Support NeoGAF

[IISANDERII]

I thought this captured the Star Wars feel much, much better than Ep VII. This director understands and fucking loves Star Wars and at the same time also made R1 feel unique.

Ep VII also honestly made me cringe several times so hard that I thought I'd hate fan service forever but the fan service in R1 was so well done that it gave me goosebumps, even just thinking about it. Really cool to see Vader flexing.

The robot death made me sad.

 

[Hex]

I was so happy they didn't kiss, I was don't you dare! Was it romantic or just two people seeing the end and wanting to be close?

That is how I have compartmentalized it so that it does not bother me.
And all of those little glances before hand were him feeling guilty, not getting hooked.

 

[Godzilla's Left Toe]

So much better than EPISODE 7.

 

[demosthenes]

That is how I have compartmentalized it so that it does not bother me.
And all of those little glances before hand were him feeling guilty, not getting hooked.

This is how I took it.

 

[kame-sennin]

Just saw it. Hated it. Why did anyone in that movie do any of the things they did?

I appreciate you fighting the good fight. I've long given up at this point in trying to have any decent discourse on CG/VFX.

What's to fight about? It looked bad.

 

[Monocle]

The guy in the Vader suit is pretty awful at acting compared to the original, the way he moves and stands is so whatever. It just doesn't come across well, did they allow him to speak while acting ? His about turn before unleashing at the end was so lacking and I think the darkness helped immensely to cover up the Vader flaws in the last scene. It was still cool to see but a bit off.

Yes, I noticed this.

 

[kame-sennin]

The guy in the Vader suit is pretty awful at acting compared to the original, the way he moves and stands is so whatever. It just doesn't come across well, did they allow him to speak while acting ? His about turn before unleashing at the end was so lacking and I think the darkness helped immensely to cover up the Vader flaws in the last scene. It was still cool to see but a bit off.

They should have cast Hayden Christiansen.

 

[Surfinn]

Just saw it. Hated it. Why did anyone in that movie do any of the things they did?

Huh

 

[old manatee]

Christ

The problem with the CGI faces isn't that the CGI is bad, because the CGI faces are technically amazing.

The problem is that there is just no reason for them to be CGI in the first place. It's the prairie dog in The Crystal Skull all over again. There are tons of examples of parts being recast that were far less jarring than seeing these animatronic nightmares desperately trying to convince me that it's still the late 70's and I haven't even been born and I haven't yet squandered all of my potential and we CAN STILL GO BACK GODDAMNIT WE CAN STILL MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN LIKE IT WAS WHEN WE MADE STAR WARS

 

[Bobby Roberts]

Huh

Mm-hmm.

The problem with the CGI faces isn't that the CGI is bad, because the CGI faces are technically amazing

I had a big fat ol post that went into it, yeah.

 

[old manatee]

Mm-hmm.



I had a big fat ol post that went into it, yeah.

'animatronic nightmares' sounds dramatic, but the CGI renders of young Carrie Fisher in your post literally look like headshots from the Real Dolls website, which is also technically amazing.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

'animatronic nightmares' sounds dramatic,

Well yeah, but you knew you were spiraling way over the top for comedic effect.

There's people in here trying to pass that shit off as reasoned analysis

 

[kame-sennin]

Huh

The character motivations. Where were they?

 

[Bobby Roberts]

In the movie you just fuckin' watched

 

[old manatee]

Well yeah, but you knew you were spiraling way over the top for comedic effect.

There's people in here trying to pass that shit off as reasoned analysis

They recast Lando as Donald Glover, they might as well recast Leia as Alison Brie.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

They recast Lando as Donald Glover, they might as well recast Leia as Alison Brie.

I'm not disagreeing (they recast Jan Dodonna, who is in the very next movie 3 weeks later with a key monologue) but like I said - they didn't have to show Leia at all, and it would have actually kept even closer continuity with the movie than the CGI they didn't get quite right.

I don't have a problem w/ recasting.

But describing that VFX work as bad is bad.

 

[Veelk]

In the movie you just fuckin' watched

I feel there needs to be a different term for what some people do at movies. You know, how you can hear someone without listening to them? How you can speak without saying anything?

I'm sure he watched it, but did he...idk, see the movie?

 

[Surfinn]

The problem with the CGI faces isn't that the CGI is bad, because the CGI faces are technically amazing.

The problem is that there is just no reason for them to be CGI in the first place. It's the prairie dog in The Crystal Skull all over again. There are tons of examples of parts being recast that were far less jarring than seeing these animatronic nightmares desperately trying to convince me that it's still the late 70's and I haven't even been born and I haven't yet squandered all of my potential and we CAN STILL GO BACK GODDAMNIT WE CAN STILL MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN LIKE IT WAS WHEN WE MADE STAR WARS

But it's nothing like the animal CGI in Indy 4. R1 attempted to recreate already established characters. They wanted to see if they could faithfully insert two well known and respected characters through the use of advanced tech (pushing and revolutionizing visual effects is a staple of the franchise). In my opinion, they got pretty damn close. You could argue that they should have just recast, but I think it's cool that they attempted something pretty risky and quite different from the usual visual effects we are accustomed to seeing in blockbusters (most of the time it's simply deaging).

The CGI animals we see in Indy are there simply for the sake of being there. There seemed to be no other reason.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

I'm sure he watched it, but did he...idk, see the movie?

So he Billy Hoyle'd it.

 

[old manatee]

I'm not disagreeing (they recast Jan Dodonna, who is in the very next movie 3 weeks later with a key monologue) but like I said - they didn't have to show Leia at all, and it would have actually kept even closer continuity with the movie than the CGI they didn't get quite right.

I don't have a problem w/ recasting.

But describing that VFX work as bad is bad.

The VFX work is incredible, but it's also ineffective.

 

[Surfinn]

The character motivations. Where were they?

The rebels (including rogue one) wanted to defeat the evil empire and Jyn wanted to fulfill her father's dying wish of destroying the death star (saving millions or billions of innocent lives). There's at least something to get you started.

Did you really watch the film?

 

[BobLoblaw]

I just watched this for the first time last night. It was a decent film. Way better than TFA. The two major issues (besides the sometimes hammy script + cliches) was the godawful CGI for Tarkin and Leia. That was some circa 2009 shit right there.

 

[Surfinn]

Yeah godawful is hyperbole.

 

[kame-sennin]

In the movie you just fuckin' watched

You need to calm down.

The rebels (including rogue one) wanted to defeat the evil empire and Jyn wanted to fulfill her father's dying wish of destroying the death star (saving millions or billions of innocent lives).

Did you really watch the film?

The reasons for their behavior are laid out in the plot, but the inner motivations of the characters are absent. Donny Yen joins the rebels because he cares deeply about the force. But why does he care about the force? He just exists as a guy who always does the right thing at the right time. Why did the Captain not shoot Milkensen? Because Mads got slapped? There's no reason why he turns from asshole spy to noble hero before Jin gives her speech.

Also, what the fuck is going on with Jin? It seems like growing up a rebel and then being abandoned was a really big deal for her, but we're told about it instead of shown. And her turn back to being a hopeful hero is totally unconvincing. If she was doing it for revenge, that would work with her tough image, but she turns into a totally different person once her dad dies. Where did all that optimism come from?

And nothing involving Forest Whittaker makes sense.

I feel there needs to be a different term for what some people do at movies. You know, how you can hear someone without listening to them? How you can speak without saying anything?

I'm sure he watched it, but did he...idk, see the movie?

I was a cinema studies major. I can follow a star wars movie.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

The reasons for their behavior are laid out in the plot, but the inner motivations of the characters are absent. Donny Yen joins the rebels because he cares deeply about the force. But why does he care about the force?

This is kind of a dumb question.

It's a quantifiable superpower in this fictional universe.

Imagine being a Catholic, but it turns out if you're a good enough Catholic, you get to literally turn water in to wine by pointing at it.

Now imagine that instead of something lame like transubstantiation of water into red water that gets you drunk, your religion allows you to jump 80 feet in mid-air and push people 80 feet away with your mind and a mimed hadoken.

Why wouldn't he care deeply about it.

Hell, Jyn cares deeply about it and she just had a fucking rock hung on her neck. Yen was around during the Clone Wars, when these bathrobed glowstick motherfuckers were running all over the place.

You need to calm down.

Dunno why you went back and edited that in after your post, man. I'm not excited.

I was a cinema studies major. I can follow a star wars movie.

You seem to be having problems with this one

 

[Monocle]

I feel there needs to be a different term for what some people do at movies. You know, how you can hear someone without listening to them? How you can speak without saying anything?

I'm sure he watched it, but did he...idk, see the movie?

He was with the movie? Inside the story room, if not attentive and engaged?

As an aside, anyone who claims that they "saw" a movie when they actually exited the theater two or three times for bathroom or concessions breaks is a filthy liar. At best, you sampled the movie. You don't get to claim you had the full experience when you were gone for literally 20 minutes that one time.

 

[old manatee]

You need to calm down.



The reasons for their behavior are laid out in the plot, but the inner motivations of the characters are absent. Donny Yen joins the rebels because he cares deeply about the force. But why does he care about the force? He just exists as a guy who always does the right thing at the right time. Why did the Captain not shoot Milkensen? Because Mads got slapped? There's no reason why he turns from asshole spy to noble hero before Jin gives her speech.

Also, what the fuck is going on with Jin? It seems like growing up a rebel and then being abandoned was a really big deal for her, but we're told about it instead of shown. And her turn back to being a hopeful hero is totally unconvincing. If she was doing it for revenge, that would work with her tough image, but she turns into a totally different person once her dad dies. Where did all that optimism come from?

And nothing involving Forest Whittaker makes sense.



I was a cinema studies major. I can follow a star wars movie.

Dawg.






The other Star Wars movies famously start with a giant text crawl.

 

[kame-sennin]

This is kind of a dumb question.

It's a quantifiable superpower in this fictional universe.

Imagine being a Catholic, but it turns out if you're a good enough Catholic, you get to literally turn water in to wine by pointing at it.

Now imagine that instead of something lame like transubstantiation of water into red water that gets you drunk, your religion allows you to jump 80 feet in mid-air and push people 80 feet away with your mind and a mimed hadoken.

Why wouldn't he care deeply about it.

Hell, Jyn cares deeply about it and she just had a fucking rock hung on her neck. Yen was around during the Clone Wars, when these bathrobed glowstick motherfuckers were running all over the place.

Yeah, I get that the force is cool. But Yen could just hang out in the wilderness and train if that was the only issue. Instead, he joins up with a terrorist group and helps them deal with their emotional baggage. And the machine gun guy just hangs out.

We know why Obi-wan goes on an adventure he shouldn't be involved in. He's got unfinished business. He wants to fix all the stuff that went wrong 20 years earlier. Yen is apparently 'following the will of the force' by helping these people out?

Dunno why you went back and edited that in after your post, man. I'm not excited.

Why do use italics so often?

 

[Bobby Roberts]

We know why Obi-wan goes on an adventure he shouldn't be involved in. He's got unfinished business. He wants to fix all the stuff that went wrong 20 years earlier. Yen is apparently 'following the will of the force' by helping these people out?

What more do you need, and why would you need it? How is it you're not inferring what you need based on what's given you? I don't get it. It's right up front.

Do you ask these questions of most other monk/mystics you've seen in any prior work of fantasy?

Why do use italics so often?

Why do people so often give a shit that I use the formatting available?

Italics denotes emphasis. It's a visual trick that enables readers to more accurately hear my voice in their head when they read. It's not a new thing. I learned it from books.

 

[Surfinn]

You need to calm down.



The reasons for their behavior are laid out in the plot, but the inner motivations of the characters are absent. Donny Yen joins the rebels because he cares deeply about the force. But why does he care about the force? He just exists as a guy who always does the right thing at the right time. Why did the Captain not shoot Milkensen? Because Mads got slapped? There's no reason why he turns from asshole spy to noble hero before Jin gives her speech.

Also, what the fuck is going on with Jin? It seems like growing up a rebel and then being abandoned was a really big deal for her, but we're told about it instead of shown. And her turn back to being a hopeful hero is totally unconvincing. If she was doing it for revenge, that would work with her tough image, but she turns into a totally different person once her dad dies. Where did all that optimism come from?

And nothing involving Forest Whittaker makes sense.



I was a cinema studies major. I can follow a star wars movie.

Bobby said what I was gunna say about the force/religion.

I took Cassian not shooting him as making a judgement call. He didn't feel like it was right. Maybe they could have been clearer in the film.

Again.. Jyn's optimism comes from learning her father spent his life's work trying to give the galaxy a fighting chance against the empire by crippling the death star's defenses. Then her motivation for destroying it increases ten fold when her father dies in her arms telling her that he loves her and reminding her that the death star must be destroyed.

Her motivation could not be clearer. Her shift to hero makes perfect sense in this context. The film practically beats you over the head with why she changed.

 

[old manatee]

Yeah, I get that the force is cool. But Yen could just hang out in the wilderness and train if that was the only issue. Instead, he joins up with a terrorist group and helps them deal with their emotional baggage. And the machine gun guy just hangs out.

We know why Obi-wan goes on an adventure he shouldn't be involved in. He's got unfinished business. He wants to fix all the stuff that went wrong 20 years earlier. Yen is apparently 'following the will of the force' by helping these people out?



Why do use italics so often?

aka the death star

 

[Bobby Roberts]

aka the death star

Yeah, there's this, too.

The giant superweapon capable of planet-wide genocides in less than 2 seconds. Stopping that thing from being a thing is a decent-ish motivation

 

[kame-sennin]

Dawg.






The other Star Wars movies famously start with a giant text crawl.

First, this is basically a prequel defense, 'the other star wars movies aren't good either'.

Second, the opening craw in the original movie establishes the setting, but it doesn't delve into character motivations. Those are developed during the film. We know Luke yearns to fly away from home because we literally see him gazing at the sky and playing with a model plane. Han Solo is a scumbag because he shoots first. And when he starts to befriend people and lose his tough-guy exterior, we immediately get shots of his face that explicitly signal that. Obi-wan's motivations may be explained in his backstory, but Guiness gives us that thousand-yard stare so we immediately understand he's seen some shit.

 

[Veelk]

Donny Yen joins the rebels because he cares deeply about the force. But why does he care about the force? He just exists as a guy who always does the right thing at the right time.

Why does anyone care about the force? The force brings inner peace and is set in the path of righteousness. It's a faith thing. You follow the force because it's the way you do the right thing.

Why did the Captain not shoot Milkensen? Because Mads got slapped? There's no reason why he turns from asshole spy to noble hero before Jin gives her speech.

Because he was already conflicted and anguished about all the moral wrongs he's done in the name of the rebellion. He's never been happy about doing these things and his growing closeness to Jyn pushed him over the edge.

Also, what the fuck is going on with Jin? It seems like growing up a rebel and then being abandoned was a really big deal for her, but we're told about it instead of shown. And her turn back to being a hopeful hero is totally unconvincing. If she was doing it for revenge, that would work with her tough image, but she turns into a totally different person once her dad dies. Where did all that optimism come from?

This is one part I agree with, but not the way you phrased it. She wants what her dad wants. She believes that the Rebel cause is righteous because her father believed it and sought to end the empire. Her problem as a character isn't so much that she lacks internal motivation so much as her motivation isn't truly hers: She just looks at everything her dad does and goes "Yeah, me too."

I was a cinema studies major. I can follow a star wars movie.

Evidence to the contrary. The 'internal' motivations is actually far easier to dissect than plot driven motivations because, since they're often more subtext than text, they only exist subjectively: You either infer them from information previously known or you don't and it's not really provable that they're there or they aren't one way or another. That's the cost of being nebulous.

I prefer to think of it as "Do these people act in a believable manner." They do for me. It's less that I'm able to discern exactly why they do every action they do and more that I can trust that someone in their situation would behave like that. I can believe Donny Yen has become more devote to the force in the face of tragedy (especially since it's a religion that gives him quantifiable superpowers), I can believe that this mission just happened to be the straw that broke the camels back for Cassain. Jyn is the worst because I don't believe she'd have such a lack of self identity that she just goes along with whatever her father did, but it's not so bad that I end up asking stupid questions like "Why did anyone in that movie do any of the things they did?" I know why. That's extremely evident. It's just a matter of whether or not it's convincing.

 

[kame-sennin]

What more do you need, and why would you need it? How is it you're not inferring what you need based on what's given you? I don't get it. It's right up front.

Do you ask these questions of most other monk/mystics you've seen in any prior work of fantasy?

If the movie makes me care about the characters, it doesn't matter how it happens. But when everything falls flat the way this film does, it forces the audience to question what's happening on screen.

Again.. Jyn's optimism comes from learning her father spent his life's work trying to give the galaxy a fighting chance against the empire by crippling the death star's defenses. Then her motivation for destroying it increases ten fold when her father dies in her arms telling her that he loves her and reminding her that the death star must be destroyed.

Her motivation could not be clearer. Her shift to hero makes perfect sense in this context. The film practically beats you over the head with why she changed.

There's two things that need to be separated. The first is Jin wanting to destroy the death star to honor her dad. The second is her going from a moody criminal to the most optimistic (bordering on naive) character in the movie. She goes from hard-edged to doe-eyed and it's just not convincing. It's too big of a leap. That's why revenge would have worked better than "hope". It would fit her character better and make immediate sense.

aka the death star

Did you watch the movie? Yen is constantly pointing out people's repressed emotions. He's like a jedi therapist. The seen with him and Cassian in the cell is a good example. I don't have a problem with it, but it does show how convenient his presence in the movie is without there being any motivation for him to actually act that way.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

If the movie makes me care about the characters, it doesn't matter how it happens. But when everything falls flat the way this film does, it forces the audience to question what's happening on screen.

Your questions certainly seem forced, yeah

 

[old manatee]

First, this is basically a prequel defense, 'the other star wars movies aren't good either'.

Second, the opening craw in the original movie establishes the setting, but it doesn't delve into character motivations. Those are developed during the film. We know Luke yearns to fly away from home because we literally see him gazing at the sky and playing with a model plane. Han Solo is a scumbag because he shoots first. And when he starts to befriend people and lose his tough-guy exterior, we immediately get shots of his face that explicitly signal that. Obi-wan's motivations may be explained in his backstory, but Guiness gives us that thousand-yard stare so we immediately understand he's seen some shit.

Felicity Jones has father issues.

Diego Luna is a centrist Democrat.

Alan Tudyk is a loose cannon.

Donnie Yen is following the light-side of the force.

Wen Jiang is following Donnie Yen.

Ben Mendelsohn is typecast.

Guy Henry is doing the best he can under a lot of digital effects.

Forest Whitaker's character is totally confusing, I will grant you that. But I don't give a flying fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck because he is way better in this movie than he was in Battlefield Earth.

Riz Ahmed is a national treasure.

Mads Mikkelsen is a simple family man who had to build a death star and also a flaw in a death star.

Jimmy Smits was there, too.

James Earl Jones was Darth Vader.

Princess Leia held hope in her hands and was unconvincing.


It's wicked not complicated.

 

[Surfinn]

snip

snip

I felt like it was made pretty clear through visual/contextual storytelling (much like what we saw in EP7) that Jyn's dad humanized her and pulled her out of her selfish/defeatist funk by delivering that message in the hologram. Also, her experiences in Jeddah (being in battle, seeing/saving the little girl, witnessing the literal destruction of the city, seeing the empire's grip/control over citizen's lives) redefined her perspective.

This was referenced too via her interactions with Saw ("you can run no longer"). I also like her response when he asks how she can bear to look at the empire flag: "it's not a problem if you don't look up". She eventually realizes how fucked up everything is and that she can't ignore it any longer.

Considering what kind of film this is, I thought they did a good enough job at exhibiting her motivations beyond simply mimicking her father's.

 

[kame-sennin]

Why does anyone care about the force? The force brings inner peace and is set in the path of righteousness. It's a faith thing. You follow the force because it's the way you do the right thing.

Actually, all the characters in the original films only see the force as a means to an end. Luke doesn't give a shit about the force until he realizes it's a way to connect with his father. Obi-wan and Yoda only want to train Luke so that he has the power to destroy the Emperor. All these characters come to care deeply about the force through use and training, but only after they've decided to pursue it for personal reasons. It's emblematic of the process behind these new, very nostalgic, star wars films that Yen's character trains in the force because the force is just so cool.

I prefer to think of it as "Do these people act in a believable manner."

They don't. The rebel council become a bunch of irrational assholes who want to trash a 20-year conspiracy because they do or don't believe the Empire has a super weapon. The fish admiral just launches a random attack on an imperial base, with no plan for how to retrieve the information or a way to prevent the empire from just destroying the files the minute he shows up.

Also Saw fucking Gurrera.

Jyn is the worst because I don't believe she'd have such a lack of self identity that she just goes along with whatever her father did, but it's not so bad that I end up asking stupid questions like "Why did anyone in that movie do any of the things they did?" I know why. That's extremely evident. It's just a matter of whether or not it's convincing.

If character motivations are unconvincing, then we don't know why the characters did what they did. 'Why' is a much deeper question than the basic cause and effect mechanisms of the plot. Yes, the death star is bad and anyone would believe stopping it would be a good idea. But most people wouldn't risk their own lives to stop it. They'd probably just walk away - like Han Solo did. He needed a movie's worth of comradery building with Luke and Leia, plus a guilt trip from Chewbacca to do the right thing. And we also saw him struggle with the decision so that when he came back, we understood why.

 

[DonMigs85]

Lol the fish admiral

 

[Veelk]

Actually, all the characters in the original films only see the force as a means to an end. Luke doesn't give a shit about the force until he realizes it's a way to connect with his father. Obi-wan and Yoda only want to train Luke so that he has the power to destroy the Emperor. All these characters come to care deeply about the force through use and training, but only after they've decided to pursue it for personal reasons. It's emblematic of the process behind these new, very nostalgic, star wars films that Yen's character trains in the force because the force is just so cool.

You can't really distinguish the force from being a means to an end when it's directly stated that the force that acting in the ways of the force is what it means to bring about a good end. You're not wrong that Yoda and Luke and Obiwan train him for all the cool powers, but the emphasize that letting the force work through you is how you get the actual ends you want in all things, and that applies for everything from killing a death star to something as small as firing back lasers from a toy training bot. They follow the force because it makes everything right.

And we also saw him struggle with the decision so that when he came back, we understood why.

You only understand it through inferring it from everything that transpired. If someone were to challenge you to definitively prove it, you wouldn't be able to, because an inference is by it's very nature not a definitively stated thing, even if it's so likely it might as well be stated. The logical, obvious and highly likely answers are there if you want to take them, but it's up to the viewer to take them.

Much like it is the case here. You can reject the exceedingly obvious inferential explanation that Churrit is just a faithful devote of the force, that Cassian was long since having a crisis of conscience and so on, etc, but that doesn't stop them from being valid answers to your questions. I can't help you rejecting them despite it.

 

[kame-sennin]

Your questions certainly seem forced, yeah

Ok.

Donnie Yen is following the light-side of the force.

Because the force is cool. Not because he has any actual purpose in life that the force is helping him achieve. And again, if his sole purpose is religious enlightenment, he should stay home and keep training rather than follow strangers on a suicide mission.

Wen Jiang is following Donnie Yen.

Again, why? Are they in a romantic relationship? Did they survive a war? Are they related? You can say the same about Chewbacca I guess, but Chewbacca doesn't technically have dialogue.

Riz Ahmed is a national treasure.

If this is the cargo pilot, I have no idea what's going on with him. All I get from his character is that he's stressed out. He also maybe went insane but maybe not. And he apparently had a conversation with Mads that made him realize genocide is bad and it totally turned his life around, but we never see it so I can only assume it was a good talk.


Am I really the only person who hated this movie?

 

[Surfinn]

Actually, all the characters in the original films only see the force as a means to an end.

Yeah this isn't true. Obi-Wan, Vader, and Yoda already believe in the force pretty much as a religion without having a specific means to an end. It's the very essence of what drives the powerful mythology and what makes the films mystical and intriguing.

 

[kame-sennin]

Yeah this isn't true. Obi-Wan, Vader, and Yoda already believe in the force pretty much as a religion without having a specific means to an end. It's the very essence of what drives the powerful mythology and what makes the films mystical and intriguing.

Vader very clearly only cares about the force because of the power it gives him. Obi-wan and Yoda seem to have not used the force much at all for 20 years while living in exile. They only dust off their philosophy to train Luke so he can accomplish what they failed to do a generation prior - destroy the empire.

 

[Veelk]

Am I really the only person who hated this movie?

I actually have similar complaints about the lack of character clarity and depth in many cases. There's also extreme pacing issues in the first and second act.

The bigger problem is your phrasing of these questions in a really dumb way. "Why does the clearly religious fellow follow the religion that we've seen plenty of characters devote themselves to that also gives them quantifiable superpowers?" I don't know buddy, you tell me.

 

[Surfinn]

Vader very clearly only cares about the force because of the power it gives him. Obi-wan and Yoda seem to have not used the force much at all for 20 years while living in exile. They only dust off their philosophy to train Luke so he can accomplish what they failed to do a generation prior - destroy the empire.

They didn't suddenly believe in the force so they could train Luke. You don't get to just say "they did it for Luke" when Yoda's been training Jedi for hundreds of years and Obi-Wan had become a Jedi long before even being on Tatooine.

And Vader believed in the force long before his lust for power. We learn that he was once trained by Obi-Wan in ANH.

That's not a means for an end. That's a belief, a religion (Tarkin literally refers to it as such in ANH). Mysterious mythology. Not totally different from the way the force is exhibited in R1.

 

[kame-sennin]

"Why does the clearly religious fellow follow the religion

This is a tautology.

we've seen plenty of characters devote themselves to that also gives them quantifiable superpowers?" I don't know buddy, you tell me.

The other movies can't make this one interesting.

They didn't suddenly believe in the force so they could train Luke. You don't get to just say "they did it for Luke" when Yoda's been training Jedi for hundreds of years and Obi-Wan had become a Jedi long before even being on Tatooine.

When we meet Obi-wan in Star Wars, he's just a "crazy old hermit". He even refers to himself as a jedi in the past tense. He only introduces the audience and Luke to the force in order pursue his goals. If he didn't care about defeating the empire, he wouldn't have told Luke about the force at all. It's fine that in his back story, there is a lifetime of force usage. But within the bounds of the film, he only uses the force to train or protect Luke.

 

[Veelk]

This is a tautology.

Faith is tautological. It's an axiomatic supposition that you follow because you just do. Except this one also gives you quantifiable super powers.

But I guess I can't stop you from rejecting the obvious answers to questions you hypothetically want answered, so....

 

[Surfinn]

This is a tautology.



The other movies can't make this one interesting.



When we meet Obi-wan in Star Wars, he's just a "crazy old hermit". He even refers to himself as a jedi in the past tense. He only introduces the audience and Luke to the force in order pursue his goals. If he didn't care about defeating the empire, he wouldn't have told Luke about the force at all. It's fine that in his back story, there is a lifetime of force usage. But within the bounds of the film, he only uses the force to train or protect Luke.

No, you're changing your argument. This is what you originally said:

Actually, all the characters in the original films only see the force as a means to an end.

This is totally incorrect. Obi-Wan, Yoda and even Vader do not see the force as a means to an end. Sure, Obi-Wan/Yoda might use the force as a means to an end, say for example, training Luke, but their reasoning for believing in and utilizing it preceded Luke and his journey. That was my original point. That's what drives the mythology. If those characters aren't well established in their history of force use and beliefs (as being bigger than Luke and his importance in the OT), the OT falls flat on its face. This is similar to the way the force is utilized in R1. You could make the same argument that the force is used as a means to an end to allow the crew to succeed in their mission. That doesn't mean Chirrut saw the force itself as a means to an end.

Just as Obi-Wan, Yoda, and Vader did not.

If the emperor and Vader killed every last rebel in the galaxy and hypothetically knew they'd never have opposition again, they wouldn't pack up their capes, sabers and Sith powers and call it a day. Because it's a belief system. A way of life. Basically a religion.

So I'm not sure why you're describing these people as if they turn the force on and off like a light switch that's used only when deemed necessary.

Like do you imagine Obi-Wan and Yoda never thinking about it, meditating, using it to communicate with other Jedi from the time EP3 ends until EP4 begins?

That's not how the force works.

 

[HotHamBoy]

So much better than EPISODE 7.

It's really not.

I thought this captured the Star Wars feel much, much better than Ep VII. This director understands and fucking loves Star Wars and at the same time also made R1 feel unique.

Ep VII also honestly made me cringe several times so hard that I thought I'd hate fan service forever but the fan service in R1 was so well done that it gave me goosebumps, even just thinking about it. Really cool to see Vader flexing.

The robot death made me sad.

I felt quite the opposite, in fact.