logo Sign In

Ranking the Star Wars films — Page 75

Author
Time

TV’s Frink said:

Sougouk said:

TV’s Frink said:

Sougouk said:

Alphabetical Order:

Attack of the Clones
Empire Strikes Back, The
Force Awakens, The
Last Jedi, The
Phantom Menace, The
Return of the Jedi
Revenge of the Sith
Rogue One
Star Wars

I tried to fix that for you but AOTC is still first and SW still last. I guess I’ll just say “I improved that a little for you.” Although it moved up TPM too high…so I guess there’s no fixing it.

Star Wars can be first, if we use A New Hope.

Dammit I missed that.

It’s ok, pobody’s nerfect!

Author
Time

Lord Haseo said:

TV’s Frink said:

Leia was a not-Jedi for all three original movies. I don’t think of her as a Jedi, she didn’t think of herself as a Jedi, and it would have been weird for her to suddenly be a Jedi in the fourth movie.

The 30 year time gaps helps all of these issues both with our perception and Leia’s potential “conflict” regarding embracing being a Jedi.

I get that, I’m just saying it would have been jarring and I’m glad they didn’t go that route. I wouldn’t have said it “ruined her character” or anything silly like that.

Author
Time

I think the biggest issue I had is that Han and Leia’s story was over. Finished. When you write a story, or film one on screen, you have characters, and these made-up characters in theory have entire lifetimes of events. But story is about finding only the most relevant period of time in their lives, the most interesting events, and only getting into all of that. Nobody cares what they ate for breakfast yesterday or what they did at band camp when they were 10 years old unless it’s relevant to the story.

Han and Leia were relevant and interesting in Star Wars, Empire Strikes Back, and Return of the Jedi. That was the crux of their mythological lives. If you want to make them centerpieces of a new story when they are in their 60s and 70s, you have to make a different kind of movie than the lighthearted popcorn flick that is TFA. You can’t just call Leia a general and throw her in a few scenes. You can’t just take dinosaur Harrison and have him show up not taking his role seriously. You need to make a credible movie revolving around them, or you need to have them play supporting roles in a movie that revolves around the new, younger cast, telling their own story. You can’t split the movie between both, which is one of the fundamental problems I found with TFA.

In the end, I think the film would have been much better if it moved Han into the background and made the story more about Rey and the younger generation. The whole Han-Leia-Kylo family plot is out-of-place melodrama that was only artificially contrived in order to justify the unwarranted screen time for Harrison.

Whatever I may think of the film, I think TFA’s biggest flaw was Harrison Ford. Not his acting or anything he did himself necessarily, but just the effort that was made to accommodate him and tailor the movie to him and old fanservice-y people who wanted to see him and the old gang. The old characters and the new characters and their stories are not organically synthesized. There is no natural story there that the filmmakers wanted to tell. It was all just make up a bunch of action hero movie bullshit and put all the people on screen as much as possible. And I don’t think that’s the formula for a good movie, or not one that I enjoy.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Alderaan said:

I think the biggest issue I had is that Han and Leia’s story was over. Finished. When you write a story, or film one on screen, you have characters, and these made-up characters in theory have entire lifetimes of events. But story is about finding only the most relevant period of time in their lives, the most interesting events, and only getting into all of that. Nobody cares what they ate for breakfast yesterday or what they did at band camp when they were 10 years old unless it’s relevant to the story.

If you think the figurative death of a child and what that does to a couple is analogous (at least, from a drama standpoint) to what they had for breakfast, then yeah I can see why you wouldn’t like TFA.

Author
Time

DominicCobb said:

Han and Leia were perfect in TFA.

I would have liked a bit more screen time for Leia. And yeah she should have hugged Chewie first (although I was fine with her and Rey hugging because they would have a connection right away via the Force). There was one shot of Han running from the Rathtars where you could really see his age and I would have like to see that cut. And I would have only had Han use Chewie’s bowcaster the first time.

Otherwise I agree.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

TV’s Frink said:

If you think the figurative death of a child and what that does to a couple is analogous (at least, from a drama standpoint) to what they had for breakfast, then yeah I can see why you wouldn’t like TFA.

I already explained that this subplot is not intrinsic to the rest of the movie. It is just melodrama thrown in to justify Han and Leia’s screen time for old-time’s sake.

If you want to make a film about 70 year old Han and 60 year old Leia and how they figuratively lost their son, then OK do that. But it would be a very different movie than TFA or any other Star Wars movie I have ever seen. Otherwise, they just needed to be kept in the background and played supporting roles that passed the story onto the next generation.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

TV’s Frink said:

DominicCobb said:

Han and Leia were perfect in TFA.

I would have liked a bit more screen time for Leia.

You can only focus on so many characters per film. I don’t really mind the limited screen time, I don’t feel like I was missing anything from her in regards to this particular story.

And yeah she should have hugged Chewie first (although I was fine with her and Rey hugging because they would have a connection right away via the Force).

Yeah this was an obvious goof, but it’s nothing more than that - a goof. You aren’t meant to read anything into it (it’s not like Leia and Chewie ignore each other throughout the film). And yeah, nothing wrong with hugging Rey.

There was one shot of Han running from the Rathtars where you could really see his age and I would have like to see that cut.

I don’t see what’s wrong with showing his age.

And I would have only had Han use Chewie’s bowcaster the first time.

I thought that was a fun bit.

I think my only quibble is actually the moment where Han shoots a guy without looking (though even this is somewhat okay because Han checks to make sure he got him, which makes it seem more like classic Solo luck, rather than superhero skills).

Author
Time

I thought it was a fun bit the first time he fired the bowcaster. We had never seen it before and it made sense in the context of the situation - Chewie being hurt and unable to hold it. The second time, we’ve already seen it, and Chewie was running around with it just moments before that.

I agree that there’s nothing wrong showing Han’s age, I just didn’t explain myself very well. It looks obvious that they tried to hide his age the way they shot it (and failed to do so), rather than just owning up to it.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Alderaan said:

I already explained

If you really are interested in actual discussion then you probably shouldn’t start with this kind of thing.

I get where you’re coming from (at least it’s a rational argument) I just happen to disagree with you. I found it to be a worthy addition to their story.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

ray_afraid said:

TV’s Frink said:

I thought it was a fun bit the first time he fired the bowcaster. We had never seen it before and it made sense in the context of the situation

Chewie uses it in ROTJ to take out a speeder bike. And I can’t believe Han never in 40 years asked to shoot it.

I meant that we never saw Han use it before TFA, so it was fun to see it for the first time in TFA.

And I can believe Han would go that long without using it, there was (presumably) never a reason for him to do so. Judging by the original trilogy, none of them ever got shot (except Leia and Luke once each in ROTJ).

Author
Time

ray_afraid said:

He wouldn’t need a reason. He’d want to try it for fun. He also acts like he’s never even seen what it can do. I just don’t buy it.

Many gun owners marvel at weapons they’re firing for the time on a pretty consistent basis. Growing up in Florida I know that shit is true. It gets weird sometimes.

TV’s Frink said:

Lord Haseo said:

TV’s Frink said:

Leia was a not-Jedi for all three original movies. I don’t think of her as a Jedi, she didn’t think of herself as a Jedi, and it would have been weird for her to suddenly be a Jedi in the fourth movie.

The 30 year time gaps helps all of these issues both with our perception and Leia’s potential “conflict” regarding embracing being a Jedi.

I get that, I’m just saying it would have been jarring and I’m glad they didn’t go that route. I wouldn’t have said it “ruined her character” or anything silly like that.

To each their own. I’m fine with the route they went though it does make me say “So much for that” whenever I watch ROTJ.

Author
Time

Lord Haseo said:

TV’s Frink said:

Lord Haseo said:

TV’s Frink said:

Leia was a not-Jedi for all three original movies. I don’t think of her as a Jedi, she didn’t think of herself as a Jedi, and it would have been weird for her to suddenly be a Jedi in the fourth movie.

The 30 year time gaps helps all of these issues both with our perception and Leia’s potential “conflict” regarding embracing being a Jedi.

I get that, I’m just saying it would have been jarring and I’m glad they didn’t go that route. I wouldn’t have said it “ruined her character” or anything silly like that.

To each their own. I’m fine with the route they went though it does make me say “So much for that” whenever I watch ROTJ.

I don’t think it’d really make all that much sense for Leia to have dropped everything she’d been doing to become a Jedi. She’d been in politics pretty much her whole life, I don’t know what the canon thing is here but I imagine she went into that again after the Empire fell (not to mention raising her son).

And just because she didn’t become a Jedi doesn’t mean she didn’t learn to use the Force.

Author
Time

TV’s Frink said:

ray_afraid said:

TV’s Frink said:

I thought it was a fun bit the first time he fired the bowcaster. We had never seen it before and it made sense in the context of the situation

Chewie uses it in ROTJ to take out a speeder bike. And I can’t believe Han never in 40 years asked to shoot it.

I meant that we never saw Han use it before TFA, so it was fun to see it for the first time in TFA.

And I can believe Han would go that long without using it, there was (presumably) never a reason for him to do so. Judging by the original trilogy, none of them ever got shot (except Leia and Luke once each in ROTJ).

In my opinion that was the weakest part of the film. It was just cheesy and out of place in the battle.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

ray_afraid said:

He wouldn’t need a reason. He’d want to try it for fun. He also acts like he’s never even seen what it can do. I just don’t buy it.

I assumed Chewie would never let him use it.

And I assumed he was referring to how it felt when firing it, not what it could do.

Author
Time

Wazzles said:

TV’s Frink said:

ray_afraid said:

TV’s Frink said:

I thought it was a fun bit the first time he fired the bowcaster. We had never seen it before and it made sense in the context of the situation

Chewie uses it in ROTJ to take out a speeder bike. And I can’t believe Han never in 40 years asked to shoot it.

I meant that we never saw Han use it before TFA, so it was fun to see it for the first time in TFA.

And I can believe Han would go that long without using it, there was (presumably) never a reason for him to do so. Judging by the original trilogy, none of them ever got shot (except Leia and Luke once each in ROTJ).

In my opinion that was the weakest part of the film. It was just cheesy and out of place in the battle.

I didn’t like it but it’s such a minor thing I wouldn’t call it the weakest part of the film. I’d save that for Starkiller base…or maybe for the destruction of the Hosnian system.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

TV’s Frink said:

ray_afraid said:

He wouldn’t need a reason. He’d want to try it for fun. He also acts like he’s never even seen what it can do. I just don’t buy it.

I assumed Chewie would never let him use it.

And I assumed he was referring to how it felt when firing it, not what it could do.

Maybe both of those things were inferred. I only saw it once. I just remember hating that scene. And when he shoots the guy without looking.

And you’re certainly right about it not being anything like the weakest part of the film. It really has nothing to do with me not being a TFA fan.

Ray’s Lounge
Biggs in ANH edit idea
ROTJ opening edit idea

Author
Time

TV’s Frink said:

Wazzles said:

TV’s Frink said:

ray_afraid said:

TV’s Frink said:

I thought it was a fun bit the first time he fired the bowcaster. We had never seen it before and it made sense in the context of the situation

Chewie uses it in ROTJ to take out a speeder bike. And I can’t believe Han never in 40 years asked to shoot it.

I meant that we never saw Han use it before TFA, so it was fun to see it for the first time in TFA.

And I can believe Han would go that long without using it, there was (presumably) never a reason for him to do so. Judging by the original trilogy, none of them ever got shot (except Leia and Luke once each in ROTJ).

In my opinion that was the weakest part of the film. It was just cheesy and out of place in the battle.

I didn’t like it but it’s such a minor thing I wouldn’t call it the weakest part of the film. I’d save that for Starkiller base…or maybe for the destruction of the Hosnian system.

Those made sense in context; this just took me out of the movie. And the Rathtars.

Author
Time

TV’s Frink said:

ray_afraid said:

He wouldn’t need a reason. He’d want to try it for fun. He also acts like he’s never even seen what it can do. I just don’t buy it.

I assumed Chewie would never let him use it.

It could easily be this, or that he just he used it before, but so long ago he forgot how it felt. Either way, I don’t mind. I thought it was funny.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

TV’s Frink said:

Wazzles said:

TV’s Frink said:

ray_afraid said:

TV’s Frink said:

I thought it was a fun bit the first time he fired the bowcaster. We had never seen it before and it made sense in the context of the situation

Chewie uses it in ROTJ to take out a speeder bike. And I can’t believe Han never in 40 years asked to shoot it.

I meant that we never saw Han use it before TFA, so it was fun to see it for the first time in TFA.

And I can believe Han would go that long without using it, there was (presumably) never a reason for him to do so. Judging by the original trilogy, none of them ever got shot (except Leia and Luke once each in ROTJ).

In my opinion that was the weakest part of the film. It was just cheesy and out of place in the battle.

I didn’t like it but it’s such a minor thing I wouldn’t call it the weakest part of the film. I’d save that for Starkiller base…or maybe for the destruction of the Hosnian system.

Destruction of the Hosnian system the weakest part? Just because they can see it from Takodona? I’d say that’s about on the same level as Han using the bowcaster - pretty minor, whether you mind it or not.

Starkiller base is what any sane person would call the weakest part. Not so much the fact of it but more the way aspects of it were handled.

Author
Time

ray_afraid said:

Lord Haseo said:

ray_afraid said:

He wouldn’t need a reason. He’d want to try it for fun. He also acts like he’s never even seen what it can do. I just don’t buy it.

Many gun owners marvel at weapons they’re firing for the time

Some of us do. Again, I just don’t buy it. No big deal.

And that’s perfectly fine. Not exactly sure if I by it myself.

DominicCobb said:

Lord Haseo said:

TV’s Frink said:

Lord Haseo said:

TV’s Frink said:

Leia was a not-Jedi for all three original movies. I don’t think of her as a Jedi, she didn’t think of herself as a Jedi, and it would have been weird for her to suddenly be a Jedi in the fourth movie.

The 30 year time gaps helps all of these issues both with our perception and Leia’s potential “conflict” regarding embracing being a Jedi.

I get that, I’m just saying it would have been jarring and I’m glad they didn’t go that route. I wouldn’t have said it “ruined her character” or anything silly like that.

To each their own. I’m fine with the route they went though it does make me say “So much for that” whenever I watch ROTJ.

I don’t think it’d really make all that much sense for Leia to have dropped everything she’d been doing to become a Jedi. She’d been in politics pretty much her whole life, I don’t know what the canon thing is here but I imagine she went into that again after the Empire fell

The Force is a very new concept to her. One might want to train out of sheer curiosity but for her she could afford to spend a few years training since their side since her side won. Who knows how much her newfound powers could benefit the New Republic as Luke was instrumental in the Rebellions triumph. Also Ben could have trained with them once he came of age.

(not to mention raising her son).

That’s a separate issue as Luke planned to train Leia far before Ben was born.

And just because she didn’t become a Jedi doesn’t mean she didn’t learn to use the Force.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Leia never agreed to be trained. Luke was just told to pass on what he had learned. Obviously the assumption was that would be to Leia, but if Leia had different plans - like starting a family with Han - it’d make sense that he might hold off, knowing he could train Ben (and others).

And again, we don’t know that Luke didn’t teach Leia the ways of the Force, just that she didn’t become a Jedi (we know at least that she has the power to sense her husband dying on another planet). There’s a lot about this topic we don’t know yet.