Discussion in 'Music, Box Office, TV & Books' started by opstrat, Jan 23, 2017.
Why is it called a lightsaber then?
Because who wants a plasmasaber ?
and that makes it more plausible, right?
Different galaxy, different rules of physics I guess
Star wars isn't what I'd call true science fiction. It isn't really based on any real science. It is more a space opera / fantasy to be honest.
Now, i don't have a problem with that, but what i do have issue with is the disney films breaking every single rule laid down by the original films.
You have to stay true to the originals, you have to make the new films seem to exist in the same universe with the same set of constants and boundaries. Disney crapped all over that. They seem to just make it up as they go along.
Space fuel? Force skyping? Learning the force in a matter of minutes? Yoda ghost lightening bolts? Leia Mary poppins impression through space? Luke force projecting? Seriously?
Last jedi was a total abortion of a star wars film
could you not argue lucas crapped all over it first by retconning the force/blood parasites, luke/leia's brother/sister stuff etc etc?
You have a point, the prequels were not the best.
But i still say they are more authentic star wars films than the Disney abominations (rogue one excluded).
I wish they had just left the star wars franchise alone after the original trilogy to be honest.
Money rules though unfortunately
sad but true. i must say i'm not a SW fan at all really - saw teh originals when i was a kid, then watching them later as an adult just left me cold, aside from the sfx/design work. only watched 20 mins of Phantom Menace because someone had been talking up the Maul fight and i wanted to see it, had to turn the sound off though cos i didn't know exactly when it started and the dialogue was just godawful :-D TFA was....well it was just New Hope w/ different character names. and Last Jedi was just abysmally bad. The exception is Rogue One - i think that's a fabulous film.
I don’t get the love for Rogue One... people seem to love it purely because it’s a bit sombre. Ooo oh so edgy
It has a boring / rigid three act structure, 1D characters (robot excluded - he was awesome) and absolutely no tension because you know what’s going to happen.
Not terrible, just overrated. I though Solo was a lot better and certainly a lot more fun... and by coincidence the robot was the combo breaker in this film too.
In an uncharacteristic moment of being uncool / annoying, I cheered in the cinema when L3 died
Yet its still hugely superior to the other Disney star wars films
The difference for me was that I felt with Rogue One and Solo that the director/writers got the audience - both those who are Starwars fans and those who watch it for the escapism, both were wanting in many ways but also did some things very right.
Exactly, Rogue One and Solo gave the audience exactly what they wanted. Johnson says openly that his aim was to do the opposite - how on earth that works is beyond me. The original story is beyond saving in my view, but we will see I guess.
maybe people love it cos it's a good action film and didn't have the pretentiousness, stupidity or child-centric pap of the other films? you don't "know what's going to happen". you know the plans were stolen, but not how, or what happened to those who stole them. by that argument there's no interest or tension in anything like Dunkirk, Band of Brothers, World Trade Centre, or anything else based on a real life situation/event that we already know the outcome of.
The best thing that Rogue One did is explain why the Death Star had a massive flaw in it's designs.
I saw solo movie and thought it was good!
yeah me too. I also thought it was very badly edited - you could really see where the extensive reshoots were made.
I’ll have to bring out the spoiler tags for those that haven’t seen rougue one:
It was beyond obvious that they were all going to die after the objective was achieved but there were a few moments where the film presented ‘oooo will they die?’ when you knew they wouldn’t. This wouldn’t bother me if we were dealing with interesting characters but we weren’t. Actually that’s not quite fair... the lead male’s morally dubious choices were intriguing and granted, it WAS refreshing to have a more sombre tone. But that was it... refreshing, in contrast to the rest of the series. Upon a rewatch, on its own two feet, it’s not particularly strong.
I don’t feel the same about band of brothers because anyone could go at anytime and the characters there had their own stories. Rogue one, in contrast, is distinctly ‘ancillary’.
@aardvark yeah it was only on a rewatch that I came to my current view. I was a little disappointed the second time around having come out of the cinema ‘refreshed’.
I actually think that TLJ is the best of the modern bunch due to being wholly unpredictable (which is surely what we all wanted after TFA). Eh, each to his own!
I liked the TLJ but in general I think Star Wars is pretty average and I just enjoy them for what they are and not go into absurd nerdrages because the story I've been building up in my head for 30 years isn't strictly adhered to.
They would have been better waiting for 30 years more and waiting for the angry, emotionally invested fans to pass on so they dont make films in which they had no chance from day one of making the old fans happy.
Best way to measure the success of the new films is, are they generating a new generation of fans? They absolutely are and the kids go mad for it (cue"well my child much prefers Empire fnarrrrr) so they've succeeded despite what the old fans think.
I'm an older fan but personally I think the original trio are limited, Luke is a wimp and that the prequels barring Phantom are damn good films. I accept that all of the above makes me a heathen to any other star wars fan though
A few swear words, be warned -
Made me laugh though and so true
The whole blast door bit
Haha, send ALL the ships - just after Rey hits 3 ships with ONE shot (I missed that). Geez.
Separate names with a comma.