- 6,227
- Ottawa
- Pyano1132
Just got back from the Rise of Skywalker. Probably my favourite movie of the sequel trilogy. Stands on its own without repeating story structure from earlier movies, yet the fan-service that was present was great.
STAR WARS General Discussion | Warning: Possible SPOILERS!Movies
- Thread starter CodeRedR51
- 2,343 comments
- 130,824 views
- 4,453
- Vancouver, BC
- GTP_Grand_Prix
Went to see Rise of Skywalker last week with my brother and his kids.
I'll write my thoughts on the film in spoilers, but first, a bit of background so you can understand my viewpoint better:
I first watched the original trilogy sometime in the early '90s, or possibly in the late '80s, although I was just a toddler then, while having a few older brothers who were young kids when the OT films were released. I grew up in the '90s as a hardcore Star Wars fan, reading the trilogy of books by Timothy Zahn: Heir to the Empire, Dark Force Rising and The Last Command. Have also read The Courtship of Princess Leia and Dark Empire. I was also exposed to several of the Star Wars games of that decade, which consisted of Rogue Squadron, Shadows of the Empire and TIE Fighter. Something I appreciate now about these books and games is how interconnected they were. TIE Fighter cleverly used Thrawn as a character in its story, and Rogue Squadron featured a bonus mission taken from Dark Empire, complete with V-Wing airspeeders and World Devastators. This is the kind of stuff that kept the Star Wars brand going during a long break between films.
I also had access to this:
Then one day, Disney announced they were going to purchase Lucasfilm and film new Star Wars movies. I was somewhat excited, as I naively thought they might have a go at bringing Timothy Zahn's novels to the silver screen. Instead, Disney decided to create a new canon, and brush aside the investment fans like myself have put into what they designated as the "Legends" canon. I was willing to give them a chance to possibly create something better.
Having now watched the entire Sequel Trilogy, Rogue One, and Solo, here are my concluding thoughts:
These movies will not age well, in my opinion. You can say what you want about the OT films, that they had plot holes as well. The difference is the original movies did a decent job of distracting the audience, with more character development, and better structure. Most importantly, they had characters we can actually care about. It's no secret by now that George Lucas was not a brilliant filmmaker. A New Hope was a mess, described by Brian De Palma as "nonsense" before his wife, Marcia Lucas did some editing, and The Empire Strikes Back was directed by one of his film school instructors. George Lucas was, however, a great visionary and world builder. He likely would not have added universe-breaking ideas like hyperspace ramming. You can make up whatever you like in a space fantasy, but the greatest fantasies are those that obey their established laws. Otherwise you end up with characters that can do anything they like on a whim, and that would be quite boring, and difficult to relate with.
I have an idea of what Disney should do with this franchise. Stop trying to alienate the hardcore Star Wars fanbase and give them what they want, a re-boot with the Heir to the Empire trilogy of films. Cast Luke, Han and Leia with new actors in their mid to late 30s, and give Grand Admiral Thrawn the proper treatment that the character deserves. Thrawn is like a mix of Hannibal, Sun Tzu and Erwin Rommel, with an obsession of studying other cultures' artwork to better understand their weaknesses, and has the heroic qualities befitting a person of his rank. Give the New Republic a villain that requires not just hope, but brains as well, to defeat in the end. Thrawn would be a vastly better choice of villain over a re-born Palpatine. Would probably sell more toys with his unique and intimidating appearance as well.
The Sequel Trilogy would then become a New Coke of sorts, being replaced with Coke Classic, making billions.
I'll write my thoughts on the film in spoilers, but first, a bit of background so you can understand my viewpoint better:
I first watched the original trilogy sometime in the early '90s, or possibly in the late '80s, although I was just a toddler then, while having a few older brothers who were young kids when the OT films were released. I grew up in the '90s as a hardcore Star Wars fan, reading the trilogy of books by Timothy Zahn: Heir to the Empire, Dark Force Rising and The Last Command. Have also read The Courtship of Princess Leia and Dark Empire. I was also exposed to several of the Star Wars games of that decade, which consisted of Rogue Squadron, Shadows of the Empire and TIE Fighter. Something I appreciate now about these books and games is how interconnected they were. TIE Fighter cleverly used Thrawn as a character in its story, and Rogue Squadron featured a bonus mission taken from Dark Empire, complete with V-Wing airspeeders and World Devastators. This is the kind of stuff that kept the Star Wars brand going during a long break between films.
I also had access to this:
Then one day, Disney announced they were going to purchase Lucasfilm and film new Star Wars movies. I was somewhat excited, as I naively thought they might have a go at bringing Timothy Zahn's novels to the silver screen. Instead, Disney decided to create a new canon, and brush aside the investment fans like myself have put into what they designated as the "Legends" canon. I was willing to give them a chance to possibly create something better.
Having now watched the entire Sequel Trilogy, Rogue One, and Solo, here are my concluding thoughts:
In my opinion, Rise of Skywalker is the worst film of this trilogy, which is saying a lot. It tries to pick up the pieces from what The Last Jedi had done with the aftermath of The Force Awakens, and rather hastily. Perhaps a longer screentime may have helped the pacing, but that is the tip of the iceberg of this film's list of problems. One of the larger issues I have with this film trilogy is its antagonist. ROS reveals to us that the main driving force of the conflict in these films is a surviving Emperor Palpatine.
There is just so much wrong with this premise. Firstly, how is the Emperor even still alive? Not only was he completely disintegrated in his death, anything that remained would have been long gone after Death Star II was destroyed. J.J. Abrams seems to believe that Palpatine only lost some bits of his fingers, which makes me wonder if he had even watched the ending of Return of the Jedi. If he was in a younger, cloned body like in Dark Empire, that would make more sense. Secondly, Palpatine himself has been reduced to a flatter, more one-dimensional villain than he was previously, he has all of the complexity of the "Beast" from Krull. They say your story is only as good as your villain, and this was a lousy choice of villain. Somehow his force lightning is powerful enough to destroy an armada of ships, which makes me wonder why he even needs Star Destroyers with planet-exploding superlasers on them? Of course, this force lightning is not enough to defeat Rey, who simply blocks it with crossed lightsabers and then turns it back on the Emperor, who not even once thinks to stop frying himself with his own force lightning. It is so unbelievably awful.
Another thing that bugs me with this choice of bringing back the Emperor is that it makes Anakin's sacrifice in ROTJ worthless. Taking a dump on the Original Trilogy seems to be a theme with these movies: Keeping Han Solo so they can kill him off with no build-up. Making the Rebels look like morons for not thinking of hyperspace ramming the Death Star core with some old piece of junk Y-Wing piloted by a droid. Making the Old Republic, Confederates and Imperials look like morons for building large warships in a universe where hyperspace ramming exists. Turning Luke into a bitter old man and giving him a redemption, but then killing him off on a rock anyway, because, he used too much force. As did Ben Solo, of course. After being thrown down a pit to his death, only he's not dead, because we need him to save Rey, wouldn't want people to think she's Superwoman.
There is just so much wrong with this premise. Firstly, how is the Emperor even still alive? Not only was he completely disintegrated in his death, anything that remained would have been long gone after Death Star II was destroyed. J.J. Abrams seems to believe that Palpatine only lost some bits of his fingers, which makes me wonder if he had even watched the ending of Return of the Jedi. If he was in a younger, cloned body like in Dark Empire, that would make more sense. Secondly, Palpatine himself has been reduced to a flatter, more one-dimensional villain than he was previously, he has all of the complexity of the "Beast" from Krull. They say your story is only as good as your villain, and this was a lousy choice of villain. Somehow his force lightning is powerful enough to destroy an armada of ships, which makes me wonder why he even needs Star Destroyers with planet-exploding superlasers on them? Of course, this force lightning is not enough to defeat Rey, who simply blocks it with crossed lightsabers and then turns it back on the Emperor, who not even once thinks to stop frying himself with his own force lightning.
It is so unbelievably awful. Another thing that bugs me with this choice of bringing back the Emperor is that it makes Anakin's sacrifice in ROTJ worthless. Taking a dump on the Original Trilogy seems to be a theme with these movies: Keeping Han Solo so they can kill him off with no build-up. Making the Rebels look like morons for not thinking of hyperspace ramming the Death Star core with some old piece of junk Y-Wing piloted by a droid. Making the Old Republic, Confederates and Imperials look like morons for building large warships in a universe where hyperspace ramming exists. Turning Luke into a bitter old man and giving him a redemption, but then killing him off on a rock anyway, because, he used too much force. As did Ben Solo, of course. After being thrown down a pit to his death, only he's not dead, because we need him to save Rey, wouldn't want people to think she's Superwoman.
These movies will not age well, in my opinion. You can say what you want about the OT films, that they had plot holes as well. The difference is the original movies did a decent job of distracting the audience, with more character development, and better structure. Most importantly, they had characters we can actually care about. It's no secret by now that George Lucas was not a brilliant filmmaker. A New Hope was a mess, described by Brian De Palma as "nonsense" before his wife, Marcia Lucas did some editing, and The Empire Strikes Back was directed by one of his film school instructors. George Lucas was, however, a great visionary and world builder. He likely would not have added universe-breaking ideas like hyperspace ramming. You can make up whatever you like in a space fantasy, but the greatest fantasies are those that obey their established laws. Otherwise you end up with characters that can do anything they like on a whim, and that would be quite boring, and difficult to relate with.
I have an idea of what Disney should do with this franchise. Stop trying to alienate the hardcore Star Wars fanbase and give them what they want, a re-boot with the Heir to the Empire trilogy of films. Cast Luke, Han and Leia with new actors in their mid to late 30s, and give Grand Admiral Thrawn the proper treatment that the character deserves. Thrawn is like a mix of Hannibal, Sun Tzu and Erwin Rommel, with an obsession of studying other cultures' artwork to better understand their weaknesses, and has the heroic qualities befitting a person of his rank. Give the New Republic a villain that requires not just hope, but brains as well, to defeat in the end. Thrawn would be a vastly better choice of villain over a re-born Palpatine. Would probably sell more toys with his unique and intimidating appearance as well.
The Sequel Trilogy would then become a New Coke of sorts, being replaced with Coke Classic, making billions.
- 16,432
- United Kingdom
Why? Anakin killed the Emperor to save his son, not because he wanted redemption.
It's a bit of a stretch to think he can send his force lighting through hyperspace to travel across the galaxy and destroy whole planets... we saw him disable a few ships basically within line of sight... it's not the same.
.. anyway, aside from those things, I think the biggest thing you're overlooking is that you're not seeing the new stuff with the eyes of a toddler as you did with the OT, as an adult you evaluate it before you accept it... whereas when you were a toddler, you probably didn't... so the ridiculous stuff in the OT tends to just get accepted.
Thrawn's had three new books so far, and another three on the way, he was the big bad in Rebels, and was left open ended with the seasons lead character - Esra, a Mandalorian warrior - Sabine, and one of the more popular characters from the Clone Wars - Ahsoka.. they've set it up to be able to give him a heap more screen time in the future.
- 4,453
- Vancouver, BC
- GTP_Grand_Prix
True enough I suppose. Although I'm still a bit annoyed by it. Re-using the Emperor as an antagonist was just cheap, in my view.
He doesn't need to destroy planets though. With force lightning of that magnitude he could simply travel around in a flagship and destroy any fleet that opposes him. The purpose of the planet-destroying superlaser is to rule through fear of its use, it doesn't actually need to be used.
People can also change over time. When I was younger ROTJ was one of my favorite movies, now that I am older, I see it as the goofy part of the OT. It was also when George Lucas started to really cash in on toys and merchandise, so no surprise there. ROTJ was also a film where George Lucas was more involved in the making of it. Having an older brain also allows you to see positive things in movies you didn't notice before as a kid.
A New Hope (then simply known as "Star Wars") won the academy award for Best Editing for a reason (yes, I know the Oscars don't mean much, with the many great films that get snubbed, but still). The movie was not without artistic merit, as some choose to believe. Yes, it had space wizards in it, but the film was not an average '70s B-movie. It very easily could have been however, had Marcia Lucas not re-arranged the story line and removed garbage scenes. It had so perfectly captured the "Hero's Journey" that film schools still use it as an example of one.
The Empire Strikes Back was another great film that has become a classic, that was also loved by audiences at the time of its release, despite what Rian Johnson wants people to believe. The movie has a silly scene in it with an asteroid worm that seemingly defies the laws of physics, but that is why Star Wars is space opera, not science fiction. There are also parts where Mark Hamill's acting gets upstaged by Frank Oz with a puppet.
So what is great about TESB? Its story structure. The powerful imagery in Vader's scenes. The plot twist to end all plot twists, that has been parodied countless times, because of how impactful it was. Yoda's moments of wisdom. The badass, well-shot scenes of the Imperial Navy. Luke's and Han's character developments. Lando's character development. Even Vader has some character development... When Luke decides to sacrifice himself rather than give in to Vader's proposal, this visibly disturbs the dark lord. Even the fight choreography is not bad, and tells a little story through visuals: When Luke first confronts Vader, Vader is calm and in complete control of much of the fight, using his lightsaber in one hand. This makes it clear to the audience that Vader was just toying with Luke, waiting for the opportunity to disable him.
More exposure is good, I still think people would like an Heir to the Empire movie however. It's not just about Thrawn, but Talon Karrde, Rukh and Mara Jade as well. The reveal of Delta Source. Political instability in the New Republic. The mysterious Katana fleet dreadnoughts.
CodeRedR51
Premium
- 55,260
- United States
Disagree with everything you said, but to each their own as they say. You should definitely stay away from sci-fi movies.Went to see Rise of Skywalker last week with my brother and his kids.
I'll write my thoughts on the film in spoilers, but first, a bit of background so you can understand my viewpoint better:
I first watched the original trilogy sometime in the early '90s, or possibly in the late '80s, although I was just a toddler then, while having a few older brothers who were young kids when the OT films were released. I grew up in the '90s as a hardcore Star Wars fan, reading the trilogy of books by Timothy Zahn: Heir to the Empire, Dark Force Rising and The Last Command. Have also read The Courtship of Princess Leia and Dark Empire. I was also exposed to several of the Star Wars games of that decade, which consisted of Rogue Squadron, Shadows of the Empire and TIE Fighter. Something I appreciate now about these books and games is how interconnected they were. TIE Fighter cleverly used Thrawn as a character in its story, and Rogue Squadron featured a bonus mission taken from Dark Empire, complete with V-Wing airspeeders and World Devastators. This is the kind of stuff that kept the Star Wars brand going during a long break between films.
I also had access to this:
Then one day, Disney announced they were going to purchase Lucasfilm and film new Star Wars movies. I was somewhat excited, as I naively thought they might have a go at bringing Timothy Zahn's novels to the silver screen. Instead, Disney decided to create a new canon, and brush aside the investment fans like myself have put into what they designated as the "Legends" canon. I was willing to give them a chance to possibly create something better.
Having now watched the entire Sequel Trilogy, Rogue One, and Solo, here are my concluding thoughts:
In my opinion, Rise of Skywalker is the worst film of this trilogy, which is saying a lot. It tries to pick up the pieces from what The Last Jedi had done with the aftermath of The Force Awakens, and rather hastily. Perhaps a longer screentime may have helped the pacing, but that is the tip of the iceberg of this film's list of problems. One of the larger issues I have with this film trilogy is its antagonist. ROS reveals to us that the main driving force of the conflict in these films is a surviving Emperor Palpatine.
There is just so much wrong with this premise. Firstly, how is the Emperor even still alive? Not only was he completely disintegrated in his death, anything that remained would have been long gone after Death Star II was destroyed. J.J. Abrams seems to believe that Palpatine only lost some bits of his fingers, which makes me wonder if he had even watched the ending of Return of the Jedi. If he was in a younger, cloned body like in Dark Empire, that would make more sense. Secondly, Palpatine himself has been reduced to a flatter, more one-dimensional villain than he was previously, he has all of the complexity of the "Beast" from Krull. They say your story is only as good as your villain, and this was a lousy choice of villain. Somehow his force lightning is powerful enough to destroy an armada of ships, which makes me wonder why he even needs Star Destroyers with planet-exploding superlasers on them? Of course, this force lightning is not enough to defeat Rey, who simply blocks it with crossed lightsabers and then turns it back on the Emperor, who not even once thinks to stop frying himself with his own force lightning.
Another thing that bugs me with this choice of bringing back the Emperor is that it makes Anakin's sacrifice in ROTJ worthless. Taking a dump on the Original Trilogy seems to be a theme with these movies: Keeping Han Solo so they can kill him off with no build-up. Making the Rebels look like morons for not thinking of hyperspace ramming the Death Star core with some old piece of junk Y-Wing piloted by a droid. Making the Old Republic, Confederates and Imperials look like morons for building large warships in a universe where hyperspace ramming exists. Turning Luke into a bitter old man and giving him a redemption, but then killing him off on a rock anyway, because, he used too much force. As did Ben Solo, of course. After being thrown down a pit to his death, only he's not dead, because we need him to save Rey, wouldn't want people to think she's Superwoman.
These movies will not age well, in my opinion. You can say what you want about the OT films, that they had plot holes as well. The difference is the original movies did a decent job of distracting the audience, with more character development, and better structure. Most importantly, they had characters we can actually care about. It's no secret by now that George Lucas was not a brilliant filmmaker. A New Hope was a mess, described by Brian De Palma as "nonsense" before his wife, Marcia Lucas did some editing, and The Empire Strikes Back was directed by one of his film school instructors. George Lucas was, however, a great visionary and world builder. He likely would not have added universe-breaking ideas like hyperspace ramming. You can make up whatever you like in a space fantasy, but the greatest fantasies are those that obey their established laws. Otherwise you end up with characters that can do anything they like on a whim, and that would be quite boring, and difficult to relate with.
I have an idea of what Disney should do with this franchise. Stop trying to alienate the hardcore Star Wars fanbase and give them what they want, a re-boot with the Heir to the Empire trilogy of films. Cast Luke, Han and Leia with new actors in their mid to late 30s, and give Grand Admiral Thrawn the proper treatment that the character deserves. Thrawn is like a mix of Hannibal, Sun Tzu and Erwin Rommel, with an obsession of studying other cultures' artwork to better understand their weaknesses, and has the heroic qualities befitting a person of his rank. Give the New Republic a villain that requires not just hope, but brains as well, to defeat in the end. Thrawn would be a vastly better choice of villain over a re-born Palpatine. Would probably sell more toys with his unique and intimidating appearance as well.
The Sequel Trilogy would then become a New Coke of sorts, being replaced with Coke Classic, making billions.
- 4,453
- Vancouver, BC
- GTP_Grand_Prix
Disagree with everything you said, but to each their own as they say. You should definitely stay away from sci-fi movies.
OK.
Just so you know, Star Wars is not sci-fi, it is space opera, a fantasy that takes place in space. What is science fiction? Fiction that is (somewhat) scientifically plausible. Some examples of sci-fi: Alien, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Blade Runner, Frankenstein, The Matrix, Jurassic Park, John Carpenter's The Thing. Not all sci-fi stories need to take place in space or the far future, and do not require extraterrestrials, Jurassic Park is an example of this. A common element of sci-fi is that the author explores the problems that people would have to deal with in the chosen setting of the story. For Alien and The Thing, this is pretty self-explanatory - there could be forms of life in the universe we might not want to meet. Jurassic Park questions the ethics and consequences of bringing species of animals back from extinction, that would be completely out of place in our world. Frankenstein explores how an artificial person might cope with a world that treats it with hostility for appearing unnatural.
With that said, I'll continue to watch sci-fi movies, as it is one of my favorite genres. I like fantasy as well, if the story has a consistent universe and developing characters.
- 16,432
- United Kingdom
Adam Driver (giving the best performance of all the actors in the ST, IMHO) would have made a better bad guy, but Disney didn't seem to want to go down that route. The Emperor was effectively the bad guy for 6 films, pretty much anyone was going to be less intimidating than him, so although I think it was handled clumsily, I don't mind Darth Sidious being the bad guy. I didn't dislike Snoke as a villain, but he was, at best, a discount Emperor anyway...
... I guess they could have bough back the 'Vong.
Well, there's probably an interesting debate around the best tactics to instill fear into the galaxy, personally I think a fleet of planet killers was the next logical step from the Death Star and Stark Killer Base, and for me the Emperors force lighting abilities didn't undermine it one bit. In the cold war, people were afraid of being vapourised by nuclear weapons, not the ability of the enemy to knock planes out of the sky.
This is true. I personally haven't changed my opinion much of the OT though. ANH is still my favourite, RotJ second, and ESB third. ESB was just depressing and a little bit scary to me as a young kid, and didn't fill me with any of the joy and excitement that ANH or RotJ did. My point is though as a kid you see more positives because your not looking to critique the film as you do as an adult, as such, those of use that grew up with the OT, have probably already accepted many of the drawbacks, and can now just get on with enjoying the rest. Seeing the films as an adult doesn't allow you to do that, not so easily at least, so to me a lot of the criticism of the ST from 'original' fans seems like huge hypocrisy. That's not to say they're beyond criticism, or the OT is bad, but I perceive a lot of double standards at play - and to me that can only because people have had 40 years to accept one thing for what it is, and days or weeks to accept what TroS is. The people I know that only recently got into watching Star Wars perceive a far, far, smaller difference between the OT and the ST. AotC and an unclear plot continues to drag down their estimation of the PT, sadly.
CodeRedR51
Premium
- 55,260
- United States
The Skywalker saga started out with him pulling the strings, not sure why it's so bad that he's the one doing it at the end. Makes perfect sense to me. *shrugs*
DesertPenguin
(Banned)
- 10,691
- Long Island, New York
- DesertPenguin_
Having not seen the movie yet but reading all the spoilers, it's bad because it's nothing new. Simple as that. It may seem childish but when there's so much hype around a franchise and it having new movies after so many years, most people were looking forward to something new and fresh. We were teased with The Force Awakens but nothing went anywhere.
CodeRedR51
Premium
- 55,260
- United States
I don't read anyone else's reviews before seeing anything because everyone is bound to have a different opinion than me. I'll see it for how I want to see it. Having watched the movie twice now, I can safely say I enjoyed it. But I'm a simple man, the 2.5 hours in the theater is a chance for me to escape this hell we call reality and I'm not going to put so much thought into something that it completely ruins that escape. People that can be so critical of movies should probably find a new hobby.
DesertPenguin
(Banned)
- 10,691
- Long Island, New York
- DesertPenguin_
I didn't read reviews, just straight plot dumps. At least you can understand the other side?
I'm critical of everything (to a fault) but with movies I really want something to make me think and push the imagination, not "escape reality" so much. I can still do that with certain movies but I have to go into it knowing it's that kind of movie. If I want to escape reality I play video games.
I'm critical of everything (to a fault) but with movies I really want something to make me think and push the imagination, not "escape reality" so much. I can still do that with certain movies but I have to go into it knowing it's that kind of movie. If I want to escape reality I play video games.
CodeRedR51
Premium
- 55,260
- United States
That was your first mistake.
There are movie fans and there are fans of other types of entertainment. One of these is not you.
DesertPenguin
(Banned)
- 10,691
- Long Island, New York
- DesertPenguin_
Just say it. You don't think I'm a movie fan. Uhm... okay? I like movies, but some things I don't care enough about to not read spoilers. Star Wars is one of those things. To each their own though. I'm watching The Witcher and some other shows right now and I refuse to read discussion threads for fear of having something spoiled.
CodeRedR51
Premium
- 55,260
- United States
I don't care for that show but you don't see me in there ragging on it because of that. Which is the point.
DesertPenguin
(Banned)
- 10,691
- Long Island, New York
- DesertPenguin_
I'm not ragging on anything. You said you don't know why it's so bad etc. and I gave my opinion on why I think it's bad. Can we move on now? Jeez, it's just a movie with pew pew lasers and space wizards lol
CodeRedR51
Premium
- 55,260
- United States
This is why I'm confused why you are even in here.
DesertPenguin
(Banned)
- 10,691
- Long Island, New York
- DesertPenguin_
Because I can? I'll probably see it this week and give my thoughts
- 16,432
- United Kingdom
I'm not sure the culmination of 40 year saga is going to appear fresh or new without totally alienating a massively invested fan base. TFA teased nothing fresh or new either, that was one of it's biggest problems... retreading too much of the same ground.
DesertPenguin
(Banned)
- 10,691
- Long Island, New York
- DesertPenguin_
Exactly. They were too afraid to do anything new for fear of angering the nostalgia needs. So frustrating for a younger viewer
- 4,453
- Vancouver, BC
- GTP_Grand_Prix
Adam Driver (giving the best performance of all the actors in the ST, IMHO) would have made a better bad guy, but Disney didn't seem to want to go down that route. The Emperor was effectively the bad guy for 6 films, pretty much anyone was going to be less intimidating than him, so although I think it was handled clumsily, I don't mind Darth Sidious being the bad guy. I didn't dislike Snoke as a villain, but he was, at best, a discount Emperor anyway...
... I guess they could have bough back the 'Vong.
*nods*
The problem with Attack of the Clones was George Lucas backing out of his plan to use Jar Jar Binks as the dark side equivalent of Yoda. If you re-watch The Phantom Menace with this in mind, it becomes clearer that Jar Jar is just acting stupid. He had a lame excuse for being banished by the Gungans, and Obi-Wan starts to catch on quick: "...you were banished because you were clumsy?"
This is why AOTC was such a mess, and why Count Dooku appears out of nowhere.
- 1,994
- Ontario
- bloodyboyblue
The Rise of Skywalker had an almost comical amount of plot holes, was incredibly rushed, deus ex machina galore, one dimensional characters, and was completely over the top and ridiculous, but I really enjoyed it. Not as much as The Last Jedi, but it was still enjoyable. And literally anything is better than The Force Awakens, glad Abrams learned some lessons from that mess. I learned very quickly to not think about the Disney Star Wars movies too hard since applying my childhood of Star Wars fandom to them just makes me sad. As blockbuster entertainment, it was excellent. And Palpatine is my favourite character so any time we see him shooting Force lightning is alright by me.
- 1,402
- United Kingdom
- evildave333
At lot of the reasons why the film turned out the way it did is the current style of film making, bigger, faster, louder which nonetheless is very enjoyable. Given the marvel effect on cinema recently there was never going to be 40 mins of c3po whining wandering in the sand dunes like in the original... Despite some short comings there is lots more to like than dislike...
- 2,501
- London
- nowcontrol
👍
- 16,432
- United Kingdom
- 2,863
- Pittsburgh, PA
- Leadfoot530
EDIT; Aww the gif didn't work...
Just know I'm excited.
CodeRedR51
Premium
- 55,260
- United States
One of these popped up in Resistance recently.
CodeRedR51
Premium
- 55,260
- United States
Next week!
