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

pixelburp

Wibbs wrote: »

I think there are a few reasons. 1) people, fans need these flics to work and expect them to work, so give the shoddiness far more leeway than they otherwise would. 2) It has the usual colour by numbers explosions on the regular(more than any other SW flic I can think of), so that keeps some of the blockbuster audience engaged and young kids of course. 3) Fans of this director tend to be quite blind to his failings and by god they're on the screen for all to see on this outing. To the degree that his previous flics look like someone else directed them. 4) a section of fans love an oul retcon for all sorts of reasons and they got that here(they love the burn the past stuff, thinking it innovative and the like, even when it makes NO sense). 5) there is also the background cultural polarisation going on too. So opinions tend to be much more black and white and differences of opinion lead to more polarisation. Rey as Mary Sue an obvious one. At one extreme, particularly in the US, we have go girl "feminists" who thinks she's brilliant because XX chromosomes and see any criticism as "sexist", at the other we have true blue cast iron chauvinists that are pissed off Rey isn't Ray and men are mostly wasters in the film. Joke is both have a point.

There's also 6) People recognise the flaws, but still enjoyed the film despite them; and what problems were there, weren't so overwhelming that they hindered the overall experience. I mean sure, it's not as exciting a prospect of discussion as the raging fanboy or fundamentalist social-warrior, but not everything should be boiled down to the continued factionalisation of pop-culture - some of us just enjoyed the bits that Last Jedi got right, and moved on from the missteps. I hated the goofy humour - like, genuinely hated it - but it was only there in fits & starts, I could move on.

Wish other threads on this forum garnered such enthusiastic discussion!

johnny_ultimate

Again this may be a stretch, but: It's *almost* like people may like films other people dislike, and vice versa

Tony EH

Wibbs wrote: »

The main difference for me is nada to do with either Rey or Ren, who are both drawn thinner than a pauper's soup, it's how the Force, that other main character, has been changed under Disney. Where before it was an ability, a talent, now it's a superpower.

I think you can go back to Lucas and the prequels and lay that blame there though.

In the original films, force users could do "simple tricks and nonsense". They could move objects, sense stuff, influence people, etc. But, it was fairly vague. But, in the prequels, we have Jedi's leeping all over the place, fighting like they're dancing, jumping out of flying cars etc. It's ridiculous. Even Yoda gets in on the leaping around gig.

Before, Luke and Vader's abilites were actually quite reasonable, if completely fantastical. But, from the prequels on, these abilites have become more and more absurd.

I wholely espect to see Jedi flying through space, Superman style, at some point.

Oh wait!

Wibbs

pixelburp wrote: »

There's also 6) People recognise the flaws, but still enjoyed the film despite them; and what problems were there, weren't so overwhelming that they hindered the overall experience.

TBH I found they did. They were too jarring and obvious for me(and not just because it was a SW flic. I'd have been Wut if I watched the same in any film). Though I didn't mind the humour bits Though again they were jarring. Going for a taste of the trend in mainstream flics when something serious happens is followed, or preceded by a gag.

Wish other threads on this forum garnered such enthusiastic discussion!

True, but I suppose SW is different, it has become a huge cultural icon and modern myth of the last 40 years, unlike pretty much any other franchise I can think of. What has interested me is the polarisation effect and that as a reflection on the wider culture. When the same scene/plotline garners very different takes depending on the viewer. EG Dern's general. What I saw was someone who was screwing up, but who realised this and sought redemption in sacrifice. Another bunch saw women in total charge who did everything right and another lot saw SJW pandering. IMHO my take is what's on the screen and I liked her role.

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Again this may be a stretch, but: It's *almost* like people may like films other people dislike, and vice versa

Oh sure J. Hell I like some films that many would consider low brow, even daft. I don't laud them as anything better than that though, nor question why their obvious genius passes many by. Something which has been the case with TLJ.

Tony EH wrote: »

Before, Luke and Vader's abilites were actually quite reasonable, if completely fantastical. But, from the prequels on, these abilites have become more and more absurd.

True enough, so I suppose it's gone full superpower now. Though even with the leaping about in the prequels, it was still seen as this latent talent and required training to be able to do all that stuff.

SnakePlissken

Went for round 3 today, has it the tightest screenplay ever written? Not even close, but yet I find it beautifully compelling.

Wibbs

It's a very nicely shot film*, without going full Luc Besson. I actually can't think of one frame where the camera isn't pointing where it needs to be pointing and I find there are few enough films like that. It would be still watchable if it was a silent film, if that makes any sense? I loved the scuttled X Wing image. Skelligs looked fantastic though you'd have to work hard to feck that up. Well... not an easy location and bloody changeable in weather(been a few times, when I was a kid). To match shots must have been a nightmare. It also gave a good sense and scale of it as a real place, which surprised me. The hyper speed suicide run was a fantastic cinematic "event". Most memorable bit in the flic for me. Pure cinema. The salt planet looked good too. The throne room I wasn't sure of first time around, because I thought the all red colour blocking an odd choice, but shooting wise that was a pretty gutsy move to have red guards in a red room. The obvious would be to go black for the guards for contrast. But it worked. All the FX were spot on too. As were the various creatures and droids and I like the new knuckle walking ATAT's. Like giant sinister metal chimps. With lasers. TBH I hated the look and sound of muppet Yoda first time around, but was more into it second time around(I still dislike Yoda's vibe and characterisation). They nailed the look and feel right down. Put it another way, I could have easily believed every single look and droid and ship and set had been drawn by Ralph McQuarrie(more than TFA in my humble. And the late Ralph is the one who really gave us the look of that universe, not George).

The sound is also very tight, though the soundtrack I found oddly forgettable. Certainly none of the "hits" that spring to mind with the OT, or even bits and bobs in the prequels. And save for the cantina, sorry casino scene it also doesn't flag in moving forward.

That may sound like damning with faint praise, but it's genuinely not. That list is a bloody hard one to get right and they did. TBH I was so impressed with the film making aspect of it(and IMHO there should be a few Oscars handed out on that score), my issues with the script and characterisation were actually amplified. Like the production team got the script from elsewhere and set out to make the best of a bad lot sorta thing. And they very nearly did. Which might be another reason for some loving it, some hating it and most thinking it was a good use of a couple of hours in the flickering dark.




*though for me the Jedi tree parts didn't quite gel with the rest of it look and vibe wise. The only other visual "glitch" for me was on the Skelligs where in the background a too perfectly framed sea serpent rolled in the tide.

S.M.B.

I was surprised with how well it was shot that I completely overlooked all the issues people had with plot and characterisation. I genuinely didn't expect Disney to be willing to put their money behind making it look that good. Why would they bother.

I've made my peace with the fact that they need to somehow pass the torch with this trilogy so is not going to be afforded some of the luxuries the OT was.

I've also no issue with the themes of the movie which actually echo some of my favourite pop culture properties .

johnny_ultimate

One visual motif that stood out was Kylo’s response & relationship with the colour red. If you think of him as a bull, red frequently serves as the matador’s cape. Snoke’s throne room seems cruelly designed to goad and troll him. When you get down to the red planet, the flashes of red again seem to drive him ever deeper into fury - and when he unleashes all hell on Luke, that eruption of spraying red is that explosive emotion captured in a clear, vivid image. It doesn’t hurt that it looks quite nice in a mere colour contrast sense, of course

It’s not subtle... but isn’t quite the ‘just paint everything red!’ maximalist approach taken in We Need To Talk About Kevin either :pac:

Sad Professor

Mark Hamill Shouldn't Have To Apologise For Being Honest

Very balanced piece. Hamill was being honest, giving us an insight into the creative process that we don't normally get. He obviously knows the fans extremely well, probably better than anyone, and correctly anticipated that Luke's characterisation in TLJ would prove a problem for many of them. However, he has also repeatedly stated that he accepted that Johnson did what was best for the story and movie he was making. Yet the cherry-picking and misrepresentation of Hamill's comments to create the false impression that he hates the film or didn't know that Luke was going to die, etc, has created a totally toxic atmosphere. All this does is discourage actors from being honest in interviews for fear that their words will be taken out of context and weaponised to suit some agenda.

Sad Professor

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

One visual motif that stood out was Kylo’s response & relationship with the colour red. If you think of him as a bull, red frequently serves as the matador’s cape. Snoke’s throne room seems cruelly designed to goad and troll him. When you get down to the red planet, the flashes of red again seem to drive him ever deeper into fury - and when he unleashes all hell on Luke, that eruption of spraying red is that explosive emotion captured in a clear, vivid image. It doesn’t hurt that it looks quite nice in a mere colour contrast sense, of course

It’s not subtle... but isn’t quite the ‘just paint everything red!’ maximalist approach taken in We Need To Talk About Kevin either :pac:

It's like the planet is bleeding at the end. Very powerful effect.

I loved the entire sequence on that planet bar the deus ex machina moment. I loved how the mine looked like it was bleeding at the end.

david75

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I think that if you need to defend the writing by saying "people who dislike it are misogynists" or "you would have no problem if it was a man you misogynist" then you really don't have much of a defense. If you can't engage in discussion without attacking people who have a different point of view then why bother. I enjoyed the film for what it was, brainless blockbuster fare that I had all but forgotten as soon as I left the cinema.

There are a number of issues I have with the film, the characterization and the poor writing are two big ones. I think Rey is a weak character, not because I hate women but because so far the scripts have failed her. Same as they have failed the rest of the new cast who have become cliched copies of characters from the original films. If I think Finn is an awfully written character who adds nothing to the film does that mean that I hate men?

Not at all!
I mainly just don’t buy these criticisms of Rey being thinly written. I’m as big an OT fan as anyone but Put side by side with Luke in his first chapter, hers is just as fleshed out and believable as his. Probably moreso. We got no explanation about him suddenly being aware and able to use the force other than he’s had one lesson that we see, whereas her abilities emerging is the main point of that first chapter.
Yet we just buy it in Luke’s case simply cos we know at this remove who he’s related to and have the benefit of his whole journey from whiney farmboy to Jedi.
But people seem to have a problem with Reys. They both go from zero to super hero chapter one of their stories but somehow hers isn’t earned and is badly written? Luke is a better written character in a new hope? I just can’t agree.

I made the mistake of looking at some of the videos posted the last few pages and the bigger mistake of reading the comments sections beneath. And yeah I’m afraid it’s all based in sexism and misogyny but a hatred of new Star Wars and Disney seems to be the real cause and a deeper one.

To dismiss her breaking down and ‘confessing’ all and crying in front of Kylo about her woes and loneliness and failure n all that, really isn’t fair. It’s far more interesting and real than anything we ever get from Luke in the OT at any point.
I don’t think she’s been given a fair shake here, it’s outright hostility towards her elsewhere.



*just on Finn. His and Reys relationship was originally shot in an almost adversarial non trusting argumentative way. It was reshot though. Be weird had they gone that way with it.

OwaynOTT

If years of reading fantasy books has thought me anything, it is that Fighting with a staff is totally different than fighting with a sword.
I don't think we can say that she should be so good with a lightsaber because she has fought with a staff.
Now I've only seen the film once, so I don't know if my post holds any value. I did both light and dislike the movie.

py2006

So today I finally got around to my second viewing. Wow, it was a lot better than my midnight opening night reflection. Today I saw it in the Savoy, sat back with my popcorn on my own and digested it better.

Firstly, I will never go to the Odeon again, the Savoy Screen 1 had FAR better picture and even better sound quality. That alone improved things for me. The meh moments (milk/mary poppins) that stuck out like a sore thumb on first viewing didn't seem so bad or at least because I knew they were coming I focused more on what was happening elsewhere.

Some absolutely stunning and thrilling star wars moments in this and again made all the more exciting due to good sound system in the Savoy.

Defo recommend that second viewing for those who were enjoying it but couldn't look past certain decisions by the director.

Looking forward to a 3rd viewing in a week or so.

Sad Professor

OwaynOTT wrote: »

If years of reading fantasy books has thought me anything, it is that Fighting with a staff is totally different than fighting with a sword.
I don't think we can say that she should be so good with a lightsaber because she has fought with a staff.
Now I've only seen the film once, so I don't know if my post holds any value. I did both light and dislike the movie.

I'm not so sure about TLJ, but watch her fighting style in TFA. She does use the lightsaber as if it was a staff, making poking motions, etc. She also repeatedly uses the environment to her advantage and spends most of her time dodging Kylo's blows, using her greater agility to her advantage. The fight choreography in both films is extremely well done and reflects character.

johnny_ultimate

A few interesting insights into the creature designs in this LA Times piece: http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/la-et-mn-star-wars-the-last-jedi-porgs-caretakers-fathier-milk-20171228-htmlstory.html

Intriguing observation that (all?) the featured creatures serve a ‘higher purpose’ with the humans, and Johnson noting the Miyazaki comparison (man, this film is loaded with references & homages to Japanese cinema of the late 20th century!). I think that’s an angle that fits really nicely with the film’s understanding and representation of the force: a sort of harmony that extends to the humans’ relationships with nature. Could be straight out of Princess Mononoke!

david75

david75 wrote:

I made the mistake of looking at some of the videos posted the last few pages and the bigger mistake of reading the comments sections beneath. And yeah I’m afraid it’s all based in sexism and misogyny but a hatred of new Star Wars and Disney seems to be the real cause and a deeper one.

So by not finding her characters arc all that interesting you are saying that I'm sexist and misogynistic. Get over yourself, there is no need for such sweeping generalisations. Am I a self hating man given that I find Finn and Poe to be poorly written too?

If your need to accuse anyone who found the films poor and felt the writing was weak as sexist and misogynistic then that says a lot more about you then me. I always thought that people can like different things but I suppose when it comes go Star Wars you either like Rey or else your a sexist misogynist.

Star Wars, all of them are kids films. They're generally poorly written, full of 2d characters with weak dialogue and often coast by on the charisma of the cast and the fancy FX. I think that had these last few films been called anything but Star Wars the reaction would be very different.

And don't get me wrong, I didn't hate the film, I just found it rather mundane but my 10 year old brother loved it and as he's the target audience then it must be doing something right.

OwaynOTT

Sad Professor wrote: »

I'm not so sure about TLJ, but watch her fighting style in TFA. She does use the lightsaber as if it was a staff, making poking motions, etc. She also repeatedly uses the environment to her advantage and spends most of her time dodging Kylo's blows, using her greater agility to her advantage. The fight choreography in both films is extremely well done and reflects character.

I'll keep that in mind if I ever watch the first one again. Apparently we're going to see the second again tomorrow, so I'll keep a sharp eye out for that in the throne room brawl.

Wibbs

david75 wrote: »

Not at all!
I mainly just don’t buy these criticisms of Rey being thinly written. I’m as big an OT fan as anyone but Put side by side with Luke in his first chapter, hers is just as fleshed out and believable as his. Probably moreso.

No, it really isn't. No really. This is getting beyond bloody ridiculous at this stage. I would respectfully suggest that anybody considering that the two are comparable are woefully deluded of opinion and lacking in two eyes and ears and common sense.

We got no explanation about him suddenly being aware and able to use the force other than he’s had one lesson that we see, whereas her abilities emerging is the main point of that first chapter.

Jesus H Christ, there are all levels of explanation, never mind that he's mostly as thick as a housebrick for most of the first film and isn't much better in the second.

Yet we just buy it in Luke’s case simply cos we know at this remove who he’s related to and have the benefit of his whole journey from whiney farmboy to Jedi.

Which I hate to break it to you, wasn't near evident at the start. Hell, it wasn't evident in his second outing and was up for grabs in his last. But no way will you budge from your clearly untenable position, which seems on all evidence to be based much more in some received ideology than film criticism, or understanding of how stories work.

But people seem to have a problem with Reys. They both go from zero to super hero chapter one of their stories but somehow hers isn’t earned and is badly written? Luke is a better written character in a new hope? I just can’t agree.

Then honestly I dunno how to make this more simplistic for you. I really don't. Now there is personal opinion, hallowed be its name it seems, no matter how blatantly illogical,, even stupid, but even the most crayon drawn basic analysis of the two characters should make things pretty plain as far as differences go.

I made the mistake of looking at some of the videos posted the last few pages and the bigger mistake of reading the comments sections beneath. And yeah I’m afraid it’s all based in sexism and misogyny but a hatred of new Star Wars and Disney seems to be the real cause and a deeper one.

Jesus H Christ Part Deux, The Daftness Strikes Back. Without any New Hope of objectivity. If your argument - and I use the term lightly - boils down to "sexism and misogyny" said argument is baseless and at this point just silly. Never mind insulting to both individuals and basic intelligence. So posters like me are in your mind guilty of "sexism and misogyny"? GTFO. But you keep banging that drum. For whatever odd reasoning there is behind it.

Deleted User wrote: »

So by not finding her characters arc all that interesting you are saying that I'm sexist and misogynistic. Get over yourself, there is no need for such sweeping generalisations. Am I a self hating man given that I find Finn and Poe to be poorly written too?

Apparently you are somewhere just below Mr Weinstein for even suggesting it.

I always thought that people can like different things but I suppose when it comes go Star Wars you either like Rey or else your a sexist misogynist.

Seems that way.

Star Wars, all of them are kids films. They're generally poorly written, full of 2d characters with weak dialogue and often coast by on the charisma of the cast and the fancy FX. I think that had these last few films been called anything but Star Wars the reaction would be very different.

+1000

And don't get me wrong, I didn't hate the film, I just found it rather mundane but my 10 year old brother loved it and as he's the target audience then it must be doing something right.

Pretty much and more power to it for that at least.

Wibbs

OwaynOTT wrote: »

If years of reading fantasy books has thought me anything, it is that Fighting with a staff is totally different than fighting with a sword.
I don't think we can say that she should be so good with a lightsaber because she has fought with a staff.
Now I've only seen the film once, so I don't know if my post holds any value. I did both light and dislike the movie.

Did a bit of Kendo back in the day and you're not so wrong there O. The two disciplines are very different. The staff is more about keeping distance and long strikes, the sword is more close in and well... stabby and slashy. It's also much faster. Which is something that kinda irritated me about the dancing of the prequels.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0CSrUrfA98

If lightsabers existed it would more akin to that than fencing, or dancing. Knightly broadsword would be another matter. For a start they wouldn't come in with swords aloft. It would be much more considered and blade low and more stabby again.

Wedwood

It'll be interesting to see if Lucasfilm let Johnson go ahead with his own trilogy after the mixed fan reaction to TLJ.

On some of the fan reactions to the movie, a few people need to dial it down a bit, it's only a popcorn movie after all, not something to be considered high art.

Sad Professor

Wedwood wrote: »

It'll be interesting to see if Lucasfilm let Johnson go ahead with his own trilogy after the mixed fan reaction to TLJ.

On some of the fan reactions to the movie, a few people need to dial it down a bit, it's only a popcorn movie after all, not something to be considered high art.

TLJ under Johnson was easily the smoothest of Disney's 4 Star Wars productions to date. He was incredibly efficient. Script finished before TFA came out, edit done months ago, no disastrous reshoots, etc. And they were obviously happy with the film and liked working with him. That's why he's coming back.

The divisive reaction is mostly due to two things: 1) blowback from JJ's mystery box plotting and the fan theorising it inspired, and 2) the sacrilegious characterisation of Luke also arising out of story decisions made in TFA. Neither of these things will be an issue with a non-saga film. The other potential issue is the off-kilter humour, which is very much part of Johnson's style but something which I'm sure he can tweak to satisfy fan desire for greater grittiness, realism, etc if need be.

Anyway, he's only confirmed for the first film, I doubt he wants to do the whole trilogy. Personally I would have liked to have seen him do 9, but now that's out of the question I'd rather see him do something new than another SW movie.

ps3lover

This reminds me of when Ghostbusters came out, anyone who didn’t think the trailer looked very good was instantly labeled a misogynist.
Now if you don’t like The Last Jedi it’s because of misogyny again.
What happened if you liked both The Force Awakens and Rogue One but didn’t like The Last Jedi? Late misogyny?

ps3lover

ps3lover wrote: »

This reminds me of when Ghostbusters came out, anyone who didn’t think the trailer looked very good was instantly labeled a misogynist.
Now if you don’t like The Last Jedi it’s because of misogyny again.
What happened if you liked both The Force Awakens and Rogue One but didn’t like The Last Jedi? Late misogyny?

Just ignore anyone saying this ****e tbh

Wedwood

Just on the Luke thing, they've more or less fulfilled Lucas' original ideas for the sequel trilogy.

The original idea Lucas had was Luke goes bad at the end of ROTJ in another end of movie twist, to be later redeemed at the end of the sequel trilogy by 'the other hope' referred to by Yoda in ESB. The idea was ditched when Lucas curtailed the story to finish at ROTJ.

TLJ essentially plays out those ideas in one movie, so Luke's original story arc has been completed as Lucas previously intended.

That's why all that subsequent (mostly crap) EU stuff such as Luke getting married, having kids etc, had to be ditched.

Sad Professor

Wedwood wrote: »

Just on the Luke thing, they've more or less fulfilled Lucas' original ideas for the sequel trilogy.

The original idea Lucas had was Luke goes bad at the end of ROTJ in another end of movie twist, to be later redeemed at the end of the sequel trilogy by 'the other hope' referred to by Yoda in ESB. The idea was ditched when Lucas curtailed the story to finish at ROTJ.

TLJ essentially plays out those ideas in one movie, so Luke's original story arc has been completed as Lucas previously intended.

That's why all that subsequent (mostly crap) EU stuff such as Luke getting married, having kids etc, had to be ditched.

Yeah, also, according to the Art of The Last of the Jedi book (which I have on order), Luke's storyline in TLJ is similar to the outline Lucas gave Disney for Episode 7 but abandoned by Abrams. In the outline Luke was at a Jedi temple but in a dark frame of mind and apparently haunted by a Sith ghost but over the course of the film would rediscover himself. Interesting stuff.

http://www.slashfilm.com/george-lucas-sequel-trilogy/

ancapailldorcha

I saw this yesterday. I can't help but feel that this franchise has strayed into popcorn movie territory. I was expecting this to be a big step forward in the premise established by TFA but it just felt like filler with a few small twists dropped in to justify the runtime. The trailer had me quite excited for this. Alas.

Drumpot

Saw it a third time yesterday in savoy. Wanted to get their for nostalgia reasons before they knock the big screen down.

Just a heads up for anybody who wants to chance it, They don’t seem to be too bothered checking people’s tickets going in as there was no usher going in or out. You could of easily just walked in and sat in the cinema for the next screening as they didn’t do a clear out.

conorhal

Wibbs wrote: »

Did a bit of Kendo back in the day and you're not so wrong there O. The two disciplines are very different. The staff is more about keeping distance and long strikes, the sword is more close in and well... stabby and slashy. It's also much faster. Which is something that kinda irritated me about the dancing of the prequels.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0CSrUrfA98

If lightsabers existed it would more akin to that than fencing, or dancing. Knightly broadsword would be another matter. For a start they wouldn't come in with swords aloft. It would be much more considered and blade low and more stabby again.

I'd imagine that fighting with a lightsaber would definately be more like Kendo TBH, there are no little jabs or light tips with a lightsaber, it's a devastating single strke weapon. A single nick and that's your arm off! so I'd say it would be more likely you don't want to be close in with one and instead would want to stick to short sharp clashes and single strikes.

conorhal

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

A few interesting insights into the creature designs in this LA Times piece: http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/la-et-mn-star-wars-the-last-jedi-porgs-caretakers-fathier-milk-20171228-htmlstory.html

Intriguing observation that (all?) the featured creatures serve a ‘higher purpose’ with the humans, and Johnson noting the Miyazaki comparison (man, this film is loaded with references & homages to Japanese cinema of the late 20th century!). I think that’s an angle that fits really nicely with the film’s understanding and representation of the force: a sort of harmony that extends to the humans’ relationships with nature. Could be straight out of Princess Mononoke!

Now that you say it, there was definitely a kind of Japanese 'manga' feel to the last third of the film in it's look, fights and philosophy alright.