Celtics Blog Forums

Other Discussions => Entertainment => Off Topic => Movies => Topic started by: eja117 on December 18, 2015, 12:53:57 AM

Title: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: eja117 on December 18, 2015, 12:53:57 AM
Force Awakens < Phantom Menace.
Force Awakens < Godfather 3

Total plagiarism of New Hope
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Rondo9 on December 18, 2015, 12:54:45 AM
Star Wars fanbase remains as divisive as ever I see.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: eja117 on December 18, 2015, 12:57:17 AM
I have liked every single Star Wars film I ever saw and I liked every Star Wars Tv show I ever saw, and every video game and every book and comic.

I am not a Star Wars complainer. I am not a Star Wars snob.   And I hated this movie. Hated. Like watching Rick Pitino or something.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: HomerSapien on December 18, 2015, 01:08:22 AM
I really liked it.  I thought it was better than all 3 prequels as it felt a lot truer to the original 3 to me.  It wasn't perfect, but I thought JJ Abrams did a great job and I can't wait to see the next one.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Rondo9 on December 18, 2015, 01:13:20 AM
I haven't watched it yet, though the marketing disappointed me. It felt like they were trying too hard to please the fans who hated the prequels while leaving the people who liked them in the dust.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: RockinRyA on December 18, 2015, 01:14:39 AM
I liked it a lot, same as with fellow fanatics who Ive asked. It eerily feels like I'm watching A New Hope. The atmosphere, the story telling, its the same. It doesnt quite follow Star Wars expanded universe but I think Kylo Ren and Rey are based on Jacen and Jaina Solo.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Rondo9 on December 18, 2015, 01:15:37 AM
I'm still looking forward to the movie though.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: eja117 on December 18, 2015, 01:24:45 AM
I liked it a lot, same as with fellow fanatics who Ive asked. It eerily feels like I'm watching A New Hope. The atmosphere, the story telling, its the same. It doesnt quite follow Star Wars expanded universe but I think Kylo Ren and Rey are based on Jacen and Jaina Solo.
How is the story telling the same? And is that a good thing?
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: RockinRyA on December 18, 2015, 01:37:05 AM
I liked it a lot, same as with fellow fanatics who Ive asked. It eerily feels like I'm watching A New Hope. The atmosphere, the story telling, its the same. It doesnt quite follow Star Wars expanded universe but I think Kylo Ren and Rey are based on Jacen and Jaina Solo.
How is the story telling the same?

When Rey was first seen they showed her taking down scraps, parts from the machine, sliding down then making a makeshift sled. You basically knew she was a survivor and a loner without a word being said. An adventure leads to another. People getting to know each other through those? Aren't those A New Hope's? lol If you can't figure it out I have no reason to talk to you.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: eja117 on December 18, 2015, 01:49:27 AM
I liked it a lot, same as with fellow fanatics who Ive asked. It eerily feels like I'm watching A New Hope. The atmosphere, the story telling, its the same. It doesnt quite follow Star Wars expanded universe but I think Kylo Ren and Rey are based on Jacen and Jaina Solo.
How is the story telling the same?

When Rey was first seen they showed her taking down scraps, parts from the machine, sliding down then making a makeshift sled. You basically knew she was a survivor and a loner without a word being said. An adventure leads to another. People getting to know each other through those? Aren't those A New Hope's? lol If you can't figure it out I have no reason to talk to you.
New Hope wasn't basically an hour and a half chase scene followed by a half hour fight scene without laying any of the parameters of the film.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: eja117 on December 18, 2015, 01:50:44 AM
I haven't watched it yet, though the marketing disappointed me. It felt like they were trying too hard to please the fans who hated the prequels while leaving the people who liked them in the dust.
Actually I kinda agree with that.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on December 18, 2015, 04:39:08 AM
I have liked every single Star Wars film I ever saw and I liked every Star Wars Tv show I ever saw, and every video game and every book and comic.

I am not a Star Wars complainer. I am not a Star Wars snob.   And I hated this movie. Hated. Like watching Rick Pitino or something.
PM me with your thoughts.  I saw it... everyone I saw it with loved it.  The movie got glowing reviews.  It's being unanimously praised by fans for "bringing back Star Wars".  You might be the first person I've seen with a negative reivew.   I'm not sure what kind of standard you were holding it to or what kind of expectations you may have had, but it was classic Star Wars.  I'm curious to find out what you hated about it.   It was a super enjoyable movie.  Significantly better than the prequels.  Worthy of all the love it's getting.  I highly recommend it.   

It wasn't without faults, but neither were the original movies.  It captured the tone/vibe of the originals wonderfully.  The action was fantastic.  Unlike the prequels, it had a much needed dose of humor.   I thought Kylo Ren was great.  It's the first movie I've seen Harrison Ford NOT mail in for several years... I was worried about his performance and I thought he was classic Han Solo.  I had tiny gripes, but so many moments that got me hyped up.  I'm looking forward to the sequels.  I think Episode 8 might even be better... I think Rian Johnson is a better director than JJ Abrams.  But what JJ Abrams pulled off here was great.  This was a worthy addition to the Star Wars saga. 
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: eja117 on December 18, 2015, 07:25:11 AM
I have no real issues with the bad guy. I thought Han carried the movie mostly. I thought it was definitely funnier. I liked one of the new characters and didn't hate the others. Liked the thing on the ship that was scary (that was very clever). But overall terrible.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: MBunge on December 18, 2015, 08:50:49 AM
Force Awakens < Phantom Menace.

There is NOTHING in this film that even approaches the awfulness of Jar Jar Binks.

I enjoyed it as a really fun sci-fantasy adventure and it starkly illustrates how bad Lucas was with elementary filmmaking/storytelling in the prequels.

However, TFA is largely a merciless rehash, recap and recycle of the previous films.  It's like the most expensive and best made Star Wars fan fiction ever.

Mike
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: eja117 on December 18, 2015, 10:20:04 AM
To be fair to Phantom Menace I grant you nothing in TFA may be as bad as Jar Jar, but nothing in it was as good as Darth Maul, so it sorta evened out on that. There was also nothing as good as Qui Gon.
That scary thing on the ship that was chasing people.  Ok that was pretty good. Liked that
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Rondo9 on December 18, 2015, 01:26:45 PM
Force Awakens < Phantom Menace.



I enjoyed it as a really fun sci-fantasy adventure and it starkly illustrates how bad Lucas was with elementary filmmaking/storytelling in the prequels.



I strongly disagree with that statement
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Rondo9 on December 18, 2015, 01:27:57 PM
I have liked every single Star Wars film I ever saw and I liked every Star Wars Tv show I ever saw, and every video game and every book and comic.

I am not a Star Wars complainer. I am not a Star Wars snob.   And I hated this movie. Hated. Like watching Rick Pitino or something.
PM me with your thoughts.  I saw it... everyone I saw it with loved it.  The movie got glowing reviews.  It's being unanimously praised by fans for "bringing back Star Wars".  You might be the first person I've seen with a negative reivew.   I'm not sure what kind of standard you were holding it to or what kind of expectations you may have had, but it was classic Star Wars.  I'm curious to find out what you hated about it.   It was a super enjoyable movie.  Significantly better than the prequels.  Worthy of all the love it's getting.  I highly recommend it.   

It wasn't without faults, but neither were the original movies.  It captured the tone/vibe of the originals wonderfully.  The action was fantastic.  Unlike the prequels, it had a much needed dose of humor.   I thought Kylo Ren was great.  It's the first movie I've seen Harrison Ford NOT mail in for several years... I was worried about his performance and I thought he was classic Han Solo.  I had tiny gripes, but so many moments that got me hyped up.  I'm looking forward to the sequels.  I think Episode 8 might even be better... I think Rian Johnson is a better director than JJ Abrams.  But what JJ Abrams pulled off here was great.  This was a worthy addition to the Star Wars saga.
[/quote


Universal praise? I've heard mixed results from fans



Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: eja117 on December 18, 2015, 02:01:33 PM
As far as I can tell it's like 85% positive and for the few that didn't like it I don't think they're haters. I think they have legit reasons.

Things to really like about.

The world looks pretty cool and interesting.
All the new characters (mostly) seem pretty good
Decent to great action scenes
The funniest one to date but in a real way with real personality
A lot of good questions to answer later
Excellent Han Solo and Chewie

But overall did not like.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: MBunge on December 18, 2015, 02:12:54 PM
Force Awakens < Phantom Menace.



I enjoyed it as a really fun sci-fantasy adventure and it starkly illustrates how bad Lucas was with elementary filmmaking/storytelling in the prequels.



I strongly disagree with that statement

I could understand why someone wouldn't like TFA but I don't think there's any argument that it makes the prequels look even worse.  There's been some contrarian bull from millennial hipsters about how the prequels really weren't that bad.  They were.  Badly plotted.  Badly paced.  Badly acted.  Badly conceived.  Badly executed.  Take away the goodwill of Star Wars and they'd be universally considered disasters on the order of Jupiter Rising or the Matrix sequels.

Mike
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Rondo9 on December 18, 2015, 02:22:08 PM
Force Awakens < Phantom Menace.



I enjoyed it as a really fun sci-fantasy adventure and it starkly illustrates how bad Lucas was with elementary filmmaking/storytelling in the prequels.



I strongly disagree with that statement

I could understand why someone wouldn't like TFA but I don't think there's any argument that it makes the prequels look even worse.  There's been some contrarian bull from millennial hipsters about how the prequels really weren't that bad.  They were.  Badly plotted.  Badly paced.  Badly acted.  Badly conceived.  Badly executed.  Take away the goodwill of Star Wars and they'd be universally considered disasters on the order of Jupiter Rising or the Matrix sequels.

Mike

Thanks for calling people who felt the prequels great hipsters just because they like something you don't
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on December 18, 2015, 02:41:27 PM
I have liked every single Star Wars film I ever saw and I liked every Star Wars Tv show I ever saw, and every video game and every book and comic.

I am not a Star Wars complainer. I am not a Star Wars snob.   And I hated this movie. Hated. Like watching Rick Pitino or something.
PM me with your thoughts.  I saw it... everyone I saw it with loved it.  The movie got glowing reviews.  It's being unanimously praised by fans for "bringing back Star Wars".  You might be the first person I've seen with a negative reivew.   I'm not sure what kind of standard you were holding it to or what kind of expectations you may have had, but it was classic Star Wars.  I'm curious to find out what you hated about it.   It was a super enjoyable movie.  Significantly better than the prequels.  Worthy of all the love it's getting.  I highly recommend it.   

It wasn't without faults, but neither were the original movies.  It captured the tone/vibe of the originals wonderfully.  The action was fantastic.  Unlike the prequels, it had a much needed dose of humor.   I thought Kylo Ren was great.  It's the first movie I've seen Harrison Ford NOT mail in for several years... I was worried about his performance and I thought he was classic Han Solo.  I had tiny gripes, but so many moments that got me hyped up.  I'm looking forward to the sequels.  I think Episode 8 might even be better... I think Rian Johnson is a better director than JJ Abrams.  But what JJ Abrams pulled off here was great.  This was a worthy addition to the Star Wars saga.


Universal praise? I've heard mixed results from fans
It's got an 81/100 on Metacritic and 95% Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes.  It's a significantly higher rated film than any of the prequels.

Look, neck-beards will find anything to criticize.   But it's received universal praise.  Notoriously critical celebrity fans like Patton Oswalt and Kevin Smith have given glowing reviews of it as well. 

It's not without faults.   "Star Trek" from 2009 was a darn fun movie, but Star Trek fans criticized it for being "too star-warsy"   ... With this one, the main bit of criticism seems to be that it's "too similar to the original movie". 

I don't want to spoil anything.  Eja, I'll reach out to you with my response to your valid criticisms, but let's first acknowledge that there's a chance you might be in the minority here.  You had Mace WIndu as your avatar for several years.  Did you like the prequels more than the original movies?  That would presumably slant your view of the new ones.  In fact, has anyone ever seen Eja and George Lucas together at the same time?  Hmmm... makes you think.  Heh. 

I'm actually fine with the prequels for what they were, but I can easily sum up the reasons the prequels were not as beloved as the originals.   There's three very simple reasons. 

#1 - Overly complicated - the prequels got muddled in a bunch of political nonsense... the battles didn't make much sense... there was nobody to really root for... clones vs droids and they were both in the pocket of the emperor.   

#2 - No sense of humor - The prequels seemed like they were written by someone with autism or something.  No sense of humor at all.  In the original, they were able to improvise slightly.  Han had swagger.  It was light hearted and fun. 

#3 - Impossible to capture the awe of seeing cutting edge visuals in the late 70s.  -  This is pretty impossible to replicate.  Once a decade a movie comes out that's success is greatly impacted by having cutting edge visual technology.  Star Wars was at the forefront when it came out.  Another great example is Jurrassic Park... minds were blown when people so CGI dinosaurs.   Most recently, "Avatar" was greatly impacted by the visual spectacle.   In general, we're pretty jaded to visuals at this point, unfortunately.   


At best, this latest Star Wars could fix two of those 3... and it does.  Boy does it.  They simplify the story.  It's filled with character and humor.  They did a good job of reintroducing a scarred audience to the Star Wars universe.   The magic was back.  There were genuine moments of glee.  Genuine moments where I got excited.    Unlike the prequels, the actors weren't stiff and the dialogue wasn't stunted.   All four of the new leads shined.   I want to see more of them.   Does it borrow too much from the original? Sure... but I think they had to do that.  It's a love letter to the original Star Wars while at the same time setting things up for future installments.   

If I were to compare to to recent movies and set some expectations, I would say it's successful because it has the best elements of three recently successful films. 

#1 - "Guardians of the Galaxy" - Guardians was the best sci fi movie in years.  Episode 7 is right up there in terms of swashbuckling Star battling fun.  The characters have swagger and humor. 

#2 - "Jurassic World" -  The main reason Jurassic World was so successful was because of the nostalgia of going back to a familiar world.  Episode 7 has that in spades. 

#3 - "Creed" -  If you haven't seen it yet, go see Creed.  It's awesome.  It's basically a remake of "Rocky" while pushing the "Rocky" story forward.   Fans were skeptical after a couple misfires in the Rocky franchise ("rocky 5" comes to mind), but "Creed" is wonderful.  We get to see old man Rocky Balboa and the torch is passed along to a worthy new actor.   "Episode 7" is very similar in that regard.   They cover familiar ground, you get to see old versions of your favorite characters, and the torch is passed on to characters you immediately are fond of. 

Go see it.   It's worth it.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Rondo9 on December 18, 2015, 10:12:23 PM
I have liked every single Star Wars film I ever saw and I liked every Star Wars Tv show I ever saw, and every video game and every book and comic.

I am not a Star Wars complainer. I am not a Star Wars snob.   And I hated this movie. Hated. Like watching Rick Pitino or something.
PM me with your thoughts.  I saw it... everyone I saw it with loved it.  The movie got glowing reviews.  It's being unanimously praised by fans for "bringing back Star Wars".  You might be the first person I've seen with a negative reivew.   I'm not sure what kind of standard you were holding it to or what kind of expectations you may have had, but it was classic Star Wars.  I'm curious to find out what you hated about it.   It was a super enjoyable movie.  Significantly better than the prequels.  Worthy of all the love it's getting.  I highly recommend it.   

It wasn't without faults, but neither were the original movies.  It captured the tone/vibe of the originals wonderfully.  The action was fantastic.  Unlike the prequels, it had a much needed dose of humor.   I thought Kylo Ren was great.  It's the first movie I've seen Harrison Ford NOT mail in for several years... I was worried about his performance and I thought he was classic Han Solo.  I had tiny gripes, but so many moments that got me hyped up.  I'm looking forward to the sequels.  I think Episode 8 might even be better... I think Rian Johnson is a better director than JJ Abrams.  But what JJ Abrams pulled off here was great.  This was a worthy addition to the Star Wars saga.


Universal praise? I've heard mixed results from fans
It's got an 81/100 on Metacritic and 95% Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes.  It's a significantly higher rated film than any of the prequels.

Look, neck-beards will find anything to criticize.   But it's received universal praise.  Notoriously critical celebrity fans like Patton Oswalt and Kevin Smith have given glowing reviews of it as well. 

It's not without faults.   "Star Trek" from 2009 was a darn fun movie, but Star Trek fans criticized it for being "too star-warsy"   ... With this one, the main bit of criticism seems to be that it's "too similar to the original movie". 

I don't want to spoil anything.  Eja, I'll reach out to you with my response to your valid criticisms, but let's first acknowledge that there's a chance you might be in the minority here.  You had Mace WIndu as your avatar for several years.  Did you like the prequels more than the original movies?  That would presumably slant your view of the new ones.  In fact, has anyone ever seen Eja and George Lucas together at the same time?  Hmmm... makes you think.  Heh. 

I'm actually fine with the prequels for what they were, but I can easily sum up the reasons the prequels were not as beloved as the originals.   There's three very simple reasons. 

#1 - Overly complicated - the prequels got muddled in a bunch of political nonsense... the battles didn't make much sense... there was nobody to really root for... clones vs droids and they were both in the pocket of the emperor.   

#2 - No sense of humor - The prequels seemed like they were written by someone with autism or something.  No sense of humor at all.  In the original, they were able to improvise slightly.  Han had swagger.  It was light hearted and fun. 

#3 - Impossible to capture the awe of seeing cutting edge visuals in the late 70s.  -  This is pretty impossible to replicate.  Once a decade a movie comes out that's success is greatly impacted by having cutting edge visual technology.  Star Wars was at the forefront when it came out.  Another great example is Jurrassic Park... minds were blown when people so CGI dinosaurs.   Most recently, "Avatar" was greatly impacted by the visual spectacle.   In general, we're pretty jaded to visuals at this point, unfortunately.   






Did you know that the Prequels used more pratical effects than the originals? Shocking I know and there was some humor in the prequels like Obi wan's constant snark. The story I felt was well done.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Redz on December 18, 2015, 10:18:59 PM
Chewy stole the show.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Chief on December 18, 2015, 10:24:30 PM
I loved it.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: eja117 on December 19, 2015, 11:18:40 AM
Force Awakens < Phantom Menace.



I enjoyed it as a really fun sci-fantasy adventure and it starkly illustrates how bad Lucas was with elementary filmmaking/storytelling in the prequels.



I strongly disagree with that statement

I could understand why someone wouldn't like TFA but I don't think there's any argument that it makes the prequels look even worse.  There's been some contrarian bull from millennial hipsters about how the prequels really weren't that bad.  They were.  Badly plotted.  Badly paced.  Badly acted.  Badly conceived.  Badly executed.  Take away the goodwill of Star Wars and they'd be universally considered disasters on the order of Jupiter Rising or the Matrix sequels.

Mike
Wait wait wait. How does this "new" movie make the prequels look worse?

Also the prequels absolutely stand up to the originals. And there are reasons why.

One....prequels have better bad guys. A lot better. The bad guys in the original trilogy are dumb and incompetent. They can be easily outwitted by a drunk smuggler with no plan. They get knocked into sarlacs by blind guys. They get killed by teddy bears with stone age tools.

Second....if you like lightsabers the prequels are way more for you.

Third ....if you like places the prequels are more for you, or at least more for you than TFA. I mean seriously? Another desert planet? Again? How many times are we going to go to a desert planet? I mean why do people even live there? Of all the places to go people decide to settle on a piece of crud planet like that?

Fourth....more mystery and intrigue. That's good
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on December 19, 2015, 12:40:04 PM
Force Awakens < Phantom Menace.



I enjoyed it as a really fun sci-fantasy adventure and it starkly illustrates how bad Lucas was with elementary filmmaking/storytelling in the prequels.



I strongly disagree with that statement

I could understand why someone wouldn't like TFA but I don't think there's any argument that it makes the prequels look even worse.  There's been some contrarian bull from millennial hipsters about how the prequels really weren't that bad.  They were.  Badly plotted.  Badly paced.  Badly acted.  Badly conceived.  Badly executed.  Take away the goodwill of Star Wars and they'd be universally considered disasters on the order of Jupiter Rising or the Matrix sequels.

Mike
Wait wait wait. How does this "new" movie make the prequels look worse?

Also the prequels absolutely stand up to the originals. And there are reasons why.

One....prequels have better bad guys. A lot better. The bad guys in the original trilogy are dumb and incompetent. They can be easily outwitted by a drunk smuggler with no plan. They get knocked into sarlacs by blind guys. They get killed by teddy bears with stone age tools.

Second....if you like lightsabers the prequels are way more for you.

Third ....if you like places the prequels are more for you, or at least more for you than TFA. I mean seriously? Another desert planet? Again? How many times are we going to go to a desert planet? I mean why do people even live there? Of all the places to go people decide to settle on a piece of crud planet like that?

Fourth....more mystery and intrigue. That's good
i think kylo ren is 10 times more interesting than count dooku and general grievous combined.  Grievous was lame as hell in the prequels.  He just runs away and gets his butt handed to him by obi-wan.    I haven't seen the cartoons so I can only go on darth maul's one appearance.  The saber fights were admittedly cool, but he had like one line in the entire movie.  We knew nothing about him other than his fight style and face paint.   Maybe he was "cooler looking" but I wouldn't call him a better bad guy. 

I do agree the saber fights in the prequels were neat, but even those have been heavily criticized for being overly choreographed and nonsensical.  Random flips and random twirls of the light sabers that were purely showy and deviated from the original ... The critics would say that a saber fight should be a power struggle vs good and evil.   The new one captures that.   

Eja, I think you're maybe younger and were a kid when the prequels came out so I don't hold it against you for loving them.  I know people who were children when phantom menace came out and adored jar jar.  But the prequels were so universally hated and seen "ruining" Star Wars.  An entire generation of fans felt like it ruined their childhood. Lol. I never was that overly hateful of them, but I totally understood the criticism.  They were bad for some of the same reasons the Matrix sequels were bad ... The creators fell in love with their own made up universe too much, tried to force so much extra crap into their movie... And failed to capture what made their original movie so beloved.   You are complaining about the planet being a desert again.  They HAD to do that.  This movie wasn't about pushing the Star Wars storyline forward as much as it was proving to audiences that Star Wars could still be great.  They had to cover familiar ground before they could move forward. It also stays true to George Lucas original vision that these trilogies should mirror one another.  So many people had felt burned by the prequels and felt Disney was going to ruin their childhood even further that they sort of had to use this movie to prove to everyone they "got it" and could bring back the magic.  They succeeded. It's wonderful.

Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on December 19, 2015, 12:53:12 PM
Double post
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Smartacus on December 19, 2015, 01:05:11 PM
I'm not letting the film makers of off the hook. J J Abrams is too talented to recycle that many shots from A New Hope.

Same thing with Jurassic World last year, the constant feeling of deja vu from how the plot progresses and how it was shot really takes me out of the experience. It made an otherwise really enjoyable movie feel cheapaned.

The little details were awesome. The music and cinematography were top notch. I really hope the sequels will be more independent of the source material when they come out.

7.8/10

Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Evantime34 on December 19, 2015, 01:24:15 PM
Thoughts after seeing it:
1. Fin has to be a jedi right? Wouldn't Han Solo's sun just cut him to ribbons immediately if he wasn't. I feel like in the old movies a jedi holding a light sabre would have destroyed a regular person
2. Thought the movie was great. It gave me a happy nostalgic feeling when I saw the old characters.
3. I thought the humor was really good in spots which is part of what was good about the last movies.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: eja117 on December 19, 2015, 01:33:18 PM
Kylo Ren is interesting? He's an emo kid.  Which is the same criticism people had of....young Anakin Skywalker. Only young Anakin had a billion times better skills...from the time he was 8.

Dooku had a phenomenal actor playing him. Grevious was awesome CGI.

They HAD to go back to a desert planet? To prove Star Wars can be good? So Star Wars can only be good on desert planets? The universe isn't good enough to go forwards so we have to go backwards?

And ultimately it's a plagiarism.  It's not an homage of any kind. If I make a movie next week about some little people that find a magic ring and they have to take a long dangerous journey where they meet monsters, but have several friends to help them....let's call it a "fellowship", and in the end they have to throw it in a volcano to destroy it, but not before a big battle at a castle, and in the mean time there's a creature trying to steal this ring......that's not an homage. That's plagiarism.

Princess Leia...yeah it's great to see her again and C3PO is annoying as ever, but they were forced into the film and serve no purpose that someone else couldn't have served.

Can we possibly find something new to fight? And can we possibly fight it differently?

Brien of Tarth could crush Cpt Phasma.

It's amazing to me that people say Lucas lost it and he shouldn't be writing any more, then they rip off his stuff and say it's good. How does that work?
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Roy H. on December 19, 2015, 02:35:33 PM
I thought it was good, not great.

The two things I didn't like:

1.  Kylo Ren. He's a whiny emo punk. First Peter Parker, then Anakin Skywalker, now Ben Solo.  Enough. There's nothing wrong with making a villain bad ass; he doesn't need daddy issues.

2.  You don't kill Han Solo, period. He's a larger than life hero, and those guys shouldn't die. I get it, Obi Wan died, but Han's death was gratuitous.

Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on December 19, 2015, 03:12:40 PM
Roy with the big spoiler.

I think any major Star Wars fan went in expecting that.  Harrison ford has been adamant that Han Solo should have died in empire strikes back.  He probably refused to take the role without getting his death. Lol. 

I disagree about kylo ren.   Adam driver was great in it.  He's what anakin SHOULD have been.  I also think people are confused about the timeline.  He's not a Sith master.  From what I understand, he was displaying signs of aggression and "the dark side".  Snoke probably got to him at a young age since it would be obvious that a kid with skywalker blood would have force sensitivity.  But he was likely untrained... Just turning to the dark side.   Leia saw "too much Vader in him" so she sent him to Luke with hopes that Luke could get through to him.  Luke couldn't...  He killed all the other Jedi trainees and went full blown dark side.   Point is, I'm not sure he's really had much training of his own.   And we know very little about Rey... And what kind of training she may have had as a young girl.   My guess is she was either a padawan who somehow didn't get murdered by kylo ren.... So she was put into hiding. Or... More likely she's Luke's daughter. There were several things that pointed to her being Luke's daughter.

Anyways, I've seen it twice. I loved it.  I feel bad for anyone who left the theater disappointed.  It was everything I wanted out of a Star Wars movie.  It got me pumped up.  It made grown men in the theater squeal with delight like children. My girlfriend's 50 year old uncle said he wanted to buy all the action figures...   It brought back their childhood.  They love Star Wars again.  Mission accomplished by JJ Abrams.  If you didn't feel that way after seeing it, that's too bad for you, I guess.  The drug didn't work on you.  I'm still giddy.

Many mysteries remain.  Now we get to see another great young director (rian johnson) start to answer some of them.  Time to explore some new worlds, get a taste of old man Luke, and see where this journey takes us. Is Snoke Darth Plageius?  Is Rey a former youngling mind-wiped and having a Borne Identity moment?   Will Fin be a paraplegic?   Will Kylo finish his training?  Will he turn to the light side?  Will Poe Dameron turn to the dark side ?  What secrets are in store?  Gotta wait two years to find out.  Star Wars is back, baby.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: eja117 on December 19, 2015, 03:27:48 PM
What does Kylo have that Anakin didn't have? He's got more humor but no skill at all with a lightsaber.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on December 19, 2015, 03:33:56 PM
What does Kylo have that Anakin didn't have?
Acting ability, mainly.  A lot of the prequels could have been saved with just better acting and writing.  I studied film and see almost every movie that comes out in a theater. I'm a movie fanatic.  The prequels were just total hackery.  So many fundamental things were wrong with them.  George Lucas was a bad director.  The acting was horrible. The characters sucked.  The core concept sucked.  It didn't follow proper story conventions.    So many things needed to be cut out of them.  There was too much reliance on CGI and effects.  Look, I'm not saying anything that hasn't been said endlessly for the past 15 years.  Go watch the Red Letter Media reviews of the prequels if you don't understand why they are so despised and why they could be critically panned while Episode 7 is critically adored:  http://redlettermedia.com/plinkett/star-wars/

Here's part 1, Eja.  Highly entertaining.  Watch it and think about how Force Awakens addresses all of those complaints.  It will explain to you why "Force Awakens" had to go back to basics to win over a jilted audience.  These reviews are almost more entertaining than the movies themselves:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PL5919C8DE6F720A2D&v=FxKtZmQgxrI

Also, Kylo Ren in two scenes simply interrogating people seemed more frightening and dangerous than anakin when he was slaughtering entire temples filled with children.  Hayden Christensen just comes across like a femmy pre-pubescent pretty boy in a costume.  Adam Driver made Kylo ren actually believable.  He's nowhere near as powerful as Anakin was... But he's unhinged... He's flawed... He's fearful and angry... He's torn inside... He displayed real emotion and I'm interested to see how he grows as a character and threat. 

Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: eja117 on December 19, 2015, 04:01:14 PM
Oh yeah....Adam Driver has a major academy award nomination coming his way.   If we have to talk about guys who acted through a mask I'll take Dave Prowse or Boba Fett.

I will take Ewan McGregor, Liam Neeson, Natalie Portman, Hayden Christiansen, Ian McDiarmid, Samuel Jackson, and Christopher Lee over anyone in this film, and that might even include a tired and disinterested Harrison Ford.

Furthermore let's make this clear about these "reviews".  Disney is a major player in Hollywood, but Lucas was despised. They tried to make him change his movies so he told them to go f themselves and left the director's guild. He's better than them and above them and they know it. "Reviews" was the only revenge they could get.

So now they feed us this junk and give it good "reviews". Disney made a billion dollar investment. There was no way the reviews were gonna be bad.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on December 19, 2015, 04:13:47 PM
Oh yeah....Adam Driver has a major academy award nomination coming his way.   If we have to talk about guys who acted through a mask I'll take Dave Prowse or Boba Fett.

I will take Ewan McGregor, Liam Neeson, Natalie Portman, Hayden Christiansen, Ian McDiarmid, Samuel Jackson, and Christopher Lee over anyone in this film, and that might even include a tired and disinterested Harrison Ford.

Furthermore let's make this clear about these "reviews".  Disney is a major player in Hollywood, but Lucas was despised. They tried to make him change his movies so he told them to go f themselves and left the director's guild. He's better than them and above them and they know it. "Reviews" was the only revenge they could get.

So now they feed us this junk and give it good "reviews". Disney made a billion dollar investment. There was no way the reviews were gonna be bad.
Nah.  That's utter nonsense.   Major Disney films get panned all the time.

ANyways, watch the Red Letter Media review series.  Highly entertaining and will explain to you why the prequels were despised and why this movie had to go back to basics.   If you do end up watching them, I'll be interested to see your response. 

Part 1:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PL5919C8DE6F720A2D&v=FxKtZmQgxrI
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: eja117 on December 19, 2015, 04:32:43 PM
Oh yeah....Adam Driver has a major academy award nomination coming his way.   If we have to talk about guys who acted through a mask I'll take Dave Prowse or Boba Fett.

I will take Ewan McGregor, Liam Neeson, Natalie Portman, Hayden Christiansen, Ian McDiarmid, Samuel Jackson, and Christopher Lee over anyone in this film, and that might even include a tired and disinterested Harrison Ford.

Furthermore let's make this clear about these "reviews".  Disney is a major player in Hollywood, but Lucas was despised. They tried to make him change his movies so he told them to go f themselves and left the director's guild. He's better than them and above them and they know it. "Reviews" was the only revenge they could get.

So now they feed us this junk and give it good "reviews". Disney made a billion dollar investment. There was no way the reviews were gonna be bad.
Nah.  That's utter nonsense.   Major Disney films get panned all the time.

ANyways, watch the Red Letter Media review series.  Highly entertaining and will explain to you why the prequels were despised and why this movie had to go back to basics.   If you do end up watching them, I'll be interested to see your response. 

Part 1:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PL5919C8DE6F720A2D&v=FxKtZmQgxrI
Disney films get panned all the time? Ones that they spent billions to buy?
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on December 19, 2015, 04:53:37 PM
Oh yeah....Adam Driver has a major academy award nomination coming his way.   If we have to talk about guys who acted through a mask I'll take Dave Prowse or Boba Fett.

I will take Ewan McGregor, Liam Neeson, Natalie Portman, Hayden Christiansen, Ian McDiarmid, Samuel Jackson, and Christopher Lee over anyone in this film, and that might even include a tired and disinterested Harrison Ford.

Furthermore let's make this clear about these "reviews".  Disney is a major player in Hollywood, but Lucas was despised. They tried to make him change his movies so he told them to go f themselves and left the director's guild. He's better than them and above them and they know it. "Reviews" was the only revenge they could get.

So now they feed us this junk and give it good "reviews". Disney made a billion dollar investment. There was no way the reviews were gonna be bad.
Nah.  That's utter nonsense.   Major Disney films get panned all the time.

ANyways, watch the Red Letter Media review series.  Highly entertaining and will explain to you why the prequels were despised and why this movie had to go back to basics.   If you do end up watching them, I'll be interested to see your response. 

Part 1:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PL5919C8DE6F720A2D&v=FxKtZmQgxrI
Disney films get panned all the time? Ones that they spent billions to buy?
Dude that's a reach.  Am i really going to have to waste my time explaining why critics aren't paid off by studios?  Again, the core issue here is that you don't understand why people dislike the prequels.  Watch the Red Letter Media reviews and get back to me. 

For what it's worth, Episode 7 has an 81/100 on Metacritic.  That's very high.  I don't think a single Marvel movie (owned by Disney) has scored as highly as Episode 7.   On metacritic, the avengers movies scored in the 60s.   Some of score in the Marvel character movies score in the 40s/50s.   The Hobbit movies are some of the most expensive films ever made and those all were widely panned by critics (scoring in the 50s)... in your twisted world does only Disney have the money to pay off movie critics?  The most expensive movie of all time, "Pirates of the Caribbean:  On Stranger Tides" is... Disney... and scored a 45 on Metacritic.  It reportedly had a budget of 375 million.   

This is nonsense.  It's also received unanimous praise from people who have been dumping on Star Wars for the past 15 years.   You think they were all paid off?

(http://imgur.com/IEoL0V3.jpg)

(http://imgur.com/uZlJYSS.jpg)

(http://imgur.com/kT4VQgb.jpg)

Maybe I was paid off too.  We were all paid off!! Muhahaha.   Silly...  these movies could have been completely panned and would have still made a zillion dollars...

If you're incapable of comprehending what people are loving about this movie, I don't really know what to tell you.  It's mostly just a shame you couldn't enjoy it.  The movie isn't without flaws (literally no Star Wars movie is... ultimately they are all just homages (or "rip offs" if you'd prefer) to classic films with a cliche story arc and a heavy dose of stupidity), but it's a ton of fun... and that's what Star Wars is supposed to be. 
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: eja117 on December 19, 2015, 05:57:47 PM
The Hobbit movies weren't as good as the LOTR movies and everyone knew that.

Your politics free Hollywood idea is a very interesting theory.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Beat LA on December 19, 2015, 07:52:59 PM
#2 - No sense of humor - The prequels seemed like they were written by someone with autism or something.  No sense of humor at all.  In the original, they were able to improvise slightly.  Han had swagger.  It was light hearted and fun.

I don't have a problem with ideas of yours that others perceive to be obnoxious at times and it's perfectly fine if you don't like a movie, but to be so inconceivably insulting and offensive towards people with autism is not only unacceptable, but is also, as a move, lower than Sam Hinkie's win total, I'm sorry.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Rondo9 on December 19, 2015, 08:25:48 PM
Oh yeah....Adam Driver has a major academy award nomination coming his way.   If we have to talk about guys who acted through a mask I'll take Dave Prowse or Boba Fett.

I will take Ewan McGregor, Liam Neeson, Natalie Portman, Hayden Christiansen, Ian McDiarmid, Samuel Jackson, and Christopher Lee over anyone in this film, and that might even include a tired and disinterested Harrison Ford.

Furthermore let's make this clear about these "reviews".  Disney is a major player in Hollywood, but Lucas was despised. They tried to make him change his movies so he told them to go f themselves and left the director's guild. He's better than them and above them and they know it. "Reviews" was the only revenge they could get.

So now they feed us this junk and give it good "reviews". Disney made a billion dollar investment. There was no way the reviews were gonna be bad.
Nah.  That's utter nonsense.   Major Disney films get panned all the time.

ANyways, watch the Red Letter Media review series.  Highly entertaining and will explain to you why the prequels were despised and why this movie had to go back to basics.   If you do end up watching them, I'll be interested to see your response. 

Part 1:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PL5919C8DE6F720A2D&v=FxKtZmQgxrI

Prequels weren't "despised" like you or the reviewer claims. They have a lot of fans, I don't like the "go watch this review" argument because it's lazy and the reviewer slanders and strawman George Lucas.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Rondo9 on December 19, 2015, 08:26:47 PM
Oh yeah....Adam Driver has a major academy award nomination coming his way.   If we have to talk about guys who acted through a mask I'll take Dave Prowse or Boba Fett.

I will take Ewan McGregor, Liam Neeson, Natalie Portman, Hayden Christiansen, Ian McDiarmid, Samuel Jackson, and Christopher Lee over anyone in this film, and that might even include a tired and disinterested Harrison Ford.

Furthermore let's make this clear about these "reviews".  Disney is a major player in Hollywood, but Lucas was despised. They tried to make him change his movies so he told them to go f themselves and left the director's guild. He's better than them and above them and they know it. "Reviews" was the only revenge they could get.

So now they feed us this junk and give it good "reviews". Disney made a billion dollar investment. There was no way the reviews were gonna be bad.
Nah.  That's utter nonsense.   Major Disney films get panned all the time.

ANyways, watch the Red Letter Media review series.  Highly entertaining and will explain to you why the prequels were despised and why this movie had to go back to basics.   If you do end up watching them, I'll be interested to see your response. 

Part 1:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PL5919C8DE6F720A2D&v=FxKtZmQgxrI
Disney films get panned all the time? Ones that they spent billions to buy?
Dude that's a reach.  Am i really going to have to waste my time explaining why critics aren't paid off by studios?  Again, the core issue here is that you don't understand why people dislike the prequels.  Watch the Red Letter Media reviews and get back to me. 

For what it's worth, Episode 7 has an 81/100 on Metacritic.  That's very high.  I don't think a single Marvel movie (owned by Disney) has scored as highly as Episode 7.   On metacritic, the avengers movies scored in the 60s.   Some of score in the Marvel character movies score in the 40s/50s.   The Hobbit movies are some of the most expensive films ever made and those all were widely panned by critics (scoring in the 50s)... in your twisted world does only Disney have the money to pay off movie critics?  The most expensive movie of all time, "Pirates of the Caribbean:  On Stranger Tides" is... Disney... and scored a 45 on Metacritic.  It reportedly had a budget of 375 million.   

This is nonsense.  It's also received unanimous praise from people who have been dumping on Star Wars for the past 15 years.   You think they were all paid off?

(http://imgur.com/IEoL0V3.jpg)

(http://imgur.com/uZlJYSS.jpg)

(http://imgur.com/kT4VQgb.jpg)

Maybe I was paid off too.  We were all paid off!! Muhahaha.   Silly...  these movies could have been completely panned and would have still made a zillion dollars...

If you're incapable of comprehending what people are loving about this movie, I don't really know what to tell you.  It's mostly just a shame you couldn't enjoy it.  The movie isn't without flaws (literally no Star Wars movie is... ultimately they are all just homages (or "rip offs" if you'd prefer) to classic films with a cliche story arc and a heavy dose of stupidity), but it's a ton of fun... and that's what Star Wars is supposed to be.

The prequels were "hated" too, and the blu-ray versions made a lot of money so does that mean they're good?
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on December 19, 2015, 08:42:08 PM
#2 - No sense of humor - The prequels seemed like they were written by someone with autism or something.  No sense of humor at all.  In the original, they were able to improvise slightly.  Han had swagger.  It was light hearted and fun.

I don't have a problem with ideas of yours that others perceive to be obnoxious at times and it's perfectly fine if you don't like a movie, but to be so inconceivably insulting and offensive towards people with autism is not only unacceptable, but is also, as a move, lower than Sam Hinkie's win total, I'm sorry.
Maybe you find it offensive if you don't know much about the autism spectrum (or are familiar with other famous celebrities, artists, directors who are autistic).  I have spent a lot of time with folks with high functioning autism.  Some of them are very smart, but have difficulty comprehending certain emotions... and humor is often a difficult thing for them to grasp.  An autistic girl I worked with simply didn't understand jokes unless they were puns. She loved puns.  I also know someone who knows George Lucas personally and he insists he shows all the signs of high functioning autism.  There's been a lot of speculation in the autism community for a while that Lucas has Asperger’s Syndrome based on elements of his personality and how his writing lacks emotion (fwiw, Helena Bonham Carter claimed that Tim Burton also had all the signs of asperger's).  Sorry if the comment comes across flippant or if my use of the word "autism" was a trigger (I think some people confuse autism with down's syndrome), but I was more commenting on  the way those prequels were written, what the focus of the movies was on, how stunted/flat the dialogue was... and generally how the characters interacted with each other.  They seemed to lack a basic understanding of how real people interact with each other.  The reviewer in the video I linked says it felt like it was written by an 8 year old.  Maybe instead I should have said the prequels seem like they were written by someone with social problems... and I've heard from someone who knows him directly that George Lucas has social problems... and have seen many interviews in which people described him as an anti-social introvert with an obsessive personality.  He apparently had never been easy to get along with on sets... and I suspect that if Harrison Ford had not been clashing with Lucas and making up his own lines in the original movie, it probably wouldn't have worked as well. 

Anyways...  a lot of the best parts of the original trilogy didn't actually come from Lucas.   Lots of improvisation, both Empire and Jedi (and Episode 7) were written by Lawrence Kasden.  There were elements that were added in spite of him.  Lucas also wasn't the director on either "Empire Strikes Back" or "Return of the Jedi".   There was a lot more collaboration in the original trilogy.   With the prequels, Lucas took over the entire thing (all writing and directing responsibilities) and ultimately failed.  I think Lucas strength is world-building and ideas... I'm not sure he was ever a great director.  He should consult, create plot elements, give input on the world... and then step back and let people with a sense of humor and understanding of storytelling principles write the screenplay and direct the film.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on December 19, 2015, 08:51:15 PM
Oh yeah....Adam Driver has a major academy award nomination coming his way.   If we have to talk about guys who acted through a mask I'll take Dave Prowse or Boba Fett.

I will take Ewan McGregor, Liam Neeson, Natalie Portman, Hayden Christiansen, Ian McDiarmid, Samuel Jackson, and Christopher Lee over anyone in this film, and that might even include a tired and disinterested Harrison Ford.

Furthermore let's make this clear about these "reviews".  Disney is a major player in Hollywood, but Lucas was despised. They tried to make him change his movies so he told them to go f themselves and left the director's guild. He's better than them and above them and they know it. "Reviews" was the only revenge they could get.

So now they feed us this junk and give it good "reviews". Disney made a billion dollar investment. There was no way the reviews were gonna be bad.
Nah.  That's utter nonsense.   Major Disney films get panned all the time.

ANyways, watch the Red Letter Media review series.  Highly entertaining and will explain to you why the prequels were despised and why this movie had to go back to basics.   If you do end up watching them, I'll be interested to see your response. 

Part 1:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PL5919C8DE6F720A2D&v=FxKtZmQgxrI
Disney films get panned all the time? Ones that they spent billions to buy?
Dude that's a reach.  Am i really going to have to waste my time explaining why critics aren't paid off by studios?  Again, the core issue here is that you don't understand why people dislike the prequels.  Watch the Red Letter Media reviews and get back to me. 

For what it's worth, Episode 7 has an 81/100 on Metacritic.  That's very high.  I don't think a single Marvel movie (owned by Disney) has scored as highly as Episode 7.   On metacritic, the avengers movies scored in the 60s.   Some of score in the Marvel character movies score in the 40s/50s.   The Hobbit movies are some of the most expensive films ever made and those all were widely panned by critics (scoring in the 50s)... in your twisted world does only Disney have the money to pay off movie critics?  The most expensive movie of all time, "Pirates of the Caribbean:  On Stranger Tides" is... Disney... and scored a 45 on Metacritic.  It reportedly had a budget of 375 million.   

This is nonsense.  It's also received unanimous praise from people who have been dumping on Star Wars for the past 15 years.   You think they were all paid off?

(http://imgur.com/IEoL0V3.jpg)

(http://imgur.com/uZlJYSS.jpg)

(http://imgur.com/kT4VQgb.jpg)

Maybe I was paid off too.  We were all paid off!! Muhahaha.   Silly...  these movies could have been completely panned and would have still made a zillion dollars...

If you're incapable of comprehending what people are loving about this movie, I don't really know what to tell you.  It's mostly just a shame you couldn't enjoy it.  The movie isn't without flaws (literally no Star Wars movie is... ultimately they are all just homages (or "rip offs" if you'd prefer) to classic films with a cliche story arc and a heavy dose of stupidity), but it's a ton of fun... and that's what Star Wars is supposed to be.

The prequels were "hated" too, and the blu-ray versions made a lot of money so does that mean they're good?
Nope.   It means that had this movie gotten poor reviews, it would have broken records anyways.  It's getting good reviews, because it's a fun movie that people enjoyed. 
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on December 19, 2015, 09:16:41 PM
Oh yeah....Adam Driver has a major academy award nomination coming his way.   If we have to talk about guys who acted through a mask I'll take Dave Prowse or Boba Fett.

I will take Ewan McGregor, Liam Neeson, Natalie Portman, Hayden Christiansen, Ian McDiarmid, Samuel Jackson, and Christopher Lee over anyone in this film, and that might even include a tired and disinterested Harrison Ford.

Furthermore let's make this clear about these "reviews".  Disney is a major player in Hollywood, but Lucas was despised. They tried to make him change his movies so he told them to go f themselves and left the director's guild. He's better than them and above them and they know it. "Reviews" was the only revenge they could get.

So now they feed us this junk and give it good "reviews". Disney made a billion dollar investment. There was no way the reviews were gonna be bad.
Nah.  That's utter nonsense.   Major Disney films get panned all the time.

ANyways, watch the Red Letter Media review series.  Highly entertaining and will explain to you why the prequels were despised and why this movie had to go back to basics.   If you do end up watching them, I'll be interested to see your response. 

Part 1:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PL5919C8DE6F720A2D&v=FxKtZmQgxrI

Prequels weren't "despised" like you or the reviewer claims. They have a lot of fans, I don't like the "go watch this review" argument because it's lazy and the reviewer slanders and strawman George Lucas.
Sure... I'll concede that some people who were children when Phantom Menace came out really like "Jar Jar"...  Overall, those movies were seen as a giant disappointment...   They are widely seen as the biggest failure of George Lucas' career... and the massive amount of backlash they received played a significant part in Lucas selling the rights and moving on.  A large chunk of dedicated Star Wars fans hated him for what he did with the "special editions" and the prequels.  They blamed him for "ruining" Star Wars.   Is this not common knowledge?  This is a strange thread... I thought this was common knowledge.

Naturally, some fans will hate the new movie too.  Most of that stems from a failure to live up to unrealistic expectations.  People grew up watching these movies as kids... and they were the greatest thing ever.  It was also the cutting edge of special effects in cinema for the 70s.  Impossible to re-capture that.  It's very difficult for anything to live up to your imagination as a child.  Of the original trilogy, not all three of those movies are great.  We give them a pass, because we grew up with them and watched them as kids, but I mean... if you look at "Return of the Jedi" in particular, it's a movie about a race of teddy bears winning a war.  At the time, some fans hated that.   I think the prequels have something like a 60% fan approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes.   "Episode 7" is sitting in the low 90s right now.  Seems for the bulk of the audience, is on a par with the original trilogy and did as good a job as it possibly could of bringing them back to their childhood.   

The point that it borrowed too heavily from the original is valid, but I think it was necessary given the circumstances of what they were attempting to do.  They needed to gain back the trust of fans.  If it aint broke don't fix it.  So you get a classic "Heroes Journey" arc set in the Star Wars universe.   And in a way, complaining about this borrowing from the original would be like complaining that Justin Timberlake borrows too heavily from Michael Jackson... even though Michael Jackson was borrowing heavily from Gene Kelly, Fred Astaire, James Brown, etc.   The original Star Wars movies borrowed from all sorts of popular science fiction or hero stories of the past (such as Star Trek, Flash Gordon, "Seven Samurai ", etc).  For those who support Lucas, how can you dog on them "borrowing" from the originals when Lucas himself felt that each trilogy should be like poetry rhyming with one another.  All that has happened will happen again.   Anakin's story mirror's luke's mirror's rey.  It's fitting for that world.   

You can't please everyone... but the core elements of what makes "Star Wars" so [dang] enjoyable were all there.  Is it too similar to the original?  I guess.  But that's what people wanted... they wanted more of the original.  Is Timberlake too similar to Michael Jackson?  Sure... but that's not going to make his singing and dancing any less entertaining.   In my opinion, JJ/Disney nailed it.  Overall, the fan base is hooked... ready for more.  Gonna be a fun ride.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: colincb on December 19, 2015, 10:09:38 PM
Force Awakens < Phantom Menace.
Force Awakens < Godfather 3

Total plagiarism of New Hope

Hated, hated, hated, Phantom Menace. Never watched another SW prequel all the way through thereafter.  I wanted to kill Jar Jar Binks. Couldn't stand the kid. Hated the idea of a prequel. Oh look, I'm going to want that kid to die when he grows up! Stupid film and anybody that liked it I hate. Nothing personal. Certainly better than any of the slash and gore movies though like Hostel, Saw and its ilk where all the attendees in the theater are future mass murderers, but that's about it.

I thought they did a nice job on this 3D version. I'd watch a sequel, but not a prequel.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Rondo9 on December 19, 2015, 10:15:19 PM
Force Awakens < Phantom Menace.
Force Awakens < Godfather 3

Total plagiarism of New Hope

Hated, hated, hated, Phantom Menace. Never watched another SW prequel all the way through thereafter.  I wanted to kill Jar Jar Binks. Couldn't stand the kid. Hated the idea of a prequel. Oh look, I'm going to want that kid to die when he grows up! Stupid film and anybody that liked it I hate. Nothing personal. Certainly better than any of the slash and gore movies though like Hostel, Saw and its ilk where all the attendees in the theater are future mass murderers, but that's about it.

I thought they did a nice job on this 3D version. I'd watch a sequel, but not a prequel.

I'll never understand why people hate other people for liking movies or entertainment they don't like.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Rondo9 on December 19, 2015, 10:18:08 PM
#2 - No sense of humor - The prequels seemed like they were written by someone with autism or something.  No sense of humor at all.  In the original, they were able to improvise slightly.  Han had swagger.  It was light hearted and fun.

I don't have a problem with ideas of yours that others perceive to be obnoxious at times and it's perfectly fine if you don't like a movie, but to be so inconceivably insulting and offensive towards people with autism is not only unacceptable, but is also, as a move, lower than Sam Hinkie's win total, I'm sorry.
Maybe you find it offensive if you don't know much about the autism spectrum (or are familiar with other famous celebrities, artists, directors who are autistic).  I have spent a lot of time with folks with high functioning autism.  Some of them are very smart, but have difficulty comprehending certain emotions... and humor is often a difficult thing for them to grasp.  An autistic girl I worked with simply didn't understand jokes unless they were puns. She loved puns.  I also know someone who knows George Lucas personally and he insists he shows all the signs of high functioning autism.  There's been a lot of speculation in the autism community for a while that Lucas has Asperger’s Syndrome based on elements of his personality and how his writing lacks emotion (fwiw, Helena Bonham Carter claimed that Tim Burton also had all the signs of asperger's).  Sorry if the comment comes across flippant or if my use of the word "autism" was a trigger (I think some people confuse autism with down's syndrome), but I was more commenting on  the way those prequels were written, what the focus of the movies was on, how stunted/flat the dialogue was... and generally how the characters interacted with each other.  They seemed to lack a basic understanding of how real people interact with each other.  The reviewer in the video I linked says it felt like it was written by an 8 year old.  Maybe instead I should have said the prequels seem like they were written by someone with social problems... and I've heard from someone who knows him directly that George Lucas has social problems... and have seen many interviews in which people described him as an anti-social introvert with an obsessive personality.  He apparently had never been easy to get along with on sets... and I suspect that if Harrison Ford had not been clashing with Lucas and making up his own lines in the original movie, it probably wouldn't have worked as well. 

Anyways...  a lot of the best parts of the original trilogy didn't actually come from Lucas.   Lots of improvisation, both Empire and Jedi (and Episode 7) were written by Lawrence Kasden.  There were elements that were added in spite of him.  Lucas also wasn't the director on either "Empire Strikes Back" or "Return of the Jedi".   There was a lot more collaboration in the original trilogy.   With the prequels, Lucas took over the entire thing (all writing and directing responsibilities) and ultimately failed.  I think Lucas strength is world-building and ideas... I'm not sure he was ever a great director.  He should consult, create plot elements, give input on the world... and then step back and let people with a sense of humor and understanding of storytelling principles write the screenplay and direct the film.

Lucas written a lot of Empire along Kasdan. Jedi was considered to be the weakest of the OT so is that Kasdan's fault as well?
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Rondo9 on December 19, 2015, 10:20:30 PM
Oh yeah....Adam Driver has a major academy award nomination coming his way.   If we have to talk about guys who acted through a mask I'll take Dave Prowse or Boba Fett.

I will take Ewan McGregor, Liam Neeson, Natalie Portman, Hayden Christiansen, Ian McDiarmid, Samuel Jackson, and Christopher Lee over anyone in this film, and that might even include a tired and disinterested Harrison Ford.

Furthermore let's make this clear about these "reviews".  Disney is a major player in Hollywood, but Lucas was despised. They tried to make him change his movies so he told them to go f themselves and left the director's guild. He's better than them and above them and they know it. "Reviews" was the only revenge they could get.

So now they feed us this junk and give it good "reviews". Disney made a billion dollar investment. There was no way the reviews were gonna be bad.
Nah.  That's utter nonsense.   Major Disney films get panned all the time.

ANyways, watch the Red Letter Media review series.  Highly entertaining and will explain to you why the prequels were despised and why this movie had to go back to basics.   If you do end up watching them, I'll be interested to see your response. 

Part 1:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PL5919C8DE6F720A2D&v=FxKtZmQgxrI
Disney films get panned all the time? Ones that they spent billions to buy?
Dude that's a reach.  Am i really going to have to waste my time explaining why critics aren't paid off by studios?  Again, the core issue here is that you don't understand why people dislike the prequels.  Watch the Red Letter Media reviews and get back to me. 

For what it's worth, Episode 7 has an 81/100 on Metacritic.  That's very high.  I don't think a single Marvel movie (owned by Disney) has scored as highly as Episode 7.   On metacritic, the avengers movies scored in the 60s.   Some of score in the Marvel character movies score in the 40s/50s.   The Hobbit movies are some of the most expensive films ever made and those all were widely panned by critics (scoring in the 50s)... in your twisted world does only Disney have the money to pay off movie critics?  The most expensive movie of all time, "Pirates of the Caribbean:  On Stranger Tides" is... Disney... and scored a 45 on Metacritic.  It reportedly had a budget of 375 million.   

This is nonsense.  It's also received unanimous praise from people who have been dumping on Star Wars for the past 15 years.   You think they were all paid off?

(http://imgur.com/IEoL0V3.jpg)

(http://imgur.com/uZlJYSS.jpg)

(http://imgur.com/kT4VQgb.jpg)

Maybe I was paid off too.  We were all paid off!! Muhahaha.   Silly...  these movies could have been completely panned and would have still made a zillion dollars...

If you're incapable of comprehending what people are loving about this movie, I don't really know what to tell you.  It's mostly just a shame you couldn't enjoy it.  The movie isn't without flaws (literally no Star Wars movie is... ultimately they are all just homages (or "rip offs" if you'd prefer) to classic films with a cliche story arc and a heavy dose of stupidity), but it's a ton of fun... and that's what Star Wars is supposed to be.

The prequels were "hated" too, and the blu-ray versions made a lot of money so does that mean they're good?
Nope.   It means that had this movie gotten poor reviews, it would have broken records anyways.  It's getting good reviews, because it's a fun movie that people enjoyed.

You know reviews aren't everything. Lots of people bought the blu rays, if the prequels were "despised" as you claim then the sales wouldn't be so high.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Sketch5 on December 19, 2015, 10:21:45 PM
I thought it was good, not great.

The two things I didn't like:

1.  Kylo Ren. He's a whiny emo punk. First Peter Parker, then Anakin Skywalker, now Ben Solo.  Enough. There's nothing wrong with making a villain bad ass; he doesn't need daddy issues.

2.  You don't kill Han Solo, period. He's a larger than life hero, and those guys shouldn't die. I get it, Obi Wan died, but Han's death was gratuitous.


1.With Ren, when he had the mask on he was intimidating. He needed the mask yo put fear in you. He was using Vaders image to become bigger than he actually was. Having an actor like him shows venerability, a weakness, his humanity due to the connection to his parents. I thought the same thing as you at first but after thinking about it and discussing it, it made sense in the end.

2.I don't think Ford does the movie it unless he died. He was trying to get Lucas to do it since Empire. Plus that is what makes Ren scarier than Vader, he will kill his own father were Vader couldn't. So it was either Han or blow Leia up. And that doesn't go by the hand of Ren, so Han it was. It also shows how strong the hold Sook(?) Has on Ren, and this is what he need to do to be come a Darth....And that was a end goal for Ren.

It also in powered Rey. The force was bubbling near the top, that help push it over the edge, Seeing Han Die and then Finn get sliced. It helped make her stronger for her fight with Ren. Plus these movies are about the new generation. If you want  hero Han, watch the original trilogy. This is about Rey,Finn and Poa. Plus Han got a huge part in this, and I have a feeling his death will be more meaningful in the long run for the story than keeping him around.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Rondo9 on December 19, 2015, 10:22:57 PM
Oh yeah....Adam Driver has a major academy award nomination coming his way.   If we have to talk about guys who acted through a mask I'll take Dave Prowse or Boba Fett.

I will take Ewan McGregor, Liam Neeson, Natalie Portman, Hayden Christiansen, Ian McDiarmid, Samuel Jackson, and Christopher Lee over anyone in this film, and that might even include a tired and disinterested Harrison Ford.

Furthermore let's make this clear about these "reviews".  Disney is a major player in Hollywood, but Lucas was despised. They tried to make him change his movies so he told them to go f themselves and left the director's guild. He's better than them and above them and they know it. "Reviews" was the only revenge they could get.

So now they feed us this junk and give it good "reviews". Disney made a billion dollar investment. There was no way the reviews were gonna be bad.
Nah.  That's utter nonsense.   Major Disney films get panned all the time.

ANyways, watch the Red Letter Media review series.  Highly entertaining and will explain to you why the prequels were despised and why this movie had to go back to basics.   If you do end up watching them, I'll be interested to see your response. 

Part 1:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PL5919C8DE6F720A2D&v=FxKtZmQgxrI

Prequels weren't "despised" like you or the reviewer claims. They have a lot of fans, I don't like the "go watch this review" argument because it's lazy and the reviewer slanders and strawman George Lucas.
Sure... I'll concede that some people who were children when Phantom Menace came out really like "Jar Jar"...  Overall, those movies were seen as a giant disappointment...   They are widely seen as the biggest failure of George Lucas' career... and the massive amount of backlash they received played a significant part in Lucas selling the rights and moving on.  A large chunk of dedicated Star Wars fans hated him for what he did with the "special editions" and the prequels.  They blamed him for "ruining" Star Wars.   Is this not common knowledge?  This is a strange thread... I thought this was common knowledge.



Those movies were overall liked with Revenge of the Sith receiving an 80 percent on Rotton Tomatoes. It's not as "common knowledge" as you claim despite what the People vs George Lucas or the youtube reviewers say.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: fairweatherfan on December 19, 2015, 10:30:49 PM
I'm learning a lot from this thread.  Mainly why I don't read Star Wars discussions online.  Holy cow. 



I thought it was good, not great.

The two things I didn't like:

1.  Kylo Ren. He's a whiny emo punk. First Peter Parker, then Anakin Skywalker, now Ben Solo.  Enough. There's nothing wrong with making a villain bad ass; he doesn't need daddy issues.

2.  You don't kill Han Solo, period. He's a larger than life hero, and those guys shouldn't die. I get it, Obi Wan died, but Han's death was gratuitous.


1.With Ren, when he had the mask on he was intimidating. He needed the mask yo put fear in you. He was using Vaders image to become bigger than he actually was. Having an actor like him shows venerability, a weakness, his humanity due to the connection to his parents. I thought the same thing as you at first but after thinking about it and discussing it, it made sense in the end.

I do agree completely with this.  The childish rage, self-loathing, and mixed emotions Ren showed were pretty much exactly how Anakin should've been played in the prequels.  He desperately wants to be what he imagines Vader was but is really just a less powerful Anakin.  This was conveyed extremely well in my opinion.  I also liked how "Kylo" was probably chosen as a deliberate portmanteau of "Skywalker/Solo". 


I enjoyed the movie overall, though the New Hope callbacks in details and the overall plot got to be a bit much.  Especially the Death Star III bit, though I liked having Han poke a little fun at it.  I was half-expecting someone to get their hand cut off in the end.  But I love the in media res feel of it, and can't wait for more backstory to get filled in next episode as Rey + Ren train with their respective masters.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on December 19, 2015, 10:40:56 PM
Oh yeah....Adam Driver has a major academy award nomination coming his way.   If we have to talk about guys who acted through a mask I'll take Dave Prowse or Boba Fett.

I will take Ewan McGregor, Liam Neeson, Natalie Portman, Hayden Christiansen, Ian McDiarmid, Samuel Jackson, and Christopher Lee over anyone in this film, and that might even include a tired and disinterested Harrison Ford.

Furthermore let's make this clear about these "reviews".  Disney is a major player in Hollywood, but Lucas was despised. They tried to make him change his movies so he told them to go f themselves and left the director's guild. He's better than them and above them and they know it. "Reviews" was the only revenge they could get.

So now they feed us this junk and give it good "reviews". Disney made a billion dollar investment. There was no way the reviews were gonna be bad.
Nah.  That's utter nonsense.   Major Disney films get panned all the time.

ANyways, watch the Red Letter Media review series.  Highly entertaining and will explain to you why the prequels were despised and why this movie had to go back to basics.   If you do end up watching them, I'll be interested to see your response. 

Part 1:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PL5919C8DE6F720A2D&v=FxKtZmQgxrI

Prequels weren't "despised" like you or the reviewer claims. They have a lot of fans, I don't like the "go watch this review" argument because it's lazy and the reviewer slanders and strawman George Lucas.
Sure... I'll concede that some people who were children when Phantom Menace came out really like "Jar Jar"...  Overall, those movies were seen as a giant disappointment...   They are widely seen as the biggest failure of George Lucas' career... and the massive amount of backlash they received played a significant part in Lucas selling the rights and moving on.  A large chunk of dedicated Star Wars fans hated him for what he did with the "special editions" and the prequels.  They blamed him for "ruining" Star Wars.   Is this not common knowledge?  This is a strange thread... I thought this was common knowledge.



Those movies were overall liked with Revenge of the Sith receiving an 80 percent on Rotton Tomatoes. It's not as "common knowledge" as you claim despite what the People vs George Lucas or the youtube reviewers say.
Revenge of the Sith wasn't that bad.   But let's not pretend like 'phantom menace" was embraced.  It disappointed many people and was seen as hacky.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wars_Episode_I:_The_Phantom_Menace#Reception

I will say, there's a fan-edit of the prequel trilogy that might actually be worth watching.   They cut out the majority of Phantom Menace, because it's mostly hot garbage.  The cut the remainder into one 2 hour long movie.  Even the opening scroll makes a lot more sense than the trade federation blockade nonsense in the original prequels.  From a storytelling perspective, it makes a lot more sense... they focus on Obi-Wan as the main protagonist.  It begins with his final show-down with Darth Maul.  His master is killed.  He barely survives.   By cutting out baby-Anakin and some of the ghastly dialogue from the "romance" scenes, they sort of make the relationship between Padme and Anakin work better... since part of the reason it failed was because we couldn't buy that the little 3 year old obnoxious kid from the  Phantom Menace was suddenly the love interest to Natalie Portman.    Also, it makes the beginning and end work a lot better, because it highlights how the Darth Maul fight mirrors Obi-Wan's final battle with Anakin.  In the Darth Maul fight, Maul has the higher ground... Obi-Wan is hanging below him ... he manages to force-flip over Maul and slice him down.    Then in the final battle, Obi-Wan has the higher ground.  Anakin is below him... Obi-Wan warns him, "Don't do it!!  I have the higher ground!  It's over!!"... you realize that from Obi-Wan's perspective, he's had that Darth Maul battle running through his head for years.  He realizes it was wreckless... he thinks about how Maul could have defeated him.  And here you have Anakin... about to try the same stunt... and yet Obi-Wan knows how to stop it.  Anakin is too cocky to hear Obi-Wan's warnings, so he tries the force flip over him...  Obi-Wan cuts him down in mid air... just like Darth Maul SHOULD have.  Thus it completes Obi-Wan's story arc to a certain extent. 

It helps the story a bit.  It's not perfect, but it makes sense.  Lucas needed other voices in the room telling him what needed to be trimmed out.   

"A Phantom Edit":  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9LEhOZZbuk
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Rondo9 on December 19, 2015, 11:19:55 PM
Oh yeah....Adam Driver has a major academy award nomination coming his way.   If we have to talk about guys who acted through a mask I'll take Dave Prowse or Boba Fett.

I will take Ewan McGregor, Liam Neeson, Natalie Portman, Hayden Christiansen, Ian McDiarmid, Samuel Jackson, and Christopher Lee over anyone in this film, and that might even include a tired and disinterested Harrison Ford.

Furthermore let's make this clear about these "reviews".  Disney is a major player in Hollywood, but Lucas was despised. They tried to make him change his movies so he told them to go f themselves and left the director's guild. He's better than them and above them and they know it. "Reviews" was the only revenge they could get.

So now they feed us this junk and give it good "reviews". Disney made a billion dollar investment. There was no way the reviews were gonna be bad.
Nah.  That's utter nonsense.   Major Disney films get panned all the time.

ANyways, watch the Red Letter Media review series.  Highly entertaining and will explain to you why the prequels were despised and why this movie had to go back to basics.   If you do end up watching them, I'll be interested to see your response. 

Part 1:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PL5919C8DE6F720A2D&v=FxKtZmQgxrI

Prequels weren't "despised" like you or the reviewer claims. They have a lot of fans, I don't like the "go watch this review" argument because it's lazy and the reviewer slanders and strawman George Lucas.
Sure... I'll concede that some people who were children when Phantom Menace came out really like "Jar Jar"...  Overall, those movies were seen as a giant disappointment...   They are widely seen as the biggest failure of George Lucas' career... and the massive amount of backlash they received played a significant part in Lucas selling the rights and moving on.  A large chunk of dedicated Star Wars fans hated him for what he did with the "special editions" and the prequels.  They blamed him for "ruining" Star Wars.   Is this not common knowledge?  This is a strange thread... I thought this was common knowledge.



Those movies were overall liked with Revenge of the Sith receiving an 80 percent on Rotton Tomatoes. It's not as "common knowledge" as you claim despite what the People vs George Lucas or the youtube reviewers say.
Revenge of the Sith wasn't that bad.   But let's not pretend like 'phantom menace" was embraced.  It disappointed many people and was seen as hacky.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wars_Episode_I:_The_Phantom_Menace#Reception

I will say, there's a fan-edit of the prequel trilogy that might actually be worth watching.   They cut out the majority of Phantom Menace, because it's mostly hot garbage.  The cut the remainder into one 2 hour long movie.  Even the opening scroll makes a lot more sense than the trade federation blockade nonsense in the original prequels.  From a storytelling perspective, it makes a lot more sense... they focus on Obi-Wan as the main protagonist.  It begins with his final show-down with Darth Maul.  His master is killed.  He barely survives.   By cutting out baby-Anakin and some of the ghastly dialogue from the "romance" scenes, they sort of make the relationship between Padme and Anakin work better... since part of the reason it failed was because we couldn't buy that the little 3 year old obnoxious kid from the  Phantom Menace was suddenly the love interest to Natalie Portman.    Also, it makes the beginning and end work a lot better, because it highlights how the Darth Maul fight mirrors Obi-Wan's final battle with Anakin.  In the Darth Maul fight, Maul has the higher ground... Obi-Wan is hanging below him ... he manages to force-flip over Maul and slice him down.    Then in the final battle, Obi-Wan has the higher ground.  Anakin is below him... Obi-Wan warns him, "Don't do it!!  I have the higher ground!  It's over!!"... you realize that from Obi-Wan's perspective, he's had that Darth Maul battle running through his head for years.  He realizes it was wreckless... he thinks about how Maul could have defeated him.  And here you have Anakin... about to try the same stunt... and yet Obi-Wan knows how to stop it.  Anakin is too cocky to hear Obi-Wan's warnings, so he tries the force flip over him...  Obi-Wan cuts him down in mid air... just like Darth Maul SHOULD have.  Thus it completes Obi-Wan's story arc to a certain extent. 

It helps the story a bit.  It's not perfect, but it makes sense.  Lucas needed other voices in the room telling him what needed to be trimmed out.   

"A Phantom Edit":  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9LEhOZZbuk

Did you know at one time, the Phantom Menace achieved a 97 percent on Rotten Tomatoes? And I don't care much for fan edits, I liked the movie the way it is.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on December 20, 2015, 09:22:25 PM
Ok I've seen the movie three times.

MASSIVE SPOILERS


Here's my theory that will maybe address some of the complaints.

Rey is Luke's daughter.  Everything seems to point to that. Star Wars is a story about Skywalkers afterall.  We need a Skywalker for the next generation.  It's Rey.  All sorts of hints.  Main hints:

- Naturally powerful with the force.  Seems familiar with the ways of the force and knows of the myths of Luke.   My original thought was that maybe she was a random youngling/padawan that somehow escaped the wrath of Ren and was put into hiding... so maybe she had some basic jedi training that she's forgotten Bourne Identity style... but i'm going with her being Luke's daughter.

- I think Han knows who she is.  He warms to her instantly.  Offers her a job.  In the watering hole with the 1000 year old elf woman, she asks who the girl is and it immediately cuts away... suggesting that Han knows.   Also, the Skywalker light-saber calls out to her.   And after her visions, the 1000 year old woman is like, "That was Luke's and his father's before... now it's yours... you take it".  She reacted towards Rey as if Han had just informed her, "uh yeah... that's Luke's daughter, but she doesn't remember who she is"... Then suddenly the light saber calls out to Rey and elf woman recognizes, "woah... we have a new hope... this is big... she needs that saber... she needs to find Luke... it's the will of the force".   All seems to suggest that Rey is the next in line.   Elf woman also says something like, "You already know nobody is coming back for you... but the belonging you seek is in front of you... someone can still come back"... and Rey responds knowingly... "Luke".  Even as the place is being bombed, the elf woman insists that Fin take the saber and give it to Rey.

- Despite the fact that she's never met Rey before, Leia and Rey embrace each other when they first meet at the Rebel Republic base.   They are connected not only by the force, but I think instinctively know they are family.   Also, Han has already filled in Leia about "the girl"... I suspect Leia knows it's her niece. 

-  This is a big one.  R2D2 has gone into "low power mode" ever since Luke went away.  But as soon as Rey arrives at the base and is in the general proximity of R2D2,  he beep boop beeps back to life.   Not a coincidence.  Also, R2D2 was in Rey's visions/memories. 

She's Luke's daughter.  But why was she abandoned? 

Here's where I think it gets interesting and after watching the movie 3 times, I think the visions/memories offer many clues. 

One thing that wasn't clear to me the first viewing was the timeline for Ben Solo/Kylo Ren.  It's now clear to me that he was displaying aggression from an early age.  As Leia puts it, "he had too much Vader in him".   It was also suggested that Snoke got to Ben at a young age and seduced him to the Dark Side.  It makes sense that Snoke would target an offspring of Anakin Skywalker, because he's strong with the force.   Leia/Han feel the main blame is with Snoke (though they clearly blamed themselves).  It was at this point that Leia decided he needed to be sent away to live with his religious fanatic uncle Luke who might be able to get through to Ben.   It didn't work out.  We're told that Ben turned on Luke and "destroyed all of it"... presumably killing all of the remaining new generation of Jedi that Luke was training.   Out of shame, Luke went into seclusion. 

I think this partially explains why Kylo Ren isn't very powerful.  He's naturally gifted in the force, but likely wasn't trained very long.  Originally, I thought he was training with Luke as a young boy, but it seems more likely that he wasn't formally trained for long.  He's still learning the ways of the force and Snoke himself says Kylo Ren has yet to complete his training.

I think there's another very key reason why Kylo Ren didn't come across "very powerful" in that final battle and it speaks more to his pathos and inner conflict.  You gotta understand that from Kylo Ren's perspective, the dark side of the force is what needs to be embraced for ultimate peace (side note:  Remember that it's all blatantly Nazi inspired... they felt that their methods would lead to a better world... the ends justified the means).  His grandfather, Vader, almost succeeded, but was "Seduced by the light side".  Think about that for a second... from Kylo Ren's perspective, Vader FELL to the light side... Vader didn't have the strength to murder his own son.  Kylo wants to finish what Vader started... and wants to prove he can succeed where his grandfather failed... hence why he had to murder his relative.     But he was obviously pained by it.  It wasn't easy for him.   He still feels the pull of the light side.  It still haunts him. 

So here's the thing... Let's assume for a moment that I'm right and that Rey is Luke's daughter.  That makes Rey the young cousin of Kylo Ren.  He would have held her as a baby... watched her as an innocent young child.  While he was going through all this inner struggle, Rey was pure light... but she was also dangerous.  She was naturally strong with the force and could be a major threat down the line if she was kept alive and trained.   

When Rey has her visions, we see her as a young child being dropped on Jakku and screaming "nooooOooo!!! don't go!!!"... We also see visions of Luke and R2D2 and visions of Kylo Ren.  The interesting thing about the visions of Kylo Ren is that Ren is surrounded by his "Knights of Ren" (only seen in this brief glimpse, but basically they are a group of his lackeys)

(http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/wwfeatures/624_351/images/live/p0/35/s0/p035s090.jpg)

Presumably, this is the group that worked with Kylo Ren to cut down and murder the remaining Jedi.  The really interesting thing is that in Rey's vision, one of them is coming towards her... only to be lightsabered through the chest by Kylo Ren himself.   If you watch the movie again, watch specifically for that scene.  It's one of his own men that is coming towards Rey (shot from her perspective) and then Kylo Ren cuts him down.    We then cut to a shot of her at Jakku screaming "noooo!!!" while she's abandoned... and my girlfriend insists that the ship that is flying away is an Imperial First Order ship.   

All this leads me to believe that Kylo Ren, being seduced by the "light side" of the force, couldn't bring himself to murder his young baby Cousin.  This leads me to believe that one of the Knights of Ren was about to cut her down, but Kylo Ren himself murdered his own man... ultimately decided to let Rey live, mind-wiped her, and dropped her off on some desert planet... sparing her and hoping that his decision wouldn't come back to haunt him.  Keep in mind this was likely a decade before the movie's events start... and Kylo hadn't yet fully embraced the dark side.  Murdering family members wasn't something he could yet bring himself to do.

There seems to be evidence of this in how Kylo Ren reacts when he's told of "a girl" helping the Droid escape.   He seems to instantly know something.  He knows where Rey was dropped off... he knows how the force works... he knows that it's not a coincidence that "some girl" has helped a droid escape in the Millenium Falcon of all ships.    The force works in mysterious ways... and at that moment Kylo Ren realizes he dun fugged up.  He reacts in a fit of rage, smashing the console in front of him with his saber.

... This also explains why when they first meet... Kylo Ren reacts knowingly.  He's not hateful towards Rey.  He's curious.  He knows she's seen the map, of course, and she's an asset in that regard... but he also knows... this is his cousin... the cousin he spared.   Later when interrogating her, he taps into her mind... realizes that Rey has seen visions of an ocean/island (where we eventually realize Luke is staying)... realizes that Rey saw Han as the father figure she never had and tells her that Han would only disappoint her... but Rey starts to fight back with the force and this frightens Kylo.   His worst fears are coming true...  the cousin his spared is powerful with the force... she could prove to be a threat.    When he realizes she's escaped, he once again reacts in a fit of rage.   He knows this is his fault.   

Which brings me to my final point about the climactic fight between Kylo and Rey.  Not only do I think Kylo Ren is not fully trained in the force.. not only do I think Kylo Ren was semi-injured during that battle (Chewie shot his leg up)...  but I think Kylo Ren was absolutely holding back.  He doesn't want to kill Rey for the same reasons he couldn't bring himself to kill her as a little girl.   He's not going for the kill.  He's sparring with her.   She's jabbing and swinging and he's fending her off... and at one point he even tries to plea with her, "I can train you... join me!"...   He doesn't want to kill her.   She taps into the force, gains the upper hand and lashes out at him...  but I think if Kylo wanted her dead, she'd be dead.    This of course mirrors the early fights between Luke and Vader in which Vader essentially toys with Luke... not wanting to kill his son.

So anyways.  I think Han/Leia know who Rey was.  It wasn't their place to tell her the truth.  Of all people to send to see Luke, they decided to send Rey... a curious decision until you realize General Leia is keenly aware that Rey is perhaps the only person who can bring Luke back.  We then need to ponder what Luke's reaction is when he sees Rey on that mountain top.  Does he immediately know that is his daughter?  Did he believe her to be dead?   Has Luke himself lost his marbles a bit after years of seclusion?  Will he be fearful in training her... worried that she may be lost for good to the dark side?   

All of this I suspect, will be played out in more detail during the sequels.   Is there still good in Kylo Ren?  Will he fully embrace the Dark side or will his soft spot for Rey remain?  Will he be saved by Rey much like Vader was saved by Luke?  Will a greater threat appear?  Will Luke himself turn to the dark side?   What kind of twists and turns are in store for us? 

This is what was missing from the prequels.  There was no mystery.  I thought the new movie was a blast and I'm genuinely interested to see where the story goes from here.   

 
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Sketch5 on December 20, 2015, 09:48:55 PM
the group I was with thought the same as you on Ren. We also thought Luke could have mind wiped her to hide her from Ren.

Should be interesting. People are complaining about some things, but I think they are questions that will be answered in the next movie.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: MBunge on December 20, 2015, 11:26:21 PM
1.  The prequels were very poorly made.  Even "Revenge of the Sith," which gets over praised simply by not being quite as bad as the first two.  This isn't really a matter of opinion.  Of course, people can still like bad movies.  I enjoyed the Tim Story Fantastic Four flicks and they are both pretty terrible.

2.  I'd hold off on thinking that any of the relatively minor problems with TFA are actually part of some master plan.  It's most likely they're just mistakes.  I mean, Han just mentions The Force to Rey and she goes from someone who has never shown any Jedi abilities to being more powerful than Luke in "Empire?"  If you have to invoke Jason Bourne to explain it, it's really better to just admit that it doesn't hold up and move on.

Mike
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: MBunge on December 20, 2015, 11:42:38 PM


#2 - No sense of humor - The prequels seemed like they were written by someone with autism or something.  No sense of humor at all.  In the original, they were able to improvise slightly.

Just watched the original again and the guy who wrote and directed it clearly didn't have the kind of condition you are talking about.  You can't give all the credit to the actors.  Lucas at that age absolutely had a solid grasp on emotions, humor and interpersonal relationships.  If anything affected him later on, it's decades of being insanely wealthy and surrounded by sycophants.

Mike
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on December 21, 2015, 12:10:03 AM


2.  I'd hold off on thinking that any of the relatively minor problems with TFA are actually part of some master plan.  It's most likely they're just mistakes.  I mean, Han just mentions The Force to Rey and she goes from someone who has never shown any Jedi abilities to being more powerful than Luke in "Empire?"  If you have to invoke Jason Bourne to explain it, it's really better to just admit that it doesn't hold up and move on.

Mike
There's much of the story left to be explained.  I'm saying that these "minor problems' likely aren't problems at all.  She's obviously familiar with the force... otherwise why would she have even tried a jedi mind trick?  She knows of Luke SKywalker.  She knows of Han Solo.  And she's obviously naturally gifted in the force.  There's also points in her vision where you can hear Obi-Wan telling her "these are your first steps"... so for all we know, she's been communicating with Force Ghosts or at the very least is being guided by the force.   Luke Skywalker more or less gets a pep talk from Obi-Wan and is suddenly able to blow up a death star by closing his eyes... this isn't uncharted territory.   That combined with the fact that Kylo Ren just got blasted with a cross-bow that had previously been shown powerful enough to knock a normal person across the room (he was clearly in pain) and the fact that he was avoiding killing her... either for the reasons I explained or because he preferred keeping her as a student... I had zero problems with how any of that fight went down.  It was great.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on December 21, 2015, 12:21:27 AM


#2 - No sense of humor - The prequels seemed like they were written by someone with autism or something.  No sense of humor at all.  In the original, they were able to improvise slightly.

Just watched the original again and the guy who wrote and directed it clearly didn't have the kind of condition you are talking about. You can't give all the credit to the actors.  Lucas at that age absolutely had a solid grasp on emotions, humor and interpersonal relationships.  If anything affected him later on, it's decades of being insanely wealthy and surrounded by sycophants.

Mike
George Lucas is a known anti-social.  He's very awkward.  Had trouble developing relationships.  Awkward on sets.  Went into it in the previous page, but he shows many signs of someone with aspergers. 

But more to the point, you suggested I'm wrong, because Lucas wrote the original "Star Wars".   You don't actually know what you're talking about.  I'll just cut and paste this super-fan's response from another website on "who wrote Star Wars":

Quote
Lucas began by writing a synopsis of the story in early 1973, then started working on a rough draft of a script the next year. Lucas' first draft was a mess: the story was confusing, far too long, and incredibly boring; the characters were terrible and bland; the dialogue was leaden and stilted; etc. He eventually produced at least 6 versions of the script (first/rough draft, second draft, third draft, then 3 different versions of the fourth draft), and he had lots of help during the revision process.

In Lucas' own words in an article from Mediascene Prevue #42, 1980:
Quote
    I think [I came up with the title The Star Wars before the story]. When I made the deal, I had to give it a name. I had been making notes, doing research over the years, but it wasn’t until I finished American Graffiti in ’73 that I actually started writing it. My original 14-page treatment didn’t bear much relationship to the final production, though.
From a site on the development of Star Wars:
Quote
    [In the first synopsis,] the story was very confusing and the spelling was horrible, since Lucas had never learned proper spelling or punctuation. His agent and lawyer were puzzled and did not understand the story, and it was actually due to the popularity of American Graffiti that they eventually managed to sell the film to Twentieth Century Fox—after it had been rejected by both United Artists and Universal Pictures.

    A rough [draft] was completed one year later in May 1974, and still carried the title The Star Wars. It was the first of four major drafts and several revised versions... When the screenplay draft was finished, however, Lucas still thought it was a mess.

    The Adventures of the Starkiller (Episode One): “The Star Wars” was the title of Lucas’s second draft which was delivered on January 28, 1975. This was a more character-driven story with more character development, which was important since Lucas wanted the film to make an emotional impact... He let his friends (among them director Francis Ford Coppola) read the scripts and tape-recorded their comments in order to get some advice. However, the suggestions from his wife Marcia (a film editor who later won an Oscar for Star Wars) were the ones he took most seriously, even though her criticism sometimes made him angry.

    The third [draft] which was finished on August 1, 1975 was called The Star Wars: From the Adventures of Luke Starkiller, and by this time, most of the plot was established. Lucas felt quite comfortable with his characters, but he still thought that the dialogue needed improvement, and was very concerned that his story might never make it to the silver screen.

    Lucas’s revised fourth draft was the one which was used when filming began in Tunisia on March 25, 1976. A slightly edited version of this draft, entitled Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope—From the Journal of the Whills, was published in 1979 as the official screenplay of the film (the final editing of that public version [of the fourth draft]—erroneously dated to January 15, 1976—was done after Star Wars went into production, probably after the film’s May 1977 release).

    Lucas had consulted his co-writers from American Graffiti (Willard Huyck and Gloria Katz) to sharpen the dialogue, which he felt lacked humour and bounce, and although he rejected most of what they came up with, their new ideas gave Lucas renewed confidence in his work.
Regarding A New Hope:

Lucas later commented on the contributions of Huyck and Katz, in the book Star Wars: The Annotated Screenplays:
Quote
    Dialogue has never been my strong point, and so I talked to Willard and Gloria and asked them to do a quick dialogue polish. I gave them the fourth draft of the script, and they just improved the dialogue where they felt they could make a contribution. Then I took their changes, and sometimes I rewrote some of their lines. Some of their dialogue of course changed again when we started shooting. Some of it survived; some of it didn’t. They did about thirty percent of the dialogue.
The cast agreed with Lucas' assessment of his dialogue-related shortcomings. Carrie Fisher, Mark Hammil, and others frequently teased Lucas about this, and it is touched upon in audio commentary tracks and making-of documentaries. Harrison Ford was particularly outspoken, and his difficulties with Lucas' dialogue led him to improvise many of his lines in the series.
Quote
    Ford famously told George Lucas, concerning the clunky dialogue in "Star Wars," "George, you can type this ****, but you sure as hell can't say it."
Harrison Ford later confirmed this:
Quote
    "I told George: 'You can't say that stuff. You can only type it.'"
Regarding Ford's improvisation:
Quote
    Mark Hamill, for one, was amazed at the dedication Ford put into each and every line, stating, "He'd written things in the margins, saying the same thing basically, but his way. He had an amazing way of keeping the meaning but doing it in a really unique way for his character."
A George Lucas quote from Denise Worrell’s book Icons (1989):
Quote
    There are four or five scripts for Star Wars, and you can see as you flip through them where certain ideas germinated and how the story developed. There was never a script completed that had the entire story as it exists now. But by the time I finished the first Star Wars, the basic ideas and plots for Empire and Jedi were also done. As the stories unfolded, I would take certain ideas and save them; I’d put them aside in notebooks. As I was writing Star Wars, I kept taking out all the good parts, and I just kept telling myself I would make other movies someday. It was a mind trip I laid on myself to get me through the script. I just kept taking out stuff, and finally with Star Wars I felt I had one little incident that introduced the characters. So for the last six years [1977-1983] I’ve been trying to get rid of all the ideas I generated and felt so bad about throwing out in the first place.
Regarding Empire Strikes Back:

George Lucas quote from Star Wars: The Annotated Screenplays:
Quote
    Writing has never been something I have enjoyed, and so, ultimately, on the second film I hired Leigh Brackett. Unfortunately, it didn’t work out; she turned in the first draft, and then she passed away. I didn’t like the first script, but I gave Leigh credit because I liked her a lot. She was sick at the time she wrote the script, and she really tried her best. During the story conferences I had with Leigh, my thoughts weren’t fully formed and I felt that her script went in a completely different direction.
A George Lucas quote from Alan Arnold’s book Once Upon A Galaxy
Quote
    I hired Leigh Brackett to write the screenplay, but tragically she died right after completing the first draft. Faced with the situation that somebody had to step in and do a rewrite, I was forced to write the second draft of this screenplay. But I found it much easier than I’d expected, almost enjoyable. It still took me three months to do, but that’s a lot different from two years. I also had the advantage of Larry Kasdan coming in later to do a rewrite and fix it up.
Lawrence Kasdan quote from Cinefantastique Vol. 28:
Quote
    What I worked on was a draft of the script George had written, based on the story George had given to Leigh [Brackett]. I don’t know what of Leigh’s draft survived into the draft George wrote. What George handed me was a very rough first draft, really somewhere between an outline and a first draft. The structure of the story was all there – it was the skeleton for a movie. What was needed was the flesh and the muscle.”
Regarding Return of the Jedi (originally titled "Return of the Jedi" in early pre-production, retitled "Revenge of the Jedi" just before filming began, kept this title until 4 months before the film was released, when Lucas finally, officially changed the title back to "Return of the Jedi"):

Lawrence Kasdan quote from Starlog #51 (October 1981):
Quote
    [Kasdan is working from a] very rough first draft [script that George Lucas wrote. Kasdan will have to write Revenge of the Jedi quickly, since it begins shooting in January.] It’s a similar situation to the terrible time problem we had on Empire, but I think that this time I’ll have a much freer hand, because the Jedi screenplay that George gave me isn’t nearly as far along as Empire’s was.
Robert Watts quote from The Making of Return of the Jedi:
Quote
    The screenplay is the blueprint for everything, and without it you tend to flounder a bit. We’d had indications, we’d had discussions, we’d had drafts, but the final script did come very, very late.
You can see more here:  http://movies.stackexchange.com/questions/10555/how-much-of-star-wars-did-george-lucas-actually-write  ... along with links to the original terrible script and notes on how it differed from the one that made it to the screen.  It was VERY MUCH a collaborative process. 

The problem with the prequels... Lucas wrote it all with no input.  He directed it with no input.  He did all the casting.  It was his show from start to finish.. and they were pretty flawed... and this is someone who apparently has trouble communicating with people and admits he's terrible at writing dialogue.   George Lucas is not Steilberg.   Speilberg is a people person.  Lucas own personality reflects in his writing.  I'm not the first person to speculate he's got high functioning autism.  And if that offends you, it might just be that you aren't familiar with what high functioning autism is. 

Regardless, part of the reason this new movie works is because more people were involved.  They noted what people disliked about the prequels and addressed all of it.  They took things back to basics.  Far more humor.  A more simplified story.  Dialogue that actually works.  Characters that display actual characteristics.   It wasn't just a bunch of bland models spewing empty lines... which is what the prequels were and what the original Star Wars would have been had the script not gone through many revisions with tons of input.


Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Beat LA on December 21, 2015, 01:25:13 AM
#2 - No sense of humor - The prequels seemed like they were written by someone with autism or something.  No sense of humor at all.  In the original, they were able to improvise slightly.  Han had swagger.  It was light hearted and fun.

I don't have a problem with ideas of yours that others perceive to be obnoxious at times and it's perfectly fine if you don't like a movie, but to be so inconceivably insulting and offensive towards people with autism is not only unacceptable, but is also, as a move, lower than Sam Hinkie's win total, I'm sorry.
Maybe you find it offensive if you don't know much about the autism spectrum (or are familiar with other famous celebrities, artists, directors who are autistic).  I have spent a lot of time with folks with high functioning autism.  Some of them are very smart, but have difficulty comprehending certain emotions... and humor is often a difficult thing for them to grasp.  An autistic girl I worked with simply didn't understand jokes unless they were puns. She loved puns.  I also know someone who knows George Lucas personally and he insists he shows all the signs of high functioning autism.  There's been a lot of speculation in the autism community for a while that Lucas has Asperger’s Syndrome based on elements of his personality and how his writing lacks emotion (fwiw, Helena Bonham Carter claimed that Tim Burton also had all the signs of asperger's).  Sorry if the comment comes across flippant or if my use of the word "autism" was a trigger (I think some people confuse autism with down's syndrome), but I was more commenting on  the way those prequels were written, what the focus of the movies was on, how stunted/flat the dialogue was... and generally how the characters interacted with each other.  They seemed to lack a basic understanding of how real people interact with each other.  The reviewer in the video I linked says it felt like it was written by an 8 year old.  Maybe instead I should have said the prequels seem like they were written by someone with social problems... and I've heard from someone who knows him directly that George Lucas has social problems... and have seen many interviews in which people described him as an anti-social introvert with an obsessive personality.  He apparently had never been easy to get along with on sets... and I suspect that if Harrison Ford had not been clashing with Lucas and making up his own lines in the original movie, it probably wouldn't have worked as well. 

Anyways...  a lot of the best parts of the original trilogy didn't actually come from Lucas.   Lots of improvisation, both Empire and Jedi (and Episode 7) were written by Lawrence Kasden.  There were elements that were added in spite of him.  Lucas also wasn't the director on either "Empire Strikes Back" or "Return of the Jedi".   There was a lot more collaboration in the original trilogy.   With the prequels, Lucas took over the entire thing (all writing and directing responsibilities) and ultimately failed.  I think Lucas strength is world-building and ideas... I'm not sure he was ever a great director.  He should consult, create plot elements, give input on the world... and then step back and let people with a sense of humor and understanding of storytelling principles write the screenplay and direct the film.

No, I know far too much about mental health problems and disabilities, thank you very much.  I find it offensive and insulting because it is so, despite your 'well I have black friends so I can't be racist' kind of argument as it pertains to people with such disabilities.  I just can't believe that you're actually trying to defend what you said.  Wow.  Has D.O.S. taken over your account, lol, because he's great at offending any number of people at any time on here which has been well documented, unfortunately.

I never got the sense that you were that type of guy, though, and perhaps this is all just a big misunderstanding over a poor choice of words, but here's how it sounded to me, "No sense of humor - The prequels seemed like they were written by some retard/someone with autism down syndrome or something.  No sense of humor at all."  It may not have been your intent, but that's how it came across to me.  It wasn't like there was any attempt at humor by you there, either, from where I sit, not even like target's ocd stands for obsessive christmas disorder shirts, which, while at least being somewhat cute and funny, are still in poor taste, imo, even if that is not the intent of the company or the people who bought the product.  Sorry, your choice of words just really bothered me.

As far as the movie, I do like Star Wars, but I'm not a fanatic about the films, so you'll have to fill me in on why so many people hated the prequels.  I was a kid at the time when they came out, and, not being an avid Star wars fan, thought that it was at least cool to see more films come out, even though the ensuing years have showed that Hollywood is clearly out of ideas and is intent on turning every goo-to-great movie into a Land Before Time Format, lol.  They just don't know to quit when they're ahead.  From the ads from this movie, all I saw was Star Wars 7 - We're All Old Now :laugh:. That doesn't mean that I might not still want to see it at some point, but yeah, from what Eja/Mace Windu :laugh: has said, it sounds like this film is to Star Wars what The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull was to the Indiana Jones series, which I love, as in they waited far too long.  Idk who the directors are that you've mentioned, although I know Lucas, obviously, and J.J. Abrams does sound familiar, lol, but I don't remember any of his films right now.  Feel free to expand or not on this, because I'm not even a novice in this department.  I'm sorry for coming down so hard on you, btw, it's just that that really irked me, intentional or not.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on December 21, 2015, 03:38:19 AM
#2 - No sense of humor - The prequels seemed like they were written by someone with autism or something.  No sense of humor at all.  In the original, they were able to improvise slightly.  Han had swagger.  It was light hearted and fun.

I don't have a problem with ideas of yours that others perceive to be obnoxious at times and it's perfectly fine if you don't like a movie, but to be so inconceivably insulting and offensive towards people with autism is not only unacceptable, but is also, as a move, lower than Sam Hinkie's win total, I'm sorry.
Maybe you find it offensive if you don't know much about the autism spectrum (or are familiar with other famous celebrities, artists, directors who are autistic).  I have spent a lot of time with folks with high functioning autism.  Some of them are very smart, but have difficulty comprehending certain emotions... and humor is often a difficult thing for them to grasp.  An autistic girl I worked with simply didn't understand jokes unless they were puns. She loved puns.  I also know someone who knows George Lucas personally and he insists he shows all the signs of high functioning autism.  There's been a lot of speculation in the autism community for a while that Lucas has Asperger’s Syndrome based on elements of his personality and how his writing lacks emotion (fwiw, Helena Bonham Carter claimed that Tim Burton also had all the signs of asperger's).  Sorry if the comment comes across flippant or if my use of the word "autism" was a trigger (I think some people confuse autism with down's syndrome), but I was more commenting on  the way those prequels were written, what the focus of the movies was on, how stunted/flat the dialogue was... and generally how the characters interacted with each other.  They seemed to lack a basic understanding of how real people interact with each other.  The reviewer in the video I linked says it felt like it was written by an 8 year old.  Maybe instead I should have said the prequels seem like they were written by someone with social problems... and I've heard from someone who knows him directly that George Lucas has social problems... and have seen many interviews in which people described him as an anti-social introvert with an obsessive personality.  He apparently had never been easy to get along with on sets... and I suspect that if Harrison Ford had not been clashing with Lucas and making up his own lines in the original movie, it probably wouldn't have worked as well. 

Anyways...  a lot of the best parts of the original trilogy didn't actually come from Lucas.   Lots of improvisation, both Empire and Jedi (and Episode 7) were written by Lawrence Kasden.  There were elements that were added in spite of him.  Lucas also wasn't the director on either "Empire Strikes Back" or "Return of the Jedi".   There was a lot more collaboration in the original trilogy.   With the prequels, Lucas took over the entire thing (all writing and directing responsibilities) and ultimately failed.  I think Lucas strength is world-building and ideas... I'm not sure he was ever a great director.  He should consult, create plot elements, give input on the world... and then step back and let people with a sense of humor and understanding of storytelling principles write the screenplay and direct the film.

No, I know far too much about mental health problems and disabilities, thank you very much.  I find it offensive and insulting because it is so, despite your 'well I have black friends so I can't be racist' kind of argument as it pertains to people with such disabilities.  I just can't believe that you're actually trying to defend what you said.  Wow.  Has D.O.S. taken over your account, lol, because he's great at offending any number of people at any time on here which has been well documented, unfortunately.

I never got the sense that you were that type of guy, though, and perhaps this is all just a big misunderstanding over a poor choice of words, but here's how it sounded to me, "No sense of humor - The prequels seemed like they were written by some retard/someone with autism down syndrome or something.  No sense of humor at all."  It may not have been your intent, but that's how it came across to me.  It wasn't like there was any attempt at humor by you there, either, from where I sit, not even like target's ocd stands for obsessive christmas disorder shirts, which, while at least being somewhat cute and funny, are still in poor taste, imo, even if that is not the intent of the company or the people who bought the product.  Sorry, your choice of words just really bothered me.

As far as the movie, I do like Star Wars, but I'm not a fanatic about the films, so you'll have to fill me in on why so many people hated the prequels.  I was a kid at the time when they came out, and, not being an avid Star wars fan, thought that it was at least cool to see more films come out, even though the ensuing years have showed that Hollywood is clearly out of ideas and is intent on turning every goo-to-great movie into a Land Before Time Format, lol.  They just don't know to quit when they're ahead.  From the ads from this movie, all I saw was Star Wars 7 - We're All Old Now :laugh:. That doesn't mean that I might not still want to see it at some point, but yeah, from what Eja/Mace Windu :laugh: has said, it sounds like this film is to Star Wars what The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull was to the Indiana Jones series, which I love, as in they waited far too long.  Idk who the directors are that you've mentioned, although I know Lucas, obviously, and J.J. Abrams does sound familiar, lol, but I don't remember any of his films right now.  Feel free to expand or not on this, because I'm not even a novice in this department.  I'm sorry for coming down so hard on you, btw, it's just that that really irked me, intentional or not.
It's not impossible for folks with aspergers to have a sense of humor.  Like I said, my co-worker with high functioning autism really enjoys Puns.  Clearly George Lucas thought Jar Jar Binx was hilarious.  But folks with aspergers often struggle with humor.

Quote
Hans Asperger, in 1944, theorised that people with Asperger’s Syndrome do not have the propensity for humour, and that attempts at humour would turn out, at best, awkward, and at worst, hostile. In recent years, this musing has been proved to be only true in minority. While people with Autism and Asperger’s Syndrome can have difficulties with the subtleties of humour, this does not mean to say that having an ASD and having a sense of humour cannot mesh.

The key thing in your response was: 
Quote
Here's how it sounded to me, "No sense of humor - The prequels seemed like they were written by some retard/someone with autism down syndrome or something. "

This confirms what I believed... you don't know the difference between autism and down syndrome.  If that's how my comment sounded to you, I don't blame you for being offended... but if that's how it sounded to you, it's clearly a topic you aren't familiar with.

It's not the same thing...

Down Syndrome:

(http://lovelace-media.imgix.net/getty/180011105.jpg)
(Lauren Potter of "Glee" fame)

(http://lovelace-media.imgix.net/getty/80413120.jpg)
(Chris Burke of "Life Goes On" fame)

(http://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/thenewnormal/images/b/bd/Roger.JPG)
(Edward Barbanell from "Workaholics")

Aspergers:

(http://www.wearysloth.com/Gallery/ActorsH/7393-18010.gif)
(Daryl Hannah from "Splash")

(http://www4.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/Craig+Nicholls+Splendour+Grass+Day+3+2qT21y0PixTl.jpg)
(Craig Nichollis of the rock band "the Vines")

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/c/cf/James_Taylor_-_Columbia.jpg/220px-James_Taylor_-_Columbia.jpg)
(James Taylor - 5-time Grammy Award Winner)

... As well as a host of other folks who have either been partially diagnosed, have pubically stated they exhibit signs, or have had experts speculate that they likely had Aspergers... including:  David Byrne, Marilyn Monroe, Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Andy Warhol, Al Gore, Tim Burton, Michael Jackson, Bob Dylan, Albert Einstein, Crispin Glover, Bobby Fischer, Sheldon Cooper, Abed Nadir, Sherlock Holmes, GEORGE LUCAS, and many others.

But yeah, maybe I should have said "the prequels seem like they were written by a socially awkward introvert with no sense of humor and tendency to obsess/fixate over unimportant details"... which if you know anything about George Lucas or have watched a single documentary on the making of Star Wars, would have been pretty difficult to dispute.  Sorry about my choice of words.  I do regret making that comment... mostly because I had to spend time explaining them... but also because you think less of me now... The last thing I want is for Beat LA to think I'm a retard-hating racist.  But if we're being straight with one another... I'd guess Lucas is on the autism spectrum and I believe it reflects in his writing (And by the way just to reiterate... this isn't some crazy rambling Drunk uncle thing I made up on my own... I've been hearing these things about Lucas for years, there's speculation all over the internet if you want to Google it, I've heard it from someone who has spent time with him first hand, and it's even referenced by those in the autism community itself)   Lucas seems like a very intelligent guy, wonderful at world building, great at creating stories and obsessing over tiny details...  He's the architect of the Star Wars world and deserves praise for it... but he seemingly struggled with writing believable dialogue or multi-dimensional relatable characters.  He was a good Producer.  He should have let others write and direct the prequels based on his own concepts. 

Anyways, before the Star Wars convo was railroaded by PC Principal, the point I was attempting to make was that there was a significant amount of backlash to the prequels... and I think "Episode 7" was a direct response to that.  What was lacking from the prequels was on full display in the new movie... and you can blame the botched prequels on poor writing, poor storytelling and poor directing.   It's clear that the new movies have a focus on character, a focus on humor, a simplified story, wonderful action sequences and "moments of delight" that brought back the Magic of the original trilogy.  What's funny to me is that the main criticism the movie is getting (though from a minority of fans) which is on full display in this thread is that the story was too simplified and too similar to the original.  I guess they couldn't please everyone, but in my opinion... they totally nailed it.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: MBunge on December 21, 2015, 10:00:34 AM


2.  I'd hold off on thinking that any of the relatively minor problems with TFA are actually part of some master plan.  It's most likely they're just mistakes.  I mean, Han just mentions The Force to Rey and she goes from someone who has never shown any Jedi abilities to being more powerful than Luke in "Empire?"  If you have to invoke Jason Bourne to explain it, it's really better to just admit that it doesn't hold up and move on.

Mike
There's much of the story left to be explained.  I'm saying that these "minor problems' likely aren't problems at all. 

And I'm suggesting that usually these kind of problems are simply about the creators not being perfect and their creation not being perfect.  You can come up with excuses, explanations and rationalizations for anything if you work hard enough.  That doesn't make them true or accurate.

Mike
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: MBunge on December 21, 2015, 10:05:53 AM


#2 - No sense of humor - The prequels seemed like they were written by someone with autism or something.  No sense of humor at all.  In the original, they were able to improvise slightly.

Just watched the original again and the guy who wrote and directed it clearly didn't have the kind of condition you are talking about. You can't give all the credit to the actors.  Lucas at that age absolutely had a solid grasp on emotions, humor and interpersonal relationships.  If anything affected him later on, it's decades of being insanely wealthy and surrounded by sycophants.

Mike
George Lucas is a known anti-social.  He's very awkward.  Had trouble developing relationships.  Awkward on sets.  Went into it in the previous page, but he shows many signs of someone with aspergers. 

But more to the point, you suggested I'm wrong, because Lucas wrote the original "Star Wars".   You don't actually know what you're talking about. 

Being anti-social doesn't mean you have Aspergers or anything else.  Not every non-normal personality is the result of a biological/psychological disorder.

And I know how much you hate it when people suggest you're wrong but Lucas both wrote and directed Star Wars.  Yes, other people contributed but he was the guy in charge.  Google how seriously Hollywood takes screenwriting credits before you suggest the script was primarily written by others and Lucas' just had his named slapped on it.  And Lucas was the unquestioned director, which kind of has a lot to do with how the script is presented on screen.

And considering that YOU are the one trying to freakin' diagnose someone you've never met based on nothing but watching movies, maybe you need to dial back the arrogant presumption on this one.

Mike
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: triboy16f on December 21, 2015, 10:11:45 AM
One thing I don't get is that some fans hatred for JJ Abrams.he did a great job with this movie. Did it justice if you ask me
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Donoghus on December 21, 2015, 10:18:21 AM
I won't touch this Asperger's nonsense...

Anyways, saw the movie last night.  A few of my takeaways:

1)  Hate, hate, hate the fact they killed Han. 

2)  It is a mirror of A New Hope but that doesn't necessarily make it a bad thing & certainly is better than Episodes I-III which Lucas botched.  Although, there were definitely some parts I was thinking New Hope ripoff & wasn't thrilled with it.

3) The more I think about it, how the heck is Rey so advanced with the Force already?  Heck, it even took Luke longer to get a grip on it.  I just don't understand how she could be able to grasp it so quickly without any sort of training.

4)  Thought Chewie was excellent.

5)  They can go in about a dozen directions with Kylo Ren.  Really looking forward to how they progress his character.

I don't think its as good as any of IV-VI but I think they've been able to resurrect the heartbeat of the franchise.   

Still hate what they did to Han, though.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: GC003332 on December 21, 2015, 12:15:24 PM
(http://ak-hdl.buzzfed.com/static/2015-03/12/4/enhanced/webdr14/anigif_enhanced-buzz-18766-1426150175-7.gif)
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: fairweatherfan on December 21, 2015, 12:42:16 PM
I won't touch this Asperger's nonsense...

Anyways, saw the movie last night.  A few of my takeaways:

1)  Hate, hate, hate the fact they killed Han. 

I didn't mind it, though it was heavily telegraphed.  And practically, as others have noted if Han doesn't get killed off Harrison Ford probably doesn't sign on; he wanted Han killed in the Return of the Jedi.  But I think you either need to kill Han or relegate him to the background; it'd be very tough to have him prominently involved in the long-term plot.  Here he served as a major driver of character development for Ren, Rey, and to a lesser extent Finn.

3) The more I think about it, how the heck is Rey so advanced with the Force already?  Heck, it even took Luke longer to get a grip on it.  I just don't understand how she could be able to grasp it so quickly without any sort of training.

She may have been trained already and forgotten/had her memory wiped; there's very likely some pre-existing link between her and Kylo that she doesn't remember.   They're probably either siblings or cousins (if she's Luke's kid). 


5)  They can go in about a dozen directions with Kylo Ren.  Really looking forward to how they progress his character.


Yeah he's got the most interesting future arc.  I doubt they'll have the guts to go through with this, but Rey looked like she was showing some Dark Side tendencies when she was using the Force - during the last fight she looked like she was trying to be at peace but wound up lashing out in anger.  The most interesting resolution to me would the two of them flipping places over time, with Rey being corrupted and Kylo having to sacrifice himself to stop/redeem her.  It's more likely she'll be tempted by the Dark Side and resist and he'll just pull a Vader on whatever Snoke is, though.

The whole thing felt like a "soft reboot" - starting with very similar story beats but then (hopefully) taking it to some new places.  Next they need to solve the single biggest mystery - how'd C3PO get that red arm?????
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Donoghus on December 21, 2015, 12:52:37 PM
I won't touch this Asperger's nonsense...

Anyways, saw the movie last night.  A few of my takeaways:

1)  Hate, hate, hate the fact they killed Han. 

I didn't mind it, though it was heavily telegraphed.  And practically, as others have noted if Han doesn't get killed off Harrison Ford probably doesn't sign on; he wanted Han killed in the Return of the Jedi.  But I think you either need to kill Han or relegate him to the background; it'd be very tough to have him prominently involved in the long-term plot.  Here he served as a major driver of character development for Ren, Rey, and to a lesser extent Finn.

3) The more I think about it, how the heck is Rey so advanced with the Force already?  Heck, it even took Luke longer to get a grip on it.  I just don't understand how she could be able to grasp it so quickly without any sort of training.

She may have been trained already and forgotten/had her memory wiped; there's very likely some pre-existing link between her and Kylo that she doesn't remember.   They're probably either siblings or cousins (if she's Luke's kid). 


5)  They can go in about a dozen directions with Kylo Ren.  Really looking forward to how they progress his character.


Yeah he's got the most interesting future arc.  I doubt they'll have the guts to go through with this, but Rey looked like she was showing some Dark Side tendencies when she was using the Force - during the last fight she looked like she was trying to be at peace but wound up lashing out in anger.  The most interesting resolution to me would the two of them flipping places over time, with Rey being corrupted and Kylo having to sacrifice himself to stop/redeem her.  It's more likely he'll just pull a Vader on whatever Snoke is, though.

The whole thing felt like a "soft reboot" - starting with very similar story beats but then (hopefully) taking it to some new places.  Next they need to solve the single biggest mystery - how'd C3PO get that red arm?????

I understand the history behind Ford & the Solo character in regards to killing him or not.  I would've been fine with him being relegated more to the background in VIII & IX.  If Ford really wanted out, they could've simply had him die off screen at some point or have him far way.  Just to send him out that way seemed unnecessary given the history of the character.   Was it necessary for the character development of Kylo Ren? Maybe but I'm inclined to say no.

It was definitely telegraphed, though.  The whole buildup was basically New Hope on the Death Star rehashed with Han as Obi Wan.   You could see it building for a good 15-20 minutes before it happened.  It was gut-wrenching. 
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Spilling Green Dye on December 21, 2015, 01:15:02 PM
I enjoyed the movie, but the more time I've been away from it the more I've felt rather cheated on it.  It's amazing to me that they made a movie that was nearly identical to episode 4, with some other story lines taken from 6, etc.  I'm all for a bit of history repeating itself, but this movie had a direct character-to-character match that showed almost no creativity.

This review pretty much hit home on how I feel about the movie:  http://venturebeat.com/2015/12/16/star-wars-spoilers-the-force-awakens-lacks-a-single-original-idea-and-you-will-love-it-anyways/

Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on December 21, 2015, 01:16:51 PM
I know how much you hate it when people suggest you're wrong but Lucas both wrote and directed Star Wars. 

Neat.  The script went through several revisions. Multiple people including Francis Ford Copolla, his agent and his wife had input into the story and fixing the clunky dialogue and stunted characters.  Despite that, the script was still so bad that Harrison ford reportedly made up his own lines on set.  Yeah Lucas got writing credit.  Perhaps he should have had his wife, the studio, multiple friends and Harrison ford look over his prequels instead of just shooting his rough draft.  Alls I know is, while enjoyable in some regards (the involvement of top level costume designers, fight choreographers, special effects experts, CGI designers, John Williams, sound engineers, and hundreds of others who go into making a production of that scale), the prequels were poorly written and poorly directed.  The backlash was so mighty that Lucas was shamed into selling the entire property to Disney.  Abrams and Kasden threw out most of what Lucas had for a story and wrote their own for episode 7... And it was wonderful.  Glad to see they brought back the sense of humor that was sorely lacking in the prequels.  Disney, Abrams and Kasden seemed to understand what people liked about the original Star Wars trilogy and manage to capture that.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Spilling Green Dye on December 21, 2015, 01:41:35 PM
Abrams and Kasden threw out most of what Lucas had for a story and wrote their own for episode 7... And it was wonderful. 
 

While I realize you are referring to throwing out what he wrote for episode 7, and that Lucas had help for episode 4 (the original), in NO WAY did they "write their own episode".  Instead, they did this, which required nearly 0 creativity (SPOILER ALERT):

(http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a26/Mike80D/SW_zpsok3j4dsr.jpg)

Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: triboy16f on December 21, 2015, 01:45:06 PM
I won't touch this Asperger's nonsense...

Anyways, saw the movie last night.  A few of my takeaways:

1)  Hate, hate, hate the fact they killed Han. 

2)  It is a mirror of A New Hope but that doesn't necessarily make it a bad thing & certainly is better than Episodes I-III which Lucas botched.  Although, there were definitely some parts I was thinking New Hope ripoff & wasn't thrilled with it.

3) The more I think about it, how the heck is Rey so advanced with the Force already?  Heck, it even took Luke longer to get a grip on it.  I just don't understand how she could be able to grasp it so quickly without any sort of training.

4)  Thought Chewie was excellent.

5)  They can go in about a dozen directions with Kylo Ren.  Really looking forward to how they progress his character.

I don't think its as good as any of IV-VI but I think they've been able to resurrect the heartbeat of the franchise.   

Still hate what they did to Han, though.

You never know, he could still be alive

Kylo Ren is def not dead yet

Finn will wake up one of these days and join Rey

Chewie was hilarious

This Star Wars movie was better than the last 2

Cgi not that adv , kept true to the original as possible. Overall a great movie. Should break all kinds of box-office records
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: PhoSita on December 21, 2015, 01:48:49 PM
I mean, guys, let's be real -- the original Star Wars was a pretty by-the-numbers Hero's Journey story.

So to suggest they copied Episode 4 for Episode 7 kind of overlooks the fact that all along they've been working with a pretty straightforward story structure.  A very old and effective one, to boot.

The reason Episode 7 seems so much like Episode 4 is probably simply because they're looking at Episode 7 as a reboot type story, which means they need to begin the Hero's Journey arc over again.

The prequels were so dissatisfying because they failed to follow an effective structure around the narrative arc of a particular character's journey.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Spilling Green Dye on December 21, 2015, 01:51:09 PM
I mean, guys, let's be real -- the original Star Wars was a pretty by-the-numbers Hero's Journey story.

So to suggest they copied Episode 4 for Episode 7 kind of overlooks the fact that all along they've been working with a pretty straightforward story structure.  A very old and effective one, to boot.


Oh c'mon, we're not talking about a general hero path/story, we're talking about a nearly identical step-by-step story with identical characters in identical environments. 
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: kozlodoev on December 21, 2015, 01:58:17 PM
I must say, while I didn't imagine that a seventh installment in a series could be completely original, I didn't in my wildest dreams imagine that they'd simply punt and go for an Epizode IV remake. Wow.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: fairweatherfan on December 21, 2015, 02:05:39 PM
If Ford really wanted out, they could've simply had him die off screen at some point or have him far way.  Just to send him out that way seemed unnecessary given the history of the character.   Was it necessary for the character development of Kylo Ren? Maybe but I'm inclined to say no.


So it wasn't so much Han dying as dying the way he did?  I think it was more meaningful that he was trying to redeem his son than some other kind of death, especially off-camera.  Though maybe some kind of swashbuckling suicide run with some smartass remarks thrown in would've been fun too.  But I liked that the central theme of the movie involved Han and his son, and I don't think any other resolution would've been satisfying.  I think the in media res framework hurt a little because there's no real background on their relationship to draw on, though.

As for whether it's necessary for Ren's character, it's hard to think of anything that could be considered "necessary" in that way, for just about any character.  But he certainly seemed to think it was necessary to commit fully to the Dark Side and stop being "seduced by the Light", which was a really interesting and telling description.  Curious to see if he comes back with some fun new cybernetics after the beating he took in the last 20 minutes.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Donoghus on December 21, 2015, 02:06:11 PM
I mean, guys, let's be real -- the original Star Wars was a pretty by-the-numbers Hero's Journey story.

So to suggest they copied Episode 4 for Episode 7 kind of overlooks the fact that all along they've been working with a pretty straightforward story structure.  A very old and effective one, to boot.


Oh c'mon, we're not talking about a general hero path/story, we're talking about a nearly identical step-by-step story with identical characters in identical environments.

Yeah, I'd have to agree with Spilling here.  That was way beyond a general hero path/story.

Not that it was necessarily a bad thing although, at times in VII, I thought it was.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Donoghus on December 21, 2015, 02:09:42 PM
If Ford really wanted out, they could've simply had him die off screen at some point or have him far way.  Just to send him out that way seemed unnecessary given the history of the character.   Was it necessary for the character development of Kylo Ren? Maybe but I'm inclined to say no.


So it wasn't so much Han dying as dying the way he did?  I think it was more meaningful that he was trying to redeem his son than some other kind of death, especially off-camera.  Though maybe some kind of swashbuckling suicide run with some smartass remarks thrown in would've been fun too.  But I liked that the central theme of the movie involved Han and his son, and I don't think any other resolution would've been satisfying.

As for whether it's necessary for Ren's character, it's hard to think of anything that could be considered "necessary" in that way, for just about any character.  But he certainly seemed to think it was necessary to commit fully to the Dark Side and stop being "seduced by the Light", which was a really interesting and telling description.  Curious to see if he comes back with some fun new cybernetics after the beating he took in the last 20 minutes.

To me, Han Solo isn't just one of the most beloved Star Wars characters ever, he's also one of the most beloved movie characters ever. 

It's certainly emotional for my take on it but I just would've rather seen him getting phased out than getting skewered on a catwalk by his son. 

I'm probably not being totally rational here but it was Han effin' Solo!  C'mon man!
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: PhoSita on December 21, 2015, 02:49:15 PM
I mean, guys, let's be real -- the original Star Wars was a pretty by-the-numbers Hero's Journey story.

So to suggest they copied Episode 4 for Episode 7 kind of overlooks the fact that all along they've been working with a pretty straightforward story structure.  A very old and effective one, to boot.


Oh c'mon, we're not talking about a general hero path/story, we're talking about a nearly identical step-by-step story with identical characters in identical environments.

Yeah, I'd have to agree with Spilling here.  That was way beyond a general hero path/story.

Not that it was necessarily a bad thing although, at times in VII, I thought it was.

It definitely seems like they made some pointed decisions mostly for the sake of nostalgia.  Why is Rey stranded on a desert planet that ISN'T EVEN TATTOINE?  I guess in space there are probably a lot of desert and ice planets, so in that sense it's reasonable.

Still, this is essentially fantasy.  You couldn't put her in a different biome?  There are more options than Desert, Jungle, Snow.

My point is just that the original story wasn't especially complex or whatever.  On some level, this movie would have been very reminiscent of Episode 4 even if they weren't trying to parallel that installment for nostalgia's sake.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on December 21, 2015, 10:14:51 PM
Backstory for those who care:  http://www.slashfilm.com/star-wars-the-force-awakens-questions/
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Redz on December 21, 2015, 11:01:43 PM
I won't touch this Asperger's nonsense...

Anyways, saw the movie last night.  A few of my takeaways:

1)  Hate, hate, hate the fact they killed Han. 

meh.  He'd still had his fastball until he went to do Leah's beckoning.  Shoulda stuck with being a dead beat loner.

2)  It is a mirror of A New Hope but that doesn't necessarily make it a bad thing & certainly is better than Episodes I-III which Lucas botched.  Although, there were definitely some parts I was thinking New Hope ripoff & wasn't thrilled with it. the sentimental faux remake is all the rage

3) The more I think about it, how the heck is Rey so advanced with the Force already?  Heck, it even took Luke longer to get a grip on it.  I just don't understand how she could be able to grasp it so quickly without any sort of training. she's the bomb, that's why

4)  Thought Chewie was excellent.Oscar worthy.  He was awesome.

5)  They can go in about a dozen directions with Kylo Ren.  Really looking forward to how they progress his character. big baby

I don't think its as good as any of IV-VI but I think they've been able to resurrect the heartbeat of the franchise.   

Still hate what they did to Han, though.if they had any sense of deadpan they would have had sonny boy leap in the air just in time to avoid a giant rolling ball that crushes Solo like a grape.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: SHAQATTACK on December 21, 2015, 11:19:33 PM
Saw it yesterday

Wife loved it .

I'm not a huge Star Wars fan tho .



Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Beat LA on December 21, 2015, 11:26:30 PM
#2 - No sense of humor - The prequels seemed like they were written by someone with autism or something.  No sense of humor at all.  In the original, they were able to improvise slightly.  Han had swagger.  It was light hearted and fun.

I don't have a problem with ideas of yours that others perceive to be obnoxious at times and it's perfectly fine if you don't like a movie, but to be so inconceivably insulting and offensive towards people with autism is not only unacceptable, but is also, as a move, lower than Sam Hinkie's win total, I'm sorry.
Maybe you find it offensive if you don't know much about the autism spectrum (or are familiar with other famous celebrities, artists, directors who are autistic).  I have spent a lot of time with folks with high functioning autism.  Some of them are very smart, but have difficulty comprehending certain emotions... and humor is often a difficult thing for them to grasp.  An autistic girl I worked with simply didn't understand jokes unless they were puns. She loved puns.  I also know someone who knows George Lucas personally and he insists he shows all the signs of high functioning autism.  There's been a lot of speculation in the autism community for a while that Lucas has Asperger’s Syndrome based on elements of his personality and how his writing lacks emotion (fwiw, Helena Bonham Carter claimed that Tim Burton also had all the signs of asperger's).  Sorry if the comment comes across flippant or if my use of the word "autism" was a trigger (I think some people confuse autism with down's syndrome), but I was more commenting on  the way those prequels were written, what the focus of the movies was on, how stunted/flat the dialogue was... and generally how the characters interacted with each other.  They seemed to lack a basic understanding of how real people interact with each other.  The reviewer in the video I linked says it felt like it was written by an 8 year old.  Maybe instead I should have said the prequels seem like they were written by someone with social problems... and I've heard from someone who knows him directly that George Lucas has social problems... and have seen many interviews in which people described him as an anti-social introvert with an obsessive personality.  He apparently had never been easy to get along with on sets... and I suspect that if Harrison Ford had not been clashing with Lucas and making up his own lines in the original movie, it probably wouldn't have worked as well. 

Anyways...  a lot of the best parts of the original trilogy didn't actually come from Lucas.   Lots of improvisation, both Empire and Jedi (and Episode 7) were written by Lawrence Kasden.  There were elements that were added in spite of him.  Lucas also wasn't the director on either "Empire Strikes Back" or "Return of the Jedi".   There was a lot more collaboration in the original trilogy.   With the prequels, Lucas took over the entire thing (all writing and directing responsibilities) and ultimately failed.  I think Lucas strength is world-building and ideas... I'm not sure he was ever a great director.  He should consult, create plot elements, give input on the world... and then step back and let people with a sense of humor and understanding of storytelling principles write the screenplay and direct the film.

No, I know far too much about mental health problems and disabilities, thank you very much.  I find it offensive and insulting because it is so, despite your 'well I have black friends so I can't be racist' kind of argument as it pertains to people with such disabilities.  I just can't believe that you're actually trying to defend what you said.  Wow.  Has D.O.S. taken over your account, lol, because he's great at offending any number of people at any time on here which has been well documented, unfortunately.

I never got the sense that you were that type of guy, though, and perhaps this is all just a big misunderstanding over a poor choice of words, but here's how it sounded to me, "No sense of humor - The prequels seemed like they were written by some retard/someone with autism down syndrome or something.  No sense of humor at all."  It may not have been your intent, but that's how it came across to me.  It wasn't like there was any attempt at humor by you there, either, from where I sit, not even like target's ocd stands for obsessive christmas disorder shirts, which, while at least being somewhat cute and funny, are still in poor taste, imo, even if that is not the intent of the company or the people who bought the product.  Sorry, your choice of words just really bothered me.

As far as the movie, I do like Star Wars, but I'm not a fanatic about the films, so you'll have to fill me in on why so many people hated the prequels.  I was a kid at the time when they came out, and, not being an avid Star wars fan, thought that it was at least cool to see more films come out, even though the ensuing years have showed that Hollywood is clearly out of ideas and is intent on turning every goo-to-great movie into a Land Before Time Format, lol.  They just don't know to quit when they're ahead.  From the ads from this movie, all I saw was Star Wars 7 - We're All Old Now :laugh:. That doesn't mean that I might not still want to see it at some point, but yeah, from what Eja/Mace Windu :laugh: has said, it sounds like this film is to Star Wars what The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull was to the Indiana Jones series, which I love, as in they waited far too long.  Idk who the directors are that you've mentioned, although I know Lucas, obviously, and J.J. Abrams does sound familiar, lol, but I don't remember any of his films right now.  Feel free to expand or not on this, because I'm not even a novice in this department.  I'm sorry for coming down so hard on you, btw, it's just that that really irked me, intentional or not.
It's not impossible for folks with aspergers to have a sense of humor.  Like I said, my co-worker with high functioning autism really enjoys Puns.  Clearly George Lucas thought Jar Jar Binx was hilarious.  But folks with aspergers often struggle with humor.

Quote
Hans Asperger, in 1944, theorised that people with Asperger’s Syndrome do not have the propensity for humour, and that attempts at humour would turn out, at best, awkward, and at worst, hostile. In recent years, this musing has been proved to be only true in minority. While people with Autism and Asperger’s Syndrome can have difficulties with the subtleties of humour, this does not mean to say that having an ASD and having a sense of humour cannot mesh.

The key thing in your response was: 
Quote
Here's how it sounded to me, "No sense of humor - The prequels seemed like they were written by some retard/someone with autism down syndrome or something. "

This confirms what I believed... you don't know the difference between autism and down syndrome.  If that's how my comment sounded to you, I don't blame you for being offended... but if that's how it sounded to you, it's clearly a topic you aren't familiar with.

It's not the same thing...

Down Syndrome:

(http://lovelace-media.imgix.net/getty/180011105.jpg)
(Lauren Potter of "Glee" fame)

(http://lovelace-media.imgix.net/getty/80413120.jpg)
(Chris Burke of "Life Goes On" fame)

(http://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/thenewnormal/images/b/bd/Roger.JPG)
(Edward Barbanell from "Workaholics")

Aspergers:

(http://www.wearysloth.com/Gallery/ActorsH/7393-18010.gif)
(Daryl Hannah from "Splash")

(http://www4.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/Craig+Nicholls+Splendour+Grass+Day+3+2qT21y0PixTl.jpg)
(Craig Nichollis of the rock band "the Vines")

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/c/cf/James_Taylor_-_Columbia.jpg/220px-James_Taylor_-_Columbia.jpg)
(James Taylor - 5-time Grammy Award Winner)

... As well as a host of other folks who have either been partially diagnosed, have pubically stated they exhibit signs, or have had experts speculate that they likely had Aspergers... including:  David Byrne, Marilyn Monroe, Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Andy Warhol, Al Gore, Tim Burton, Michael Jackson, Bob Dylan, Albert Einstein, Crispin Glover, Bobby Fischer, Sheldon Cooper, Abed Nadir, Sherlock Holmes, GEORGE LUCAS, and many others.

But yeah, maybe I should have said "the prequels seem like they were written by a socially awkward introvert with no sense of humor and tendency to obsess/fixate over unimportant details"... which if you know anything about George Lucas or have watched a single documentary on the making of Star Wars, would have been pretty difficult to dispute.  Sorry about my choice of words.  I do regret making that comment... mostly because I had to spend time explaining them... but also because you think less of me now... The last thing I want is for Beat LA to think I'm a retard-hating racist.  But if we're being straight with one another... I'd guess Lucas is on the autism spectrum and I believe it reflects in his writing (And by the way just to reiterate... this isn't some crazy rambling Drunk uncle thing I made up on my own... I've been hearing these things about Lucas for years, there's speculation all over the internet if you want to Google it, I've heard it from someone who has spent time with him first hand, and it's even referenced by those in the autism community itself)   Lucas seems like a very intelligent guy, wonderful at world building, great at creating stories and obsessing over tiny details...  He's the architect of the Star Wars world and deserves praise for it... but he seemingly struggled with writing believable dialogue or multi-dimensional relatable characters.  He was a good Producer.  He should have let others write and direct the prequels based on his own concepts. 

Anyways, before the Star Wars convo was railroaded by PC Principal, the point I was attempting to make was that there was a significant amount of backlash to the prequels... and I think "Episode 7" was a direct response to that.  What was lacking from the prequels was on full display in the new movie... and you can blame the botched prequels on poor writing, poor storytelling and poor directing.   It's clear that the new movies have a focus on character, a focus on humor, a simplified story, wonderful action sequences and "moments of delight" that brought back the Magic of the original trilogy.  What's funny to me is that the main criticism the movie is getting (though from a minority of fans) which is on full display in this thread is that the story was too simplified and too similar to the original.  I guess they couldn't please everyone, but in my opinion... they totally nailed it.

I'm well aware of the difference between asberger's and down syndrome.  The only reason I used the latter, as well as 'retard', in place of the former was to illustrate how it came across to me in terms I couldn't think of any that sounded so insulting, so that's why I used it as an example, not because I can't distinguish between the two disabilities, if that makes any sense.  In my experience, when someone thinks of a person who is mentally-handicapped, retarded, and/or is a member of special education, they seem to solely associate it with people with Down Syndrome bc the disorder is physically and readily discernible and therefore easier to identify, whereas people with asperger's, autism, and other mental impairments, for the most part, look like the average joe, so no one would think that they had any difficulties, that's all I meant. 

And listen, if you truly didn't mean it, which now seems to be the case, don't worry about it - I won't think any less of you or that you're someone who hates people who happen to be retarded.  The racism thing was just an example of the parallel argument that you seemed to be making, btw, bc I never said, nor do I have any reason to believe, that you are a racist.  I'm also assuming that you were being sarcastic when you said that the last thing you would want is for me to think that you're a retard-hating racist, simply for the reason that I'm neither the least bit important in any phase of life, nor am I even interesting by any measure, lol.  I guess what I'm trying to say is that if you do care about what I said, you really shouldn't, because I don't matter, lol, but let's just focus on the movies now, haha.

Btw, what specifically was wrong with the story line of any of the prequels?  Did they just seem completely removed from the original and being far from plausible or something?  All I remember is that Jar Jar Binks was more funny, imo, than annoying, and that Obi Wan was a total **** in each of the prequels, or at least that's how he came off to me.  He was far too strict and lacked the people skills necessary to be Anakin's Master as opposed to the wiser and far more patient Qui-Gon Jinn, but that was probably because of a lack of experience.  Or maybe not.  Perhaps Obi Wan had a touch of asperger's or at least a problem with making friends, lol ;D.   
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: MBunge on December 21, 2015, 11:35:26 PM
I mean, guys, let's be real -- the original Star Wars was a pretty by-the-numbers Hero's Journey story.

So to suggest they copied Episode 4 for Episode 7 kind of overlooks the fact that all along they've been working with a pretty straightforward story structure.  A very old and effective one, to boot.


Oh c'mon, we're not talking about a general hero path/story, we're talking about a nearly identical step-by-step story with identical characters in identical environments.

Yeah, I'd have to agree with Spilling here.  That was way beyond a general hero path/story.

Not that it was necessarily a bad thing although, at times in VII, I thought it was.

It definitely seems like they made some pointed decisions mostly for the sake of nostalgia.  Why is Rey stranded on a desert planet that ISN'T EVEN TATTOINE?  I guess in space there are probably a lot of desert and ice planets, so in that sense it's reasonable.

Still, this is essentially fantasy.  You couldn't put her in a different biome?  There are more options than Desert, Jungle, Snow.

My point is just that the original story wasn't especially complex or whatever.  On some level, this movie would have been very reminiscent of Episode 4 even if they weren't trying to parallel that installment for nostalgia's sake.

Whatever else you want to say about them, Lucas was trying to do different things with the prequels.  Both structurally and thematically, it was some new ground for the franchise.

I don't blame them for giving us a mix tape of Star Wars greatest hits.  It's probably what they had to do.  Hopefully the tremendous response will give them the courage to be a little more original next time.

Mike
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on December 21, 2015, 11:45:25 PM
Beat-LA, many suspect that C3PO also has aspergers (https://www.google.com/search?q=c3po+aspergers)... he displays many attributes.  True story.

No offense, but this aspect of the conversation is sort of lame.  I get you were offended... I'd rather just talk about Star Wars.  Since you explained to me "how it sounded" from your perspective... here's how it sounds from mine:  It's akin to me saying, "Hmm, I've long heard that Joaquin Phoenix is a vegan and I suspect that's why the movie he wrote has people exclusively eating vegetables in every scene" and you reacting, "That's racist!! You might as well be calling Joaquim Phoenix a dirty jew!"...

My main point was that the prequels had empty characters with no characteristics, stunted dialogue, an over-focus on Politics, and no sense of humor at all.   It was stiff models speaking about trade disputes.  Others have commented that the prequels felt like they were written by an 8 year old.   I took it a step further and commented on why I think George Lucas struggled writing them.  Main point is... I think the new movie had far better writing.  I could actually describe who these characters were, what their motivations were, how they were unique, etc.  I already care about these characters.  It was hard to care about anyone in the prequels, because they were such lifeless characters with no character traits.  Beyond Padme being cute... what's her purpose, exactly?  Who is she as a person?  What makes her tick?  What's her motivations?  What does she want out of this world?  Describe her for me without commenting on her makeup (please don't actually describe her... I don't care... I'm just illustrating a point).  These were problems in the prequels.  It lacked basic storytelling and character development.  The new movie addressed that.  The new movie was also helped by considerably better acting... though bad acting often comes from bad writing and bad directing... and George Lucas isn't a good writer or director.

Back on topic (HEAVY SPOILERS).. Just to comment on people complaining about Rey's power-levels... the consensus theory seems to be that she was a youngling training to be a jedi when she had her memory wiped and was dropped on Jakku (clearly out of safety since the Knights of Ren were in the process of murdering all the remaining Jedi).   Most popular theory is that she's Luke's daughter... super likely, imo based on a number of hints.   I take it a step further... I think Kylo Ren was the one who spared her (and clips during the flashback/vision scene seem to show exactly that) and was likely the one who dropped her off on Jakku, because he couldn't bring himself to murder his young cousin.  He knows who she is.  He's holding back when fighting her.  These aren't "excuses" about "plot holes".... If some of you are unfamiliar with "Star Wars", the first movie left MANY questions that were later revealed in the story.  It's what these movies do.  In-fact, when the original movie came out there was a pretty prevalent theory that LUke's father was R2D2.   The mystery is part of it.   Hold off on judging Rey standing toe-to-toe with Kylo Ren until you know about Rey's backstory.   Right now, nothing is confirmed.  We do know that she was abandoned... we do know that she's wearing a costume suspiciously similar to a padawan during her flashback... we do know that's she's familiar with Han Solo, Luke Skywalker, the Millenium Falcon, and Jedi concepts such as mind tricks...  All this points to her having received training at some point in her youth... and having repressed memories.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: GetLucky on December 21, 2015, 11:49:39 PM
BeatLA, you try to be the most transparent person possible on the internet. I think that's not as fun as leaving ambiguity, but TP for your valiant cause. (I won't comment about the whole exchange that just took place.)

LarBrd, we share a love for movies (and it seems like we have similar taste)! TP to you as well. Thank you for the bolded spoiler warnings. I hope to see the new Star Wars this Xmas week with the family, and I'll hopefully be able to contribute to (and read more than half) of this thread then.

EDIT: I will admit to being a prequel fan, but I only liked Revenge of the Sith by itself. Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones were just too slow-moving for me. Revenge of the Sith was a visual delight to watch, and when I look back on the entire prequel trilogy, I get a lot more from overarching personal reflection than the individually-tailored movie breakdowns.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Beat LA on December 21, 2015, 11:56:08 PM
Beat-LA, many suspect that C3PO also has aspergers... he displays many attributes.  True story.

No offense, but this aspect of the conversation is sort of lame.  I get you were offended... I'd rather just talk about Star Wars.  Since you explained to me "how it sounded" from your perspective... here's how it sounds from mine:  It's akin to me saying, "Hmm, I've long heard that Joaquin Phoenix is a vegan and I suspect that's why the movie he has people exclusively eating vegetables in every scene" and you reacting, "That's racist!! You might as well be calling Joaquim Phoenix a dirty jew!"...

My main point was that the prequels had empty characters with no characteristics, stunted dialogue, an over-focus on Politics, and no sense of humor at all.   It was stiff models speaking about trade disputes.  Others have commented that the prequels felt like they were written by an 8 year old.   I took it a step further and commented on why I think George Lucas struggled writing them.  Main point is... I think the new movie had far better writing.  I could actually describe who these characters were, what their motivations were, how they were unique, etc.  This was also helped by considerably better acting... though bad acting often comes from bad directing... and George Lucas isn't a good director.

Back on topic (HEAVY SPOILERS).. Just to comment on people complaining about Rey's power-levels... the consensus theory seems to be that she was a youngling training to be a jedi when she had her memory wiped and was dropped on Jakku (clearly out of safety since the Knights of Ren were in the process of murdering all the remaining Jedi).   Most popular theory is that she's Luke's daughter... super likely, imo based on a number of hints.   I take it a step further... I think Kylo Ren was the one who spared her (and clips during the flashback/vision scene seem to show exactly that) and was likely the one who dropped her off on Jakku, because he couldn't bring himself to murder his young cousin.  He knows who she is.  He's holding back when fighting her.  These aren't "excuses" about "plot holes".... If some of you are unfamiliar with "Star Wars", the first movie left MANY questions that were later revealed in the story.  It's what these movies do.  In-fact, when the original movie came out there was a pretty prevalent theory that LUke's father was R2D2.   The mystery is part of it.   Hold off on judging Rey standing toe-to-toe with Kylo Ren until you know about Rey's backstory.   Right now, nothing is confirmed.  We do know that she was abandoned... we do know that she's wearing a costume suspiciously similar to a padawan during her flashback... we do know that's she's familiar with Han Solo, Luke Skywalker, the Millenium Falcon, and Jedi concepts such as mind tricks...  All this points to her having received training at some point in her youth... and having repressed memories.

Umm, how can a robot have a mental disability?  As for the rest of what I've emboldened, well, that's not even close to an apt comparison, so -

(https://i.imgur.com/kpTtTh.jpg)

But I agree, let's just stick to the movie.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Beat LA on December 22, 2015, 12:00:13 AM
BeatLA, you try to be the most transparent person possible on the internet. I think that's not as fun as leaving ambiguity, but TP for your valiant cause. (I won't comment about the whole exchange that just took place.)

LarBrd, we share a love for movies (and it seems like we have similar taste)! TP to you as well. Thank you for the bolded spoiler warnings. I hope to see the new Star Wars this Xmas week with the family, and I'll hopefully be able to contribute to (and read more than half) of this thread then.

EDIT: I will admit to being a prequel fan, but I only liked Revenge of the Sith by itself. Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones were just too slow-moving for me. Revenge of the Sith was a visual delight to watch, and when I look back on the entire prequel trilogy, I get a lot more from overarching personal reflection than the individually-tailored movie breakdowns.

Lol, I'm just trying to eliminate the possibility of having ugly misunderstandings.  Btw, I saw what you wrote about the 'infamous' Leia costume and I wholeheartedly agree, probably bc we're of the same demographic, bc it did absolutely nothing for me, lol :laugh:, so TP for you too :).
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on December 22, 2015, 12:12:04 AM
BeatLA, you try to be the most transparent person possible on the internet. I think that's not as fun as leaving ambiguity, but TP for your valiant cause. (I won't comment about the whole exchange that just took place.)

LarBrd, we share a love for movies (and it seems like we have similar taste)! TP to you as well. Thank you for the bolded spoiler warnings. I hope to see the new Star Wars this Xmas week with the family, and I'll hopefully be able to contribute to (and read more than half) of this thread then.

EDIT: I will admit to being a prequel fan, but I only liked Revenge of the Sith by itself. Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones were just too slow-moving for me. Revenge of the Sith was a visual delight to watch, and when I look back on the entire prequel trilogy, I get a lot more from overarching personal reflection than the individually-tailored movie breakdowns.

Lol, I'm just trying to eliminate the possibility of having ugly misunderstandings.  Btw, I saw what you wrote about the 'infamous' Leia costume and I wholeheartedly agree, probably bc we're of the same demographic, bc it did absolutely nothing for me, lol :laugh:, so TP for you too :).
Just to temporarily stick with the PC Police/Star Wars theme...

If this new trilogy continues down the same familiar trajectory of the originals with just a couple gender-reversals, imagine the outrage in Episode 9 when we are forced to watch a scantily-clad "Slave Finn".  Here's hoping the next two episodes break away from the mold a bit.

 
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: GetLucky on December 22, 2015, 12:15:16 AM
BeatLA, you try to be the most transparent person possible on the internet. I think that's not as fun as leaving ambiguity, but TP for your valiant cause. (I won't comment about the whole exchange that just took place.)

LarBrd, we share a love for movies (and it seems like we have similar taste)! TP to you as well. Thank you for the bolded spoiler warnings. I hope to see the new Star Wars this Xmas week with the family, and I'll hopefully be able to contribute to (and read more than half) of this thread then.

EDIT: I will admit to being a prequel fan, but I only liked Revenge of the Sith by itself. Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones were just too slow-moving for me. Revenge of the Sith was a visual delight to watch, and when I look back on the entire prequel trilogy, I get a lot more from overarching personal reflection than the individually-tailored movie breakdowns.

Lol, I'm just trying to eliminate the possibility of having ugly misunderstandings.  Btw, I saw what you wrote about the 'infamous' Leia costume and I wholeheartedly agree, probably bc we're of the same demographic, bc it did absolutely nothing for me, lol :laugh:, so TP for you too :).

I'm not really sure what you're referring to, but thanks (I think)!
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: MBunge on December 22, 2015, 12:16:29 AM
If some of you are unfamiliar with "Star Wars", the first movie left MANY questions that were later revealed in the story.
.

No, it didn't.  There weren't a lot of questions left unanswered in the first movie because neither Lucas nor the studio had the slightest idea of how successful it would be.  The identity of Luke's father isn't a mystery.  The identity of the Emperor isn't a mystery.  Obi-wan becoming Luke's guiding spirit isn't a mystery.  I would think how quickly and thoroughly all the sequels contradicted or deviated from what was established in the first movie is a fairly undeniable sign that most of this stuff was made up as they went along.

Mike
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Beat LA on December 22, 2015, 12:21:29 AM
BeatLA, you try to be the most transparent person possible on the internet. I think that's not as fun as leaving ambiguity, but TP for your valiant cause. (I won't comment about the whole exchange that just took place.)

LarBrd, we share a love for movies (and it seems like we have similar taste)! TP to you as well. Thank you for the bolded spoiler warnings. I hope to see the new Star Wars this Xmas week with the family, and I'll hopefully be able to contribute to (and read more than half) of this thread then.

EDIT: I will admit to being a prequel fan, but I only liked Revenge of the Sith by itself. Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones were just too slow-moving for me. Revenge of the Sith was a visual delight to watch, and when I look back on the entire prequel trilogy, I get a lot more from overarching personal reflection than the individually-tailored movie breakdowns.

Lol, I'm just trying to eliminate the possibility of having ugly misunderstandings.  Btw, I saw what you wrote about the 'infamous' Leia costume and I wholeheartedly agree, probably bc we're of the same demographic, bc it did absolutely nothing for me, lol :laugh:, so TP for you too :).

I'm not really sure what you're referring to, but thanks (I think)!

Brb :laugh:.

Edit: And now we know why you weren't familiar with it - bc you didn't write it, lol.  I somehow got you confused with TheTruthFot18 *face palm*.  Wow.  Oh well, I gave him a TP anyway :laugh:.

At any rate, this is what I was talking about.


  I'd wager that she's taken full advantage of the fame that came her way, and I'd guess she's happier with the way things turned out than she'd have been if she hadn't taken advantage of her looks to be even considered for that role.

OK, fine, even if all of that is true ... can you blame her for being bitter that the space bikini is maybe the most enduring scene of that movie for a lot of people?

I don't understand why it's so important to you to push against that.  So women in Hollywood get ahead, or not, because of their looks.  The ones that benefit from that can't resent the fact that they're evaluated based on how attractive they are?

Maybe as a "millennial" or someone who grew up in the internet age and having seen all the movies, the outfit only stands out because it's talked about so much. When I watched the movie growing up I was more focused on the giant slug and frozen Han, but that's just me.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on December 22, 2015, 12:36:39 AM
If some of you are unfamiliar with "Star Wars", the first movie left MANY questions that were later revealed in the story.
.

No, it didn't.  There weren't a lot of questions left unanswered in the first movie because neither Lucas nor the studio had the slightest idea of how successful it would be.  The identity of Luke's father isn't a mystery.  The identity of the Emperor isn't a mystery.  Obi-wan becoming Luke's guiding spirit isn't a mystery.  I would think how quickly and thoroughly all the sequels contradicted or deviated from what was established in the first movie is a fairly undeniable sign that most of this stuff was made up as they went along.
k... whatev

Like I said, when the first movie came out there was a popular theory that R2D2 was Luke's father.   

Kinda fun that there's a lot about this new story we don't know yet.  Will be fun to find out.  Look if some of you guys didn't like it, so be it.  Star Wars isn't for everyone.  Had you seen the originals for the first time as a jaded adult, you probably would have thought they were pretty silly.  I think some people don't recognize why they liked the originals in the first place.   For what Star Wars is, I like them... and the new movie is pure Star Wars. 
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: fairweatherfan on December 22, 2015, 12:40:12 AM
If some of you are unfamiliar with "Star Wars", the first movie left MANY questions that were later revealed in the story.
.

No, it didn't.  There weren't a lot of questions left unanswered in the first movie because neither Lucas nor the studio had the slightest idea of how successful it would be.  The identity of Luke's father isn't a mystery.  The identity of the Emperor isn't a mystery.  Obi-wan becoming Luke's guiding spirit isn't a mystery.  I would think how quickly and thoroughly all the sequels contradicted or deviated from what was established in the first movie is a fairly undeniable sign that most of this stuff was made up as they went along.

Mike

I agree with two of those, because they were more world details at that point, but Luke's father and his connection to Vader were brought up several times in the first movie and left unanswered. 

It was left as a mystery, and they'd have to be pretty incompetent for it to have been unintentional.  They might've changed the answer as they wrote Empire but his parentage was definitely made prominent and left hanging.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: MBunge on December 22, 2015, 01:11:06 AM
If some of you are unfamiliar with "Star Wars", the first movie left MANY questions that were later revealed in the story.
.

No, it didn't.  There weren't a lot of questions left unanswered in the first movie because neither Lucas nor the studio had the slightest idea of how successful it would be.  The identity of Luke's father isn't a mystery.  The identity of the Emperor isn't a mystery.  Obi-wan becoming Luke's guiding spirit isn't a mystery.  I would think how quickly and thoroughly all the sequels contradicted or deviated from what was established in the first movie is a fairly undeniable sign that most of this stuff was made up as they went along.
k... whatev

Like I said, when the first movie came out there was a popular theory that R2D2 was Luke's father.   

It was not a popular theory.  It was wild speculation by some people in fanzines which had tiny readerships.  I'm old enough to have seen Star Wars in the theatre when it first ran and neither I nor 99.99999999% of the people who watched and loved the movie ever heard of this "popular" theory.

Mike
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: MBunge on December 22, 2015, 01:13:22 AM
If some of you are unfamiliar with "Star Wars", the first movie left MANY questions that were later revealed in the story.
.

No, it didn't.  There weren't a lot of questions left unanswered in the first movie because neither Lucas nor the studio had the slightest idea of how successful it would be.  The identity of Luke's father isn't a mystery.  The identity of the Emperor isn't a mystery.  Obi-wan becoming Luke's guiding spirit isn't a mystery.  I would think how quickly and thoroughly all the sequels contradicted or deviated from what was established in the first movie is a fairly undeniable sign that most of this stuff was made up as they went along.

Mike

I agree with two of those, because they were more world details at that point, but Luke's father and his connection to Vader were brought up several times in the first movie and left unanswered. 

It was left as a mystery, and they'd have to be pretty incompetent for it to have been unintentional.  They might've changed the answer as they wrote Empire but his parentage was definitely made prominent and left hanging.

The answer is that Luke's father was a great pilot who trained to be a Jedi, only to be killed by fellow trainee Darth Vader.  There really wasn't anything more to it than that.

Mike
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on December 22, 2015, 01:14:49 AM
If some of you are unfamiliar with "Star Wars", the first movie left MANY questions that were later revealed in the story.
.

No, it didn't.  There weren't a lot of questions left unanswered in the first movie because neither Lucas nor the studio had the slightest idea of how successful it would be.  The identity of Luke's father isn't a mystery.  The identity of the Emperor isn't a mystery.  Obi-wan becoming Luke's guiding spirit isn't a mystery.  I would think how quickly and thoroughly all the sequels contradicted or deviated from what was established in the first movie is a fairly undeniable sign that most of this stuff was made up as they went along.
k... whatev

Like I said, when the first movie came out there was a popular theory that R2D2 was Luke's father.   

It was not a popular theory.  It was wild speculation by some people in fanzines which had tiny readerships.  I'm old enough to have seen Star Wars in the theatre when it first ran and neither I nor 99.99999999% of the people who watched and loved the movie ever heard of this "popular" theory.

Mike
How do you know if 99% of people were unaware of this popular theory unless you yourself were familiar with that popular theory?  Maybe it was more popular in the UK since they had over a decade of Daleks at that point so the idea of R2D2 being the brain of Luke's destroyed Jedi father in a cyborg body wasn't too far fetched.  Plus R2D2 was present any time the force was used... You can see how everyone came to that conclusion.

Anyways... What are we even talking about at this point ?  You didn't like the movie ?  That's a shame.  You ever seen "Hook"?  You know how Robin Williams acts before he remembers he is Peter Pan?   That's how it must feel to hate the new Star Wars movie... Unable to tap into the magic of your childhood and love it for what it is.  I mostly feel bad for anyone who wasn't thrilled with it.  Everyone I went with loved it.  It's all anyone has been talking about.   I couldn't stop smiling.  I got chills multiple times.  It fully delivered.  JJ nailed it.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Casperian on December 22, 2015, 07:08:55 AM
I thought it was...ok, roughly on the level of Ep III.

As others have already said, I didn't like that it was basically a re-imagining of Ep IV. I mean, another planet-destroying weapon? Really? C'mon JJ, you're better than that. Stop playing it safe, and be a bit more daring.

Absolutely hated the Finn character, though. So bland, so pointless. The actor was also terrible (as was the guy playing the pilot). Generally, the movie had way too much Hollywood about it for my taste. "Here's a strong, independent woman. Here's a token black guy who makes funny faces." Bleh, so forced and formulaic. What's next? The big reveal that C3PO is gay?

Still, when the credits rolled, I thought "That's it?". I genuinely believed we had at least one more hour to go. So I guess it was pretty entertaining. I maintain hope that the next 2 movies will be more original, though.
Maybe I'm just too old for these bland vanilla stories. I guess I would've loved it if I was still 12.

Oh, and while we're on topic: please, stop saying the prequels weren't bad (which I've read quite a few times, recently). They were terrible (at least Ep I & II). It's really not a matter of opinion. It's basically "The Muppets on Tatooine". Ep II is one big, boring love story, with crappy dialogue, and two actors with absolutely no chemistry. It's ok if you like them, I like some bad movies, too. It's also ok if you were young when you watched them, and they hold some nostalgic value for you. Doesn't change anything, though, they're absolutely mind-numbingly bad movies, Star Wars or not.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: eja117 on December 22, 2015, 07:46:28 AM
I can't get past the part where a movie with hundreds of lightsabers, a huge space battle, Jango Fett, and a fairly compelling mystery was bad.

I found it exceptionally entertaining, which is why I was there.

You want a boring as heck, virtually meaningless space movie, go for 2001 Space Oddessy. I've been more entertained literally watching paint dry.

During AOTC at the beginning of the clone war battle and again when Yoda was carving up Dooku people were literally jumping out of their seats, and it wasn't just the kids.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: AngryAndIrritable on December 22, 2015, 06:38:30 PM
I can't get past the part where a movie with hundreds of lightsabers, a huge space battle, Jango Fett, and a fairly compelling mystery was bad.

I found it exceptionally entertaining, which is why I was there.

You want a boring as heck, virtually meaningless space movie, go for 2001 Space Oddessy. I've been more entertained literally watching paint dry.

During AOTC at the beginning of the clone war battle and again when Yoda was carving up Dooku people were literally jumping out of their seats, and it wasn't just the kids.

No idea why you brought up '2001' with reference to Star Wars. This is one of the most 'apples to oranges' comparisons I have seen in a long time. It's like comparing The Beatles to Monteverdi.

Anyway... having spent the last week playing 'dodge the spoiler' with varying degrees of success, I finally got to watch it. I don't really know what to make of it - obviously JJ Abrams was on a hiding to nothing if he did anything other than move the look and feel of the film back to the original trilogy.

The human/ humorous aspects were what made the film for me. Admittedly some of the themes and comic riffs were rehashed but they still worked, albeit with entirely new characters. Rey and Finn were the best two characters in the film - Leia may as well not have been there for all she truly added to the story, and even Solo's presence seemed ultimately disposable.

Kylo Ren is either a villain played incredibly badly or not a villlain at all. I guess we'll see how that pans out later.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: 86MaxwellSmart on December 22, 2015, 08:08:44 PM
Saw it last night..
I have to say...I thought it was a metaphor for Disney taking over for Lucas.
Bad guys more evil than the Empire--?...Bigger Death Star...Skywalker is NOW basically Obi-Wan.
New cuter "Disney" marketable Droid taking over for R2D2.
Yoda replaced by girl character with goggles.
Typical Hollywood--Re-boot--with a girl NOW the hero.
SAME plot as episode IV---gotta capture those young audiences somehow---Just remake the first one I guess.

It was okay---just don't ever have to see it again---I'll just watch Episode IV.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: MBunge on December 22, 2015, 08:36:22 PM
If some of you are unfamiliar with "Star Wars", the first movie left MANY questions that were later revealed in the story.
.

No, it didn't.  There weren't a lot of questions left unanswered in the first movie because neither Lucas nor the studio had the slightest idea of how successful it would be.  The identity of Luke's father isn't a mystery.  The identity of the Emperor isn't a mystery.  Obi-wan becoming Luke's guiding spirit isn't a mystery.  I would think how quickly and thoroughly all the sequels contradicted or deviated from what was established in the first movie is a fairly undeniable sign that most of this stuff was made up as they went along.
k... whatev

Like I said, when the first movie came out there was a popular theory that R2D2 was Luke's father.   

It was not a popular theory.  It was wild speculation by some people in fanzines which had tiny readerships.  I'm old enough to have seen Star Wars in the theatre when it first ran and neither I nor 99.99999999% of the people who watched and loved the movie ever heard of this "popular" theory.

Mike
How do you know if 99% of people were unaware of this popular theory unless you yourself were familiar with that popular theory?  Maybe it was more popular in the UK since they had over a decade of Daleks at that point so the idea of R2D2 being the brain of Luke's destroyed Jedi father in a cyborg body wasn't too far fetched.  Plus R2D2 was present any time the force was used... You can see how everyone came to that conclusion.

Anyways... What are we even talking about at this point ?  You didn't like the movie ?  That's a shame.  You ever seen "Hook"?  You know how Robin Williams acts before he remembers he is Peter Pan?   That's how it must feel to hate the new Star Wars movie... Unable to tap into the magic of your childhood and love it for what it is.  I mostly feel bad for anyone who wasn't thrilled with it.  Everyone I went with loved it.  It's all anyone has been talking about.   I couldn't stop smiling.  I got chills multiple times.  It fully delivered.  JJ nailed it.

Unless you are in your mid 50s, you heard about this "popular" theory the same way I did.  You read about it recently on the Internet.

And when did I say I didn't like TFA?  I just saw it a second time and enjoyed it even more.  I just objected to you pulling a "Scrottie McBoogerballs" with it.

Mike
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Vox_Populi on December 22, 2015, 08:49:54 PM
I agree about Rey's near instant aptitude with the Force. It was like watching Dragon Ball Z...I mean really...
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: eja117 on December 22, 2015, 09:34:27 PM
I did not get the whole "nostalgia" thing.  I did not need Star Wars nostalgia. The nostalgia was going to come naturally from Han, Chewie, Luke, R2, C3PO, and Leia, and the trailers made it pretty clear there was going to be a certain nostalgic ship as well. And it would be fighting nostalgic tie fighters.

But I was very much under the impression it would be a NEW movie. Meaning new plots, new planets, new ships, new weapons, new themes, new problems, new characters, NNNNNEEEEEEEWWWW.

Instead I got recycled. Didn't have that new movie smell. Got that "we just stole your money after we mailed it in" smell.

God even the minor parts are recycled. I mean a thousand year old small person who is wise and knows the Force? Geeze. Is Maz Yoda's little sister or something?  Just dumb.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Redz on December 22, 2015, 09:56:42 PM
I did not get the whole "nostalgia" thing.  I did not need Star Wars nostalgia. The nostalgia was going to come naturally from Han, Chewie, Luke, R2, C3PO, and Leia, and the prequels made it pretty clear there was going to be a certain nostalgic ship as well. And it would be fighting nostalgic tie fighters.

But I was very much under the impression it would be a NEW movie. Meaning new plots, new planets, new ships, new weapons, new themes, new problems, new characters, NNNNNEEEEEEEWWWW.

Instead I got recycled. Didn't have that new movie smell. Got that "we just stole your money after we mailed it in" smell.

God even the minor parts are recycled. I mean a thousand year old small person who is wise and knows the Force? Geeze. Is Maz Yoda's little sister or something?  Just dumb.

Is Yoda dead?

And speaking of dead, there had to have been a way for them to reincarnate Lando for a lil Billy D cameo. 

(http://cdn.movieweb.com/img.news.tops/NEPYU1mObMmrTS_2_b.jpg)
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Redz on December 22, 2015, 10:00:06 PM
I agree about Rey's near instant aptitude with the Force. It was like watching Dragon Ball Z...I mean really...

I think the rub was that being pinned down brought it out naturally.  She was just using what's always been in her, it just became super wicked strong when she recognized it for it was.

We all got the force in us when we believe!

TESTIFY to the FORCE!

Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Lucky17 on December 22, 2015, 10:11:53 PM
Very much enjoyed it.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: MJohnnyboy on December 23, 2015, 01:22:06 AM
I saw it an hour ago and I loved it. What's funny is I watch this movie and like others have said, it really enforces the notion that the prequels were AWFUL. This movie also had the right mixture of Star Wars elements and JJ Abrams' style of directing movies. Spoiler warning

Case and point: The character of Rey. She all the sudden discovers the force and knows how to use it to her advantage as a warrior. The movie implies that she clearly is a gifted jedi who has a mysterious backstory. That took me off-guard but knowing JJ Abrams and his tendency to make his stories mysterious, I think her backstory and power will be explained with time. Also, I watched her character and thought to myself, This is how they should have done Anakin Skywalker in the prequels. Someone who unknowingly has this power as a jedi and slowly but surely knows how to use the force to become a legendary fighter. Atleast with Anakin, even if he didn't know his own power as a jedi, the audience would have because we knew he was going to become Darth Vader. That's what makes the character of Rey so interesting. Her character has so much potential.

Something else that was phenomenal was the character relationships. Particularly between Rey and Finn. You got the sense of a budding friendship between the two from their interactions. Even though Finn had the hots for her early on you could see both him and her clearly connecting as people and having each other's back. Could they later fall in love as the trilogy goes on? Who knows? The movie leaves it open-ended between the two of them. Compared to yet again, the prequels, where all the relationships are told to us instead of being shown like with Obiwan and Anakin's "friendship", where you don't see them interact much together throughout the trilogy (Heck in AOTC you get more of a sense that they resent each other), or more infamously, Anakin and Padme's "love", where their relationship a. Doesn't make any sense and b. Is all told through awful dialogue.

You could also see the continued chemistry between Han/Chewbacca and Han/Leia. Han's death still shook me even though I saw it coming when I saw him talk with with his son. I'm going to agree with the more positive view of Kylo Ren in that I thought he was a great villain. I may have already said this somewhat with Rey, but Kylo Ren was what I think George Lucas wanted Anakin to be. An almighty sith lord who is power hungry but confused and may still have some good in him as a person.

I agree that "The Force Awakens" borrows a lot of elements from "A New Hope", but I saw it more as adding something new to these elements as opposed to blatantly ripping them off. The movie keeps you invested the whole time. You can't honestly tell me there were parts of this movie where you were bored, unlike the prequels. There was a scene of sitting and talking but the difference between that and the prequels was that something was happening during the sitting and talking scene that furthers the plot.

Overall, the movie, even if it left me with some questions, lived up to the hype. I hope to see it again soon and can't wait for episodes 8 & 9.

I mentioned the prequels a lot in this rant but it's just, to me, the prequels had so much potential to be great movies and they were absolutely awful, and "The Force Awakens" reminded me of what a Star Wars movie should be. The prequels on the other hand are not what Star Wars is about. So much of the story doesn't make sense. It's very boring and hard to follow. You don't care about the characters. They go with a "tell-don't-show" approach. The only reason why all three movies are connected is because they say that they are. However, what sticks out the most to me is that prequels demonstrated that George Lucas did not understand the mythos of Star Wars. There was a deeper meaning to becoming a Jedi than just swinging a shiny burning sword to kill people as told in the originals, but in the prequels, they in fact go against the real meaning of a Jedi. I will say "Revenge of the Sith" is the only enjoyable prequel out of the three, but it is still a very flawed movie.

But yeah, loved episode 7. Well done Mr. Abrams and good riddance Mr. Lucas.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: fairweatherfan on December 23, 2015, 02:01:07 AM
This seems appropriate for this thread.  IMPORTANT NOTE: Please start the YouTube link before clicking on Twitter link.  Kylo would want it that way.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5anLPw0Efmo

https://twitter.com/KyloR3n
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Mr Green on December 23, 2015, 07:18:53 AM
I saw it yesterday with my dad. We both really enjoyed it even though there were many plot holes and much of the story was recycled from episodes 4 to 6. The only real concern I have is Kylo Ren's lack of credibility as a bad ass. He struggles to hold his own in a light saber duel against two amatuers plus he looks too much like a babyfaced John Travolta in Saturday Night Fever. Other than that it is definately worth watching on the silver screen. I rate it just below the originals but way above the prequels.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Lucky17 on December 23, 2015, 10:30:15 AM
I actually liked the character of Finn. A Stormtrooper with a crisis of conscience? He starts out as a bit of a coward, concerned only with self-preservation, but grows into a bit of a flawed hero, taking greater and greater risks (usually to save Rey).

I know people are down on recycled elements. But, if you're the Empire, and you still had the plans for the Death Star lying around somewhere, wouldn't you build an upgraded model a generation later with newer technology, instead of trying to build something completely new?
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: eja117 on December 23, 2015, 10:43:17 AM
I have a couple issues with a 3rd Death Star. Ironically the first seemed the hardest to kill, and the others relied on shields.

Next, it seems entirely too expensive and time consuming, and if something goes wrong you have a very serious problem. 

Next, this time around they didn't have the resources of the empire to draw on. You would think the Republic would have made this really difficult for them.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Lucky17 on December 23, 2015, 11:12:29 AM
I have a couple issues with a 3rd Death Star. Ironically the first seemed the hardest to kill, and the others relied on shields.

Next, it seems entirely too expensive and time consuming, and if something goes wrong you have a very serious problem. 

Next, this time around they didn't have the resources of the empire to draw on. You would think the Republic would have made this really difficult for them.

Aren't those last two the same concerns fans had with the previous iterations of the Death Star?
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: eja117 on December 23, 2015, 11:14:20 AM
I have a couple issues with a 3rd Death Star. Ironically the first seemed the hardest to kill, and the others relied on shields.

Next, it seems entirely too expensive and time consuming, and if something goes wrong you have a very serious problem. 

Next, this time around they didn't have the resources of the empire to draw on. You would think the Republic would have made this really difficult for them.

Aren't those last two the same concerns fans had with the previous iterations of the Death Star?
Sorta, but now they take their mistakes and make them even bigger, and with a Republic out there that you would think would be a major thorn in their side. I mean who are they taxing and stealing from?
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: fairweatherfan on December 23, 2015, 11:14:24 AM
I agree that "The Force Awakens" borrows a lot of elements from "A New Hope", but I saw it more as adding something new to these elements as opposed to blatantly ripping them off.

I think the idea was to present the same story beats but put a different spin on them.  Like the daring mission to rescue a damsel in distress from the heart of the enemy's strength, but oops - she's not helpless at all, she's super-competent and has already gotten loose and is halfway to breaking out on her own.  Or, there's a new Sith badass in a black mask, but oh - he turns out to be a childish poser who's just wearing the mask to try and ape his scary grandpa. 

That said I think it didn't always hit those goals - it was so samey in a lot of places that the different spins got drowned out, most notably in the whole Starkiller set up.  But definitely entertaining throughout. 
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Donoghus on December 23, 2015, 11:29:45 AM
I guess the bigger question with Starkiller Base was, are all the independent contractors that built the base already gone or is there going to be more economic fallout like with Death Star II?
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Casperian on December 23, 2015, 11:53:34 AM
I can't get past the part where a movie with hundreds of lightsabers, a huge space battle, Jango Fett, and a fairly compelling mystery was bad.

I found it exceptionally entertaining, which is why I was there.

You want a boring as heck, virtually meaningless space movie, go for 2001 Space Oddessy. I've been more entertained literally watching paint dry.

During AOTC at the beginning of the clone war battle and again when Yoda was carving up Dooku people were literally jumping out of their seats, and it wasn't just the kids.

Well,  first of all, as AngryandIrritable already said, it's kinda pointless to compare Star Wars with 2001. One is a fantasy/adventure flick, the other is an allegorical director movie strong on imagery. Not that I disagree with you, I'm not exactly a Kubrick fan myself and thought 2001 was incredibly boring. The only thing these movies have in common, though, is that they both happen to play in space.

More to the point, yes, AOTC had hundreds of lightsabers and a huge space battle, but a) it's what happened in between the CGI spectacles that was boring, and b) those weren't even that good to begin with. Yoda rolling around with his lightsaber, beating up baddies by the dozen, cracking jokes in between, as if he was Fred Flintstone at the bowling center was neither particularly funny nor exciting. On top of that you had the usual trifecta of bad writing, bad acting and bad pacing.

Simply put, they're an all-around mess, even without the Star Wars label to live up to. It's a bad movie as "The Muppets on Tatooine", but it's a slap to the face as a Star Wars movie.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Donoghus on December 23, 2015, 12:10:52 PM
In regards to AOTC, it had its moments but I don't remember walking out of that movie being blown away.  Watching it years removed from theaters and its even more apparent how overblown the CGI is and how flat the acting it.

That being said, it had its moments;

-The chase on Coruscant

-The stuff on Kamino

- The Geonosis battles (both in the arena & the Dooku showdown)

The love story was godawful.  Absolutely terrible writing.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: kozlodoev on December 23, 2015, 12:12:30 PM
I actually liked the character of Finn. A Stormtrooper with a crisis of conscience?
He's also a practical impossibility in the SW universe, since all stormtroopers were cloned from Jango Fett, and Jango Fett wasn't black. So there's that.  ;D
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Donoghus on December 23, 2015, 12:15:16 PM
I actually liked the character of Finn. A Stormtrooper with a crisis of conscience?
He's also a practical impossibility in the SW universe, since all stormtroopers were cloned from Jango Fett, and Jango Fett wasn't black. So there's that.  ;D

The troopers in the Clone Wars were clones.   The stormtroopers in the original trilogy aren't clones. 

And the stormtroopers in VII were basically children stolen from families and brainwashed into stormtroopers.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: fairweatherfan on December 23, 2015, 12:56:17 PM
I actually liked the character of Finn. A Stormtrooper with a crisis of conscience?
He's also a practical impossibility in the SW universe, since all stormtroopers were cloned from Jango Fett, and Jango Fett wasn't black. So there's that.  ;D

The troopers in the Clone Wars were clones.   The stormtroopers in the original trilogy aren't clones. 

And the stormtroopers in VII were basically children stolen from families and brainwashed into stormtroopers.

Yeah, there's a quick throwaway line where Hux (General Weasley) gets defensive about how his stormtroopers are better than clones.  I think it was implied or maybe spelled out that there are still some clone armies out there somewhere (not necessarily in the First Order), but the current stormtroopers aren't it.  Otherwise the female stormtrooper doesn't make any sense either.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: kozlodoev on December 23, 2015, 12:58:46 PM
The troopers in the Clone Wars were clones.   The stormtroopers in the original trilogy aren't clones.
The Stormtroopers in the original trilogy certainly include the clones from the Clone Wars, but you're right that there are other Stormtroopers at that point, too.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: fairweatherfan on December 23, 2015, 01:03:15 PM
The troopers in the Clone Wars were clones.   The stormtroopers in the original trilogy aren't clones.
The Stormtroopers in the original trilogy certainly include the clones from the Clone Wars, but you're right that there are other Stormtroopers at that point, too.

Not to get all hyper-nerd on you, but no, the clone troopers are all out of service by the original movie.  Mainly because the rapid aging that let the army be raised so quickly made them all too old to fight within a couple decades.

...please don't make me post a Wookiepedia link to support this.   :-\
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: kozlodoev on December 23, 2015, 01:16:29 PM
The troopers in the Clone Wars were clones.   The stormtroopers in the original trilogy aren't clones.
The Stormtroopers in the original trilogy certainly include the clones from the Clone Wars, but you're right that there are other Stormtroopers at that point, too.

Not to get all hyper-nerd on you, but no, the clone troopers are all out of service by the original movie.  Mainly because the rapid aging that let the army be raised so quickly made them all too old to fight within a couple decades.

...please don't make me post a Wookiepedia link to support this.   :-\
I'm not going to outnerd anyone on SW (I'm more of a LOTR guy), but wasn't that an expanded universe factoid?
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Lucky17 on December 23, 2015, 01:26:47 PM
I actually liked the character of Finn. A Stormtrooper with a crisis of conscience?
He's also a practical impossibility in the SW universe, since all stormtroopers were cloned from Jango Fett, and Jango Fett wasn't black. So there's that.  ;D

The troopers in the Clone Wars were clones.   The stormtroopers in the original trilogy aren't clones. 

And the stormtroopers in VII were basically children stolen from families and brainwashed into stormtroopers.

Yeah, there's a quick throwaway line where Hux (General Weasley) gets defensive about how his stormtroopers are better than clones.  I think it was implied or maybe spelled out that there are still some clone armies out there somewhere (not necessarily in the First Order), but the current stormtroopers aren't it.  Otherwise the female stormtrooper doesn't make any sense either.

Right. Additionally, why would a clone need "reconditioning?" Obedience would have been genetically engineered from the get-go, no?
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: fairweatherfan on December 23, 2015, 01:40:50 PM
The troopers in the Clone Wars were clones.   The stormtroopers in the original trilogy aren't clones.
The Stormtroopers in the original trilogy certainly include the clones from the Clone Wars, but you're right that there are other Stormtroopers at that point, too.

Not to get all hyper-nerd on you, but no, the clone troopers are all out of service by the original movie.  Mainly because the rapid aging that let the army be raised so quickly made them all too old to fight within a couple decades.

...please don't make me post a Wookiepedia link to support this.   :-\
I'm not going to outnerd anyone on SW (I'm more of a LOTR guy), but wasn't that an expanded universe factoid?

I'm pretty sure the current Rebels CGI cartoon is considered official and it was primarily from there. 

...btw, not a bad show overall, definitely for a younger audience but not all that "kiddie".  Some likable characters and interesting plots.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Donoghus on December 23, 2015, 02:11:24 PM
The troopers in the Clone Wars were clones.   The stormtroopers in the original trilogy aren't clones.
The Stormtroopers in the original trilogy certainly include the clones from the Clone Wars, but you're right that there are other Stormtroopers at that point, too.

Not to get all hyper-nerd on you, but no, the clone troopers are all out of service by the original movie.  Mainly because the rapid aging that let the army be raised so quickly made them all too old to fight within a couple decades.

...please don't make me post a Wookiepedia link to support this.   :-\
I'm not going to outnerd anyone on SW (I'm more of a LOTR guy), but wasn't that an expanded universe factoid?

I'm pretty sure the current Rebels CGI cartoon is considered official and it was primarily from there. 

...btw, not a bad show overall, definitely for a younger audience but not all that "kiddie".  Some likable characters and interesting plots.

They've actually done a pretty solid job filling in some gaps from Revenge of the Sith to New Hope. 

It's definitely not that "kiddie" based on some of the plotlines and stuff going.

Also, the expanded universe stuff pretty much got chucked out the window when Disney took over and, basically, Disney is stamping what is canon outside the 7 films.  The "Rebels" cartoon is canon.

Although, you can certainly see some concepts from EU novels being used.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Redz on December 23, 2015, 05:57:11 PM
I have a couple issues with a 3rd Death Star. Ironically the first seemed the hardest to kill, and the others relied on shields.

Next, it seems entirely too expensive and time consuming, and if something goes wrong you have a very serious problem. 

Next, this time around they didn't have the resources of the empire to draw on. You would think the Republic would have made this really difficult for them.

Suspend reason.  It's like Dr.Evil wanting his sharks with laser beams.  They wanted a bigger badder Death Star with a new "weapon".

(http://i.imgur.com/YOCAznW.jpg)


It kind of bugged me that the weapon was only referred to as "the weapon".  Something along the lines of the  Illudium PU- 36 Explosive Space Modulator.


Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: wayupnorth on December 23, 2015, 06:49:34 PM
I did not get the whole "nostalgia" thing.  I did not need Star Wars nostalgia. The nostalgia was going to come naturally from Han, Chewie, Luke, R2, C3PO, and Leia, and the prequels made it pretty clear there was going to be a certain nostalgic ship as well. And it would be fighting nostalgic tie fighters.

But I was very much under the impression it would be a NEW movie. Meaning new plots, new planets, new ships, new weapons, new themes, new problems, new characters, NNNNNEEEEEEEWWWW.

Instead I got recycled. Didn't have that new movie smell. Got that "we just stole your money after we mailed it in" smell.

God even the minor parts are recycled. I mean a thousand year old small person who is wise and knows the Force? Geeze. Is Maz Yoda's little sister or something?  Just dumb.

lol I find it wild anyone can actually think this about the movie.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: wayupnorth on December 23, 2015, 06:54:07 PM
I actually liked the character of Finn. A Stormtrooper with a crisis of conscience?
He's also a practical impossibility in the SW universe, since all stormtroopers were cloned from Jango Fett, and Jango Fett wasn't black. So there's that.  ;D

Why on earth do you keep repeating this?

It is wrong.

They stopped using clones before A New Hope, and this has even been pointed out to you.

Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: eja117 on December 23, 2015, 06:59:02 PM
I did not get the whole "nostalgia" thing.  I did not need Star Wars nostalgia. The nostalgia was going to come naturally from Han, Chewie, Luke, R2, C3PO, and Leia, and the trailers made it pretty clear there was going to be a certain nostalgic ship as well. And it would be fighting nostalgic tie fighters.

But I was very much under the impression it would be a NEW movie. Meaning new plots, new planets, new ships, new weapons, new themes, new problems, new characters, NNNNNEEEEEEEWWWW.

Instead I got recycled. Didn't have that new movie smell. Got that "we just stole your money after we mailed it in" smell.

God even the minor parts are recycled. I mean a thousand year old small person who is wise and knows the Force? Geeze. Is Maz Yoda's little sister or something?  Just dumb.

lol I find it wild anyone can actually think this about the movie.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: wayupnorth on December 23, 2015, 07:05:49 PM
I did not get the whole "nostalgia" thing.  I did not need Star Wars nostalgia. The nostalgia was going to come naturally from Han, Chewie, Luke, R2, C3PO, and Leia, and the trailers made it pretty clear there was going to be a certain nostalgic ship as well. And it would be fighting nostalgic tie fighters.

But I was very much under the impression it would be a NEW movie. Meaning new plots, new planets, new ships, new weapons, new themes, new problems, new characters, NNNNNEEEEEEEWWWW.

Instead I got recycled. Didn't have that new movie smell. Got that "we just stole your money after we mailed it in" smell.

God even the minor parts are recycled. I mean a thousand year old small person who is wise and knows the Force? Geeze. Is Maz Yoda's little sister or something?  Just dumb.

lol I find it wild anyone can actually think this about the movie.

? Not saying you are wrong, or cannot feel that way. I just find it hard to believe anyone could go to the movie and leave thinking that.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: eja117 on December 23, 2015, 07:09:21 PM
I did not get the whole "nostalgia" thing.  I did not need Star Wars nostalgia. The nostalgia was going to come naturally from Han, Chewie, Luke, R2, C3PO, and Leia, and the trailers made it pretty clear there was going to be a certain nostalgic ship as well. And it would be fighting nostalgic tie fighters.

But I was very much under the impression it would be a NEW movie. Meaning new plots, new planets, new ships, new weapons, new themes, new problems, new characters, NNNNNEEEEEEEWWWW.

Instead I got recycled. Didn't have that new movie smell. Got that "we just stole your money after we mailed it in" smell.

God even the minor parts are recycled. I mean a thousand year old small person who is wise and knows the Force? Geeze. Is Maz Yoda's little sister or something?  Just dumb.

lol I find it wild anyone can actually think this about the movie.

? Not saying you are wrong, or cannot feel that way. I just find it hard to believe anyone could go to the movie and leave thinking that.
That was an accident. I tried to modify something and ended up quoting it....and modifying it slightly.

It's a plagiarized plot

A droid has to guard important information on a desert planet where the people live at the margins and then finds help from someone strong in the force. Then that person is chased by an evil empire run by a Sith in a helmet. Then they get off that planet in the Millennium Falcon doing some shooting from the blaster cannons and Han Solo and Chewy take them to the rebellion. And then they fight a planet size space station and infiltrate it with almost no plan and destroy it with X-Wings......Yeah. And in the mean time a major father figure character could die off.

I've seen that movie before. It was better the first time.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: wayupnorth on December 23, 2015, 07:23:19 PM
I did not get the whole "nostalgia" thing.  I did not need Star Wars nostalgia. The nostalgia was going to come naturally from Han, Chewie, Luke, R2, C3PO, and Leia, and the trailers made it pretty clear there was going to be a certain nostalgic ship as well. And it would be fighting nostalgic tie fighters.

But I was very much under the impression it would be a NEW movie. Meaning new plots, new planets, new ships, new weapons, new themes, new problems, new characters, NNNNNEEEEEEEWWWW.

Instead I got recycled. Didn't have that new movie smell. Got that "we just stole your money after we mailed it in" smell.

God even the minor parts are recycled. I mean a thousand year old small person who is wise and knows the Force? Geeze. Is Maz Yoda's little sister or something?  Just dumb.

lol I find it wild anyone can actually think this about the movie.

? Not saying you are wrong, or cannot feel that way. I just find it hard to believe anyone could go to the movie and leave thinking that.
That was an accident. I tried to modify something and ended up quoting it....and modifying it slightly.

It's a plagiarized plot

A droid has to guard important information on a desert planet where the people live at the margins and then finds help from someone strong in the force. Then that person is chased by an evil empire run by a Sith in a helmet. Then they get off that planet in the Millennium Falcon doing some shooting from the blaster cannons and Han Solo and Chewy take them to the rebellion. And then they fight a planet size space station and infiltrate it with almost no plan and destroy it with X-Wings......Yeah. And in the mean time a major father figure character could die off.

I've seen that movie before. It was better the first time.

Indeed there were quite a few parallels. Saying it is the exact same is showing a lack of attention to the details that made it different.

I believe the similarities were just a way to introduce new characters and set up the plot of the trilogy, as well as some nice nostalgia (considering it was almost 40 years since that movie came out).

If the next movie is just as similar to TESB, I will change my viewpoint, but personally I very much enjoyed the plot similarities.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: fairweatherfan on December 24, 2015, 05:17:31 PM
The troopers in the Clone Wars were clones.   The stormtroopers in the original trilogy aren't clones.
The Stormtroopers in the original trilogy certainly include the clones from the Clone Wars, but you're right that there are other Stormtroopers at that point, too.

Not to get all hyper-nerd on you, but no, the clone troopers are all out of service by the original movie.  Mainly because the rapid aging that let the army be raised so quickly made them all too old to fight within a couple decades.

...please don't make me post a Wookiepedia link to support this.   :-\
I'm not going to outnerd anyone on SW (I'm more of a LOTR guy), but wasn't that an expanded universe factoid?

I'm pretty sure the current Rebels CGI cartoon is considered official and it was primarily from there. 

...btw, not a bad show overall, definitely for a younger audience but not all that "kiddie".  Some likable characters and interesting plots.

They've actually done a pretty solid job filling in some gaps from Revenge of the Sith to New Hope. 

It's definitely not that "kiddie" based on some of the plotlines and stuff going.

Also, the expanded universe stuff pretty much got chucked out the window when Disney took over and, basically, Disney is stamping what is canon outside the 7 films.  The "Rebels" cartoon is canon.

Although, you can certainly see some concepts from EU novels being used.

The EU was entirely thrown out, I think with the exception of the Clone Wars CGI cartoon (even the cool shorts by the guy who did Dexter's Laboratory are out). 

Which is a shame, because now the canon loses priceless characters and moments like this:

(http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/starwars/images/c/c8/Lord_Nyax.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20090521184317)

(http://i617.photobucket.com/albums/tt252/Jedi_Zekk/Selonian.jpg)

(http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/starwars/images/5/5d/Leia_Beldorion_TERC.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20121006114429)
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: slamtheking on December 25, 2015, 10:36:36 PM
saw the movie today.  my thoughts.

- big ripoff of IV.  it's like each trilogy starts off with Major Bad guy no one wants to face, The Enemy has an unbeatable weapon that the rebels end up beating, A young protege/apprentice arises to take on the bad guy AND the older mentor dies at the hands of the Major Bad Guy.
- hated that they killed Han but it was being telegraphed for a good part of the movie.
- Like the new characters - particularly Rey.  Not digging Ren's weakness though.  Also not keen on Rey's sudden aptitude in the force. 
-seemed pretty obvious as soon as Rey was interacting with BB8 that she was Luke's daughter.  Not sure who Luke would have had a kid with but I'm sure they'll explain it.  I can't see her being Han and Leia's daughter but that would be the only other option.

overall, I liked the movie a lot.  The overwhelming similarities to New Hope make me dread the potential predictability of the next 2 movies.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Yoki_IsTheName on December 25, 2015, 11:20:54 PM
I can finally read thru this thread.

But I might need a couple of hours before I do, I need to mourn a icon.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Csfan1984 on December 27, 2015, 01:41:07 PM
I saw the movie and thought it was great for a new generation. If you ignore the similarities to episode 4 it's a really good movie. I really felt it could not have been better as all the new characters shined. Rey and Poe are a little OP so I expect Finn will some how be the one to defeat the new Sith Lord in the end.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: dark_lord on December 27, 2015, 09:50:10 PM
-very good, but not great

-looking forward to see where it goes

-liked rey and looking forward to her story

-loved the character maz kanata

-having the old cast really helped bring the saga to the new storyline
liked kylo ren in the beginning, then was let down. star wars villains always had that appeal that you liked them, even if you hated them. i don't have that feeling with ren (or snoke) right now

-hated that ren was "ben solo" and not jacen solo.  also using ben from ben skywalker

-was hoping we would see thrawn

-HAN SOLO'S DEATH......Hated how he died.  as a kid, you always envisioned he would die in a blaze of glory, not all emotional



Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Redz on December 27, 2015, 10:12:06 PM
What was the hot shot pilot's significance?  Beyond the greatest guy in the universe and a heck of a fine pilot.  He's gotta be someone's something, right?  Did I miss that?
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: GratefulCs on December 27, 2015, 10:15:51 PM
What was the hot shot pilot's significance?  Beyond the greatest guy in the universe and a heck of a fine pilot.  He's gotta be someone's something, right?  Did I miss that?
is he related to Wedge somehow?


Not sure
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: littleteapot on December 27, 2015, 10:22:00 PM
What was the hot shot pilot's significance?  Beyond the greatest guy in the universe and a heck of a fine pilot.  He's gotta be someone's something, right?  Did I miss that?
Honestly he was probably supposed to be this movie's version of Han Solo in the original trilogy.

Practically someone needed to run away with Fin. It would've been better if he just died in the crash. Would've given Fin some more emotional depth throughout the trilogy I think. Not to mention I hate when the protagonists are all invincible in these movies.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: slamtheking on December 27, 2015, 10:38:20 PM
What was the hot shot pilot's significance?  Beyond the greatest guy in the universe and a heck of a fine pilot.  He's gotta be someone's something, right?  Did I miss that?
Honestly he was probably supposed to be this movie's version of Han Solo in the original trilogy.

Practically someone needed to run away with Fin. It would've been better if he just died in the crash. Would've given Fin some more emotional depth throughout the trilogy I think. Not to mention I hate when the protagonists are all invincible in these movies.
I'm pretty sure Han's death in this one showed the protagonists aren't invincible. 
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: littleteapot on December 27, 2015, 10:44:12 PM
I'm pretty sure Han's death in this one showed the protagonists aren't invincible.
He was old though and his story is told already. I didn't feel very vulnerable watching this movie.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: slamtheking on December 27, 2015, 10:46:47 PM
I'm pretty sure Han's death in this one showed the protagonists aren't invincible.
He was old though and his story is told already. I didn't feel very vulnerable watching this movie.
too early to feel vulnerable but then again, you know the formula.  other than maybe the anticipation of losing a body part (watch for it next movie -- either Fin or Rey lose a hand I'll bet -- like Anakin in II and Luke in V) you know the heroes will live.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Sketch5 on December 27, 2015, 11:17:27 PM
What was the hot shot pilot's significance?  Beyond the greatest guy in the universe and a heck of a fine pilot.  He's gotta be someone's something, right?  Did I miss that?
Honestly he was probably supposed to be this movie's version of Han Solo in the original trilogy.

Practically someone needed to run away with Fin. It would've been better if he just died in the crash. Would've given Fin some more emotional depth throughout the trilogy I think. Not to mention I hate when the protagonists are all invincible in these movies.

Poe wasn't even suppose to make it threw the interrogation, but the actor didn't want to sign on just for a few moments. Good call career wise, plus he would have been pointless in that opening scene.

I have a feeling Poe and Finn will be hunted by Capt Phasma in the next movie, Poe and Phasma were barely in it and they were hyped a ton.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: BornReady on December 27, 2015, 11:38:10 PM
What was the hot shot pilot's significance?  Beyond the greatest guy in the universe and a heck of a fine pilot.  He's gotta be someone's something, right?  Did I miss that?
Honestly he was probably supposed to be this movie's version of Han Solo in the original trilogy.

Practically someone needed to run away with Fin. It would've been better if he just died in the crash. Would've given Fin some more emotional depth throughout the trilogy I think. Not to mention I hate when the protagonists are all invincible in these movies.

Poe wasn't even suppose to make it threw the interrogation, but the actor didn't want to sign on just for a few moments. Good call career wise, plus he would have been pointless in that opening scene.

I have a feeling Poe and Finn will be hunted by Capt Phasma in the next movie, Poe and Phasma were barely in it and they were hyped a ton.


Didnt really see the point of capt phasma
looked like a rip off version of boba fett but with a cape and female (i think)
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Csfan1984 on December 28, 2015, 04:06:12 AM
Possible spoilers/My Personal theories ie guesses so far,
-Poe is a former beginner student of Luke, he is a high force sensitive. Which explains his ,OP fighter pilot skills and why he was given the mission.
-Rey also has some training from birth to be a jedi from Luke but she has obviously repressed those early memories. (Or maybe Luke wiped her mind of them) Being trained very young then repressing the memories would explains how she starts to use the force quickly. We see in episode 1 they start training very young.
-Finn is force sensitive which is how he did not conform/fall to the stormtrooper brainwashing. Also maybe all the new class of stormtroopers are similar to Halo spartan program. Elite Gen pool kids stole then trained. Many could be force sensitive?
-Ren was not given full training due to not committing completely to the dark side. With his father now dead he will receive full training to become a true sith and 2x as strong. Thus First Order comes out on top in episode 8.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: hpantazo on December 28, 2015, 04:49:31 AM
saw the movie today.  my thoughts.

- big ripoff of IV.  it's like each trilogy starts off with Major Bad guy no one wants to face, The Enemy has an unbeatable weapon that the rebels end up beating, A young protege/apprentice arises to take on the bad guy AND the older mentor dies at the hands of the Major Bad Guy.
- hated that they killed Han but it was being telegraphed for a good part of the movie.
- Like the new characters - particularly Rey.  Not digging Ren's weakness though.  Also not keen on Rey's sudden aptitude in the force. 
-seemed pretty obvious as soon as Rey was interacting with BB8 that she was Luke's daughter.  Not sure who Luke would have had a kid with but I'm sure they'll explain it.  I can't see her being Han and Leia's daughter but that would be the only other option.

overall, I liked the movie a lot.  The overwhelming similarities to New Hope make me dread the potential predictability of the next 2 movies.

Most reports about this new trilogy before Force Awakens came out said that the lines between good and evil would be totally blurred in this trilogy, so I expect that it was set up to look a lot like Episode IV to make us think the next two will go the same way but things will take some major plot swings. For one, I think Kylo Ren is already working for the light side imo.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Casperian on December 28, 2015, 06:57:10 AM
I actually liked the character of Finn. A Stormtrooper with a crisis of conscience? He starts out as a bit of a coward, concerned only with self-preservation, but grows into a bit of a flawed hero, taking greater and greater risks (usually to save Rey).

You'd have a point if they explored that angle and we actually saw him grow, but it was merely glossed over.

Stormtrooper gets blood on his helmet, decides to desert, because "it was the right thing to do". Instead of simply fleeing at the next convenient opportunity, he decides to help the rebellion and free the captive pilot so they can flee the battleship full of stormtroopers on a captured fighter. He then meets a girl and is instantly head over heels in love with her. So flat, so shoehorned in.

At no point did they ever explore his motivations or evolved him past anything than "bumbling sidekick", and the fact it's part 1 of a trilogy isn't really an excuse for that, either.

That being said, it had its moments;

-The chase on Coruscant

-The stuff on Kamino

- The Geonosis battles (both in the arena & the Dooku showdown)

I'll give you the chase on Coruscant. That was actually a fine action sequence. I mean, it's been over 10 years since the last time I watched AOTC, but I remember liking that part, even though it was basically nothing more than a hover car chase. The rest was somewhere between boring and cringe-worthy, especially the arena battle, imo.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: dark_lord on December 28, 2015, 12:00:55 PM
In regards to AOTC, it had its moments but I don't remember walking out of that movie being blown away.  Watching it years removed from theaters and its even more apparent how overblown the CGI is and how flat the acting it.

That being said, it had its moments;

-The chase on Coruscant

-The stuff on Kamino

- The Geonosis battles (both in the arena & the Dooku showdown)

The love story was godawful.  Absolutely terrible writing.

seeing yoda fight for the first time is by far the highlight of the film
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on December 28, 2015, 12:48:54 PM
I get that there's some fans of the prequels here, which I suspect speaks more to the ages of the people posting on this forum, but whether you are a prequel apologist or not, try to understand the reality that the prequels damaged the prestige of the Star Wars franchise.  They were Mediocre movies at best and there was significant backlash that they weren't as good as the originals and that aspects of the originals were missing.  They felt different.   George Lucas was so shamed by the the amount of the backlash that he realized he had to sell the rights to Star Wars.  The general population was not hyped by Lucas doing more Star Wars.  There was already too much bad vibes there from his mediocre prequels and his "ruining" the originals with his completely unnecessary "special editions".

Episode 7 was a direct response to that.  It's a re-launch of Star Wars. Yes, it borrows heavily from the original movie, but it wasn't accidental.  They wanted to prove they could capture the joys of the original.  They wanted to pass it on to a new generation of young actors.  So yeah, you get a bit of a paint by numbers rehash of the original.  It's intended to regain confidence in a franchise with wounds in it.  They have succeeded.  People are hooked again.  We are going to get a Star Wars movie every year from here on out.  They obviously felt like they couldn't take any chances with this one.

Here's the good news:   Rian Johnson is very creative.  If you've seen "brick" and "looper", you'd see that he's very good at defying expectations within specific genres.  Disney apparently has a lot of confidence in him, because he's writing episode 8 and 9.  He will be directing episode 8 (Colin treveror will direct episode 9).  I would be flabbergasted if episode 8 simply follows a blueprint of "empire strikes back".  They wouldn't have hired Rian Johnson if that was the intention.   The original idea from Disney seemed to be to let exciting young directors with creative vision take the helm of these projects.  You can feel free to be cynical and skeptical about it, but Disney had given some leeway to writer/directors of their marvel projects.   JJ was hired with the task of reintroducing us to this world in a familiar way.   I have a lot of confidence that Rian Johnson will put his stamp on this heading forward.  Hiring him was a bold choice.   You don't make bold choices if you just want a rehash.

I've heard that the script for episode 8 is pretty great.  Read an article that JJ Abrams himself was so impressed with it that he wished he had written it. 

Lots of criticism in this thread about how the new movie is just a rehash.  It wasn't a mistake.  Say what you will, but Star Wars is officially back.  The general audience is hooked again.  It's already made a billion dollars and the general consensus is very positive (which makes this thread kind of confusing to me since its slanting so negative).   It's going to be fun to see where it goes from here.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: slamtheking on December 28, 2015, 01:32:28 PM
Lots of criticism in this thread about how the new movie is just a rehash.  It wasn't a mistake.  Say what you will, but Star Wars is officially back.  The general audience is hooked again.  It's already made a billion dollars and the general consensus is very positive (which makes this thread kind of confusing to me since its slanting so negative).   It's going to be fun to see where it goes from here.
The criticism of it being a rehash is justified though.  that's not to say it wasn't a great or entertaining movie, which it certainly was even for most of those not happy with a rehash (such as myself). 

Saying it's not a mistake would be inaccurate.  Saying it was intentional seems to be more accurate.

they definitely rebooted the franchise.  as stated previously, my principle concern is whether the next 2 movies in the trilogy will be more rehashes of V and VI.  The rehashes may be wonderful and entertaining but if they are rehashes, that would be a disappointment.  hopefully you're right about VIII and IX going in a new direction. 
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on December 28, 2015, 02:17:32 PM
Lots of criticism in this thread about how the new movie is just a rehash.  It wasn't a mistake.  Say what you will, but Star Wars is officially back.  The general audience is hooked again.  It's already made a billion dollars and the general consensus is very positive (which makes this thread kind of confusing to me since its slanting so negative).   It's going to be fun to see where it goes from here.
The criticism of it being a rehash is justified though.  that's not to say it wasn't a great or entertaining movie, which it certainly was even for most of those not happy with a rehash (such as myself). 

Saying it's not a mistake would be inaccurate.  Saying it was intentional seems to be more accurate.

they definitely rebooted the franchise.  as stated previously, my principle concern is whether the next 2 movies in the trilogy will be more rehashes of V and VI.  The rehashes may be wonderful and entertaining but if they are rehashes, that would be a disappointment.  hopefully you're right about VIII and IX going in a new direction.

I mean, it's been over 30 years since a beloved Star Wars movie came out.  When news of Disney buying the property came it, it was met with a lot of skepticism.   There's also an entire young generation of kids who will never love the original trilogy as much as their parents.  They may have played this one safe, but they nailed it.  I don't think this was the movie to take risks.  Prove you can still bring back the magic, hook the fans again, and then move in a new direction.

They aren't going to just remake empire strikes back.  I've read a little about it.  It will be different.  It should be even better than episode 7.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: thirstyboots18 on December 29, 2015, 01:27:24 PM
-very good, but not great

-looking forward to see where it goes

-liked rey and looking forward to her story

-loved the character maz kanata

-having the old cast really helped bring the saga to the new storyline
liked kylo ren in the beginning, then was let down. star wars villains always had that appeal that you liked them, even if you hated them. i don't have that feeling with ren (or snoke) right now

-hated that ren was "ben solo" and not jacen solo.  also using ben from ben skywalker

-was hoping we would see thrawn

-HAN SOLO'S DEATH......Hated how he died.  as a kid, you always envisioned he would die in a blaze of glory, not all emotional
Saw this yesterday, and mostly agreed w/dark lord's critique.  I liked how the originals were sprinkled in the story.  Not better than the original, but not bad.  Liked the "Mah" character.  Even 'though science fiction is not my favorite genre, I really enjoyed this one...maybe because, since I didn't expect much, it exceeded my expectations.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: eja117 on December 31, 2015, 04:51:25 PM
The only critic whose opinion matters to me......


https://www.yahoo.com/news/george-lucas-explains-why-didn-t-star-wars-153745258.html
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on January 09, 2016, 05:51:56 AM
Abrams responded to critics:

Quote
“It was obviously a wildly intentional thing that we go backwards, in some ways, to go forwards in the important ways, given that this is a genre — that Star Wars is a kind of specific gorgeous concoction of George [Lucas]’ — that combines all sorts of things. Ultimately the structure of Star Wars itself is as classic and tried and true as you can get. It was itself derivative of all of these things that George loved so much, from the most obvious, Flash Gordon and Joseph Campbell, to the [Akira] Kurosawa references, to Westerns — I mean, all of these elements were part of what made Star Wars. I can understand that someone might say, ‘Oh, it’s a complete rip-off! What was important for me was introducing brand new characters using relationships that were embracing the history that we know to tell a story that is new — to go backwards to go forwards. We inherited Star Wars. The story of history repeating itself was, I believe, an obvious and intentional thing, and the structure of meeting a character who comes from a nowhere desert and discovers that she has a power within her, where the bad guys have a weapon that is destructive but that ends up being destroyed — those simple tenets are by far the least important aspects of this movie, and they provide bones that were well-proven long before they were used in Star Wars.”

“What was important for me was introducing brand new characters using relationships that were embracing the history that we know to tell a story that is new — to go backwards to go forwards,” he continues. “So I understand that this movie, I would argue much more than the ones that follow, needed to take a couple of steps backwards into very familiar terrain, and using a structure of nobodies becoming somebodies defeating the baddies — which is, again, I would argue, not a brand new concept, admittedly — but use that to do, I think, a far more important thing, which is introduce this young woman, who’s a character we’ve not seen before and who has a story we have not seen before, meeting the first Storm Trooper we’ve ever seen who we get to know as a human being; to see the two of them have an adventure in a way that no one has had yet, with Han Solo; to see those characters go to find someone who is a brand new character who, yes, may be diminutive, but is as far from Yoda as I think a description of a character can get, who gets to enlighten almost the way a wonderful older teacher or grandparent or great-aunt might, you know, something that is confirming a kind of belief system that is rejected by the main character; and to tell a story of being a parent and being a child and the struggles that that entails — clearly Star Wars has always been a familial story, but never in the way that we’ve told here.”

It was obviously intentional to re-introduce the world in a familiar way.  Regardless of how you feel about it... long-term, it'll be fine.  Literally every piece of information I've heard about Episode 8/9 is that Rian Johnson is going to take it in a different direction.  Don't expect it to be just another Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi.   
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Celtics4ever on January 09, 2016, 09:03:04 AM
Most of my friends, liked Kylo Ren, until he took off the mask.   Then he was an emo, which disgusted them.   I am still waiting for the crowds to thin.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Vox_Populi on January 09, 2016, 09:16:30 AM
I saw this movie again recently and in terms of acting...Rey was definitely the weakest  - although I imagine that's been said before. She's, maybe intentionally, stiff-ish early but later she seems to ease into the role. I wish there had been more Poe.

Some unexplained/un-fleshed out stuff still bothered me, but I think there'll be good explanations later.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Sketch5 on January 09, 2016, 10:08:27 AM
-very good, but not great

-looking forward to see where it goes

-liked rey and looking forward to her story

-loved the character maz kanata

-having the old cast really helped bring the saga to the new storyline
liked kylo ren in the beginning, then was let down. star wars villains always had that appeal that you liked them, even if you hated them. i don't have that feeling with ren (or snoke) right now

-hated that ren was "ben solo" and not jacen solo.  also using ben from ben skywalker

-was hoping we would see thrawn

-HAN SOLO'S DEATH......Hated how he died.  as a kid, you always envisioned he would die in a blaze of glory, not all emotional

Heres the thing about Hans death. It wasn't about him, it was about Ren(Ben). Ren did the one thing Vader couldn't do and that was kill his own flesh and blood. Vader suggested to the Emperor to bring Luke in the fold and that caused the Emperor's undoing.

Han tried to bring his son back, which shows growth of his character of a once was shoot first(yes George Han shot first) to a father trying to reason with his son. His Son to torn to do what he had to do asked pretty much asked him his permission to do so. Which shows the twistedness of Ren and the grasp of the Darkside has on him and how much further he's willing to go. Which Makes Ren a much more opposing foe than Vader was.

Han's death long term becomes much more meaningful for the story. When Ford went to Lucas about killing off Han it was suppose to be when he got froze in cardonite. So this death was much better than that. I mean to be killed by your own son when you're trying to help him, think about that.
   
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: MBunge on January 09, 2016, 11:16:33 AM
Abrams responded to critics:

Quote
“It was obviously a wildly intentional thing that we go backwards, in some ways, to go forwards in the important ways, given that this is a genre — that Star Wars is a kind of specific gorgeous concoction of George [Lucas]’ — that combines all sorts of things. Ultimately the structure of Star Wars itself is as classic and tried and true as you can get. It was itself derivative of all of these things that George loved so much, from the most obvious, Flash Gordon and Joseph Campbell, to the [Akira] Kurosawa references, to Westerns — I mean, all of these elements were part of what made Star Wars. I can understand that someone might say, ‘Oh, it’s a complete rip-off! What was important for me was introducing brand new characters using relationships that were embracing the history that we know to tell a story that is new — to go backwards to go forwards. We inherited Star Wars. The story of history repeating itself was, I believe, an obvious and intentional thing, and the structure of meeting a character who comes from a nowhere desert and discovers that she has a power within her, where the bad guys have a weapon that is destructive but that ends up being destroyed — those simple tenets are by far the least important aspects of this movie, and they provide bones that were well-proven long before they were used in Star Wars.”

“What was important for me was introducing brand new characters using relationships that were embracing the history that we know to tell a story that is new — to go backwards to go forwards,” he continues. “So I understand that this movie, I would argue much more than the ones that follow, needed to take a couple of steps backwards into very familiar terrain, and using a structure of nobodies becoming somebodies defeating the baddies — which is, again, I would argue, not a brand new concept, admittedly — but use that to do, I think, a far more important thing, which is introduce this young woman, who’s a character we’ve not seen before and who has a story we have not seen before, meeting the first Storm Trooper we’ve ever seen who we get to know as a human being; to see the two of them have an adventure in a way that no one has had yet, with Han Solo; to see those characters go to find someone who is a brand new character who, yes, may be diminutive, but is as far from Yoda as I think a description of a character can get, who gets to enlighten almost the way a wonderful older teacher or grandparent or great-aunt might, you know, something that is confirming a kind of belief system that is rejected by the main character; and to tell a story of being a parent and being a child and the struggles that that entails — clearly Star Wars has always been a familial story, but never in the way that we’ve told here.”

It was obviously intentional to re-introduce the world in a familiar way.  Regardless of how you feel about it... long-term, it'll be fine.  Literally every piece of information I've heard about Episode 8/9 is that Rian Johnson is going to take it in a different direction.  Don't expect it to be just another Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi.

This is the only response Abrams needs to make: $$$$$$$$$!

The decision to rehash Star Wars' greatest hits has been validated by overwhelming popular acclaim.  Hopefully there won't be extreme pressure from Disney to continue down that road.

Mike
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: incoherent on January 09, 2016, 11:46:11 AM
Take away all the comparisons and expectations.

Remove the idea that it's even a Star Wars film.

Forget about the politics and the majority opinions.


TFA is an above average sci-fantasy film. 
TFA is an above average movie compared to rest of what Hollywood produces on a regular basis.


I honestly don't believe people when they say they hate this movie. I think they are saying it because they like the sound of their own voice.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: incoherent on January 09, 2016, 11:51:23 AM
I actually liked the character of Finn. A Stormtrooper with a crisis of conscience? He starts out as a bit of a coward, concerned only with self-preservation, but grows into a bit of a flawed hero, taking greater and greater risks (usually to save Rey).

You'd have a point if they explored that angle and we actually saw him grow, but it was merely glossed over.

Stormtrooper gets blood on his helmet, decides to desert, because "it was the right thing to do". Instead of simply fleeing at the next convenient opportunity, he decides to help the rebellion and free the captive pilot so they can flee the battleship full of stormtroopers on a captured fighter. He then meets a girl and is instantly head over heels in love with her. So flat, so shoehorned in.

At no point did they ever explore his motivations or evolved him past anything than "bumbling sidekick", and the fact it's part 1 of a trilogy isn't really an excuse for that, either.

That being said, it had its moments;

-The chase on Coruscant

-The stuff on Kamino

- The Geonosis battles (both in the arena & the Dooku showdown)

I'll give you the chase on Coruscant. That was actually a fine action sequence. I mean, it's been over 10 years since the last time I watched AOTC, but I remember liking that part, even though it was basically nothing more than a hover car chase. The rest was somewhere between boring and cringe-worthy, especially the arena battle, imo.

I have the disagree with above bolded statement.

Poe clearly figures out and calls Finn out on just using him to escape the ship and Finn doesn't actually care, at that point, about helping the rebellion.   In fact Finn still doesn't care about helping the rebellion for quite some time after his and Poe's escape.  The movie made sure they had dialogue that clearly pointed out Finn only doing this to help himself.

Also, I dont believe Finn immediately falls head over heels in love with Rey.  I didnt pick up on that at all and the movie definitely doesn't portray Finn falling in love Rey in my opinion.  Can I see it happening in the next couple movies, yeah... but to pretend like he immediately falls in love with Rey is just wrong. Hell he is ready to abandon Rey the first chance he gets at Maz's pub.

Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Hemingway on January 17, 2016, 01:19:27 PM
living in China I just saw the movie. I thought it was pretty good. my gf had never seen any of the other movies and she really liked it. i kept thinking I would have to explain things to her during the movie but they made it well enough that someone who knew nothing of starwars would still like it a lot. well done.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: rocknrollforyoursoul on January 17, 2016, 02:25:21 PM
Finally saw it yesterday—I hate crowded theaters, usually wait until there's only about 10 or 20 people in attendance—and it was awesome.

I grew up on the original trilogy, loved them. Was mostly unimpressed with the prequels, but this one had much more of the feel of the originals to me. Though I was really, really bummed when they axed you-know-who. Being a writer, I understand that drama and tension are mostly what drive stories forward and keep audiences hooked, but still, that's a tough pill for me to swallow.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Casperian on January 17, 2016, 02:45:43 PM

Poe clearly figures out and calls Finn out on just using him to escape the ship and Finn doesn't actually care, at that point, about helping the rebellion.   In fact Finn still doesn't care about helping the rebellion for quite some time after his and Poe's escape.  The movie made sure they had dialogue that clearly pointed out Finn only doing this to help himself.

Yes, you're right. I actually thought about that half an hour after I made my post, but didn't get back to edit it. Poe does call out Finn immediately. Still doesn't change anything about the fact that the whole "Stormtrooper sees the light" angle was only superficially touched upon. Finn is still a very flat character who feels tacked on and only provides comic relief at best.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: BudweiserCeltic on January 17, 2016, 02:53:27 PM
Watched it today...

Overall really enjoyed it and was entertained by it. Still was hoping for something better.

My biggest gripe was the lost opportunity of a Han Solo and Luke Skywalker duo again after all this time. Also hated that the final events was made all about Rey, when it should've been more about Leia and Chewbacca. I mean, what was the point of that hug between Leia and Rey when they arrived and Chewbacca completely ignored?

What a terrible sense of perspective of what happened.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Csfan1984 on January 17, 2016, 03:20:55 PM

Poe clearly figures out and calls Finn out on just using him to escape the ship and Finn doesn't actually care, at that point, about helping the rebellion.   In fact Finn still doesn't care about helping the rebellion for quite some time after his and Poe's escape.  The movie made sure they had dialogue that clearly pointed out Finn only doing this to help himself.

Yes, you're right. I actually thought about that half an hour after I made my post, but didn't get back to edit it. Poe does call out Finn immediately. Still doesn't change anything about the fact that the whole "Stormtrooper sees the light" angle was only superficially touched upon. Finn is still a very flat character who feels tacked on and only provides comic relief at best.
I like Finn because he is more average joe than the typical hero. He is the only one that acts like it's crazy to want to be in a star wars. Him wanting no part is exactly how a majority of people would behave afterall. I could also see him becoming the sad ending twist of being killed and/or indoctrinated again into a villain. Kylo and Finn have the biggest character change potential.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Csfan1984 on January 17, 2016, 03:24:12 PM
Watched it today...

Overall really enjoyed it and was entertained by it. Still was hoping for something better.

My biggest gripe was the lost opportunity of a Han Solo and Luke Skywalker duo again after all this time. Also hated that the final events was made all about Rey, when it should've been more about Leia and Chewbacca. I mean, what was the point of that hug between Leia and Rey when they arrived and Chewbacca completely ignored?

What a terrible sense of perspective of what happened.
Yeah they missed that one for sure. Maybe they went into it more but it got cut?
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: makaveli on January 17, 2016, 04:32:12 PM
a total disappointment of a movie. I was really hyped about it. The storyline is god terrible, there was so much potential and they ruined it.
the best part(sarcasm) of the movie was when they made the plan to destroy that death planet. it was like:
-let's destroy it
-but it has shields
-we'll disable the shields
-okay, let's go

i swear if i could only read the transcript i would call that a new Family Guy Star Wars movie(witch would actually be really great by the way, i loved them so far :D )
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Redz on January 17, 2016, 04:42:35 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FaOSCASqLsE
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: makaveli on January 17, 2016, 05:05:41 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FaOSCASqLsE
tp :)
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on January 17, 2016, 05:59:06 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FaOSCASqLsE
tp :)
I really like Adam Driver.  He did a solid job on SNL last night.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: cltc5 on January 17, 2016, 07:13:40 PM
I thought it sorta sucked as a Star Wars movie
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Rondo9 on April 06, 2016, 12:38:29 AM
First things first, I still can't why they're some guys who can't accept the fact that there are a lot of people who legitimately believe that the prequels are good movies. Seriously why are you guys so threatened when people say they are good movies. Aren't movies supposed to be subjective? I liked the prequels and felt that they were well made. Does that make me a lesser fan? A person with bad taste in movies? In denial that they are bad movies? No, I just loved the story and characters, I felt they were interesting and complex. If you don't like the Prequels, fine but I ask that please respectful towards those who think differently from you. Some of you guy sound like Donald Trump the way you spew venom towards prequel fans.  ;)

With that out of the way and this is overdue. I liked the The Force Awakens.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on April 06, 2016, 01:11:24 AM
First things first, I still can't why they're some guys who can't accept the fact that there are a lot of people who legitimately believe that the prequels are good movies. Seriously why are you guys so threatened when people say they are good movies. Aren't movies supposed to be subjective? I liked the prequels and felt that they were well made. Does that make me a lesser fan? A person with bad taste in movies? In denial that they are bad movies? No, I just loved the story and characters, I felt they were interesting and complex. If you don't like the Prequels, fine but I ask that please respectful towards those who think differently from you. Some of you guy sound like Donald Trump the way you spew venom towards prequel fans.  ;)

With that out of the way and this is overdue. I liked the The Force Awakens.
I'll try to give a simplified answer, because this crosses over a lot with the recent feelings towards "Batman V Superman".  It's a mediocre/bad movie that is making tons of money.  DC fanboys/apologists are upset with the critics.

Movies are subjective to a point.  There's certain attributes that scholars/critics/academy voters/etc use to determine the quality of a film.   Story is always important.  The performances always matter.  Visual style/cinematography always matters.   It's ability to take someone on an emotional journey always matters.  To get the viewer to see things differently.  If you take any "Film as Literature" class they will get you to understand the depth and hidden meaning of aspects.   It can convey a message.   Great film is a work of art.   

Rottentomatoes's scoring scale is silly.  It's a measure of what % of critics thought a movie was watchable.  If every single critic scored a movie a 2.5 out of 4, it would be considered "100% certified Fresh" on RottenTomatoes.  It's basically a percentage of "thumbs up" vs "thumbs down".    I gravitate towards metacritic.com.  It takes every critical review, converts it to a 1-100 score, adds weighting depending on the publication, and tries to come up with a consensus score measuring the quality of the film.   With some exceptions, I generally agree with the critical consensus.  I understand why they come to those conclusions.  I understand why they are docking points and what they are celebrating. 

People have various opinions and it's fine to break certain film conventions.  Filmmakers are celebrated for breaking conventions and innovating.  Despite this, as someone who studied film, it's not hard for me to spot issues that prevent a film from being considered "great".   It doesn't take a film scholar to understand why a movie like "Weekend at Bernies" isn't on the same level as a film like "Schindler's List".

That said, it's completely fine if you like "Weekend at Bernies" significantly more than "Schindler's List".   Understand that you can measure the quality of a film separate from your enjoyment of it.   There's plenty of bad movies I've enjoyed.   Nobody in their right mind would call the "Fast and Furious" franchise Oscar-worthy films, but I watch every single of one them.  I watch movies like "Dumb and Dumber To" knowing full well it will be garbage, but sometimes I just want to watch a stupid comedy.   I watch a movie like "Entourage: The Movie" fully understanding it's trash, but enjoying aspects of it.   One of my favorite movies of all time is "Hook".  I'm getting Rufio's autograph this weekend at a comicon.  That movie was widely panned by critics and I totally understand why.   

Point is, "Phantom Menace" had significant flaws.  "Batman v Superman" has significant flaws.  Neither is a great movie.  You can still love them for any number of reasons.  It's ok to like a bad movie.   In the same way that you might prefer a 20 piece Chicken McNugget over a $150 plate of "Sea urchin atop a purée of fennel and potato with citrus jus" from 3-Michelin star restaurant.   It's totally ok to like the McNuggets more.  Everyone has different tastes.  But understand why one is regarded as a culinary achievement and the other is considered edible garbage.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Rondo9 on April 06, 2016, 01:35:55 AM
There you go again, saying that it is okay to like a bad movie. I've analyzed and dissected the The Phantom Menance and I feel that it is a work of art. If someone feels that Dumb and Dumber is better than Schiedler's List than that's their opinion. And you say that good film is a work of art, then you should know that art is subjective and what works for one person will not work for another.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Roy H. on April 06, 2016, 10:25:28 AM
First things first, I still can't why they're some guys who can't accept the fact that there are a lot of people who legitimately believe that the prequels are good movies. Seriously why are you guys so threatened when people say they are good movies. Aren't movies supposed to be subjective? I liked the prequels and felt that they were well made. Does that make me a lesser fan? A person with bad taste in movies? In denial that they are bad movies? No, I just loved the story and characters, I felt they were interesting and complex. If you don't like the Prequels, fine but I ask that please respectful towards those who think differently from you. Some of you guy sound like Donald Trump the way you spew venom towards prequel fans.  ;)

With that out of the way and this is overdue. I liked the The Force Awakens.

Was it the fart jokes or the terrible acting that you enjoyed? ;)

Every movie will have at least some fans. Some people prefer Uwe Boll to Shakespeare. As works of art, though, one is objectively superior to the other.

Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Rondo9 on April 06, 2016, 05:16:35 PM
First things first, I still can't why they're some guys who can't accept the fact that there are a lot of people who legitimately believe that the prequels are good movies. Seriously why are you guys so threatened when people say they are good movies. Aren't movies supposed to be subjective? I liked the prequels and felt that they were well made. Does that make me a lesser fan? A person with bad taste in movies? In denial that they are bad movies? No, I just loved the story and characters, I felt they were interesting and complex. If you don't like the Prequels, fine but I ask that please respectful towards those who think differently from you. Some of you guy sound like Donald Trump the way you spew venom towards prequel fans.  ;)

With that out of the way and this is overdue. I liked the The Force Awakens.

Was it the fart jokes or the terrible acting that you enjoyed? ;)

Every movie will have at least some fans. Some people prefer Uwe Boll to Shakespeare. As works of art, though, one is objectively superior to the other.

Well I think that the acting was on par with the OT.  ;D As for your art comments how is it objective? By what measure and who's judging it? Honestly (I'm not calling you out just an observation) I think who say that a work of art is objectively superior to one another is just using to put people down, judging from these comments here.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Roy H. on April 07, 2016, 12:52:01 PM
First things first, I still can't why they're some guys who can't accept the fact that there are a lot of people who legitimately believe that the prequels are good movies. Seriously why are you guys so threatened when people say they are good movies. Aren't movies supposed to be subjective? I liked the prequels and felt that they were well made. Does that make me a lesser fan? A person with bad taste in movies? In denial that they are bad movies? No, I just loved the story and characters, I felt they were interesting and complex. If you don't like the Prequels, fine but I ask that please respectful towards those who think differently from you. Some of you guy sound like Donald Trump the way you spew venom towards prequel fans.  ;)

With that out of the way and this is overdue. I liked the The Force Awakens.

Was it the fart jokes or the terrible acting that you enjoyed? ;)

Every movie will have at least some fans. Some people prefer Uwe Boll to Shakespeare. As works of art, though, one is objectively superior to the other.

Well I think that the acting was on par with the OT.  ;D As for your art comments how is it objective? By what measure and who's judging it? Honestly (I'm not calling you out just an observation) I think who say that a work of art is objectively superior to one another is just using to put people down, judging from these comments here.

Is there any outer line for you? Is Michaelangelo's work on the Sistine Chapel objectively better art than a third grader pooping on a paper plate?
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: slamtheking on April 07, 2016, 12:56:52 PM
First things first, I still can't why they're some guys who can't accept the fact that there are a lot of people who legitimately believe that the prequels are good movies. Seriously why are you guys so threatened when people say they are good movies. Aren't movies supposed to be subjective? I liked the prequels and felt that they were well made. Does that make me a lesser fan? A person with bad taste in movies? In denial that they are bad movies? No, I just loved the story and characters, I felt they were interesting and complex. If you don't like the Prequels, fine but I ask that please respectful towards those who think differently from you. Some of you guy sound like Donald Trump the way you spew venom towards prequel fans.  ;)

With that out of the way and this is overdue. I liked the The Force Awakens.

Was it the fart jokes or the terrible acting that you enjoyed? ;)

Every movie will have at least some fans. Some people prefer Uwe Boll to Shakespeare. As works of art, though, one is objectively superior to the other.

Well I think that the acting was on par with the OT.  ;D As for your art comments how is it objective? By what measure and who's judging it? Honestly (I'm not calling you out just an observation) I think who say that a work of art is objectively superior to one another is just using to put people down, judging from these comments here.

Is there any outer line for you? Is Michaelangelo's work on the Sistine Chapel objectively better art than a third grader pooping on a paper plate?
well if the third grader turns it into a finger painting, all bets are off   :P
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Roy H. on April 07, 2016, 01:00:11 PM
First things first, I still can't why they're some guys who can't accept the fact that there are a lot of people who legitimately believe that the prequels are good movies. Seriously why are you guys so threatened when people say they are good movies. Aren't movies supposed to be subjective? I liked the prequels and felt that they were well made. Does that make me a lesser fan? A person with bad taste in movies? In denial that they are bad movies? No, I just loved the story and characters, I felt they were interesting and complex. If you don't like the Prequels, fine but I ask that please respectful towards those who think differently from you. Some of you guy sound like Donald Trump the way you spew venom towards prequel fans.  ;)

With that out of the way and this is overdue. I liked the The Force Awakens.

Was it the fart jokes or the terrible acting that you enjoyed? ;)

Every movie will have at least some fans. Some people prefer Uwe Boll to Shakespeare. As works of art, though, one is objectively superior to the other.

Well I think that the acting was on par with the OT.  ;D As for your art comments how is it objective? By what measure and who's judging it? Honestly (I'm not calling you out just an observation) I think who say that a work of art is objectively superior to one another is just using to put people down, judging from these comments here.

Is there any outer line for you? Is Michaelangelo's work on the Sistine Chapel objectively better art than a third grader pooping on a paper plate?
well if the third grader turns it into a finger painting, all bets are off   :P

That's the metaphorical equivalent of Jar Jar Binks, along with the fart jokes and racial accents.

Darth Maul, though... so awesome, but so under-utilized.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Rondo9 on April 07, 2016, 09:13:29 PM
First things first, I still can't why they're some guys who can't accept the fact that there are a lot of people who legitimately believe that the prequels are good movies. Seriously why are you guys so threatened when people say they are good movies. Aren't movies supposed to be subjective? I liked the prequels and felt that they were well made. Does that make me a lesser fan? A person with bad taste in movies? In denial that they are bad movies? No, I just loved the story and characters, I felt they were interesting and complex. If you don't like the Prequels, fine but I ask that please respectful towards those who think differently from you. Some of you guy sound like Donald Trump the way you spew venom towards prequel fans.  ;)

With that out of the way and this is overdue. I liked the The Force Awakens.

Was it the fart jokes or the terrible acting that you enjoyed? ;)

Every movie will have at least some fans. Some people prefer Uwe Boll to Shakespeare. As works of art, though, one is objectively superior to the other.

Well I think that the acting was on par with the OT.  ;D As for your art comments how is it objective? By what measure and who's judging it? Honestly (I'm not calling you out just an observation) I think who say that a work of art is objectively superior to one another is just using to put people down, judging from these comments here.

Is there any outer line for you? Is Michaelangelo's work on the Sistine Chapel objectively better art than a third grader pooping on a paper plate?

The point is, everyone has different standards on what makes a good movie. When it comes to things like movie's I don't believe that one is "objectively" better than the other.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on April 07, 2016, 09:24:47 PM
There you go again, saying that it is okay to like a bad movie. I've analyzed and dissected the The Phantom Menance and I feel that it is a work of art. If someone feels that Dumb and Dumber is better than Schiedler's List than that's their opinion. And you say that good film is a work of art, then you should know that art is subjective and what works for one person will not work for another.
yes, it's ok to like a bad movie in the same way it's ok to like bad food.  Taste is subjective. You might think chicken McNuggets are the best food ever, but those who critique food for a living will point out the flaws.  Go ahead and argue that your Happy Meal is worthy of anything being served at Joel Robuchon on account of "taste being subjective", but anyone who understands culinary arts will say you're wrong.  It's ok, though.  If chicken McNuggets are your thing, that's totally ok. And even an ardent foodie might have a craving for them once in a while. 

I enjoy plenty of bad movies. I recognize why they are bad though.  In the same way I recognize the bacon egg cheese biscuit I ate for breakfast isn't good food.

Neither phantom menace or "batman v superman" are great movies.  It's ok to like them, though.  I think if people accepted that, there would be a lot less fanboy arguments.  Sometimes the worse the movie, the more people will enjoy it.  If "Sharknado" is your "Godfather"... So be it.  My ex girlfriend's favorite movie of all time was "Tank Girl". It is literally on some of the "worst movies ever" lists.  I didn't judge her for it. 
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Roy H. on April 07, 2016, 10:35:28 PM
Quote
the bacon egg cheese biscuit I ate for breakfast isn't good food

Lies!
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Rondo9 on April 08, 2016, 02:56:07 PM
There you go again, saying that it is okay to like a bad movie. I've analyzed and dissected the The Phantom Menance and I feel that it is a work of art. If someone feels that Dumb and Dumber is better than Schiedler's List than that's their opinion. And you say that good film is a work of art, then you should know that art is subjective and what works for one person will not work for another.
yes, it's ok to like a bad movie in the same way it's ok to like bad food.  Taste is subjective. You might think chicken McNuggets are the best food ever, but those who critique food for a living will point out the flaws.  Go ahead and argue that your Happy Meal is worthy of anything being served at Joel Robuchon on account of "taste being subjective", but anyone who understands culinary arts will say you're wrong.  It's ok, though.  If chicken McNuggets are your thing, that's totally ok. And even an ardent foodie might have a craving for them once in a while. 

I enjoy plenty of bad movies. I recognize why they are bad though.  In the same way I recognize the bacon egg cheese biscuit I ate for breakfast isn't good food.

Neither phantom menace or "batman v superman" are great movies.  It's ok to like them, though.  I think if people accepted that, there would be a lot less fanboy arguments.  Sometimes the worse the movie, the more people will enjoy it.  If "Sharknado" is your "Godfather"... So be it.  My ex girlfriend's favorite movie of all time was "Tank Girl". It is literally on some of the "worst movies ever" lists.  I didn't judge her for it.

Again I don't consider them bad movies. People just can't accept that fact that I don't find them bad movies at all.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Roy H. on April 08, 2016, 02:58:45 PM
There you go again, saying that it is okay to like a bad movie. I've analyzed and dissected the The Phantom Menance and I feel that it is a work of art. If someone feels that Dumb and Dumber is better than Schiedler's List than that's their opinion. And you say that good film is a work of art, then you should know that art is subjective and what works for one person will not work for another.
yes, it's ok to like a bad movie in the same way it's ok to like bad food.  Taste is subjective. You might think chicken McNuggets are the best food ever, but those who critique food for a living will point out the flaws.  Go ahead and argue that your Happy Meal is worthy of anything being served at Joel Robuchon on account of "taste being subjective", but anyone who understands culinary arts will say you're wrong.  It's ok, though.  If chicken McNuggets are your thing, that's totally ok. And even an ardent foodie might have a craving for them once in a while. 

I enjoy plenty of bad movies. I recognize why they are bad though.  In the same way I recognize the bacon egg cheese biscuit I ate for breakfast isn't good food.

Neither phantom menace or "batman v superman" are great movies.  It's ok to like them, though.  I think if people accepted that, there would be a lot less fanboy arguments.  Sometimes the worse the movie, the more people will enjoy it.  If "Sharknado" is your "Godfather"... So be it.  My ex girlfriend's favorite movie of all time was "Tank Girl". It is literally on some of the "worst movies ever" lists.  I didn't judge her for it.

Again I don't consider them bad movies. People just can't accept that fact that I don't find them bad movies at all.

Can you concede "flawed movies" that you love? Or do you find them to be Grade A film?
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: makaveli on April 08, 2016, 03:11:53 PM
the movie was a borderline walkout. i cannot name one thing outside the new r2d2 i liked about the whole scenario or plot or acting or anything.
i loved the original series and i was very excited to watch this one in the cinema
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on April 08, 2016, 03:39:35 PM
There you go again, saying that it is okay to like a bad movie. I've analyzed and dissected the The Phantom Menance and I feel that it is a work of art. If someone feels that Dumb and Dumber is better than Schiedler's List than that's their opinion. And you say that good film is a work of art, then you should know that art is subjective and what works for one person will not work for another.
yes, it's ok to like a bad movie in the same way it's ok to like bad food.  Taste is subjective. You might think chicken McNuggets are the best food ever, but those who critique food for a living will point out the flaws.  Go ahead and argue that your Happy Meal is worthy of anything being served at Joel Robuchon on account of "taste being subjective", but anyone who understands culinary arts will say you're wrong.  It's ok, though.  If chicken McNuggets are your thing, that's totally ok. And even an ardent foodie might have a craving for them once in a while. 

I enjoy plenty of bad movies. I recognize why they are bad though.  In the same way I recognize the bacon egg cheese biscuit I ate for breakfast isn't good food.

Neither phantom menace or "batman v superman" are great movies.  It's ok to like them, though.  I think if people accepted that, there would be a lot less fanboy arguments.  Sometimes the worse the movie, the more people will enjoy it.  If "Sharknado" is your "Godfather"... So be it.  My ex girlfriend's favorite movie of all time was "Tank Girl". It is literally on some of the "worst movies ever" lists.  I didn't judge her for it.

Again I don't consider them bad movies. People just can't accept that fact that I don't find them bad movies at all.
In your defense, there are Yelp reviewers with no understanding of the culinary arts who believe they are just as qualified to critique the quality of chicken McNuggets as the Michelin Guide critics.  And if they want to give their local McDonalds 5 stars for achievement in food supremacy, who be us to stop them. 

Go ahead and sing your praises of phantom menace.  That's what "audience ratings" are for.  Every single Madea movie receives favorable reviews from the audience that pays to see them:

(http://i.imgur.com/QzGZ7DX.jpg)

Perhaps every movie is "good" simply for existing. Perhaps every Happy Meal should be praised because it beats eating grubs off the ground.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: MBunge on April 08, 2016, 04:00:08 PM
First things first, I still can't why they're some guys who can't accept the fact that there are a lot of people who legitimately believe that the prequels are good movies. Seriously why are you guys so threatened when people say they are good movies. Aren't movies supposed to be subjective? I liked the prequels and felt that they were well made. Does that make me a lesser fan? A person with bad taste in movies? In denial that they are bad movies? No, I just loved the story and characters, I felt they were interesting and complex. If you don't like the Prequels, fine but I ask that please respectful towards those who think differently from you. Some of you guy sound like Donald Trump the way you spew venom towards prequel fans.  ;)

With that out of the way and this is overdue. I liked the The Force Awakens.

Was it the fart jokes or the terrible acting that you enjoyed? ;)

Every movie will have at least some fans. Some people prefer Uwe Boll to Shakespeare. As works of art, though, one is objectively superior to the other.

Well I think that the acting was on par with the OT.  ;D As for your art comments how is it objective? By what measure and who's judging it? Honestly (I'm not calling you out just an observation) I think who say that a work of art is objectively superior to one another is just using to put people down, judging from these comments here.

Is there any outer line for you? Is Michaelangelo's work on the Sistine Chapel objectively better art than a third grader pooping on a paper plate?

The point is, everyone has different standards on what makes a good movie. When it comes to things like movie's I don't believe that one is "objectively" better than the other.

Human beings have been telling stories for thousands of years.  In that time, we have actually developed some guidelines or rules for what does and does not constitute a good story.  When someone says "The Godfather" is better than "Ernest Goes to Camp," they are partly expressing an opinion but they are also judging each work on well-established standards of performance and narrative.

Those rules have little to do with personal preference and I've seen a lot of crap movies I've enjoyed more than finely made cinema, but that doesn't mean the rules don't exist or have value.

If a film has a huge plot hole, you may not care about it.  That does not mean the plot hole doesn't exist and it doesn't mean that plot holes are, in general, bad things in movies.

Mike
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: rocknrollforyoursoul on April 08, 2016, 04:04:41 PM
There you go again, saying that it is okay to like a bad movie. I've analyzed and dissected the The Phantom Menance and I feel that it is a work of art. If someone feels that Dumb and Dumber is better than Schiedler's List than that's their opinion. And you say that good film is a work of art, then you should know that art is subjective and what works for one person will not work for another.
yes, it's ok to like a bad movie in the same way it's ok to like bad food.  Taste is subjective. You might think chicken McNuggets are the best food ever, but those who critique food for a living will point out the flaws.  Go ahead and argue that your Happy Meal is worthy of anything being served at Joel Robuchon on account of "taste being subjective", but anyone who understands culinary arts will say you're wrong.  It's ok, though.  If chicken McNuggets are your thing, that's totally ok. And even an ardent foodie might have a craving for them once in a while. 

I enjoy plenty of bad movies. I recognize why they are bad though.  In the same way I recognize the bacon egg cheese biscuit I ate for breakfast isn't good food.

Neither phantom menace or "batman v superman" are great movies.  It's ok to like them, though.  I think if people accepted that, there would be a lot less fanboy arguments.  Sometimes the worse the movie, the more people will enjoy it.  If "Sharknado" is your "Godfather"... So be it.  My ex girlfriend's favorite movie of all time was "Tank Girl". It is literally on some of the "worst movies ever" lists.  I didn't judge her for it.

Again I don't consider them bad movies. People just can't accept that fact that I don't find them bad movies at all.
In your defense, there are Yelp reviewers with no understanding of the culinary arts who believe they are just as qualified to critique the quality of chicken McNuggets as the Michelin Guide critics.  And if they want to give their local McDonalds 5 stars for achievement in food supremacy, who be us to stop them. 

Go ahead and sing your praises of phantom menace.  That's what "audience ratings" are for.  Every single Madea movie receives favorable reviews from the audience that pays to see them:

(http://i.imgur.com/QzGZ7DX.jpg)

Perhaps every movie is "good" simply for existing. Perhaps every Happy Meal should be praised because it beats eating grubs off the ground.

Don't be dissin' Madea!  ;D

Seriously, though, I love those movies.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Donoghus on April 08, 2016, 04:10:23 PM
Speakin' of crap movies, has anybody watched the documentary "Electric Boogaloo"? 

Story of Cannon films which made some truly horrific movies in the '80s like He-Man, Superman IV, Over the Top, Breakin', etc...

It's an awesome documentary.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Rondo9 on April 08, 2016, 04:16:38 PM
There you go again, saying that it is okay to like a bad movie. I've analyzed and dissected the The Phantom Menance and I feel that it is a work of art. If someone feels that Dumb and Dumber is better than Schiedler's List than that's their opinion. And you say that good film is a work of art, then you should know that art is subjective and what works for one person will not work for another.
yes, it's ok to like a bad movie in the same way it's ok to like bad food.  Taste is subjective. You might think chicken McNuggets are the best food ever, but those who critique food for a living will point out the flaws.  Go ahead and argue that your Happy Meal is worthy of anything being served at Joel Robuchon on account of "taste being subjective", but anyone who understands culinary arts will say you're wrong.  It's ok, though.  If chicken McNuggets are your thing, that's totally ok. And even an ardent foodie might have a craving for them once in a while. 

I enjoy plenty of bad movies. I recognize why they are bad though.  In the same way I recognize the bacon egg cheese biscuit I ate for breakfast isn't good food.

Neither phantom menace or "batman v superman" are great movies.  It's ok to like them, though.  I think if people accepted that, there would be a lot less fanboy arguments.  Sometimes the worse the movie, the more people will enjoy it.  If "Sharknado" is your "Godfather"... So be it.  My ex girlfriend's favorite movie of all time was "Tank Girl". It is literally on some of the "worst movies ever" lists.  I didn't judge her for it.

Again I don't consider them bad movies. People just can't accept that fact that I don't find them bad movies at all.

Can you concede "flawed movies" that you love? Or do you find them to be Grade A film?

Could you concede the movies you love flaws? I'm aware my favorite movies have flaws just like hopefully you do. What I reject is the "objective" view that movies and other entertainment is subjected to. You can understand why a lot of people like a movie and examine its impact, but that doesn't necessarily that it is "objectively" better.

Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Rondo9 on April 08, 2016, 04:21:19 PM
First things first, I still can't why they're some guys who can't accept the fact that there are a lot of people who legitimately believe that the prequels are good movies. Seriously why are you guys so threatened when people say they are good movies. Aren't movies supposed to be subjective? I liked the prequels and felt that they were well made. Does that make me a lesser fan? A person with bad taste in movies? In denial that they are bad movies? No, I just loved the story and characters, I felt they were interesting and complex. If you don't like the Prequels, fine but I ask that please respectful towards those who think differently from you. Some of you guy sound like Donald Trump the way you spew venom towards prequel fans.  ;)

With that out of the way and this is overdue. I liked the The Force Awakens.

Was it the fart jokes or the terrible acting that you enjoyed? ;)

Every movie will have at least some fans. Some people prefer Uwe Boll to Shakespeare. As works of art, though, one is objectively superior to the other.

Well I think that the acting was on par with the OT.  ;D As for your art comments how is it objective? By what measure and who's judging it? Honestly (I'm not calling you out just an observation) I think who say that a work of art is objectively superior to one another is just using to put people down, judging from these comments here.

Is there any outer line for you? Is Michaelangelo's work on the Sistine Chapel objectively better art than a third grader pooping on a paper plate?

The point is, everyone has different standards on what makes a good movie. When it comes to things like movie's I don't believe that one is "objectively" better than the other.

Human beings have been telling stories for thousands of years.  In that time, we have actually developed some guidelines or rules for what does and does not constitute a good story.  When someone says "The Godfather" is better than "Ernest Goes to Camp," they are partly expressing an opinion but they are also judging each work on well-established standards of performance and narrative.

Those rules have little to do with personal preference and I've seen a lot of crap movies I've enjoyed more than finely made cinema, but that doesn't mean the rules don't exist or have value.

If a film has a huge plot hole, you may not care about it.  That does not mean the plot hole doesn't exist and it doesn't mean that plot holes are, in general, bad things in movies.

Mike

It does depend on how much of the good things the movie does to the point where it outweighs the bad. In other words, It really depends how much you're willing overlook those flaws and acknowledge whatever good things the movie has to offer.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: MBunge on April 08, 2016, 05:40:43 PM
First things first, I still can't why they're some guys who can't accept the fact that there are a lot of people who legitimately believe that the prequels are good movies. Seriously why are you guys so threatened when people say they are good movies. Aren't movies supposed to be subjective? I liked the prequels and felt that they were well made. Does that make me a lesser fan? A person with bad taste in movies? In denial that they are bad movies? No, I just loved the story and characters, I felt they were interesting and complex. If you don't like the Prequels, fine but I ask that please respectful towards those who think differently from you. Some of you guy sound like Donald Trump the way you spew venom towards prequel fans.  ;)

With that out of the way and this is overdue. I liked the The Force Awakens.

Was it the fart jokes or the terrible acting that you enjoyed? ;)

Every movie will have at least some fans. Some people prefer Uwe Boll to Shakespeare. As works of art, though, one is objectively superior to the other.

Well I think that the acting was on par with the OT.  ;D As for your art comments how is it objective? By what measure and who's judging it? Honestly (I'm not calling you out just an observation) I think who say that a work of art is objectively superior to one another is just using to put people down, judging from these comments here.

Is there any outer line for you? Is Michaelangelo's work on the Sistine Chapel objectively better art than a third grader pooping on a paper plate?

The point is, everyone has different standards on what makes a good movie. When it comes to things like movie's I don't believe that one is "objectively" better than the other.

Human beings have been telling stories for thousands of years.  In that time, we have actually developed some guidelines or rules for what does and does not constitute a good story.  When someone says "The Godfather" is better than "Ernest Goes to Camp," they are partly expressing an opinion but they are also judging each work on well-established standards of performance and narrative.

Those rules have little to do with personal preference and I've seen a lot of crap movies I've enjoyed more than finely made cinema, but that doesn't mean the rules don't exist or have value.

If a film has a huge plot hole, you may not care about it.  That does not mean the plot hole doesn't exist and it doesn't mean that plot holes are, in general, bad things in movies.

Mike

It does depend on how much of the good things the movie does to the point where it outweighs the bad. In other words, It really depends how much you're willing overlook those flaws and acknowledge whatever good things the movie has to offer.

But that's not the same thing as denying objective standards exist.  You subjectively may not care about them in the case of movie X but they are still there.

Mike
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: BitterJim on April 08, 2016, 06:20:36 PM
Ranking movies is both subjective and objective.  Objectively, every movie had a range that it can reasonably considered to be in, but different people will rank it differently in that range.  It's like NBA Draft prospects: no one thinks that the guy that goes 6th is better than the guy that goes 6th, but is the guy that goes 6th better than the guy going 59th? That's a matter a bit more difficult
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Rondo9 on April 08, 2016, 07:08:34 PM
First things first, I still can't why they're some guys who can't accept the fact that there are a lot of people who legitimately believe that the prequels are good movies. Seriously why are you guys so threatened when people say they are good movies. Aren't movies supposed to be subjective? I liked the prequels and felt that they were well made. Does that make me a lesser fan? A person with bad taste in movies? In denial that they are bad movies? No, I just loved the story and characters, I felt they were interesting and complex. If you don't like the Prequels, fine but I ask that please respectful towards those who think differently from you. Some of you guy sound like Donald Trump the way you spew venom towards prequel fans.  ;)

With that out of the way and this is overdue. I liked the The Force Awakens.

Was it the fart jokes or the terrible acting that you enjoyed? ;)

Every movie will have at least some fans. Some people prefer Uwe Boll to Shakespeare. As works of art, though, one is objectively superior to the other.

Well I think that the acting was on par with the OT.  ;D As for your art comments how is it objective? By what measure and who's judging it? Honestly (I'm not calling you out just an observation) I think who say that a work of art is objectively superior to one another is just using to put people down, judging from these comments here.

Is there any outer line for you? Is Michaelangelo's work on the Sistine Chapel objectively better art than a third grader pooping on a paper plate?

The point is, everyone has different standards on what makes a good movie. When it comes to things like movie's I don't believe that one is "objectively" better than the other.

Human beings have been telling stories for thousands of years.  In that time, we have actually developed some guidelines or rules for what does and does not constitute a good story.  When someone says "The Godfather" is better than "Ernest Goes to Camp," they are partly expressing an opinion but they are also judging each work on well-established standards of performance and narrative.

Those rules have little to do with personal preference and I've seen a lot of crap movies I've enjoyed more than finely made cinema, but that doesn't mean the rules don't exist or have value.

If a film has a huge plot hole, you may not care about it.  That does not mean the plot hole doesn't exist and it doesn't mean that plot holes are, in general, bad things in movies.

Mike

It does depend on how much of the good things the movie does to the point where it outweighs the bad. In other words, It really depends how much you're willing overlook those flaws and acknowledge whatever good things the movie has to offer.

But that's not the same thing as denying objective standards exist.  You subjectively may not care about them in the case of movie X but they are still there.

Mike

You may be right, but people use those arbitrary objective standards. Some people can overlook them some people can't.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Roy H. on April 08, 2016, 07:21:22 PM
First things first, I still can't why they're some guys who can't accept the fact that there are a lot of people who legitimately believe that the prequels are good movies. Seriously why are you guys so threatened when people say they are good movies. Aren't movies supposed to be subjective? I liked the prequels and felt that they were well made. Does that make me a lesser fan? A person with bad taste in movies? In denial that they are bad movies? No, I just loved the story and characters, I felt they were interesting and complex. If you don't like the Prequels, fine but I ask that please respectful towards those who think differently from you. Some of you guy sound like Donald Trump the way you spew venom towards prequel fans.  ;)

With that out of the way and this is overdue. I liked the The Force Awakens.

Was it the fart jokes or the terrible acting that you enjoyed? ;)

Every movie will have at least some fans. Some people prefer Uwe Boll to Shakespeare. As works of art, though, one is objectively superior to the other.

Well I think that the acting was on par with the OT.  ;D As for your art comments how is it objective? By what measure and who's judging it? Honestly (I'm not calling you out just an observation) I think who say that a work of art is objectively superior to one another is just using to put people down, judging from these comments here.

Is there any outer line for you? Is Michaelangelo's work on the Sistine Chapel objectively better art than a third grader pooping on a paper plate?

The point is, everyone has different standards on what makes a good movie. When it comes to things like movie's I don't believe that one is "objectively" better than the other.

Human beings have been telling stories for thousands of years.  In that time, we have actually developed some guidelines or rules for what does and does not constitute a good story.  When someone says "The Godfather" is better than "Ernest Goes to Camp," they are partly expressing an opinion but they are also judging each work on well-established standards of performance and narrative.

Those rules have little to do with personal preference and I've seen a lot of crap movies I've enjoyed more than finely made cinema, but that doesn't mean the rules don't exist or have value.

If a film has a huge plot hole, you may not care about it.  That does not mean the plot hole doesn't exist and it doesn't mean that plot holes are, in general, bad things in movies.

Mike

It does depend on how much of the good things the movie does to the point where it outweighs the bad. In other words, It really depends how much you're willing overlook those flaws and acknowledge whatever good things the movie has to offer.

But that's not the same thing as denying objective standards exist.  You subjectively may not care about them in the case of movie X but they are still there.

Mike

You may be right, but people use those arbitrary objective standards. Some people can overlook them some people can't.

That's completely fair. I'd watch American Pie over Citizen Kane.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on April 08, 2016, 09:30:00 PM
First things first, I still can't why they're some guys who can't accept the fact that there are a lot of people who legitimately believe that the prequels are good movies. Seriously why are you guys so threatened when people say they are good movies. Aren't movies supposed to be subjective? I liked the prequels and felt that they were well made. Does that make me a lesser fan? A person with bad taste in movies? In denial that they are bad movies? No, I just loved the story and characters, I felt they were interesting and complex. If you don't like the Prequels, fine but I ask that please respectful towards those who think differently from you. Some of you guy sound like Donald Trump the way you spew venom towards prequel fans.  ;)

With that out of the way and this is overdue. I liked the The Force Awakens.

Was it the fart jokes or the terrible acting that you enjoyed? ;)

Every movie will have at least some fans. Some people prefer Uwe Boll to Shakespeare. As works of art, though, one is objectively superior to the other.

Well I think that the acting was on par with the OT.  ;D As for your art comments how is it objective? By what measure and who's judging it? Honestly (I'm not calling you out just an observation) I think who say that a work of art is objectively superior to one another is just using to put people down, judging from these comments here.

Is there any outer line for you? Is Michaelangelo's work on the Sistine Chapel objectively better art than a third grader pooping on a paper plate?

The point is, everyone has different standards on what makes a good movie. When it comes to things like movie's I don't believe that one is "objectively" better than the other.

Human beings have been telling stories for thousands of years.  In that time, we have actually developed some guidelines or rules for what does and does not constitute a good story.  When someone says "The Godfather" is better than "Ernest Goes to Camp," they are partly expressing an opinion but they are also judging each work on well-established standards of performance and narrative.

Those rules have little to do with personal preference and I've seen a lot of crap movies I've enjoyed more than finely made cinema, but that doesn't mean the rules don't exist or have value.

If a film has a huge plot hole, you may not care about it.  That does not mean the plot hole doesn't exist and it doesn't mean that plot holes are, in general, bad things in movies.

Mike

It does depend on how much of the good things the movie does to the point where it outweighs the bad. In other words, It really depends how much you're willing overlook those flaws and acknowledge whatever good things the movie has to offer.

But that's not the same thing as denying objective standards exist.  You subjectively may not care about them in the case of movie X but they are still there.

Mike

You may be right, but people use those arbitrary objective standards. Some people can overlook them some people can't.

That's completely fair. I'd watch American Pie over Citizen Kane.
i have art prints of cartoonish ninja turtles hanging on my wall, but I'd never be foolish enough to suggest those are as great as Monet's Water Lilies simply because "taste is subjective".

There's all sorts of things (Food, art, clothing, music, plays, movies, etc) that have some base-level attributes used to determine qualify.  Yes, it's a matter of opinions. You might be of the strong opinion that "Insane Clown Possee" deserves to sweep the Grammy's every year.  Your taste might not align with what is considered qualify.  And that's ok.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: eja117 on April 08, 2016, 09:49:54 PM
I thoroughly reject the "It can still be great and fine if you didn't enjoy it" argument and I also thoroughly reject the "Well people do this for a living so therefore they are the only real authority". Bull. If some authority on film tells you Ishtar is great does that make it better? These same authorities awarded Best Picture to Shakespeare in Love over Saving Private Ryan. They also picked Titanic over Good Will Hunting. They didn't give any consideration to Batman Dark Knight and they haven't awarded or nominated Best Picture to a comedy since the 60s or something. Schindler's List is a great example. The Pianist mopped the floor with it on tons of levels but that was the academy's opportunity to kiss Spielberg's arse and nobody had the guts to call it.

By the same token it's been conclusively proven in blind taste tests the best testers in the world simply cannot consistently tell the difference between an appellation controlee that's been aged vs a born yesterday California box wine.

The prequels were awesome. Taken as a whole they did everything they were supposed to do. They showed the jedi temple. They showed the origins and fall of Anakin. They showed the Clone Wars. And there weren't any stupid teddy bears fighting off walkers and stormtroopers with sticks.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: thirstyboots18 on April 10, 2016, 01:05:14 PM
Whether or not someone thinks I am lacking in taste or objectivity, I liked Force Awakens.  I am not a big Star Wars follower.  I don't care who directed, wrote, or starred in the movie.  I did notice that John Williams did the music, however.  I can not critique a film that is pure fantasy, science fiction.  I can only say that the reason I went was not to prove how intelligent I am by tearing it down scene by scene.  The reason I went was pure escapism, and to be entertained  for a couple hours.  Mission Accomplished.  I really did not find the film worthy of spending time spent on dissection.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Roy H. on April 10, 2016, 01:15:24 PM
Quote
The prequels were awesome. Taken as a whole they did everything they were supposed to do. They showed the jedi temple. They showed the origins and fall of Anakin. They showed the Clone Wars. And there weren't any stupid teddy bears fighting off walkers and stormtroopers with sticks.

Ewoks > Jar Jar, fart jokes, racist accents and Jango Fett

The prequels had two epic potential storylines: the temptation of Anakin, and the Clone Wars / near extinction of the Jedi. They didn't pay enough attention to either aspect. I could overlook the other stuff, maybe even Jar Jar, if they nailed the central elements. They didn't. Add to that the terrible acting / directing, and it was a jumbled mess.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Rondo9 on April 10, 2016, 01:36:42 PM
Quote
The prequels were awesome. Taken as a whole they did everything they were supposed to do. They showed the jedi temple. They showed the origins and fall of Anakin. They showed the Clone Wars. And there weren't any stupid teddy bears fighting off walkers and stormtroopers with sticks.

Ewoks > Jar Jar, fart jokes, racist accents and Jango Fett

The prequels had two epic potential storylines: the temptation of Anakin, and the Clone Wars / near extinction of the Jedi. They didn't pay enough attention to either aspect. I could overlook the other stuff, maybe even Jar Jar, if they nailed the central elements. They didn't. Add to that the terrible acting / directing, and it was a jumbled mess.

Jango Fett was awesome, the fart jokes were only in TPM and weren't used as much as you think it did, Jar Jar wasn't that bad and honestly people couldn't decide what race that George was "offensive" so I hesitate to call them racist. YOU didn't think they were awesome, but clearly I and the poster two posts above thinks so and you know what, the acting was actually pretty good on par with the OT.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Roy H. on April 10, 2016, 02:04:09 PM
Quote
The prequels were awesome. Taken as a whole they did everything they were supposed to do. They showed the jedi temple. They showed the origins and fall of Anakin. They showed the Clone Wars. And there weren't any stupid teddy bears fighting off walkers and stormtroopers with sticks.

Ewoks > Jar Jar, fart jokes, racist accents and Jango Fett

The prequels had two epic potential storylines: the temptation of Anakin, and the Clone Wars / near extinction of the Jedi. They didn't pay enough attention to either aspect. I could overlook the other stuff, maybe even Jar Jar, if they nailed the central elements. They didn't. Add to that the terrible acting / directing, and it was a jumbled mess.

Jango Fett was awesome, the fart jokes were only in TPM and weren't used as much as you think it did, Jar Jar wasn't that bad and honestly people couldn't decide what race that George was "offensive" so I hesitate to call them racist. YOU didn't think they were awesome, but clearly I and the poster two posts above thinks so and you know what, the acting was actually pretty good on par with the OT.

So of those are opinions, but stuff like "the acting was pretty good" is ridiculous. Natalie Portman thought the prequels would end her career, because the acting / directing / dialogue was so bad.

And no, Asian caricatures are racist.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: eja117 on April 10, 2016, 02:04:46 PM
Quote
The prequels were awesome. Taken as a whole they did everything they were supposed to do. They showed the jedi temple. They showed the origins and fall of Anakin. They showed the Clone Wars. And there weren't any stupid teddy bears fighting off walkers and stormtroopers with sticks.

Ewoks > Jar Jar, fart jokes, racist accents and Jango Fett

The prequels had two epic potential storylines: the temptation of Anakin, and the Clone Wars / near extinction of the Jedi. They didn't pay enough attention to either aspect. I could overlook the other stuff, maybe even Jar Jar, if they nailed the central elements. They didn't. Add to that the terrible acting / directing, and it was a jumbled mess.
You can't use Jar Jar as an excuse to hate all the prequels.

Racist accents? It's scifi. Are we to assume all accents in space are the same? Any racist accents in Star Trek or Battlestar Galactica or Firefly? I'm just curious. As long as we're talking about political incorrectness in a galaxy far away a long time ago we should probably point out that Leia's outfits are just not cool...except for cloud city where she balanced feminism with well fitting clothes, and had a sensible yet nice hair do. And why do we only care about Asians? Jar Jar set back Caribbean people another generation. Also...what's the theory here? Shortly before Lucas married and had a child with a black woman he developed a thing against Asians?

This is the first I've heard of someone not liking Jango. He had a pretty good video game for himself.

I have no real problem with people not liking all the acting in the prequels, but I'll take Ewan McGregor's acting at his absolute worst in any of the prequels over just about all the "acting" in Force Awakens. 

Jar Jar....the whole world hates him but if you put him in an annoying contest with C3PO I'm not sure who wins. Jar Jar was more annoying but was on screen way less.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Rondo9 on April 10, 2016, 02:32:27 PM
Quote
The prequels were awesome. Taken as a whole they did everything they were supposed to do. They showed the jedi temple. They showed the origins and fall of Anakin. They showed the Clone Wars. And there weren't any stupid teddy bears fighting off walkers and stormtroopers with sticks.

Ewoks > Jar Jar, fart jokes, racist accents and Jango Fett

The prequels had two epic potential storylines: the temptation of Anakin, and the Clone Wars / near extinction of the Jedi. They didn't pay enough attention to either aspect. I could overlook the other stuff, maybe even Jar Jar, if they nailed the central elements. They didn't. Add to that the terrible acting / directing, and it was a jumbled mess.

Jango Fett was awesome, the fart jokes were only in TPM and weren't used as much as you think it did, Jar Jar wasn't that bad and honestly people couldn't decide what race that George was "offensive" so I hesitate to call them racist. YOU didn't think they were awesome, but clearly I and the poster two posts above thinks so and you know what, the acting was actually pretty good on par with the OT.

So of those are opinions, but stuff like "the acting was pretty good" is ridiculous. Natalie Portman thought the prequels would end her career, because the acting / directing / dialogue was so bad.

And no, Asian caricatures are racist.

So one actress over plenty of actors who said they loved working on the prequels means the acting was bad? And as I said before people can't even decide what stereotypes they were pepertuatinng so it makes the racist accusations dubious at best
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: eja117 on April 10, 2016, 05:08:25 PM
It's interesting that Portman was concerned about her career when her acting was clearly the worst. Ewan McGregor and Liam Neeson have both stated they are open to returning in stand alone films.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Roy H. on April 10, 2016, 05:26:52 PM
It's interesting that Portman was concerned about her career when her acting was clearly the worst. Ewan McGregor and Liam Neeson have both stated they are open to returning in stand alone films.

I think they had fun with it more, for sure.

Hayden's acting was the worst, but Portman's wasn't much better.  But, that's largely on the script and the directing.

But, honestly, I didn't think that McGregor and Neeson were close to as good as they can be.

Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: eja117 on April 10, 2016, 06:46:49 PM
It's interesting that Portman was concerned about her career when her acting was clearly the worst. Ewan McGregor and Liam Neeson have both stated they are open to returning in stand alone films.

I think they had fun with it more, for sure.

Hayden's acting was the worst, but Portman's wasn't much better.  But, that's largely on the script and the directing.

But, honestly, I didn't think that McGregor and Neeson were close to as good as they can be.
I agree with that last sentence, and I agree the script mostly didn't do favors. I have to wonder what exactly went down with that line when Neeson is talking to Watoo and he's like "We'll be far away from here my blue friend".  I mean...nobody? Nobody said anything? Why didn't Neeson say something?

I liked Hayden way more in AOTC but it's hard to defend him. Had the looks and the moves, but that's about it.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: fairweatherfan on April 10, 2016, 07:05:20 PM
Quote
The prequels were awesome. Taken as a whole they did everything they were supposed to do. They showed the jedi temple. They showed the origins and fall of Anakin. They showed the Clone Wars. And there weren't any stupid teddy bears fighting off walkers and stormtroopers with sticks.

Ewoks > Jar Jar, fart jokes, racist accents and Jango Fett

The prequels had two epic potential storylines: the temptation of Anakin, and the Clone Wars / near extinction of the Jedi. They didn't pay enough attention to either aspect. I could overlook the other stuff, maybe even Jar Jar, if they nailed the central elements. They didn't. Add to that the terrible acting / directing, and it was a jumbled mess.

Jango Fett was awesome, the fart jokes were only in TPM and weren't used as much as you think it did, Jar Jar wasn't that bad and honestly people couldn't decide what race that George was "offensive" so I hesitate to call them racist. YOU didn't think they were awesome, but clearly I and the poster two posts above thinks so and you know what, the acting was actually pretty good on par with the OT.

So of those are opinions, but stuff like "the acting was pretty good" is ridiculous. Natalie Portman thought the prequels would end her career, because the acting / directing / dialogue was so bad.

And no, Asian caricatures are racist.

Don't forget the Jews!  In!  Spaaaaaaaaace!

(http://vignette1.wikia.nocookie.net/starwars/images/e/eb/WattoHS.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20081222024729)


EDIT:  Haha, Googled Jews in space and this was one of the first links:

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SpaceJews (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SpaceJews)
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Roy H. on April 10, 2016, 07:17:13 PM
It's interesting that Portman was concerned about her career when her acting was clearly the worst. Ewan McGregor and Liam Neeson have both stated they are open to returning in stand alone films.

I think they had fun with it more, for sure.

Hayden's acting was the worst, but Portman's wasn't much better.  But, that's largely on the script and the directing.

But, honestly, I didn't think that McGregor and Neeson were close to as good as they can be.
I agree with that last sentence, and I agree the script mostly didn't do favors. I have to wonder what exactly went down with that line when Neeson is talking to Watoo and he's like "We'll be far away from here my blue friend".  I mean...nobody? Nobody said anything? Why didn't Neeson say something?

I liked Hayden way more in AOTC but it's hard to defend him. Had the looks and the moves, but that's about it.

And that's where my disappointment comes in.  I enjoyed a lot of AOTC and ROTS, and enjoyed  parts of TPM.  I can't get over that they should have been so much better!
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: eja117 on April 10, 2016, 07:17:25 PM
5 points to Gryffindor for (wow. Autocorrect knows how to spell Gryffindor) referencing Pigs in Space in a Star Wars thread successfully. (It should be noted the long relationship between the Muppets and Star Wars.)
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: eja117 on April 10, 2016, 07:19:35 PM
Alright....so...for the prequel haters.

Where do you rank the prequels vs Godfather 3? My thing is Godfather 3 is a fine stand alone film, but you just can't give me a borderline B+/A- following on the heels of A++++++.  To me the prequels aren't as big a let down as that. They fit in there with the other Star Wars films, if uncomfortably.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: fairweatherfan on April 10, 2016, 07:54:34 PM
5 points to Gryffindor for (wow. Autocorrect knows how to spell Gryffindor) referencing Pigs in Space in a Star Wars thread successfully. (It should be noted the long relationship between the Muppets and Star Wars.)

Pigs in Space was itself a play on Jews in Space from the end of Mel Brooks' History of the World Part I, which also heavily referenced Star Wars. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Cy9HeM8QQc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Cy9HeM8QQc)

...now I wanna watch Spaceballs.


EDIT:  Well after looking up the dates I completely reversed it, Pigs in Space came first.  Every day's a school day!
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: Roy H. on April 10, 2016, 08:10:26 PM
Alright....so...for the prequel haters.

Where do you rank the prequels vs Godfather 3? My thing is Godfather 3 is a fine stand alone film, but you just can't give me a borderline B+/A- following on the heels of A++++++.  To me the prequels aren't as big a let down as that. They fit in there with the other Star Wars films, if uncomfortably.

At least Godfather 3 has one great line, right?

Otherwise, it joins the list of movies that I choose to believe don't exist, like Rocky V.

Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: crimson_stallion on April 10, 2016, 08:33:52 PM
The prequels were on the same level as the origibal trilogy - they were entertaining, yet mindless and terribly acted.

Thise who complain about the acting in the prequels - have you not seen the originals? My god.  The acting in those films was an absolute joke. 

I think Han Solo and Chewbacca were the only characters in the original trilogy that werent horribly acted.

If anything the prequels were probably more thought provoking then either TFA or the originals, and i felt the action scenes were also far superior. 

Some of the scripting and acting was "roll my eyes" worthy, and Jar Jar (and the whole Gungan race) was annoying...but its not as of the originals were free of "rolling eyes" moments.

Hell if you look at some of the most iconic moments of the original trilogy, many of there are borderline laughable in retrospect.  The "i am your father" scene was so poorly acted, and so terribly monotone on Darth Vader's part that it seemed like he didn't even care what happened to Luke.  I thought the trilogy did a much better job of portraying Anakin/Vader as the wreckless, emotional and highly unstable person he is supposed to be.  In the origonals he just comes across as an pretty indifferent guy with abad temper.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on April 15, 2016, 10:58:09 PM
Alright....so...for the prequel haters.

Where do you rank the prequels vs Godfather 3? My thing is Godfather 3 is a fine stand alone film, but you just can't give me a borderline B+/A- following on the heels of A++++++.  To me the prequels aren't as big a let down as that. They fit in there with the other Star Wars films, if uncomfortably.

At least Godfather 3 has one great line, right?

Otherwise, it joins the list of movies that I choose to believe don't exist, like Rocky V.
Eja's point actually brings up an interesting question... would Sofia Copolla have out-acted the cast of Phantom Menace?
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: thirstyboots18 on April 16, 2016, 07:49:08 AM
It is CAMP....CAMP, I say.  Like Las Vegas, Disneyland, or "Rocky Horror Picture Show"...not meant to be deep intellectual works.  If you are trying to turn them into life changing events, you are probably missing the point.  Pure mindless entertainment. 
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: LarBrd33 on April 16, 2016, 04:00:06 PM
It is CAMP....CAMP, I say.  Like Las Vegas, Disneyland, or "Rocky Horror Picture Show"...not meant to be deep intellectual works.  If you are trying to turn them into life changing events, you are probably missing the point.  Pure mindless entertainment.
i get what you're saying, but none of the Star Wars movies are really considered part of the camp genre.  Sci fi adventure.  And that doesn't explain why one would be critically acclaimed and the other bashed.  You can have acclaimed movies in that genre like "guardians of the Galaxy".  But if your movie has wooden acting, terrible pacing, boring and unnecessary segments about niche politics, misguided cgi comic relief character, awful writing, fundamentally broken storytelling like the lack of a definable protagonist, plastic characters without describable characteristics, etc... It's going to get dumped on by any reviewer not lulled into a giddy haze by flashy glow-stick battles.   A movie like phantom menace received warranted criticism.   On the flip side, a movie like episode 7 was generally liked by audiences precisely because it covered familiar ground, was filled with fun moments, and had a tried and true story arc that's been battle tested since the origin of storytelling.   Still, someone's personal preference doesn't have to align with what is considered quality.  If you liked phantom menace more than episode 7, it's fine.  Whatever floats your boat.  It's ok to like bad moves.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: dannyboy35 on April 16, 2016, 04:09:59 PM
I think Marvel is in the campy category. I mean the raccoon and if a Howard the duck appearance I heard was true I mean that's as campy as you can get.  I think Star Wars is not QUITE campy but not deep or anything. Just your general hero's journey and mostly light fun.
Title: Re: Force Awakens. (Possible spoilers)
Post by: dannyboy35 on April 16, 2016, 04:14:23 PM
I actually think Mark Hamill was great in a popcorn trilogy. I thought especially in Empire his interactions with a puppet made yoda yoda very believable in those moments. I don't even think Harrison ford could pull that kind of thing off as well as Hamill did.