Star Wars

A little song, a little dance, a little seltzer down your pants.

Star Wars

Postby Mr. Perfect » Sat Jan 16, 2016 7:41 am

I thought it was awful.

1) They killed Han Solo. I hear they kill Santa Claus in the next one
2) Scene by scene copy of the original
3) Return of the Jedi never really happened because the Empire bounced right back.

I was over the moon for the originals, and the prequels were among the worst movies ever made. As such my expectations were low, but I thought that the likely outcome was a serviceable action type movie in the Star Wars universe. But no, they managed to make the worst one ever.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Mr. Perfect
 
Posts: 13878
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Star Wars

Postby noddy » Sat Jan 16, 2016 11:20 am

cant say.

the child version of me back in the day loved the first two and thought the third one sucked - it went from a slighly edgy anti hero to a lame family thing with teddy bears and soap opera situations.

the adult of me accidently caught a section of the prequals and thought he was watching an advertisement for a computer game and left the room.
Last edited by noddy on Sat Jan 16, 2016 11:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
noddy
 
Posts: 5622
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 3:09 pm

Re: Star Wars

Postby Mr. Perfect » Sat Jan 16, 2016 11:27 am

The only reason I went is so that I didn't have to learn about any spoilers. Now, I wish I had known the spoiler and never gone.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Mr. Perfect
 
Posts: 13878
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Star Wars

Postby Typhoon » Sat Jan 16, 2016 3:46 pm

Well, apparently you have George Lucas for company.
_____

I only saw the first one, now many years ago.

I'm an anomaly as it didn't interest me enough to see the rest.
So no plans to see the current one.
All the world's a stage.
User avatar
Typhoon
 
Posts: 15345
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm

Re: Star Wars

Postby Nonc Hilaire » Sat Jan 16, 2016 3:58 pm

Typhoon wrote:Well, apparently you have George Lucas for company.
_____

I only saw the first one, now many years ago.

I'm an anomaly as it didn't interest me enough to see the rest.
So no plans to see the current one.

Agreed. I found the first one trite and dissapointing.
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
 
Posts: 4096
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: Star Wars

Postby Parodite » Sat Jan 16, 2016 7:08 pm

Haven't seen any star wars movie yet.. but did see the latest mad max: fury road which I enjoyed pretty much also because it is so well done. If the latest star wars is made very well.. maybe still worth wtaching it? I mean.. movies where the story line isn't that important and the amount of improbable nonsense is actually fun.
Outside, away from the noise, grows a flower.
User avatar
Parodite
 
Posts: 4284
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:43 pm

Re: Star Wars

Postby NapLajoieonSteroids » Sun Jan 17, 2016 10:27 am

In defense of the prequels, George Lucas set out to tell a different story (that thing wrapped around the Darth Vader melodrama) while showcasing ILM and what they had been working on. In that, he pretty much got what he wanted to do.

The way he made those films was a very controversial thing and he was all but shunned over it- I guarantee you that even if those movies were halfway decent, they still would be panned and ridiculed because of all the backroom politics going on at the time. It's almost besides the point that they completely failed to entertain. I don't think we'll ever see a blockbuster again where one guy has so much control over the product, from the production on down to the marketing.

It also should be exhibit A for why 'movie making' is a great collaborative project.

and exhibit B on why you shouldn't divorce your editor, the lady that actually made the first two films work as entertainment.
User avatar
NapLajoieonSteroids
 
Posts: 3087
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm

Re: Star Wars

Postby NapLajoieonSteroids » Sun Jan 17, 2016 11:00 am

Which makes those prequels such a good contrast to how Episode 7 panned out because they both cratered:

-It played like a very calculated fan fiction movie- an amalgamation of the first two. Even then, what they had wasn't that good, even in its context.

-It was silly and it moved much too slowly the minute grandpa showed up and started stumbling around with his blaster.

-Speaking of the original characters, I don't believe they were necessary for the story they were telling (or retelling as it were); in fact, the movie goes out of its way to portray them as failures. Anyone who sees the movie will understand what I'm getting at.

-I seem to be in the minority from what I gathered, but I thought the movie started out all right. I thought the Oscar Issacson character John Boyega character had a good, immediate chemistry and I would've preferred to follow the two of them through the movie in hindsight. Mr.Boyega plays very different parts though in the movie. In the beginning he is this novel character for the star wars films, then once he meets the female lead, he becomes a non-entity helpmeet. You could easily erase him from his scenes. They ruin his character in another way, but I wouldn't know how to go into that without getting into spoilers.

-Which brings me to the girl. She was...a prequel sort of wooden. Which was terrible because the whole thing revolves around her. And I don't know if that's her limitations as an actress or what, but it can't all fall on her because they gave her a role where she had to play a combination of the three lead archetypes from original movie- how can you possibly do that? A lot of the complaints I read centered around her being a Mary Sue character who is most perfect in every situation. And yeah, I get that, and I guess my criticism falls within that range; but I really don't care if she is stronger than X or if she breaks Star Wars mythology (or what have you) ...

I wanna know why Disney decided to shove what took three characters the first time around into one character- it clearly left a whole bunch of bloat around her. Half way through the movie you don't need anyone else because she is Hans, Luke and Leia all wrapped into one. Why bother having any supporting protagonists? It can only be chalked up to bad writing and directing.
User avatar
NapLajoieonSteroids
 
Posts: 3087
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm

Re: Star Wars

Postby Mr. Perfect » Sun Jan 17, 2016 11:41 am

NapLajoieonSteroids wrote:In defense of the prequels, George Lucas set out to tell a different story (that thing wrapped around the Darth Vader melodrama) while showcasing ILM and what they had been working on. In that, he pretty much got what he wanted to do.

The way he made those films was a very controversial thing and he was all but shunned over it- I guarantee you that even if those movies were halfway decent, they still would be panned and ridiculed because of all the backroom politics going on at the time. It's almost besides the point that they completely failed to entertain. I don't think we'll ever see a blockbuster again where one guy has so much control over the product, from the production on down to the marketing.

It also should be exhibit A for why 'movie making' is a great collaborative project.

and exhibit B on why you shouldn't divorce your editor, the lady that actually made the first two films work as entertainment.

I think she cheated on him with a guy from the prop department.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Mr. Perfect
 
Posts: 13878
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Star Wars

Postby Mr. Perfect » Sun Jan 17, 2016 11:47 am

Well they killed Han Solo, they copied the original movie to the dots, and they negated Return of the Jedi since the Empire pretty much came right back, and Hanlukeleia basically just pissed around in the intervening decades. From galaxy conquerors to hippies trying to find themselves.

As for the new stuff, none of it worked. The girl was as you say, a copy of Luke who then absorbed Han Solo and Leia, the storm trooper fizzled fast and the new Darth Maul was a joke. I can't believe how bad that went. Some whiny emo kid with a lightsaber.

Jar Jar Abrams has only begun I'm afraid.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Mr. Perfect
 
Posts: 13878
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Star Wars

Postby NapLajoieonSteroids » Sun Jan 17, 2016 12:32 pm

He gave the fans what they wantedL nostalgia, where nothing has changed. They even threw a line in there that nothing will ever change (as long as they can make money on the brand).
User avatar
NapLajoieonSteroids
 
Posts: 3087
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm

Re: Star Wars

Postby NapLajoieonSteroids » Tue Dec 12, 2017 10:03 am

Hey Mr.P, you're a Star Wars fan; if I were you, I'd skip seeing the new one in theaters.

Despite the glowing reviews (which the last two very suspiciously received as well, ) it sounds from the leaks that Disney is crapping on everything the Star Wars fans liked about these films. They are not course correcting or adding to the mythos...from the spoilers, it sounds like more very bad and shallow storytelling and genuine disappointment is brewing, lots of people perturbed at some really stupid choices they made.

I spoiled it for myself because it's long been a family tradition to go see a movie on Christmas Eve, and frankly, I can't sit through another Star Wars. Yet, that's what'll be the big spectacle movie this month....so I was hoping for some [b]real[/i] reviews saying how fun and awesome it is or that Mark Hamill steals the show or that the new characters step up and the questions from the first film are answered.

nope.Nope.NopE. noPe. Nope.

It's such a turd that Disney is sending barely disguised pr people to message boards to clear up the negative criticisms and reactions from the spoilers and explain why its a "work of genius" and the "best Star Wars movie" ever and and aand....

And I'm warning you because what I read even insulted me ---there is a scene which in a most obtuse manner pisses right on any fans from the 6 other movies/the toys/the books/the video games/the toothbrushes....you know, anyone who has bought their junk for 40 years. Why should anyone subject themselves to that?
User avatar
NapLajoieonSteroids
 
Posts: 3087
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm

Re: Star Wars

Postby Mr. Perfect » Thu Dec 21, 2017 9:30 am

Through gritted teeth I have to go with relatives.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Mr. Perfect
 
Posts: 13878
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Star Wars

Postby Mr. Perfect » Thu Dec 21, 2017 9:33 am

I'll never forget the moment when I first saw Phantom Menace and about half way through I was getting bored.

I haven't considered myself a Star Wars fan for many years.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Mr. Perfect
 
Posts: 13878
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Star Wars

Postby Mr. Perfect » Thu Jan 04, 2018 7:26 am

It was predictably awful. I have young relatives who are forcing me to watch these and they are completely horrible and i have to pretend they are good. They are going to pump out these cowpies one per year for the rest of our lives and I will have to watch them all. This must be what hell is like.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Mr. Perfect
 
Posts: 13878
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Star Wars

Postby Mr. Perfect » Thu Jan 04, 2018 8:40 am

Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Mr. Perfect
 
Posts: 13878
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Star Wars

Postby NapLajoieonSteroids » Sun Jan 07, 2018 11:41 am

Well, it seems that Star Wars has hit 50% on the fan side of Rotten Tomatoes.

For all the bellyaching about how inaccurate the system is and how deplorable the people leaving negative reviews are, it's being matched by a decline in box office. Those nuts who go to see a Star Wars movie 18 times have been driven away. And the end goal, the toy&doodad sales, seem to be suffering.
User avatar
NapLajoieonSteroids
 
Posts: 3087
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm

Re: Star Wars

Postby Mr. Perfect » Tue Jan 09, 2018 5:10 am

I'm not sure why this one is getting crushed more than Jar Jar Abrams failure. It's not as bad. It was written as if it took the series seriously and was written with more of an adult audience in mind.

The problems starting with the minor, the movie took place all around one event, a standoff in space. Normally in a move you move around to different places in a series of events, while this centered around one. Minor quibble. However the diversion of going to the planet looking for a codebreaker was ultimately pointless and was really bad story error and merely highlighted the weaknesses in the characters they sent on a wild goose chase. So that is a major flaw that they deserve reduced points for.

I had mixed feelings about the Adam Driver Daisy conflict but not worth getting into. The movie didn't rise or fall on that basis.

The major flaw was the handling of Luke Skywalker. It was easily Mark Hammils best movie, but I have come to agree that they violated the character, but the biggest problem was again, they killed him. Killing Qui gon, Darth Maul, Han Solo and now Luke Skywalker is movie malpractice of the highest order for which their is no forgiveness. You don't kill great characters, you kill the non great characters. And I'm speaking objectively here, I have mixed feelings about individuals in that list, but they were all charismatic enough to hold your interest on screen. You keep the people who hold your interest and have charisma, you get rid of the rest. So simple.

Also, Adam Driver is an unsalvageable character and Daisy Ridley is rather directionless. I don't mind the "strong female" character, at all, but the franchise is appearing to fall on her shoulders and I'm not seeing that happen. One of the main criticisms of the cast is that the men were all melancholy irrational dolts while the women were capable assertive problem solvers, and while I missed it in the movies in retrospect it's obvious. However I don't read much politics into it, it's been an artificial story device in hollywood for decades now, the whiny protaganist, which simply creates artificial tension instead of real tension. The challenge for the creative types is to come up with really capable characters in competition with each other and they take every opportunity to get out of that.

And yes there were dozens of other problems, like bombs falling in space, no explanation as to how the Empire got that big or how the rebels were reduced to 10 people, all failures but you can take a lot of that in stride if the fundamentals are in place. But killing Luke Skywalker and the other problems with that characeter for no particular reason was fatal.

To show my objectivity I will say that visually it was the most impressive by far since the originals. Also, the confrontation between Luke and Adam Driver was as good as anything in any of the other movies. I liked that they were expanding the force beyond moving things around and choking people.

But perhaps the fatal flaw at the root of these last 2 movies is that despite the trivial problems the writers seemed to be propelled primarily at plots meant to keep you guessing instead of just a great movie. Predictable is fine if it's really good.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Mr. Perfect
 
Posts: 13878
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Star Wars

Postby NapLajoieonSteroids » Tue Jan 09, 2018 9:37 am

I think people are unloading a lot of pent up dissatisfaction (and whinging, a good amount of it) built up over the last two movies and Disney and having every movie of theirs shoved down throats as the most special, most fun, most everything "thing" ever; from here on out 'till Doomsday.

That's why partly why this movie is baring the brunt of the negativity. It also spells out how much its creators despise its main audience. They could only make that clearer if they spelled it out in the opening crawler.

Like I think I said on here, Star Wars is now about the disappointment of sons. People are sick of these major movies all having the same subtext about the condescending disappointments imagined by Hollywood...and the box office keeps falling and people are less engaged and they wonder why.
User avatar
NapLajoieonSteroids
 
Posts: 3087
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm

Re: Star Wars

Postby NapLajoieonSteroids » Tue Jan 09, 2018 10:02 am

And let me say I don't blame Adam Driver-- I know a lot of people don't like his whiny character but he a)is giving it all and b)has more presence than most of the cast. John Boyega is a total waste of time in these movies. His character lost all purpose the minute Daisy RIdley was introduced in Episode 7. And here's the nutty thing about that: he's done hundreds of interviews now, been in other movies, etc. The guy is naturally warm and engaging (and a much better actor than Daisy Ridley is)...and they saddled him in a role that has less personality&use than the robots do because Heaven forfend he show up Daisy&co. It is like they decided that they didn't want Harrison Ford around to outshine Mark Hamill and Carrie Fisher so they completely strip him of a use or personality after he gets them off the first planet in the first movie. John Boyega isn't Harrison Ford but compared to the lead he is, and she could use all the help she can get to carry scenes.

I've avoided seeing it. So I cannot comment on how it all actually works as a film.

Talking to my brother about it, we both were most disappointed that the last two movies were a drag-- Episode 7 being less so because it was easy to get some laughs out of how dopey it all was but Rogue One was an absolutely uninteresting slog and a waste of ~2 hours of life-- that were getting the "Emperor's New Clothes" treatment.

I could understand what people saw in Episode 7 even if I disagreed but I didn't get Rogue One at all and having been burnt twice was enough for me.
Last edited by NapLajoieonSteroids on Tue Jan 09, 2018 10:52 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
NapLajoieonSteroids
 
Posts: 3087
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm

Re: Star Wars

Postby Mr. Perfect » Tue Jan 09, 2018 10:45 am

I make it a point not to blame the actor when the director or the character are to blame, and in the case of Boyega and Adam Driver it's not their fault in the slightest. I really don't care for either of them in terms of on screen presence, just not my preference but both characters never get off the ground.

In the case of Adam Driver no way in the world is that Han Solo's kid, no way in the world does Han Solo's kid kill Han Solo, yes the whiny bit in the first one was comic relief in the first scene and then killed the character for the rest of the run, but the whole thing was a fatal conception from the beginning. If you were enamored with Driver as an actor and just wanted to put him in a movie then make him Darth Maul jr or something, some sort of emo sith. Han Solo's kid is a non starter.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Mr. Perfect
 
Posts: 13878
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Star Wars

Postby NapLajoieonSteroids » Tue Jan 09, 2018 10:58 am

Nah, it's not so much being enamored but incredulity that you go through the trouble of setting your cast and story and then deciding to not to use/misusing what you have

Another bizarre choice- giving Carrie Fisher so much screen time. Of the three, she is the most wooden...which is saying something with Mark Hamill around. The difference is Mark Hamill is a wonderful voice actor and can sell things that way.

It definitely had a part in killing the lady.
User avatar
NapLajoieonSteroids
 
Posts: 3087
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm

Re: Star Wars

Postby Mr. Perfect » Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:19 am

I'm talking about the POV of Jar Jar Abrams, that is if he thought Adam was a compelling guy to stick in the movie fine but he simply does not work as Han Solo's son. Emo sith, sure.

Mark Hamill was incredible, yes Carrie Fisher was terrible. Poorly written character, dull performance. One of the reasons I was so pissed at Mark Hamill getting killed is I genuinely just wanted to see him one more time, in full flight, he was that good. Not to be.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Mr. Perfect
 
Posts: 13878
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Star Wars

Postby Mr. Perfect » Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:27 am

So a quick note on Star Wars killing people. I saw Star Wars as a kid, and through those eyes killing Ben worked. It added a layer to it, especially because he came back as a spirit.

But the killing of Qui gon was where the head scratching started. The 2 best characters of that movie were Liam Neeson and Darth Maul, and they killed both of them. It was pure idiocy. But, they stopped killing good characters after that, so hopefully it had just been a misjudgement.

When Jar Jar killed Han, that ended any future for Star Wars. Not only was it just using the basest of storytelling gimmicks, but they had him die for no particular reason. Now apparently Harrison Ford wanted it done, but if so have him go out like Luke did, against 10 Star Destroyers and 100 Tie fighters. Not to some lame character in a nonsensical fashion.

Now they did the same thing to Luke, so they turned Star Wars into some gruesome horror franchise where your childhood idol gets shanked by some bros while people snicker.

It's the dumbest thing on planet earth.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Mr. Perfect
 
Posts: 13878
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Star Wars

Postby NapLajoieonSteroids » Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:32 am

I saw Phantom Menace through kid eyes, killing Liam Neeson was no where as disappointing as seeing Darth Maul bite the dust after all the commercials and action figures and the cool light saber. At least we got to see it, so much of what seems like it would be interesting in the prequels happens off screen or are only alluded to.

Even that didn't really move me- the whole thing was more indifferent/confusing compared to the the VHS of the original three.

Harrison Ford was always right about killing the character off; his whole arc ends with the first movie and he's not that necessary as a character after that.


I guess it doesn't bother me so much that the emo kid did it, what was rougher was having to watch an elderly Harrison Ford stumble through the role, dressed in that stupid leather vest like he was 35 again and his character being revealed to be this pathetic old man who reverted to his youth after raising a brat and having his marriage dissolve.

"Chewy we're home" was the most defeating, depressing this put to film- a man giving up on life in a scene which was supposed to be his triumphant return (and JJ made sure it was easily snickered at.)
Last edited by NapLajoieonSteroids on Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:53 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
NapLajoieonSteroids
 
Posts: 3087
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm

Next

Return to Art + Architecture

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest