Star Wars: Rogue One *spoilers from post 1195*

BMMachine

PhiloCypher wrote: »

Find it kinda funny that you went into such a meltdown over people liking Rogue one and how it was symptomatic of a wider failing in society about how we elevate mediocrity and yet give TFA a pass despite it being a, quite frankly, patronizing and cynical remake of A New Hope . Kinda stands in contrast to your raging against the dying of the light stance don't you think . Turns out we're both in denial , just about different films 😄

incorrect - I am well aware of the force awakens shortcomings. It is a limited film, especially in regards the main plot, but it had enough for me to enjoy. And thats they key word, I was able to enjoy it with knowing its flaws and knowing that technically it wasn't a great film, maybe barely a good film, but was still able to enjoy it. I haven't distorted the quality of the film based on my feelings toward it. It is possible to enjoy something and know its crap or not good at the same time. Your taste doesn't have to dictate if something is good or bad, its called being objective and yes - the lack of objectivity being placated with how people feel and irrational self interests are some of the biggest problems in the direction Western society is going, as you can see by Trump and Brexit

pixelburp

Not long out of it, so my first thoughts are that while it had its problems, it felt far more a 'Star Wars' film than The Force Awakens, and honestly thought it a significantly better film all round. The scope, the stakes, the ... voice of the film felt more in keeping.

Force Awakens felt like the bubblegum Disneyland ride, superficially enjoyable but lacking the inherent tone of the franchise (not unlike Abrams other SciFi reboot with Star Trek), whereas Rogue One felt like the kind of tale from the Star Wars universe I wanted to see myself, the perspective more akin to those from the Extended Universe of yore, with its books, games et al from before the Disney acquisition.

Will think on it more though because I really liked Rogue One, while Force Awakens left me slightly irritated and wouldn't mind pondering on the why.

david75

Was thinking about that too. Rogue one is more instantly satisfying being a complete piece beginning middle and end. Force awakens is more like Star Wars in that it's just a chapter and the leaving you waiting does bleed into being unhappy with it. Same happened with the original trilogy but were too far removed now to think on it even if we were there.

PhiloCypher

BMMachine wrote: »

PhiloCypher wrote: »

Find it kinda funny that you went into such a meltdown over people liking Rogue one and how it was symptomatic of a wider failing in society about how we elevate mediocrity and yet give TFA a pass despite it being a, quite frankly, patronizing and cynical remake of A New Hope . Kinda stands in contrast to your raging against the dying of the light stance don't you think . Turns out we're both in denial , just about different films 😄

incorrect - I am well aware of the force awakens shortcomings. It is a limited film, especially in regards the main plot, but it had enough for me to enjoy. And thats they key word, I was able to enjoy it with knowing its flaws and knowing that technically it wasn't a great film, maybe barely a good film, but was still able to enjoy it. I haven't distorted the quality of the film based on my feelings toward it. It is possible to enjoy something and know its crap or not good at the same time. Your taste doesn't have to dictate if something is good or bad, its called being objective and yes - the lack of objectivity being placated with how people feel and irrational self interests are some of the biggest problems in the direction Western society is going, as you can see by Trump and Brexit

And people are well aware of Rogue ones Shortcomings, for instance for me the soundtrack was seriously lacking , Saw Guerrera was a pointless novel tie in Who's screen time would have been better given to fleshing out the other characters . The Cgi tarkin/Leia while it didn't ruin the film for me isn't quite there yet and was probably overused. And yet ... and yet, like you with TFA I still "enjoyed" the film. That's why your outrage about this film in this thread has baffled me , even David75 who by his own admission is a massive fanboy has issues with it , but no, apparently we are all blind to its faults because it fits in with your narrative. Its like you are either mixing us up with another thread On another forum or are raging against the fact it's been widely fairly well received .

On a sidenote this is a film thread. Could you leave your soapboxing over what liking this film means for society as a whole at the door .

david75

PhiloCypher wrote: »

And people are well aware of Rogue ones Shortcomings, for instance for me the soundtrack was seriously lacking , Saw Guerrera was a pointless novel tie in Who's screen time would have been better given to fleshing out the other characters . The Cgi tarkin/Leia while it didn't ruin the film for me isn't quite there yet and was probably overused. And yet ... and yet, like you with TFA I still "enjoyed" the film. That's why your outrage about this film in this thread has baffled me , even David75 who by his own admission is a massive fanboy has issues with it , but no, apparently we are all blind to its faults because it fits in with your narrative. Its like you are either mixing us up with another thread On another forum or are raging against the fact it's been widely fairly well received .

On a sidenote this is a film thread. Could you leave your soapboxing over what liking this film means for society as a whole at the door .

He means well but you're really better off not responding. I've been spoken to for it. Just a heads up.

BMMachine

PhiloCypher wrote: »

And people are well aware of Rogue ones Shortcomings, for instance for me the soundtrack was seriously lacking , Saw Guerrera was a pointless novel tie in Who's screen time would have been better given to fleshing out the other characters . The Cgi tarkin/Leia while it didn't ruin the film for me isn't quite there yet and was probably overused. And yet ... and yet, like you with TFA I still "enjoyed" the film. That's why your outrage about this film in this thread has baffled me , even David75 who by his own admission is a massive fanboy has issues with it , but no, apparently we are all blind to its faults because it fits in with your narrative. Its like you are either mixing us up with another thread On another forum or are raging against the fact it's been widely fairly well received .

On a sidenote this is a film thread. Could you leave your soapboxing over what liking this film means for society as a whole at the door .

lots of people are blind to its faults.
and you did ask with "how it was symptomatic of a wider failing in society about how we elevate mediocrity" - I answered, so whats the point in telling me your little sidenote on soapboxing?

and the issues and faults of this film are far worse and make for a much less enjoyable film than TFA. Its not good film making, it is pretty though and has a lot of crap thrown in for people to squeal over but there was little to nothing of value in it, oh aside from Hammerhead Corvette

Sad Professor

Finally got to see this today. I was spoiled for a lot of the plot obviously but that had the effect of lowering my expectations which was probably for the best. CGI Tarkin looked superb to my eyes. Uncanny valley yes but perfectly passable for what was required of that character. CGI Leia not so much.

Third act was brilliant. I was sceptical that they would be brave enough to kill all the characters, but fair play they followed through. A suicide mission movie in which the characters actually die. My respect for Disney has gone up.

This is what the prequels, especially Episode 3, should have been. I'd rank it about on par with TFA, which had a much stronger first half but a weaker third act.

Will definitely try and see it again before it leaves the cinema.

tigger123

Went to see it yesterday and enjoyed it. For me (as a Star Wars fan) it was a solid 3.5 / 5. I felt the film was lacking a proper villain and equally I found it hard to be drawn into, and emotionally engage with, the male and female lead.

So overall it lacked an emotional core. When Darth Vader showed up and started kicking ass and being terrifying I thought "Now we're talking!!"

Visually its incredible though, and I loved how the storey of Rogue One dovetailed into the overall story, and the dark ending. But I just couldn't connect with the characters enough.

Will def see it again before it leaves the cinema.

Victor

Oh, while Jyn and Cassian can't be Rey's parents, is there anything to stop Jyn being her mother? Although Rey might be a bit young for that.

B.A._Baracus

Victor wrote: »

Oh, while Jyn and Cassian can't be Rey's parents, is there anything to stop Jyn being her mother? Although Rey might be a bit young for that.

The timeline would make that impossible I reckon. As you say Rey is too young.

Passage of time between ep 6 and ep 7 story wise appears to be mirroring the real passage of time between the movies. So I guess Rey is certainly too young.

On that topic tho I am surprised there wasnt something big in rogue one that would effect ep 8 in someway.

Venom

I got to see this this yesterday and not only is it a damm good Star Wars movie but it makes the prequels look even worse as this is a proper war movie set in that galaxy, far, far away.

The story, effects and action sequences are top notch stuff, but as others have said the characters are just lacking something to make them pop. Director Krennic was a very weak main villain compared to previous outings in this universe and is out acted and out menaced by both Vader and CGI Tarkin who looked amazing. Sadly, CGI Leia stood out like a sore thumb.

The big flaw for me in Rogue One is the music, which is just feels wrong and out of place in far to many parts and overall doesn't fit either the movie or the franchise.

fryup

found it a bit meh! to be honest

the crescendo was bit OTT which seems to be the trend with modern Hollywood blockbusters

the most impressive thing was the cgi on Peter Cushing and Carrie Fisher faces, although Cushing did look a tad crossed-eyed

BMMachine

Victor wrote: »

Oh, while Jyn and Cassian can't be Rey's parents, is there anything to stop Jyn being her mother? Although Rey might be a bit young for that.

this is some stretch. Do you really want Rey's mother to be that boring and anonymous?

jimmy blevins

Loved the force awakens but found rogue one a bit flat and hard to root for any of the good guys. Would have liked to see a film from the perspective of the empire though, as director krennic was the best thing about it.

Slydice

ads20101 wrote: »

Sorry for going slightly off topic.

The main aim of CPR is to restore circulation and breathing. Yes, if successful, it will result in a pulse. An AED will not work if there is no cardiac output at all, it needs something. It is designed to stop an arrhythmia to return a regular rhythm.

On first read, I thought you were just saying about how an AED works. Seemed right.

But not on the CPR bit. Pretty sure the CPR is just to wait for the AED:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardiopulmonary_resuscitation

CPR alone is unlikely to restart the heart; Its main purpose is to restore partial flow of oxygenated blood to the brain and heart. The objective is to delay tissue death and to extend the brief window of opportunity for a successful resuscitation without permanent brain damage. Administration of an electric shock to the subject's heart, termed defibrillation, is usually needed in order to restore a viable or "perfusing" heart rhythm.

Kiith

Say what you want about the rest of the film (i thought it was excellent), but Vader's scene at the end was amazingly well done. I was waiting to see if we got a true glimpse of why he was so feared, and they did a fantastic job of showing just how powerful he was compared to normal people.

BMMachine

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJgfxlgUIZY

pretty much perfect

robinph

Carrie Fisher has just been confirmed as having died.

Calibos

Slydice

Kirby

BMMachine wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJgfxlgUIZY

pretty much perfect

Very inperfect to be honest.

I find his breakdowns of the prequels both funny and accurate but not this one. This is a STAR WARS prequel. EVERYONE in the audience has already seen it. There is no need to retread old ground that everyone knows. We all know what the force is, what the death star can do, who Tarkin and Vader are. He is nitpicking. I have issues with Rogue One but he hasnt mentioned anything of substance.

KingBrian2

BMMachine wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJgfxlgUIZY

pretty much perfect

Gotta say not a fan of that guys voice. Does my head in.

Tony EH

BMMachine wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJgfxlgUIZY

pretty much perfect

I would pretty much agree with a lot of what Mike Stoklasa has to say about a lot of films.

But, this is just so wrong an assessment on a number of levels.

The main one being his assessment that the audience should be spoonfed information about Star Wars tropes that have been in circulation since 1977, such as what the Force is. That's just silly, especially since IIRC, Red Letter Media complain about other films spoonfeeding audiences.

They're just way, way off the mark here, quite remarkably too.

They are also mistaking 'Rogue One' as a completely standalone film, when it really is episode 3.5 in a series. A series, BTW, that doesn't go through the laborious task of explaining every single thing the characters say to the audience and leaves much to their imagination.

Incredible just how wrong they have this.

david75

OT but my favourite R1 'review' in light of Star Wars problems/Star Wars logic


The finale of R1 is basically this:

"lets steal the Death Star plans"
"The plans that the designer let us know about in a carefully smuggled message"
"Yes"
"The plans he could have smuggled out instead of the message"
"Yes"
"Oh no, we have the plans but can't email them to the alliance"
"Did you reset the router"
"Okay its working now"
"Email them to the giant intergalactic spaceship right above you"
"Done"
"Giant intergalactic spaceship, email them to your base"
"We can't do that for some reason"
"Okay, jump to light speed"
"We can't do that for some reason"


But who cares because it's Star Wars and it was awesome to watch

pixelburp

Thinking on what made Rogue One feel more definitively 'Star Wars' in its setting than part VII, one of the ideas that kept lingering was the sense of scale & scope threaded within the prequel, as opposed with Abrams' version. Planets seemed genuinely vast and exotically hostile, from Jedha through to Scarif, while the lens frequently struggled to encompass all the various ships, cities and landscapes into the frame. And when ships were fully in shot, they were either right in our faces or utterly dwarfed against the backdrop of a huge planet.

On the other hand, Force Awakens, apart from a couple of fleeting moments, constantly felt frustratingly narrow in its vision. The budget was giant, the distances travelled just as vast as this years prequel, yet everything felt so ... small. Paradoxically, it was a sequel that contrived to introduce a third Death Star that was X times larger than its predecessors, but that sheer size never translated into any palpable sense of scale or awe - quite the contrary in fact: the overeager attempt to exponentially inflate the threat just made things feel more trivial, infantile and illogical, like it was a 12 year old writer's idea of what how to make things more dangerous. Bigger! More explosions! Why destroy 1 planet when you can destroy a bajillion etc. etc.

Gareth Edwards understood better how to translate a universe as inherently broad as this one to the screen & it wasn't about simply making everything bigger: looking to his previous work with Monsters & the otherwise missed opportunity that was Godzilla demonstrated this knack. He simply knew how to properly frame and compose shots to drive home the contrasting scales of massive things, in turn making every action by characters feel both small, yet aggressively desperate at the same time - extremely appropriate for a story of rebels against a ubiquitous empire. The two new Star Wars films had set-pieces set on exploding planets yet only one of those felt like a shocking, tragic moment.

Sure, Rogue One's characters were - let's be honest - dull and fairly unexceptional, but their actions didn't lack some understandable purpose or context, because it was clear what the threats were and how immediate they manifested themselves. On the flip side, Force Awakens had personable characters that were genuinely likeable & interesting, but with the exception of Kylo Ren everyone & their actions felt glib and trivial. What made the original Star Wars films such benchmarks in Blockbuster drama of course was that they perfectly balanced the stakes of Rogue One and the charisma of Force Awakens.

david75

That's interesting. I read this earlier. It captures a lot of my problems with rogue one and answers a few of your points

Point: Everything Wrong with 'Rogue One'
http://collider.com/rogue-one-problems/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=collidersocial

Wedwood

Oh dear, it's depressing that every movie that's ever going to be released is now going to be subjected to an infinite number of DIY dissections, like these 'everything that's wrong with ..' articles.

The term 'suspension of disbelief' which previously applied to such fantasy films and allowed you to enjoy them, has been replaced with what is basically a new form of trolling posing as a 'review'. I'd hate to be a child of one of these lot listening to them in the cinema scouring the movie for every tiniest inconsistency.

Even the good movies now only get a couple of positive weeks, before all these 'whats wrong with' articles appear.

You're better off ignoring these 'reviews' of movies, go to see it if you want and make up your own mind whether you like it or not.

david75

To be fair the opposite has been happening a lot more. Meaning having to make rogue one out to be great but having to dismantle force awakens to do so. Which is pointless given they're two entirely different films about totally different things but happen in the same universe.

Not Propaganda

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

The timeline would make that impossible I reckon. As you say Rey is too young.

Passage of time between ep 6 and ep 7 story wise appears to be mirroring the real passage of time between the movies. So I guess Rey is certainly too young.

On that topic tho I am surprised there wasnt something big in rogue one that would effect ep 8 in someway.

I was actually thinking about this as I watched TFA over Christmas there

In the scene where Rey has her vision and she sees Kylo Ren with a lightsaber and what I assume are the other Knights of Ren behind him: none of the others have a lightsaber.

I'm thinking what we learned about kyber crystals in Rogue One will have a part to play in episode VIII next year, why Kylo Ren's lightsaber is more crackly, imperfectly made for example. Are kyber crystals a rarity now? Maybe not a major plot point but something to look out for I think.

Doctor DooM

Not Propaganda wrote: »

I was actually thinking about this as I watched TFA over Christmas there

In the scene where Rey has her vision and she sees Kylo Ren with a lightsaber and what I assume are the other Knights of Ren behind him: none of the others have a lightsaber.

I'm thinking what we learned about kyber crystals in Rogue One will have a part to play in episode VIII next year, why Kylo Ren's lightsaber is more crackly, imperfectly made for example. Are kyber crystals a rarity now? Maybe not a major plot point but something to look out for I think.

Sith lightsabers always used synthetic crystals anyway.

I assume Ren is not actually a sith but a fanboy, it'd make sense that he'd try to make a knock off crystal himself.

Just conjecture