Support NeoGAF

[peanutbutterlatte]

I don't give a tupenny fuck for the lore of Honest Trailers so this was an incredibly lame video for me. You can accuse Star Wars of rehashing all you like but when you release a video 5 months after TFA releases, along with 5 month old criticisms like "HAHA Rey's a Mary Sue, it's like A NEW HOPE!" it's throwing stones in glass houses.

 

[border]

Yeah I shut this video off after two minutes. Right or wrong, I'm just bored of hearing jokes about how the movie is a remake of A New Hope. That angle has become hopelessly tired and played out.

 

[Stallion Dan]

...nope. Not really. I was commenting on both character and story as well.

Er...yes. I commented on story, you went off on characterisation. Moving goalposts and changing the argument.

Character living on desert planet who becomes force user, as well as find a mentor offering them a different life, but that mentor ends up getting killed by the big evil force user at the end. Character who not meant to be a good guy but has a change of heart and joins rebels/resistance. The big bad morally conflicted over light/dark side of force etc etc.

It's all the same story and roles that Star Wars and mostly ANH already done, yeah the characters may have different personalities but the story is all retread.

Yeah I shut this video off after two minutes. Right or wrong, I'm just bored of hearing jokes about how the movie is a remake of A New Hope. That angle has become hopelessly tired and played out.

Maybe you should realise they aren't jokes and very valid observations and criticisms. If you're hoping you can wait until a time they won't be valid, I can tell it it is never.

 

[mlclmtckr]

There were not nearly enough "I'm a rapist with a captive woman in my basement" jokes. These guys are slipping.

No but seriously I've only seen a few Honest Trailers but considering the one I saw for Pacific Rim was overwhelmingly positive I'm going to go ahead and agree with the people ITT who are saying that 'Rey is a Mary Sue' is a vapid argument that has a very different sentiment behind it.

 

[brandonh83]

Er...yes. I commented on story, you went off on characterisation. Moving goalposts and changing the argument.

Character living on desert planet who becomes force user, as well as find a mentor offering them a different life, but that mentor ends up getting killed by the big evil force user at the end. Character who not meant to be a good guy but has a change of heart and joins rebels/resistance. The big bad morally conflicted over light/dark side of force etc etc.

It's all the same story and roles that Star Wars and mostly ANH already done, yeah the characters may have different personalities but the story is all retread.

Sorry I thought the topic was about Finn being just like Han. That's what I was commenting on.

 

[Surfinn]

Finn was just Han, out for himself, helping Luke (Rey) until he decides to help the resistance.

This was your ridiculously generalized "criticism" that began the confusion, where you said absolutely nothing specific about the story.

Finn was never leaving out of selfish reasons, he left because he did the right thing and separated himself from evil as soon as he was being forced to do something against his will. This is nothing like Hans character. So "Finn was just Han, out for himself" is BS.

 

[border]

Maybe you should realise they aren't jokes and very valid observations and criticisms. If you're hoping you can wait until a time they won't be valid, I can tell it it is never.

I don't really mind or care about criticism of the film. But I watch these videos for the insightful jokes and criticism......not to hear talking points from 6 months ago repeated ad nauseum. If I wanted to hear the very obvious parallels between TFA and ANH painstakingly detailed step-by-step, I could have done it a long time ago.

"Hur hur -- these actors sure look old!"

The fact that they're doing hack material doesn't really invalidate their points, it just makes their video a tiresome bore.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

Again, tackle dummies aren't goalposts.

When tackle dummies get moved, it's because they're supposed to be moved.

 

[GhaleonEB]

Maybe you should realise they aren't jokes and very valid observations and criticisms. If you're hoping you can wait until a time they won't be valid, I can tell it it is never.

Thing A is similar to thing B is not a criticism. It's noticing something was similar, without any thought put into why it was made similar, and whether the elements that were similar were effective in the film. It's not even effective shorthand.

A lot of the similarities were intentional homages that worked just fine. ANH was itself filled with homages to past films and TV shows. That's not a criticism, but the Honest Trailer postured it as such for TFA, which is why it was dumb.

 

[Surfinn]

Thing A is similar to thing B is not a criticism. It's noticing something was similar, without any thought put into why it was made similar, and whether the elements that were similar were effective in the film. It's not even effective shorthand.

A lot of the similarities were intentional homages that worked just fine. ANH was itself filled with homages to past films and TV shows. That's not a criticism, but the Honest Trailer postured it as such for TFA, which is why it was dumb.

And as others have said, the video simply parrots shallow/surface level criticism from five months ago.

This thread reeks of irony.

 

[Sephzilla]

Er...yes. I commented on story, you went off on characterisation. Moving goalposts and changing the argument.

Character living on desert planet who becomes force user, as well as find a mentor offering them a different life, but that mentor ends up getting killed by the big evil force user at the end. Character who not meant to be a good guy but has a change of heart and joins rebels/resistance. The big bad morally conflicted over light/dark side of force etc etc.

It's all the same story and roles that Star Wars and mostly ANH already done, yeah the characters may have different personalities but the story is all retread.

Yeah, I remember in A New Hope when a Stormtrooper defected to the Rebel Alliance and when Luke Skywalker defeated a wounded Darth Vader in a lightsaber duel while they both stood on the Death Star as it was being destroyed.

 

[Tonedeff]

When it comes to Finn, I'd have to say I'm more disappointed than anything else.

I mean he's a stormtrooper, who's gone through all the stormtrooper conditioning, and on his first day on the job, he's so horrified by the terrors of war that his programming essentially breaks down. That's how I understood his origin. But not long after this, he's blasting people left and right (in the escape scene), which made both myself and my brother go "Holy shit" while watching it. It just doesn't make sense. I know he trying to escape, but if his attachment to life is so strong that his first taste of death fucking de-Terminatorizes him, I don't see how he can justify killing anyone, even, and maybe especially, his fellow stormtroopers. He more than anyone else should understand their plight. Now maybe I have something backwards here, but honestly, a Finn with a No-kill policy seems to fit better with his origin, was where I thought the film was going with his character initially, and would have certainly made him more interesting than what's actually here.

Because besides that, he just seemed to fall into the typical black sidekick character archetype. Keep the funny coming, make the hero look good type shit. Luckily John Boyega's so charming that I did end up liking him more than not. He just had so much potential.

 

[brandonh83]

A lot of the similarities were intentional homages that worked just fine. ANH was itself filled with homages to past films and TV shows. That's not a criticism, but the Honest Trailer postured it as such for TFA, which is why it was dumb.

Absolutely this. I mean, I get when something like this can be seen as a negative. I really do. The Force Awakens means more to me than just Rey finding her powers, or Kylo fully turning to the dark side. It's also about vanquishing that terrible prequel era. And I mostly like the prequels. What I didn't like was all the negativity. "It's terrible, it's not like Star Wars." The Force Awakens to me was made to show that Disney/Lucasfilm care about the property and wanted to show people that they "get" Star Wars. Most people think Awakens is far better than the prequels. The writing, acting, directing all certainly are.

Having similarities is fine. We want to be familiar, we want to know what it is we're watching. I loved the aesthetics of the prequels-- the art direction, set design, the elegance of it all. I really dug it, despite being part of very problematic films. But here we have something much closer to hitting all the reasons why Star Wars took off in the first place. And it works, because the prequels took place before the originals and before the empire took hold, so it makes sense that the galaxy feels a little different in those. Awakens takes place after the originals, and the content, the characters and aesthetics of those makes sense to be in place for Episode VII, following Episode VI.

I'm not saying this couldn't have been done without doing this and relating everything and having characters and said aesthetics carry over; but what I will tell you is that as this is VII, it's an episodic series that is very closely related, it makes since for VII to be a sort of bridge into the new trilogy, just as Episode III was a bridge into Episode IV; you look at Lucas' imagination with Episode III and how that story started to bridge with IV, introducing elements such as the Tantive IV, Tarkin, and other things. It was still its own film and story, but it started to bridge the mold.

The Force Awakens, then, is a bridge but sort of in reverse to Episode III. Elements, characters, unfinished character arcs, developments, etc. have to be accounted for. In the home release features, Harrison Ford talks about how he didn't want Han Solo to die, but that after the first movie he made friends and came back to help, then in the second movie had further development, then in the last movie he... honestly really didn't do anything of significance, that he felt as though the character wasn't going anywhere and was at a development standstill.

I agree with Ford, Abrams and Kasdan 100% with what they did in that regard. It finally feels as though Han Solo was given proper closure rather than the roses and wine closure of Episode VI, and you just simply see him as a fully-rounded and closed-off character now. Having VII address things like this while building into a new story with new characters is fantastic, and I honestly would not want it any other way.

 

[Count Dookkake]

At least "TFA is a remake" has given the film's defenders a new appreciation for Avatar.

 

[Sephzilla]

At least "TFA is a remake" has given the film's defenders a new appreciation for Avatar.

 

[Raziel]

Being a complete and utter rehash absolutely is a criticism, and a valid one. The problems that are implied from that are it being unoriginal, unambitious, and unsurprising. Add on top of it, that for some, it iterates unremarkably so. It was billed as a brand new chapter in the series (with unlimited resources no less), and the resulting product is inherently disappointing for it.

Also, an "homage" is the very first shot of the movie where the star destroyer scrolls slowly across. Rehashing major plot points, characters, and scenarios is just rehashing - and laziness - masquerading as poetry™, and bordering on plagiarism. When what can be said to be an homage is the movie, then yeah, you've pretty much made a remake. It took zero creativity to make this film.

 

[brandonh83]

notlikethis

 

[brandonh83]

It took zero creativity to make this film.

This is fucking bullshit of the absolute highest order.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

At least "TFA is a remake" has given the film's defenders a new appreciation for Avatar.

I see what you're trying to do.

It is not appreciated.

 

[broncobuster]

At least "TFA is a remake" has given the film's defenders a new appreciation for Avatar.

You're not wrong.

 

[Sephzilla]

Being a complete and utter rehash absolutely is a criticism, and a valid one. The problems that are implied from that are it being unoriginal, unambitious, and unsurprising. Add on top of it, that for some, it iterates unremarkably so. It was billed as a brand new chapter in the series (with unlimited resources no less), and the resulting product is inherently disappointing for it.

Also, an "homage" is the very first shot of the movie where the star destroyer scrolls slowly across. Rehashing major plot points, characters, and scenarios is just rehashing - and laziness - masquerading as poetry™, and bordering on plagiarism. When what can be said to be an homage is the movie, then yeah, you've pretty much made a remake. It took zero creativity to make this film.

 

[Discotheque]

At least "TFA is a remake" has given the film's defenders a new appreciation for Avatar.

Hopefully. I like both. The latter gets shit on way too much despite being a very solid blockbuster. More solid than TFA as well tbh

But star wars has the benefit of more likeable characters and an IP that practically everyone loves

 

[Sephzilla]

Hopefully. I like both. The latter gets shit on way too much despite being a very solid blockbuster. More solid than TFA as well tbh

But star wars has the benefit of more likeable characters and an IP that practically everyone loves

I don't hate Avatar, it's a really well put together James Cameron movie. But you sort of hit on what brings it down a bit - it really seems to lack any truly likable or memorable characters, which does the unoriginal plot absolutely no favors. The villain is the only character in that movie that really stands out, but honestly he isn't that great either and he stands out mostly because he's an okay character among a group of bland ones.

 

[Evolved1]

Being a complete and utter rehash absolutely is a criticism, and a valid one. The problems that are implied from that are it being unoriginal, unambitious, and unsurprising. Add on top of it, that for some, it iterates unremarkably so. It was billed as a brand new chapter in the series (with unlimited resources no less), and the resulting product is inherently disappointing for it.

Also, an "homage" is the very first shot of the movie where the star destroyer scrolls slowly across. Rehashing major plot points, characters, and scenarios is just rehashing - and laziness - masquerading as poetry™, and bordering on plagiarism. When what can be said to be an homage is the movie, then yeah, you've pretty much made a remake. It took zero creativity to make this film.

What a garbage-fucking post.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

What a garbage-fucking post.

 

[jman2050]

At least "TFA is a remake" has given the film's defenders a new appreciation for Avatar.

Nah, the common "Avatar is just Dances with Wolves with blue people" criticism is just shallow posturing. The actual true problems with Avatar are on a different tack.

Though this isn't the thread for that really.

 

[brandonh83]

Avatar is good,.
Force Awakens is good.
People can just get along.

 

[Nabbis]

Id put it in the same turd category as BvS. Probably explains why i liked both.

 

[Arnie7]

A lot of the similarities were intentional homages that worked just fine. ANH was itself filled with homages to past films and TV shows. That's not a criticism, but the Honest Trailer postured it as such for TFA, which is why it was dumb.

Thats the thing i disliked the most. It felt just on the verge of being too fourth wall breaking and meta "nudge nudge, win, wink".

Especially lines like "Thats not how the force works!", just ugh.

 

[Warm Machine]

Being a complete and utter rehash absolutely is a criticism, and a valid one. The problems that are implied from that are it being unoriginal, unambitious, and unsurprising. Add on top of it, that for some, it iterates unremarkably so. It was billed as a brand new chapter in the series (with unlimited resources no less), and the resulting product is inherently disappointing for it.

Also, an "homage" is the very first shot of the movie where the star destroyer scrolls slowly across. Rehashing major plot points, characters, and scenarios is just rehashing - and laziness - masquerading as poetry™, and bordering on plagiarism. When what can be said to be an homage is the movie, then yeah, you've pretty much made a remake. It took zero creativity to make this film.

I agree with you pretty much completely. The movie is still fun to watch and very well made but it is creatively bankrupt. It's like a band releasing a greatest hits album and adding 2 b-sides people never heard before.

 

[foxuzamaki]

Don't get people calling raziel's post trash, I agree with him and I liked TFA

 

[diamount]

Don't get people calling raziel's post trash, I agree with him and I liked TFA

It's quite insulting really. He put out valid points and people are just straight out calling him wrong without any attempt to rebuke it.

 

[brandonh83]

It's quite insulting really. He put out valid points and people are just straight out calling him wrong without any attempt to rebuke it.

Yeah calling it a retread, no originality, etc. isn't a compelling argument either. I can immediately write it off: no creativity went into making BB-8? And that's just a droid. That's why people are going about his post like this. It's a black hole of reasoning.

No creativity or intelligence went into the script? Go ahead and write a script as good as TFA, apparently everyone should be able to do it since no ounce of skill or originality went into it. People are just calling out the bullshit hyperbole.

 

[phanphare]

It's quite insulting really. He put out valid points and people are just straight out calling him wrong without any attempt to rebuke it.

probably because of the hyperbole and the fact that every point has been rebuked already in this thread

 

[SeanC]

probably because of the hyperbole and the fact that every point has been rebuked already in this thread

Yep.



We can talk about problems with the film, but calling it unoriginal and a rehash is thoughtfully bankrupt. That's saying something without actually saying anything.

 

[plasmawave]

It's quite insulting really. He put out valid points and people are just straight out calling him wrong without any attempt to rebuke it.

They can't.

No creativity or intelligence went into the script? Go ahead and write a script as good as TFA, apparently everyone should be able to do it since no ounce of skill or originality went into it. People are just calling out the bullshit hyperbole.

And this tired old counter argument lol.

 

[brandonh83]

They can't.

It's already been done though. Time, time and time again. There have been in-depth discussion in this thread already about how it isn't the case, and how these arguments are ignoring extremely fundamental aspects of the creative and storytelling process. It's a bandwagon criticism at best, easy to jump onto but hard to stay on without providing anything but short posts repeating the same criticism without any reasoning behind it.

 

[diamount]

Yeah calling it a retread, no originality, etc. isn't a compelling argument either. I can immediately write it off: no creativity went into making BB-8? And that's just a droid. That's why people are going about his post like this. It's a black hole of reasoning.

I don't care if it's a retread, the film was still good. But it's not brimming with originality, there are scenes that are shot-for-shot exactly the same as before. So why do you have such an issue with it being called a retread? It clearly is.

probably because of the hyperbole and the fact that every point has been rebuked already in this thread

Yeah, I'm not seeing it. I've read through the thread in its entirety and have not seen a post successfully defend that viewpoint, it's just shouts and insults.

 

[phanphare]

They can't.

I mean, yeah sure if you want to ignore every instance to the contrary

in that case I'd agree with you

without that stipulation however...

Yeah, I'm not seeing it. I've read through the thread in its entirety and have not seen a post successfully defend that viewpoint, it's just shouts and insults.

which point specifically? iirc a mod came in here and made a good post about the whole "rehash" thing

edit: and it's on this very page lol, whoops. though it wasn't the post I was thinking of

 

[brandonh83]

I don't care if it's a retread, the film was still good. But it's not brimming with originality, there are scenes that are shot-for-shot exactly the same as before. So why do you have such an issue with it being called a retread? It clearly is.

Because it is not. How is it a retread? I keep seeing that it is, and myself and many others have pointed out exactly how it isn't, yet those who keep saying it is are failing to explain how it is.

 

[GhaleonEB]

Don't get people calling raziel's post trash, I agree with him and I liked TFA

Because it's hyperbole, and misses the mark. While TFA references elements of TFA - there's a robot holding a MacGuffin that needs to get to the rebel resistance, for instance - those touchstones aren't the story, but the skeleton on which the story is hung.

There's no parallel to Rey's situation, or to how she gets off Jakku, or to her capture and interrogation by Kylo Ren, or to the three way fight at the end of the film. No parallel to the First Order village slaughter, or to their wreaking Maz's castle, or to the saber fight in the woods at the end.

It's even more different when you get down to the characters. Rey is not Luke. Finn is not Han. Kylo Ren is not Vader, though he wishes he was.

TFA takes elements from the entire prequel trilogy (a father confronting their son on a bridge over a chasm is from Empire), makes them its own, fleshes out its own story, and creates decidedly different characters on different paths. They are very different films.

What's frustrating about these threads is there definitely flaws to the TFA that warrant discussing. The way Starkiller is perfunctory, the pacing into the third act, Maz's disappearing act from the story. But instead we get caught up on Mary Sue nonsense and the notion that TFA is plagiarism of the films it's a sequel/reboot/pastiche of.

 

[brandonh83]

Because it's hyperbole, and misses the mark. While TFA references elements of TFA - there's a robot holding a MacGuffin that needs to get to the rebel resistance, for instance - those touchstones aren't the story, but the skeleton on which the story is hung.

Maybe I just don't have the patience or something, but yeah. There's a massive gulf between a skeletal plot setup, how things actually play out, etc. With some people calling it a downright remake, you have to wonder.

 

[plasmawave]

People realize remakes are not 1:1 yeah?

 

[CloudyTuba]

I don't give a tupenny fuck for the lore of Honest Trailers so this was an incredibly lame video for me. You can accuse Star Wars of rehashing all you like but when you release a video 5 months after TFA releases, along with 5 month old criticisms like "HAHA Rey's a Mary Sue, it's like A NEW HOPE!" it's throwing stones in glass houses.

Yeah the whole self referential thing really killed the video. They may be going for some sort of meta joke there, but either way the end result is that I didn't laugh.

Okay, there was one chuckle when a certain special guest star showed up at the end. But that was it.

 

[brandonh83]

People realize remakes are not 1:1 yeah?

Yep.

And this tired old counter argument lol.

Right, and I hate to say it, but yes absolutely. It takes a ton of talent and creativity to write a script like TFA. Or a lot of things actually. The counter-argument applies because it disregards an exponential amount of creativity. It's super fucking ignorant.

 

[Sub_Level]

At least "TFA is a remake" has given the film's defenders a new appreciation for Avatar.

ayyyy lmao

 

[Vice]

Being a complete and utter rehash absolutely is a criticism, and a valid one. The problems that are implied from that are it being unoriginal, unambitious, and unsurprising. Add on top of it, that for some, it iterates unremarkably so. It was billed as a brand new chapter in the series (with unlimited resources no less), and the resulting product is inherently disappointing for it.

Also, an "homage" is the very first shot of the movie where the star destroyer scrolls slowly across. Rehashing major plot points, characters, and scenarios is just rehashing - and laziness - masquerading as poetry™, and bordering on plagiarism. When what can be said to be an homage is the movie, then yeah, you've pretty much made a remake. It took zero creativity to make this film.

It's not going to be as original as ANH. It's a sequel to an established franchise with direct ties to the original. That's fine, a few plot points being similar is going to happen in any Star Wars film, and most blockbusters. It's a movie that was enjoyable, had a very positive reception and switches thing up enough to be different than either the prequels or the OT. Ambition and surprise are good but, so is a fun popcorn movie.

 

[plasmawave]

Yep.

So this is more like Dawn of the Dead remake than Psycho remake.

Right, and I hate to say it, but yes absolutely. It takes a ton of talent and creativity to write a script like TFA. Or a lot of things actually. The counter-argument applies because it disregards an exponential amount of creativity. It's super fucking ignorant.

Of course, but do you need to be one to criticize someone's work? Nope. This is the laziest counter argument I've read so far and I actually can't believe someone went there.

 

[SeanC]

I don't care if it's a retread, the film was still good. But it's not brimming with originality, there are scenes that are shot-for-shot exactly the same as before. So why do you have such an issue with it being called a retread? It clearly is.



Yeah, I'm not seeing it. I've read through the thread in its entirety and have not seen a post successfully defend that viewpoint, it's just shouts and insults.

This is the thing for me though, nobody is arguing there aren't similarities because there totally are, but the issue is where the whole argument of it being a bad film is reliant on people calling out those similarities (and conveniently ignoring the differences). That's where I have an issue. We can point out similarities/differences all day but that's not really going into the issues the film might have.

 

[Evolved1]

Dear ILM,

It took zero creativity to make this film. Yes, you may have created hundreds of unique characters (most practical, many that didn't even make the cut) but they are just rehashes! Aliens? Uh we've seen aliens before, they were in the cantina. You are creativity bankrupt almost-plagiarists. I know, I'm from the internet. Zero creativity. It took zero creativity to make this. ZERO!

Sincerely,
Trash-Humper

P.S. Zeeeerrrro creativity.