Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

1…167168170172173…221

Comments

  • #5072
    david75
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,611 ✭✭✭david75


    Kinda wish this happened. :)

    https://twitter.com/theswlegacy/status/952149419125854208


  • #5073
    Sad Professor
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,678 CMod ✭✭✭✭Sad Professor


    david75 wrote: »
    Kinda wish this happened. :)

    https://twitter.com/theswlegacy/status/952149419125854208

    It was storyboarded that way:

    Porgs-vs-a-lightsaber-in-Star-Wars-The-Last-concept-art.jpg

    but I think it's funnier that it cuts just as he stomps on the button.


  • #5074
    david75
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,611 ✭✭✭david75


    Sad Professor wrote: »
    It was storyboarded that way:

    Porgs-vs-a-lightsaber-in-Star-Wars-The-Last-concept-art.jpg

    but I think it's funnier that it cuts just as he stomps on the button.


    Yeah I got the art of book too. It’s way way more a Making of book than an art book isn’t it?

    I hope we get the proper making of books once the trilogy is finished.
    There seems to have been a parting of ways with Rinzler though so perhaps not.


  • #5075
    Sad Professor
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,678 CMod ✭✭✭✭Sad Professor


    david75 wrote: »
    Yeah I got the art of book too. It’s way way more a Making of book than an art book isn’t it?

    I hope we get the proper making of books once the trilogy is finished.
    There seems to have been a parting of ways with Rinzler though so perhaps not.

    Yeah, there's quite a lot of production details in it. I was bit disappointed with it, though. It's missing a lot of art because they didn't want to spoil certain sequences. I wish they had just waited until the film was out a while.

    They could get somebody else to do a proper making of book when the trilogy is complete. I get the impression Rinzler was a George loyalist so probably not the best choice.


  • #5076
    david75
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,611 ✭✭✭david75


    Sad Professor wrote: »
    Yeah, there's quite a lot of production details in it. I was bit disappointed with it, though. It's missing a lot of art because they didn't want to spoil certain sequences. I wish they had just waited until the film was out a while.

    They could get somebody else to do a proper making of book when the trilogy is complete. I get the impression Rinzler was a George loyalist so probably not the best choice.

    Yeah I’d agree. It’s trying to do two things, be an art book and almost a production diary and doing neither to full effect. I can’t rememebr for sure but I don’t think the TFA art book was like this. Think it was all about the art. Must go through it again. It was definitely more enjoyable than this one. Packed with stuff.


  • Advertisement
  • #5077
    Tony EH
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,429 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    Gbear wrote: »
    This is just another example of pretend-objectivity in criticising this film.

    I'm being entirely objective and criticising the films based on what I see.
    Gbear wrote: »
    There is absolutely no problem pointing this out in general terms. If you're not into Star Wars, Fantasy, or Sci-fi and you find all this sort of thing irritating then yeah, this is a valid criticism, although I'm not sure why you'd have bothered going to see it - not when we've already had 8 other films doing the same.

    I IS being pointed out "in general terms", but within the context of the given film and I'll happily criticise ANY of the Star Wars flms, as there is a lot to criticise in all of them.

    One thing though. THEY ARE NOT THE SAME. Each trilogy, in fact each film, are quite different to one another in many areas.
    Gbear wrote: »
    Why are you watching these films?
    None of this is even remotely out of character for Star Wars. In fact it's a core tenet. You can barely go a scene in any Star Wars film without having to either totally suspend disbelief or at least take what you're seeing on screen as given.

    That's a question a lot of people have been asking themselves. Personally, and I reckon the same goes for a lot of folk my age, is that we are hoping that a new Star Wars film will capture the spirit of the original films, or even film. We know it probably won't, given the constraints (trying to appeal to everyone) that new maker has to operate under and the fact that their hearts (Disney) aren't really in the right place. Let's be perfectly honest about this.

    As for suspension of belief, I would sat that that's a given for any Star Wars film and a lot of films in general. I don't see ANYBODY on the thread, critical or otherwise saying different. If you "believe" Star Wars', you not doing it right.
    Gbear wrote: »
    I don't have an issue with these nitpicks bothering people. What I do take issue with is the intellectual dishonesty from people claiming to be fans of the other films who selectively pick these out but ignore the exact same class of problem from the previous films.
    Even Empire is riddled with nonsense!

    Obviously, you do an issue. You've just written a book about it.

    Here's a thing, start a thread about the "nonsense" in 'The Empire Strikes Back', or any other film in the series and people, including myself, will contribute. There's a LOT wrong with the OT. You're labouring under the impression that the folk who are being critical of these shortcomings in Disney's sequels aren't aware of the shortcomings that the other films suffer from.

    You're wrong.

    As I said, if you want to talk about the issues you have with ANY film in the series, do so and you'll have people who are critical of 'The Last Jedi' joining in.
    Gbear wrote: »
    Why does the Death Star not scramble 2000 fighters instead of half a dozen to defend it?

    Because budget, time and lack of models didn't allow it. I don't know what the "in universe" reason or excuse is. I'm sure somebody has come up with something. Is it a shortcoming? Perhaps. Is there a real world reason for it, Yes. Problem is, if they didn't put enemy fighters on the screen at all, people would be asking why didn't they scramble any fighters.

    Plus, the action is focused on a small part of the area concerned. It's plausible that off screen, there are other fighter engagements happening.
    Gbear wrote: »
    Why don't they just blow up Yavin? Why didn't they hyperspace in at an angle where they could shoot immediately?

    Agreed and it's because they wanted to create drama. It's a definite shortcoming in the script and I have no issue with someone pointing that out. I've done so myself. Again, I've no doubt that someone, somewhere has made an excuse for it. Then again, the Death Star is a slow and clumsy weapon. Perhaps is simply cannot just hyperspace on top of a given planet and go boom.
    Gbear wrote: »
    Why were there no fighters at Hoth?

    In the film, we hear a rebel pilot saying that they are having trouble adapting their equipment to cold. That indicates that such vehicles are suseptible to the extreme temps that Hoth has. Of course, one would then question why can they fly in space, where the temp is much lower.

    The reason, again, is budget, time and not enough models.

    If CGI existed as it does today, it would have been a sinch to put a load of TIE fighters into the scene. In 1980, that simply wasn't possible. They had a ton of trouble trying to get the snowspeeders to look realistic against the snowy background. Bluescreen tech of the day and white backgrounds were a nightmare to work with.

    That's not a flaw, like the lazy writing the 'The Last Jedi' exhibits. That's a practical issue. It just wasn't possible.
    Gbear wrote: »
    Why weren't one of the dozens of Star Destroyers defending the escape path from the base?

    Budget, time and not enough models. Again, this is a technical issue. The more models you have to display, the more difficult a scene becomes. The more scope for mistake and the more money you use.

    In any case, there were SD's ranged to try and stop the Rebels escaping. That's why they had to use an ION cannon to disable the one we see getting disabled in the scene where the first transport has to flee. That's there to suggest that the Rebels have a method of escape and it's not just happening by magic.
    Gbear wrote: »
    Why didn't they land 50,000 troops instead of 200 and 5 ATATs?

    Budget, time and not enough models.

    Do you see a pattern emerging here?
    Gbear wrote: »
    Why does the Emperor allow Darth Vader to throw him off a thing when he could just freeze him with the force?

    We don't know. Perhaps he's too busy concentrating on Luke? Perhaps Vader moves so fast, he doesn't have time to react. It happens in a second.

    If you think that's flaw in the same fashion of the multiple flaws in 'The Force Awakens' or 'The Last Jedi'. Whatever. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
    Gbear wrote: »
    Why do care bear arrows penetrate Storm Trooper armour (what is that armour even for? It does absolutely nothing!)

    You'll have a hard time finding ANYONE who doesn't find that stupid.
    Gbear wrote: »
    why does it take them so long to destroy a tiny republic fleet when they outnumber them 5000:1?

    Because it would take some time to destroy enemies, even if the odds are uneven. There's real life examples of this.

    That's not a realistic criticism of anything.

    And in any case, in realistic terms, the battle of Endor is actually too short, if anything.
    Gbear wrote: »
    These are just 10 minute slices from those 3 films. The rest of the films aren't any different.

    And they are largely down to the three things that I've pointed out to you. Money, time and especially the Technical constraints that faced the film makers of the time, which is now 35 - 40 years ago. That's a REAL WORLD issue that, in fact, is remarkable that it didn't have a BIGGER effect on the outcome of those films. George Lucas, himself, always lamented the confines that ILM had to work within.
    Gbear wrote: »
    You can go through some sort of mental gymnastics to try to answer these kinds of issues but you can't escape the fact that Star Wars is nonsense from start to finish and if you can't accept that that's absolutely fine, but these films aren't for you.

    One doesn't have to go through any "mental gymnastics" at all for the nitpicks you've outlined as the there is a VERY VALID reason for most of them. They're down to technical, money and time issues that the producers faced during the three years it took to make those films. If Lucasfilm had the even just the money and the technicial advances in 1977 - 83 that Disney has today, a lot of the issues you pointed out would be gone.

    And yes, Star Wars is nonsense. Nowhere, have I said anything otherwise.

    The rest of you words don't apply to my post, so I'll leave it there.

    Again, feel free to start a thread on the flaws of any film in the series that you wish.


  • #5078
    david75
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,611 ✭✭✭david75


    Now Tony... neither you nor I can talk about ‘writing a book about it’ in fairness ;)


  • #5079
    Saruhashi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 591 ✭✭✭Saruhashi


    david75 wrote: »
    Railing against anyone who does enjoy them and in some cases insulting people who do like the new ones though? Have ye nothing else to do? Seriously?

    Yet you do the same thing to people who don't like the films and want to post their thoughts on why the new movie was bad.

    I'm seeing that a lot online and I think you especially are guilty of it.

    Complaining about the toxic Star Wars fan base whilst being every bit as snarky and dismissive and toxic towards people who didn't like the movie.


  • #5080
    Saruhashi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 591 ✭✭✭Saruhashi


    david75 wrote: »
    Agree with all of that and have been saying as much since we’ve had Star Wars film threads but the reply always seem to be the OT is kinda bullet proof from this kind of comparative analysis in its own ridiculous inconsistencies and endless excuses get made for them.

    I reckon that "but the OT had problems too" has become the "but Hillary's emails" of Star Wars conversations at this point.

    Didn't like the humor in the last jedi? What about the OT? There was humor in those too!? Haha! Gotcha!

    Nearly every criticism of TLJ seems to be countered by saying that either the OT had the same problems or the OT isn't as good as people remembered or the OT didn't get good reviews when they first came out.

    I feel like if I say "I like Star Wars in general but I didn't like The Last Jedi" then there's always someone eager to tell me that I'm wrong.

    Either I like the originals AND the new movies or it has to be explained to me how I am wrong and I'm just watching the new ones wrong or some other similar crap.


  • #5081
    TomSweeney
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,231 ✭✭✭TomSweeney


    david75 wrote: »
    The main thing I don’t get and you picked up on it and I’m seeing it a lot elsewhere, if now after two films in a new trilogy you find they aren’t working for you, maybe that’s cool and they just aren’t for you. You’ll always have the OT or the PT or whatever you’re into. Railing against anyone who does enjoy them and in some cases insulting people who do like the new ones though? Have ye nothing else to do? Seriously?

    I can only imagine they’re sorta deeply p!ssed off that the new ones arent working for them. I felt the same on rogue one and eventually came to like it. Sometimes this stuff takes a while. The best art like albums or films often don’t give themselves up first try and take some time. Like we said much earlier, Empire was that for a great many people. Took ROTJ for it to be seen as best of the three given time and context.

    I’m thinking you’ll see all but the most hardliners come around on TLJ once they’ve seen it a few more times.


    It’s out on home release March 27 too which is cool.

    But you seem to have forced yourself to like it ?

    skimming through the thread you weren't happy at first and have seen it what - 11 times now ?
    It's ok to be dissapointed you know.


  • Advertisement
  • #5082
    david75
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,611 ✭✭✭david75


    TomSweeney wrote: »
    But you seem to have forced yourself to like it ?

    skimming through the thread you weren't happy at first and have seen it what - 11 times now ?
    It's ok to be dissapointed you know.


    It took me three to really get it. It’s biggest flaw imo is it’s far too dense. There’s way too much to unpack and that serves to make it feel like a mid season finale of a tv show. There’s no breathing room at all when there should be and a lot of scenes and set pieces could really do with it-particularly the Luke/island stuff and everything with Snoke and Kylo. Those are crucial and feel just too compressed and would be much better served if they were given that space.

    Much like anything with the emperor in ROTJ. It *feels* heavy and important.
    That doesn’t happen in TLJ. Sadly.

    So I’m by no means at all blind or convincing myself of anything. It has the above issues and others for sure.

    I just think when it’s brilliant, it’s as brilliant and often more brilliant at being Star Wars than we’ve seen.

    That’s the thing I hope/think people will come around on given time


  • #5083
    Tony EH
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,429 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    Saruhashi wrote: »
    I reckon that "but the OT had problems too" has become the "but Hillary's emails" of Star Wars conversations at this point.

    Didn't like the humor in the last jedi? What about the OT? There was humor in those too!? Haha! Gotcha!

    Nearly every criticism of TLJ seems to be countered by saying that either the OT had the same problems or the OT isn't as good as people remembered or the OT didn't get good reviews when they first came out.

    I feel like if I say "I like Star Wars in general but I didn't like The Last Jedi" then there's always someone eager to tell me that I'm wrong.

    Either I like the originals AND the new movies or it has to be explained to me how I am wrong and I'm just watching the new ones wrong or some other similar crap.

    Agreed.

    There's a ridiculous amount of whataboutery regarding these new movies. In fact, there was when people were critical of the prequels, which are now almost universally accepted as poor films for all the reasons that were being pointed out years ago.

    If people like these films, then have at it. Go and like them. Let nobody tell you what entertainment should be.

    But there does seem to be a reaction from some quarters that if one criticises elements within either the prequels or the sequels, that the "but the OT..." line gets dragged out, as if that's some sort of argumentative parry to redirect the blows of criticism and often, I have to say, it doesn't work, as evidenced by GBear's OT criticisms, which are largely down to reasons that were (pretty much) beyond the film makers control.

    Plus, one of the OT criticisms. the "Teddy Bear" issue, is almost completely disdained by the fanbase. It was like that in 1983 and like that in 2018. That's a poor counter argument to people who pointing out the flaws within the prequels/sequels.


  • #5084
    david75
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,611 ✭✭✭david75


    It doesn’t have to be either / or and I’m definitely not a fan of that line of thinking or criticism at all. There’s tons of stuff to love in every single film of the 8 we have so far.
    GBear wasn’t doing that either he was pointing out we do turn a blind eye out to mad stupid stuff and inconsistencies in the OT yet the new ones and prequels get savaged. and truth is we do do that. Rogue one even has a ton of this stupid stuff and all it says is they all have the same thing going on where you have to leave your disbelief outside. Completely.

    We do hold them all to different scales and standards thats just a fact.and we shouldn’t.

    People complaining about magna bombs and the physics of bombs falling in zero gravity in TLJ(yet the same happened in ESB) is just an example.

    You have to throw that level of knit picking out if you’re gonna enjoy them.


    But a lot of the stuff we’re seeing is people willingly not wanting to enjoy them either and just go knives out at it. All of them. That’s the problem that causes the toxic stuff


  • #5085
    Sad Professor
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,678 CMod ✭✭✭✭Sad Professor


    david75 wrote: »
    Yeah I’d agree. It’s trying to do two things, be an art book and almost a production diary and doing neither to full effect. I can’t rememebr for sure but I don’t think the TFA art book was like this. Think it was all about the art. Must go through it again. It was definitely more enjoyable than this one. Packed with stuff.

    TFA had a longer development period with various different ideas being thrown around so it would make sense that there would be a lot more concept art. I also think Johnson was very efficient developing the script and clear about what he wanted and that didn't really change. Unlike say George who often relied on the art department to come up with story and character ideas while he figured out what the story was.

    There's a funny story of Lucas sticking his head in the door of the art department, mumbling "there's going to be a snow battle" or something and then walking off before they could ask him any questions.


  • #5086
    david75
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,611 ✭✭✭david75


    Sad Professor wrote: »
    TFA had a longer development period with various different ideas being thrown around so it would make sense that there would be a lot more concept art. I also think Johnson was very efficient developing the script and clear about what he wanted and that didn't really change. Unlike say George who often relied on the art department to come up with story and character ideas while he figured out what the story was.

    There's a funny story of Lucas sticking his head in the door of the art department, mumbling "there's going to be a snow battle" or something and then walking off before they could ask him any questions.


    Haha! I remember that :)
    He was also brilliant at letting the artists do their thing and then whole characters and even subplots coming out of just a sketch someone did. The new ones are good at this too. What’s it called, the blue sky stage?
    I’d say Lucasfilm is brilliant to work in


  • #5087
    Tony EH
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,429 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    david75 wrote: »
    It doesn’t have to be either / or and I’m definitely not a fan of that line of thinking or criticism at all. There’s tons of stuff to love in every single film of the 8 we have so far.
    GBear wasn’t doing that either he was pointing out we do turn a blind eye out to mad stupid stuff and inconsistencies in the OT yet the new ones and prequels get savaged. and truth is we do do that.

    No. "we" don't. There are plenty of people who do, of course, but their criticism can be disected quite easily, because usually it's of the "it sucked" kind and not not much more.

    However, where GBear (and plenty of others) are wrong, is the impression that people who are criticising the newer films for their OWN flaws are oblivious to the flaws within the OT.

    In general, they're not.

    The thing is, whether those flaws are so overwhelming that they break the film for you.

    In the case of the prequels - which I've gone on about in detail - the sheer amount of awfulness destroys them for me to the point where I think those stories are actually detrimental to the over all story. Even when talented faneditors have tried their best to make them watchable, they simple cannot erase the worst aspects of them.

    In the case of the sequels, there's a lot to like. But, there are too many cases of sheer bad writing (or just a lack of care) going on to dismiss. These have been listed by myself and others time and again in this thread and others. Now, that's not down just to taste - because the criticism has been repeated by many, many different people seperate from one another and the same things keep coming up again and again.

    The thing is, with fantasy, if a plausible reason can be constructed to allow a flaw to slide, most fans would do it. Because fans actually WANT to like these films. But, when they are so rude in implausibility, you simply just cannot ignore them. A case being the political state of the galaxy in the sequel trilogy, which is utterly ridiculous to say the least. But, that's just bad writing. The writers don't actually HAVE an answer to those questions, because they didn't really bother to stop and think about it themselves. Criticism of something like that (which is open to criticism in ANY film, not just Star Wars) is very different to criticising 'Star Wars' in 1977 for why there weren't thousands of TIE fighters and X Wings flying about the screen.
    david75 wrote: »
    People complaining about magna bombs and the physics of bombs falling in zero gravity in TLJ(yet the same happened in ESB) is just an example.

    That kind of nitpick can, and has been, dismissed by a lot of people. Inculding people who didn't like 'The Last Jedi'. We don't know the specs of the equipment. Perhaps they're magnetised in TLJ, or they're propelled somehow in TESB.

    That allows a certain logic to exist.
    david75 wrote: »
    But a lot of the stuff we’re seeing is people willingly not wanting to enjoy them either and just go knives out at it. All of them. That’s the problem that causes the toxic stuff

    I don't think that's the case.

    Few people if any want to go into a film (any film) and hate it. That's just dumb.

    Look, people want to enjoy these films. But, for a lot of folk, their flaws make that impossible.

    And people WILL drop off.


  • #5088
    irishman86
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,814 ✭✭✭irishman86


    Theres nothing worse than "go watch something else if you dont like it" attitude. Dont people realise how weak a argument that is
    I have zero faith in the third movie being good or even decent, ill still watch it in the hope that it is.
    The super fans here and in general have seriously weak arguments regarding the movie, its the same as the original trilogy ffs.
    Now i wouldnt have a problem with this but like has been said already the flaws make it pretty unwatchable
    I'm just waiting for Rey to end up being Kylo Rens sister somehow :pac:


  • #5089
    david75
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,611 ✭✭✭david75


    irishman86 wrote: »
    Theres nothing worse than "go watch something else if you dont like it" attitude. Dont people realise how weak a argument that is
    I have zero faith in the third movie being good or even decent, ill still watch it in the hope that it is.
    The super fans here and in general have seriously weak arguments regarding the movie, its the same as the original trilogy ffs.
    Now i wouldnt have a problem with this but like has been said already the flaws make it pretty unwatchable
    I'm just waiting for Rey to end up being Kylo Rens sister somehow :pac:


    Gas thing is they probably are brother and sister :) (please god no)
    You said yourself you don’t get why people watch something again they don’t like the first time. Sometimes in all realms of art you have to try a few times.
    You’ve never read a book a few times? I used to read lord of the rings once a year. Don’t anymore
    You’ve never had a favourite song or album you always listen to? Same thing. Sometimes a book or film or album take a long time and one day they just click.
    That isn’t fanboi anything and it’s dismissive to say that. You can say you don’t like something in the now. It doesn’t mean you won’t in the future. Much the same way you can love something all your life and just grow out of it one day and it no longer has any value to you.

    In everything not just Star Wars.


  • #5090
    Tony EH
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,429 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    People only tend to repeat watch/listen to something when they're already a fan and in many cases a choice bias is very much involved. I think a lot of Star Wars fans are aprticularly prone to choice bias.

    But, there comes a time when you just have to be honest with yourself and say that something isn't very good.

    For instance, I have tried and tried to like the last My Bloody Valentine album. But, no. I just don't like it and can't make any escuses for that.

    But that's a matter of taste.

    My dislike of 'The Last Jedi' is down to its numerous flaws that I find too much to simply gloss over. Something like Star Wars is agreeable to my taste. It's just been executed badly and that's different matter altogether.

    It depends on how the last one plays out, but I don't think revision is going to be too kind to the sequel trilogy in a few years time.


  • #5091
    david75
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,611 ✭✭✭david75


    Tony EH wrote: »
    People only tend to repeat watch/listen to something when they're already a fan and in many cases a choice bias is very much involved. I think a lot of Star Wars fans are aprticularly prone to choice bias.

    But, there comes a time when you just have to be honest with yourself and say that something isn't very good.

    For instance, I have tried and tried to like the last My Bloody Valentine album. But, no. I just don't like it and can't make any escuses for that.

    But that's a matter of taste.

    My dislike of 'The Last Jedi' is down to its numerous flaws that I find too much to simply gloss over. Something like Star Wars is agreeable to my taste. It's just been executed badly and that's different matter altogether.

    It depends on how the last one plays out, but I don't think revision is going to be too kind to the sequel trilogy in a few years time.



    That band left me deaf. I saw them at EP few years back.


  • Advertisement
  • #5092
    Tony EH
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,429 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    Ear plugs Dave. Ear plugs.

    BTW, that gig was nearly 10 years ago. :(


  • #5093
    david75
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,611 ✭✭✭david75


    Tony EH wrote: »
    Ear plugs Dave. Ear plugs.

    BTW, that gig was nearly 10 years ago. :(


    I must have gotten lost. Been part of a convoy or something


  • #5094
    Earthhorse
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,714 ✭✭✭✭Earthhorse


    I was at that too; with earplugs though. I wonder is there Star Wars/My Bloody Valentine crossover market waiting to be found.

    It's true that some of the nit picks of the new film have their counterparts in the OT, the whole point is that the OT was so brilliant that you forgive or barely notice them. When a movie as clunky as TLJ comes along you have plenty of time to realise it's flaws because it's failed transport you to a galaxy far, far away:


  • #5095
    david75
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,611 ✭✭✭david75


    Thankfully JJ is back on board for 9 and we’re guaranteed Luke and Obi wan and Yoda and Anakin force ghosts at the end. That’ll take us to a galaxy far far away. Might even get Leia.


  • #5096
    py2006
    Registered Users Posts: 9,847 ✭✭✭py2006


    https://i.imgur.com/1Si2WhC.gifv

    1Si2WhC.gifv


  • #5097
    Gbear
    Registered Users Posts: 12,775 ✭✭✭✭Gbear


    Tony EH wrote: »

    Because budget, time and lack of models didn't allow it.
    [...]
    One doesn't have to go through any "mental gymnastics" at all for the nitpicks you've outlined as the there is a VERY VALID reason for most of them. They're down to technical, money and time issues that the producers faced during the three years it took to make those films. If Lucasfilm had the even just the money and the technicial advances in 1977 - 83 that Disney has today, a lot of the issues you pointed out would be gone.

    I don't agree with this conclusion at all.
    The SFX for Star Wars are already having to contend with making spaceships when they have none. They've shown the capacity to pull enough rabbits out of hats that you can't put the issues I highlighted down to lack of budget.

    There'd be nothing to stop a pilot saying "there's 1000's of them" or having 2 dozen smaller models they could've thrown together in a couple of days to show the greater weight of numbers.

    Aside from the practical, they could've easily written around it.
    A throwaway line saying "a fighter will sneak aboard and disable all the launch bay doors" or something of that nature.

    And anyway, I mightn't hold it against a director if their film falls short technically due to budget, but it doesn't make the film any better.
    My film doesn't get bonus points just because I made it on my phone in my back garden, because I don't have resources.

    The reason there are so few fighters at Yavin isn't down to practicality - it's down to narrative driving the reality of the scene rather than the other way around and that applies to all the other scenes I mentioned.

    It doesn't matter that asteroid fields are mostly empty space - having one with loads of asteroids clustered together in Empire creates drama.
    Tony EH wrote: »
    We don't know. Perhaps he's too busy concentrating on Luke? Perhaps Vader moves so fast, he doesn't have time to react. It happens in a second.

    If you think that's flaw in the same fashion of the multiple flaws in 'The Force Awakens' or 'The Last Jedi'. Whatever. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps.
    Perhaps Kylo Ren and Rey don't have the skill with the Force to simultaneously fend off 12 attackers and toss them about with the Force like rag dolls.

    Perhaps jumping to hyperspace directly at opponents is inefficient, only works with ships above a certain size, only works if their shields are down or whatever.

    Etc, etc.

    As with the OT, they probably came up with a cool scenario or shot and then work backwards from there and they're not too bothered about laying out every details or having bulletproof logic underpinning it. It just has to be cool.
    Tony EH wrote: »
    And yes, Star Wars is nonsense. Nowhere, have I said anything otherwise.

    The rest of you words don't apply to my post, so I'll leave it there.

    Again, feel free to start a thread on the flaws of any film in the series that you wish.

    The problem with that is that it would be like opening a thread on the soccer forum complaining about how the balls are too round or there aren't enough scores.

    Sure, they might be deal-breakers for you, but they're not going to change and you might be better off looking at Rugby instead.

    But that isn't what we're seeing for the most part. It's not people who don't like Star Wars wondering what all this nonsense is about.
    It's people trying to apply a logical lens to a film that eschews the notion and claiming that it's a travesty to have done such a thing, when the OT was doing the same thing.

    If someone doesn't like the film that's perfectly valid, but they ought to stick to the actual reasons why that is. If they liked the OT then a lack of internal consistency cannot possibly be deal breakers in the new ones.


  • #5098
    Gbear
    Registered Users Posts: 12,775 ✭✭✭✭Gbear


    Saruhashi wrote: »
    I reckon that "but the OT had problems too" has become the "but Hillary's emails" of Star Wars conversations at this point.

    Didn't like the humor in the last jedi? What about the OT? There was humor in those too!? Haha! Gotcha!

    Nearly every criticism of TLJ seems to be countered by saying that either the OT had the same problems or the OT isn't as good as people remembered or the OT didn't get good reviews when they first came out.

    I feel like if I say "I like Star Wars in general but I didn't like The Last Jedi" then there's always someone eager to tell me that I'm wrong.

    Either I like the originals AND the new movies or it has to be explained to me how I am wrong and I'm just watching the new ones wrong or some other similar crap.

    It depends very much on why you're saying you don't like it.

    Many criticisms I've seen on here or on Reddit have been incompatible with also liking the OT, which suggests that they're not valid criticisms for the person making them.
    They're making criticisms of the film that they don't apply elsewhere, so either they're valid for the OT as well or they're valid for neither.

    I've seen others criticise the humour, the score, the pacing, the writing, the acting and many other elements that are entirely related to the TLJ itself and while I generally don't agree, they're valid opinions to hold.


  • #5099
    Tony EH
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,429 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    Gbear wrote: »
    I don't agree with this conclusion at all.
    The SFX for Star Wars are already having to contend with making spaceships when they have none. They've shown the capacity to pull enough rabbits out of hats that you can't put the issues I highlighted down to lack of budget.

    There'd be nothing to stop a pilot saying "there's 1000's of them" or having 2 dozen smaller models they could've thrown together in a couple of days to show the greater weight of numbers.

    Aside from the practical, they could've easily written around it.
    A throwaway line saying "a fighter will sneak aboard and disable all the launch bay doors" or something of that nature.

    And anyway, I mightn't hold it against a director if their film falls short technically due to budget, but it doesn't make the film any better.
    My film doesn't get bonus points just because I made it on my phone in my back garden, because I don't have resources.

    Are you really trying to tell people that 'Star Wars' was a bad film, because it didn't have 1000's of TIE fighters in it, or a reference to such?
    Gbear wrote: »
    The reason there are so few fighters at Yavin isn't down to practicality - it's down to narrative driving the reality of the scene rather than the other way around and that applies to all the other scenes I mentioned.

    It's ENTIRELY down to practicality.

    Lucas even said so and went back in in the 90's to CGI in more X Wings, because it couldn't be done in the 70's.


  • #5100
    Gbear
    Registered Users Posts: 12,775 ✭✭✭✭Gbear


    Tony EH wrote: »
    Are you really trying to tell people that 'Star Wars' was a bad film, because it didn't have 1000's of TIE fighters in it, or a reference to such?

    No, I'm saying that entire class of criticisms cannot be applied to Star Wars, OT or TLJ, or that if you are going to apply it, these films probably aren't your cup of tea.

    Tony EH wrote: »
    It's ENTIRELY down to practicality.

    Lucas even said so and went back in in the 90's to CGI in more X Wings, because it couldn't be done in the 70's.

    He might've added a few but he didn't change the number of Ties to something like ROTJ's Endor battle. It makes no practical difference.

    Fudging the numbers a little either way doesn't change the general thrust of the battle scenes I mentioned. They were the way they were because there was a vision for what they should be like and because the bad guys couldn't win, even though they clearly should have.


  • Advertisement
  • #5101
    Tony EH
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,429 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    Gbear wrote: »
    No, I'm saying that entire class of criticisms cannot be applied to Star Wars, OT or TLJ, or that if you are going to apply it, these films probably aren't your cup of tea.

    He might've added a few but he didn't change the number of Ties to something like ROTJ's Endor battle. It makes no practical difference.

    Fudging the numbers a little either way doesn't change the general thrust of the battle scenes I mentioned. They were the way they were because there was a vision for what they should be like and because the bad guys couldn't win, even though they clearly should have.

    Critiicism can be levelled at any film, be it Star Wars or anything else and practicality has EVERYTHING to do with how much you can put on a screen, when using models and other PRACTICAL effects.

    I've given you practical reasons why you couldn't see 1000's of models in the original Star Wars films. It just wasn't possible at the time, regardless of what ILM managed to actually achieve and that eleminates many of your OT criticisms, frankly.

    You don't seem to agree and you don't think opening a thread on the OT will do anything either, so there isn't much further to discuss here. :confused:

    As for Star Wars not being my cup of tea, that's just silly.


Advertisement