Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Star Wars: Rogue One *spoilers from post 1195*
Options
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
johnny_ultimate wrote: »Couple of reasons for my opinions on this
I've said before that Disney can only play the 'nostalgia jamboree' card once before it outstays its welcome (once was too much for many viewers). I believe Episode VIII will have to be something MUCH bolder than its predecessor and cannot rely on the 'Star Wars is back!' novelty. Given the series is now established as 'back', I think it's disappointing Rogue One relies as much as it does on what's gone before when it should be trying to be more of its own thing.
Can I ask, what exactly were you expecting from a direct prequel borne of the opening crawl of A New Hope ? Or was Rogue One always on a hiding to nothing given TFA had already used up your one nostalgia hall pass. Aside from having "I've got a death sentence in 12 systems" guy and his buddy bump into Jyn I can't think of one other scene or nod that jarred me as being out of place or too fan wanky.When familiar characters show up in TFA, they have something to do. We learn something about them, where they are at decades later. In Rogue One they mostly just kind of pop up for a scene or two, recite some exposition and move on to A New Hope.
By familiar characters I assume you mean Han and Leia . Thats a saga film and they were main characters, them appearing complete with back story is expected, not an example of how things should have been handled with supporting characters in a standalone story like Rogue One . The two scenes Bail organa appeared in and the warmth in his line delivery about "trusting her(Leia) with his life" was all that was needed.The Force Awakens is derivative for sure, but put together with energy, enthusiasm and flair. It is cohesive and focused (a few second act asides excepted). IMO Rogue One is derivative too (beyond Star Wars - tonnes of war movie cliches in there too), but is clunky, confused and feels weirdly compromised so its familiarity becomes less forgivable. Ultimately, the difference for me is that TFA's throwbacks are mostly deeply embedded in the narrative, whereas in Rogue One they feel forced and get in the way.
I wont argue about tone as I'm not a cineaste and while I know there were reshoots I didn't go looking for the seams as I was thoroughly engrossed in the film. Where we differ is that I believe it is a far greater sin to patronise the audience by rehashing the plots of previous films incase people had forgotten what they were watching ala TFA then throwing in a few scenes that act as connective tissue in a transitional film that leads directly into a new hope. Anyways, I realise it was but one of your issues, but as you brought it up....0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,443 CMod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 28154
PhiloCypher wrote: »Can I ask, what exactly were you expecting from a direct prequel borne of the opening crawl of A New Hope?
Was actually hoping for quite a bit that IMO the film did not deliver
Edwards is an interesting enough director so was curious to see what he had to offer. I was hoping they'd take the opportunity to take a small little aside from one of the films and do completely their own thing with it - I'm not a screenwriter by any stretch, but I don't think it's crazy to suggest that a rollicking, gritty, or even legitimately dark film based on the 'rebels steal Death Star plans' premise could have been made with a much less significant reliance on legacy characters. That's what I find interesting about the concept of these standalone films - they don't have to be tied to the main 'saga', but ultimately I felt this one was more shackled to the past than I for one would have liked, even allowing for a premise that extends from a few brief lines in the original film. I guess it's the different expectations of going into 'Episode xxx' (Episode 30: Coming 2083) and 'A Star Wars Story' (that in some ways goes out of its way to establish itself as something different - hell, even the video games didn't drop an opening crawl).
Ultimately, a lot of my disappointment with this film boiled down to my belief nobody had a clue what the **** they wanted this film to be - or maybe more that they couldn't follow through on their ideas (whether that was a case of corporate compromise, too many cooks, or just simple old unrealised artistic ambitions we may never know). It's just not gritty enough and just not dark enough to be what it wants to be in the first half - it has had all its edges smoothed down over fears it might poke someone (take the scene where Cassian shoots the other guy in the alley - a scene robbed of much of its potential impact by the sheer bloodlessness of the delivery, even by the bloodless standards of Star Wars). In the battles, it's just not down-and-dirty enough. It always feels like it's almost there but can't quite nail the landing. Like as far as I'm concerned the first half of the film and the second are almost entirely different, with no aesthetic or tonal connecting tissue. The final Vader scene everyone's fond of - and it's a good solid scene, if not quite as emotionally or visually impactful as the epic lightsaber duels in TFA or especially ESB - actually feels like it could have come from a different film entirely, and if we cut it out wouldn't actually have much significant impact on the flow or narrative of the film overall.
Ultimately a few cameos - whether that's Jimmy Smits delivering a few lines of exposition, C3PO saying something wacky, dead-eyed Leia, or familiar Cantina faces lingering on screen a little bit too long to really seamlessly fit in - are minor concerns, but perhaps one of the most obvious manifestations of the film's strange identity crisis.I wont argue about tone as I'm not a cineaste and while I know there were reshoots I didn't go looking for the seams as I was thoroughly engrossed in the film.
I guess that's where we're destined to disagree on this one. Been a long time since I've found myself fidgeting quite so much during a film - really found the whole thing a pretty lifeless slog (and, ahem, literally lifeless in the case of CG Zombie Cushing) and a mess overall. Even the more engaging final act suffered from an abundance of lazy war movie clichés involving characters I couldn't have cared less about, muting its impact somewhat.
I guess when a film just isn't working for you little things - which we could chalk the fan service down to in the general scheme of things - stand out more than they would if you were engrossed. As opposed to TFA, where I personally found Abrams' confident direction and the film's tonal assuredness allowed me to forgive - maybe even embrace - its unashamed rehashing of the past. As said, I won't be quite so generous if Episode VIII is an Empire Strikes Back remake
0 -
-
johnny_ultimate wrote: »Was actually hoping for quite a bit that IMO the film did not deliver Edwards is an interesting enough director so was curious to see what he had to offer. I was hoping they'd take the opportunity to take a small little aside from one of the films and do completely their own thing with it
I'd absolutely agree that if all they do with these anthology films is make solo films(pun intended) for supporting characters or origin films for main characters, then it will be a missed opportunity .- I'm not a screenwriter by any stretch, but I don't think it's crazy to suggest that a rollicking, gritty, or even legitimately dark film based on the 'rebels steal Death Star plans' premise could have been made with a much less significant reliance on legacy characters.
Whatever your misgivings, given that they chose to make a film about how the rebels got the deathstar plans I'm struggling to think of a way they could have written around Tarkin and Vader tbh(but then I too am no screenwriter haha) . Its a bit of a no win situation tbh . If they had only given them cameos it would be the type of fan service you were decrying earlier, yet when they're given something to do its over relying on legacy characters.It's just not gritty enough and just not dark enough to be what it wants to be in the first half - it has had all its edges smoothed down over fears it might poke someone (take the scene where Cassian shoots the other guy in the alley - a scene robbed of much of its potential impact by the sheer bloodlessness of the delivery, even by the bloodless standards of Star Wars). In the battles, it's just not down-and-dirty enough. It always feels like it's almost there but can't quite nail the landing.
Is it Platoon levels of gritty, no. Is it malickian in its examination of the effect of war on the human psyche or the swaying grass in the fields, again no, but for a star wars film this is gritty as ****. I'm honestly baffled by your issue with the scene where Cassian shoots therebel informant, blasters dont leave bloody exit wounds , would the scene have had more impact for you if he'd gutted him ? What made the scene for me wasn't the manner in which he'd killed him but the fact he had done it at all. I was fully expecting the chap to tell Cassian to run while he held them off, as up to this point the rebels had been portrayed as whiter then white good guys. It was a welcome bit of a shading imo.Plus it kills all the main cast. Not gritty or dark enough ? Baffled, honestly baffled.The final Vader scene everyone's fond of - and it's a good solid scene, if not quite as emotionally or visually impactful as the epic lightsaber duels in TFA or especially ESB - actually feels like it could have come from a different film entirely, and if we cut it out wouldn't actually have much significant impact on the flow or narrative of the film overall.
It doesn't, it feels like it comes from a star wars film, which this is. Would the film still work without it ? yes , am I glad its there ? yes . That those lightsaber battles you mention work, and the lightsaber battles in TFA are one of the things the film does right imo, is down to the fact we are emotionally connected to those characters. That this scene works, for me anyways, is because I am emotionally connected to the cause, to seeing that disc safely into Leias hands. Even knowing the disc would get to her in the end it was still thrilling and terrifying in equal measure to see Vader tearing through those rebels to get to it.I guess when a film just isn't working for you little things - which we could chalk the fan service down to in the general scheme of things - stand out more than they would if you were engrossed. As opposed to TFA, where I personally found Abrams' confident direction and the film's tonal assuredness allowed me to forgive - maybe even embrace - its unashamed rehashing of the past. As said, I won't be quite so generous if Episode VIII is an Empire Strikes Back remake
haha Yeh I'm the same, if I enjoy a film as a whole ill forgive a multitude of sins, if I don't, I tend to go looking for faults .0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
A nice summary of the unused footage from the trailers etc
0 -
-
Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,443 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Join Date:Posts: 28154
PhiloCypher wrote: »Whatever your misgivings, given that they chose to make a film about how the rebels got the deathstar plans I'm struggling to think of a way they could have written around Tarkin and Vader tbh(but then I too am no screenwriter haha) . Its a bit of a no win situation tbh .[/spoiler]
I actually very much reckon that the core 'rebels steal Death Star plans' doesn't actually need Tarken, Vader or the actual Death Star at all - think it could be told almost entirely with a new cast of characters on both sides of the battle. But that's purely a hypothetical, and again no screenwriterIs it Platoon levels of gritty, no. Is it malickian in its examination of the effect of war on the human psyche or the swaying grass in the fields, again no, but for a star wars film this is gritty as ****. I'm honestly baffled by your issue with the scene where Cassian shoots therebel informant, blasters dont leave bloody exit wounds , would the scene have had more impact for you if he'd gutted him ? What made the scene for me wasn't the manner in which he'd killed him but the fact he had done it at all. I was fully expecting the chap to tell Cassian to run while he held them off, as up to this point the rebels had been portrayed as whiter then white good guys. It was a welcome bit of a shading imo.Plus it kills all the main cast. Not gritty or dark enough ? Baffled, honestly baffled.
My issues with that scene boil down to the delivery (also felt it was a heavily signposted and predictable sequence generally though, hence the 'shock' was no particular surprise). The framing choice defangs the scene, almost underplays it as if they don't quite want to show him pulling the trigger. Not expecting guts to be spilled or anything like that - it is bloomin' Star Wars! - but don't think it's particularly impactful in its current form. For an in series example of how to handle such an event in a more visceral way, I'd point towards Han shooting Greedo (although Lucas himself introduced some unneeded ambiguity to that scene with his silly re-edits). Obviously you have to realise scenes differently from film to film, but this one didn't work for me (alongside, as I've said, many other things).
As for thecharacter deaths, sure - but that is defanged by all of the main characters dying in a heroic sacrifice or blaze of glory: something that overplays the 'cheesy war movie' cliches of the film.What the film lacks IMO is the sort of brutality you see in, say, Revenge of the Sith (a mostly terrible film, I hasten to add, but pulls off scenes like Windu's death with rather brutal aplomb by the prequels' terrible standards at least). Similarly, the Empire Strikes Back is brutal and relatively bruising (Luke losing his hand being an example) in a way this IMO isn't. For a film which sets out to be grittier, darker and more serious-minded than earlier Star Wars films, personally I just feel there's better examples of how to pull that off in the series itself
(Although I think it's funny that at this stage in the series Death Star genocides are almost a matter of course :pac:)It doesn't, it feels like it comes from a star wars film, which this is. Would the film still work without it ? yes , am I glad its there? yes
Yeah, I think the film is better with it too (I do think it feels strangely tacked on - would make sense if it was a reshoot addition - but the film needs that last burst of energy), but as I said I reckon that when you can cut the film's best scene without any major impact on the core narrative or character arcs, it's an indicator of the film's struggles elsewhere.0 -
-
-
Join Date:Posts: 23661
johnny_ultimate wrote: »I actually very much reckon that the core 'rebels steal Death Star plans' doesn't actually need Tarken, Vader or the actual Death Star at all - think it could be told almost entirely with a new cast of characters on both sides of the battle. But that's purely a hypothetical, and again no screenwriter
Without Tarkin, Vader or the Death Star then people who are not already embedded in the Star Wars universe won't get what all the trouble is about. Saying that there is a big scary laser gun that we need the plans for is all very well, but unless you show it destroying a city or two then there is nothing really for the newcomer to Star Wars to be getting concerned about and it will just seem like a sexed up dossier on WMD's that no-one will have reason to belive.
You absolutely need the Death Star, and therefore you need Tarkin on screen as well. Darth Vader could be optional, but he's barely there and the final sequence really adds to ANH opening.0 -
Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,443 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Join Date:Posts: 28154
But the language you are using to discuss this movie comes across like a snobby critic benchmarking this against Oscar winning movies. I think its not wise to go and see any fictional comicbook movie with those sort of expectations. Nolan's Batman was the exception, the rest are just popcorn flicks. A studio doesn't spend 200million on a movie to please connoisseur's of movies looking for the next Shawshank Redemption. I think many critics are incapable of factoring this in when trying to objectively rate a movie. While you have every right highlight the bits that you found disappointing, I wonder if perhaps your expectation with this movie wasn't completely fair from the start.
With all due respect, I have attempted to criticise the film within its own context and have (Im pretty sure exclusively, or close to it) used comparisons within its own franchise as opposed to any unfair or unreasonable comparisons. I thought TFA was a terrific old-fashioned romp, and it instilled me with fresh hope that Disney might make something out of Star Wars. I went into this film knowing exactly what it was - a Disney-funded Star Wars spin-off - and left disappointed even within appropriately adjusted expectations
So yes, I fully acknowledge I'm in a minority here - although hardly of one. I have now responded to PhiloCypher's reasonable and considered posts, and have said most of what I have to say about the film. Although I guarantee you wouldn't like my thoughts on The Shawshank Redemption
0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Theboinkmaster wrote: »It's called the suspension of disbelief and needs to be utilised every now and again to enhance a film
That's exactly why I had a problem with CGI Tarkin. My suspension was shattered.0 -
Advertisement
-
Johnny, Disney invested 4billion in the franchise. They would be crazy to include the violent changes you suggest. They want this to reach as much an audience as possible and be as inclusive as possible.
I think your suggestions would possibly make the movie more enjoyable for adults, but I think it potentially alienates more children in what is primarily targeted as a family movie. And its not simply about how a scene is directed as you state. In the cinema , I find that more intensive/action scenes can be more powerful. Perhaps its because when I bring my children to the cinema I am more atune to what I think is suitable to them.
You said a few pages back that the star wars nods to former characters weren't that big, but you repeatedly bring them up and complain about them. Most people didn't find they took away from the movie (certainly not to the extent you make out), you are better off taking it that you are in the minority and leave it at that. You are not wrong, you just felt differently about certain aspects of the movie and that's ok.
But the language you are using to discuss this movie comes across like a snobby critic benchmarking this against Oscar winning movies. I think its not wise to go and see any fictional comicbook movie with those sort of expectations. Nolan's Batman was the exception, the rest are just popcorn flicks. A studio doesn't spend 200million on a movie to please connoisseur's of movies looking for the next Shawshank Redemption. I think many critics are incapable of factoring this in when trying to objectively rate a movie. While you have every right highlight the bits that you found disappointing, I wonder if perhaps your expectation with this movie wasn't completely fair from the start.
Sorry Drumpot but this bit in bold comes across as extremely patronising. Johnny has been very reasonable in his posts on this thread, it's not like they've been attacking everyone who disagrees with them, in fact most of their posts are in response to others who have questioned their opinion, which they are entitled to hold and express. To suggest that they are in the minority and should therefore keep schtum (as that is how it comes across) is misguided. These forums thrive on difference of opinion and the resultant discussions. You're correct that the vast majority in here are fans of the franchise and the film but they should be open to critique and discussion.
End of sermon. 0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgJ0oae861U![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement