|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Dec 22, 2015 22:46:08 GMT -5
Saw this yesterday and thought it was OK/nothing special. I was passionate about Star Wars as a kid, but for some reason lost interest over time. Still, a couple of friends asked me to go and...
I don't know - I thought, if anything, it'd be interesting to see the old cast again, but it was Finn and Rey who I got a kick out of and I don't know if Harrison Ford was just phoning it in or if he was instructed to be nothing but tired and wearied, but... yeah, Han Solo and Princess Leia were just... bland. In the interest of full disclosure though, since learning he's a big Polanski defender, I don't like Ford as a human being and that may have affected my opinion to an extent, but at the same time, I genuinely can't remember a thing he did or said that didn't sound like it was written with the direction 'SOLO LETS OUT A WEARIED SIGH' before every line. Even lines which demanded enthusiasm - ie. "I like this gun!" - sounded flat. Maybe Ford was giving it his all and the director kept shouting "Remember - you're 73 years old, constantly tired, and the Grim Reaper is just waiting for you to take your next nap! Everything is bland to you! Food! Sex! Life! BLAND! Now let's take that scene again!"
I liked Ren a lot though thought the character lost a step once the helmet came off. I think what appealed to me most about Darth Vader was that he was a character whose first move was to intimidate the hell out of you and then follow that up with something that made his intimidation seem like an act of humbleness. Ren's introduction made it clear that he was going to follow the same pattern. That he was acting alongside a General who stood up to him therefore not only suggested a greater ruthlessness to come on Ren's part, but it also made this General guy look like a serious threat. And who was that giant bald guy they answered to? Man, that guy had presence!
Didn't like the attempts at humour. I think the first "joke" was when that pilot commented on how he couldn't understand Ren because of his voice modulator. I generally cringe at meta-textual humour like that since it points out flaws that shouldn't be perceivable within the context of the film and because it was a joke that came at the expense of a guy who was supposed to be a serious threat. Bits like Finn and Rey's "You were incredible!" "I was incredible, no you were incredible!" "No you were!" seemed as if they were just improvised on the day.
Kind of ticked about the bait and switch - yes, R2D2 was in it, but you'll have to wait for the next film if you want to see him do anything. Luke Skywalker's here, but makes his appearance in the last 15 seconds of film. Chewbacca was in the background too much and C-3P0 shows up - actually, with perfect timing - there was a moment of humour I liked after all - and then just joins in on background group scenes.
I think in short, for it to have been a great movie, it would either have had to have been able to stand on its own as a film or use previous characters/ideas as more than a sentimental call out.
Does any of what I just spewed out make sense?
|
|
|
|
Post by Paste Pot Paul on Dec 23, 2015 2:05:39 GMT -5
Well I really liked it, and cant help but feel that a whole lot of folk expect too damn much from a SW movie. Its pulp man, always was, so much of what Lucas did originally was directly inspired by old pulpy SF, books, movies and serials. It seems to me that all the folk who "expected more' and were after something "groundbreaking" forget they're watching Space Opera. SF it aint, you want realism watch The Martian, you want deep and meaningful watch Adam Sandler...er...Shakespeare, but you're not going to get them here. Its entertainment, pure and simple. Hell what the %$#& else are you guys expecting to see in there.
Like you said Shax, its disheartening to want to share your high, but theres just so much venom.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dizzy D on Dec 23, 2015 3:25:46 GMT -5
I liked it already, but the more I think about it, the more I like it. It has definitely surpassed Return of the Jedi now on my list of favourites (which apart from the Luke/Vader moments, tends to be a bit of a mess of a movie and mostly is cashing the checks that ESB and ANH wrote).
The prequels: there are few parts I like in the prequels. Ian McDiarmid as Palpatine is one thing (who is chewing the scenery in ROTS but is at least enjoying himself) and Ewan McGregor should receive some award for managing to put in a good performance despite the terrible writing and directing.
I'm looking forward to VIII, but I'm worried about IX. Rian Johnson is a great director, but Colin Trevorrow has not done anything I've liked yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Gordon Scratch on Dec 23, 2015 12:13:57 GMT -5
Its entertainment, pure and simple. Hell what the %$#& else are you guys expecting to see in there. Like you said Shax, its disheartening to want to share your high, but theres just so much venom. I believe I opened my criticism with "i expected to be entertained, and sadly wasn't, quite the contrary". So sure, this shouldn't be judged withthe same grill of analysis as a Hard SF thriller or a drama, but Adama Sandler movies also are not supposed to be anything else but entertainment, that doesn't absolves them of crimes against cinema, right? Indiana Jones and A new Hope are good entertainement flicks, self contained, and their direct sequels expended the diegesis and somewhat changed the initial paradigm a little. This didn't, hence my disapointment, plus my annoyance with the annoyingly omnipresent score, lack of epicness ("let's introduce a new death star, make it 10 times bigger, clumsyly put the spotlight on that fact to the audience, and destroy it 20 mn after introducing its menace...), lack of drama in the new charcters, etc. After having seen this, I could just think, "ah, it wasn't great, but it wasn't that bad...". But, hey, it's Star Wars, the current biggest franchise in the world, the producers have been building momentum for ages now, of course I was gonna expect more than average space opera : I wasn't a fan of the original trilogy as a kid, but I'd be lying if those movies didn't root themselves into my young imagination, and probably had a part in my interest of all this culture we here thrive to discuss. I fail to see how todays kids will be more inspired by this then with anything already there star wars wise. How was what we just saw cooler than Speed Racer or Guardians Of The Galaxy for a kid of today? How was that cooler than a Star Wars LEGO ship for Christmas the past 4 years, or whichever current videogame htat kids love these days? So sure, one can enjoy the moment, I can see how one would, but if I think for a a minute about the potential legacy of that movie, I'm sorry to say but I'll just forget about this one hoping that Rian Johnson will give us the Star Wars movie I think we deserve. |
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Dec 23, 2015 13:19:41 GMT -5
I think a lot of us go through a period in our 20's where the things we loved as kids start to lose their luster when held up to too much jaded, adult scrutiny. I'm 38 now, and I'm slowly getting to the point where I can enjoy those old things like I used to. I think it's impossible to be awed by most special effects nowadays like we all were when we first saw Star Wars back in the late 70's and early 80's. CGI is everywhere, so we've come to expect it as a norm. There was nothing in the new Star Wars film, as good as it was, that we haven't seen before at this point. I think the filmmakers understand this and wisely gave us a bit of well intentioned nostalgia to prep us for the overall tone of the new series. I'm fine with this and I'm at peace that we'll never see the ideal prequels/sequels that I had in my head all those years pre-1999.
I think the next "evolution" of the CGI blockbuster is not in the application of the CGI itself, but in the serious and depth of the material. I think once we get the point where we can have a 12 part series with the production values of The Lord of the Rings, we'll start to get the level of character development and nuance that we still only fined in the best fantasy and science fiction novels, but with the gloss and glitter to rival those crowed pleasing films.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pharozonk on Dec 23, 2015 15:27:26 GMT -5
Does any of what I just spewed out make sense?
I felt pretty much the same way as you. It's fun, but nothing more. |
|
|
|
Post by The Captain on Dec 23, 2015 17:10:47 GMT -5
Just saw it this afternoon. It wasn't bad, and I would give it 3.5 out of 5.
I think part if the problem for me is that I didn't feel any kind of emotional connection to it. While I felt like I should see the movie, I didn't feel any level of overwhelming excitement about it.
Conversely, I've probably watched the Civil War trailer a dozen times and have already made plans to take opening day off from work so I can get at least one if not two showings in that afternoon. That is a movie I am legitimately excited about.
|
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Dec 23, 2015 17:11:26 GMT -5
Hey Shaxper, a negative review is not meant to undermine your satisfaction with this movie, it really doesn't need to be antagonistic  I agree the prequels were a mess, but at least they tried to build this world further. FMPOV, this new movie does no such thing, which really is an issue as in the end, you get nothing more then (in my opinion clumsy) fan service. And I really felt the plot had no groove : I can't imagine a kid of today's mind being set on fire by this. There was so much potential, but they went the safest and therefore blandest road. It's probably not the worst film ever, but the potential was so big that the let down feels gigantic. It actually made me sad/angry. How could this be exciting as it's a remake of the first film and adds nothing to the mythology but a two new characters, much less interesting ones then Luke and Han in the first movie. In this movie they did exactly what you had an issue with in the prequels : instead of showing us those characters tragedy, htey told us it...  But the greatest sin of all in this new movie is the lack of "Wow!", either visualy or storywise. Even his second and deeply flawed Star Trek had more of this in both departments... I think you're wrong about kids.. my teenager LOVED it, and she's reported most of the kids at school she knows did also. She actually was wowed.. much more so than I (or she) expected. Small sample, but still |
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Gordon Scratch on Dec 23, 2015 17:15:22 GMT -5
Well, there you go . But was she really more wowed by it than anything else in the past 12 months? |
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Gordon Scratch on Dec 23, 2015 17:24:09 GMT -5
I think a lot of us go through a period in our 20's where the things we loved as kids start to lose their luster when held up to too much jaded, adult scrutiny. I'm 38 now, and I'm slowly getting to the point where I can enjoy those old things like I used to. I think it's impossible to be awed by most special effects nowadays like we all were when we first saw Star Wars back in the late 70's and early 80's. CGI is everywhere, so we've come to expect it as a norm. There was nothing in the new Star Wars film, as good as it was, that we haven't seen before at this point. I think the filmmakers understand this and wisely gave us a bit of well intentioned nostalgia to prep us for the overall tone of the new series. I'm fine with this and I'm at peace that we'll never see the ideal prequels/sequels that I had in my head all those years pre-1999. I think the next "evolution" of the CGI blockbuster is not in the application of the CGI itself, but in the serious and depth of the material. I think once we get the point where we can have a 12 part series with the production values of The Lord of the Rings, we'll start to get the level of character development and nuance that we still only fined in the best fantasy and science fiction novels, but with the gloss and glitter to rival those crowed pleasing films. I'm 38 as well, so for me, it would be more like warming up to the prequels, hahaha. But hey, as I said, I never was the bigest Star Wars fan anyways, I just aknowledge their influence on my imagination more than their deep qualities or lack of. Of course we now expect the current special effects to run so smoothly that we kind of forget about them. But I tell you, a baroque and epic battle on screen isn't that much about special effects as about the directorial skills, ask John Millius, McTiernan or Spielberg. I kinda agree with your second intuition, as Ryan Johnson has demonstrated depth and seriousness in all of his previous three movies, even a strong interest in SFX, but when JJ Abrahams and Josh Whedon are given the biggest budgets, I'm quite sleptical... I hope you're right though |
|
|
|
Post by dupersuper on Dec 23, 2015 20:30:53 GMT -5
What's with all the 38 year olds here?
This 38 year old thought it was awesome, for the record. He may even have the Williams theme stuck in his head as he types this...
|
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Gordon Scratch on Dec 23, 2015 23:40:01 GMT -5
We're all punk babies, 1977, no future!
|
|
|
|
Post by dupersuper on Dec 23, 2015 23:46:55 GMT -5
Within a year of my birth: Star Wars, Star Trek the Motion Picture, Superman the movie: the future actually looked rather bright...
|
|
|
|
Post by crazyoldhermit on Dec 24, 2015 0:01:05 GMT -5
Well I really liked it, and cant help but feel that a whole lot of folk expect too damn much from a SW movie. Its pulp man, always was, so much of what Lucas did originally was directly inspired by old pulpy SF, books, movies and serials. It seems to me that all the folk who "expected more' and were after something "groundbreaking" forget they're watching Space Opera. SF it aint, you want realism watch The Martian, you want deep and meaningful watch Adam Sandler...er...Shakespeare, but you're not going to get them here. Its entertainment, pure and simple. Hell what the %$#& else are you guys expecting to see in there. Like you said Shax, its disheartening to want to share your high, but theres just so much venom. Well for me at least the problem is that Star Wars hasn't been just any old pulp. It was really really good pulp. And when people were saying that the movie was based a lot on A New Hope that got me really excited, because whats so great about the original is how simple and elegant it is. The conflicts are simple, the characters are little more than archetypes and the movie really doesn't try to break any new ground in terms of storytelling. It's just a really good old fashioned adventure story that hits all the right beats. And what bugs me about The Force Awakens is that it isn't that. It feels like it's trying to be more of a character drama while delivering the ball numbing mindless action that the fanboys crave (to quote Mr Plinkett). I watched this movie and couldn't help but this " This is what people wanted?" It's really changed my perspective on how people look at Star Wars. I thought the prequels were hated for being poorly acted passionless movies that made no sense. I guess they were just hated for not having enough TIE fighters and X-Wings. Is that really what people have been getting out of Star Wars for the last forty years? Is Star Wars a pop culture icon because of things blowing up? That just bums me out. |
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,202 
|
Post by Confessor on Dec 24, 2015 14:22:19 GMT -5
Not snarky at all. Honestly, it's been a very long time since I watched any of the prequels and I have no intention of ever doing so again, but as I recall, there was a whole lot that didn't make sense: Sorry for the delay in answering this, shax. I knew it'd be a fairly long post and I've just been so busy with Xmas stuff. Anyway, not to be a know-it-all smart arse, but in answer to your points... - who is taxing what, and why does the trade federation have a problem with this? Prior to the events of the first prequel movie, the Galactic Senate had introduced a tax on the free trade zones that were used by the Trade Federation and which were essential to their business. In retaliation and as a protest, the Federation -- which was the largest and most powerful trade company (they even had their own representative in the Senate) -- set up a blockade of the planet Naboo. As far as I know, Naboo was chosen as an example to other worlds and to the Senate because it was deemed a soft target, with a young and inexperienced Queen that would be easy to bully. Or so the Federation thought! Of course, as we know, the Federation were also being manipulated by Darth Sidious. - Why is the TRADE federation's solution to therefore shut down TRADE? Isn't that how they make their money? They were shutting off Naboo's trading to essentially starve the populace of various essential supplies, as an example to the rest of the galaxy and to the Senate of what would happen if the Senate didn't acquiesce to their demands to scrap the trade tax. As noted above, it was ostensibly a gesture -- two fingers up at the Senate, in protest of the taxation of the trade routes that the Federation made its money from. The blockade itself was an exercise in sabre rattling and almost an act of war, but of course, once the Federation invaded Naboo it was an act of war. - What goods is Amadalla's planet so desperately in need of that they can't handle an embargo for even a day? They look like they are living the lavish life on a fertile planet rich in water and natural resources, and they even have a pretty intense looking power generator. As noted above, it wasn't the length of the embargo, so much as the affront to their sovereignty that it represented. That goes doubly for when the Federation then escalated the situation by invading, under instruction from Darth Sidious, of course. - How do you create a blockade around an entire planet anyway? Ha! Well, it's obviously pretty hard to do that, as we see when Amidala's ship manages to slip past the blockade. - Why does the trade federation have a full fledged military? Presumably to protect its financial interests and its trade routes. As noted above, the Trade Federation was the biggest and most powerful of all the various trading bodies in the galaxy and, as previously stated, they even had their own representative in the Senate. So having a miltary, in this case a droid army, isn't such a stretch. - Why are Jedi called in to settle a trade dispute? Because Chancellor Valorum was practicing bully boy politics, basically. He sent the Jedi to intimidate the Trade Federation into negotiating a treaty, rather than go through the proper political procedures. That decision was questionable in a galactic democracy, but one of the chief Neimoidians in The Phantom Menace notes that the Jedi are "here to force a settlement." Qui-Gon Jinn himself openly says to Obi-Wan Kenobi that in his experience "these Federation types are cowards" and that "the negotiations will be short." - Why do high ranking trade federation people accept some mysterious thug's orders to kill the two Jedi who come to broker the deal without any sort of provocation? In short, greed. Darth Sidious had promised the heads of the Federation increased power and influence in the Senate, once he had destroyed the Jedi order and moved Senator Palpatine into the Chancellor's chair (the Nimoidians were unaware that Sidious and Palpatine were the same person). |
|
But the greatest sin of all in this new movie is the lack of "Wow!", either visualy or storywise. Even his second and deeply flawed Star Trek had more of this in both departments...
