Star Wars: Rogue One *spoilers from post 1195*

Tony EH

pixelburp wrote: »

I've banged the drum before & elsewhere, but I definitely think Disney showed a lot of nous in hiring Gareth Edwards; he has his flaws but absolutely knows how to handle & compose objects of massive scale. A lesser director would have let that set-piece devolve into showy, floaty CGI & lost the scope of it all.

Yep. Aside from a few slips, everything feels like it has a weight to it. Plus, he wasn't afraid kill off Rebels here and there either. You actually feel like there are people dying in the background and that adds to the urgency of the events unfolding, both on the ground and in the air (or space).

check_six

david75 wrote: »

That's deadly. And watching a new hope afterwards is a top class idea. Puts it in a whole new light in many ways.

When we watched it in the cinema, we raced home to put on A New Hope. Watching them close together enhanced both movies, I felt. Recommended.

david75

check_six wrote: »

When we watched it in the cinema, we raced home to put on A New Hope. Watching them close together enhanced both movies, I felt. Recommended.

I did the same. Went to the opening night. Ran home and out on a new hope. Mind blown. Then saw there was a midnight screening on at lighthouse so ran down and saw it again

DrWu

Just watching it again in HD. I'm old enough to have seen two of the thee Original movies in the cinema and I have to say R1 is up there with Empire for me, maybe even my fave SW movie of all. So much about it is just bang on. Love it!

pauldla

Watched it again over the weekend (and watched THAT scene at least half a dozen times). Enjoyed it even more the second time, this is what Star Wars movies are meant to be!

("But Daddy, we want to watch Moana!" "In a minute dear, in a minute..")

iguot

I just watched this, where in the timeline was this pos supposed to be?

IncognitoMan

iguot wrote: »

I just watched this, where in the timeline was this pos supposed to be?

In timeline order it is episode 1, 2 , 3, Rogue one, 4, 5, 6, 7.

Rogue one is the events leading up to episode 4.

Slydice

Yeah, this splice of the end of 'rogue one' into the start of 'a new hope' has been online a while: https://vimeo.com/209263699

humanji

IncognitoMan wrote: »

In timeline order it is episode 1, 2 , 3, Rogue one, 4, Caravan of Courage, Ewoks: The Battle For Endor, 5, 6, 7.

Rogue one is the events leading up to episode 4.

Fixed your post. You missed out the two most popular and critically acclaimed movies!

Tony EH

You forgot the holiday special.

If we're going to have episodes 1, 2 and 3 in there, we have to include the holiday special too.

:pac:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRrm59Z_0w4

Falthyron

Slydice wrote: »

Yeah, this splice of the end of 'rogue one' into the start of 'a new hope' has been online a while: https://vimeo.com/209263699

A solid effort, but ultimately there is something disjointed about linking Rogue One with A New Hope.

The entire conversation between Leia and Darth Vader makes little sense. "Transmissions beamed aboard this ship by Rebel spies" and Leia stating they are part of a diplomatic mission when they clearly just left a battle zone involving Rebel and Imperial ships. Infact, the Tantive IV was a part of a major Rebel ship. A more sensible and consistent ending for Rogue One would have seen the Tantive IV passing the battle above Scarif, thought about intervening, and instead received the plans via transmission from the Rebel capital ship. It then proceeded on with its journey pretending to have merely stumbled upon the conflict while on their 'diplomatic mission to Alderaan'.

What Vader should have said to Leia: "Who are you fúcking kidding here, love? I just saw this ship disembarking from your Rebel capital ship. See this guy here? *points to a rebel soldier* Yeah, he ran off with something in his hand while I was cutting down his fellow soldiers. They were running from me...!"

It's a great ending as a standalone film, but marred by inconsistencies.

Tony EH

Falthyron wrote: »

A solid effort, but ultimately there is something disjointed about linking Rogue One with A New Hope.

The entire conversation between Leia and Darth Vader makes little sense. "Transmissions beamed aboard this ship by Rebel spies"

They were transmitted to Admiral whatshisface's ship and the Tantive IV was docked there. So, technically Vader's correct.

Falthyron wrote: »

and Leia stating they are part of a diplomatic mission when they clearly just left a battle zone involving Rebel and Imperial ships. Infact, the Tantive IV was a part of a major Rebel ship. A more sensible and consistent ending for Rogue One would have seen the Tantive IV passing the battle above Scarif, thought about intervening, and instead received the plans via transmission from the Rebel capital ship. It then proceeded on with its journey pretending to have merely stumbled upon the conflict while on their 'diplomatic mission to Alderaan'.

I equate this line as the rebels giving out a uniform answer as not to give anything away to the enemy. A kind of name and number, if you will.

Both Leia and Captain Antilles repeat the same line and again, technically they are correct. They are on a diplomatic mission. They just undocked from a ship that was part of a rebel fleet.

So, when this line is said to Vader, he clearly has no time for it, but isn't going to mince words. He kills Antilles, cos he knows that's a dead end and he gets rid of Leia to deal with her later. She still has diplomatic immunity at that point, because the senate is still functioning. Vader isn't aware at that point that the Emperor is in the process of carrying out its dissolution.

Falthyron

Tony EH wrote: »

They just undocked from a ship that was part of a rebel fleet.

A ship that happened to be in the first major battle of the war... Come on, it is very far-fetched. Gareth Edwards is asking viewers to suspend a little skepticism and let the technicalities slide.

I understand what you mean when Antilles/Leia say they are on a diplomatic mission, but when we now know what preceded these moments in A New Hope, it is difficult to enjoin the reality of what happened with the story being touted by the crew.

iguot

IncognitoMan wrote: »

In timeline order it is episode 1, 2 , 3, Rogue one, 4, 5, 6, 7.

Rogue one is the events leading up to episode 4.

I though it was gonna follow on from 7, Couldn't make sense of it at all.

Tony EH

Falthyron wrote: »

A ship that happened to be in the first major battle of the war... Come on, it is very far-fetched. Gareth Edwards is asking viewers to suspend a little skepticism and let the technicalities slide.

I understand what you mean when Antilles/Leia say they are on a diplomatic mission, but when we now know what preceded these moments in A New Hope, it is difficult to enjoin the reality of what happened with the story being touted by the crew.

Um, not really.

Leia and crew know they're pretty much buggered. Why else mount a last stand against Vader and his men? They know that Vader has them over a barrel as it were. So, they stick to the standard response and claim diplomatic immunity.

Vader knows he's not going to get any joy from them and has no time to argue the toss. Vader says "Don't act so surprised your Highness, you weren't on any mercy mission this time..." and directly accuses Leia of being "...part of the rebel alliance and a traitor." He has her cold, but as his officer says, "she'll die before she'll tell you anything."

In any case, once he realises that Leia has "hidden then plans in the escape pod", the matter becomes academic. That's his goal, not proving that Leia was at Scarrif.

I'm the last person in the world that will let Star Wars away with anything, but this works for me. Compared to the contradictory crap that the prequels threw up, this is very small potatoes indeed.

Falthyron

Tony EH wrote: »

Um, not really.

Leia and crew know they're pretty much buggered. Why else mount a last stand against Vader and his men? They know that Vader has them over a barrel as it were. So, they stick to the standard response and claim diplomatic immunity.

Vader knows he's not going to get any joy from them and has no time to argue the toss. Vader says "Don't act so surprised your Highness, you weren't on any mercy mission this time..." and directly accuses Leia of being "...part of the rebel alliance and a traitor." He has her cold, but as his officer says, "she'll die before she'll tell you anything."

In any case, once he realises that Leia has "hidden then plans in the escape pod", the matter becomes academic. That's his goal, not proving that Leia was at Scarrif.

I'm the last person in the world that will let Star Wars away with anything, but this works for me. Compared to the contradictory crap that the prequels threw up, this is very small potatoes indeed.

It still feels like we are letting Edwards off with a little too much. Why doesn't Vader mention the battle? Why not mention how close he came to boarding the ship? Why doesn't he ask where the officer is who ran off with the data file? Why doesn't he say that the ship was just involved with the Battle of Scariff and he knows the plans are on board?

To be honest, Leia and her crew saying they got caught in the middle of a battle would have been a better excuse. They were in the area and feared for their safety so they fled quickly. But none of this works when the Tantive IV was seen leaving the Rebel capital ship. That is the crux of the issue for me - the Tantive IV disembarking. I really do feel it would have been a more consistent ending had the Tantive IV entered the area too late and instead of fighting quickly received the plans and high-tailed it out of there. Then the whole 'diplomatic mission' could actually work.

Tony EH

Falthyron wrote: »

It still feels like we are letting Edwards off with a little too much. Why doesn't Vader mention the battle? Why not mention how close he came to boarding the ship? Why doesn't he ask where the officer is who ran off with the data file? Why doesn't he say that the ship was just involved with the Battle of Scariff and he knows the plans are on board?

Again, I'd say why would he? He's going to get no joy out of any of the responses. The ship's brief is tell them we're on a diplomatic mission to Alderaan and nothing else. Vader's like oh fcuk it, look for the data tapes lads, I'll deal with yer wan later. I've no time for this bollox.

Also, I find it much, much better that something is left unsaid, than have something said and really introduce a spanner into the works.

Falthyron wrote: »

To be honest, Leia and her crew saying they got caught in the middle of a battle would have been a better excuse. They were in the area and feared for their safety so they fled quickly. But none of this works when the Tantive IV was seen leaving the Rebel capital ship. That is the crux of the issue for me - the Tantive IV disembarking. I really do feel it would have been a more consistent ending had the Tantive IV entered the area too late and instead of fighting quickly received the plans and high-tailed it out of there. Then the whole 'diplomatic mission' could actually work.

In WWII (and today), when soldiers were caught by the enemy, they were instructed to only give out their name and number, even if they were caught red handed. Under the Geneva conventions, this was to satisfy the enemy, while keeping your side safe and torturing prisoners for more info was severely frowned upon, even though all sides did it, signatories or not. Even diplomats and ambassadors, when caught spying in all but name, were told to deny everything regardless. Such denials of information automatically frustrated the enemy.

I can see the "diplomatic mission to Alderaan" line working like that in Star Wars.

Besides the Tantive IV was a common corvette, there's supposed to be thousands of these ships milling around. It could have been any ship that Vader intercepted. A bigger question is how did he manage to track it in hyperspace?

Zubeneschamali

Falthyron wrote: »

It still feels like we are letting Edwards off with a little too much. Why doesn't Vader mention the battle? Why not mention how close he came to boarding the ship? Why doesn't he ask where the officer is who ran off with the data file? Why doesn't he say that the ship was just involved with the Battle of Scariff and he knows the plans are on board?.

None of this is new in Rogue One, it was in the crawl for the original movie:

It is a period of civil war. Rebel spaceships, striking from a hidden base, have won their first victory against the evil Galactic Empire.

During the battle, Rebel spies managed to steal secret plans to the Empire's ultimate weapon, the DEATH STAR, an armored space station with enough power to destroy an entire planet.

Pursued by the Empire's sinister agents, Princess Leia races home aboard her starship, custodian of the stolen plans that can save her people and restore freedom to the galaxy...

robinph

Tony EH wrote: »

In WWII (and today), when soldiers were caught by the enemy, they were instructed to only give out their name and number, even if they were caught red handed. Under the Geneva conventions, this was to satisfy the enemy, while keeping your side safe and torturing prisoners for more info was severely frowned upon, even though all sides did it, signatories or not. Even diplomats and ambassadors, when caught spying in all but name, were told to deny everything regardless. Such denials of information automatically frustrated the enemy.

Deny everything Baldrick:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGZrdh0fJyU

Tony EH

In an alternative dimension somewhere, Leia and the crew of the Tantive IV have underpants on their heads and pencils up their noses and are answering Vader's question with "wibble..."

david75

Now that it's out people are cottoning on to the fact that rogue one has about five times as many self referential nods and winks and fan servicey Star Wars tropes than force awakens has and is still accused of.

Dr evezan and R2 and 3PO being the worst offenders

Sad Professor

The use of onscreen titles for planets in Rogue One really annoys me. It annoys me in most movies ("Washington DC" over a shot of the White House, etc), but it's particularly out of place in Star Wars.

Tony EH

david75 wrote: »

Now that it's out people are cottoning on to the fact that rogue one has about five times as many self referential nods and winks and fan servicey Star Wars tropes than force awakens has and is still accused of.

Dr evezan and R2 and 3PO being the worst offenders

Walrus man and ugly mug was definitely fan service, but they didn't impact on the story in any way so they remain a cameo. R2 and 3PO are in every single Star Wars film ever, that's not going to change. Look out fo them in the upcoming Han Solo film too.

However, almost the entire film of 'The Force Awakens' was fan service. From slightly painted TIE fighters to having Han Solo and Leia back in it. There's nothing in TFA but 2.0 versions of everything that came before.

Tony EH

Sad Professor wrote: »

The use of onscreen titles for planets in Rogue One really annoys me. It annoys me in most movies ("Washington DC" over a shot of the White House, etc), but it's particularly out of place in Star Wars.

I have to say I've not cared at all about this. However, one thing I did think was odd was why Vader's gaff wasn't labelled, when every other place was?

Sad Professor

Tony EH wrote: »

I have to say I've not cared at all about this. However, one thing I did think was odd was why Vader's gaff wasn't labelled, when every other place was?

Because they didn't want to give away the reveal that it was Vader's gaff, even though it was kinda obvious.

johnny_ultimate

Sad Professor wrote: »

Because they didn't want to give away the reveal that it was Vader's gaff, even though it was kinda obvious.

Speak for yourself. I was waiting for Saruman to appear after the establishing shots!

david75

Tony EH wrote: »

Walrus man and ugly mug was definitely fan service, but they didn't impact on the story in any way so they remain a cameo. R2 and 3PO are in every single Star Wars film ever, that's not going to change. Look out fo them in the upcoming Han Solo film too.

However, almost the entire film of 'The Force Awakens' was fan service. From slightly painted TIE fighters to having Han Solo and Leia back in it. There's nothing in TFA but 2.0 versions of everything that came before.

I often wonder have you ever even watched the force awakens Tony?
Han and Leia are central to the story. Their son Kylo is the main antagonist.
Luke is also in the film as his uncle and former master.
Everything else Isjust design language in an established universe. Of course there's gonna be TIE fighters and X wings(and droids and lightsabers)
Both the first order and the resistance are working from the fringes with limited assets and in the FOs case wanting to remain secret until the declare themselves as depicted in events in TFA.

My point was a count has been done and rogue one has far more references to the original trilogy than TFA has. More being discovered daily as people get there hands on the blu Ray.


Rogue one can't survive at all as it's own film. It's totally dependent on the oxygen of a new hope to be able to work. Even then it has trouble. The guy posting top of the page asking where is this film set in the timeline, is representative of the majority of people I know who aren't fans.
'Cool movie. No idea what it was about. Oh yeah. The Death Star. Again.'

david75

In the ending, it like everything else in this film was only tagged on at the last minute according to Edwards. Meaning The Vader scene.
The battle above scarriff was to end a number of different ways. All of them beyond awful. (Including Jyn and cassian surviving and escaping with the plans and setting off a Carbon freeze bomb in their ship to avoid Vaders ship detecting any life forms on theirs) and then thawing out and fleeing to the rebel base.

They went with the best they could.
This whole production seems like they were just throwing sh!t at the wall as they went and choosing what stuck. And then having to do a lot of it over in reshoots.
It shows.

Zubeneschamali

Sad Professor wrote: »

The use of onscreen titles for planets in Rogue One really annoys me. It annoys me in most movies ("Washington DC" over a shot of the White House, etc), but it's particularly out of place in Star Wars.

Especially when we don't need the names to follow the plot. I found myself thinking "Blogboo, remember, blogboo, must be important", and it wasn't. Removing those titles would have made the movie less confusing, not more.

david75

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Especially when we don't need the names to follow the plot. I found myself thinking "Blogboo, remember, blogboo, must be important", and it wasn't. Removing those titles would have made the movie less confusing, not more.

They broke Lucas' main design rule. Audience should know exactly where they are by the design of the planet/landscape and not need to be told.
Major screw up.

Hey let's take out the opening crawl to actually explain what's going on to the majority of people haven't read catalyst but let's add title cards for planets in case they get confused about where they are.

Jesus wept.