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

kirk buttercup

Drumpot wrote: »

I can accept all these explanations and not go down a rabbit hole dissecting your points because I just love the OT's and don't see the benefit of being hyper critical.

Just to clarify, I wasn't picking TESB apart, my point was that some people are not willing to offer the same benefit of the doubt for the newer SW movies and default to the negative on any aspect of the newer movies that is debatable.

to be honest I am glad I enjoy the new films for what they are, a lot of people on here seem very frustrated and that's a pity for all the faults that have been debated on here I feel they have been good fun especially if you have kids (as mentioned before my kids loved it and I think that's part of the reason I liked them more). I always felt trying to tie it all together would split opinion and when Disney eventually start new time lines and story lines this may (or may not ) make people happier. I just hope they don't go down the Marvel or Pirates of the Caribbean approach.

Drumpot

kirk buttercup wrote: »

to be honest I am glad I enjoy the new films for what they are, a lot of people on here seem very frustrated and that's a pity for all the faults that have been debated on here I feel they have been good fun especially if you have kids (as mentioned before my kids loved it and I think that's part of the reason I liked them more). I all always felt trying to tie it all together would split opinion and when Disney eventually start new time lines and story lines this may (or may not ) make people happier. I just hope they don't go down the Marvel or Pirates of the Caribbean approach.

Yeh, your kids point is definitely relevant for me. I wonder would I be as forgiving if I couldn't enjoy them enjoying them! I look forward to bringing them to the new star Wars. Even the new Solo movie that I am not desperate to see, is a cinema event I am looking forward to. Its like the way Christmas becomes fun again when you can enjoy your children getting excited and opening presents.

The newer Star Wars movies don't give me the same sense of excitement that I got as a youngster. But I am older and to expect the same feelings I did 30 years ago is bound to leave me disappointed with whatever we get.

Theboinkmaster

david75 wrote: »

ive about 55 different versions of this saved, and most worse than this,

I stand by that comment, if you stood back and looked at the volume, tone and content of all your posts throughout the star wars threads you would see how you come across clearly as that. You would literally defend anything star wars related to the point now that your posts are disregarded as fan boy propaganda.

PhiloCypher

david75 wrote: »

Were you not here for the lengthy run of pages of anyone saying they liked the film getting crapped on? As if we had written it & were to blame?
This is the weirdest most aggressive and consistently negative forum I’m on when it comes to Star Wars. There isn’t even a ‘here’s what I did like’ aspect to any post complaining about this film or sw generally. You get attacked for even being positive about it. That’s not martyrdom, it’s fact. Read back on any random page.

Way way more butthurt self entitled angry fanbois screaming about TLJ didn’t meet their demands and expectations than those liking it. childish behaviour in most cases, yet somehow if you like it you’re a deluded blinkered Fanboi.

It’s all rather toxic if you can’t even talk about a film without getting abuse for liking it.

If I can use a few film analogies as the preeminent Star Wars fanboy in this forum you've "escalated" things Batman style and inspired a polar opposite in "oh so serious" TonyEH. Or as Snoke himself said Darkness rises and light to meet it. Not saying that either you or Tony are this threads Kylo just that extremes generally beget their opposite.

To use another analogy you and Tony are like Elias and Barnes in Platoon and we're all Charlie Sheen trying to decide who's methods/opinions we agree with .

That said we're all argumentative gobsheens, so there's more then enough blame to go around.

*cue Adagio for Strings

PhiloCypher

Drumpot wrote: »

Most of your responses to my “gripes” with TESB ended with “big deal”?! That’s exactly how many people feel about the “gripes” being said about TLJ. People can choose to take a “big deal” approach to the Disney movies but for some reason they are applying a different set of rules to what they want or expect.

It’s not attacking people’s opinions, it’s challanging the reasons they give as to why TLJ didn’t meet their expectations. I don’t think TLJ is flawless by any stretch. My major issue with the newer movies is that I don’t care much for the characters and it lacks the charm of the originals. I actually think rogue one had more charming characters then the ones we have gotten in the new trilogy.

Was it not TonyEH who was rebutting your TESB "gripes" ?

Tony EH

Conall Cernach wrote: »

On the attack on Hoth:
Vader knowing they were on Hoth could have been due to some Force premonition or vision or some such or maybe once he had a potential location he could use a sort of narrow beam force search to confirm it. Or maybe combining the droids report with it being destroyed he was able to "trust his feelings" and make an educated guess. Maybe he's been doing that for the 3 years between ANH and TESB just sending the Imperial fleet off round the galaxy every time one of the droids reports anything suspicious.

Or maybe Vader just put 2 and 2 together? They sent probe droids down to lots of planets in the system. One of them finds an inhabited base on and unihabited planet and then gets attacked and blown up.

You don't need to be a genius or a jedi.

There's nothing at odds in that scene at all.

Conall Cernach wrote: »

The AT-ATs don't seem particularly practical given that repulsor lift technology seems cheap and efficient. But they are intimidating so maybe that's the thinking behind them. They're the equivalent of those giant panzers the Nazis put into development just before the end of WW2.

The clue to their inclusion is in the name. They're All Terrain Attack Transports.

Despite being cumbersome, they have the ability to traverese the worst of land and conditions. Plus when they get there, they can seriously fuck shit up.

Perhaps "repulsor lift tech" isn't that good over snow?

Conall Cernach wrote: »

It does seem remiss of the Empire not to have some aerial backup for their land assault. Larger starships couldn't get too close due to the ion cannon presumably.

This is down to a real world physical constraint that the filmakers faced. They just couldn't put loads of fighters in the air as well as film the ground battle. With the tech available in 1980, it would have looked crap. They had an awful time filming the speeders against the snow background alone. If CGI had existed in 1980, there probably would have been an Imperial aerial assault on Hoth too.

Tony EH

Drumpot wrote: »

I can accept all these explanations and not go down a rabbit hole dissecting your points because I just love the OT's and don't see the benefit of being hyper critical.

Just to clarify, I wasn't picking TESB apart, my point was that some people are not willing to offer the same benefit of the doubt for the newer SW movies and default to the negative on any aspect of the newer movies that is debatable.

What "benefit of doubt" are you looking for?

There are a myriad of problems with both 'The Force Awakens' and 'The Last Jedi', that cannot be just waved away, no matter how people try.

Some people are discussing those, with the ramifications the have on the broader story and simpy stating "but the OT..." doesn't negate them in any way, especially when those "but the OT..." nitpicks are explained so easily and the problems with the sequels aren't.

Saruhashi

Drumpot wrote: »

I can accept all these explanations and not go down a rabbit hole dissecting your points because I just love the OT's and don't see the benefit of being hyper critical.

Just to clarify, I wasn't picking TESB apart, my point was that some people are not willing to offer the same benefit of the doubt for the newer SW movies and default to the negative on any aspect of the newer movies that is debatable.

The thing is that I don't feel like you are comparing like for like when you point out problems in the originals vs problems in the new ones.

So we don't even agree that they are fair comparisons.

I don't honestly believe that Leia using the force to fly through space like Superman is on a par with anything in the OT in terms of how dumb it was.

I think that the Hyperspace Kamikaze moment was more objectionable than anything in the originals.

I thought the squandering of Finn and Poe, the snails pace development of Kylo, the sheer overpowered nature of Rey and the handling of Luke, Leia and Han was worse than anything in the OT.

The plot surrounding the First Order chasing the Resistance in TLJ is just, I think, very dull. I didn't like the Canto Bight "side quest" AT ALL and I don't know how I can properly express that without a monster wall of text (apparently my posts are too long and boring as it is).

I understand that none of this is objective anyway but in my subjective view the issues you have pointed out in ESB are not comparable to the issues in TLJ.

If you think they are objectively comparable then I have to just say I don't agree at all.

Let's say I wasn't willing to give ESB the benefit of the doubt and I ripped into it. Even then, upon watching TLJ my opinion would be "I thought ESB was awful but this one is somehow even more awful than that".

Straight out the gate I don't agree that the comparisons are like for like anyway.

Tony EH

Drumpot wrote: »

Most of your responses to my “gripes” with TESB ended with “big deal”?! That’s exactly how many people feel about the “gripes” being said about TLJ. People can choose to take a “big deal” approach to the Disney movies but for some reason they are applying a different set of rules to what they want or expect.

If "big deal" is all you took from that post, then you weren't reading it close enough.

Drumpot wrote: »

It’s not attacking people’s opinions, it’s challanging the reasons they give as to why TLJ didn’t meet their expectations. I don’t think TLJ is flawless by any stretch. My major issue with the newer movies is that I don’t care much for the characters and it lacks the charm of the originals. I actually think rogue one had more charming characters then the ones we have gotten in the new trilogy.

The thing is though, you aren't challenging those reasons. You're just reducing them down to "ranting" and "moaning" or whatever. Then you try and bring up nonexistent issues with a film from the classics and claim that people who are critical of the sequels view the originals through rose tinted glasses, which isn't actually true in most cases.

That's not a challenge.

So far, I've yet to see any satisfactory answers (not that answers have to be forthcoming mind you) to any of the issues raised by numerous people across different fora. And the issues are pretty uniform as well.

Frankly, most fans of the longer story are willing to have an explanation for the..."odd"...parts of that story, Ewoks = murder bears, Luke's training = three years of self teaching, etc. But, the issues with the sequels aren't being addressed in even a flimsy way.

I'd share your lack of care about the sequel's characters - even where the OT crowd are used. They don't make a bit of sense, under the shallowest of scrutiny, and are very poorly written. Which is one of the biggest failings of these new films. And yes, the 'Rogue One' characters felt real, or at least real enough. They weren't quiptastic, one-liner spewing, hollywood tropes. They felt like people who were at war, albeit a fantasy war in galaxy far far away.

Relikk

Tony EH wrote: »

The clue to their inclusion is in the name. They're All Terrain Attack Transports.

Despite being cumbersome, they have the ability to traverese the worst of land and conditions. Plus when they get there, they can seriously fuck shit up.

This masterpiece of a scene alone told me all I needed to know about AT-AT's...

pixelburp

AT ATs look the way they do because they look cool, IIRC because Lucas & Co wanted imperial war elephants; backwards rationalisation about practicality seems a bit redundant. Star Wars has always had an aesthetics-first driven design. If AT ATs were practical, they'd have tracks or hovercraft style tech.

Saruhashi

I saw in the Han Solo thread pictures of some of the new figures.

Got me thinking.

Why are there Snowtroopers on Crait?

Kylo, Finn, Rose etc and the resistance folks are just wearing their regular gear but the First Order is strolling in with Snowtroopers.

Or are those just the helmets you wear for white planets? Maybe they help with glare or something?

Now THIS is where a "what about the OT, there's no guard-rails on the death star" response would be appropriate, I think.

david75

Saruhashi wrote: »

I saw in the Han Solo thread pictures of some of the new figures.

Got me thinking.

Why are there Snowtroopers on Crait?

Kylo, Finn, Rose etc and the resistance folks are just wearing their regular gear but the First Order is strolling in with Snowtroopers.

Or are those just the helmets you wear for white planets? Maybe they help with glare or something?

Now THIS is where a "what about the OT, there's no guard-rails on the death star" response would be appropriate, I think.

Think it’s just a similar environment or similar gear but they might be desert troops too, I don’t pay much attention to the action figures. They usually tell you exactly what they are.

Saruhashi

david75 wrote: »

Think it’s just a similar environment or similar gear but they might be desert troops too, I don’t pay much attention to the action figures. They usually tell you exactly what they are.

They do indeed:

Snowtroopers were a variant of the stormtrooper used by the First Order approximately thirty years after the Battle of Endor. The latest generation of cold weather assault stormtroopers, snowtroopers wore advanced insulated armor and helmets that reduced the glare of icy terrain. They wore insulated gloves with adjustable heating units. Their body armor also had heating controls, and they wore an insulated belt kama.

Many of them were on Starkiller Base when it was attacked by the Resistance in 34 ABY.

Snowtroopers were also involved in the Battle of Crait shortly thereafter. Although Crait was only superficially a snowy planet due to the white dust obscuring red crystals on the ground, it nonetheless had similar enough properties to necessitate their deployment in the battle.

david75

Thanks. Can never decide if they look cool or crap. The old action figure Conor posted in the Solo thread looks really cool. Think they’re the guys escorting Vader into echo base? They definitely look cool. The new ones, I’m not sure.

PhiloCypher

How many stormtroperating variants are there .

Stormtroopers, Snow Troopers, Desert Troopers, Death Trooper ,Speeder Bike guys

Am I missing any ?

david75

PhiloCypher wrote: »

How many stormtroperating variants are there .

Stormtroopers, Snow Troopers, Desert Troopers, Death Trooper ,Speeder Bike guys

Am I missing any ?

Loads n loads Phillo. Just found out yesterday the troops with the big tank carrying the kyber crystals in Rogue one were a totally different type of trooper. I never noticed. They look deadly.

It’s a great question I’ll have a goo for an answer

david75

This is the one. It’s not even out for a couple of months. The tank too. These from the hasbro toy fair yesterday. Looks deadly. Glad I’m not a collector.

david75

PhiloCypher wrote: »

How many stormtroperating variants are there .

Stormtroopers, Snow Troopers, Desert Troopers, Death Trooper ,Speeder Bike guys

Am I missing any ?

Wow. Loads. Fvckloads.
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Stormtrooper_variants

Burgo

david75 wrote: »

Wow. Loads. Fvckloads.
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Stormtrooper_variants

Not many of those are canon anymore!

david75

Oh yeah. Forgot about that.
I wonder if it’s officially answered?

Burgo

david75 wrote: »

Oh yeah. Forgot about that.
I wonder if it’s officially answered?

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Stormtrooper
under Specialized stormtroopers lists all the canon ones I presume.
Honestly more there than I thought.

david75

Yeah I’d say there’s still loads n loads. They’ll keep making new variations too as the films go by. I think the TIE pilots in both the ot and new films are the coolest.

Oafley Jones

Finally got to see this at what was probably the second last showing. Found it to be an absolute slog. I didn’t care much for TFA but at least I wasnt willing it to end. I just feel that the set of characters they’ve got aren’t compelling and that they’ve no idea of what do with them, where they’re going or how their threads should come together. There’s also a laziness to the writing that drives me mad eg The obviously arbitrary limitations of the Star Destroyers.

david75

Oafley Jones wrote: »

Finally got to see this at what was probably the second last showing. Found it to be an absolute slog. I didn’t care much for TFA but at least I wasnt willing it to end. I just feel that the set of characters they’ve got aren’t compelling and that they’ve no idea of what do with them, where they’re going or how their threads should come together. There’s also a laziness to the writing that drives me mad eg The obviously arbitrary limitations of the Star Destroyers.

Thought it was gone and all. You must have had the Cinema to yourself?!

Arne_Saknussem

kirk buttercup

Just a question for all the people that absolutely hated it , since the original trilogy are there any you actually liked ? if not do you think the franchise will be completely ruined by what has come out since? would you prefer they did movies from another timeline ? in your opinion what would you actually like to see ? just wondering feel free to ignore.

Relikk

I didn't "hate" TLJ, but there are some things in there I will never like with regards to Luke, Canto Bight, the humour (mom jokes in Star Wars :rolleyes:), and the Holdo/Poe situation. The Force Awakens was an A New Hope rehash, there's no denying it, but it was a good Star Wars movie in the spirit of the original trilogy. The acting was great, Kylo Ren is amazing and the humour is more like the OT, probably because of Kasdan's input. The same goes for Rogue One, although for me, R1 is a far superior movie to TFA.

The prequels however... They had the potential to be great, but poor acting, directing, scripts, Jar Jar and the over reliance of CGI has soured them.

tigger123

One of the few things I did enjoy about the prequels was that it gave us Vader's back story. It's cack handed, but I'm still glad we have that at least. I feel the prequels have added to the overall SW experience.

Love all the new stuff. And liking the look of Solo.

Hector Savage

kirk buttercup wrote: »

Just a question for all the people that absolutely hated it , since the original trilogy are there any you actually liked ? if not do you think the franchise will be completely ruined by what has come out since? would you prefer they did movies from another timeline ? in your opinion what would you actually like to see ? just wondering feel free to ignore.

Like Relikk said I didn't hate TLJ either, it was a good film, but there
was just some things unforgivable for me.

Mary Poppins
Canto Bight
Rose
Finn (after being a fantastic character in TFA)
Snoke
Luke milking the Skellig Walrus .. like WTF!!

And I did love TFA ... in fact I can't find anything about that film I'd change ..