• 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.

Opinion Spoilers Clickbait Why aren't the sequel trilogy considered some of the worst films ever made?

#Phonepunk#

Gold Member
Sep 4, 2018
11,880
19,103
715
39
They actually paid attention to legions of sexist gamers
why run with this obnoxious narrative? where does this come from, the idea that JJ "listened to legions of sexist gamers"? same dude made TFA which the entire world loved because it was just like old SW. he did the same with RoS, it's just that by then TLJ had ruined the very idea of nostalgia.

cutting KMT wasn't to appease sexist gamers, it was to appease his executives that demanded the film be a certain length. HE LITERALLY APPEASED THE VIRTUE SIGNALLING EXECUTIVES NOT "TOXIC GAMERS". massive chunks of the story were cut. Rose was not an essential part of the movie. it has nothing to do with sexists. sorry to tell you this.

the funny thing is TLJ did such a shit job that when JJ came in and repeat what he did with TFA, the well had long been poisoned, anything "nostalgic" was seen as suspect, when the massive success of TFA rested entirely on that nostalgia. they made a billion dollars off nostalgia, then the next film was all about how bad nostalgia is. so when JJ stepped back in to do his previously insanely popular nostalgia trip, all the self important Film Critics declared it trash. nostalgia, which everyone just celebrated to the tune of a billion dollars a few years ago, is now bad.

Rian shot them in the foot. lol but go on blaming random gamers for the writing of this billion dollar movie.
 
Last edited:

sol_bad

Member
Jan 17, 2006
4,344
2,585
1,485
.
I think you need to take into account the size and cultural impact of the franchise and amount of legacy content where they could draw from, plus the obscene budget they were able to spend on production.
Considering these things, it's really onenof the greatest disappointments in cinema history.

That these movies are still better than the zombie movie your cousin did where he is smashing wig wearing melons with his pops big hammer doesn't need to be said.
Why do people mention legacy content now?
George Lucas was never going to use that legacy content in his films so why are people saying that JJ abrams / Rian Johnson / Disney should be using it? That's right, people just like bitching about Disney for reasons.
 

MrA

Member
Mar 9, 2020
384
599
315
as long as the adventures of pluto nash continues to exist, they will continue to not be the worst big budget films ever.
 

Diddy X

Member
Jan 7, 2018
718
585
345
The Star Wars movies have never been good, they are all about the lightsabers, the force, iconic characters, etc. The movies all suck, each one of them.
 
May 22, 2019
1,672
2,740
550
The Joker was one of the worst movies I've seen in recent years. I was excited for it. I thin Joaquin Phoenix is amazingly talented. But this was such an ugly, utterly joyless movie. Whatever message it had was incredibly surface level.

That said, that character wasnt even really the Joker. Not once in that shitty movie was I convinced that Arthur was particularly smart, much less a criminal genius. The Joker is manipulative. He's cunning. He's seductive in his own way. Arthur was none of those things. He was just a weak, small man.
Totally agree. I came out of that movie shaking my head. It was so bad. Too much try hard artistic shit too. This was such a terrible take on the Joker. I feel like it appeal is that it's a film made for losers. The bigger the loser you are the more you're likely to enjoy it.

That said Joaquin Pheonix acted his ass off. Too bad he was given that interpretation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spectyre

Stiflers Mom

Member
Apr 27, 2012
4,697
3,672
970
Why do people mention legacy content now?
George Lucas was never going to use that legacy content in his films so why are people saying that JJ abrams / Rian Johnson / Disney should be using it? That's right, people just like bitching about Disney for reasons.
Abrams ripped off legacy content in the form of ANH.
Why he didn't go one step further and use content from the EU that hasn't been used in a movie before is beyond me.
So given that, maybe you should stop talking shit.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: TheSadRanger

sol_bad

Member
Jan 17, 2006
4,344
2,585
1,485
Abrams ripped off legacy content in the form of ANH.
Why he didn't go one step further and use content from the EU that hasn't been used in a movie before is beyond me.
So given that, maybe you should stop talking shit.
I didn't realise that Luke gets chased by Stormtroopers and escapes Tatooine using daring ship maneuvers in the Millennium Falcon and he finds Han Solo in space. Meanwhile Obi-Wan realises that the Empire are evil and he runs away from them and joins Luke on an adventure. And Leia was always with the rebels and not a prisoner on the Death Star. And Luke finds his fathers lightsaber in the basement of a tavern. Actually it was Luke that was the prisoner on the Death Star and he escapes himself buy using the force and telling a Stormtrooper to let him go.
And remember how how Han has a light saber fight with Darth Vader and dies?

Yep, A New Hope and Force Awakens are exactly the same.
 

Stiflers Mom

Member
Apr 27, 2012
4,697
3,672
970
I didn't realise that Luke gets chased by Stormtroopers and escapes Tatooine using daring ship maneuvers in the Millennium Falcon and he finds Han Solo in space. Meanwhile Obi-Wan realises that the Empire are evil and he runs away from them and joins Luke on an adventure. And Leia was always with the rebels and not a prisoner on the Death Star. And Luke finds his fathers lightsaber in the basement of a tavern. Actually it was Luke that was the prisoner on the Death Star and he escapes himself buy using the force and telling a Stormtrooper to let him go.
And remember how how Han has a light saber fight with Darth Vader and dies?

Yep, A New Hope and Force Awakens are exactly the same.
Who wrote it's exactly the same?
The major plot points are basically the same.

But I guess that answer of yours is just you being contrarian for the sake of it, like always, you glorious rebel.
 

sol_bad

Member
Jan 17, 2006
4,344
2,585
1,485
Who wrote it's exactly the same?
The major plot points are basically the same.

But I guess that answer of yours is just you being contrarian for the sake of it, like always, you glorious rebel.
There are similarities and call backs to A New Hope but it doesn't rip off the film. People hated the prequel films 7 years ago and they wanted to hit that nostalgia cord hard, and they did, and it worked 5 years ago.
 
  • Like
Reactions: #Phonepunk#

Gargus

Banned
Oct 1, 2018
2,067
2,838
515
Because I know way more about movies than just stupid blockbuster movies. I know what truly bad movies look like and the sequels aren't truly bad movies.

But they are definitely not good movies, and the pretty much everything after the original 6 are just big fucking turds. Yes that includes rogue one and solo because they sucked also.

I still haven't seen Skywalker and I dont really care if I do or dont. There are too many other movies I'm interested in seeing.
 

#Phonepunk#

Gold Member
Sep 4, 2018
11,880
19,103
715
39
There are similarities and call backs to A New Hope but it doesn't rip off the film. People hated the prequel films 7 years ago and they wanted to hit that nostalgia cord hard, and they did, and it worked 5 years ago.
RE: "people hated the prequels". sure, some did, but also, many millions of people loved them enough to see the movies, buy the games, tv shows, etc. plenty of people loved the prequels. it was mostly film snob types that didn't. the proto Film Crit Hulk types that birthed Rian Johnson. i do agree that TFA was constructed with a conscious desire to stay away from the prequels ("Begin to make things right", lack of worldbuilding, no politics, etc.)

it is funny looking back at the prequels, when toxic fandom (people that outwardly hated the movies) was largely the mainstream. Jay Leno joking about it in his monologues. Triumph the Insult Comic Dog making fun of nerd virgins. the theatrically released films "Fanboys" and "The People vs. George Lucas". there was a big mainstream market for prequels haters. by the time RLM arrived the mainstream media had been trashing the prequels for years.

the new films are all three a nostalgia trip. this is George said upon seeing them. it's just unfortunate that Rian made his movie partially about how bad nostalgia is. it just makes the ST an incoherent whiplash.
 
Last edited:

Kev Kev

Member
Oct 25, 2012
1,120
1,417
775
Daytona Beach, FL
i think they're fine.

in fact i find TLJ to be one of the best SW movies. RoS started out as the best SW film so far (for me at least) but the ending made some weird choices that knocked it back down. TFA is aging like fine wine honestly. its better everytime i watch it.

i loved them all to death. shit, Solo is one of my favorite, if not my favorite SW movie ever! sure, the films made some head scratching choices, but nothing movie breaking. people were always going to take a sloppy shit all over these movies, no matter how good they were. just like the did with the PT and just like theyll do for every SW made in the future
 
  • Like
Reactions: sol_bad

#Phonepunk#

Gold Member
Sep 4, 2018
11,880
19,103
715
39
yeah it's kind of like, there were people in the 50s and 60s saying that the space and monster movies of the time were stupid trash. there were people in the 20s and 30s saying Flash Gordon and King Kong was trash. the West Coast science fiction community was assaulted on many fronts, from g-men looking for secret Communists to the NYT writing articles dismissing rocket science as a possibility.

it really began with mainstream media bullying rocketry pioneer Robert H. Goddard into hiding, delaying the start of the US space program by decades. this goes back 100 years, when the New York Times was publishing dismissive articles calling his ideas of rocketry childish and fanciful. he got so much bad press that he ended up retiring in shame. when DIY pioneers like Jack Parsons tried contacting him to share his science, he wanted nothing to do with it. he had been bullied into silence.
Although his work in the field was revolutionary, Goddard received little public support, moral or monetary, for his research and development work. He was a shy person and rocket research was not considered a suitable pursuit for a physics professor. The press and other scientists ridiculed his theories of spaceflight. As a result, he became protective of his privacy and his work. He also preferred working alone because of the aftereffects of a bout with tuberculosis.

The publication of Goddard's document gained him national attention from U.S. newspapers, most of it negative. Although Goddard's discussion of targeting the moon was only a small part of the work as a whole (eight lines on the next to last page of 69 pages), and was intended as an illustration of the possibilities rather than a declaration of intent, the papers sensationalized his ideas to the point of misrepresentation and ridicule. Even the Smithsonian had to abstain from publicity because of the amount of ridiculous correspondence received from the general public. David Lasser, who co-founded the American Rocket Society (ARS), wrote in 1931 that Goddard was subjected in the press to the "most violent attacks."

On January 12, 1920, a front-page story in The New York Times, "Believes Rocket Can Reach Moon", reported a Smithsonian press release about a "multiple-charge, high-efficiency rocket." The chief application envisaged was "the possibility of sending recording apparatus to moderate and extreme altitudes within the Earth's atmosphere", the advantage over balloon-carried instruments being ease of recovery, since "the new rocket apparatus would go straight up and come straight down." But it also mentioned a proposal "to [send] to the dark part of the new moon a sufficiently large amount of the most brilliant flash powder which, in being ignited on impact, would be plainly visible in a powerful telescope. This would be the only way of proving that the rocket had really left the attraction of the earth, as the apparatus would never come back, once it had escaped that attraction."

On January 13, 1920, the day after its front-page story about Goddard's rocket, an unsigned New York Times editorial, in a section entitled "Topics of the Times", scoffed at the proposal. The article, which bore the title "A Severe Strain on Credulity", began with apparent approval, but soon went on to cast serious doubt.
ironically, despite progress in the field by DIY enthusiasts, the US officially did not pursue a rocket program until after World War II, when through Operation Paperclip they basically let the former Nazi rocket scientists run it. when NASA left for the moon, the Times finally printed an apology.
Forty-nine years after its editorial mocking Goddard, on July 17, 1969—the day after the launch of Apollo 11The New York Times published a short item under the headline "A Correction." The three-paragraph statement summarized its 1920 editorial and concluded:

Further investigation and experimentation have confirmed the findings of Isaac Newton in the 17th Century and it is now definitely established that a rocket can function in a vacuum as well as in an atmosphere. The Times regrets the error.
 
Last edited:

MacReady13

Member
Jun 22, 2018
555
586
340
People don't watch MST3k anymore I guess.

Imagine watching the fucking Robot Monster episode when you are 7, have a 102-103 fever from a URI, and can't sleep a wink at 2AM from coughing while elevated in a chair. That shit haunts your movie experience forever.

There are so many incomprehensibly awful movies out there that people never see. The ST clearly sucks, but they are (mostly) competently edited, have plots, have characters, and don't make you feel like you are hallucinating and on the verge of death.
Hundreds of millions of dollars, plus the biggest movie company on earth backing you will help these films look and sound the part. They are hollow excuses for Star Wars films. Say what you will about George Lucas and the prequels, but the guy had a vision and stuck with it. These last 3 films feel like 3 films from 3 seperate trilogies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: #Phonepunk#

Atrus

Member
Jul 16, 2007
4,301
366
1,090
The sequel trilogy was so bad it actually made the prequel trilogy better.

It’s just a reminder that no matter how bad things are, things can most definitely get worse.

At least these movies have good cinematic visuals that may some day inspire others to create something better.
 

#Phonepunk#

Gold Member
Sep 4, 2018
11,880
19,103
715
39
it is kind of interesting how each film negates the last. tbh i don't think this is by design, that each director thought they were doing a good job, but it was just the wrong approach, and it ended up a mess.

the constant retconning, i suppose you could compare it to the OT retcons, yet those retcons added to the story. these retcons retracted from the story. retcons made the world feel bigger with each film in the OT, the ST feels smaller and smaller.

finding out that Vader is Luke's dad was a massive paradigm shift for the series, it leaves that film with the hope of redemption. you want to see what will happen. Luke has a personal stake in Vader coming to the light because he is his father. this is something everyone can relate to, for everyone has a father. Rey being told she is nobody does not add anything. what is worse, they tease the reveal twice, with the mirror scene, and Kylo's "revelation".

funny thing is it is not even a new revelation (thus IMO a waste of time). she says she is no one throughout the first movie. it's old news. she had moved past it by leaving her planet behind in her main story arc. in fact, someone asking Rey "Who are you?" and her responding "I'm no one" were literally the first words in one of the early trailers for the Force Awakens:

people act like it is this big revelation, and indeed it was sold that way by Rian, but it was really just a retread of what we already knew (we didn't know the exact identity of her parentage).

ironically the extremely lame twist for Rey Skywalker seems to have been the one thing about the ST suggested long in advance even before TFA. this quote from the story group just came out:
In the recently released Rise of Skywalker art book there’s a quote from 2014 from LucasFilm Story Group member Pablo Hidalgo that caught our eye:

“I like the idea that she’s going to be our Skywalker, but she’s not a Skywalker. Then, for our purpooses, ‘the Skywalker’ is really a metaphor. It doesn’t have to be something that’s directly connected by blood.”
 
Last edited:

mekes

Member
Jun 30, 2013
2,696
2,183
685
London, UK
Did they have to be the best movies ever? I personally thought they were okay. But an easy distinction I can make particularly in comparison to the original trilogy, is that I won’t be watching the sequel trilogy again. I saw the latest movie just yesterday for the first time, I’ve forgotten what it’s called already 😂
 

TeezzyD

Fantastik Tuna
Mar 18, 2020
964
1,849
565
I think they're awesome, honestly. Especially Force Awakens and Last Jedi.

I'm a prequel apologist also. Only Star Wars movie that I didnt jive with was Rogue One. Not a single character worth giving a rat's ass about in the entire flick. Bores me to tears.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sol_bad
Jan 17, 2014
2,752
219
580
I mean they aren’t even close to the worst movies ever but since I love Star Wars so much they are some of the most disappointing movies ever.
 

H4ze

Member
Aug 20, 2019
613
579
295
Germany
Maybe because they aren't the worst movies ever made?

Star Wars fans are the worst, for real. And I absolutely love Star Wars...

The movies are so bad mimimi, the prequels suck so much mimimi
Fuck Jar Jar mimimievenmore²
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stitch

Faenrir

Member
Mar 2, 2020
149
133
245
37
www.fabricebacquart.info
Why do people mention legacy content now?
George Lucas was never going to use that legacy content in his films so why are people saying that JJ abrams / Rian Johnson / Disney should be using it? That's right, people just like bitching about Disney for reasons.
Lol what? Fans have dreamed about adaptations of the novels into movies since they were written, especially the Thrawn saga.
Just because you've discovered them recently doesnnt mean it wouldn't have made sense to use them as materials for new movies.
The plot is so much better than anything Disney released ~
 

sol_bad

Member
Jan 17, 2006
4,344
2,585
1,485
Lol what? Fans have dreamed about adaptations of the novels into movies since they were written, especially the Thrawn saga.
Just because you've discovered them recently doesnnt mean it wouldn't have made sense to use them as materials for new movies.
The plot is so much better than anything Disney released ~
Of course fans have dreamed of those adaptations forever.
But neither Lucas or Disney are going to or were going to make them. The dream is lost no matter who owns the franchise.
Were people hoping that now Lucas is out of the way that these adaptations would start being made?