Has Disney disrespected Lucas.

Replies

  • D_Millennial
    847 posts Member
    edited February 2016
    @Ring

    To each there own. We both have our seperate opinions about the Star Wars movies and no amount of persuasion will convince me or you otherwise. Just keep in mind that there are many people that like the prequels and/or dislike the new movie, and that doesn't make them wrong. :)

    May the force be with you.

    P.S. Mandalorians are still badass. B)

    P.P.S. You accidentally quoted me in the above post.
  • Ring
    559 posts Member
    @Ring
    Just keep in mind that there are many people that like the prequels and/or dislike the new movie, and that doesn't make them wrong. :)

    Absolutely, and if that's how it came across, then I apologize, it was not my intention to suggest anything of the sort. But taking one's opinion, generalizing and presenting it as the opinion of others is something I have a problem with.
    P.S. Mandalorians are still badass. B)

    Death Watch. The everyday, mundane Mandalorians are now wimps. Thanks, George.
    P.P.S. You accidentally quoted me in the above post.

    Thanks, fixed.
  • CPMP
    974 posts Member
    Ring wrote: »
    CPMP wrote: »
    If everyone you know liked the movie, can you please tell me what exactly they liked in movie?

    You DO know it's not polite to respond to a question with another question? You said it's a "fact" that a "vast majority" of SW fans hated TFA. I'm still waiting for you to back that claim up with something more than "it's my opinion".

    You say the plot is unoriginal. As opposed to what, exactly? The original Star Wars, which were a rip-off of a number of different stories glued together? Accusing anything Star Wars related of being unoriginal makes about as much sense as accusing it of being scientifically inaccurate. The only reply to both can be "no kidding, Sherlock". :wink:

    But ok, I'll bite. What my friends and I liked about the movie:
    - a perfect balance between action and humor, something that the prequels missed completely
    - chemistry between the old and the new characters (again, the prequels lacked any sort of chemistry, probably because the guy playing the character who was supposed to be responsible for this chemistry had the acting skills of a jellyfish on a frying pan.
    - going back to "old-fashioned" special effects, as opposed to using blue-screen for everything, which made everything look fake
    - nostalgia
    - characters who, like the ones from the OT, are more than paper-thin
    - BB-8
    - Bet you were thinking I would bring up Rey, right? :wink:

    That's just a short list off the top of my head.
    So if you believe top grossing movies are the best, shall i suppose you like : Spider Man 3, Twilight Saga, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen etc? And don't get me started about the overhyped movies...

    Nope. But then none of those movies came even close to making as much money AND staying on top for such a long time. Compare the results of Crystal Skull and TFA after,say, 4 weeks. See how the former plummetted while the latter is still up there? THAT's the difference.

    So, still waiting for the answer to my questions.

    Ok then, a vast majority of the people that "I" encountered. Are you happy now?

    The plot was unoriginal because its was Episode IV all over again with small elements from prequels.

    "- a perfect balance between action and humor, something that the prequels missed completely" .
    Humor? What humor? Like when Han asks "do you have a trash compactor around anywhere"? Seriously??

    "- chemistry between the old and the new characters (again, the prequels lacked any sort of chemistry, probably because the guy playing the character who was supposed to be responsible for this chemistry had the acting skills of a jellyfish on a frying pan. "

    There wasn't chemistry between Palpatine and Anakin? Between Obi Wan and Anakin? Also i never said i disliked Originals, but ep 7. But since you gone full hate on prequels i ll mention those.

    "- going back to "old-fashioned" special effects, as opposed to using blue-screen for everything, which made everything look fake"

    When it was made in the era of Originals, it was awesome. Also, there are good "old fashioned effects" and there are bad old fashioned effects. The scene with the beast was good, the one with X wings were terrible for 2016 standards. It was like Resistance Pilots were playing console game. And there are good CGI and bad CGI. And the scene with Supreme Leader Snoke (lol, even that name) was terrible CGI.

    "nostalgia"

    It reminded me of how superior the Originals were compared to this.

    "- characters who, like the ones from the OT, are more than paper-thin"
    Just Kylo Ren, from the new ones. The rest cant even be put on same sentence with Original characters...

    "- BB-8"

    Is that a reason? I also liked Tie fighter's left wing and Poe Dameron's right boot...
    At least R2D2 did a lot more and had great synergy with C3PO. Also yea...they were humorous too. I still can't find what humorous part you found on TFA.
    BB-8 is another blatant copy of R2D2 and his ability to roll was made to target to younger audience. I found it more disturbing of how inefficient that kind of movement is for a droid, than enjoyable.

    You seriously can't compare Original Trilogy with TFA, hell even the prequels were better than that last movie.
  • I think the loud minority of fanboys disrespected Lucas and it just so happens that a few of them made the piece of you know what that is TFA just so they can keep all the fanboys happy.
  • Qeltar
    4326 posts Member
    edited February 2016
    Ring wrote: »
    And if this movie is so bad, how come it's one of the top grossing movies of all times?

    McDonald's sells 6,500,000 hamburgers a day. Just sayin'.
    I think your chances of liking TFA are inversely proportional to your age.
    Quit 7/14/16. Best of luck to all of you.
  • CPMP wrote: »
    Ring wrote: »
    CPMP wrote: »
    If everyone you know liked the movie, can you please tell me what exactly they liked in movie?

    You DO know it's not polite to respond to a question with another question? You said it's a "fact" that a "vast majority" of SW fans hated TFA. I'm still waiting for you to back that claim up with something more than "it's my opinion".

    You say the plot is unoriginal. As opposed to what, exactly? The original Star Wars, which were a rip-off of a number of different stories glued together? Accusing anything Star Wars related of being unoriginal makes about as much sense as accusing it of being scientifically inaccurate. The only reply to both can be "no kidding, Sherlock". :wink:

    But ok, I'll bite. What my friends and I liked about the movie:
    - a perfect balance between action and humor, something that the prequels missed completely
    - chemistry between the old and the new characters (again, the prequels lacked any sort of chemistry, probably because the guy playing the character who was supposed to be responsible for this chemistry had the acting skills of a jellyfish on a frying pan.
    - going back to "old-fashioned" special effects, as opposed to using blue-screen for everything, which made everything look fake
    - nostalgia
    - characters who, like the ones from the OT, are more than paper-thin
    - BB-8
    - Bet you were thinking I would bring up Rey, right? :wink:

    That's just a short list off the top of my head.
    So if you believe top grossing movies are the best, shall i suppose you like : Spider Man 3, Twilight Saga, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen etc? And don't get me started about the overhyped movies...

    Nope. But then none of those movies came even close to making as much money AND staying on top for such a long time. Compare the results of Crystal Skull and TFA after,say, 4 weeks. See how the former plummetted while the latter is still up there? THAT's the difference.

    So, still waiting for the answer to my questions.

    Ok then, a vast majority of the people that "I" encountered. Are you happy now?

    The plot was unoriginal because its was Episode IV all over again with small elements from prequels.

    "- a perfect balance between action and humor, something that the prequels missed completely" .
    Humor? What humor? Like when Han asks "do you have a trash compactor around anywhere"? Seriously??

    "- chemistry between the old and the new characters (again, the prequels lacked any sort of chemistry, probably because the guy playing the character who was supposed to be responsible for this chemistry had the acting skills of a jellyfish on a frying pan. "

    There wasn't chemistry between Palpatine and Anakin? Between Obi Wan and Anakin? Also i never said i disliked Originals, but ep 7. But since you gone full hate on prequels i ll mention those.

    "- going back to "old-fashioned" special effects, as opposed to using blue-screen for everything, which made everything look fake"

    When it was made in the era of Originals, it was awesome. Also, there are good "old fashioned effects" and there are bad old fashioned effects. The scene with the beast was good, the one with X wings were terrible for 2016 standards. It was like Resistance Pilots were playing console game. And there are good CGI and bad CGI. And the scene with Supreme Leader Snoke (lol, even that name) was terrible CGI.

    "nostalgia"

    It reminded me of how superior the Originals were compared to this.

    "- characters who, like the ones from the OT, are more than paper-thin"
    Just Kylo Ren, from the new ones. The rest cant even be put on same sentence with Original characters...

    "- BB-8"

    Is that a reason? I also liked Tie fighter's left wing and Poe Dameron's right boot...
    At least R2D2 did a lot more and had great synergy with C3PO. Also yea...they were humorous too. I still can't find what humorous part you found on TFA.
    BB-8 is another blatant copy of R2D2 and his ability to roll was made to target to younger audience. I found it more disturbing of how inefficient that kind of movement is for a droid, than enjoyable.

    You seriously can't compare Original Trilogy with TFA, hell even the prequels were better than that last movie.

    There are many people who agree with you. And many others who disagrees. That's the inherent nature of subjective entertainment.

    I personally was most disappointed by the lack of originality combined with the reintroduction of Han/Luke/Leia. Their story was over and ended happily. There was no reason other than nostalgia to reintroduce them into the franchise.

    I would have much rather preferred a movie set in The Old Republic era of Star Wars that took a step away from the Skywalker lineage. Think of all possibilities! Heck, the extended universe had many cinema-worthy story's which could've been implemented into a movie. Oh well, maybe in another 20 years.
  • D_Millennial
    847 posts Member
    edited February 2016
    Qeltar wrote: »
    Ring wrote: »
    And if this movie is so bad, how come it's one of the top grossing movies of all times?

    McDonald's sells 6,500,000 hamburgers a day. Just sayin'.
    I think your chances of liking TFA are inversely proportional to your age.

    :D

    @Qeltar
    Interesting. Are you saying the the older the Star Wars fan, the less likely they are to enjoy the movie? Or have I got it backwards?
  • CPMP
    974 posts Member
    CPMP wrote: »
    Ring wrote: »
    CPMP wrote: »
    If everyone you know liked the movie, can you please tell me what exactly they liked in movie?

    You DO know it's not polite to respond to a question with another question? You said it's a "fact" that a "vast majority" of SW fans hated TFA. I'm still waiting for you to back that claim up with something more than "it's my opinion".

    You say the plot is unoriginal. As opposed to what, exactly? The original Star Wars, which were a rip-off of a number of different stories glued together? Accusing anything Star Wars related of being unoriginal makes about as much sense as accusing it of being scientifically inaccurate. The only reply to both can be "no kidding, Sherlock". :wink:

    But ok, I'll bite. What my friends and I liked about the movie:
    - a perfect balance between action and humor, something that the prequels missed completely
    - chemistry between the old and the new characters (again, the prequels lacked any sort of chemistry, probably because the guy playing the character who was supposed to be responsible for this chemistry had the acting skills of a jellyfish on a frying pan.
    - going back to "old-fashioned" special effects, as opposed to using blue-screen for everything, which made everything look fake
    - nostalgia
    - characters who, like the ones from the OT, are more than paper-thin
    - BB-8
    - Bet you were thinking I would bring up Rey, right? :wink:

    That's just a short list off the top of my head.
    So if you believe top grossing movies are the best, shall i suppose you like : Spider Man 3, Twilight Saga, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen etc? And don't get me started about the overhyped movies...

    Nope. But then none of those movies came even close to making as much money AND staying on top for such a long time. Compare the results of Crystal Skull and TFA after,say, 4 weeks. See how the former plummetted while the latter is still up there? THAT's the difference.

    So, still waiting for the answer to my questions.

    Ok then, a vast majority of the people that "I" encountered. Are you happy now?

    The plot was unoriginal because its was Episode IV all over again with small elements from prequels.

    "- a perfect balance between action and humor, something that the prequels missed completely" .
    Humor? What humor? Like when Han asks "do you have a trash compactor around anywhere"? Seriously??

    "- chemistry between the old and the new characters (again, the prequels lacked any sort of chemistry, probably because the guy playing the character who was supposed to be responsible for this chemistry had the acting skills of a jellyfish on a frying pan. "

    There wasn't chemistry between Palpatine and Anakin? Between Obi Wan and Anakin? Also i never said i disliked Originals, but ep 7. But since you gone full hate on prequels i ll mention those.

    "- going back to "old-fashioned" special effects, as opposed to using blue-screen for everything, which made everything look fake"

    When it was made in the era of Originals, it was awesome. Also, there are good "old fashioned effects" and there are bad old fashioned effects. The scene with the beast was good, the one with X wings were terrible for 2016 standards. It was like Resistance Pilots were playing console game. And there are good CGI and bad CGI. And the scene with Supreme Leader Snoke (lol, even that name) was terrible CGI.

    "nostalgia"

    It reminded me of how superior the Originals were compared to this.

    "- characters who, like the ones from the OT, are more than paper-thin"
    Just Kylo Ren, from the new ones. The rest cant even be put on same sentence with Original characters...

    "- BB-8"

    Is that a reason? I also liked Tie fighter's left wing and Poe Dameron's right boot...
    At least R2D2 did a lot more and had great synergy with C3PO. Also yea...they were humorous too. I still can't find what humorous part you found on TFA.
    BB-8 is another blatant copy of R2D2 and his ability to roll was made to target to younger audience. I found it more disturbing of how inefficient that kind of movement is for a droid, than enjoyable.

    You seriously can't compare Original Trilogy with TFA, hell even the prequels were better than that last movie.

    There are many people who agree with you. And many others who disagrees. That's the inherent nature of subjective entertainment.

    I personally was most disappointed by the lack of originality combined with the reintroduction of Han/Luke/Leia. Their story was over and ended happily. There was no reason other than nostalgia to reintroduce them into the franchise.

    I would have much rather preferred a movie set in The Old Republic era of Star Wars that took a step away from the Skywalker lineage. Think of all possibilities! Heck, the extended universe had many cinema-worthy story's which could've been implemented into a movie. Oh well, maybe in another 20 years.

    I couldn't agree more about the Han/Luke/Leia part. And don't forget about the Millenium Falcon coinscidence and the same reference that is flying pile of junk. It's like JJ Abraams telling the audience "Here!! Its like the originals!!! You have to like it!!!".
  • Ring wrote: »
    CPMP wrote: »
    But the fact is that a vast majority of both sides hated the dinsey Star Wars.

    Say WHAT? How is that a "fact"? Where did you get this information? Clearly I haven't met any of this "vast majority", because pretty much everyone I know either liked or downright loved the new Star Wars. I would really love to see you back that claim with some data please. And if this movie is so bad, how come it's one of the top grossing movies of all times?

    I hate TFA, nice to meet you.

  • Qeltar
    4326 posts Member
    edited February 2016
    Are you saying the the older the Star Wars fan, the less likely they are to enjoy the movie? Or have I got it backwards?

    No you have it right.
    Younger folks identify more with the new younger heroes. But more importantly, they aren't as emotionally attached to the older characters as we old farts are. They went into TFA with more of a blank slate than we did.
    I deliberately avoided all information on this movie leading up to its release, afraid of spoilers. What I was expecting was to see Master Jedi Luke Skywalker and Master Jedi Leia Organa leading a new group of young Jedi against some new menace. So you can imagine how the movie started out for me: even before the first actor was seen, the opening crawl says my boyhood hero has run off to hide for decades allowing the galaxy to fall into ruin. It only got worse from there for me.
    Leia -- remember, at the end of Ep 6 only one of two known force-sensitives -- was not swinging a lightsaber, which I thought would have been amazing to see (and a good segue into Rey as new heroine of the series). Instead she mostly sat around and looked worried. The scenes with her and Han were painful. Han and Chewie were the only original characters to maintain even a semblance of chemistry.
    Most teens and young adults also aren't as familiar with the OT and so don't realize (or aren't as bothered by) the fact that nearly every single plot element in that movie was blatantly ripped off of one of the OT movies. Homages and themes are fine, but there was basically no originality in this movie, and that likely bothered people more who have already seen the older movies many times.
    What new plot elements they introduced made little sense. The political setup makes no sense: why would there be a "resistance" when there's a new Republic? Why would the Republic sit there and get nuked by a new death star, one large enough that there's no possible way they couldn't have known it was being built unless they were completely incompetent? Where were their ships? Why wasn't the "resistance" working with them?
    Then we had Rey "Jedi Mastery for Dummies" who can do Jedi mind tricks without even knowing such a thing exists and swing a lightsaber like a pro, and the villain who was intimidating until he took off his helmet and.. on and on. It just wasn't very well done.
    As a standalone action flick it was pretty good. In the context of 6 prior movies, it was for me a disappointment.
    Quit 7/14/16. Best of luck to all of you.
  • @Qeltar

    I'm going to go a bit further and say as a standalone action flick it was a huge disappointment also. It needed a little Maul, Qui-Gon, Obi action. I get what happened at the end and why the fight was the way it was but it was the most poorly executed action end scene in the whole franchise IMO.
  • D_Millennial
    847 posts Member
    edited February 2016
    @Qeltar

    You've hit the nail on the head. Well said.

    I would have preferred anything other than a rehash of Episode 4, whether it be:

    1) Extended Universe stories

    2) The Old Republic era

    3) A Darth Plaguis the Wise story arc.

    They had so many possibilities!

    I personally thought that the Han/Luke/Leia story arc would have been better left untouched. Episode 6 had a very satisfying ending with Luke redeeming Vader, Han and Leia cementing their relationship, and Anakin/Obi-Wan/Yoda overlooking the celebrations. It just screamed "The End". It was the type of closure that the fans were looking forward to. However, Disney has completely tarnished that happy ending by introducing Episode 7. Luke was never a hero, he was a coward. Leia and Han never lived happily ever after, they got divorced. Their emo child's sole purpose was to "finish what Vader started", which makes no sense. Anakin redeemed himself in Episode 6. Did Han/Leia/Luke ever mention this to Kylo Ren? There was nothing to finish!

    The bad acting between Han and Leia in the new movie was on par with Anakin and Padme in Episode 2. It was painfully awkward to watch.

    The fact that it was an Episode 4 ripoff was obvious. What bothered me more was the complete disregard for "the force". It took Luke two movies until he could pull his lightsaber out of the snow on Hoth, and even that required immense strain. But not for Mary "Rey" Sue. She had a lightsaber flying through the air at top speed by the end of the first movie with no prior training. She's exponentially more powerful then Luke and Anakin combined. It just doesn't make any sense. The force was used as an plot device in the new movie, nothing more.

    I've said this many times, The Force Awakens was a great "summer" blockbuster. Was it fun if you just relaxed and didn't think to much about the plot? Yes. Was it in any way creative/groundbreaking/memorable? No.

    P.S. If your theory is valid, that would make me an outlier. ;)
  • I really liked TFA. I have to admit, though, that I knew what I was going in for. From the trailers and the poster, I knew that there was going to be a 3rd superweapon, if not specifically a Death Star. I think whether or not you liked TFA overall has more to do with whether or not you were OK with the 3rd retelling of Kurosawa's Hidden Fortress, than age. I, for one, didn't mind it at all. I was looking forward to seeing the new characters, how relatable/compelling they'd be, and to see how the torch was passed between generations. In this aspect, I don't feel disappointed. I'm especially glad Ford finally got his 'big moment', even if it was a feature or two late ;)

    To put it all out there, I hated the prequels. Rather than spend a bunch of time going over what I hate about them, I'll just point out the Plinkett reviews, and leave it at that. I have a distaste for George Lucas' decision to not release an HD non-Special Edition version of the OT, as well. I find his attitude towards the fans that share these opinions as very smug and adversarial. I don't hold any personal grudge toward him as a person, because people aren't 1-dimensional caricatures, and he's done a lot of great things for the world and for film overall. Despite my disagreements, I am still intensely thankful for his input into these movies that I've been watching and enjoying for so long.

    Back to TFA, like I said, I didn't mind the re-hashing of the 'Hidden Fortress' plot. Fully 2 of the original 3 movies used it, and everyone mostly agrees that RotJ was a very good film, if some may say that it was the weakest of the 3. I'd say that ESB is 'the best', while RotJ is my favorite.

    (Spoiler alert)

    Just like in RotJ, the best parts of the movie were about the intrapersonal conflicts going on between characters, and even between father and son. Where RotJ's main thrust was the redemption of Vader, in TFA we have the seduction of Kylo, to set the stage for his own redemption. I think there's a lot going on in the subtext of the movie, specifically, what Ford's face shows as he's walking on to that bridge. He has a very good idea of what's going to happen, and puts it all on the line because he loves his boy. I think what this film needed most was an emotional driver like that, moreso than a completely new and different story arc. Hence, why I am ok with the complete un-originality of the overarching plot itself.

    P.S. @Qeltar - I do not think having Carrie Fisher take a lead role in this film would've been a good idea. I love her as an actress and as a person, but I don't think she'd be up to the physical demands of the role. Because of that, if it would've been as you'd liked, we'd have a situation where either scenes were intentionally less physically demanding, or had her face cgi'd onto a body double. I don't think either would've been as good as what we got, here. I also believe that the loud minority that was against what screen time she did have, histrionic and hyperbolic as they are, would've been much more insufferable were that to have been the case.

    I do share your disappointment as far as the lack of Luke, though. He went from protagonist to plot device really freaking quick, and I don't think the movie was any better for it. That last scene, especially, was a bit too on-the-nose, not to mention needlessly lengthy. It felt like that helicopter shot lasted about 3 hours. Still, I was happy to forgive it, because I enjoyed the rest of the movie so much. As always, YMMV.
  • Qeltar
    4326 posts Member
    edited February 2016
    The OT was 30+ years ago. The prequels were to some extent pre-cast, we knew what had to happen and that it would basically be the story of Anakin Skywalker's rise and fall. What this new movie needed was: something new and cool and interesting to set the stage for the movies to come. I feel it failed miserably at that. (FWIW I like the prequels more than most people, and Ep 3 could even be my favorite, something I never figured I would say. It is very well done in most respects (with some flaws)).
    I wouldn't have expected Fisher or even Hammill to have major starring roles. I get it, they need to introduce new blood to get a new generation into SW. I expected them to have interesting paternal supporting roles along the lines of Obiwan in Episode 4 or Yoda in Episode 5. I mean, they were the last two Jedi in the galaxy.. what the hell was Luke doing hiding on an island and Leia basically didn't show any sign she had ever had any Jedi training at all.
    By the way Fisher was only in her late 50s when that was filmed, that's not that old. It's younger than Guinness was for ANH and they didn't have CGI then like they have now.. they can basically paste faces onto stunt people and you'd never know the difference. Christopher Lee did most of the swordfighting in Episodes 2 and 3, just not the running and jumping, and he was over 80 by ROTS...
    Quit 7/14/16. Best of luck to all of you.
  • Qeltar wrote: »
    The OT was 30+ years ago. The prequels were to some extent pre-cast, we knew what had to happen and that it would basically be the story of Anakin Skywalker's rise and fall. What this new movie needed was: something new and cool and interesting to set the stage for the movies to come. I feel it failed miserably at that. (FWIW I like the prequels more than most people, and Ep 3 could even be my favorite, something I never figured I would say. It is very well done in most respects (with some flaws)).
    I wouldn't have expected Fisher or even Hammill to have major starring roles. I get it, they need to introduce new blood to get a new generation into SW. I expected them to have interesting paternal supporting roles along the lines of Obiwan in Episode 4 or Yoda in Episode 5. I mean, they were the last two Jedi in the galaxy.. what the hell was Luke doing hiding on an island and Leia basically didn't show any sign she had ever had any Jedi training at all.
    By the way Fisher was only in her late 50s when that was filmed, that's not that old. It's younger than Guinness was for ANH and they didn't have CGI then like they have now.. they can basically paste faces onto stunt people and you'd never know the difference. Christopher Lee did most of the swordfighting in Episodes 2 and 3, just not the running and jumping, and he was over 80 by ROTS...

    Like I said, the "new and cool and interesting to set the stage for the movies to come" was more about the new characters, than the story. If you were willing to go in and look past the 'Hidden Fortress plot' bit, then there was plenty there to fit as "new and cool and interesting to set the stage for the movies to come". If you weren't, that's completely fair, too, and I'm not trying to argue the inherently subjective, only point out that one's opinion on the movie tends to hinge on this assessment more than anything else.

    Fisher is 50, but it's not just age keeping her from being able to headline a movie, anymore. She hasn't exactly taken care of herself, over the years. Christopher Lee also did not live the life she has, from what I understand. Also, with regards to the CGI bit, I can absolutely tell when a face is composted onto a double. It's very uncanny valley. I do agree to your point of having them be more in-line with Obi-Wan's influential/advisory role, though. I'm pretty confident we'll get more of that in the upcoming movies. I do apologize for misunderstanding you, though; I thought you were saying that you wanted to have it take place immediately after RotJ, with Hammil and Fisher in the lead.
  • Qeltar
    4326 posts Member
    edited February 2016
    For me the characters and the plot are the movie. I liked Rey (except for the Supergirl routine), Finn was.. strange, Kylo was great until he pulled off his mask, and Poe was, well, good for what little screen time he got. The plot I just thought was a complete and utter rehash. It was so bad they even had Ford lampshade the death star part... that's bad. (You keep referencing this other movie. I haven't seen it but the descriptions I just read would never have brought any SW movies to mind if not for your mentioning it here. So I'll have to take your word for it. There's really little new under the sun, but still, they could have done better than they did.)
    And no, they could never have pulled off having this continue right after ROTJ, all of the actors are 30 years older and no CGI could ever have adequately hidden that. Hammill is in his early 60s and frankly he's always looked old for his age. Luke looked older to me in 7 than Dooku did in 3. It also would have been very hard to come up with a compelling plot, given that 6 really does tie a bow neatly on the story to that point.
    Quit 7/14/16. Best of luck to all of you.
  • Rather than spend a bunch of time going over what I hate about them, I'll just point out the Plinkett reviews, and leave it at that.

    :D

    While those videos are absolutely hilarious and quite entertaining, they are in no way "reviews".

    They tear apart the movies piece by peace while beating it with a stick. Any movie can be picked apart and attacked based on his method of "reviewing". A better word for it would be nitpicking.

    I'd rather read a logical and well-reasoned review from someone like Roger Edbert (who mind you, gave both The Phantom Menace and Revenge of the Sith 3.5/4 stars).

    Do the prequels have their flaws? Yes of course. Are people allowed to hate them? Of course, no movie is exempt from critisism. But does that make them inherently bad movies? No, not in the slightest.
  • Strangely, I agree with all the above posts...I love and hate TFA at the same time (not sure of any other movies like that for me) but I agree with the points on both sides... I have seen it twice, I'd like to see it in 3D, and I'll prob buy when it comes out...just wish it was better but am happy to have more Star Wars.

    Also, Rey might now be my favorite character of all...
    "You don't want to sell me death sticks... You want to go home and rethink your life. "
    Obi-Wan Kenobi
  • USAmazing wrote: »
    Strangely, I agree with all the above posts...I love and hate TFA at the same time (not sure of any other movies like that for me) but I agree with the points on both sides... I have seen it twice, I'd like to see it in 3D, and I'll prob buy when it comes out...just wish it was better but am happy to have more Star Wars.

    Also, Rey might now be my favorite character of all...

    I doubt anyone believes that The Force awakens is an inherently bad movie. In fact it's very well made both in terms of character development and cinematography/visuals.

    What is being argued is whether it's a good Star Wars movie. More specially, does it have a logical and compelling plot that corresponds to the pre-established Star Wars universe? Some say no, some say yes.

    At the end of the day, it's the Star Wars movie we were never supposed to get. I just wish that is was better executed and didn't conflict with the previous 6 films as much as it did.

    Here's hopping the next 2 movies can redeem the first. :)
  • Ring
    559 posts Member
    CPMP wrote: »
    Ok then, a vast majority of the people that "I" encountered. Are you happy now?

    But why are you getting so aggressive? You made a statement and I simply asked for some sort of data backing it up. There is a huge difference between "a vast majority of SW fans" and "a vast majority of people I know".
    CPMP wrote: »
    Humor? What humor? Like when Han asks "do you have a trash compactor around anywhere"? Seriously??

    Humor. Seriously. Although there seems to be a contradiction there. See, the funny thing about humor (if you pardon the pun) is that it's a bit like taste. Your taste in cars, food, women (or men) - it's pretty subjective. That being said, I saw TFA in the cinema thrice. Funnily enough, the audience laughed at exactly the same things every time. So I guess there IS humor in this movie. It's not the "roar with laughter" kind of humor, it's more of the giggling kind of humor. The little things. Like BB-8 giving Finn a thumbs-up (or the finger, still thinking about that one actually) with his burner. Or Chewie admitting that Han does try to bluff his way out of things. Now compare it with scenes attempts at humor in the prequels. Like Episode 3, where Kenobi says "wait a minute, how did this happen, we're smarter than this!" - I was half-expecting them to copy the scene from Robin Hood: Men in Tights, where everyone takes out a copy of the script to check if they got the scene right :/
    CPMP wrote: »
    There wasn't chemistry between Palpatine and Anakin? Between Obi Wan and Anakin?

    Not for me there wasn't. Mainly because Christensen couldn't show chemistry in a school lab.
    CPMP wrote: »
    . But since you gone full hate on prequels i ll mention those.

    Full hate? Hardly. I get the impression you're not reading my posts as I write them, but rather as you think I wrote them. I don't hate the prequels. In fact, I've admitted that they do have some good things going for them (like Maul), but those things are not utilized to their fullest.
    CPMP wrote: »
    And there are good CGI and bad CGI.

    And then there is "too much of a good thing". The prequels had both good and bad CGI (Anakin riding those giant ticks on Naboo being an example of bad CGI), but the point is there was simply too much of it. Waaaaaay too much. They CGI'd things they didn't have to, like Padme eating a piece of fruit levitated to her by Anakin. Similar things take place in The Lord of the Rings (Gandalf handing his hat and staff to Bilbo), but there it was done properly.
    CPMP wrote: »
    It reminded me of how superior the Originals were compared to this.

    Some parts, definitely. Others... not so much. But I was also referring to things like references to the previous movies. Like when Rey is trying to avoid stormtrooper patrols towards the end and she overhears of the troopers talking about "the new T-17" and his opinion of it. Sounds familiar? Because it should. "Have you seen the new VT-16?" is what Ben Kenobi hears when avoiding stormies on the Death Star.
    CPMP wrote: »
    Just Kylo Ren, from the new ones.

    For me there were a few more. Maz Kanata, Poe, just to name some.
    CPMP wrote: »
    Is that a reason? I also liked Tie fighter's left wing and Poe Dameron's right boot...

    Now you're just being deliberately silly. I was under the impression we were having a nice discussion going here. Perhaps I was mistaken.

    Yes, BB-8. He's as much of a character (key word, unlike the TIE's left wing or Poe's right boot) as Vader or Dooku. He was supposed to be the comic relief in this movie and, unlike Jar-Jar binks, he manages to pull it off. He's what R2 was to the generation who grew up on the OT. And he's doing a splendid job of it. Think Wall-E in Star Wars.
    CPMP wrote: »
    I found it more disturbing of how inefficient that kind of movement is for a droid, than enjoyable.

    You mean as opposed to giant walkers moving slowly on four legs over ICE? And being brought down with a piece of string? Or having a single TIE squadron defending the biggest and most powerful (and most expensive) space station up to that point? The mov8es have been around for almost 40 years and you still expect logic from them?
    CPMP wrote: »
    You seriously can't compare Original Trilogy with TFA, hell even the prequels were better than that last movie.

    And this is a matter of opinion. For you the prequels were better. For me they were not. I felt no need to watch them more than once in the cinema (and even then had a problem with making it to the end). I saw TFA three times in the cinema so far and will probably go again. Because I think the movie is worth it. And, as I said elsewhere in this thread, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree :wink:
  • Baal
    602 posts Member
    I've seen it over a dozen times with different groups of people, can't say anyone has complained, no one I was with has claimed it was worse than any of the prequels.
  • CPMP
    974 posts Member
    edited February 2016
    Ring wrote: »


    You mean as opposed to giant walkers moving slowly on four legs over ICE? And being brought down with a piece of string? Or having a single TIE squadron defending the biggest and most powerful (and most expensive) space station up to that point? The mov8es have been around for almost 40 years and you still expect logic from them?

    Don't forget the OT was made in 1977. And the BB8 in 2015. How does it even store items in his Spherical body? Doesn't these items get scrambled while he moves? How his head stays on top of the body? Is it magnetism? But if it is, doesn't it interfere with other circuits? What if the head falls off? How can he walk in rough ground? How he continues to roll properly if he gathers mud and debris while he moves around?
    I found him greatly disturbing rather enjoyable. It's clear that they add his rolling motion to appeal to the younger audience.
    Also what was it's purpose to the movie other than inflict nostalgia as a reminder of R2D2? It would have made more sense if Finn had the plans to defeat the empire and handed them to the Resistance to redeem himself too. Instead, they gave them to droid (to get scrambled all up everytime it moved) and they had Finn and Rey pamper it all the way to the Resistance because its obvious this droid can't do anything alone! It's not R2D2. And when they got there they were like "Go bb8!! Give them the plans! Good droid! You did it all by yourself!" Like he is some kind of baby. Huh...bb8 - baby. I see what you did there JJ...

    EDIT: And yes, the part where bb-8 gave the finger, was the only part of the movie that made me laugh. (I think if it was thumbs up they would have made the motion of lifting the lighter sideways, like the thumbs up motion)
  • CPMP
    974 posts Member
    Baal wrote: »
    I've seen it over a dozen times with different groups of people, can't say anyone has complained, no one I was with has claimed it was worse than any of the prequels.

    Like none said prequels were bad until it became a trend on the internet. And since then every prequel hater has to mention Jar Jar at least 20 times in his posts of hate.
  • USAmazing wrote: »
    Strangely, I agree with all the above posts...I love and hate TFA at the same time (not sure of any other movies like that for me) but I agree with the points on both sides... I have seen it twice, I'd like to see it in 3D, and I'll prob buy when it comes out...just wish it was better but am happy to have more Star Wars.

    Also, Rey might now be my favorite character of all...

    I doubt anyone believes that The Force awakens is an inherently bad movie. In fact it's very well made both in terms of character development and cinematography/visuals.

    What is being argued is whether it's a good Star Wars movie. More specially, does it have a logical and compelling plot that corresponds to the pre-established Star Wars universe? Some say no, some say yes.

    At the end of the day, it's the Star Wars movie we were never supposed to get. I just wish that is was better executed and didn't conflict with the previous 6 films as much as it did.

    Here's hopping the next 2 movies can redeem the first. :)

    As a huge Star Wars fan I have been saying it's a horrible movie. My hardcore SW friends who loved it have told me I'm expecting too much but I believe they're just too forgiving because they're so desperate to love anything new that isn't from Lucas. I see a lot of Phasma love and for what? She did nothing! IMO she is a worst character than JarJar. In the end we're all allowed to have our opinions but I felt like I was watching a parody produced by the Wayan Bros.

    Maybe if TFA was Episode X then it would make a bit more sense. By then it would've been the right time in the galaxy to tell THIS STORY and the perfect time for a JJ rehash story.
  • Wow this form got busy. I'm just going to assume that Disney dumped George not out of disrespect, but because they know Lucas likes to break the rules of conventional film makeing and and take uncharted risks with his films. Since they need to make the 4 billion back, from a business point of view makeing a "safe" film and that the New Republic and Knights of Ren will help distinguish the Trilogy so it doesn't feel like a waist.
  • Ring
    559 posts Member
    CPMP wrote: »
    Don't forget the OT was made in 1977.

    And this is relevant... how exactly? I wasn't exactly saying that the walkers look fake or something, but that the entire Star Wars universe only works if you apply something Tolkien called "willing suspension of disbelief". The moment you try to apply "our" logic to that world, it crumbles around you. So why do it?
    CPMP wrote: »
    How does it even store items in his Spherical body? Doesn't these items get scrambled while he moves?

    Really? Out of all the things that could be problematic in Star Wars (like, say, complete disregard of Newtonian physics), you have a problem with things rattling around inside BB-8? O_o You don't have a problem with two shafts of light acting as if they were solid objects, you don't have a problem with proton torpedoes changing course by 90 degrees, you don't have a problem with a human being falling several hundred meters straight down and then not having their arms ripped out of their sockets when they grab a passing speeder, but you DO have a problem with the fact that BB-8 might have difficulty crossing rough terrain?
    CPMP wrote: »
    It would have made more sense if Finn had the plans to defeat the empire and handed them to the Resistance to redeem himself too. Instead, they gave them to droid

    Uh... what? Plans to defeat the empire? What plans? What empire? Have you even SEEN the movie you're criticizing? There were no plans to defeat any empire, mainly because there WAS no empire to defeat and the plans were a bloody treasure map (except in this case the treasure is a person, not captain Flint's chest with pieces-of-eight).
    CPMP wrote: »
    And since then every prequel hater has to mention Jar Jar at least 20 times in his posts of hate

    I've already asked you this, but apparently either you missed it completely, or you seem to ignore huge pieces of text, only responding to select fragments. So I'll ask again - can you tell me why is there all this hostility in your posts? Because from where I'm sitting, it appears that you believe you're entitled to say absolutely anything your heart desires to "prove" how bad TFA is (and clearly anyone who has a different opinion is wrong), but the moment anyone says the prequels were bad, you act as though someone just made a "yo mama" joke. Expressing one's opinion (even if that opinion differs from yours), contrary to what you might believe, is not the same as being a hater. And saying that movie ABC was bad or character XYZ was bad is, and I can't stress this enough, NOT hate.
  • CPMP
    974 posts Member
    Ring wrote: »
    CPMP wrote: »
    Don't forget the OT was made in 1977.

    And this is relevant... how exactly? I wasn't exactly saying that the walkers look fake or something, but that the entire Star Wars universe only works if you apply something Tolkien called "willing suspension of disbelief". The moment you try to apply "our" logic to that world, it crumbles around you. So why do it?
    CPMP wrote: »
    How does it even store items in his Spherical body? Doesn't these items get scrambled while he moves?

    Really? Out of all the things that could be problematic in Star Wars (like, say, complete disregard of Newtonian physics), you have a problem with things rattling around inside BB-8? O_o You don't have a problem with two shafts of light acting as if they were solid objects, you don't have a problem with proton torpedoes changing course by 90 degrees, you don't have a problem with a human being falling several hundred meters straight down and then not having their arms ripped out of their sockets when they grab a passing speeder, but you DO have a problem with the fact that BB-8 might have difficulty crossing rough terrain?
    CPMP wrote: »
    It would have made more sense if Finn had the plans to defeat the empire and handed them to the Resistance to redeem himself too. Instead, they gave them to droid

    Uh... what? Plans to defeat the empire? What plans? What empire? Have you even SEEN the movie you're criticizing? There were no plans to defeat any empire, mainly because there WAS no empire to defeat and the plans were a bloody treasure map (except in this case the treasure is a person, not captain Flint's chest with pieces-of-eight).
    CPMP wrote: »
    And since then every prequel hater has to mention Jar Jar at least 20 times in his posts of hate

    I've already asked you this, but apparently either you missed it completely, or you seem to ignore huge pieces of text, only responding to select fragments. So I'll ask again - can you tell me why is there all this hostility in your posts? Because from where I'm sitting, it appears that you believe you're entitled to say absolutely anything your heart desires to "prove" how bad TFA is (and clearly anyone who has a different opinion is wrong), but the moment anyone says the prequels were bad, you act as though someone just made a "yo mama" joke. Expressing one's opinion (even if that opinion differs from yours), contrary to what you might believe, is not the same as being a hater. And saying that movie ABC was bad or character XYZ was bad is, and I can't stress this enough, NOT hate.

    I mentioned bb-8 because you mentioned him as a reason of why the movie was good...I would 've mentioned the part that Anakin drops a hundred meters and grabs a passing speeder without having his hands ripped of, if you said that your favorite part of the movie was when Anakin jumbed and grabed a passing speeder.

    I said the plans to defeat the empire to make a pun of how similar the plot is to episode IV. But there, "the droid holds the key to the secret to defeat the first order", for you.

    Because i can't bother argueing with you anymore, google "reasons that the force awakens sukced". Maybe it will shatter your rose tinted glasses.
  • The main issue I have with the prequels is the casting of older Anakin. He's not convincing and the actor is not able to portray him as anything more than a one-sided coin. He seems so whiny and selfish that it's hard to believe how Padme could ever fall for him. He is completely void of charm. There is no real desperation or vulnerability in his love for Padme and the desire to save her from harm. He's like a hormonal adolescent screaming at his "parents" when he doesn't get his way. It's all about his wants and posessions and he's frustrated and defiant the entire time. There is no inner conflict to be seen because he is so obviously dark from the very beginning of episode 2. I should be able to watch the film without having seen the original three (ep. 4-6) and not know if he's going to go dark. I should want him to succeed as a jedi and genuinely worry, but no one would route for a **** like Anakin. At least with Kylo Ren the inner conflict is obvious and we weren't sure if he would be able to murder his dad or not.

    I think Disney did a good job on ep. 7. It was an homage to the previous movies, but with exciting twists. If anything, Disney was actually celebrating Lucas' work, not vice versa.
  • Ring
    559 posts Member
    CPMP wrote: »
    Because i can't bother argueing with you anymore, google "reasons that the force awakens sukced". Maybe it will shatter your rose tinted glasses.
    CPMP wrote: »
    Like none said prequels were bad until it became a trend on the internet. And since then every prequel hater has to mention Jar Jar at least 20 times in his posts of hate.

    It's a pity you don't see the irony of this. First you complain that internet is responsible for the wave of "hate" against the prequels, then you tell me to look for reasons TFA is bad on the internet.

    Anyway, have a good day and enjoy the update :smile:
  • For 4 billion dollars they could disrespectful me all they want.
Sign In or Register to comment.