ThatStupidLion
Member
if the rumor is "false" he might still be doing a trilogy.... it'll just be for Disney+ side story fodder I bet. possibly animated.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Victory! Rian Johnson will no longer destroy more Star Wars (Mod Edit: Confirmed False)
- Thread starter pramod
- Start date
MilkyJoe
Member
Dude, he fucked the franchise into a tree. They just sacked Kiri Hart but claimed she's now a consultant, she's not, she's fired, Lucasfilm are not going to accept they made a mistake, Hollywood is too woke for that.
Doom85
Member
The first post literally said "Disney listened to the true fans". Like, really? My least favorite movie ever is Silent Hill Revelations yet even if someone liked it I'm not so arrogant and mean to suggest they're not a "true fan" or some nonsense like that. It's not exactly showing confidence in their opinion if they feel they have to mock, bash, and sometimes basically threaten fans who DARED to enjoy the movie.
There's been quite a few people on Gaf who have made it clear their hostility for not just the movie itself but those who liked it. I remember the condescending posts on a SW-related thread a while back hearing the likes of, "anyone who likes it clearly turned their brain off" or "only Disney-worshippers and/or SJW-losers liked this movie". Then again, this didn't exactly start with this film, when 7 came out tons of people started saying, "oh, you're just hyped we finally got a new film and you don't actually like it, you'll realize it's not that good eventually." Ah, nothing screams like a nice, considerate person than one saying that people are too ignorant to know how they genuinely feel about something. Well, it's been over three years since 7 came out, but don't worry, I'm "sure" I'll just randomly start disliking the film all of a sudden.....
S
slugbahr
Unconfirmed Member
What's with the hard-on for the word 'toxicity'?
Has society forgotten 'negativity'? Or is it felt to be overused or something - a new word for the same meaning is needed?
Or is it that some feel they need to try to invoke something a bit more sinister is going on.
Has society forgotten 'negativity'? Or is it felt to be overused or something - a new word for the same meaning is needed?
Or is it that some feel they need to try to invoke something a bit more sinister is going on.
Punished Miku
Member
As much as I think he destroyed Star Wars with TLJ, I actually don't have any stance on his new trilogy project. Why? Because I have no clue what it even is. And if it's set in an entirely new galaxy, then there really isn't anything tied to it to mess up. It's a new thing and it'll be good or bad on its own merits.
I guess we'll see if it sucks.
I guess we'll see if it sucks.
Fbh
Member
Damn, so it was fake ?.
Guess this just means I can continue to not care about Star Wars
Sure it's impossible to predict the future and no one can say for sure that his trilogy will suck.
Personally though, while I was disappointed that it killed every interesting plot point made by the force awakens, ultimately I disliked the last jedi not because it "ruined" any previous work but simply because it was a really boring and really badly written movie.
So the idea of giving this guy an entire trilogy doesn't generate a lot of confidence
Guess this just means I can continue to not care about Star Wars
Sure it's impossible to predict the future and no one can say for sure that his trilogy will suck.
Personally though, while I was disappointed that it killed every interesting plot point made by the force awakens, ultimately I disliked the last jedi not because it "ruined" any previous work but simply because it was a really boring and really badly written movie.
So the idea of giving this guy an entire trilogy doesn't generate a lot of confidence
Last edited:
Punished Miku
Member
Fbh
Member
I guess time will tell.
At some point I would have agreed with you that him still having a job means his idea shows potential. But Disney has made so many missteps with SW that I don't trust their judgement either.
Looper was ok but I didn't find it to be as good as people were saying it was. It's one of those movies I had fun watching once but don't feel like I ever need to see again
#Phonepunk#
Banned
his compelling idea is rehashing OT bits and selling them in "new" and "bold" ways to the youth of the day. note how JJ gets dragged for TFA rehashing OT but RJ was successful at selling the same thing as "never before done" with TLJ. Disney knew they had little hope in creating anything actually new in this universe, so repackaging the IP they bought is of utmost importance.
feel like this is the main reason he is in. he proved you could shovel the same old shit on screen but sell it as daring and new. he proved you could dumb it down into Disney cartoon level of idiocy but as long as you shoot enough impressive prestige tv-style shots, people will fall over themselves to call it art.
feel like this is the main reason he is in. he proved you could shovel the same old shit on screen but sell it as daring and new. he proved you could dumb it down into Disney cartoon level of idiocy but as long as you shoot enough impressive prestige tv-style shots, people will fall over themselves to call it art.
Last edited:
sol_bad
Member
Sorry guys, I loved The Last Jedi and hope Rian gets to make his trilogy films.
I don't get the hate. I don't understand how people think he is "shoveling the same shit" when he has actually turned things on it's head.
No more chosen one re Anakin/Luke.
No more blood line related Jedi bullshit.
No more "there are only 2" for the dark side.
No more mysterious emperor type figure.
I hope JJ does not bring these things back.
I don't get the hate. I don't understand how people think he is "shoveling the same shit" when he has actually turned things on it's head.
No more chosen one re Anakin/Luke.
No more blood line related Jedi bullshit.
No more "there are only 2" for the dark side.
No more mysterious emperor type figure.
I hope JJ does not bring these things back.
gioGAF
Member
No one said you can't like it. However, TLJ is "shoveling the same shit" but worse. Nothing was turned on its head, it was just replaced with dumb shit.
No more chosen one re Anakin/Luke.
Instead we get automatically overpowered characters with zero explanation. Yes, before we had the tired trope of the chosen one, now we have the tired trope of the chosen one without any sort of explanation. You are the chosen one just because.
Verdict: Just as tired as before, except the chosen one is a random pick, yawn.
No more blood line related Jedi bullshit.
So TLJ removes blood line (for ONE character) and replaces it with nothing. Now instead of being a saga about a family, it is a story about a random newcomer. Okay, great, nothing new or exciting here. We went from being the chosen one because of lineage (Jon Snow from GoT), to just randomly being the chosen one (Neo from the Matrix). I would argue that what we got is less interesting and just as bullshit as the "blood line related Jedi bullshit".
Verdict: Still blood line related shit, Kylo is a Skywalker. Nothing new, random individuals with Jedi powers have been around forever. Rey instead of being Luke is just Anakin (undisclosed background). Yawn again...
No more "there are only 2" for the dark side.
Great, there are only 2 for the dark side becomes still 2 for the dark side but one of them is lamely removed in a no stakes contest in the middle of the trilogy.
Verdict: Rehash of The Phantom Menace's "surprise" Darth Maul death, and just as stupid and pointless. They still had 2, killing one of them in a way that isn't even as good as a prequel sequence is a disgrace. Another terrible point.
No more mysterious emperor type figure.
See above, TLJ still had the emperor figure, removing him mid-movie doesn't make things more interesting. Replacing him with nothing is also not very interesting.
Verdict: Another bad move, TLJ replaces the tired trope of the big bad, with guess what, they get rid of the big bad and the clearly less powerful second in command takes over. I guess the OT could have just killed the emperor during the first or second episode and left only Vader around, yeah, not really interesting.
You can like TLJ all you want, it doesn't change the fact that it is a TERRIBLE and UNORIGINAL movie. The plot is literally a slow speed car chase (basically a worse version of the sequence in Empire Strikes Back) with rehashed bits from throughout existing films, lore-breaking decisions to subvert your expectations and a heavy dose of identity politics to boot (automatically destroying the timelessness of the movie).
I don't have time to keep going, but:
Empire space chase > TLJ space chase
Hoth > Salt planet
Emperor, Vader, Luke throne room showdown > Snoke, Kylo, Rey throne room snorefest
And on, and on, and on...
PS. I am CONVINCED the good reviews for TLJ are straight up Disney strong-arming fools and activist reviewers.
Last edited:
Airola
Member
The only thing that bothered me with The Last Jedi was the chick ending the suicide strike by the black dude. I don't quite remember what it was all about though and what exactly annoyed me.
The rest of the movie was ok and average just like Star Wars movies usually are, with some good parts here and there. I thought Luke throwing the light saber was a good joke. And I never thought Luke died there in the astral projection scene. Or if he did die he's going to either be resurrected or continue being a spirit / projection. The casino thing was interesting too. Never thought it was pointless. Kylo killing the super bad guy was a good scene too, and a genuine surprise.
I don't get the hate.
The rest of the movie was ok and average just like Star Wars movies usually are, with some good parts here and there. I thought Luke throwing the light saber was a good joke. And I never thought Luke died there in the astral projection scene. Or if he did die he's going to either be resurrected or continue being a spirit / projection. The casino thing was interesting too. Never thought it was pointless. Kylo killing the super bad guy was a good scene too, and a genuine surprise.
I don't get the hate.
Lanrutcon
Member
Where's the rest of your opinion? If you wanted the old stuff removed, cool...but I'd like to see you defend what it was replaced with.
Taking the doughnuts out of my Krispy Kreme container and replacing them with painted dog turds also counts as turning things on its head.
S
slugbahr
Unconfirmed Member
TFA was about finding Luke, by finding a map he left behind in case he was needed. Within minutes of TLJ, we're told that was all a waste of time - he's changed his mind and will let the galaxy burn.
Poe is given shit for disobeying orders to take on the dreadnaught, even though if he hadn't they would've gotten annihilated after it followed them through hyperspace.
And that's after he cracks jokes with the FO, who should've blown him to smithereens if that was the attitude he was giving them.
A super slow chase in space, that goes on forever! Holy fuck, that sequence shouldn't be more than 5 minutes of screen time.
A fun little jaunt to a casino planet in the middle of that - to track down a super special dude that can do things no droid can. And actually, there's another dude who is better, who talks in an annoying manner for some reason, and they happen to randomly bump into him in the same place. Subtitles please!
Poe not told the 'plan' to limp to Hoth 2.0 because....ummmm.....like, he might be a spy, or something?? Or he's been demoted (for the dreadnaught thing!) so didn't need to know?? Ummm, who the fuck was left that was higher rank than him???
Sommec random new female leader sacrifices herself because droids can't pilot ships. Or autopilots?
Force video call - fuck off with that shit.
Force skill transfer/download/acquisition - see above.
Force lightning - from a fucking ghost. WHAT. THE. FUCK!!
A truly epic moment of sacrifice prevented because that's not how you beat the bad guys.
Would you like to know more?
Poe is given shit for disobeying orders to take on the dreadnaught, even though if he hadn't they would've gotten annihilated after it followed them through hyperspace.
And that's after he cracks jokes with the FO, who should've blown him to smithereens if that was the attitude he was giving them.
A super slow chase in space, that goes on forever! Holy fuck, that sequence shouldn't be more than 5 minutes of screen time.
A fun little jaunt to a casino planet in the middle of that - to track down a super special dude that can do things no droid can. And actually, there's another dude who is better, who talks in an annoying manner for some reason, and they happen to randomly bump into him in the same place. Subtitles please!
Poe not told the 'plan' to limp to Hoth 2.0 because....ummmm.....like, he might be a spy, or something?? Or he's been demoted (for the dreadnaught thing!) so didn't need to know?? Ummm, who the fuck was left that was higher rank than him???
Sommec random new female leader sacrifices herself because droids can't pilot ships. Or autopilots?
Force video call - fuck off with that shit.
Force skill transfer/download/acquisition - see above.
Force lightning - from a fucking ghost. WHAT. THE. FUCK!!
A truly epic moment of sacrifice prevented because that's not how you beat the bad guys.
Would you like to know more?
Javthusiast
Banned
^
These points are so obvious yet everyone is screaming we are just haters and misogynists for critisizing the quality of this shitty movie.
These points are so obvious yet everyone is screaming we are just haters and misogynists for critisizing the quality of this shitty movie.
Doom85
Member
Dunno about the latter, but the former isn't that far off for some of them given how they treat their subjective opinions as facts. Like, literally a few posts above we have the whole "you can like the movie but it's a FACT that it's bad" BS nonsense. No, stop, learn how opinions work, and at least try to act mature. It's a fact that it's a Star Wars movie. It's a fact that Kylo Ren's lightsaber blade is red. It's a fact that BB-8 is a droid. It's an opinion on the quality of the movie or any movie for that matter, and a person can scream at the world all they want but that will never change.
If a person is so confident about their opinion, why do they feel the need to so strongly rule out any validity of any opposing opinion? If their opinion is that so supposedly superior, they shouldn't feel this challenged by opposing viewpoints, and yet here we are.
I'm guessing this might shock some people, but there's people out there who didn't care for Empire Strikes Back. Now we could just be grown-up and respect their opinion and not act like they're factually wrong about a movie. OR we could act condescending and rude towards them over, again, a freakin' movie.
S
slugbahr
Unconfirmed Member
Ok, George ruined star wars.
Making Vader a whiny baby, as a teenager and adult, was fucking dumb.
R2 and 3po being in them made even less sense than DV being Luke's (and Leia's) dad considering how he acted towards them in IV.
Palpatine was RIGHT IN FRONT OF THEM!
The 'rule of two' is broken all the time - fuckin stupid idea anyway.
Jar jar - should've been behind it all.
But they've got away more going for them than TLJ. TLJ is a crap movie even without considering it as a star wars movie.
Doom85
Member
The Disney movies at the very least have characters who possess normal emotions and seem human. Obi-Wan was the only significant prequel character who didn't feel like he was written/acted by someone who doesn't know how simple social interaction works although for a lot of the actors I think it's Lucas' directing as plenty of the cast have done well in other films (Ian McDiarmid wasn't bad, he was a bit over-the-top but intentionally so and it worked mostly).
S
slugbahr
Unconfirmed Member
There are a few posts in here that could be.
Can you quote it specifically in order to counter the point it makes, instead of just casually dismissing it because 'everyone has an opinion'.
Thanks.
Doom85
Member
I was trying not to specifically call the person or others who have done so out, but since you asked I was specifically referring to post #61 with "You can like TLJ all you want, it doesn't change the fact that it is a TERRIBLE and UNORIGINAL movie." I'm also rolling my eyes at "PS. I am CONVINCED the good reviews for TLJ are straight up Disney strong-arming fools and activist reviewers." Like, didn't we make fun of DC fans who got that mad at the RT scores for Batman v Superman and just said critics were haters or Marvel fanboys? I mean, I enjoyed that movie despite it having some flaws but I didn't feel the need to downplay other's opinions or make conspiracy theories on their "real feelings". That should go for every movie, any person's opinion on a movie is just as valid as any other person's opinion.
Also, as I said in an earlier post, this whole thread started with a post saying this phrase: "Disney listened to the true fans." I mean, I've loved Star Wars most of my life. But hey, because my opinion doesn't match other people's opinions, I guess I'm not a "true fan".
MilkyJoe
Member
I have no idea what you are trying to say here
Doom85
Member
Re-reading it, I'm pretty sure the message is clear. People have been rude and condescending to others over the "unforgivable crime" of enjoying a movie.
MilkyJoe
Member
Oh.
Well normally I'd agree. But with the last jedi they don't know wtf they are talking about if they say it's a good movie.
S
slugbahr
Unconfirmed Member
You don't think a movie is supposed to have structure and make sense wrt to how it tells a story?
There aren't schools dedicated to the process of filmmaking?
That poster makes a counter argument to someone that is well thought out and details the objective situation for each point they made, and you dismiss it because it's "BS nonsense".
Yes, it's actually possible for bad things to be liked, or even loved. Doesn't mean they're good.
Reviewers apparently thought it was a great movie. A large amount of people who paid to watch it, and whose livelihoods don't depends on media access, are able to spot massive flaws in it, from a film structure perspective, that these so called professionals didn't, or couldn't. Yeah, i call shenanigans. And so will a ton of others.
"Disney listened to the true fans".
Sure, that's a massive generalisation, and an insult to fans like you who enjoyed it.
Big deal. That statement doesn't, or shouldn't, have any impact on how you enjoy your media and your opinions of it.
Again, you can like whatever you want. We all can.
Some things are objectively bad though.
Doom85
Member
And you both just made it worse. I'm curious, do you talk to your IRL friends like this if they enjoyed the movie? I certainly wouldn't have any patience for this sort of behavior. I have argued about this movie countless times for about six months after it came out before I realized I was wasting my time. Any time I listed my issues with their arguments, they would ignore most of my points, double down on what they already said, etc. You can't have a discussion with a person who has decided they are absolutely right and anyone who thinks otherwise is completely wrong. Why should I waste my time listing all of that when I know it's extremely likely the other person has already decided to disagree with everything I'm about to say? There's no point in it anymore.
And I'm tired of it. I wouldn't want to talk about ANY movie this much no matter how much I loved or hated it. Honest Trailers called the fanbase out on this, it's not fun to talk about Star Wars anymore because of the attitude so many people have had. Rude, condescending, elitist, stubborn, close-minded, in the most extreme cases threatening (I specifically was told to kill myself by one commenter on another site because as they said my life has no meaning if I need to convince myself this is a good film). Who wants to engage with people like this? Certainly not me.
"Some things are objectively bad though."
Yeah, stabbing yourself with a sword through your chest is objectively bad for your health. A movie's quality can't be objective. The definition of objective when talking about entertainment is: "expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations" You can't say any of your arguments prove the film is objectively bad especially since counter-arguments have existed for this film since its release. And try as you might, that last part of the definition applies to any film viewer, we all have those last parts. Merely being a Star Wars fan alone makes all of us incapable of being fully impartial and that's hardly the only thing that prevents anyone from having an "objective" opinion on the film. No one will ever be capable of determining the quality of a film "objectively" and I just can't understand how people who have any idea on how objectivity and subjectivity work could possibly think otherwise.
Oh, and if you think people should just get over being insulted and/or treated like their opinion is "objectively" wrong, how about a little experiment? If you've got a good friend or someone you're dating who likes a movie but you think it's "objectively" bad, why not say your arguments in basically the same way you do here? I'm SURE it'll go over well with them and they won't call you out for being both rude and misusing the word "objective" (guess I shouldn't be surprised, lord knows how many people totally misuse the word "literally").
I won't be responding to this specific thread anymore. I was hoping just MAYBE this thread could go better than previous instances, and yet here we are again.
And I'm tired of it. I wouldn't want to talk about ANY movie this much no matter how much I loved or hated it. Honest Trailers called the fanbase out on this, it's not fun to talk about Star Wars anymore because of the attitude so many people have had. Rude, condescending, elitist, stubborn, close-minded, in the most extreme cases threatening (I specifically was told to kill myself by one commenter on another site because as they said my life has no meaning if I need to convince myself this is a good film). Who wants to engage with people like this? Certainly not me.
"Some things are objectively bad though."
Yeah, stabbing yourself with a sword through your chest is objectively bad for your health. A movie's quality can't be objective. The definition of objective when talking about entertainment is: "expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations" You can't say any of your arguments prove the film is objectively bad especially since counter-arguments have existed for this film since its release. And try as you might, that last part of the definition applies to any film viewer, we all have those last parts. Merely being a Star Wars fan alone makes all of us incapable of being fully impartial and that's hardly the only thing that prevents anyone from having an "objective" opinion on the film. No one will ever be capable of determining the quality of a film "objectively" and I just can't understand how people who have any idea on how objectivity and subjectivity work could possibly think otherwise.
Oh, and if you think people should just get over being insulted and/or treated like their opinion is "objectively" wrong, how about a little experiment? If you've got a good friend or someone you're dating who likes a movie but you think it's "objectively" bad, why not say your arguments in basically the same way you do here? I'm SURE it'll go over well with them and they won't call you out for being both rude and misusing the word "objective" (guess I shouldn't be surprised, lord knows how many people totally misuse the word "literally").
I won't be responding to this specific thread anymore. I was hoping just MAYBE this thread could go better than previous instances, and yet here we are again.
S
slugbahr
Unconfirmed Member
Second movie of a planned trilogy.
That means the first feeds into the second, and the third concludes.
Three parts - beginning, middle and end.
Part 1 - TFA is about getting the map to find Luke.
Part 2 - within minutes (and for the rest of the movie) we're told that part 1 was a waste of time.
What the fuck do you not understand about that being objectively bad?
That means the first feeds into the second, and the third concludes.
Three parts - beginning, middle and end.
Part 1 - TFA is about getting the map to find Luke.
Part 2 - within minutes (and for the rest of the movie) we're told that part 1 was a waste of time.
What the fuck do you not understand about that being objectively bad?
S
slugbahr
Unconfirmed Member
And i also said, multiple times...
Enjoy whatever the fuck you want to! There's no crime in doing that.
Enjoy whatever the fuck you want to! There's no crime in doing that.
#Phonepunk#
Banned
who cares about what anyone says about "true fans"? honestly feel like at this point people should just ignore anybody who comments on what the "true fans" want. it's gatekeeping and takes the discussion off the movies themselves and into more identity based politics (ie you are wrong not cos of the movie but bc you are a poor consumer of movies) ditto for any "objectively bad" or "objectively wrong". goes for both haters and stans of TLJ.
look, this isn't rocket science. Star Wars just happened to be the biggest blockbuster of all time by tapping into universal themes that were archetypal and easy to understand. the idea that "you are watching the movie wrong" is stupid, this has never been some complicated series, and criticizing things you don't like have been a part of watching these movies since the OT.
obviously there is no objective value to these things. just people with opinions wanting to make theirs the dominant one. this isn't just a trend in SW, it's across the board online. feel like people need to have others agree with them in order to feel right. in truth, just think what you want, without relying on direction from others.
look, this isn't rocket science. Star Wars just happened to be the biggest blockbuster of all time by tapping into universal themes that were archetypal and easy to understand. the idea that "you are watching the movie wrong" is stupid, this has never been some complicated series, and criticizing things you don't like have been a part of watching these movies since the OT.
obviously there is no objective value to these things. just people with opinions wanting to make theirs the dominant one. this isn't just a trend in SW, it's across the board online. feel like people need to have others agree with them in order to feel right. in truth, just think what you want, without relying on direction from others.
Last edited:
DunDunDunpachi
Banned
So the rumor was a sith deception all along...
Nymphae
Banned
I don't see why it's so difficult to simply say that the movie has glaring flaws, even if you ultimately enjoyed the time you spent with it.
My major problem with it was a lack of respect from RJ - both for the source material and characters, and for the story that JJ had laid out for him. As I've mentioned here before, I feel like RJ valued subversion of any expectation above all else, and I believe that ruined his script, and potentially the trilogy.
My major problem with it was a lack of respect from RJ - both for the source material and characters, and for the story that JJ had laid out for him. As I've mentioned here before, I feel like RJ valued subversion of any expectation above all else, and I believe that ruined his script, and potentially the trilogy.
gioGAF
Member
I did not present my opinion as "supposedly superior", I presented my opinion along with supporting evidence. Your opinion is just that you liked the movie.
There are entire fields dedicated to evaluating written works and film. Yes, they are subjective to a degree, but in general, someone who has studied/trained in something is better at said activity than a novice. You can't just say you are good, you need to be evaluated by a group of your peers. This point is being made to illustrate that someone can say a movie or piece of literature is bad objectively, which doesn't mean someone else can't find said work entertaining / enjoyable.
It is within this metric that TLJ is "TERRIBLE and UNORIGINAL", not within each and every individual's own personal structure. I find Road House (1989), Over the Top (1987) and White Chicks (2004) enjoyable movies, but I can acknowledge that they are generally terrible and unoriginal works.
My "conspiracy" issue with the state of our media is a VALID concern. Powerful companies can and do punish "professional" critics for negative press/reviews. Your channel trashes EA's latest game? Guess what, you are blacklisted and won't be getting a copy of the next one ahead of time, hurting your ability to be relevant. This can cripple many outlets. While such a practice is not illegal, it does muddy the waters as to who and what you can believe.
Big "reviewers" either praised or gave positive reviews to TLJ. Most of the early access crowd followed suit, it wasn't until the smaller reviewers got to see the movie that problems started to emerge. Many media outlets are also not interested in the medium itself, they are interested in activism. As long as something aligns with their ideology, they will praise it.
How the fuck is Black Panther nominated for Best Picture? Activism. Hell, most movies touted by Hollywood have always been agenda driven, but it is getting worse.
Last edited:
Nymphae
Banned
Doom85
Member
Well, got to make a liar out of me and post again, but god I can't let this nonsense slide. Like, for real? Alright, where to begin:
gioGaf:
-"There are entire fields dedicated to evaluating written works and film. Yes, they are subjective to a degree, but in general, someone who has studied/trained in something is better at said activity than a novice. You can't just say you are good, you need to be evaluated by a group of your peers. This point is being made to illustrate that someone can say a movie or piece of literature is bad objectively, which doesn't mean someone else can't find said work entertaining / enjoyable."
And these supposedly "better trainer" filmviewers are a hive mind that agree on anything? Funny, that sounds bogus and false. The second a single one of them disagrees with another it rips apart this absurd notion that there is an "objective" way to look at a film. Someone could praise Pulp Fiction for its jumps between chronological events, another could criticize it calling it a gimmick that adds little and saying there's no suspense in following John Travolta's character in the final third of the movie if we know what happens to him already, and both are totally valid viewpoints.
-"My "conspiracy" issue with the state of our media is a VALID concern. Powerful companies can and do punish "professional" critics for negative press/reviews. Your channel trashes EA's latest game? Guess what, you are blacklisted and won't be getting a copy of the next one ahead of time, hurting your ability to be relevant. This can cripple many outlets. While such a practice is not illegal, it does muddy the waters as to who and what you can believe."
So EA being EA proves every film company is as corrupt? Kind of a stretch. Also, funny how months later 130 critics were willing to rate Solo "rotten"......
Nymphae; A) had to look up who Kyle Newman even was, not exactly a major career there that would make him a big target for speaking out, B) "I don't know anybody out here, maybe two people in my life, out of hundreds of people that I've talked to, who liked the movie." Well clearly a 1.3 billion dollar grossing film with a 45% liked audience rating on RT and a 7.2/10 on IMDb really strengthens that angle, I mean we all know general audiences are scared Disney will fire them.......or you know, NOT, and C) "100 percent. I can't name them, but yes, 100 percent." Well, this sounds totally valid. Sure, if it's real then yeah you can't name them, but also not naming them and letting those people be interviewed as well kinda doesn't help prove his point. Instead we're basically given, "uh, lots of people were forced to like it but everyone actually hates it! Can't name a single name but just trust me, a single small director!"
But ultimately, getting back to this "objective" nonsense, no review can be objective. You can claim to be impartial all you want, and I can rip that nonsense to shreds like a caffeinated kid ripping apart Christmas wrapping. Let's begin:
-do you like Star Wars movies? You're already less impartial.
-do you think movies should be a certain length whether not too short or long? You're already less impartial.
-do you think romance,suspense, drama, and/or action should be a significant focus of this film? Regardless of how you answer, you're already less impartial.
-do you think exposition can quickly become overused and it's better to let the audience figure most things out, or do think things should be significantly explained to reduce the possibility of plot holes and not confuse the audience? Again, no matter how you answer, you're already less impartial
-does humor enhance the experience or distract? Again, doesn't matter, you're already less impartial
I could go on, but let's really drive in the final nail of this coffin.
What is the purposes of a movie? To entertain. To make us think. To make us look at something a new way. To deliver a message. To make us laugh. To make us cry. To make us afraid. To make us want to cheer for the protagonists. To surprise us when things don't go where we thought they would. Etc. Etc. Etc.
That destroys the idea of any objectivity. If somebody says a film made them do any number of things, you cannot disprove that at all, that is their personal experience of the film and that cannot be dismissed with a simple "but that only means you enjoyed it, the film is still objectively bad". How can a film be objectively bad if it's accomplishing many of these factors to certain filmviewers? THAT IS A CONTRADICTORY STATEMENT. A film that is completely succeeding in accomplishing what it set out to do cannot be objectively bad in the eyes of those particular filmviewers, and no matter how desperately you try, you can never disprove this.
You mention White Chicks which is a comedy. If White Chicks made somebody laugh a ton which is what its primary purpose is, then that person has a valid viewpoint that is a funny movie therefore a good movie in their eyes because it accomplished its primary objective. NOTHING YOU SAY CAN DISPROVE THAT NO MATTER HOW HARD YOU TRY. You don't control how other people feel or view the quality of things, JUST STOP.
Any film critic who expects to be taken seriously would never claim a film is objectively bad because it completely misuses the definition of the word and is so easily disproven. And if they really want to die on that hill, maybe they should focus first on majoring in English (or whatever their native language is) and make sure they understand what words mean before attempting to major in film.
gioGaf:
-"There are entire fields dedicated to evaluating written works and film. Yes, they are subjective to a degree, but in general, someone who has studied/trained in something is better at said activity than a novice. You can't just say you are good, you need to be evaluated by a group of your peers. This point is being made to illustrate that someone can say a movie or piece of literature is bad objectively, which doesn't mean someone else can't find said work entertaining / enjoyable."
And these supposedly "better trainer" filmviewers are a hive mind that agree on anything? Funny, that sounds bogus and false. The second a single one of them disagrees with another it rips apart this absurd notion that there is an "objective" way to look at a film. Someone could praise Pulp Fiction for its jumps between chronological events, another could criticize it calling it a gimmick that adds little and saying there's no suspense in following John Travolta's character in the final third of the movie if we know what happens to him already, and both are totally valid viewpoints.
-"My "conspiracy" issue with the state of our media is a VALID concern. Powerful companies can and do punish "professional" critics for negative press/reviews. Your channel trashes EA's latest game? Guess what, you are blacklisted and won't be getting a copy of the next one ahead of time, hurting your ability to be relevant. This can cripple many outlets. While such a practice is not illegal, it does muddy the waters as to who and what you can believe."
So EA being EA proves every film company is as corrupt? Kind of a stretch. Also, funny how months later 130 critics were willing to rate Solo "rotten"......
Nymphae; A) had to look up who Kyle Newman even was, not exactly a major career there that would make him a big target for speaking out, B) "I don't know anybody out here, maybe two people in my life, out of hundreds of people that I've talked to, who liked the movie." Well clearly a 1.3 billion dollar grossing film with a 45% liked audience rating on RT and a 7.2/10 on IMDb really strengthens that angle, I mean we all know general audiences are scared Disney will fire them.......or you know, NOT, and C) "100 percent. I can't name them, but yes, 100 percent." Well, this sounds totally valid. Sure, if it's real then yeah you can't name them, but also not naming them and letting those people be interviewed as well kinda doesn't help prove his point. Instead we're basically given, "uh, lots of people were forced to like it but everyone actually hates it! Can't name a single name but just trust me, a single small director!"
But ultimately, getting back to this "objective" nonsense, no review can be objective. You can claim to be impartial all you want, and I can rip that nonsense to shreds like a caffeinated kid ripping apart Christmas wrapping. Let's begin:
-do you like Star Wars movies? You're already less impartial.
-do you think movies should be a certain length whether not too short or long? You're already less impartial.
-do you think romance,suspense, drama, and/or action should be a significant focus of this film? Regardless of how you answer, you're already less impartial.
-do you think exposition can quickly become overused and it's better to let the audience figure most things out, or do think things should be significantly explained to reduce the possibility of plot holes and not confuse the audience? Again, no matter how you answer, you're already less impartial
-does humor enhance the experience or distract? Again, doesn't matter, you're already less impartial
I could go on, but let's really drive in the final nail of this coffin.
What is the purposes of a movie? To entertain. To make us think. To make us look at something a new way. To deliver a message. To make us laugh. To make us cry. To make us afraid. To make us want to cheer for the protagonists. To surprise us when things don't go where we thought they would. Etc. Etc. Etc.
That destroys the idea of any objectivity. If somebody says a film made them do any number of things, you cannot disprove that at all, that is their personal experience of the film and that cannot be dismissed with a simple "but that only means you enjoyed it, the film is still objectively bad". How can a film be objectively bad if it's accomplishing many of these factors to certain filmviewers? THAT IS A CONTRADICTORY STATEMENT. A film that is completely succeeding in accomplishing what it set out to do cannot be objectively bad in the eyes of those particular filmviewers, and no matter how desperately you try, you can never disprove this.
You mention White Chicks which is a comedy. If White Chicks made somebody laugh a ton which is what its primary purpose is, then that person has a valid viewpoint that is a funny movie therefore a good movie in their eyes because it accomplished its primary objective. NOTHING YOU SAY CAN DISPROVE THAT NO MATTER HOW HARD YOU TRY. You don't control how other people feel or view the quality of things, JUST STOP.
Any film critic who expects to be taken seriously would never claim a film is objectively bad because it completely misuses the definition of the word and is so easily disproven. And if they really want to die on that hill, maybe they should focus first on majoring in English (or whatever their native language is) and make sure they understand what words mean before attempting to major in film.
5secondrulesucks
Banned
i always pronounce this idiots name "ree-anne" in my head fuck him he can be ree anne
S
slugbahr
Unconfirmed Member
Ok. Yes. You are right. Absolutely. 100%. Sure.
We should major in English to understand how language is supposed to work.
No one ever goes to film school to learn how movies are supposed to work.
Please don't respond. Just talk to yourself or your RL friends who 100% agree with every little detail and perspective you have. On everything.
You are always right.
gioGAF
Member
So according to you, nothing in the realm of the arts can be considered objectively good or well done. Got it. Everything is equally as valid. No such thing as a masterpiece. Hard work and years of practice mean nothing.
For your next point, you don't believe Disney ever has anything to do with how their product is publicly received. Any reviewer can give any Disney product whatever review they want with zero repercussion. All of them are also 100% transparent to their audience of who they deal with, who pays them and who they depend on behind closed doors. You don't find it credible that there are people out there who would be scared to be on Disney's bad side.
Your entire novela has no substance. Every point you make doesn't add up to anything.
In your world:
- All individual opinions are used as the barometer, something I never said.
- You assume I said nobody enjoyed the movie, also false.
- You pick a great movie, with great writing and draw a parallel based on a style choice. I don't see the parallel. Great movie with great writing shuffles scenes out of chronological order vs. bad movie with bad writing. Therefore bad movie is good too? smh
- Companies don't astroturf
- Disney has no influence or power over anyone in the media.
#Learntoquote
sol_bad
Member
Do I really need to defend it though? I enjoyed the movie and I am excited to see where it goes next. I am just scared that JJ will bring everything back that Rian changed.
Luke never really died and just teleported away.
Kylo was LYING, Rey is someone related to the Skywalker linage, Rey is Kylo's half sister!
Surprise! Snoke isn't dead either, he is really Darthh Plagus and he resurrected himself.
DEATH STAR MARK 4
If he seriously does any of that, he never should have walked away from episode 8 and should have stuck with the trilogy.
gioGAF
The Chosen One and Jedi Bullshit
Rey isn't a chosen one, that is the whole point, she is a nobody from no where. Regarding force powers that came to Rey naturally, The force works within everyone and everything, people just need to open their hearts to it to use it's power and this is what Rey did. I never liked the idea of midichlorian (spelling?) counts from the prequel trilogy, it seemed like Lucas just couldn't come up with another way for Qui-gon Jin to realise Annakin had high force potential.
How long did Luke train with Yoda for in Empire Strikes back, a day or 3? You'd think that also isn't enough time to be fully trained, especially by an old creature that can barely walk. Both Luke and Rey had zero to barely any training.
Obi-Wan quote:
“The Force is what gives a Jedi his power. It’s an energy field created by all living things. It surrounds us and penetrates us, it binds the galaxy together.”
You mention that Rey and Anakin are the same, this is true as they both grew up vaguely knowing about the force and Jedi's. Naratively things are very different though, from the get go we knew Anakin was the "chosen one", Rey on the other hand we had no idea who she was and everyone was guessing she'd be a blood relation to someone else with Jedi training. This has turned out false and I am happy it's false because blood linage isn't required to become attuned to the force.
We know the Jedi Council won't accept adults and they don't accept adults because they want young minds to mold as they please. Do any of the prequel films or the Clone Wars films say anything about adults being too hard to train? If they do then they shot themselves in the foot because Luke became a master"" in 3 days in a swamp.
There Are Only Two and Emperors
Rian didn't create Kylo and Snoke, it was JJ and co that created them. Rian was just working with the chess pieces that he already had on the board.
Snokes death is not a rehash of Darth Maul's "death", if Kylo died then it would be a rehash, the apprentice and all that. Snokes death is more akin to Palpatines death in Return of the Jedi. Being force cut in half is more bad ass than being thrown over a railing by a crusty old man if you ask me.
I guess I should have been clearer in what I meant. Rian moved the chess pieces in a way that changes the status quo. There is no more master and apprentice, there is no more hint of them being on the Dark side, there is no emperor type figure. I guess Rian could have done this at the start of the film so his very film felt more fresh but I can't imagine how he would do it. The fact is, the chess pieces are currently in a position for something potentially very refreshing for the Star Wars franchise.
PS:
I am not a fan of the final shot with the kid and the mop. I understand that the force can work within everyone but I don't think it should be THAT simple to tap in to the force.
Anakin had Qui-Gon and Obi-wan to help reinforce his hearth and soul to the force.
Rey at least had Han and Maz explain the force to her to reinforce her belief in the force and reach down within herself.
Doom85
Member
slugbahr: oh, I'll respond, don't ask me that after getting THAT passive-aggressive at me. And I was exaggerating on the English major part because guess what, I merely had to Google the definition of objectivity to know in seconds how much this word has been misused in this discussion. The definition of words is something we need to agree on to be a functioning society, you can call a chair a "phone" all you want but it's not going to change the definition of the word.
And ironic you claim I need to be only around people who think exactly like me since according to others in this discussion that's "apparently" how all educated critics of film work, they're all one hive mind and have a universal agreement on what films are objectively good or bad or in-between. Never a disagreement between any of them, I'm sure.
-nothing that can be "proven" to be one. Science works by constantly testing hypothesis and determining what can be proven and be considered a law in science. Film discussion does not work that way. Gravity is a proven scientific law on Earth, whether the Godfather succeeds in telling a captivating story with interesting characters is up to each individual.
-well, you conveniently don't counter my Solo point. So 130 reviewers just decided 5 months later to jeopardize their jobs? Seems kinda fishy. Also, your "proof" to the contrary is the word of a single individual who can't name names and is throwing out numbers inconsistent with the audience ratings on multiple sites and you're going really crazy if you're claiming non-critics are scared to rate the film poorly because of Disney. "Sorry Jim, you've served us well at Fed Ex for decades, but we've got to let you go." "What? Why?" "Apparently Disney saw you gave Wreck it Ralph 2 a low score. Should have known better, son."
-oh, well two sentences that offer zero elaboration as to why my thoroughly explained points about why objectivity and film opinions can't mix is sufficient. Well done.
-I don't know what you're getting at with the first thing. The second thing is false in that I never said anything suggesting you assumed that. The third part, I wasn't drawing a parallel to another film, I was using an example to show how there's no objective look at even "story structure" (and again, you pretend every pro critic are the same person basically and all consider it a great film). You think David Lynch gives a **** about that sort of nonsense? One critic can look into a film of his and say, "it's a bunch of nonsense trying to be clever but ultimately saying nothing" and another critic can look at it and say, "actually, I think what's actually happening in the film and what it all means is _________________________" and both are valid viewpoints.
-they could but you've yet to provide sufficient evidence that they do. You provide a single sketchy source and call it a day. Funny, the majority of Gaf loves dismissing even a good number of allegations against just a single individual, but I guess when it's "big, bad Disney" it doesn't take much to turn them in a tyrannical empire in people's minds
Good god, this shouldn't require this much explaining. Geezus. BTW, since apparently film reviews are an objective science, I guess all highly-educated critics have the same Top 100 films lists. I mean, objectivity demands there be complete impartiality which means those lists should end up exactly the same, none of them have preferred genres, runtimes, story tone, camera use, etc. Critics are clearly just emotionless robots apparently in how you view them.
But you probably still don't understand anything I'm conveying since I completely didn't notice until now that in your previous post's second paragraph you flat out say a film evaluation can both be "subjective to a degree" and "objective" at the same time. Merriam and Webster are rolling in their graves.
And ironic you claim I need to be only around people who think exactly like me since according to others in this discussion that's "apparently" how all educated critics of film work, they're all one hive mind and have a universal agreement on what films are objectively good or bad or in-between. Never a disagreement between any of them, I'm sure.
-nothing that can be "proven" to be one. Science works by constantly testing hypothesis and determining what can be proven and be considered a law in science. Film discussion does not work that way. Gravity is a proven scientific law on Earth, whether the Godfather succeeds in telling a captivating story with interesting characters is up to each individual.
-well, you conveniently don't counter my Solo point. So 130 reviewers just decided 5 months later to jeopardize their jobs? Seems kinda fishy. Also, your "proof" to the contrary is the word of a single individual who can't name names and is throwing out numbers inconsistent with the audience ratings on multiple sites and you're going really crazy if you're claiming non-critics are scared to rate the film poorly because of Disney. "Sorry Jim, you've served us well at Fed Ex for decades, but we've got to let you go." "What? Why?" "Apparently Disney saw you gave Wreck it Ralph 2 a low score. Should have known better, son."
-oh, well two sentences that offer zero elaboration as to why my thoroughly explained points about why objectivity and film opinions can't mix is sufficient. Well done.
-I don't know what you're getting at with the first thing. The second thing is false in that I never said anything suggesting you assumed that. The third part, I wasn't drawing a parallel to another film, I was using an example to show how there's no objective look at even "story structure" (and again, you pretend every pro critic are the same person basically and all consider it a great film). You think David Lynch gives a **** about that sort of nonsense? One critic can look into a film of his and say, "it's a bunch of nonsense trying to be clever but ultimately saying nothing" and another critic can look at it and say, "actually, I think what's actually happening in the film and what it all means is _________________________" and both are valid viewpoints.
-they could but you've yet to provide sufficient evidence that they do. You provide a single sketchy source and call it a day. Funny, the majority of Gaf loves dismissing even a good number of allegations against just a single individual, but I guess when it's "big, bad Disney" it doesn't take much to turn them in a tyrannical empire in people's minds
Good god, this shouldn't require this much explaining. Geezus. BTW, since apparently film reviews are an objective science, I guess all highly-educated critics have the same Top 100 films lists. I mean, objectivity demands there be complete impartiality which means those lists should end up exactly the same, none of them have preferred genres, runtimes, story tone, camera use, etc. Critics are clearly just emotionless robots apparently in how you view them.
But you probably still don't understand anything I'm conveying since I completely didn't notice until now that in your previous post's second paragraph you flat out say a film evaluation can both be "subjective to a degree" and "objective" at the same time. Merriam and Webster are rolling in their graves.
#Phonepunk#
Banned
they really fucked themselves with TLJ. i have no desire to see IX. the rumors that leak out has sounded very tired and dull as well:
- threat from "The Beyond" causes Kylo & heroes to team up and fight it (so i guess mass genocide & patricide can be forgiven as long as there's someone worse)
- going back to Tattooine to get a new "controversial" macguffin (at this point it should be easy to find what they HAVEN'T referenced in ANH/ROTJ.)
- return of Jabba? Emperor? Obi Wan? (three movies in and these film still have nothing new to offer?)
- Ghost Luke doomed to follow around these losers and taunt Kylo (i physically don't want to see this)
- maybe Rey and Ren are secret lovers? (yeah that sounds horrible. the lead hero of your new trilogy was boning Hitler behind the scenes? i don't think so.)
- Kylo Ren turns to the light (oh wow an evil Skywalker turns to the light in the final entry, where have i seen that before?)
i don't know, im just not invested in it anymore. i don't care about the state of Resistance vs First Order cos we know whoever is winning can simply be reset in the next movie. already we have TLJ showing the Resistance down to 15 people or so, next film will just jump to the future and they'll have ton of ships and stuff, all that happened offscreen. just keep resetting the status quo,
- threat from "The Beyond" causes Kylo & heroes to team up and fight it (so i guess mass genocide & patricide can be forgiven as long as there's someone worse)
- going back to Tattooine to get a new "controversial" macguffin (at this point it should be easy to find what they HAVEN'T referenced in ANH/ROTJ.)
- return of Jabba? Emperor? Obi Wan? (three movies in and these film still have nothing new to offer?)
- Ghost Luke doomed to follow around these losers and taunt Kylo (i physically don't want to see this)
- maybe Rey and Ren are secret lovers? (yeah that sounds horrible. the lead hero of your new trilogy was boning Hitler behind the scenes? i don't think so.)
- Kylo Ren turns to the light (oh wow an evil Skywalker turns to the light in the final entry, where have i seen that before?)
i don't know, im just not invested in it anymore. i don't care about the state of Resistance vs First Order cos we know whoever is winning can simply be reset in the next movie. already we have TLJ showing the Resistance down to 15 people or so, next film will just jump to the future and they'll have ton of ships and stuff, all that happened offscreen. just keep resetting the status quo,
Last edited:
Nymphae
Banned
It's quite possibly the worst middle section of a trilogy I've ever seen, in terms of continuing and expanding on the plot of the first entry, and making you excited for the conclusion. Immediately after watching it in theatres I said to my friend, so what is the plot of the next one exactly? He shits on the foundation laid by JJ, and doesn't even really set up the next one with anything major.
After Empire you were going into Jedi with huge hype, Han was captured, Luke lost his hand and now knew his father was Darth so you knew there would be an epic showdown, things looked very dire and you had some very specific things you were looking forward to seeing resolved. I have almost none of that after TLJ going into whatever 9 is. Rose and Finn will...do more together? Poe will...fly a successful mission somewhere?? Rey and Kylo will confront each other again, and she'll turn him good? Maybe? I don't fucking care.
I guess you'll probably see the piddly resistance take out the last of the First Order forces, but the stakes do not feel in place to me.
Last edited:
Dr. Claus
Vincit qui se vincit
He is a highly talented director - he should just never be allowed to write. Also the dude openly blamed GamerGate for the TLJ hate. Dude is a dumbass.
gioGAF
Member
I understand your points and see where you are coming from. I hope you are not taking anything that I am saying as hostile towards you. This kind of discussion is what I hope takes place here.Do I really need to defend it though? I enjoyed the movie and I am excited to see where it goes next. I am just scared that JJ will bring everything back that Rian changed.
Luke never really died and just teleported away.
Kylo was LYING, Rey is someone related to the Skywalker linage, Rey is Kylo's half sister!
Surprise! Snoke isn't dead either, he is really Darthh Plagus and he resurrected himself.
DEATH STAR MARK 4
If he seriously does any of that, he never should have walked away from episode 8 and should have stuck with the trilogy.
The Chosen One and Jedi Bullshit
Rey isn't a chosen one, that is the whole point, she is a nobody from no where. Regarding force powers that came to Rey naturally, The force works within everyone and everything, people just need to open their hearts to it to use it's power and this is what Rey did. I never liked the idea of midichlorian (spelling?) counts from the prequel trilogy, it seemed like Lucas just couldn't come up with another way for Qui-gon Jin to realise Annakin had high force potential.
How long did Luke train with Yoda for in Empire Strikes back, a day or 3? You'd think that also isn't enough time to be fully trained, especially by an old creature that can barely walk. Both Luke and Rey had zero to barely any training.
Obi-Wan quote:
“The Force is what gives a Jedi his power. It’s an energy field created by all living things. It surrounds us and penetrates us, it binds the galaxy together.”
You mention that Rey and Anakin are the same, this is true as they both grew up vaguely knowing about the force and Jedi's. Naratively things are very different though, from the get go we knew Anakin was the "chosen one", Rey on the other hand we had no idea who she was and everyone was guessing she'd be a blood relation to someone else with Jedi training. This has turned out false and I am happy it's false because blood linage isn't required to become attuned to the force.
We know the Jedi Council won't accept adults and they don't accept adults because they want young minds to mold as they please. Do any of the prequel films or the Clone Wars films say anything about adults being too hard to train? If they do then they shot themselves in the foot because Luke became a master"" in 3 days in a swamp.
There Are Only Two and Emperors
Rian didn't create Kylo and Snoke, it was JJ and co that created them. Rian was just working with the chess pieces that he already had on the board.
Snokes death is not a rehash of Darth Maul's "death", if Kylo died then it would be a rehash, the apprentice and all that. Snokes death is more akin to Palpatines death in Return of the Jedi. Being force cut in half is more bad ass than being thrown over a railing by a crusty old man if you ask me.
I guess I should have been clearer in what I meant. Rian moved the chess pieces in a way that changes the status quo. There is no more master and apprentice, there is no more hint of them being on the Dark side, there is no emperor type figure. I guess Rian could have done this at the start of the film so his very film felt more fresh but I can't imagine how he would do it. The fact is, the chess pieces are currently in a position for something potentially very refreshing for the Star Wars franchise.
PS:
I am not a fan of the final shot with the kid and the mop. I understand that the force can work within everyone but I don't think it should be THAT simple to tap in to the force.
Anakin had Qui-Gon and Obi-wan to help reinforce his hearth and soul to the force.
Rey at least had Han and Maz explain the force to her to reinforce her belief in the force and reach down within herself.
The Chosen One and Jedi Bullshit
I still think Rey and Anakin are a good parallel for each other and share many characteristics in common. Anakin and Rey both come from nowhere and are highly force sensitive, the only difference is Anakin lives with a mother who gives us some additional back story, while Rey gets none.
To be clear, I actually don't have anything against Rey and as you pointed out there are many similarities between Rey and Luke. I'm okay with what was presented in TFA, it is the contents of TLJ that I have a problem with. She is force sensitive and has no special lineage, fine. The problem is that the OT at least gives you some unaccounted for time to come to grips with Luke while TLJ doesn't. Okay, so Luke trains in a swamp for 3 months, and Rey trains with Luke for 3 months, fine. But then there is an undisclosed gap between ESB and RotJ. Time for Luke to improve, while the new Rian Johnson take is that you just get better automatically. Getting better automatically is fine I guess, it is just not really well built or thought out and cheapens the hero's journey. Might as well just have Rey pull Star Destroyers out of the sky and get it over with.
The original point stands, Rey is just like Anakin. Until Qui-gon and Obi-wan show up, Anakin is basically Rey. I think Anakin = Rey is pretty clear. No lineage, no past, very good at a bunch of random shit. Is this a tired trope, sure. Was it original in TPM? Nope. Is it fresh and original in TLJ? Nope. That is my point. TLJ = rehash, except with no respect to the existing lore/universe.
There Are Only Two and Emperors
Our disagreement here has more to do with execution. You see something potentially refreshing for Star Wars, I see a movie that completely deflated everything that was set up before AND at the same time provides the viewer with nothing to look forward to. I don't have a problem with the move to kill Snoke, but the way it was done was a real letdown. Rey/Kylo could have teamed up, instead Snoke gets offed unceremoniously and Rey and Kylo fight nameless/faceless red dudes. I don't know anyone who felt tension during that scene (both from the I don't like TLJ and I like TLJ camps). What could have been a great scene became a throw away sequence. I was about as worried for Rey and Kylo as I was for Qui-gon and Obi-wan when they are fighting those "Roger-Roger" droids at the beginning of TPM.
By this point in time, Rey has dumped on Kylo twice. I'm not really fearing for her when the eventual third encounter comes around. She'll just have to whup Kylo's ass a third time. If Kylo had been a formidable opponent, then I could see a bit more anticipation for the third, fresh encounter. But with how things stand, are we really worried about Rey's prospects? If Luke kicked the crap out of Vader in ESB and chucked the Emperor over the railing, would you really worry about encountering Vader again in RotJ?
Doom85
No disrespect, but your wall of text again doesn't say anything. You are purposely evading the point. Why do people study Shakespeare and not your writings? Since I don't think much progress will be made engaging in a circular discussion with you, we can agree to disagree. Maybe you are viewing TLJ from a special effects point of view (quite good when viewed through that lense), while I am focusing on a narrative pov.
Serious question, what is your favorite scene from TLJ and why?
Last edited:
S
slugbahr
Unconfirmed Member
Blah blah...
Blah blah blahblah
Respond to my specific questions or don't bother responding to me at all.
Doom85
Member
There are zero questions in your previous post: "Ok. Yes. You are right. Absolutely. 100%. Sure. We should major in English to understand how language is supposed to work. No one ever goes to film school to learn how movies are supposed to work. Please don't respond. Just talk to yourself or your RL friends who 100% agree with every little detail and perspective you have. On everything. You are always right."
And if you're referring to "What the fuck do you not understand about that being objectively bad?", I explained in massive detail about how NO FILM can be objectively good or bad.
gioGAF:
"No disrespect, but your wall of text again doesn't say anything."
That's not how a debate works. If we had an audience and judges right now, I could point out that that is a clear evasion tactic and you are deliberately avoiding addressing my counterpoints whether because you agree with them or can't think of a good counter-argument at the moment. What does studying Shakespeare have anything to do with the definition of the word objective? We do not simply get to re-define words at our whim, that is the height of hubris and you can study film all you want but that doesn't qualify you to decide to re-define language.
As for favorite scene, there's several I could choose, but I'd have to go with Kylo Ren asking Rey to join him after the throne room battle. Now, I think Mark Hammil is the best acting-wise in this film, but Adam Driver comes in a close second. I particularly love his delivery of the line, "no, you're still holding on!" Too many times in fiction the antagonist offering the protagonist to join him is shady, the antagonist will backstab the protagonist as soon as possible, when they're done with them, or just keeps using them for as long as possible. Here, it feels like a genuine offer and Driver sells it. It's also nice to see how oblivious he is to his allegiance, for all his talk about tearing down everything, Resistance, FO, Light, Dark, etc. he's still embracing the Dark Side and the chaos that comes with it. It's why him leading the First Order isn't illogical after that, he's furious that Rey, the only person left he felt he could trust, betrayed him which adds to his fury when he sees the Falcon, likely senses Rey aboard, and says furiously, "shoot that ship out of the sky!" Kylo was a fairly well-developed character in TFA but not amazing, but TLJ really raised the bar with his character.
I highly recommend for either of you that you address my points in my previous posts before responding. Why do film majors get to redefine word definitions? What about all the contrary evidence suggesting critics were not pressured to give TLJ good reviews (especially since there's just about as much "evidence" that fake audience reviews lowered the RT audience score, not much evidence but while RT claimed that couldn't happen we soon saw otherwise when fake audience reviews towards Venom appeared on RT and weren't even subtle about out as it was clear that somehow fans of A Star is Born felt antagonistic towards the other big movie coming out that week despite being of such vastly different genres). How can anyone claim that a movie is "objectively bad" when movies each have specific goals in mind with their existence and therefore for any filmviewer who did have all those goals fulfilled viewing the film it is impossible for the film to be "objectively bad"? Do you genuinely believe all educated film critics all unanimously agree on the quality of every single movie they see?!
S
slugbahr
Unconfirmed Member
Yeah, sure, whatever.
Everything is just opinion.
It was bullshit then, it's bullshit now.
Everything is just opinion.
It was bullshit then, it's bullshit now.
Doom85
Member
Maybe learn to be more mature before you start throwing out ambitious claims you can't back up.
S
slugbahr
Unconfirmed Member
Read, and properly reply to post 77, or respect my earlier statements that you don't respond to me any further please.
Doom85
Member
I specifically quoted that exact post and addressed it. Don't demand respect and then pretend that I'm not doing exactly as you asked.
Similar threads
- Locked