criterion-sm dice-lg ea-starwars-lg instagram lucasfilm-lg motive-lg twitch you-tube

Are episodes 7-9 killing Star Wars? (Spoilers, seriously?)

135

Replies

  • bfloo
    17674 posts Member
    NPA79 wrote: »
    Hanzo wrote: »
    I have a gift for @OOM19

    wUiRrWa.jpg

    Hey Hanzo how about including mickey mouse as a new character or even the new dark lord of the sith.I m sure you ll love it.

    Darth Mickey might be the villain we need ;)
    The Knights of Gareth are Eternal

    Pirate of the Knights of Gareth

    h846398gb27k.png


  • OOM19
    2833 posts Member
    Finally a Argument worthy of arguing or something

    giphy.gif
    OOM19 wrote: »
    I hate the opinion of a lot of you people. Star Wars is a story, carefully crafted by people who know what they are doing. Yeah, Snoke wasn't important, Rey's parents were nobody, and Luke changed. If you are angered by that then you are an entitled cancer to this world. Rian Johnson wasn't there to appease and please you, confirming all your theories, he was there to make a movie, and one that the franchise needed. Luke, Han, and Leia can't be around forever. The phrase, "Let the past die, kill it if you have to," was a main theme of the movie. We are gonna have to let go of the old characters and fall in love again with new ones. And don't make your own cannon. I love Kotor just as much as the next guy but I can respect it as its own story. Stop wanting everything to be how you want it. Just go along for the ride



    You couldn't be more of a Yes Man if you actually kissed Rian's rear

    "Basically accept EVERYTHING Rian does. he is your supreme overlord and master of Star Wars and knows better then you and his films are flawless"

    Are we in North Korea?

    No. I know there are flaws in the film, and I don't think Johnson is an amazing director. I just think everyone should stop whining when they don't get their way. It is a movie, a story, and it doesn't care about you're feelings or fan theories.

    So....What's your Point? you literally just said there are flaws in this movie so where's the argument you have against talking about a movie? Oh right "Fan theories and Nerd expectations" hehe

    I'm a Casual Star Wars fan. I don't care about Fan theories, I don't care about the Metaphors I care about the Story and I want as should everyone a Clear Concise Story that is consistent with what's come before

    And who are you Mr. White Knight to judge what is worthy of discussion?

    If people want to criticize and point out the insane amount of Plot Holes, Over the top Political Messages, Poor Handling of Classic and New Characters and a total mismatch in style and direction in two opposing movies in the same trilogy and just overall zero development for the Universe

    What's the problem with that? the fact you had to come in here and start projecting all these silly little "Your a nerd who likes Rey is a Qui-Gon theroieisisi" tells me that not only are you too emotionally attached to this film and can't handle actual criticism. to the point you have to make up evidence to make every negative opinion about this movie seem petty just to reinforce inside your mind that only the intelligent wise and grown up person can handle the symbolism and metaphors

    It simply tells me you have to nothing to offer and that you can only defend your Opinions with the subtlety and finesse of a Two Year Old

    I can throw Shade too bro
    Hanzo wrote: »
    Grow up. The story is a story. Not everything had to go in your way.
    Ah the "I have nothing to use to defend this movie because I can't form my own Opinions and have to resort to Trash Talking and robotically repeating what I've heard said from others and offer nothing of value to any discussion above Pre-School Level" Argument
    Hanzo wrote: »
    I have a gift for @OOM19

    wUiRrWa.jpg

    I would totally read that

    Could be fun
  • Hanzo
    1677 posts Member
    I think you goofed your quote there, I didn't post the grow up line.
  • I hate the opinion of a lot of you people. Star Wars is a story, carefully crafted by people who know what they are doing. Yeah, Snoke wasn't important, Rey's parents were nobody, and Luke changed. If you are angered by that then you are an entitled cancer to this world. Rian Johnson wasn't there to appease and please you, confirming all your theories, he was there to make a movie, and one that the franchise needed. Luke, Han, and Leia can't be around forever. The phrase, "Let the past die, kill it if you have to," was a main theme of the movie. We are gonna have to let go of the old characters and fall in love again with new ones. And don't make your own cannon. I love Kotor just as much as the next guy but I can respect it as its own story. Stop wanting everything to be how you want it. Just go along for the ride

    21aqbc.jpg

    care to explain why?
  • Hanzo wrote: »
    I have a gift for @OOM19

    wUiRrWa.jpg

    That's Amazing :D
  • I hate the opinion of a lot of you people. Star Wars is a story, carefully crafted by people who know what they are doing. Yeah, Snoke wasn't important, Rey's parents were nobody, and Luke changed. If you are angered by that then you are an entitled cancer to this world. Rian Johnson wasn't there to appease and please you, confirming all your theories, he was there to make a movie, and one that the franchise needed. Luke, Han, and Leia can't be around forever. The phrase, "Let the past die, kill it if you have to," was a main theme of the movie. We are gonna have to let go of the old characters and fall in love again with new ones. And don't make your own cannon. I love Kotor just as much as the next guy but I can respect it as its own story. Stop wanting everything to be how you want it. Just go along for the ride

    21aqbc.jpg

    care to explain why?

    No. Stop kissing Rian's ****.
    qx08b.gif



  • Hanzo
    1677 posts Member
    To reiterate my position, I was disappointed in TLJ.

    The difference is it didn't ruin my life or make we swear off the franchise.
  • OOM19
    2833 posts Member
    Hanzo wrote: »
    To reiterate my position, I was disappointed in TLJ.

    The difference is it didn't ruin my life or make we swear off the franchise.
    Only person who said that was the OP

    I and everyone else have been quite civil and made good points
  • Hanzo
    1677 posts Member
    OOM19 wrote: »
    Hanzo wrote: »
    To reiterate my position, I was disappointed in TLJ.

    The difference is it didn't ruin my life or make we swear off the franchise.
    Only person who said that was the OP

    I and everyone else have been quite civil and made good points

    They may not explicitly say it, but that's the vibe I get from a lot of posters here. I mean a lot of people are taking this really hard, like talk to their therapist about it hard.
  • Hanzo wrote: »
    OOM19 wrote: »
    Hanzo wrote: »
    To reiterate my position, I was disappointed in TLJ.

    The difference is it didn't ruin my life or make we swear off the franchise.
    Only person who said that was the OP

    I and everyone else have been quite civil and made good points

    They may not explicitly say it, but that's the vibe I get from a lot of posters here. I mean a lot of people are taking this really hard, like talk to their therapist about it hard.
    I spent six years in therapy from 1999-2005.

    Thanks, “now THIS is podracing!”

  • Hanzo
    1677 posts Member
    rocketpig wrote: »
    Hanzo wrote: »
    OOM19 wrote: »
    Hanzo wrote: »
    To reiterate my position, I was disappointed in TLJ.

    The difference is it didn't ruin my life or make we swear off the franchise.
    Only person who said that was the OP

    I and everyone else have been quite civil and made good points

    They may not explicitly say it, but that's the vibe I get from a lot of posters here. I mean a lot of people are taking this really hard, like talk to their therapist about it hard.
    I spent six years in therapy from 1999-2005.

    Thanks, “now THIS is podracing!”

    Lul.

    I want to take everyone bashing TLJ and sit them in a chair like this with Phantom Menace on loop.

    giphy.gif
  • OOM19 wrote: »
    Finally a Argument worthy of arguing or something

    giphy.gif
    OOM19 wrote: »
    I hate the opinion of a lot of you people. Star Wars is a story, carefully crafted by people who know what they are doing. Yeah, Snoke wasn't important, Rey's parents were nobody, and Luke changed. If you are angered by that then you are an entitled cancer to this world. Rian Johnson wasn't there to appease and please you, confirming all your theories, he was there to make a movie, and one that the franchise needed. Luke, Han, and Leia can't be around forever. The phrase, "Let the past die, kill it if you have to," was a main theme of the movie. We are gonna have to let go of the old characters and fall in love again with new ones. And don't make your own cannon. I love Kotor just as much as the next guy but I can respect it as its own story. Stop wanting everything to be how you want it. Just go along for the ride



    You couldn't be more of a Yes Man if you actually kissed Rian's rear

    "Basically accept EVERYTHING Rian does. he is your supreme overlord and master of Star Wars and knows better then you and his films are flawless"

    Are we in North Korea?

    No. I know there are flaws in the film, and I don't think Johnson is an amazing director. I just think everyone should stop whining when they don't get their way. It is a movie, a story, and it doesn't care about you're feelings or fan theories.

    So....What's your Point? you literally just said there are flaws in this movie so where's the argument you have against talking about a movie? Oh right "Fan theories and Nerd expectations" hehe

    I'm a Casual Star Wars fan. I don't care about Fan theories, I don't care about the Metaphors I care about the Story and I want as should everyone a Clear Concise Story that is consistent with what's come before

    And who are you Mr. White Knight to judge what is worthy of discussion?

    If people want to criticize and point out the insane amount of Plot Holes, Over the top Political Messages, Poor Handling of Classic and New Characters and a total mismatch in style and direction in two opposing movies in the same trilogy and just overall zero development for the Universe

    What's the problem with that? the fact you had to come in here and start projecting all these silly little "Your a nerd who likes Rey is a Qui-Gon theroieisisi" tells me that not only are you too emotionally attached to this film and can't handle actual criticism. to the point you have to make up evidence to make every negative opinion about this movie seem petty just to reinforce inside your mind that only the intelligent wise and grown up person can handle the symbolism and metaphors

    It simply tells me you have to nothing to offer and that you can only defend your Opinions with the subtlety and finesse of a Two Year Old

    I can throw Shade too bro
    Hanzo wrote: »
    Grow up. The story is a story. Not everything had to go in your way.
    Ah the "I have nothing to use to defend this movie because I can't form my own Opinions and have to resort to Trash Talking and robotically repeating what I've heard said from others and offer nothing of value to any discussion above Pre-School Level" Argument
    Hanzo wrote: »
    I have a gift for @OOM19

    wUiRrWa.jpg

    I would totally read that

    Could be fun

    Uh, for one, I never said it was flawless. I just said we should accept the fact that it is Star Wars, just like the prequels are, no matter how bad you think of them. You can talk about the movie negatively and what you are talking about is fine(I skimmed your review). The things I have a problem with are:
    1. Rey's parents are nobody
    2. We don't know who Snoke is
    3. Luke is "not Luke"

    I know you have some of these opinions and these are my problems with them. 1: The whole point of Rey's parents being nobodies is to show that anyone can be a hero, you don't have to be a Skywalker or a Kenobi to be one. 2: We didn't know who Palpatine "was" until the prequels so what gives. Snoke was a red herring. The real villain is Kylo and he is all that matters now. 3: Why can't people get over the fact that people change. He has a good character arc that strengthens the movie and makes him an interesting character.

    If you want to know my problems with the movie they are:
    1. Forced, Too much, and Bad Timing on Comedy
    2. Canto Bight was disappointing, and the Finn and Rose arc as a whole was mediocre
    3. The Leia in space scene

    And what about political messages. Were any of them that bad. The only major one I saw was anti-war profiteering which is an okay thing to be against.

    I am not emotionally attached to this movie. I can hear, handle, and agree with some criticism. Just not with yours.
  • I hate the opinion of a lot of you people. Star Wars is a story, carefully crafted by people who know what they are doing. Yeah, Snoke wasn't important, Rey's parents were nobody, and Luke changed. If you are angered by that then you are an entitled cancer to this world. Rian Johnson wasn't there to appease and please you, confirming all your theories, he was there to make a movie, and one that the franchise needed. Luke, Han, and Leia can't be around forever. The phrase, "Let the past die, kill it if you have to," was a main theme of the movie. We are gonna have to let go of the old characters and fall in love again with new ones. And don't make your own cannon. I love Kotor just as much as the next guy but I can respect it as its own story. Stop wanting everything to be how you want it. Just go along for the ride

    21aqbc.jpg

    care to explain why?

    No. Stop kissing Rian's ****.

    If acting like a child is the way you wanna go okay. Thanks for the laugh.
  • OOM19
    2833 posts Member
    Hanzo wrote: »
    rocketpig wrote: »
    Hanzo wrote: »
    OOM19 wrote: »
    Hanzo wrote: »
    To reiterate my position, I was disappointed in TLJ.

    The difference is it didn't ruin my life or make we swear off the franchise.
    Only person who said that was the OP

    I and everyone else have been quite civil and made good points

    They may not explicitly say it, but that's the vibe I get from a lot of posters here. I mean a lot of people are taking this really hard, like talk to their therapist about it hard.
    I spent six years in therapy from 1999-2005.

    Thanks, “now THIS is podracing!”

    Lul.

    I want to take everyone bashing TLJ and sit them in a chair like this with Phantom Menace on loop.

    giphy.gif

    Circumventing and directing criticism to something else does not put it in a different context nor solve it

    At the end of the day both are bad and nothing changes shouting "But, but this is bad"

    Is simply

    Futile
  • Hanzo
    1677 posts Member
    OOM19 wrote: »
    Hanzo wrote: »
    rocketpig wrote: »
    Hanzo wrote: »
    OOM19 wrote: »
    Hanzo wrote: »
    To reiterate my position, I was disappointed in TLJ.

    The difference is it didn't ruin my life or make we swear off the franchise.
    Only person who said that was the OP

    I and everyone else have been quite civil and made good points

    They may not explicitly say it, but that's the vibe I get from a lot of posters here. I mean a lot of people are taking this really hard, like talk to their therapist about it hard.
    I spent six years in therapy from 1999-2005.

    Thanks, “now THIS is podracing!”

    Lul.

    I want to take everyone bashing TLJ and sit them in a chair like this with Phantom Menace on loop.

    giphy.gif

    Circumventing and directing criticism to something else does not put it in a different context nor solve it

    At the end of the day both are bad and nothing changes shouting "But, but this is bad"

    Is simply

    Futile

    Right, the prequels were bad....yet we all survived and Star Wars is thriving....that's the point. Not that one was worse than the other.
  • Hanzo wrote: »
    OOM19 wrote: »
    Hanzo wrote: »
    rocketpig wrote: »
    Hanzo wrote: »
    OOM19 wrote: »
    Hanzo wrote: »
    To reiterate my position, I was disappointed in TLJ.

    The difference is it didn't ruin my life or make we swear off the franchise.
    Only person who said that was the OP

    I and everyone else have been quite civil and made good points

    They may not explicitly say it, but that's the vibe I get from a lot of posters here. I mean a lot of people are taking this really hard, like talk to their therapist about it hard.
    I spent six years in therapy from 1999-2005.

    Thanks, “now THIS is podracing!”

    Lul.

    I want to take everyone bashing TLJ and sit them in a chair like this with Phantom Menace on loop.

    giphy.gif

    Circumventing and directing criticism to something else does not put it in a different context nor solve it

    At the end of the day both are bad and nothing changes shouting "But, but this is bad"

    Is simply

    Futile

    Right, the prequels were bad....yet we all survived and Star Wars is thriving....that's the point. Not that one was worse than the other.

    Also, TPM is a bad movie. It just is.

    And you know what? I still watch it pretty regularly and enjoy the good parts. Because I like Star Wars.
  • OOM19
    2833 posts Member
    Uh, for one, I never said it was flawless.
    I never said you said it was "Flawless" and even acknowledged that you said it had flaws, do not put words in my mouth
    I just said we should accept the fact that it is Star Wars, just like the prequels are, no matter how bad you think of them. You can talk about the movie negatively and what you are talking about is fine(I skimmed your review). The things I have a problem with are:
    1. Rey's parents are nobody
    2. We don't know who Snoke is
    3. Luke is "not Luke"
    We should just accept Bad Quality because Bad Quality? What hopelessly depressing and pointless existence if we were to do that
    1: The whole point of Rey's parents being nobodies is to show that anyone can be a hero, you don't have to be a Skywalker or a Kenobi to be one.
    Sure that's a pretty good and uplifting message I suppose

    If it weren't for the fact that the whole deciding line on Rey's character either breaking the power levels of Star Wars and defying all common sense depended on her being a decedent of another character

    Because everything she does and knows in TFA completely breaks down and makes no sense with just the tiniest bit of thinking

    How does she know how to fly? How does she know maneuvers and the capability to execute them that would put Real Fighter Pilots to shame? How does she know what the Mind-Trick is? and numerous other issues

    Just going into one of them shows you how rushed and how flabbergasted the Scripts are
    2: We didn't know who Palpatine "was" until the prequels so what gives. Snoke was a red herring.
    So we should just repeat a "Bad Decision" because Bad Decision? I thought the ST was supposed to right the Prequel Trilogy not become it
    3: Why can't people get over the fact that people change. He has a good character arc that strengthens the movie and makes him an interesting character.
    Because it completely throws away his development in ROTJ and makes no sense with that knowledge and makes Luke look like a Psychopath

    Seriously who tries to murder their relative in their sleep?

  • OOM19 wrote: »
    Uh, for one, I never said it was flawless.
    I never said you said it was "Flawless" and even acknowledged that you said it had flaws, do not put words in my mouth
    I just said we should accept the fact that it is Star Wars, just like the prequels are, no matter how bad you think of them. You can talk about the movie negatively and what you are talking about is fine(I skimmed your review). The things I have a problem with are:
    1. Rey's parents are nobody
    2. We don't know who Snoke is
    3. Luke is "not Luke"
    We should just accept Bad Quality because of Bad Quality? What hopelessly depressing and pointless existence if we were to do that
    1: The whole point of Rey's parents being nobodies is to show that anyone can be a hero, you don't have to be a Skywalker or a Kenobi to be one.
    Sure that's a pretty good and uplifting message I suppose

    If it weren't for the fact that the whole deciding line on Rey's character either breaking the power levels of Star Wars and defying all common sense depended on her being a decedent of another character

    Because everything she does and knows in TFA completely breaks down and makes no sense with just the tiniest bit of thinking

    How does she know how to fly? How does she know maneuvers and the capability to execute them that would put Real Fighter Pilots to shame? How does she know what the Mind-Trick is? and numerous other issues

    Just going into one of them shows you how rushed and how flabbergasted the Scripts are
    2: We didn't know who Palpatine "was" until the prequels so what gives. Snoke was a red herring.
    So we should just repeat a "Bad Decision" because Bad Decision? I thought the ST was supposed to right the Prequel Trilogy not become it
    3: Why can't people get over the fact that people change. He has a good character arc that strengthens the movie and makes him an interesting character.
    Because it completely throws away his development in ROTJ and makes no sense with that knowledge and makes Luke look like a Psychopath

    Seriously who tries to murder their relative in their sleep?

    Why does she need to be a descendant? When has that ever stopped anyone from using the force? How does she know how to fly. She had before and worked on the ships for Unkar. How does she know what a Mind-trick is? Watto did, Jabba did, why couldn't she.

    Us not knowing who Palpatine was, wasn't a "Bad Decision". It doesn't matter. He acted as a story progression tool for Vader as Snoke did for Kylo Ren.

    Luke explained that it was a fleeting thought and he regretted it almost immediately. You've never had those. He wasn't a phsyco. He regretted it immediately and felt so guilty he just left. He was still Luke, just a Luke that made a bad decision.

    And I am not accepting "Bad Quality", the movie wasn't to me. It was flawed yes. But so were Rogue One and Return of the Jedi. They all struggled with the same things. And that's not even what I said. I said it's is Star Wars, and it didn't ruin it. The prequels are bad, but they didn't ruin Star Wars, and that is my main point thru all of this.
  • timidobserver
    807 posts Member
    edited January 2018
    OOM19 wrote: »
    Uh, for one, I never said it was flawless.
    I never said you said it was "Flawless" and even acknowledged that you said it had flaws, do not put words in my mouth
    I just said we should accept the fact that it is Star Wars, just like the prequels are, no matter how bad you think of them. You can talk about the movie negatively and what you are talking about is fine(I skimmed your review). The things I have a problem with are:
    1. Rey's parents are nobody
    2. We don't know who Snoke is
    3. Luke is "not Luke"
    We should just accept Bad Quality because of Bad Quality? What hopelessly depressing and pointless existence if we were to do that
    1: The whole point of Rey's parents being nobodies is to show that anyone can be a hero, you don't have to be a Skywalker or a Kenobi to be one.
    Sure that's a pretty good and uplifting message I suppose

    If it weren't for the fact that the whole deciding line on Rey's character either breaking the power levels of Star Wars and defying all common sense depended on her being a decedent of another character

    Because everything she does and knows in TFA completely breaks down and makes no sense with just the tiniest bit of thinking

    How does she know how to fly? How does she know maneuvers and the capability to execute them that would put Real Fighter Pilots to shame? How does she know what the Mind-Trick is? and numerous other issues

    Just going into one of them shows you how rushed and how flabbergasted the Scripts are
    2: We didn't know who Palpatine "was" until the prequels so what gives. Snoke was a red herring.
    So we should just repeat a "Bad Decision" because Bad Decision? I thought the ST was supposed to right the Prequel Trilogy not become it
    3: Why can't people get over the fact that people change. He has a good character arc that strengthens the movie and makes him an interesting character.
    Because it completely throws away his development in ROTJ and makes no sense with that knowledge and makes Luke look like a Psychopath

    Seriously who tries to murder their relative in their sleep?

    Luke explained that it was a fleeting thought and he regretted it almost immediately. You've never had those. He wasn't a phsyco. He regretted it immediately and felt so guilty he just left. He was still Luke, just a Luke that made a bad decision.

    There is a fleeting thought and then there going to someone's sleeping area and then standing behind them with an ignited lightsaber.

  • Hanzo wrote: »
    rocketpig wrote: »
    Hanzo wrote: »
    OOM19 wrote: »
    Hanzo wrote: »
    To reiterate my position, I was disappointed in TLJ.

    The difference is it didn't ruin my life or make we swear off the franchise.
    Only person who said that was the OP

    I and everyone else have been quite civil and made good points

    They may not explicitly say it, but that's the vibe I get from a lot of posters here. I mean a lot of people are taking this really hard, like talk to their therapist about it hard.
    I spent six years in therapy from 1999-2005.

    Thanks, “now THIS is podracing!”

    Lul.

    I want to take everyone bashing TLJ and sit them in a chair like this with Phantom Menace on loop.

    giphy.gif

    THAT GIF! JESUS CHRIST! THAT GIVES ME THE HEEBY JEEBIES!
    qx08b.gif



  • The Last Jedi was too obvious with their political agenda. The prequ
    OOM19 wrote: »
    Uh, for one, I never said it was flawless.
    I never said you said it was "Flawless" and even acknowledged that you said it had flaws, do not put words in my mouth
    I just said we should accept the fact that it is Star Wars, just like the prequels are, no matter how bad you think of them. You can talk about the movie negatively and what you are talking about is fine(I skimmed your review). The things I have a problem with are:
    1. Rey's parents are nobody
    2. We don't know who Snoke is
    3. Luke is "not Luke"
    We should just accept Bad Quality because of Bad Quality? What hopelessly depressing and pointless existence if we were to do that
    1: The whole point of Rey's parents being nobodies is to show that anyone can be a hero, you don't have to be a Skywalker or a Kenobi to be one.
    Sure that's a pretty good and uplifting message I suppose

    If it weren't for the fact that the whole deciding line on Rey's character either breaking the power levels of Star Wars and defying all common sense depended on her being a decedent of another character

    Because everything she does and knows in TFA completely breaks down and makes no sense with just the tiniest bit of thinking

    How does she know how to fly? How does she know maneuvers and the capability to execute them that would put Real Fighter Pilots to shame? How does she know what the Mind-Trick is? and numerous other issues

    Just going into one of them shows you how rushed and how flabbergasted the Scripts are
    2: We didn't know who Palpatine "was" until the prequels so what gives. Snoke was a red herring.
    So we should just repeat a "Bad Decision" because Bad Decision? I thought the ST was supposed to right the Prequel Trilogy not become it
    3: Why can't people get over the fact that people change. He has a good character arc that strengthens the movie and makes him an interesting character.
    Because it completely throws away his development in ROTJ and makes no sense with that knowledge and makes Luke look like a Psychopath

    Seriously who tries to murder their relative in their sleep?

    Why does she need to be a descendant? When has that ever stopped anyone from using the force? How does she know how to fly. She had before and worked on the ships for Unkar. How does she know what a Mind-trick is? Watto did, Jabba did, why couldn't she.


    I think he means how she is able to spontaneously use Mind Trick; not knowing its existence, but how to perform it. That's some bull.

    Also, @OOM19 , she learned how to fly via a luck flight simulator. She practiced all the training sessions on it. So... yeeeeeeahhhh. I'm not saying that it's the best solution to her uncanny flying capabilities, but it's something, I guess.
    We need a Tier System for the Heroes. It would justify the "op-ness" of Vader over Han and Chewbacca. It would cost much more to unlock Vader, and would require you to save a lot more than for other heroes and vehicles, but it would be rewarding in the end...

    "It would essentially ruin the eras and turn them into nothing much more than the same thing and same experience but with a different skin. Which is contrary to the point in having eras in the first place." - ZmanGames
  • rocketpig wrote: »
    New trilogy was ruined by SJWs, Feminazis, and bad story writing.
    Scorching hot take because we all know how Lucas never implemented the concepts of strong women, racism, the importance of democracy, and the evils of fasc1sm (seriously, this is word filtered?) into Star Wars from day one.

    The difference: Lucas didn't sacrifice his narrative to make a commentary about those things. He managed to weave them in in ways that not only made sense, but actually strengthened the narrative. The new trilogy has so far failed to craft their commentary so eloquently.
    giphy.gif
  • Talyn856 wrote: »
    Biggest problem with the sequel trilogy at this point is that they've obviously set out to make a series with strong feminist undertones, but they can't even do that right and it actually undermines their female characters.

    Rey never experiences loss or defeat, and is so good at everything without explanation that nobody relates to her. She has grown not one iota over the past two movies. Holdo was such an uptight, condescending **** throwing all that blatant man-hate at Poe that nobody liked her even after she kamikazed into Supremacy. Rose is... unnecessary, pointless, without impact, there only to fill a check box. Phasma serves no purpose except to look cool and die. If everyone in the new movies was male, the story decisions with these characters would make no sense (except Phasma). Even after TLJ, Leia remains the only admirable, strong female lead, and Carrie Fisher is dead.

    This didn't initially occur to me, but after rethinking the movie, there is definitely some truth to what you are saying. It explains a lot of the baffling things that occurred in the movie.

    Yep, and that point only applies to this movie. JJ Abrams and Lawrence Kasdan went out of their way, practically bent over backwards, to craft a series of reasonable excuses for why Rey doesn't get completely pwned on Starkiller Base, with the obvious unstated agreement of "Dude, if Kylo was actually focused and not injured, she'd get wrecked."

    Rian Johnson apparently doesn't understand subtlety, and watched TFA and thought "Wow, she must be super powerful for some reason."
    giphy.gif
  • 'it is now the stepchild of Disney and we know those kids often fail.'

    No.

    Sorry, but Disney never fails. =)
  • Talyn856 wrote: »
    rocketpig wrote: »
    New trilogy was ruined by SJWs, Feminazis, and bad story writing.
    Scorching hot take because we all know how Lucas never implemented the concepts of strong women, racism, the importance of democracy, and the evils of fasc1sm (seriously, this is word filtered?) into Star Wars from day one.

    The difference: Lucas didn't sacrifice his narrative to make a commentary about those things. He managed to weave them in in ways that not only made sense, but actually strengthened the narrative. The new trilogy has so far failed to craft their commentary so eloquently.
    Dunno that I can agree anything about the prequels is eloquent.
  • mathxlrose wrote: »
    'it is now the stepchild of Disney and we know those kids often fail.'

    No.

    Sorry, but Disney never fails. =)

    Have you ever seen Song of the South?
    giphy.gif
  • Vigor
    133 posts Member
    rocketpig wrote: »
    Sath wrote: »
    Maybe i am getting too old for this kind of renaissance. Since George Lucas has abandoned his "baby", it is now the stepchild of Disney and we know those kids often fail.

    Perhaps you are getting too old. I remember how people screamed that the prequels "ruined" Star Wars, particularly by destroying the legacy of Vader by making him a petulant, whiny little brat. I didn't agree with some (many) of the choices Lucas made but I never thought he ruined anything.

    Star Wars is a generational series of films aimed primarily at children. What you loved as a kid, the generation ahead of you probably reviled and ridiculed for destroying their precious childhood nostalgia.

    As for Disney, how do they "often fail"? They're absolutely killing it in the MCU. I'm not a big Disney fan and lamented the day they bought Lucasfilm (honestly, I wanted six movies to be the legacy of the series) but I have to admit that Disney does a lot more right than they do wrong.

    Because the majority of those movies are garbo. GOTG is one of the few saving graces.
    Iron Man 2 and 3? Ew
    Captain....wait...
    You like what Disney is doing?


    ...k. Um, good for you. I hate the ST (and Rebels tries to compete with TCW but fails lol) due to horrendous writing and real life political nonsense that shouldn't taint this stuff.

    So, OP, I agree with you in that I don't like the ST (although I can bear with TFA, TLJ is just nasty). If you like it, well good for you. I'm not going to tell you otherwise. Just for me, I don't know anymore.


    um excuse me mister, but what were you about to say about "captain..."
    Captain America 2 and 3 were some of the best movies Marvel put out.
  • rocketpig wrote: »
    Talyn856 wrote: »
    rocketpig wrote: »
    New trilogy was ruined by SJWs, Feminazis, and bad story writing.
    Scorching hot take because we all know how Lucas never implemented the concepts of strong women, racism, the importance of democracy, and the evils of fasc1sm (seriously, this is word filtered?) into Star Wars from day one.

    The difference: Lucas didn't sacrifice his narrative to make a commentary about those things. He managed to weave them in in ways that not only made sense, but actually strengthened the narrative. The new trilogy has so far failed to craft their commentary so eloquently.
    Dunno that I can agree anything about the prequels is eloquent.

    Let me preface this by saying that I don't find the prequels to be "good movies," only because of the clunky dialogue, bad acting, and Jar Jar. However, there's plenty of artistic merit in the prequels if you know what to look for, it just takes some effort to look past the terrible acting from everyone except Ewan McGregor, Christopher Lee, and Ian McDiarmid.

    You have to remember that George Lucas is, first and foremost, a visual storyteller and an indie director at heart. He's not at all an actor's director or a studio guy. There are plenty of stories floating around about how hard most actors find him to work with, because he doesn't help them at all, and he spent his entire life trying to avoid working for studios, which is why it was helpful that he had the foresight to retain merchandising rights for Star Wars - that enabled him to finance Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi out of his own pocket, absorbing any potential loss with merchandising and giving himself complete creative freedom, not beholden to a studio head who thought his decisions wouldn't sell well with audiences. He's also an excellent effects director who literally changed the way movies were made and, very much like Scorsese, he puts a great deal of thought into every shot, every sequence and beat and likes to hide things in plain sight. Narratively, he places a strong focus on repeating motifs and circular themes.

    There's an interesting essay at http://www.starwarsringtheory.com that breaks down a lot of the intentional visual or narrative choices in the prequels. How much truth is there to it what the essay tries to convey? Who knows. Film is art, art is meant to be interpreted, and no interpretation is necessarily more correct than another.
    giphy.gif
  • I think this whole discussion can be decided when Episode 9 comes out. If that movie is “successful” (which is such a hard criteria these days) then the Last Jedi was at least a partial success. I will reserve full judgement on the ST with its narratives and characters when they are all out. Can we all agree to wait till then?
  • rocketpig
    624 posts Member
    edited January 2018
    Talyn856 wrote: »
    rocketpig wrote: »
    Talyn856 wrote: »
    rocketpig wrote: »
    New trilogy was ruined by SJWs, Feminazis, and bad story writing.
    Scorching hot take because we all know how Lucas never implemented the concepts of strong women, racism, the importance of democracy, and the evils of fasc1sm (seriously, this is word filtered?) into Star Wars from day one.

    The difference: Lucas didn't sacrifice his narrative to make a commentary about those things. He managed to weave them in in ways that not only made sense, but actually strengthened the narrative. The new trilogy has so far failed to craft their commentary so eloquently.
    Dunno that I can agree anything about the prequels is eloquent.

    Let me preface this by saying that I don't find the prequels to be "good movies," only because of the clunky dialogue, bad acting, and Jar Jar. However, there's plenty of artistic merit in the prequels if you know what to look for, it just takes some effort to look past the terrible acting from everyone except Ewan McGregor, Christopher Lee, and Ian McDiarmid.

    You have to remember that George Lucas is, first and foremost, a visual storyteller and an indie director at heart. He's not at all an actor's director or a studio guy. There are plenty of stories floating around about how hard most actors find him to work with, because he doesn't help them at all, and he spent his entire life trying to avoid working for studios, which is why it was helpful that he had the foresight to retain merchandising rights for Star Wars - that enabled him to finance Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi out of his own pocket, absorbing any potential loss with merchandising and giving himself complete creative freedom, not beholden to a studio head who thought his decisions wouldn't sell well with audiences. He's also an excellent effects director who literally changed the way movies were made and, very much like Scorsese, he puts a great deal of thought into every shot, every sequence and beat and likes to hide things in plain sight. Narratively, he places a strong focus on repeating motifs and circular themes.

    There's an interesting essay at http://www.starwarsringtheory.com that breaks down a lot of the intentional visual or narrative choices in the prequels. How much truth is there to it what the essay tries to convey? Who knows. Film is art, art is meant to be interpreted, and no interpretation is necessarily more correct than another.

    Oh, I agree that if you dig down, there are interesting concepts in the prequels and some stuff to like, but they're pretty bad movies overall.

    Which is why I can't consider them any more eloquent in their message than TLJ (which had some great moments with its fair share of clunkers mixed in... but I think its hit rate was much higher overall than any of the prequel films).
  • rocketpig wrote: »
    Talyn856 wrote: »
    rocketpig wrote: »
    bfloo wrote: »
    I was born in 85, I’m a Star Wars Fan. With that said, even if I disagree with direction and the story telling, I am happy the story continues. And I accept where the story goes. Times change so do our heroes/legends. That’s when new ones are born.

    The problem is the story has gone no where.

    All that was accomplished in tlj was bringing the entire thing back to where rebelz started off.

    1. You're judging an incomplete product.

    Not really sure that's accurate. From my two viewings of The Last Jedi, it seems to me that there was no overall plan for the sequel trilogy going into it. They told JJ Abrams and Lawrence Kasdan to write a Star Wars movie that would spawn two sequels, and then Rian Johnson ignored or eliminated over half of what they set up while adding nothing to set up the final installment.

    Johnson also said he wrote TLJ before TFA was released.

    Released, not written. TFA's script was final - or close to it - long before Johnson was hired to direct Episode VIII. Johnson was hired to direct Ep VIII when TFA was in principal production (ie. they were shooting scenes, which means the script was locked down ages before that point).

    Now don’t let fact get in the way of rumour ;) I saw the original Starwars movie at the cinema when it released. I’ve been a fan since day one and I’ve personally loved all the movies since.They all entertain and allow the viewer to escape from their daily life for a couple of hours. Good enough for me.
  • Talyn856 wrote: »
    mathxlrose wrote: »
    'it is now the stepchild of Disney and we know those kids often fail.'

    No.

    Sorry, but Disney never fails. =)

    Have you ever seen Song of the South?

    lol nice
  • Vigor
    133 posts Member
    Talyn856 wrote: »
    rocketpig wrote: »
    Talyn856 wrote: »
    rocketpig wrote: »
    New trilogy was ruined by SJWs, Feminazis, and bad story writing.
    Scorching hot take because we all know how Lucas never implemented the concepts of strong women, racism, the importance of democracy, and the evils of fasc1sm (seriously, this is word filtered?) into Star Wars from day one.

    The difference: Lucas didn't sacrifice his narrative to make a commentary about those things. He managed to weave them in in ways that not only made sense, but actually strengthened the narrative. The new trilogy has so far failed to craft their commentary so eloquently.
    Dunno that I can agree anything about the prequels is eloquent.

    Let me preface this by saying that I don't find the prequels to be "good movies," only because of the clunky dialogue, bad acting, and Jar Jar. However, there's plenty of artistic merit in the prequels if you know what to look for, it just takes some effort to look past the terrible acting from everyone except Ewan McGregor, Christopher Lee, and Ian McDiarmid.

    You have to remember that George Lucas is, first and foremost, a visual storyteller and an indie director at heart. He's not at all an actor's director or a studio guy. There are plenty of stories floating around about how hard most actors find him to work with, because he doesn't help them at all, and he spent his entire life trying to avoid working for studios, which is why it was helpful that he had the foresight to retain merchandising rights for Star Wars - that enabled him to finance Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi out of his own pocket, absorbing any potential loss with merchandising and giving himself complete creative freedom, not beholden to a studio head who thought his decisions wouldn't sell well with audiences. He's also an excellent effects director who literally changed the way movies were made and, very much like Scorsese, he puts a great deal of thought into every shot, every sequence and beat and likes to hide things in plain sight. Narratively, he places a strong focus on repeating motifs and circular themes.

    There's an interesting essay at http://www.starwarsringtheory.com that breaks down a lot of the intentional visual or narrative choices in the prequels. How much truth is there to it what the essay tries to convey? Who knows. Film is art, art is meant to be interpreted, and no interpretation is necessarily more correct than another.

    wow praise for Lucas. You don't see that everyday. Thank you for not being a sheep
  • rocketpig wrote: »
    Talyn856 wrote: »
    rocketpig wrote: »
    Talyn856 wrote: »
    rocketpig wrote: »
    New trilogy was ruined by SJWs, Feminazis, and bad story writing.
    Scorching hot take because we all know how Lucas never implemented the concepts of strong women, racism, the importance of democracy, and the evils of fasc1sm (seriously, this is word filtered?) into Star Wars from day one.

    The difference: Lucas didn't sacrifice his narrative to make a commentary about those things. He managed to weave them in in ways that not only made sense, but actually strengthened the narrative. The new trilogy has so far failed to craft their commentary so eloquently.
    Dunno that I can agree anything about the prequels is eloquent.

    Let me preface this by saying that I don't find the prequels to be "good movies," only because of the clunky dialogue, bad acting, and Jar Jar. However, there's plenty of artistic merit in the prequels if you know what to look for, it just takes some effort to look past the terrible acting from everyone except Ewan McGregor, Christopher Lee, and Ian McDiarmid.

    You have to remember that George Lucas is, first and foremost, a visual storyteller and an indie director at heart. He's not at all an actor's director or a studio guy. There are plenty of stories floating around about how hard most actors find him to work with, because he doesn't help them at all, and he spent his entire life trying to avoid working for studios, which is why it was helpful that he had the foresight to retain merchandising rights for Star Wars - that enabled him to finance Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi out of his own pocket, absorbing any potential loss with merchandising and giving himself complete creative freedom, not beholden to a studio head who thought his decisions wouldn't sell well with audiences. He's also an excellent effects director who literally changed the way movies were made and, very much like Scorsese, he puts a great deal of thought into every shot, every sequence and beat and likes to hide things in plain sight. Narratively, he places a strong focus on repeating motifs and circular themes.

    There's an interesting essay at http://www.starwarsringtheory.com that breaks down a lot of the intentional visual or narrative choices in the prequels. How much truth is there to it what the essay tries to convey? Who knows. Film is art, art is meant to be interpreted, and no interpretation is necessarily more correct than another.

    Oh, I agree that if you dig down, there are interesting concepts in the prequels and some stuff to like, but they're pretty bad movies overall.

    Which is why I can't consider them any more eloquent in their message than TLJ (which had some great moments with its fair share of clunkers mixed in... but I think its hit rate was much higher overall than any of the prequel films).

    To me, the distinction is in why they're bad.

    The prequels are bad, to me, because of acting and dialogue, and some questionable characters. The stories are fine, my only gripe is that I think Anakin's fall was a little too easy. People like to talk about all the sitting and talking Senate scenes, but those are critical not only for the narrative of the movie they're in, but to the entire saga. They show the extent of Palpatine's machinations, answering all the questions about how exactly he rose to power and turned the Republic steadily into the Empire.

    TLJ is bad because it chooses to push a political agenda at the expense of its narrative. Whatever you think about the quality of the narrative in the prequels (or, even in the original trilogy), their political message was woven into it well and didn't beat you over the head.
    giphy.gif
  • rocketpig
    624 posts Member
    edited January 2018
    Talyn856 wrote: »
    rocketpig wrote: »
    Talyn856 wrote: »
    rocketpig wrote: »
    Talyn856 wrote: »
    rocketpig wrote: »
    New trilogy was ruined by SJWs, Feminazis, and bad story writing.
    Scorching hot take because we all know how Lucas never implemented the concepts of strong women, racism, the importance of democracy, and the evils of fasc1sm (seriously, this is word filtered?) into Star Wars from day one.

    The difference: Lucas didn't sacrifice his narrative to make a commentary about those things. He managed to weave them in in ways that not only made sense, but actually strengthened the narrative. The new trilogy has so far failed to craft their commentary so eloquently.
    Dunno that I can agree anything about the prequels is eloquent.

    Let me preface this by saying that I don't find the prequels to be "good movies," only because of the clunky dialogue, bad acting, and Jar Jar. However, there's plenty of artistic merit in the prequels if you know what to look for, it just takes some effort to look past the terrible acting from everyone except Ewan McGregor, Christopher Lee, and Ian McDiarmid.

    You have to remember that George Lucas is, first and foremost, a visual storyteller and an indie director at heart. He's not at all an actor's director or a studio guy. There are plenty of stories floating around about how hard most actors find him to work with, because he doesn't help them at all, and he spent his entire life trying to avoid working for studios, which is why it was helpful that he had the foresight to retain merchandising rights for Star Wars - that enabled him to finance Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi out of his own pocket, absorbing any potential loss with merchandising and giving himself complete creative freedom, not beholden to a studio head who thought his decisions wouldn't sell well with audiences. He's also an excellent effects director who literally changed the way movies were made and, very much like Scorsese, he puts a great deal of thought into every shot, every sequence and beat and likes to hide things in plain sight. Narratively, he places a strong focus on repeating motifs and circular themes.

    There's an interesting essay at http://www.starwarsringtheory.com that breaks down a lot of the intentional visual or narrative choices in the prequels. How much truth is there to it what the essay tries to convey? Who knows. Film is art, art is meant to be interpreted, and no interpretation is necessarily more correct than another.

    Oh, I agree that if you dig down, there are interesting concepts in the prequels and some stuff to like, but they're pretty bad movies overall.

    Which is why I can't consider them any more eloquent in their message than TLJ (which had some great moments with its fair share of clunkers mixed in... but I think its hit rate was much higher overall than any of the prequel films).

    To me, the distinction is in why they're bad.

    The prequels are bad, to me, because of acting and dialogue, and some questionable characters. The stories are fine, my only gripe is that I think Anakin's fall was a little too easy. People like to talk about all the sitting and talking Senate scenes, but those are critical not only for the narrative of the movie they're in, but to the entire saga. They show the extent of Palpatine's machinations, answering all the questions about how exactly he rose to power and turned the Republic steadily into the Empire.

    TLJ is bad because it chooses to push a political agenda at the expense of its narrative. Whatever you think about the quality of the narrative in the prequels (or, even in the original trilogy), their political message was woven into it well and didn't beat you over the head.

    Don't get me started on Anakin's fall. I *hate* how that story is told.

    Frankly, if you want a solid fall from grace story, Kylo Ren is shaping up to be what the Anakin story should have been. A series of acts that cross the line, each one furthering his descent into evil. There's no going back with Kylo at this point and Anakin's story was badly missing that component. He went from reluctant Jedi trying to do the right thing to a child killer in literally 15 minutes.

    Stuff like that (along with the lackluster Anakin/Palpatine and senate/politics scenes) is why I can't say the prequels were good storytelling. I liked some of the things Lucas was trying to achieve with the films but feel he failed across the board in conveying those ideas.

    I think Lucas' biggest mistake was TPM. Move AotC to Episode I (and make it better in the process). Episode II is Anakin's fall from grace. Episode III is what it is, mostly, though Anakin should have been quite a bit darker throughout the film than he was (after all, the end point needs to be "child killer", which means you need to do some heavy lifting to get to that point with the character). We needed more Palpatine and increasingly-dark Anakin set over the backdrop of a crumbling Republic and far less towheaded kid Anakin screaming "Now THIS is podracing!"

    Perhaps my favorite scene in the entire prequels is the Anakin/Palpatine glowy ball audience scene. Every time I see it, I want to scream WHY WAS THERE NOT MORE OF THIS. We needed to see how Palpatine got his claws into Anakin and twisted him to his purposes. That scene did a lot of legwork to get us there but we needed three or four more of those scenes spread through the prequels to make it believable.
  • OOM19
    2833 posts Member
    rocketpig wrote: »
    Talyn856 wrote: »
    rocketpig wrote: »
    Talyn856 wrote: »
    rocketpig wrote: »
    Talyn856 wrote: »
    rocketpig wrote: »
    New trilogy was ruined by SJWs, Feminazis, and bad story writing.
    Scorching hot take because we all know how Lucas never implemented the concepts of strong women, racism, the importance of democracy, and the evils of fasc1sm (seriously, this is word filtered?) into Star Wars from day one.

    The difference: Lucas didn't sacrifice his narrative to make a commentary about those things. He managed to weave them in in ways that not only made sense, but actually strengthened the narrative. The new trilogy has so far failed to craft their commentary so eloquently.
    Dunno that I can agree anything about the prequels is eloquent.

    Let me preface this by saying that I don't find the prequels to be "good movies," only because of the clunky dialogue, bad acting, and Jar Jar. However, there's plenty of artistic merit in the prequels if you know what to look for, it just takes some effort to look past the terrible acting from everyone except Ewan McGregor, Christopher Lee, and Ian McDiarmid.

    You have to remember that George Lucas is, first and foremost, a visual storyteller and an indie director at heart. He's not at all an actor's director or a studio guy. There are plenty of stories floating around about how hard most actors find him to work with, because he doesn't help them at all, and he spent his entire life trying to avoid working for studios, which is why it was helpful that he had the foresight to retain merchandising rights for Star Wars - that enabled him to finance Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi out of his own pocket, absorbing any potential loss with merchandising and giving himself complete creative freedom, not beholden to a studio head who thought his decisions wouldn't sell well with audiences. He's also an excellent effects director who literally changed the way movies were made and, very much like Scorsese, he puts a great deal of thought into every shot, every sequence and beat and likes to hide things in plain sight. Narratively, he places a strong focus on repeating motifs and circular themes.

    There's an interesting essay at http://www.starwarsringtheory.com that breaks down a lot of the intentional visual or narrative choices in the prequels. How much truth is there to it what the essay tries to convey? Who knows. Film is art, art is meant to be interpreted, and no interpretation is necessarily more correct than another.

    Oh, I agree that if you dig down, there are interesting concepts in the prequels and some stuff to like, but they're pretty bad movies overall.

    Which is why I can't consider them any more eloquent in their message than TLJ (which had some great moments with its fair share of clunkers mixed in... but I think its hit rate was much higher overall than any of the prequel films).

    To me, the distinction is in why they're bad.

    The prequels are bad, to me, because of acting and dialogue, and some questionable characters. The stories are fine, my only gripe is that I think Anakin's fall was a little too easy. People like to talk about all the sitting and talking Senate scenes, but those are critical not only for the narrative of the movie they're in, but to the entire saga. They show the extent of Palpatine's machinations, answering all the questions about how exactly he rose to power and turned the Republic steadily into the Empire.

    TLJ is bad because it chooses to push a political agenda at the expense of its narrative. Whatever you think about the quality of the narrative in the prequels (or, even in the original trilogy), their political message was woven into it well and didn't beat you over the head.

    Don't get me started on Anakin's fall. I *hate* how that story is told.

    Frankly, if you want a solid fall from grace story, Kylo Ren is shaping up to be what the Anakin story should have been. A series of acts that cross the line, each one furthering his descent into evil. There's no going back with Kylo at this point and Anakin's story was badly missing that component. He went from reluctant Jedi trying to do the right thing to a child killer in literally 15 minutes.

    Just like Luke in TLJ!
  • OOM19 wrote: »
    rocketpig wrote: »
    Talyn856 wrote: »
    rocketpig wrote: »
    Talyn856 wrote: »
    rocketpig wrote: »
    Talyn856 wrote: »
    rocketpig wrote: »
    New trilogy was ruined by SJWs, Feminazis, and bad story writing.
    Scorching hot take because we all know how Lucas never implemented the concepts of strong women, racism, the importance of democracy, and the evils of fasc1sm (seriously, this is word filtered?) into Star Wars from day one.

    The difference: Lucas didn't sacrifice his narrative to make a commentary about those things. He managed to weave them in in ways that not only made sense, but actually strengthened the narrative. The new trilogy has so far failed to craft their commentary so eloquently.
    Dunno that I can agree anything about the prequels is eloquent.

    Let me preface this by saying that I don't find the prequels to be "good movies," only because of the clunky dialogue, bad acting, and Jar Jar. However, there's plenty of artistic merit in the prequels if you know what to look for, it just takes some effort to look past the terrible acting from everyone except Ewan McGregor, Christopher Lee, and Ian McDiarmid.

    You have to remember that George Lucas is, first and foremost, a visual storyteller and an indie director at heart. He's not at all an actor's director or a studio guy. There are plenty of stories floating around about how hard most actors find him to work with, because he doesn't help them at all, and he spent his entire life trying to avoid working for studios, which is why it was helpful that he had the foresight to retain merchandising rights for Star Wars - that enabled him to finance Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi out of his own pocket, absorbing any potential loss with merchandising and giving himself complete creative freedom, not beholden to a studio head who thought his decisions wouldn't sell well with audiences. He's also an excellent effects director who literally changed the way movies were made and, very much like Scorsese, he puts a great deal of thought into every shot, every sequence and beat and likes to hide things in plain sight. Narratively, he places a strong focus on repeating motifs and circular themes.

    There's an interesting essay at http://www.starwarsringtheory.com that breaks down a lot of the intentional visual or narrative choices in the prequels. How much truth is there to it what the essay tries to convey? Who knows. Film is art, art is meant to be interpreted, and no interpretation is necessarily more correct than another.

    Oh, I agree that if you dig down, there are interesting concepts in the prequels and some stuff to like, but they're pretty bad movies overall.

    Which is why I can't consider them any more eloquent in their message than TLJ (which had some great moments with its fair share of clunkers mixed in... but I think its hit rate was much higher overall than any of the prequel films).

    To me, the distinction is in why they're bad.

    The prequels are bad, to me, because of acting and dialogue, and some questionable characters. The stories are fine, my only gripe is that I think Anakin's fall was a little too easy. People like to talk about all the sitting and talking Senate scenes, but those are critical not only for the narrative of the movie they're in, but to the entire saga. They show the extent of Palpatine's machinations, answering all the questions about how exactly he rose to power and turned the Republic steadily into the Empire.

    TLJ is bad because it chooses to push a political agenda at the expense of its narrative. Whatever you think about the quality of the narrative in the prequels (or, even in the original trilogy), their political message was woven into it well and didn't beat you over the head.

    Don't get me started on Anakin's fall. I *hate* how that story is told.

    Frankly, if you want a solid fall from grace story, Kylo Ren is shaping up to be what the Anakin story should have been. A series of acts that cross the line, each one furthering his descent into evil. There's no going back with Kylo at this point and Anakin's story was badly missing that component. He went from reluctant Jedi trying to do the right thing to a child killer in literally 15 minutes.

    Just like Luke in TLJ!

    Not even close to the same thing, as Luke's scene was a flashback while the Anakin story was told in present time (meaning there were hours dedicated to Anakin's fall-not-fall while Luke's flashback took 90 seconds).

    I totally get why you're upset over the Luke thing - it didn't really sit comfortably with me, either - but the story mechanisms used were vastly different. One relies heavily on implication there were events that led to the scene while the other didn't convince the audience the character's motivations weren't at that point through hours of actual screen time.

    You can say both failed and I won't argue the point but they failed for very different reasons.
  • So, I would like to point out, as dramatic as it seems. Ackbar had what, like 3 lines of dialogue in the 3rd movie of the OT, and his character became legend. Although at the time he was "That fish guy in the space battle". Nien Nub was the weird flat face laughing guy next to Lando for 5 minutes. Mon Mothma had one single scene and about one paragraph of dialogue. Jabba had a decent amount of screen time, but was in act 1 of 1 movie. Tarkin was in the first movie only and had only a few scenes. Famously Boba Fett has like 1 line of dialogue and like 3 minutes of screen time and became a legend.

    The point I'm making is that the cast of the OT was very small as well, if we are talking about characters we get any appreciable amount of time with, but the fandom, over time, built up all of these minor small side characters into a rich tapestry of legends and heros. Which is great, but what I am suggesting is that maybe you've already seen the next generation's ackbar, or the next generation's boba fett, and didn't even know it, because it was a minor tertiary character that didn't seem like much more than set dressing, just like many of the characters that we now cherish were in those first movies.

    Also worth note, in the OT all of the old knowledgeable previous generation mentor characters all died off too leaving only the kids to run things and find their way. Obiwan, Yoda, Vader, the Emperor, Tarkin, all gone by the end.
  • Rian simply ruined the character of Luke Skywalker, made Hux a clown and created little interest for IX.Thanks RIAN
    RELIVE THE PAST
    The knights of Gareth will rule
    4e8cbce43c2fe3a660f5599efbe18e88-jpg.jpg?width=1200&height=450
  • Hensatri wrote: »
    So, I would like to point out, as dramatic as it seems. Ackbar had what, like 3 lines of dialogue in the 3rd movie of the OT, and his character became legend. Although at the time he was "That fish guy in the space battle". Nien Nub was the weird flat face laughing guy next to Lando for 5 minutes. Mon Mothma had one single scene and about one paragraph of dialogue. Jabba had a decent amount of screen time, but was in act 1 of 1 movie. Tarkin was in the first movie only and had only a few scenes. Famously Boba Fett has like 1 line of dialogue and like 3 minutes of screen time and became a legend.

    The point I'm making is that the cast of the OT was very small as well, if we are talking about characters we get any appreciable amount of time with, but the fandom, over time, built up all of these minor small side characters into a rich tapestry of legends and heros. Which is great, but what I am suggesting is that maybe you've already seen the next generation's ackbar, or the next generation's boba fett, and didn't even know it, because it was a minor tertiary character that didn't seem like much more than set dressing, just like many of the characters that we now cherish were in those first movies.

    Also worth note, in the OT all of the old knowledgeable previous generation mentor characters all died off too leaving only the kids to run things and find their way. Obiwan, Yoda, Vader, the Emperor, Tarkin, all gone by the end.

    +1

    I can’t wait till we build up backstories for the master code breaker (the real one), Tallie Lintra (Biggs anyone), and so on.
  • QuiGonRing wrote: »
    Hensatri wrote: »
    So, I would like to point out, as dramatic as it seems. Ackbar had what, like 3 lines of dialogue in the 3rd movie of the OT, and his character became legend. Although at the time he was "That fish guy in the space battle". Nien Nub was the weird flat face laughing guy next to Lando for 5 minutes. Mon Mothma had one single scene and about one paragraph of dialogue. Jabba had a decent amount of screen time, but was in act 1 of 1 movie. Tarkin was in the first movie only and had only a few scenes. Famously Boba Fett has like 1 line of dialogue and like 3 minutes of screen time and became a legend.

    The point I'm making is that the cast of the OT was very small as well, if we are talking about characters we get any appreciable amount of time with, but the fandom, over time, built up all of these minor small side characters into a rich tapestry of legends and heros. Which is great, but what I am suggesting is that maybe you've already seen the next generation's ackbar, or the next generation's boba fett, and didn't even know it, because it was a minor tertiary character that didn't seem like much more than set dressing, just like many of the characters that we now cherish were in those first movies.

    Also worth note, in the OT all of the old knowledgeable previous generation mentor characters all died off too leaving only the kids to run things and find their way. Obiwan, Yoda, Vader, the Emperor, Tarkin, all gone by the end.

    +1

    I can’t wait till we build up backstories for the master code breaker (the real one), Tallie Lintra (Biggs anyone), and so on.

    Agreed. I eagerly anticipate stories about the master code breaker *and* DJ.

    Also, a story about what happened to the rebel base on Crait could be outstanding.
  • rocketpig wrote: »
    Talyn856 wrote: »
    rocketpig wrote: »
    Talyn856 wrote: »
    rocketpig wrote: »
    Talyn856 wrote: »
    rocketpig wrote: »
    New trilogy was ruined by SJWs, Feminazis, and bad story writing.
    Scorching hot take because we all know how Lucas never implemented the concepts of strong women, racism, the importance of democracy, and the evils of fasc1sm (seriously, this is word filtered?) into Star Wars from day one.

    The difference: Lucas didn't sacrifice his narrative to make a commentary about those things. He managed to weave them in in ways that not only made sense, but actually strengthened the narrative. The new trilogy has so far failed to craft their commentary so eloquently.
    Dunno that I can agree anything about the prequels is eloquent.

    Let me preface this by saying that I don't find the prequels to be "good movies," only because of the clunky dialogue, bad acting, and Jar Jar. However, there's plenty of artistic merit in the prequels if you know what to look for, it just takes some effort to look past the terrible acting from everyone except Ewan McGregor, Christopher Lee, and Ian McDiarmid.

    You have to remember that George Lucas is, first and foremost, a visual storyteller and an indie director at heart. He's not at all an actor's director or a studio guy. There are plenty of stories floating around about how hard most actors find him to work with, because he doesn't help them at all, and he spent his entire life trying to avoid working for studios, which is why it was helpful that he had the foresight to retain merchandising rights for Star Wars - that enabled him to finance Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi out of his own pocket, absorbing any potential loss with merchandising and giving himself complete creative freedom, not beholden to a studio head who thought his decisions wouldn't sell well with audiences. He's also an excellent effects director who literally changed the way movies were made and, very much like Scorsese, he puts a great deal of thought into every shot, every sequence and beat and likes to hide things in plain sight. Narratively, he places a strong focus on repeating motifs and circular themes.

    There's an interesting essay at http://www.starwarsringtheory.com that breaks down a lot of the intentional visual or narrative choices in the prequels. How much truth is there to it what the essay tries to convey? Who knows. Film is art, art is meant to be interpreted, and no interpretation is necessarily more correct than another.

    Oh, I agree that if you dig down, there are interesting concepts in the prequels and some stuff to like, but they're pretty bad movies overall.

    Which is why I can't consider them any more eloquent in their message than TLJ (which had some great moments with its fair share of clunkers mixed in... but I think its hit rate was much higher overall than any of the prequel films).

    To me, the distinction is in why they're bad.

    The prequels are bad, to me, because of acting and dialogue, and some questionable characters. The stories are fine, my only gripe is that I think Anakin's fall was a little too easy. People like to talk about all the sitting and talking Senate scenes, but those are critical not only for the narrative of the movie they're in, but to the entire saga. They show the extent of Palpatine's machinations, answering all the questions about how exactly he rose to power and turned the Republic steadily into the Empire.

    TLJ is bad because it chooses to push a political agenda at the expense of its narrative. Whatever you think about the quality of the narrative in the prequels (or, even in the original trilogy), their political message was woven into it well and didn't beat you over the head.

    Don't get me started on Anakin's fall. I *hate* how that story is told.

    Frankly, if you want a solid fall from grace story, Kylo Ren is shaping up to be what the Anakin story should have been. A series of acts that cross the line, each one furthering his descent into evil. There's no going back with Kylo at this point and Anakin's story was badly missing that component. He went from reluctant Jedi trying to do the right thing to a child killer in literally 15 minutes.

    Stuff like that (along with the lackluster Anakin/Palpatine and senate/politics scenes) is why I can't say the prequels were good storytelling. I liked some of the things Lucas was trying to achieve with the films but feel he failed across the board in conveying those ideas.

    I think Lucas' biggest mistake was TPM. Move AotC to Episode I (and make it better in the process). Episode II is Anakin's fall from grace. Episode III is what it is, mostly, though Anakin should have been quite a bit darker throughout the film than he was (after all, the end point needs to be "child killer", which means you need to do some heavy lifting to get to that point with the character). We needed more Palpatine and increasingly-dark Anakin set over the backdrop of a crumbling Republic and far less towheaded kid Anakin screaming "Now THIS is podracing!"

    Perhaps my favorite scene in the entire prequels is the Anakin/Palpatine glowy ball audience scene. Every time I see it, I want to scream WHY WAS THERE NOT MORE OF THIS. We needed to see how Palpatine got his claws into Anakin and twisted him to his purposes. That scene did a lot of legwork to get us there but we needed three or four more of those scenes spread through the prequels to make it believable.

    I don't think you need to remove TPM entirely, but Lucas could've used a lot of help on the story front.

    Some people have made videos over the years that are basically "What I would've done..." These are my favorites.



    giphy.gif
  • Talyn856
    756 posts Member
    edited January 2018
    rocketpig wrote: »
    QuiGonRing wrote: »
    Hensatri wrote: »
    So, I would like to point out, as dramatic as it seems. Ackbar had what, like 3 lines of dialogue in the 3rd movie of the OT, and his character became legend. Although at the time he was "That fish guy in the space battle". Nien Nub was the weird flat face laughing guy next to Lando for 5 minutes. Mon Mothma had one single scene and about one paragraph of dialogue. Jabba had a decent amount of screen time, but was in act 1 of 1 movie. Tarkin was in the first movie only and had only a few scenes. Famously Boba Fett has like 1 line of dialogue and like 3 minutes of screen time and became a legend.

    The point I'm making is that the cast of the OT was very small as well, if we are talking about characters we get any appreciable amount of time with, but the fandom, over time, built up all of these minor small side characters into a rich tapestry of legends and heros. Which is great, but what I am suggesting is that maybe you've already seen the next generation's ackbar, or the next generation's boba fett, and didn't even know it, because it was a minor tertiary character that didn't seem like much more than set dressing, just like many of the characters that we now cherish were in those first movies.

    Also worth note, in the OT all of the old knowledgeable previous generation mentor characters all died off too leaving only the kids to run things and find their way. Obiwan, Yoda, Vader, the Emperor, Tarkin, all gone by the end.

    +1

    I can’t wait till we build up backstories for the master code breaker (the real one), Tallie Lintra (Biggs anyone), and so on.

    Agreed. I eagerly anticipate stories about the master code breaker *and* DJ.

    Also, a story about what happened to the rebel base on Crait could be outstanding.

    The Storms of Crait comic book came out like a week ago. DJ comes out the end of the month.
    giphy.gif
  • Talyn856 wrote: »
    rocketpig wrote: »
    QuiGonRing wrote: »
    Hensatri wrote: »
    So, I would like to point out, as dramatic as it seems. Ackbar had what, like 3 lines of dialogue in the 3rd movie of the OT, and his character became legend. Although at the time he was "That fish guy in the space battle". Nien Nub was the weird flat face laughing guy next to Lando for 5 minutes. Mon Mothma had one single scene and about one paragraph of dialogue. Jabba had a decent amount of screen time, but was in act 1 of 1 movie. Tarkin was in the first movie only and had only a few scenes. Famously Boba Fett has like 1 line of dialogue and like 3 minutes of screen time and became a legend.

    The point I'm making is that the cast of the OT was very small as well, if we are talking about characters we get any appreciable amount of time with, but the fandom, over time, built up all of these minor small side characters into a rich tapestry of legends and heros. Which is great, but what I am suggesting is that maybe you've already seen the next generation's ackbar, or the next generation's boba fett, and didn't even know it, because it was a minor tertiary character that didn't seem like much more than set dressing, just like many of the characters that we now cherish were in those first movies.

    Also worth note, in the OT all of the old knowledgeable previous generation mentor characters all died off too leaving only the kids to run things and find their way. Obiwan, Yoda, Vader, the Emperor, Tarkin, all gone by the end.

    +1

    I can’t wait till we build up backstories for the master code breaker (the real one), Tallie Lintra (Biggs anyone), and so on.

    Agreed. I eagerly anticipate stories about the master code breaker *and* DJ.

    Also, a story about what happened to the rebel base on Crait could be outstanding.

    The Storms of Crait comic book came out like a week ago. DJ comes out the end of the month.

    Oh ****, is that what Storms of Crait is about? I have the book downloaded from Comixology but haven't gotten to it yet.
  • rocketpig wrote: »
    QuiGonRing wrote: »
    Hensatri wrote: »
    So, I would like to point out, as dramatic as it seems. Ackbar had what, like 3 lines of dialogue in the 3rd movie of the OT, and his character became legend. Although at the time he was "That fish guy in the space battle". Nien Nub was the weird flat face laughing guy next to Lando for 5 minutes. Mon Mothma had one single scene and about one paragraph of dialogue. Jabba had a decent amount of screen time, but was in act 1 of 1 movie. Tarkin was in the first movie only and had only a few scenes. Famously Boba Fett has like 1 line of dialogue and like 3 minutes of screen time and became a legend.

    The point I'm making is that the cast of the OT was very small as well, if we are talking about characters we get any appreciable amount of time with, but the fandom, over time, built up all of these minor small side characters into a rich tapestry of legends and heros. Which is great, but what I am suggesting is that maybe you've already seen the next generation's ackbar, or the next generation's boba fett, and didn't even know it, because it was a minor tertiary character that didn't seem like much more than set dressing, just like many of the characters that we now cherish were in those first movies.

    Also worth note, in the OT all of the old knowledgeable previous generation mentor characters all died off too leaving only the kids to run things and find their way. Obiwan, Yoda, Vader, the Emperor, Tarkin, all gone by the end.

    +1

    I can’t wait till we build up backstories for the master code breaker (the real one), Tallie Lintra (Biggs anyone), and so on.

    Agreed. I eagerly anticipate stories about the master code breaker *and* DJ.

    Also, a story about what happened to the rebel base on Crait could be outstanding.

    Crait should be talked about a lot more. That planet was beautiful! And beautifully in sync with Hoth. Salt vs Ice. Red right below the surface.

    Poe’s wingman is also really intriguing to me.

    By the way, if they don’t give Poe another ship (preferably not a copy of an X-wing) and give us a good space battle, I will be very disappointed. But I am a fickle fan haha.
  • Talyn856 wrote: »
    rocketpig wrote: »
    QuiGonRing wrote: »
    Hensatri wrote: »
    So, I would like to point out, as dramatic as it seems. Ackbar had what, like 3 lines of dialogue in the 3rd movie of the OT, and his character became legend. Although at the time he was "That fish guy in the space battle". Nien Nub was the weird flat face laughing guy next to Lando for 5 minutes. Mon Mothma had one single scene and about one paragraph of dialogue. Jabba had a decent amount of screen time, but was in act 1 of 1 movie. Tarkin was in the first movie only and had only a few scenes. Famously Boba Fett has like 1 line of dialogue and like 3 minutes of screen time and became a legend.

    The point I'm making is that the cast of the OT was very small as well, if we are talking about characters we get any appreciable amount of time with, but the fandom, over time, built up all of these minor small side characters into a rich tapestry of legends and heros. Which is great, but what I am suggesting is that maybe you've already seen the next generation's ackbar, or the next generation's boba fett, and didn't even know it, because it was a minor tertiary character that didn't seem like much more than set dressing, just like many of the characters that we now cherish were in those first movies.

    Also worth note, in the OT all of the old knowledgeable previous generation mentor characters all died off too leaving only the kids to run things and find their way. Obiwan, Yoda, Vader, the Emperor, Tarkin, all gone by the end.

    +1

    I can’t wait till we build up backstories for the master code breaker (the real one), Tallie Lintra (Biggs anyone), and so on.

    Agreed. I eagerly anticipate stories about the master code breaker *and* DJ.

    Also, a story about what happened to the rebel base on Crait could be outstanding.

    The Storms of Crait comic book came out like a week ago. DJ comes out the end of the month.

    Oh it did? Have you read it? Any good?

    By the way, I think I am in between you two on TLJ. I like it visually, I like characters (Kylo, Poe, Leia - spaceman, DJ, among others), I also like what they did to Luke. But I saw A New Hope in ‘99 so I get I have a different view of OT. But the casino scene was awful. Fathier scene was pushed and random, humor there was bad. And some dialogue was clunky. But besides Harrison Ford, Stars Wars has some clunky dialogue. I just don’t like the casino scene at all!
  • c0be6eb9f47e6d2f0b43818a644e1d9a05c9b8c9d44b95033948440a13bebc75.png

    archerfilmfestival-web-img_4330_-_h_2017.jpg

    1480955116491.png

    10403955_1934113406813225_6073288777188763275_o.jpg



    In an interview with Charlie Rose, George Lucas spoke about everything from his and Disney’s branching vision to the deal itself. Lucas, who has always been protective of his series and even refers to them as his “kids,” hasn’t been looking back well on the deal with Disney (via Collider).“I sold them to the white slavers that takes these things, and…,” Lucas said before laughing and deciding it better not to finish.


    Star Wars creator George Lucas has admitted his ideas for a new trilogy of films were ignored by studio Disney after he sold all rights to the long-running space opera saga in October 2012.The film-maker told USA Today last week that he planned to shoot episode seven of the series – since retooled by JJ Abrams as Star Wars: The Force Awakens – and release it in May this year. He also provided treatments for three new films. But in a new interview with Cinema Blend Lucas revealed that none of his ideas made the final screenplay for Abrams’ debut turn in the director’s chair. “The ones that I sold to Disney, they came up to the decision that they didn’t really want to do those,” said Lucas. “So they made up their own. So it’s not the ones that I originally wrote [on screen in Star Wars: The Force Awakens].”


    It is not Star Wars anymore. It is SJW Wars
  • OOM19
    2833 posts Member
    whyyyyy.gif

    All of this just

    Just why

    Why?

    Why....
  • 6 pages = tl;dr

    Just make Yoda the main character in episode 9. That will save Star Wars.


    The best Yoda loadout: https://1drv.ms/i/s!AveJpgcuWkNfdw7ZwgFzn3T3O8g


    How to effectively play Yoda: https://battlefront-forums.ea.com/discussion/97820/i-have-waited-a-long-time-for-this-moment-my-little-green-friend-yoda-guide


    General discussions about Yoda: https://battlefront-forums.ea.com/discussion/98884/general-discussions-about-yoda


    "Size matters not. Look at me. Judge me by my size, do you?"


    "Attachment leads to jealousy. The shadow of greed, that is. Train yourself to let go of everything you fear to lose."


    giphy.gif
    Links to all my Yoda tips/discussions in the spoiler tag to save space. ^^^

    Respect your fellow users (and Yoda), help improve the game and have a great day!
Sign In or Register to comment.