Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

Discuss films of the 21st century including current cinema, current filmmakers, and film festivals.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
jklugman
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2018 12:53 pm

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#1626 Post by jklugman » Sun Jul 22, 2018 1:02 pm

I am partial to "Spy Senate" (season 2, episode 4) which is an extended homage to Hitchcock's Notorious, down to the final shot.

User avatar
All the Best People
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2017 7:08 pm
Contact:

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#1627 Post by All the Best People » Tue Jul 24, 2018 12:19 am

I actually at one point did get through the Clone Wars movie over the course of several sittings, and it was not good, and also continued Apocrypha II's heresy that Artoo can fly.

hanshotfirst1138
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 6:06 pm

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#1628 Post by hanshotfirst1138 » Tue Jul 24, 2018 9:25 am

All the Best People wrote:I actually at one point did get through the Clone Wars movie over the course of several sittings, and it was not good, and also continued Apocrypha II's heresy that Artoo can fly.
Doesn’t he kind of fly in Attack of the Clones?

User avatar
Kirkinson
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 5:34 am
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#1629 Post by Kirkinson » Tue Jul 24, 2018 1:10 pm

That’s what ATBP is referring to as “Apocrypha II”.

I think I read that at some point some book or something retconned his jets being removed.... R2-D2 really is the Star Wars universe’s biggest mess, given the people he interacted with in the prequel era who show no sign of recognition later on, and all the important information he should already know that he evidently chooses not to divulge to the other characters!


User avatar
Big Ben
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2016 12:54 pm
Location: Great Falls, Montana

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#1631 Post by Big Ben » Fri Jul 27, 2018 6:46 pm

I was wondering how they were going to deal with Fisher's death and well, there it is. I imagine we'll have an angry mob raging about something regardless.

User avatar
bearcuborg
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 2:30 am
Location: Philadelphia via Chicago

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#1632 Post by bearcuborg » Fri Jul 27, 2018 9:16 pm

Richard E Grant never disappoints, but I didn’t notice Andy Serkis in the list-so much for my idea that Snoke’s story was far from over.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#1633 Post by domino harvey » Sat Aug 18, 2018 10:10 am

Trailer for Star Wars Resistance, an animated prequel series with Oscar Isaac reprising his role as Poe Dameron

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#1634 Post by domino harvey » Tue Aug 28, 2018 5:49 pm


User avatar
Big Ben
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2016 12:54 pm
Location: Great Falls, Montana

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#1635 Post by Big Ben » Tue Aug 28, 2018 5:52 pm

domino harvey wrote:
Tue Aug 28, 2018 5:49 pm
Matt Smith joining Episode IX
Very interesting choice. I imagine there's quite some overlap between Who fans and Star Wars but it'll be interesting to see him in here all the same.

User avatar
bearcuborg
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 2:30 am
Location: Philadelphia via Chicago

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#1636 Post by bearcuborg » Wed Aug 29, 2018 4:23 am

I’ll give JJ this, on the casting alone they gave the *new trilogy to the wrong guy.
Last edited by bearcuborg on Wed Aug 29, 2018 2:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Lost Highway
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2013 7:41 am
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#1637 Post by Lost Highway » Wed Aug 29, 2018 7:46 am

bearcuborg wrote:
Wed Aug 29, 2018 4:23 am
I’ll give JJ this, on the casting alone they gave the trilogy to the wrong guy.
What's wrong with Matt Smith ? He's an excellent actor and I don't even watch Dr. Who. I think this new trilogy features by far the best acting in the Star Wars franchise.

User avatar
Big Ben
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2016 12:54 pm
Location: Great Falls, Montana

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#1638 Post by Big Ben » Wed Aug 29, 2018 10:48 am

Lost Highway wrote:
Wed Aug 29, 2018 7:46 am
bearcuborg wrote:
Wed Aug 29, 2018 4:23 am
I’ll give JJ this, on the casting alone they gave the trilogy to the wrong guy.
What's wrong with Matt Smith ? He's an excellent actor and I don't even watch Dr. Who. I think this new trilogy features by far the best acting in the Star Wars franchise.
I'm consistently amazed when people forget the acting in the prequels exist. You're absolutely correct here. Smith is absolutely capable of doing this.

User avatar
bearcuborg
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 2:30 am
Location: Philadelphia via Chicago

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#1639 Post by bearcuborg » Wed Aug 29, 2018 11:21 am

I meant that JJ’s casting choices have been stellar, Matt Smith included. If I had my choice, I’d rather see a JJ trilogy spin-off than Rian Johnson.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#1640 Post by domino harvey » Wed Aug 29, 2018 11:22 am

Oh, I also assumed you meant the current trilogy

User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#1641 Post by mfunk9786 » Wed Aug 29, 2018 11:24 am

Rian Johnson just made the most compelling Star Wars film for non-Star Wars fanatics I can imagine, that totally alienated those who cannot let go of the original 40 year old films (which, thank goodness in my book), so to me there's no better person to start up something separate that those new people can enjoy than Johnson. Let J.J. Abrams do the hyper-careful fan service, he's good at that stuff (and that isn't meant as a dig). The whole "new" part of the new trilogy is going to ruffle feathers by default, so might as well ruffle them into oblivion.

User avatar
tenia
Ask Me About My Bassoon
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#1642 Post by tenia » Wed Aug 29, 2018 11:41 am

And again, how about not thinking in terms if binary reduction "JJ for old farts who can't let go / Johnson for truly original movies that will ruffle the old farts feathers" and just in terms of generic cinematographic qualities, like storytelling, pace and just expecting not another 2h30 artificially-narrated empty slog that isn't that novel anyway ?

User avatar
bearcuborg
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 2:30 am
Location: Philadelphia via Chicago

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#1643 Post by bearcuborg » Wed Aug 29, 2018 2:17 pm

Assuming Rian gets to make those films...I’m not so sure now. If anything I would love to see him do a Luke in isolation story. That’s easily the best thing in The Last Jedi.

With regard to the new trilogy, I just wish it had been one or the other for the duration of the sequels. I have qualms and love for both of them, but it’s possible neither can really be judged until the last one.

User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#1644 Post by mfunk9786 » Wed Aug 29, 2018 2:51 pm

tenia wrote:
Wed Aug 29, 2018 11:41 am
And again, how about not thinking in terms if binary reduction "JJ for old farts who can't let go / Johnson for truly original movies that will ruffle the old farts feathers" and just in terms of generic cinematographic qualities, like storytelling, pace and just expecting not another 2h30 artificially-narrated empty slog that isn't that novel anyway ?
I appreciated your constructive criticism the first time, but 'how about' never telling me how to think about movies or how to politely share those thoughts again. Much appreciated.

User avatar
MoonlitKnight
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 10:44 pm

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#1645 Post by MoonlitKnight » Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:32 am

Big Ben wrote:
Wed Aug 29, 2018 10:48 am
Lost Highway wrote:
Wed Aug 29, 2018 7:46 am
bearcuborg wrote:
Wed Aug 29, 2018 4:23 am
I’ll give JJ this, on the casting alone they gave the trilogy to the wrong guy.
What's wrong with Matt Smith ? He's an excellent actor and I don't even watch Dr. Who. I think this new trilogy features by far the best acting in the Star Wars franchise.
I'm consistently amazed when people forget the acting in the prequels exist. You're absolutely correct here. Smith is absolutely capable of doing this.
Well, it's not as though Ewan McGregor and Natalie Portman aren't also excellent actors... and it's not as though SW has ever been a vehicle for stellar acting. I mean, it was based by and large on Buck Rogers/Flash Gordon serials, FFS, and the acting and dialogue have always reflected that (even if Lucas wasn't as good at conveying it in the prequels) -- well, until the new regime came along and essentially modernized both elements, as well as put much more emphasis on the sci-fi aspect than the fantasy, thus, taking away the universe's otherworldly-ness in the process. "Droid, please!" indeed. :-&

User avatar
tenia
Ask Me About My Bassoon
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#1646 Post by tenia » Thu Aug 30, 2018 4:48 am

mfunk9786 wrote:
Wed Aug 29, 2018 2:51 pm
tenia wrote:
Wed Aug 29, 2018 11:41 am
And again, how about not thinking in terms if binary reduction "JJ for old farts who can't let go / Johnson for truly original movies that will ruffle the old farts feathers" and just in terms of generic cinematographic qualities, like storytelling, pace and just expecting not another 2h30 artificially-narrated empty slog that isn't that novel anyway ?
I appreciated your constructive criticism the first time, but 'how about' never telling me how to think about movies or how to politely share those thoughts again. Much appreciated.
My original criticism is the same than this one, and prompted by the same reasons : it frustrates me to see on this forum, which I’ve grown to think it is rather exigent in terms of movies’ analysis, such a simplistic take being taken, as if it can only the detractors being too clingy to let go, too old-farty to accept “novelty”, while the opposite side is so much more open to changes. Can’t be the movie having basic movie-making flaws.

This view bothers me a lot because it tosses aside a simpler matter-of-fact analysis, putting aside the possible cinematographic flaws of the movie. I tried and made my points at the time in what I felt was both genuinely sincere and matter-of-fact-y, but also respectful of the other side, and I don’t think I for instance considered that people liking the movie had to be people who weren’t particularly fans of the OT, trying to explain that it’s certainly a more complex situation than just fans being reluctant to the changes and non-fans not caring.

Yet, this binary reduction to a simplistic ad personam keep popping up, which is what prompted me to write this reminder about trying to avoid solely viewing the negative reactions from an ad personam point of view, and looking at the movie on the usual cinematographic merits instead (even though this kind of “clingy detractors”, I’ve been explained and have understood, are probably a specificity of the SW franchise). I suppose however that what prompted me to spontaneously write this reminder in this way is the disdain I seemed to read in your post about those who didn’t like the movie through the simplistic reduction made again, though I certainly admit I could (and probably should) have written it in a more consensual and neutral manner. In any case though, my original points about the possibility to find the movie as being overlong and having a very artificial storytelling still stand, well outside any "novelty reluctancy" considerations.


It’s unfortunate however that you chose to respond solely to how it’s written instead of focusing on the point it wanted to make (again). But echoing what I wrote very recently in the 2001 thread, and what I wrote almost exactly a year ago in the Deetz Nutz discussion (which sadly still is accurately valid), I definitely should have known better and anticipated that focus.

So don’t worry about me telling you whatever in the future, as I’ll simply try and do my best to avoid any confrontation with you by simply avoiding engaging with you altogether. I have absolutely no intent to spend time in this kind of pointless confrontations (I’ve done that way too much in the past), and this should take care of that (and also prevent me fueling some myself).

I guess that should also teach me about sticking to the more technical sections of the forum.

nitin
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2014 6:49 am

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#1647 Post by nitin » Thu Aug 30, 2018 5:04 am

Thing is tenia, some of just like The Last Jedi and the stuff that bothered you didn’t bother at least me. Now I don’t agree with mfunk’s generalisation either but there has been plenty written even in this forum that does come off as some sort of nostalgic view of the OT even when it has some of the exact same flaws that the new movies have.

User avatar
tenia
Ask Me About My Bassoon
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#1648 Post by tenia » Thu Aug 30, 2018 5:56 am

The only thing I hoped for was to generate a more open and less clichéd discussion about the field of reasons one can have for disliking the movie. I have absolutely nothing against people liking the movie and finding whatever good entertaining stuff they found in it (story, acting, emotions, adventure, twists, etc), but I certainly think there is more than one reason around to like it. So why not multiple reasons for disliking it, and not just being an old raging fan reluctant to see some changes in its treasured franchise ? I'm also quite sure there are newcomers who disliked the movie, something this dichotomy doesn't take into account either, the same way I'm quite certain some old-timers liked the movie too.

I spent some time trying to make an argumentated case about how the movie can be analysed like any other on its sole cinematographic merits, even without comparing it to any other SW movie, and providing simple movie-making-type reasons for that. Yet, the ad personam continues. It's not the movie, it's the people.

Having disliked the movie myself, it bothers me being reduced this way, on a forum I expect more than just "it's not the movie which is flawed, it's these guys who can't enjoy it", especially this cliché can be expressed in a way that can be perceived as disdainful on top of that.

User avatar
Lost Highway
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2013 7:41 am
Location: Berlin, Germany

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#1649 Post by Lost Highway » Thu Aug 30, 2018 6:06 am

I think we’ve heard you loud and clear. At some point you’ll just have to accept that those who like the film disagree with your claims in regard to bad film-making or at least that the film’s merits outshine its flaws. I didn’t like the film because toxic SW fans hated it.

User avatar
tenia
Ask Me About My Bassoon
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#1650 Post by tenia » Thu Aug 30, 2018 8:31 am

I accepted that some time ago. If some people liked it, we just haven't "seen the same movie". Well, c'est la vie. I understand and respect that, and all the best to them.
What I wish is that some who liked it to accept it goes both ways, and that one can dislike the movie for other reasons that being a clingy fanboy reluctant to change, and stop so often resorting to this ad personam reduction.

Post Reply