions I wouldn't hate on it. If the film was bad but everything happend that I wanted - I probably would treat it something like phantom menace - which is a bad film that I like because it has cool characters and tells an interesting story. I'm forced to hate on it because it's bad in every way to me - there is almost nothing to like about TLJ.

Is TLJ the worst film ever made?

Maybe the worst Star Wars movie ever made. Or at least it shares the spot with Attack Of The Clones.

No,

Manos, the hands of fate

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Maybe the worst Star Wars movie ever made. Or at least it shares the spot with Attack Of The Clones.

OK, does it deserve a review score of 0 out of 10?

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Maybe the worst Star Wars movie ever made. Or at least it shares the spot with Attack Of The Clones.

OK, does it deserve a review score of 0 out of 10?

I’d give it 1 out of 10, with the point for the aesthetics.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Is TLJ the worst film ever made?

Probably not - its definitely the worst film I have seen for years. Especially when you consider how much money has been thrown at it - its similar with the Prequals in that respect.

I just don't see anything good in it - even the rare flashes of interest such as the relationship between Rey and Ben are squandered or lost in mind numbing tedium of the chase after the Ship of Fools.

I'd give it 1 out of 10. That's probably generous.

Woohoo, I enjoyed TLJ so I'm having badwrongfun! I go out of my way to watch terrible sci-fi and horror movies and I can assure you there are far worse. Of course if people want to talk about Bond films, they should look up the original Casino Royal movie with Woody Allen and Orsin Wells doing magic tricks. Your mind will be blown.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Is TLJ the worst film ever made?

It's one of the worst films I've ever seen. In the past 5 years there are only 2 films I hated as much or more (hard to really judge this level of hate)

The Grey - They take the shells out of the gun and put them on the end of sticks to fight wolves...Why don't they make weapons out of the plane derbies?...wolves are hunting men...50% flashbacks...It's forcing some kind of message at me...I don't care. This is so bad.
Cloud Atlas - The gak did I just watch? What is this guy saying? 7 movies in 1 and they all suck? OMG - give me my life back.

OK< so it's worse than Santa Claus Conquers the Martians.