|
|
Â
|
| Quote: |
| Chatter about [Billy Dee] Williams joining the production, which is set to begin later this summer, increased in recent days when the actor bowed out of an upcoming sci-fi and pop culture convention citing a conflict with a movie schedule. Sources confirmed to The Hollywood Reporter that Williams will indeed be returning to the Star Wars film franchise for the first time since 1983’s Return of the Jedi. The Lando Calrissian character made his suave debut in 1980's The Empire Strikes Back. |
Rouge One has become my favorite of all the movies. It’s perfect.
The truth is the original trilogy had poor acting, cheese, and plot holes galore.
We just live in an age where everyone is a critic and has to have their fill now.
Besides, the nerds will have a meltdown if they dare to kill another classic character. Force Awakens was good but Last Jedi was fairly blah. Hopefully they can recover with episode IX and tie up the trilogy in a strong way.
Thus, we get the same shit over and over, like a child's bed-time story. Kinda mirrors the mission of the NFL and the NFL Players' Association.
People just want something to complain about, first 3 Star Wars were horribly cheesy and poorly acted.
Thus, we get the same shit over and over, like a child's bed-time story. Kinda mirrors the mission of the NFL and the NFL Players' Association.
They are doing exactly that though. Regardless of what you personally want, tons of fans wanted a direct sequel to the originals and others wanted a brand new story. Both are happening - what's the issue?
Nope.
I think its fair to hold off on critiquing the story until its finished. That what you were forced to do in 1977, so why not now? Not calling anyone out specifically, but everyone knows this is a trilogy and not 3 stand alone movies, so I really don't understand why its being treated as such.
Let it play out.
Pretty perfectly said. Endless rewatchability is really the true measure of Star Wars greatness. And IV, V, VI, and Rogue One are the only ones that have that quality for me.
Groundbreaking special effects were "horribly cheesy"? Um, no.
I think its fair to hold off on critiquing the story until its finished. That what you were forced to do in 1977, so why not now?
Star Wars (what we now call "Episode IV") was an outstanding film on its own. It didn't need the rest of the trilogy story to be told before it could became great. It just got greater as the story continued to unfold in sequels.
That's a problem for me in the current approach to film trilogies and franchises (not just Star Wars). This idea of "Just wait. It will all make sense in a later film." Bullshit. Each film should stand on its own as great, and then the entire story should achieve a higher level of greatness when the series is considered as a whole.
Luke may be in the final episode in a very cool and meaningful way, so we can tear it apart (even though I like how it was handled anyway) or we can see how it ends.
Lastly, trilogies rarely happen unless the first installment is a financial success. That's the way of the industry now. They need to make sure there is a draw because there's too much on the line financially so I don't think its necessarily realistic to expect massive budget movies to built in the way you are describing. I'd love it to, but I understand why it generally doesn't happen.
I'm not sure I understand your point. In 1977, George Lucas had a much bigger saga in mind than just the Episode IV story, but he was only able to get a commitment for one film, because 20th Century Fox had no idea whether it would flop or hit. It turned out to be a megablockbuster, so Lucas was able to finish the story over two more sequels.
It seems to me now that studios are greenlighting action-movie series/franchises instead of just one original film idea that they hope hits big. In the unexpected event that the initial film flops, you read about studios shelving plans for sequels.
Quote:
I think its fair to hold off on critiquing the story until its finished. That what you were forced to do in 1977, so why not now?
Star Wars (what we now call "Episode IV") was an outstanding film on its own. It didn't need the rest of the trilogy story to be told before it could became great. It just got greater as the story continued to unfold in sequels.
That's a problem for me in the current approach to film trilogies and franchises (not just Star Wars). This idea of "Just wait. It will all make sense in a later film." Bullshit. Each film should stand on its own as great, and then the entire story should achieve a higher level of greatness when the series is considered as a whole.
Amen to this. The great multiple movie storylines lusually are great stsnd alone movies to begin with.
I'll agree V is still great and IV was groundbreaking. They get extra credit for doing it when they did and being first.
Quote:
Has that rewatchable quality that only 4-5-6 and rogue one really have. Force awakens was solid — enough redeeming qualities I guess.... they (7-8) still lack that magic.
Rouge One has become my favorite of all the movies. It’s perfect.
Completely agree.
Nope.
Luke may be in the final episode in a very cool and meaningful way, so we can tear it apart (even though I like how it was handled anyway) or we can see how it ends.
Lastly, trilogies rarely happen unless the first installment is a financial success. That's the way of the industry now. They need to make sure there is a draw because there's too much on the line financially so I don't think its necessarily realistic to expect massive budget movies to built in the way you are describing. I'd love it to, but I understand why it generally doesn't happen.
I honestly don't believe Abrams film would have gone the way it did if he knew Johnson's plan for Luke ahead of filming Force Awakens. The way Last Jedi played out,it would have been more effective and possibly better to never have included Luke in this trilogy at all.
I'll agree V is still great and IV was groundbreaking. They get extra credit for doing it when they did and being first.
As for the original trilogy, it was so groundbreaking that, in my opinion, there are very few films now that can match their FX still. That is one thing I have really enjoyed with the new films. They are not overly reliant on CGI, which has made the FX much better than most movies now.
Quote:
The moment when he brushed the dirt off the shoulder, I finally thought the master Jedi of all finally arrived to whoop ass.
Nope.
Again. I thought the same thing. If he had died in the fight, so be it. This is a character being billed for years as the most powerful jedi who could do amazing things. Instead of one real battle, we got a grumpy old man with some cute one liners and a bogus death.
That would make a lot more sense if they didn’t make a point of saying how huge of a task projecting oneself using the Force is. What he did and his resulting death was supposed to be viewed as an epic feat. The fact some people dismiss it as a lame death is unfortunate and not what the writers were going for.
Tie to this that Luke was wary of violence from the time of ROTJ (refusing to kill Vader), and Yoda already noted that "war does not make one great." And you will understand that non-violent victory is very much in the spirit of Luke.
Again, I wish they didn't kill him off (not sure why he had to die), and I wish it didn't look like he was willing to abandon his friends in the first 3/4 of TLJ. But they did do justice to him as a badass force user.
Quote:
I'd love each stand alone movie to be great, but that simply isn't the way this was planned. This is a 3 part story and we are trying to critique unfinished work, and getting mad at decision that were made without actually knowing the outcome.
Luke may be in the final episode in a very cool and meaningful way, so we can tear it apart (even though I like how it was handled anyway) or we can see how it ends.
Lastly, trilogies rarely happen unless the first installment is a financial success. That's the way of the industry now. They need to make sure there is a draw because there's too much on the line financially so I don't think its necessarily realistic to expect massive budget movies to built in the way you are describing. I'd love it to, but I understand why it generally doesn't happen.
That's not really true. JJ Abrams and company started a story in The Force Awakens. Johnson essentially told his own story that was related to the first one in Last Jedi. It wasn't truly a continuation of the previous story.
I honestly don't believe Abrams film would have gone the way it did if he knew Johnson's plan for Luke ahead of filming Force Awakens. The way Last Jedi played out,it would have been more effective and possibly better to never have included Luke in this trilogy at all.
In broad outline it makes sense:
1. Rey's journey in TFA is to find Luke.
2. But in TLJ, Luke is deeply hurt (and in depression) because of his sense of failure and what they make him feel about the Jedi Order.
3. But Rey convinces him to overcome this, which he does to save the last vestiges of the resistance.
Great story, and in line with the Fisher King motif of medieval literature.
In execution, it just slows down a lot in the second act. And it isn't entirely clear why Luke's attitude about the Order and saving the teachings radically change (when Yoda apparently destroys them). Even if it is clear that Rey does convince him not to blame himself for his student's evil turn.
IMO, Luke needed to have a sense of desperation- that he knew if he failed, the Resistance would die and so would Rey and the Jedi way. I think Yoda's plan was to force Luke to save Rey and the Resistance by taking away all of his options to delay- therefore, destroying the tree- and in Luke's mind, the Jedi teachings.
I think that too many Star Wars fans bought into the post- movies universe where Luke because this all-powerful Jedi. Remember the point of the movies- Luke is a "New Hope"- not a superhero. His story arc was to give life to the Jedi and the Resistance- not to become all-powerful.
I think what too many Star Wars fans have forgotten was that the lure of power is what brought his father down. That was a path he was unwilling to follow- see his rejection of the Emperor- so why did people expect him to become this all-powerful Jedi?
In the end, I think that the overlooked element of Luke's conversations with Rey was to plant the seed of thought with Rey that perhaps neither the Jedi nor the Sith have the answers- and that a third way is what the Universe is demanding- a "balance in the force" if you will. Remember Luke telling Rey that the "Jedi must end."
I think in the end, Rey will end up taking what she needs from the Jedi, and somehow come to terms with what Kylo Ren is and draw what she needs to bring balance to the force and train the next generations in the new way.
Shouldn't they have viewed Vader ultimately as a failure?
Shouldn't they have viewed Vader ultimately as a failure?
The only person who was there when Vader turned good was Luke (the Emperor died). They surely believe that he was betrayed and killed by Luke, not that he turned good. And if there is a story that he turned good, then they would think that it was a lie by the rebellion.
I think it would have been more compelling if the new villains were so bad and formidable that they accepted the truth and considered Vader a failure who ultimately had weakness that they were consumed with exterminating in themselves and others. It also would have played well against Luke's struggles as a failure. In other words, Luke wasn't a "good enough" good guy, so he saw himself as a failure. Meanwhile, to the new villains, Vader wasn't a "bad enough" bad guy, so they viewed Vader as a failure.
Even if they believed that Luke simply killed Vader, why would Kylo Ren idolize Vader so much? Wouldn't losing his life to Luke be a knock on Vader's badassness?
I agree that there should have been some backstory on Snoke. He was just the next bad guy. It would have been more impactful when they killed him if the audience had more reasons to not like him.