Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
I still DO like Star Wars
(01-07-2021, 04:43 PM)Belloq87 Wrote: I thought the disarming was a Mon Mothma directive, as she (bafflingly) wanted to assure the galaxy that the Republic's army would never be turned on them again.

But whatever the case, it's all pretty stupid.  Being undermined by Imperial sympathizers is like the least interesting avenue to explain the government's failure.

From a certain point of view it makes sense. The Old Republic originally didn't have an army and seemed to get by pretty well, and when they actually did get an army it was all because of Palpatine manipulating the Separatist movement as a way of pushing for the vote.

Of course, another avenue they could have taken was to keep an army but simply not use programmable clones that could have an Order 66 embedded in their conditioning. But Mon Motha wanted the status quo, which is how a lot of politicians are.
Reply
(01-07-2021, 08:44 PM)bradito Wrote:
(01-07-2021, 04:35 PM)jmacq1 Wrote: And apparently Leia was the only person that was keeping it remotely functional (after Mon Mothma retired) and then basically had to resign/retire when it came out publicly that she was Vader's daughter (I think about 15 years before TFA or so).  Then she basically got slandered by her political enemies as a dangerous whacko when she formed the Resistance (though she did still have allies/old-time Alliance folks that provided some under-the-table support, hence the X-Wings and such).

Bruh, Leia got cancelled because her dad was an asshole?

Totally.
Reply
(01-07-2021, 08:32 PM)simbob Wrote: It's a nice design, but it's not fitting for what they're doing with him in the movie. They're going for some ol' timey tie the girl to some train tracks type. 

[Image: tumblr_n78ploaV9u1t53lono1_400.gif]
Reply
(01-07-2021, 09:13 PM)Nooj Wrote:
(01-07-2021, 08:32 PM)simbob Wrote: It's a nice design, but it's not fitting for what they're doing with him in the movie. They're going for some ol' timey tie the girl to some train tracks type. 

[Image: tumblr_n78ploaV9u1t53lono1_400.gif]

Lol I knew someone else saw it the way I did. 

One of my favorite moments in the movie....and one of the few that REALLY nails the type of appropriate situational humor that was in the old trilogy is when Obi-Wan forgets that Grievous is a cyborg and tries to sweep his legs and then CLANG! and yells in pain. George either had some help with that one (Spielberg if the rumors are true...I'm just not sure which parts) or after two prequels was finding his mojo again..

Reply
(01-07-2021, 01:54 AM)Belloq87 Wrote: I also think they wanted to consciously pivot away, marketing-wise, from the Prequels, where the EPISODE designation was the dominating element of the title treatment on posters and in trailers.

Again, I don't think this is the case.  Almost nobody in the general public refers to Phantom Menace as Episode 1 anymore.  Or Attack of the Clones as Episode 2.  Those were part of the marketing at the time yes, but the marketing was a time capsule for that time period and has passed.  Now, most people just use the subtitle.  

It is very easy to veer away from the prequels by simply not acknowledging them in any characters or plot elements in the trailers. Kylo Ren, Finn, Rey, Poe... these were new characters in a new time period.  The reason the studios stopped using numbers is because numbers bring the stigma of "upteenth sequel", which can generate audience fatigue.  They've been doing this since the 90s.  Speed Cruise Control.  The Matrix Reloaded.  Die Hard With A Vengeance.  Batman Returns.  Bill And Ted's Bogus Journey.  Numbers generally don't get used unless they're doing some tongue in cheek shit like John Wick 2 or Expendables 2.

Honestly doing away with the numbers had more to do with the modern trend of just not using them, than any worry about reminding people of the prequels.  It was new characters and a new studio.
In 1916 a U.S. court ruling, following the example of company law in Britain, effectively made it illegal for a corporation to be motivated by anything but the maximization of profit.  Corporate social-responsibility, therefore, became illegal. 
Reply
It actually was SPEED 2: CRUISE CONTROL.

I should know, it was the very first film I ever saw Willem Dafoe in.
Reply
(01-08-2021, 05:06 AM)mr. stockslivevan Wrote: It actually was SPEED 2: CRUISE CONTROL.

Of course!
In 1916 a U.S. court ruling, following the example of company law in Britain, effectively made it illegal for a corporation to be motivated by anything but the maximization of profit.  Corporate social-responsibility, therefore, became illegal. 
Reply
I guffawed.



In 1916 a U.S. court ruling, following the example of company law in Britain, effectively made it illegal for a corporation to be motivated by anything but the maximization of profit.  Corporate social-responsibility, therefore, became illegal. 
Reply
oh man, I love darth maguire. this is more valuable than all the deepfakes

"oh! how'd THAT get in there???"
Reply
OK, that was really well done.
"I'd rather wake up in the middle of nowhere than in any city on Earth."--Steve McQueen
Reply
Darth Maguire deserve to win because he had those sick dance moves.
I've got good news and I've got bad news. The bad news is I've lost my way. The good news is I'm way ahead of schedule!
Reply
the ones of tobey in the MCU are wonderful

pizzatime
Reply
It's no Indy Pratt.
Reply
eh, that's negligible

bully parker in the MCU all the way
Reply
Rewatched ROGUE ONE tonight.

Still the best Star Wars movie since 1980. Feels both the most and least Star Wars since Return of the Jedi. And much better directed than the other Disney Wars. Only TLJ comes close there.
I'm not Avery.
Reply
It's definitely the best-looking of the Disney productions. And well it should, since it's apparently one of the most expensive movies ever made.
"I'd rather wake up in the middle of nowhere than in any city on Earth."--Steve McQueen
Reply
The last hour of ROGUE ONE is the best that the Disney films have to offer so far.
If we can dream it, then we can do it.
Reply
(TLJ Jedi storyline is brah)
Reply
Terrible female lead though.
Reply
I was probably the hardest on Solo of anyone on here, and even I'm feeling like Solo is being unfairly completely disregarded in favor of Rogue One.

Despite all of my problems at least most of Solo feels more like a Star Wars adventure than much of Rogue One.
Reply
(01-24-2021, 05:27 AM)Felix Wrote: Terrible female lead though.

If you're talking about Jyn Erso, yeah nah get chuggered! 

She's like an OT character in that she's not constantly spouting wise-cracks that could be swapped interchangeably between the other protagonists. Plus her bizarrely-derided character arc makes complete psychogical sense and Felicity Jones somehow managed to get three of the most emotional scenes in the series (her dad's hologram; her dad's death; the scene on the beach) in her one-off film, playing her one-off character. 

I remember being completely fucking confused when Rogue One came out and the go-to criticism was that the characters weren't as good as those in TFA. Which is bonkers. Swap Rey for Jyn and Poe for Cassian and the sequels massively improve (keep Finn and BB-8 though).
Reply
Basically everyone in Rogue One but the robot seem too boring for what they're meant to be. Jyn Erso is Shosanna Dreyfus, Cassian Andor is James Bond, Donnie Yen is Zatoichi, Saw Gerrera is Colonel Kurtz, Jiang Wen is seemingly meant to be some heroic bloodshed type character, and the primary villain the movie introduces gets pushed into the background by the villains of the first movie. Movie is a giant mess of cool references assembled in maybe the most boring manner possible.

The Force Awakens Finn is a better more entertaining character than anyone in Rogue One.
Reply
(01-24-2021, 05:44 AM)rexbanner Wrote:
(01-24-2021, 05:27 AM)Felix Wrote: Terrible female lead though.

If you're talking about Jyn Erso, yeah nah get chuggered! 

She's like an OT character in that she's not constantly spouting wise-cracks that could be swapped interchangeably between the other protagonists. Plus her bizarrely-derided character arc makes complete psychological sense and Felicity Jones somehow managed to get three of the most emotional scenes in the series (her dad's hologram; her dad's death; the scene on the beach) in her one-off film, playing her one-off character. 

I remember being completely fucking confused when Rogue One came out and the go-to criticism was that the characters weren't as good as those in TFA. Which is bonkers. Swap Rey for Jyn and Poe for Cassian and the sequels massively improve (keep Finn and BB-8 though).

Rep not just for being correct about Jyn, but for the use of "yeah nah".

BB-8's not even a character, he's a gimmick, and Finn is simply weapons-grade eagerness turned up to 1138.

Rogue One >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tfa
Reply
I think that scene of her watching her dad's hologram is pretty bad

Nothing against Felicity Jones' performance, because she delivers what she can... but in the context of a big exposition dump where someone just stands there and has to strain to weep listening to it...

and Mads sounding so bored

oof

also, Jyn's mom is dumb. I just wanted to add that
Reply
I mean, remember when Finn - one of JJ's new "heroes" - was more than happy to sacrifice THE ENTIRE REBELLION just so he could get next to Rey again?

What a creepy asshole.
Reply
I mean, rey and finn aren't even characters that make sense

Jyn does make sense as legitimate character. I just didn't think ROGUE ONE did a good job telling her or anyone else's story (except for K2SO's)
Reply
You know who does make sense as a character?

DJ.
Reply
mebbe
Reply
But what does Full House have to do with Star Wars?
Reply
Twins.
"I'd rather wake up in the middle of nowhere than in any city on Earth."--Steve McQueen
Reply
When I first saw TFA my first (very ikely wrong, and fueled by mounting irritation that at the half-way point of the film the ANH allusions had gone from visual references to wholesale plot elements and set-pieces) impression was that Finn bluffing about knowing how to turn off the shields just to get Rey (and, doing so, risking hundreds/thousands of Resistance lives) was a deliberate repudiation of the prequels' 'don't let your personal feelings stop you from acting in the greater good' message.

I don't think it was intended as that at all now, but JJ would 100% choose a crowd-pleasing 'the people that matter to you are the most important in the world, and nothing bad will happen if you prioritise their lives above many others' message over a more staid and philosophical 'everyone has feelings, but don't let them cloud your moral judgements'.
Reply
Has Abrams ever expressed his actual opinions on the prequels? He's spoken highly of the original trilogy being a seminal part of his childhood, but I never came across anything regarding the prequels, even well before his hiring. It was pretty obvious at first that it was Disney that wanted to move away from the prequel era stuff when they initially took control of LucasFilm (though that's now being reversed, now that the generation that grew up with the prequels are now adults and can be placated to in the market).
Reply
I'm pretty sure he's on record as loving the opera scene in REVENGE OF THE SITH, but that's the extent of anything I've heard him say about the Prequels.
If we can dream it, then we can do it.
Reply
The opera scene? That giant info dump?

"Here, let me tell you about what we should've actually *seen* in one of the previous two movies."
Reply
it’s the best info dump
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)