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.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Likewise, I respect The Last Jedi for trying. It would have been a great middle film of a different trilogy, or even a great middle film of the trilogy it was made for, if someone other than JJ Abrams had responsibility for its sequel (or if JJ Abrams had any integrity whatsoever and followed through on the conclusion that TLJ had set up. Shame Colin Trevorrow got pulled off the project, as his treatment for what would have been The Rise of Skywalker would have fit neatly after TLJ and capped both movies in a satisfying manner.

I quite like 7, but it utterly fails to explain its world. The one attempt it makes is probably one of the clumsiest dialog exchanges in the film. What it does well, it does very well though and on second viewing Kylo quickly became one of my all time favorite characters.

8 contains multiple of my all time favorite moments in all of Star Wars and creates the compelling conflict that 7 really failed to. It ranks for me very very highly in the franchise, but has some series issues, some a result of 7's lack of world building and some of its own design. The broad stroke ideas that those in power abandon their principles to retain power are really strong, but it's so reliant on Leia's network of contacts that don't have any real presence in the film. It's maybe my favorite story in the series, but I desperately want it to be told better.

Then there's 9, which is just a huge dud in every regard, IMO. I honestly don't feel like it does anything well. It's not even a good sequel to 7, let alone do anything with the potential from 8. Trevorrow's outline is definitely more satisfying though its hard to say if it would have actually been a better film when actually created. The loss of Carrie Fischer definitely colors ever bit of this film and I really struggle with where to rank it. Maybe time will look fondly on it, but at the moment I think it might only stand above 2, and I'm not sure I care to sit through a definitive comparison.

The_Real_Chris wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:


But still it is mind blowing for me that any vaguely competent writer doesn't understand you need something for heroes to triumph over. Unless they all grew up playing computer games on easy with headshot hacks on. I just really don't get it.

I quite agree. Considering how often this is discussed it continues to amaze me that so many writers/directors do not seem to get it. (Edit: Kind of like I do not get how cinematography 101 students some how do not seems to universally get that it is better to be frugal with “showing the monster” too much, ie Jaws and Alien and you can over egg a pudding, ie Jackson‘s King Kong) There must be an angle to it that I am not seeing. Something producers and test audiences see that I do not perhaps?

It may be that so many folks working in TV and movies have no real understanding of how to portray military conflict in a narrative sense. Not enough Dale Dye type folks making command decisions while working in Hollywood it would seem…. which amazes me considering how many combat veterans are out and about right now.

I loved Rise of Skywalker. To the point I genuinely wonder if I watched and see a different movie to everyone else.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I loved Rise of Skywalker. To the point I genuinely wonder if I watched and see a different movie to everyone else.

I got lost when they time traveled to Burning Man to find the thing that located the thing (that Luke and Lando apparently had previously just given up on looking for while standing on top of it). Which was an ancient thing that lead to a relatively recent crash that they could have just searched anyway (and honestly, you can't convince me that people wouldn't have looted the death star wreckage down to the ground). Tuned out for a bit and suddenly there was a cavalry charge on... spaceship turrets... for reasons.

The less said about the martyrdom competition and re-killing a dead guy the better, but at that point it felt like a very bad episode of late season Buffy the Vampire Slayer.

Though C-3P0's 'emotional' farewell to complete indifference and open scorn was a fantastic microcosm of the whole endeavor.

 Easy E wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:


But seriously (and unironically), one of my favorite movies, if you want to talk about bad, is The Apple - a movie so famously bad that the director tried to kill himself after the premier.

Love The Apple. More people should watch it..... maybe... I think?

Most people I've shown it to really enjoy it... until the ending.

No better time to introduce a brand new character that nobody has ever mentioned before to resolve all the plot conflicts for you, lol.

chaos0xomega wrote:


Most people I've shown it to really enjoy it... until the ending.

No better time to introduce a brand new character that nobody has ever mentioned before to resolve all the plot conflicts for you, lol.

I mean, the reason that "deus ex mechanica" is know by a Latin phrase is that this sort of the plot resolution was well known and well decried for hundreds of years before the birth of Christ. Its a very old trope.

on the sequels, I think TFA was a classic 3.4 rotogens, not great, not terrible. The Last jedi was very patchy, and had some pretty bad moments (the completely pointless gambling world arc, Admiral Holdos incompetence, etc) , but had some genuinely good moments (cut out the slapstick moment, and the scene with Rey and luke where Rey reaches out and connects to the force is one of the best descriptions of the Force, for example). the Rise of Skywalker was broken mainly by the unwillingness to work with the endstate that TLJ give them, and the hard "lol,nope" reset really screwed whatever chance it might have had.

I left the cinema after watching TLJ with...mixed...feelings, but i left the cinema after the rise of skywalker with destinctly negative ones. It just...sucked.

 AduroT wrote:
We all agree Senator Objection is a secret Imperialist, right?

He's the father of the main guy from that short lived Resistance animated show. My memory of that show is fuzzy, likely for my own protection, but I don't recall him being an especially bad guy in that, so if he is in anyway an Imperialist then he's got a journey to go on.

Ambitious and naive might be a better fit?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I loved Rise of Skywalker. To the point I genuinely wonder if I watched and see a different movie to everyone else.

I just wish they kept the Rey is nobody thing. We don't need magic bloodlines and whatever. Individuals can be powerful because individuals are powerful. Hate episode 8 or not or whatever. But the shot of the little slave boy holding his broom like a lightsaber staring off into space as a visual representation of anyone can end up the hero and lineage means nothing was fantastic.

What they did with the Force was one of the best things they did in the Last Jedi, but what they did with the "Cycle of Good and Evil" was the worst.

I don’t disagree on that, especially as really Force wise? There’s but a single known bloodline of powerful force users, and that’s but four people long (Anakin, Luke, Leia, Ben).

But. And yes this is a big but the scale of which might caused Sir Mixalot to reassess his life priorities?

The messy bits about the sequels (and it is messy)? Provide a lot of hooks and latches and narrative Velcro strips for others to come along and add their take. Which is exactly what the old EU stemmed from.

Remember folks! Luke was able to fly an X-Wing competently because his T-16* happened to have an identical control system to the T-65b** because they happened to be made by the same company*** who were well into standardisation****, with the only mention of the T16 being from Luke, and Biggs saying Luke was a great bush pilot. We didn’t even know what the T-16 was***** for years afterwards.

*, **, ***, ****, ***** Thanks to the Old EU and varying sources backfilling.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I don’t disagree on that, especially as really Force wise? There’s but a single known bloodline of powerful force users, and that’s but four people long (Anakin, Luke, Leia, Ben).

But. And yes this is a big but the scale of which might caused Sir Mixalot to reassess his life priorities?

The messy bits about the sequels (and it is messy)? Provide a lot of hooks and latches and narrative Velcro strips for others to come along and add their take. Which is exactly what the old EU stemmed from.

Remember folks! Luke was able to fly an X-Wing competently because his T-16* happened to have an identical control system to the T-65b** because they happened to be made by the same company*** who were well into standardisation****, with the only mention of the T16 being from Luke, and Biggs saying Luke was a great bush pilot. We didn’t even know what the T-16 was***** for years afterwards.

*, **, ***, ****, ***** Thanks to the Old EU and varying sources backfilling.

counterpoint: we didnt need to know what a t-16 was, beyond the fact it was A) something luke was already familiar with, and B) the controls were similar enough to the fighter he was about to pilot. any extra knowledge added later was Cool(tm), but not needed to follow the plot. Frankly, thats not the case in the sequels.


as much as they are part of a larger narrative, these flims should be able to stand alone and not rely on assumed knowledge or exposition added in secondary material. Palpatines return should not have been hand-waved, it should have been arguably the focus of the first act.

Counter counter point?

T-16 is explicitly mentioned in A New Hope.

The rest? Other than Biggs claiming Luke to be an excellent bush pilot?

Is all EU.

The old EU answering the question of how Luke, a farmboy from the arse end of nowhere, could just….sort of super competently pilot a highly advanced and superior space fighter.

That’s my entire point. The OT had such flaws and foibles and oddities and “wait…hold on” moments, which the old EU addressed, and so enriched the whole of the thing.

Now that is not to excuse and handwave away the issues in the sequels - because they are there. But I will argue it’s from such oddities and issues and “huh?” the true potential of the background is found. I’m not even going to argue said crap bits and unexplained are therefore part of a careful design. Just that from sloppiness and outright incompetence something truly brilliant can grow.

What? Your pieces of argument aren't related to each other at all.

The EU is completely irrelevant to Episode 4.
Luke is a bush pilot that can target 2 meter targets is all the information we're given and all the information we need. The protagonist can pilot the fighter for the movie's climax.
The 'T-16' is just an empty setting nothing to make the setting feel more lived in. Much like 40k with its Ryza pattern lasgun vs a Mars pattern lasgun. It doesn't actually matter, but makes the universe feel slightly bigger with no effort, because people put names and brands on things.

What you are talking about is pointless SW trivia, not movie making. The gobblegook in some source books about fighters and stunt fliers and cockpits is fandom obsession at its harmless worst (we had to wait a while for the fandom to show off its harmful side).

If you want to talk about media literacy, this is part that nerd culture (as a rule) gets completely wrong. Encyclopedic knowledge of in-setting names, brands, manufacturers, ship lengths, magic systems, and what have you isn't important. Its missing the forest for the trees. How the story flows, peaks and rises matters. How the characters are written matters. What proper names get inserted into blank spots in the script does not. It helps if they aren't swapped out willy-nilly, but it really does not matter if a mook is a Storm Trooper, Scout Trooper, Snow Trooper, Dark Trooper, Lightning Trooper, Jump Trooper or whatever. Or if Han has a jibber-jabber blaster mkX What matters is its an easily identifiable mook, and Han's gun is Han's gun. It does not matter if that ever gets named, just that audience gets a thrill when he pulls it out.

Because that's what matters in movie making- what the audience feels at the moment in the story, not the random made up 'facts' that they'll look up later in a sourcebook as obsessed teenagers or twenty-somethings (or later).

I dunno, as a kid watching ANH, Luke being able to pilot an X-Wing wasn't something that required explaining to me, and it still isn't. He drove a flying car and was referred to as being a pilot at least once in the movie. He lives in a galaxy where people fly around from planet to planet in mere moments and down-on-their-luck low-lives are able to afford their own personal spaceships. Thats all the exposition I needed. In this world, flying a starship is like driving a car in our world. Anyone can do it. Boom. Done. No need to think about it further.

That EU authors took the time to fill in all those details is kinda not relevant. They did it because they were pedantic nerds overly concerned with details that most people otherwise did not care for, not because it was necessary to fill in a gap in the story. The story didn't *need* that detail, the authors *wanted* that detail.

Going into The Force Awakens as a returning fan, however, was a different story. The story - as part 7 of an ongoing narrative - would not make any sense to me without the external material, because it requires a hell of a lot of exposition to explain why the story otherwise does not make any real sense within the context of the film that preceded it, to the extent that I would not be able to figure out how the films connect to one another with the information presented to me within The Force Awakens itself.

I definitely agree with that. Leia's Resistance organization made no sense at all, given that she was part of the government, and TFA didn't bother to explain (or even really hint) that the First Order wasn't a major threat that everyone knew about (because every single person the film introduced absolutely did).

Abrams didn't skip on trivia, he skipped on connective tissue (both times), and that's a huge difference.

chaos0xomega wrote:


That EU authors took the time to fill in all those details is kinda not relevant. They did it because they were pedantic nerds overly concerned with details that most people otherwise did not care for, not because it was necessary to fill in a gap in the story. The story didn't *need* that detail, the authors *wanted* that detail.

.

actually a lot of the time those details wherte filled in by Roleplaying books. where that kind of detail becomes a bit more important

Voss wrote:
I definitely agree with that. Leia's Resistance organization made no sense at all, given that she was part of the government, and TFA didn't bother to explain (or even really hint) that the First Order wasn't a major threat that everyone knew about (because every single person the film introduced absolutely did).

Abrams didn't skip on trivia, he skipped on connective tissue (both times), and that's a huge difference.

Exactly and those issues plague all 3 of the films and just get worse and worse because they have such knock on events.

Another great example is Luke not being a hero. That whole storyline is perfectly plausible; but they don't show it. They hide almost his entire story after defeating the Emperor until we find him a shell of his former self hiding on a backwater world inhabited by puffins.

Honestly the whole film is several decades too late in setting itself up.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
They’re also fighting against Jedi, and a Mandalorian. Two more or less functionally extinct cultures.

The Jedi in particular. When they can fling you around with a thought or gesture, know where you’re going to shoot before your shoot? Yeah you’re gonna look like a bunch of idiots. All the more so given how incredibly rare Jedi are, and so not exactly something you can properly train for.

Sabine is wearing Beskar, a material highly resistant to your weapon. Oh and she’s got one of those fancy laser swords as well.

I do love for how little of it she actually wears they can only seem to shoot her where she’s covered.

 AduroT wrote:
I do love for how little of it she actually wears they can only seem to shoot her where she’s covered.

You can clearly see her moving to block the shots on armor plates.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

chaos0xomega wrote:
I dunno, as a kid watching ANH, Luke being able to pilot an X-Wing wasn't something that required explaining to me, and it still isn't. He drove a flying car and was referred to as being a pilot at least once in the movie. He lives in a galaxy where people fly around from planet to planet in mere moments and down-on-their-luck low-lives are able to afford their own personal spaceships. Thats all the exposition I needed. In this world, flying a starship is like driving a car in our world. Anyone can do it. Boom. Done. No need to think about it further.

Exactly. Luke is established as a skilled pilot and we even see him fumble around a bit trying to make the jump from a space-Cessna to a space-F22. Who cares about the rest, the movie shows us on-screen everything we need to know for the events to make sense.

The sequel trilogy doesn't do that. It opens with the classic iconography of the Evil Empire vs. Rebellion, telling the audience that somehow after ROTJ the rebellion failed and the Empire returned to power. They have star destroyers and TIE fighters and storm troopers and a space wizard in black robes. The rebels have an x-wing and a droid companion and a heroic ace pilot. We don't know why the rebellion failed and the bad guys took over the galaxy again but ok, it's at least pretty clear what's going on. Except oops, that's all completely wrong. The Republic is still around, these Imperials are all LARPing fanboys in some backwater system nobody cares about, and a few seconds after this is revealed the new death star blows up the Republic and everything important. Except oh wait, that's also wrong, there's still a whole bunch of Republic space battleships just hanging around waiting for Lando to say "hey guys, maybe we should go do something about the people who just blew up half the galaxy", because apparently nobody bothered to figure out that if you bring a massive swarm of ships you can just shoot the bad guys and win? Good luck having any clue what's really happening unless you read the prequel novel, played the video games, etc.

I finally see this weeks episode of Asohka and I come to the thread only to find this instead:



"This will be the sixth time we have had this exact same discussion about the sequel trilogy, and we have become exceedingly efficient at it." - The Architect, probably. Maybe.

There seems to be less misogyny in this version, so go us?

 AduroT wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
They’re also fighting against Jedi, and a Mandalorian. Two more or less functionally extinct cultures.

The Jedi in particular. When they can fling you around with a thought or gesture, know where you’re going to shoot before your shoot? Yeah you’re gonna look like a bunch of idiots. All the more so given how incredibly rare Jedi are, and so not exactly something you can properly train for.

Sabine is wearing Beskar, a material highly resistant to your weapon. Oh and she’s got one of those fancy laser swords as well.

I do love for how little of it she actually wears they can only seem to shoot her where she’s covered.

Whilst I’d need to watch it again, there’s at least one bit where Sabine is in a position which is presenting as much of that armour as possible.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Whilst I’d need to watch it again, there’s at least one bit where Sabine is in a position which is presenting as much of that armour as possible.

And multiple times you see her bring her hands up to block a shot with the arm/wrist plates before resuming shooting.

 Lance845 wrote:


I just wish they kept the Rey is nobody thing. We don't need magic bloodlines and whatever. Individuals can be powerful because individuals are powerful. Hate episode 8 or not or whatever. But the shot of the little slave boy holding his broom like a lightsaber staring off into space as a visual representation of anyone can end up the hero and lineage means nothing was fantastic.

Maybe we are the weird ones. Maybe everyone else prefers regal bloodlines. I mean Kings were a thing for ages. Perhaps this republic stuff is just wrong for humans... Honestly it is baffling and surely decreases generic appeal. As a kid watching star wars you can daydream you can be a character in it. Now? Sadly my old man was from Cork not Tatooine so that rules me out.

Can’t believe it’s the series finale of Ahsoka next Wednesday. Whilst my weekly watch slate is gaining pace (Generation V, Loki S2 and The Continental), I’m going to miss Ahsoka.

Of course the good news with the strike more or less resolved, any follow season shouldn’t be delayed. And we’ve Skeleton Crew to hopefully look forward to. And The Acolyte in 2024.

The funny thing about this argument is that Biggs doesn't even vouch for Luke in the original film. That's a deleted scene that was added back in the even hated Special Edition.

 LunarSol wrote:
The funny thing about this argument is that Biggs doesn't even vouch for Luke in the original film. That's a deleted scene that was added back in the even hated Special Edition.

Pretty sure it, like the introduction of Luke and Biggs, was back in the novelization that came out with the film.

Have to say have really been enjoying Ahsoka, really well put together show. I wouldn't say it's the force of nature that Andor was, but I would definitely put it up there with the Mandalorian. Although it's interesting to find that my suspension of disbelief is not broken by someone surviving a light-sabre through the torso, but was by someone giving themselves that haircut with a combat knife.

It's also made me go and watch the Clone Wars, which I completely missed when it was released. Did think it was a children's cartoon, as some of the plot lines are extremely two-dimensional (and the artwork style along with it) but then you have scenes like droids cutting through the hulls of immobile ships so the crew get sucked out into space! (Which felt a bit incongruous)

 Kanluwen wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:
The funny thing about this argument is that Biggs doesn't even vouch for Luke in the original film. That's a deleted scene that was added back in the even hated Special Edition.

Pretty sure it, like the introduction of Luke and Biggs, was back in the novelization that came out with the film.

It's definitely one of those things that was "known" long before the special editions. I always have to double check because I don't really recall how the movie went without it. Definitely one of the best additions.

 Pacific wrote:
Have to say have really been enjoying Ahsoka, really well put together show. I wouldn't say it's the force of nature that Andor was, but I would definitely put it up there with the Mandalorian. Although it's interesting to find that my suspension of disbelief is not broken by someone surviving a light-sabre through the torso, but was by someone giving themselves that haircut with a combat knife.

Real men shave with machetes. Mandalorians, being a warrior culture, cut their hair with a combat knife. Jedi should accordingly consider their lightsabers when it comes to grooming, but think better of it because nobody likes the smell of singed hair.

No disbelief in need of suspending here.