Star Wars Episode VIII - The Last Jedi *spoilers from Post 2857*

metaoblivia

tony stark wrote: »

metaoblivia wrote: »

I saw it today and thoroughly enjoyed it. The theater I was in was sold out and the audience in general seemed to love it too. They laughed at the funny bits, gasped at some of the more spectacular bits of cinematography and applauded a few times throughout the film and at the end too.

It says a lot about people if they laughed at the "funny" bits in this. As in their taste. Fans of Big Bang theory, friends etc. The humour or oversaturation of it was the divisive move they took. The rest of the movie I could have made work maybe. It's the mainstream of the mainstream. It's just taste I suppose without being patronising. I wasn't expecting curb your enthusiasm but a bit of subtlety. Han Solo for the most part gave us some great funny moments without us being taken out of the movie for the most part.

Not really. I enjoyed the funny bits and don’t like either of those shows. Opinions on entertainment aren’t really something to get worked up about or internalize too deeply.

johnny_ultimate

Wibbs wrote: »

I suppose any criticism I would have is less about the Star Wars saga, but more about the all too often colour by numbers and current audience expectation shift that informs Hollywood blockbusters in general. That some critics see this as both a well made and scripted and somehow a "brave" film says much and not a lot of it good as far as current Hollywood cinema tropes are concerned, or the audience that rocks up to them.

And here, ultimately, is where the two factions in this argument are never going to agree

I am utterly bored by most modern blockbusters, and a cursory glance at my posting history would confirm that. My favourite films of the year are things like The Florida Project, Faces Places, Columbus, I Am Not A Witch. I get excited about the new Hong Sang-Soo film as opposed to the new franchise blockbuster. I spend considerable chunks of my time promoting and encouraging world cinema in Ireland.

And yet: I do think The Last Jedi is a pretty great film, and, in its way, a brave one. It's not without its flaws (which I've mentioned earlier), and its strengths (which I've also mentioned earlier) should be spoken about in relative terms. I go to a Star Wars film primarily expecting silly, OTT, rollercoaster soap operatics. And yet I have a lot of respect for what Rian Johnson has done here - he's broken a lot of the franchise's rules to pretty fascinating, thoughtful effect; he's created a story (as opposed to a plot - significant difference!) which is perhaps the most interesting the series has seen; he's made perhaps the most cinematically rich & unusual franchise blockbuster since Fury Road. I happily forgive many of the 'crimes' many here feel are dealbreakers as I feel they are negligible in the general scheme of the film (I also don't consider some of them to be crimes at all - I'll defend the pivotal thematic value of the casino sequence as loudly as I can ).

I don't disagree with all the criticisms - I've happily acknowledged I felt there were pacing issues, over CG-ed sequences that dilute the moments' impacts, and moments that were that bit too goofy (although I always appreciate some general Star Wars goofiness, especially after the IMO joyless Rogue One - I found a lot of the gags here a hullva lot of fun, and some even essential to the film's broader messages). But generally, yes - I do feel this is in many ways a departure from modern blockbuster norms, and in its limited but nonetheless admirable way rather brave

tony stark

Drumpot wrote: »

I don’t think so. I took it that his passing into the force was balance. He had righted his wrongs (in a way) , confronting Kylo in a consolatory manner and while also help keep the rebels alive (keeping a balance to the conflict).

I thought it was beautifully written.

Beautifully written!!?? Including the constant comedy? Really? Mmmnnn ok ok ok

http://stream1.gifsoup.com/webroot/animatedgifs/239473_o.gif

pumpkin4life

Seeing the meltdown from this movie is way more craic than the movie itself.

The barber of chewbacca

Why the focus on RT audience score on it's own? IMDB has it at 8.0 and Cinemascore gave it an A. It's a divisive movie yes. Focusing on only one audience score to prove a point is disingenuous.

Edit: Point is about everyone thats used it in isolation not just the above post!

Saruhashi

The barber of chewbacca wrote: »

Why the focus on RT audience score on it's own? IMDB has it at 8.0 and Cinemascore gave it an A. It's a divisive movie yes. Focusing on only one audience score to prove a point is disingenuous.

Aren't you also proving the same point with "it's a divisive movie, yes"?

I don't get this.

In the few days before release the word "divisive" was thrown around a lot.

Then the audience score is 56%. Confirming the divisive nature of the movie.

To which the response is "yes, the movie is divisive but this 56% audience score proves nothing!"

YOU JUST ADMITTED YOURSELF IT'S A DIVISIVE MOVIE.

Drumpot

Wibbs wrote: »

To be fair, Lucas had no idea he'd be helming a trilogy when he wrote and shot Star Wars. He came up with that after the massive success and sequels were needed. Luckily Luke was a pretty flawed central hero with way more of a story to tell. If he'd done a Rey and became a force master near instantly and fought Vader in the last reel to a draw(or killed him) they'd have few places to go. Pure dumb luck. Actually the first "spoiler" I ever read was in the Star Wars comic around 1980, in a piece on the new Empire film being shot and the writer said he had heard that Vader was Luke's da, but dismissed this as highly unlikely and a bit daft.

Was anybody else disappointed with Yoda? Him showing up in the first place ten years too late and doing what he did was a bit odd, but I mean the look of him. I mentioned this earlier. OK they went back to the puppet, I suppose cos of all the criticism of some of the CGI Yoda stuff and for the member berries, but it looked odd and clumsily puppeteered(should be a word) compared to him in the original trilogy.

I suppose any criticism I would have is less about the Star Wars saga, but more about the all too often colour by numbers and current audience expectation shift that informs Hollywood blockbusters in general. That some critics see this as both a well made and scripted and somehow a "brave" film says much and not a lot of it good as far as current Hollywood cinema tropes are concerned, or the audience that rocks up to them.

I suppose it's also why I have largely given up on big Hollywood flics(I went to this because of well TBH my own memberberries working) and why I would increasingly look at TV series. Because there's generally less money at stake, not a lot of secondary merchandise concerns and it's easier to get into for a much wider demographic of behind the camera folks(far more women for a start) and the FX stuff(where required) has become so affordable so can look "cinematic" and they have time to tell a story or several stories more completely and with far more internal logic.

If this new run of Star Wars had been on the telly/netflix I'd bet the farm it would have been a much stronger set of story arcs and far more character realistic. For a start they would have had time to show Rey's heroine's journey. Beyond the popular and bloody lazy Buffy babe who can do no wrong thing, it would take far better writing than was on display in the Farce Awakens to condense that into one film, while still leaving the opening for growth. Even then it could appear rushed. As I said the original Star Wars did that by mistake and were able to let Luke's arc play out over the next two. Because Disney knew they had a trilogy to work with they could and should have and not just with her.

People are far more forgiving of certain “make it up as we go along” elements of the originals then they are when Disney does it! Just saying!

And do you not think the safest bet was to have Luke all wise and Jedi like, with the whole “find him” being his plan all along? The old, “I knew you would need to find me and had this all planned?”. That would of Been the obvious safe option.

Whether you think it was stupid or brave (can be viewed as a same sided coin in many cases), Luke’s story was very different and unexpected. So yeh, all things equal I think it was brave/stupid to make such a drastic alteration to a loved character!

And as for Poe. Again the safe bet was that his plan works, the leaders of the resistance bow down to his cheeky but effective insolence and eveybody are friends. Poe’s character was responsible for the near anhilialtion of the rebels. But by the end of the movie the character has matured which gives more depth to his progression.

And for those stating that they have just put female characters into male roles. I don’t imagine too much affection between Dern and Leia if they were men. And I don’t imagine they would be as smitten with a female Poe publicy and together as they were. Nor would they be as wise with regards to giving Poe a second chance. I picture a stereo typical general throwing Poe in the brig and just leaving him there (cue Poe breaking out to fight for redemption and the generals trust). But that aside , many woman in positions of power at the top of organizations possess the same characteristics of their male counterparts.

I just feel that it’s ok to not like the movie but many of the grievances are similar ones that could be labeled on most movies, including the originals. I also think most (not all) issues could be explained away with positive explanations or back stories but many people are just defaulting to the negative. As movies are subjective , it’s interesting to read how we all interpret the same thing in a different way.

pumpkin4life

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

And here, ultimately, is where the two factions in this argument are never going to agree

I am utterly bored by most modern blockbusters, and a cursory glance at my posting history would confirm that. My favourite films of the year are things like The Florida Project, Faces Places, Columbus, I Am Not A Witch. I get excited about the new Hong Sang-Soo film as opposed to the new franchise blockbuster. I spend considerable chunks of my time promoting and encouraging world cinema in Ireland.

And yet: I do think The Last Jedi is a pretty great film, and, in its way, a brave one. It's not without its flaws (which I've mentioned earlier), and its strengths (which I've also mentioned earlier) should be spoken about in relative terms. I go to a Star Wars film primarily expecting silly, OTT, rollercoaster soap operatics. And yet I have a lot of respect for what Rian Johnson has done here - he's broken a lot of the franchise's rules to pretty fascinating, thoughtful effect; he's created a story (as opposed to a plot - significant difference!) which is perhaps the most interesting the series has seen; he's made perhaps the most cinematically rich & unusual franchise blockbuster since Fury Road. I happily forgive many of the 'crimes' many here feel are dealbreakers as I feel they are negligible in the general scheme of the film (I also don't consider some of them to be crimes at all - I'll defend the pivotal thematic value of the casino sequence as loudly as I can ).

I don't disagree with all the criticisms - I've happily acknowledged I felt there were pacing issues, over CG-ed sequences that dilute the moments' impacts, and moments that were that bit too goofy (although I always appreciate some general Star Wars goofiness, especially after the IMO joyless Rogue One - I found a lot of the gags here a hullva lot of fun, and some even essential to the film's broader messages). But generally, yes - I do feel this is in many ways a departure from modern blockbuster norms, and in its limited but nonetheless admirable way rather brave

What makes a good reboot/sequel? Typically being different enough/heavily expanding on the themes of the world while staying loyal to the source material and treating it with respect. The third season of Twin Peaks earlier this year is a great example of this.

The Force Awakens is a terrible film because its a near shot for shot remake of Episode Four with an unlikeable, bitchy protagonist.

The Last Jedi is a terrible movie because it is a tonally inconsistent cynical nihilistic cash grab of a film that butchers the personalities of the main characters in the franchise. This is not brave, not even remotely. It's a movie for people who want to feel good about themselves now that it is "deep", when the series was always a hero's journey, a fairy tale in space, but that's all gone now.

Rogue One aint great, but it's a far better film than the other two there.

I wonder how the franchise will do now, what with this Han Solo film coming out next year.

ArthurG

I’m never getting that 2.5 hours of my life back. Christ what were they thinking. Rehashing a years old YouTube skit about not hearing people on a conference call? And it didn’t get much better after that. I’ll admit I’m not a SW superfan, but I LOVED TFA. This was a disappointing let down.

The barber of chewbacca

From reading this thread I have gotten the impression that people are using the RT score to "prove" the movie is bad. I said it was disingenuous to only point to one audience score when it backs up one's own view of the movie.

Do I think it's divisive - yes. This is based on opinions I've read/heard. I would find it difficult to back that up using all 3 of RT/IMDB/Cinemascore.

Saruhashi wrote: »

Aren't you also proving the same point with "it's a divisive movie, yes"?

I don't get this.

In the few days before release the word "divisive" was thrown around a lot.

Then the audience score is 56%. Confirming the divisive nature of the movie.

To which the response is "yes, the movie is divisive but this 56% audience score proves nothing!"

YOU JUST ADMITTED YOURSELF IT'S A DIVISIVE MOVIE.

expectationlost

so the moral of the story is don't send you kid(s) to military school?

Saruhashi

The barber of chewbacca wrote: »

From reading this thread I have gotten the impression that people are using the RT score to "prove" the movie is bad. I said it was disingenuous to only point to one audience score when it backs up one's own view of the movie.

Do I think it's divisive - yes. This is based on opinions I've read/heard. I would find it difficult to back that up using all 3 of RT/IMDB/Cinemascore.

How is 56% bad?

If someone tells me a thing is divisive then I reckon that means some people will like it and some people won't. Maybe like 50-50 ish.

The 56% just proves the movie is divisive but almost everyone was saying that anyway.

The discrepancy between critic reviews and user reviews is interesting. At least, it's worth noting.

Vertigo100

nix wrote: »

Yeah and it would be impossible to think that he would have made more than one down through the years, i mean its just what Jedi's do when they lose their current one :rolleyes:

He still had the green one when he thought about killing kylo. Doubt there’s a massive supply of kyber crystals on aach-to either so it seemed pretty obvious to me.

expectationlost

6 red warriors defending snoke the other knights of ren/

Goodshape

The comedy in this really didn't work for me. I might have expected 'fun', like TFA, but not silly. So much of this, from the very opening scene, just seemed silly.

The Ray, Luke, and Kylo stuff was good but that amounted to about 30 - 45 minutes of the 2.5 hour runtime. Really didn't think anyone else earned the emotions we were expected to feel for them. Everytime they cut away to Finn, Rose, Poe, etc, trying to find some code for something something because reasons... Ugh. There was no setup that had me invested in that story whatsoever.

And then Luke just decides to die and that's that.

Felt like Disney/Marvel world building with a bit of Star Wars sprinkled on top. Definitely don't care enough about any of it to be looking forward to a 'conclusion' in episode 9.

Acosta

I can of course accept that many people like or even love this movie and that people has different taste and expectations from what they want from a movie.

I just don't understand what details of this movie warrant the director to be credited being brave and taking risks? It felt like a Star Wars movie to me, just a bad one. Nothing surprised me about where the went with the characters, other than the lack of any pay off or expansion with some of the characters from TFA that they decided to do away with. Rey's story was predicable, Finn and Poe just ran about annoyingly turned up to 11 ALL THE TIME, have been poorly developed and i just didn't like them much in this at all. There was always a 50/50 chance Luke was going to go out in a blaze of glory.



I have softened to the point where i will probably go and see it again at the cinema. But I will be waiting for a quite day in January when people are back at work and school. I couldn't be listening to people laughing at all that **** again.

The barber of chewbacca

I am not dismissing the RT audience score at all. Of course it's worth noting. I just find it interesting that more weight is given to RT over the other 2.

When it comes down to it I really don't care about any of them. When it comes to movies my opinion is what counts for me as it should be for everyone!






[like to look at QUOTE=Saruhashi;105587077]How is 56% bad?

If someone tells me a thing is divisive then I reckon that means some people will like it and some people won't. Maybe like 50-50 ish.

The 56% just proves the movie is divisive but almost everyone was saying that anyway.

The discrepancy between critic reviews and user reviews is interesting. At least, it's worth noting.[/QUOTE]

TerrorFirmer

How is 56% bad?

If someone tells me a thing is divisive then I reckon that means some people will like it and some people won't. Maybe like 50-50 ish.

The 56% just proves the movie is divisive but almost everyone was saying that anyway.

The discrepancy between critic reviews and user reviews is interesting. At least, it's worth noting.

It doesn't prove anything though as it's just one limited source that people are for some reason attempting to use to somehow prove that it's divisive cross the board when it's largely not.

Look at IMDB, over 100K reviews already and the average stands at 8/10, while CinemaScore has it at an 'A'.

These are far more indicative of general audience opinons than RT really.

It's the true fans that are divided, but the general audience and critics are happy with the movie.

Notwithstanding that 'divisive' does not mean that it's 50/50, black/white, or love/hate.

I personally really like the movie overall whilst still hating significant elements of it.

Osmosis Jones

Nobody pays any attention to review scores unless they agree with them.

TerrorFirmer

Osmosis Jones wrote: »

Nobody pays any attention to review scores unless they agree with them.

I couldn't care less, I only checked after it was brought up in this thread.

It's disingenuous to use one very limited resource as 'proof' of something while ignoring greater statistical resources that suggest otherwise.

Tony EH

Wibbs wrote: »

Was anybody else disappointed with Yoda? Him showing up in the first place ten years too late and doing what he did was a bit odd, but I mean the look of him. I mentioned this earlier. OK they went back to the puppet, I suppose cos of all the criticism of some of the CGI Yoda stuff and for the member berries, but it looked odd and clumsily puppeteered(should be a word) compared to him in the original trilogy.

Actually didn't think it was that bad. I knew some sort of force ghost nonsense would raise its ugly head and I breathed a sigh of relief when it was Yoda. Rumours floated about that it was going to be Ewan or Hayden, which just would have added another layer of cringe.

In any case, the force ghost thing is a dreadful conceit. Sure, if they can do that once, why not do it every bleedin week? You can't help but think WTF were you before now?

JohnFalstaff

Vertigo100 wrote: »

He still had the green one when he thought about killing kylo. Doubt there’s a massive supply of kyber crystals on aach-to either so it seemed pretty obvious to me.

I took my grandson to see the film today (he loved it). Afterwards he wanted me to see his new lego set which is a replica of Luke's island. I never thought there would be a Lego version of Skellig Michael!

As part of the set there is a boulder that Rey can break apart to reveal crystals that are the same colour as her lightsaber. He already knew about the kyber crystals from the Star Wars Rebels cartoon which I haven't seen and was asking if this was a kyber crystal.

I was thinking it might be something that was in the film at some point when Lego designed their product line but got cut out of the final film?

Picture of the set here - a great Christmas present for any young Irish Star Wars fan

johnny_ultimate

pumpkin4life wrote: »

What makes a good reboot/sequel? Typically being different enough/heavily expanding on the themes of the world while staying loyal to the source material and treating it with respect. The third season of Twin Peaks earlier this year is a great example of this.

Let me make one thing clear, even as someone who really liked this film: the sublime Twin Peaks S3 compared to the TLJ is like a bang-up meal in an amazing restaurant compared to a mediocre burger after a night out. Not even in the same goddamn league.

Other than that: we ain't find common ground here, and no amount of back-and-forth will achieve that

Wibbs

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

And here, ultimately, is where the two factions in this argument are never going to agree

True dat.

- he's broken a lot of the franchise's rules to pretty fascinating, thoughtful effect;

or for the sake of it. And to clear the decks to extend the franchise for more years.

he's created a story (as opposed to a plot - significant difference!)

One does little service without the other. His story is disjointed with internal contradictions and dodgy pacing. That might be OK if it weren't for the universe he's playing in.

he's made perhaps the most cinematically rich & unusual franchise blockbuster since Fury Road.

:pac::pac: OK to be fair, this is where we really part ways and opinion Johnny. Fury Road? About as beautifully shot and choreographed empty chase film ever made. and it is beautifully shot. The stunts and visuals being not made up on a silicon chip makes a helluva difference. The action is well done. So kudos to the cinematographer and stunt coordinator. Now I'm sure it appealed to third year film students, as Millar usually does and he engaged all the correct Right On de jour stuff and did the whole studenty thing of myth deconstruction. #sobrave ). It's what they would dream of making. The lack of dialogue appears deeper than it actually is(ohhhh silent movies were so pure Tristan. I know Coimhe, it leaves such space, rioshh? ballsology) and it's far easier to pull off. Style(or stylistic) over substance always is. As a film it leaves a huge empty space of well pretty much everything. A chase movie where no one is quite certain where they're running too, or from and the audience doesn't really care beyond the next whizz bang either way. All vague plot points and whizz bangs, bugger all story. Like I say it's a genre popular with more than it used to be, outside of film schools and out of the way film festivals in Mongolia. That's a sign of the times too mind you. But yeah J, if our opinion differs so much on a flic like Fury Road I reckon we'll likely never agree on this.

And "cinematically rich"? eh... I've seen better and more dynamic(and less drawn out) space battles in Battlestar Galactica, the Skelligs looked good, but it would be hard to screw that up, though the Jedi tree was decidedly small scale and cheap looking and awkwardly and variably lit. Salt World was well done and the colour contrast if obvious looked good. The throne room was a mess of colour blocking(red soldiers agin a red background. Wut?). The casino was perfunctory. David Lean he most certainly isn't.

I happily forgive many of the 'crimes' many here feel are dealbreakers as I feel they are negligible in the general scheme of the film (I also don't consider some of them to be crimes at all - I'll defend the pivotal thematic value of the casino sequence as loudly as I can ).

The idea was fine, I'd agree there, the execution was bloody dreadful though, hamfisted and obvious and felt like it belonged in another film entirely. As if the SW actors walked onto another film's set in error.

Hector Savage

david75 wrote: »

You probably won’t believe me but I left my first viewing feeling the same. Gutted and traumatised.

I loved it a whole lot more second and third time round when the brilliant bits in it really land.

This gives me great hope, I'll go again wednesday or thursday ..

uncleoswald

Wibbs wrote: »

in the Farce Awakens Luke legs it, but leaves a map to where he is with R2, then in the Lost Jedi he's surprised Rey has been able to find him. Eh you left a map you muppet.

Drumpot wrote: »

Leaving the map when he was choosing to isolate himself is odd alright.

I think this was a problem with TFA's storytelling but Luke didn't leave a map. It was believed he went searching for the Jedi home world so the resistance searched for a map to the planet in the hope to find him there.

Wibbs

JohnFalstaff wrote: »

I took my grandson to see the film today (he loved it). Afterwards he wanted me to see his new lego set which is a replica of Luke's island. I never thought there would be a Lego version of Skellig Michael!

Unusual for Lego in that they kinda missed the ball on the hut. I mean those beehive huts could be made pretty easily from lego, being pretty much Neolithic dry wall in building style, but instead Lego went for a weird pyramid type affair?

Good spot on the crystal thing alright.

johnny_ultimate

Wibbs wrote: »

True dat.

:pac::pac: OK to be fair, this is where we really part ways and opinion Johnny. Fury Road? About as beautifully shot and choreographed empty chase film ever made. and it is beautifully shot. The stunts and visuals being not made up on a silicon chip makes a helluva difference. The action is well done. So kudos to the cinematographer and stunt coordinator. Now I'm sure it appealed to third year film students, as Millar usually does and he engaged all the correct Right On de jour stuff and did the whole studenty thing of myth deconstruction. #sobrave ). It's what they would dream of making. The lack of dialogue appears deeper than it actually is(ohhhh silent movies were so pure Tristan. I know Coimhe, it leaves such space, rioshh? ballsology) and it's far easier to pull off. Style(or stylistic) over substance always is. As a film it leaves a huge empty space of well pretty much everything. A chase movie where no one is quite certain where they're running too, or from and the audience doesn't really care beyond the next whizz bang either way. All vague plot points and whizz bangs, bugger all story. Like I say it's a genre popular with more than it used to be, outside of film schools and out of the way film festivals in Mongolia. That's a sign of the times too mind you. But yeah J, if our opinion differs so much on a flic like Fury Road I reckon we'll likely never agree on this.

OK I got a little bit lost in the formatting of this paragraph (I think you dislike it?), but Fury Road is as far as I'm concerned a bloody great roar of a film, and still the standard bearer of what a dumb (but not too dumb - there's a beautiful economy to the thing) modern big-budget action film can do and outside some of Nolan's stuff nothing in the same budgetary sphere as come close. Even as a fan of TLJ, Mad Max is still by a distance said standard bearer IMO and shames 99% of mediocre-TV grade €200m cinema that populates multiplexes every year. I mean, it still wouldn't make near the upper reaches of my favourite films of the last half decade, but Fury Road is a ****ing blast.

But again, we fundamentally disagree, that's cool

Wibbs

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

OK I got a little bit lost in the formatting of this paragraph (I think you dislike it?),

I would consider it a beautifully polished and perfumed turd.

but Fury Road is as far as I'm concerned a bloody great roar of a film,

IE it has one big trick and repeats it.

there's a beautiful economy to the thing

IE bugger all of note is in it beyond the aforementioned one big trick. I have found when the word "economy" is used in criticism it either means the production ran out of money and/or scope and/or empty space is being bullshtted up as deep and the viewer buys into the latter.

But again, we fundamentally disagree, that's cool

I am the Pope, you are the Ayatollah.

Sad Professor

Fury Road is a masterpiece. Best action movie ever made as far as I'm concerned. I've watched it 5 times in the last year and it gets better every time.