The Force Awakens: Official Review Thread - ** SPOILERS ** — Page 63

John Doom said:

TV’s Frink said:

Then perhaps I didn’t understand what you were trying to get at there.

… and then, I also said…

John Doom said:
With that said, it’s not like I think the PT is better than TFA: they’re all terribly flawed one way or another, with TFA not being an exception.

Ok, but my point is that I don’t see how you can say at least the PT tried new things and then turn around and say you never said TFA didn’t.

It’s probably not worth continuing this part of the discussion, it’s probably just a mix up with words. 😉

John Doom said:

I seriously haven’t heard of people actually being against the concept of a black stormtrooper, neither on this site (as far as I remember), nor on guerrestellari.net, Italian Star Wars site. Considering the studios probably pushed for this idea to “widen the demographic”, I doubt they thought it was actually risky.

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=black stormtrooper reaction

I think Abrahms got the tone mostly right, the dialog and acting is good, but it’s like an amalgamation of situation reprisals from the original trilogy. So I think it’s an OK fan homage, but not an authentic part of the Star Wars story.

I don’t take TFA to be an canon part of the SW saga, because its construction and meaning is, frankly, derivative and absurd.

The basis for all the trouble of TFA is that Han and Leia were bad parents… and somehow that one thing resulted in a reset of everything to Episode IV’s state, so that all the same motions could be gone through again - yet the main characters in TFA don’t notice that they’re just doing all the same things all over again.

The film is wilfully uncaring of its constant recasting of setups, imagery, scenarios, banters from the original SW trilogy. And as the film doesn’t take itself to be an equal part of the SW saga, but rather a homage to it, neither do I take it as being a believable entry.

A lot of The tone of TFA is well done, and very much Star Wars, unlike the films of the prequel trilogy. A lot of the dialog makes sense, and the acting is pretty good. But it’s all used to recreate facsimile experiences and imagery from the original trilogy. It’s playing pretend.

The Nazi imagery scenes in TFA were beneath anything Star Wars, and the film jumped the shark at that point. Also, Hans supposed death was silly in so many ways: On a bridge over a chasm, mimicking the Luke and Vader scene at Cloud City in ESB… father facing his son, who is literally a Vader wannabe… the beam of light on them, which fades as the son makes his attack…

Forget the invalid Ewoks = care bears jest argument, everything about Solo’s son being what he was, and Solo’s cheap gimmicky in TFA death was ultimate cheesiness, and came across to me as very contrived.

Also, TFA is flagrantly nerdy (the light saber hilt, the Vader wannabe, the contrived Han death - which Harrison always wanted, the mega weapon plot device, and more), while the original SW saga is not.

Overall, I found TFA to be a decent watch, but it also hurt me a bit to watch, because it used the classic characters, their actors, and did so much right - but in the end it doesn’t have the sincerity or integrity of the original trilogy, and is clearly a homage to the original Star Wars saga, and not a part of it.

Also. before watching TFA, I started to watch Episode 2 of the prequel trilogy, thinking I would enjoy it while passing some time. I ended up shutting it off because it was just crap. I hadn’t seen any of it in years, and before putting it on, I thought it couldn’t be as bad as my memory was suggesting to me. Man, my memory knew what it was talking about. For the short time I watched it, Episode 2 was abysmal, like a half-assed clumsy children’s cartoon, made by people who didn’t know that making something nonsensical and flamboyant doesn’t amount to quality children’s programming.

I never got a sense of the “bad parents” thing.

TavorX said:

I may not agree with most of your points, I found it interesting that you recognize it as a homage. I’ve seen/read comments of TFA being a homage is a good thing rather than a bad thing. I’m just saying I’m surprised you didn’t call it a ripoff or a ANH clone.

When people say homage as a good thing, they might mean the tones, the dialog, the visual designs… and in those things, creating a continuity with the original trilogy is a great thing.

But the homage which I think makes TFA an inequal SW film is so many of its setups, like Han and Chewie still being smugglers, Leia still being a general princess leading a resistance against a nefarious ruling hegemony, a force-wielding villain who wears a voice-shifting mask and black suit, a new single super-weapon threatening the rebel alliance, etc.

TV’s Frink said:

I never got a sense of the “bad parents” thing.

It’s not phrased like that in the movie, but the muscle in the First Order is Han and Leia’s son, who went to the dark side. And Han and Leia question themselves over why it happened.

And it’s also said by Solo that the reason the supreme ruler or whatever wants him is for his power.

I find it very over the top and not entirely serious to have a plot which hinges on the premise that Han and Leia could’ve done simply something, or many things differently with their son, but that now the whole galaxy is experiencing a total reboot of the same threat as in Episode IV.

It must be hard for those two to know that they’re responsible for the troubles now facing everyone - though the movie doesn’t acknowledge this. They had a son, and whoops, all the rebels victories are now undone and everything is right back to where they were.

Delicieuxz said:

TavorX said:

I may not agree with most of your points, I found it interesting that you recognize it as a homage. I’ve seen/read comments of TFA being a homage is a good thing rather than a bad thing. I’m just saying I’m surprised you didn’t call it a ripoff or a ANH clone.

When people say homage as a good thing, they might mean the tones, the dialog, the visual designs… and in those things, creating a continuity with the original trilogy is a great thing.

But the homage which I think makes TFA an inequal SW film is so many of its setups, like Han and Chewie still being smugglers

Not still, but again. Han went back to “what he knew” when things fell apart.

a force-wielding villain who wears a voice-shifting mask and black suit

He idolizes Vader. Makes perfect sense.

Delicieuxz said:

TV’s Frink said:

I never got a sense of the “bad parents” thing.

It’s not phrased like that in the movie, but the muscle in the First Order is Han and Leia’s son, who went to the dark side. And Han and Leia question themselves over why it happened.

And it’s also said by Solo that the reason the supreme ruler or whatever wants him is for his power.

I find it very over the top and not entirely serious to have a plot which hinges on the premise that Han and Leia could’ve done simply something, or many things differently with their son, but that now the whole galaxy is experiencing a total reboot of the same threat as in Episode IV.

Realism is a bad thing in a sci-fi fantasy movie, I guess?

Marriages fall apart because of something that happens or doesn’t happen with a child. I found it interesting to put that in a Star Wars movie.

There’s a deleted scene in Aliens (reinserted in the SE) that explains how Ripley lost her daughter and it’s what drove her caring for Newt. I loved that.

I also loved Sandra Bullock’s backstory in Gravity, and even some of the backstory in The Babadook.

But different life experiences bring different viewpoints. My viewpoint is shaped by my experiences.

TV’s Frink said:

Delicieuxz said:

TavorX said:

I may not agree with most of your points, I found it interesting that you recognize it as a homage. I’ve seen/read comments of TFA being a homage is a good thing rather than a bad thing. I’m just saying I’m surprised you didn’t call it a ripoff or a ANH clone.

When people say homage as a good thing, they might mean the tones, the dialog, the visual designs… and in those things, creating a continuity with the original trilogy is a great thing.

But the homage which I think makes TFA an inequal SW film is so many of its setups, like Han and Chewie still being smugglers

Not still, but again. Han went back to “what he knew” when things fell apart.

a force-wielding villain who wears a voice-shifting mask and black suit

He idolizes Vader. Makes perfect sense.

It makes sense in that a weak, and I would say lame write-off explanation was given to accomplish the film maker’s desire of having specifically a new Vader in the film.

What happened to the character at the end of TFA wasn’t shown, and it may be that he’ll be all mechanized in the next film, just like Vader.

TV’s Frink said:

Delicieuxz said:

TV’s Frink said:

I never got a sense of the “bad parents” thing.

It’s not phrased like that in the movie, but the muscle in the First Order is Han and Leia’s son, who went to the dark side. And Han and Leia question themselves over why it happened.

And it’s also said by Solo that the reason the supreme ruler or whatever wants him is for his power.

I find it very over the top and not entirely serious to have a plot which hinges on the premise that Han and Leia could’ve done simply something, or many things differently with their son, but that now the whole galaxy is experiencing a total reboot of the same threat as in Episode IV.

Realism is a bad thing in a sci-fi fantasy movie, I guess?

Marriages fall apart because of something that happens or doesn’t happen with a child. I found it interesting to put that in a Star Wars movie.

There’s a deleted scene in Aliens (reinserted in the SE) that explains how Ripley lost her daughter and it’s what drove her caring for Newt. I loved that.

I also loved Sandra Bullock’s backstory in Gravity, and even some of the backstory in The Babadook.

But different life experiences bring different viewpoints. My viewpoint is shaped by my experiences.

My point is that what TFA does is not realistic. ‘Marriages sometimes fall apart’ does not lead to ‘therefore it makes total sense that Han and Leia’s kid resulted in a reboot of rebel vs new empire in SW’.

There is a deleted scene in my life where I am forced to listen to Carrie Henn’s screaming and awkward line delivery which perfectly explains why I love the opening sequence to Alien 3 😄

I like those sorts of scenes too because it makes the fiction feel less fictional.
But then I here Padme use the word “kids” and it just doesn’t sit because it’s too informal for a former monarch.
I guess I’ve just hung around too many queens, alien and otherwise.

Does anyone think Disney will do a theatrical release of an extended edition on the build up to Episode VIII and then double dip the home releases?

The Triumph of The Will is a quoted inspiration for that composition. The original source might send shivers up our spines but for patriotic Germans it may have felt good back then. Even the title A New Hope has fascistic undertones. Hitlerism plays with the same heroic language that mythology does. Star Wars is modern mythology.