-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Mr. Plinkett Talks About Rogue One
- Thread starter jett
- Start date
- Status
The Scollard
Member
Loved the review. I completely agree with everything they said. The re-edit of the scene from ANH perfectly encapsulated the difference between those classics and a "meh" film like RO.
Yeah. Part of my main problem with them including Tarkin in the movie was that it seemed they already were setting up their own Tarkin-like figure with Krennic. With the two of them there, it just seems like Krennic has no purpose. I would have liked Krennic just to be the bad guy, and Tarkin to be left out of it. That way, we don't get CGI Peter Cushing.
Yeah. Part of my main problem with them including Tarkin in the movie was that it seemed they already were setting up their own Tarkin-like figure with Krennic. With the two of them there, it just seems like Krennic has no purpose. I would have liked Krennic just to be the bad guy, and Tarkin to be left out of it. That way, we don't get CGI Peter Cushing.
smokeymicpot
Beat EviLore at pool.
Finn we saw why he wanted out. He saw killings for no reason and wanted it to stop. Nas all he said was someone said something to him.
No idea made it like a 80s bad guy.
Gordon Shumway
Banned
Disagree..go eat your shitty pizza rolls and shaddap!
Bobby Roberts
Banned
His value was in strongarming Galen into working on the battle station. Had he not basically forced him at gunpoint to do the work (having Galen's wife killed in the process) then the Death Star wouldn't have the flaw built into it that would allow Luke to blow it up.
Not gonna disagree with the assessment that his vitality as a character decreased as the film went on, since most of his motivation past Jedha City's destruction is borne out of Tarkin shitting on him and him trying to recover from that. Those initial scenes of Mendelsohn's are his strongest, and he basically coasts on his oily nastiness for the rest of the way, only coming back to life again when he's rubbing it in Galen's face on Eadu.
But so far as why he's here? He's here because his cruel treatment of Galen's family is what causes the Death Star to have the flaw it has.
Nah, like I said upthread, dude is from Jedha, as Saw said. I'd imagine watching the Empire come in, lock down your city, fuck with everyone in it, while robbing the place blind and basically forcing you to work for them would cause you to start scanning the horizon for a way out. Galen's talk with him pushed him towards the door.
The reason people keep bringing up Finn is, I think, due to the obviousness of the answer to the question "Why would they want to leave the Empire?"
Why wouldn't they? It's the EMPIRE. Further, it's not like they're in some sort of position where being in the Empire is providing them any great benefits.
Seriously, what is this Han bullshit?
His motivation was "offscreen character will kill me so need to earn money." That's not particularly deep. His arc was "I am not a complete shit." People acting like that's GOAT level are just hilarious.
The OT characters were carried by good acting, the scripts weren't doing them any favours.
Peter Ian Staker
Member
The whole opening scene of that movie perfectly explains why Finn defected.
He was ordered to shoot at village full of defenseless people and he had a panic attack.
I don't think you really need a detailed explanation as to why someone would defect from the Nazis.
Vincent Alexander
Member
It's crazy how true this is.
Triggerhappytel
Member
I haven't watched this as I haven't seen Rogue One yet, but in their Half in the Bag review I found it odd how Mike again brought up that there was no sexual chemistry in the film. Why does he want romance in Star Wars so much?!
My main takeaway from these recent plinkett videos is how many rando reaction channels there must be. I'm aware they exist, but I imagine the actual number of them would be staggering to behold.
Because he's clearly a pre-tumblr sci-fi shipper pretending he's grown out of it.
The Scollard
Member
Except they didn't need to have that explanation for why the Death Star had it's flaw. It was one of the retcons that just made me roll my eyes; it wasn't needed, and considering how little we saw of Galen and his relationship with Jyn, it reeked of forced sentimentality, along with the dumb "Stardust" line.
I preferred when the flaw had no explanation, it was just something the Imperials overlooked, or knew about, but it was so small that they thought no one would be able to take advantage of it. It ties into the theme throughout the trilogy that the Imperials and the Sith are overconfidence, and their hubris leads to their downwall. It fits in perfectly with scenes like the Emperor thinking he could turn Luke and later kill him in front of Vader, or Tarkin refusing to evacuate when Vader told him the rebels were launching an attack. In short, I think the retcon about the flaw made things worse.
ryutaro's mama
Member
I get his meaning to the Urso family but I meant to the all up story. In wrestling, there is a term "putting someone over" meaning an established wrestler will do something (defer, lose in a match, align themselves) with a new or up and comer to get them endeared to the audience.
This movie did nothing, in the grand scheme, to put Krennic "over" with us and that's why it felt flat. To my Wrassle GAF fam, he ended up becoming Disco Inferno to Vader and Tarkin's Hall and Nash.
The Scollard
Member
Probably because the characters just feel so bland and sterile that he wants something to inject some life into them, like a romance with another character.
TAJ
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Han worked for the Empire.
Finn was raised by them. He spent his life with people who were also raised by them. Those few lines about his past were a severe miscalculation but it's too late now. Not making him an enlistee was also a missed opportunity to have him and Han bond over their regrets.
Finn's turn is about as credible as the Muslim girl in God's Not Dead hearing a few words about Jesus and instantly becoming Christian.
His squad doesn't even do anything "wrong" until after he breaks down.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
You're right, it's worked just fine for 40 years without there being any explanation for that exhaust port leading straight to the reactor other than basic Imperial arrogance. But they didn't need to tell this story at all—of the ways into the story they could have chose, this one provides a decent storytelling engine. It's apparently part of why Knoll's pitch worked well enough for Kennedy to not only say "Do it," but to lead with it as the first spinoff.
I agreed that his character's nastiness got watered down as the film went on, but you asked why he was there in the first place.
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
I like the general sentiment of the video.
I'm not sure if imagining Rogue One as if it were a standalone sci-fi film is helpful because, well... it isn't. It specifically exists to fill in the backstory of a 40 year old movie.
I'm not sure if imagining Rogue One as if it were a standalone sci-fi film is helpful because, well... it isn't. It specifically exists to fill in the backstory of a 40 year old movie.
NJDEN
Member
I think his critiques apply as a standalone film. The movie on its own would have made no sense, but it's really meant to be watched after the original trilogy. It might even be fine if you watch it after the prequels.
If Rogue was your first ever Star Wars movie, it would absolutely be terrible. After having seen all the other Star Wars movies, and being a big fan, I thought it was really good and liked it quite a bit.
If Rogue was your first ever Star Wars movie, it would absolutely be terrible. After having seen all the other Star Wars movies, and being a big fan, I thought it was really good and liked it quite a bit.
ryutaro's mama
Member
I have a coworker who's first SW movie was TFA and they had no clue who the old man at the end was and why he was so important.
So, if you are inviting in new audiences, you might want the prerequisite bar to be kinda low.
I understand Plinkett's criticism of not enjoying the movie if you have no context (it happened to my aunts when we went as a family to see the movie), but well, that's the point of Rogue One, for better or worse.
You can't judge a movie made for fans for being for fans. I know people who haven't seen a single SW movie and stilled enjoyed it, despite not understanding many of the plot points or getting the most out of it because of their lack of attachment to the SW universe.
I agree about the characters though, which is why TFA will outrank RO for me, and possibly even more as the sequel trilogy progresses.
You can't judge a movie made for fans for being for fans. I know people who haven't seen a single SW movie and stilled enjoyed it, despite not understanding many of the plot points or getting the most out of it because of their lack of attachment to the SW universe.
I agree about the characters though, which is why TFA will outrank RO for me, and possibly even more as the sequel trilogy progresses.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
I don't think it was that severe a miscalculation. It's understandable why people would be disbelieving that someone raised around idiots might break that cycle on their own through whatever means/inspirations might come, but it's also not impossible or even implausible. That sort of rejection of negative influence is a thing that happens (not frequently enough in real life, of course) enough that seeing it happen in Finn probably shouldn't be such a roadblock.
I guess it depends on the viewer's belief in such a phenomenon occurring? But considering you're watching a fantasy film, maybe that aspect shouldn't be as strongly weighted. I dunno. I get it, I just don't agree that Finn's awakening is a bridge too far or anything.
Episode 8 will be fine. 9 is the one you have to worry about (same director as Jurassic World).
BassForever
Member
I like RO but I completely agree with his assessment and it puts into words better then I could why I don't think its as good of a film as TFA. The only difference is the conclusion, I like the added back story of why the death star has an exploit, seeing the rebellion from an angle that doesn't present them as pure good, why the rebellion fleet in ANH is so tiny, etc.
kinoki
Illness is the doctor to whom we pay most heed; to kindness, to knowledge, we make promise only; pain we obey.
I get what he wants to say and agree with him in theory. However I found Rogue One great entertainment. It just spoke to me and I didn't even like the fan service aspects. I liked the characters and how it ties into the ot.
On the contrary, it seems like the vast majority of SW fans enjoyed at least one of the past two new movies. The fanbase is much happier than they were during the prequels.
Plinkett did a bad job of explaining his point, methinks. The point is that someone who has never seen Star Wars could blindly walk into a showing of ESB, ROTJ, or TFA and still enjoy the film purely on the strength of its characters, emotional appeals, and story beats, even though they wouldn't understand the specifics of the plot.
If that same person instead blindly walked into a showing of Rogue One, it's unlikely they would enjoy the film apart from about five minutes of cool action sequences. The only compelling characters are relegated to side roles, the appeals to emotion fall flat, the story is muddled. The movie only works as a tie-in to an actually good movie. It's pure lore wank for the kind of people who obsess over canon and the extended universe.
The Half in the Bag review did a better job of illustrating this when Mike said that Rogue One is the first Star Wars film that offers nothing to general audiences. It only works as a fan film.
gutter_trash
Banned
RO is good for the action, warlike battle and fan service
RO was aweful for characters, charisma (lack there of), character interest, chemistry
it took me 20 minutes to figure that the name Cassian was Delgado and not the Rebel base leader .
and why is an Imperial pilot have long hair and have full beard? if he defected, it would have taken 6 months to grow that hair that long... the pilot was completely out of character plus he didn't have a Stormtrooper accent or voice type.
RO was aweful for characters, charisma (lack there of), character interest, chemistry
it took me 20 minutes to figure that the name Cassian was Delgado and not the Rebel base leader .
and why is an Imperial pilot have long hair and have full beard? if he defected, it would have taken 6 months to grow that hair that long... the pilot was completely out of character plus he didn't have a Stormtrooper accent or voice type.
Spieler Eins
Member
The videogame equivalent of R1 would be that "dark gritty Zelda" which casual fans always asked for, preferably with lots of unnecessary lore for what's basically a cookie cutter fairy tale story.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
Finn is one of the worst written characters in Star Wars. So that doesn't help.
I think it was probably the result of rewrites. In the book he's a top of the class Storm Trooper, in the exams/tests anyway, and is always saving the ass of another one who is bottom tier, and often gets reprimanded for jeopardizing the missions by helping him. When they go out on that mission, the dumb one dies, and Finn somehow loses his cool. But it sounds like it should have been the opposite; Finn be the loser, and his buddy saving him all the time would get shot as soon as they go on their first mission, leaving Finn to panic having no one to save him. I guess it would have made him "uncool" so they switched his character around, but it sure would have worked better, especially since he spends the rest of the movie "finding his courage".
TAJ
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
About the closest comparison I could make would be Leah Remini, but she wasn't indoctrinated until she was 8 and her disillusionment was very gradual. She also wasn't nearly as isolated from other ideas as Finn would have been.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
I understand why this read is arrived at, but again, it seems to stem from a conception of "the regular joe" that actively attempts to minimize their theoretical abilities to identify or empathize with the characters.
It tends to come off less as a review of the film and more a review of fandom, or fandom's more annoying tendencies.
And considering the film comes out in a moviegoing atmosphere in which we're running on close to a decade straight of conditioning an audience to be familiar with a fictional universe before entering it, suggesting that Rogue One can't work for people not familiar with Star Wars because they aren't afflicted with the nerd disease seems shortsighted, to me.
ryutaro's mama
Member
Yeah man...
Video game equivalent is Halo Reach. Almost exactly.
ryutaro's mama
Member
Halo Reach had a lot of interpersonal character development tho.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
This is good
TAJ
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
That's unfair to Bungie but it's pretty close to the truth.
Who gives a shit if this movie required that the audience have prior knowledge of Star Wars? Seriously why is this a problem? This movie was made for the fans. The problem with TFA is that it pandered to fans and simultaneously played too broad for the wider audience, which watered the whole thing down in the process. I mean fuck, TFA had to point out to Kylo-Ren's that his grandfather who pilots the Falcon is named Han Solo.
I thought the crew was fine. It was more about the war effort and these rebels sacrificing everything to give the fleet a chance to destroy this weapon. How exactly do you build up rich stories and interactions for each member in 2 hours while keeping the film moving?
Peter Ian Staker
Member
Glass Rebel
Member
hanholding all up in this bitch
theCalamity
Member
Perhaps people want a more personal reason that's unique to him outside of bad guys are bad.
That's fair, and the funny thing is that my sister, who is a more casual fan of Star Wars than me, actually liked Rogue One more than TFA. I guess it's really just me personally that didn't connect with the film, and it bothers me because I even enjoyed the prequels to some extent. This is the first SW that completely left me cold. Nothing grabbed me apart from the references to the old movies.
Maybe I'll give it a rewatch when it comes out on Blu.
TheChewyWaffles
Member
Spot on Mr Plinkett. I loved TFA and hated Rogue One.
Han Solo's character got expanded in crazy ways in TFA O_O
The Scollard
Member
I'm a Star Wars fan, and I hated the film. The problem was that, unless you really wanted to know exactly how the Rebels acquired the Death Star plans, there isn't really any reason to care about the film. The characters are bland and forgettable, and there isn't much of an emotional connection between them and the audience, or within their team. Galen's and Saw's death scenes fell so flat for me it was hilarious. When Saw decided to stay behind and Jyn tries convincing him to come with them, I thought to myself how I had barely seen these characters interact, and the movie wanted me to care. And without good characters, there's no reason to care. The general movie going public probably knows that the Rebels get the plans and blow up the Death Star, so the plot doesn't make it compelling, unless, like I said earlier, you want to know the exact details as to how the Rebels got the plans.
Appealing to a broader audience doesn't mean you have to water things down. It means giving them a reason to want to watch the movie beside "I want to see exactly how the Rebels stole the Death Star plans". It means giving them characters that they can care about. It means making people invested in the story, which is possible even if you know the ending, if you're worried that someone you like might not make it. The original trilogy appealed to a broad audience; that's what made it so good. It gave people cake, instead of giving us tons of icing to gorge ourselves on.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
I've found that on rewatch, the last third knits up even tighter than it did on first watch, but the first third is done no favors. The characterization doesn't really improve from spending more time with them. There's not a whole lot there that wasn't easily caught on first view - if they didn't hit w/ you initially, they're probably not gonna hit any harder.
I also think some of that has to do with the nature of the film as a "Men on a Mission" thing, which tends to look at its characters as not much more than their function on the mission. There are ways to deepen those characters through the course of that mission playing out, and it tends to really come out when the characters have to interact and bounce off the other members of the team, and this is where Rogue One falters more than other similar films: Nobody really bounces off anyone but Jyn or Cassian. I said in another thread that it's like—imagine ALIENS where the marines basically only talk to either Ripley or Hicks. Maybe Gorman. That would reduce a lot of their personalities automatically.
That's what happens with Rogue One.
So it really comes down to whether the sketches the Actors are charged with bringing to life are good enough for you on first go. And if they aren't - you're probably going to always feel the film is lacking. Which is absolutely valid - and in a way that doesn't tend to bring in this weird undercurrent of general condescension/distaste towards both fans/fandom, and towards the percieved low-level-intelligence of general audiences and their inability to understand genre entertainment—both of which are elements I feel have become very stong hooks for RLM viewers, to try and tie this sidetrack back to the thread's original intent.
Prequels were better/more original am i rite
- Status