Star Wars: Rogue One - * Non Spoiler Discussion Thread * — Page 12

doubleofive said:

pittrek said:

I hate that they simply use the nostalgic factor instead of doing something new. Hey look - the Death Star. AGAIN. Oh look - Star destroyers. I remember those from my childhood. Oh look - the boring woman from Episode 6 - I sort of remember her. I remember all those things, so I guess I have a reason to go see the movie it and buy some toys, sorry, I meant “action figures”, right?

It’s a teaser trailer, this is exactly what it’s meant to do.

I know and it was successful - I am 99% sure I will see it in December. I’m just sad that instead of doing something new they’re re-using stuff which they know will bring an audience. It’s pretty lazy.

And BTW I am a minority here but I honestly hope there will be no Vader in this movie or any of the main OT characters

pittrek said:

I’ve just seen the trailer. So… another female hero? Why? We have a young chick as the lead character in the new trilogy. But the trailer seems … OK.

I hate that they simply use the nostalgic factor instead of doing something new. Hey look - the Death Star. AGAIN. Oh look - Star destroyers. I remember those from my childhood. Oh look - the boring woman from Episode 6 - I sort of remember her. I remember all those things, so I guess I have a reason to go see the movie it and buy some toys, sorry, I meant “action figures”, right?

Please be joking.
I had no problem with the Falcon being in TFA it was the plot similarities that annoyed me not the old kit or the really cool new characters (particularly the female ones what with it being the 21st Century and all).

The incident is mentioned in the crawl for the first film, Mon Mothma is in two films played here by the same actress as the chronologically earlier iteration.
I would be all for Caroline Blakiston being in a film between ROTJ and TFA it would make more sense than sticking rubber on Genevieve O’Reilly (born the same year as the series btw).

If they do something more with these characters (this is the importance of plot) It would only add value to a rather dull scene in ROTJ as on re-visiting that film we would see her as an actual character rather than an exposition tannoy.

It’s interesting that the dish is attached last on this Death Star but the station is built around it in ROTJ.

pittrek said:
And BTW I am a minority here but I honestly hope there will be no Vader in this movie or any of the main OT characters

You’d be the minority everywhere with that obscure ass opinion. I mean who wouldn’t want to see Vader killing a bunch of Rebels?

Lord Haseo said:

pittrek said:

So… another female hero? Why? We have a young chick as the lead character in the new trilogy.

She seems to know how to handle herself. I don’t know if you were privy to this information but strong and competent woman are known to be in Star Wars. Leia, Rey, Darth Zannah, Darth Cogness, Asajj Ventress, Lumiya etc.

No clue who Darth Zannah, Lumiya or Darh Cogness are, but that’s not my point. I think it’s not a wise “dramatic” decision to have a young female hero in the main movies and AT THE SAME TIME to have a young female hero as the lead character in the spin-off movie. It’s like if every Star Trek show had a young overacting Canadian playing the captain. I just hope her sidekicks won’t be a young black guy and a “cute” non-humanoid droid.

Just in case you didn’t know.

I hate that they simply use the nostalgic factor instead of doing something new. Hey look - the Death Star. AGAIN. Oh look - Star destroyers. I remember those from my childhood. Oh look - the boring woman from Episode 6 - I sort of remember her. I remember all those things, so I guess I have a reason to go see the movie it and buy some toys, sorry, I meant “action figures”, right?

Well…if this is set right before STAR WARS why wouldn’t they have the classic imagery?

Well but that’s the whole problem - the ONLY reason they’re doing it as a E4 prequel is that they want to use pre-existing things well known to the general public. It’s a business decision, not an artistic decision. That’s the whole reason why these spin-off movies do exist.

But still - they’re successful. They got me exactly as they got everybody else.

pittrek

I guess that would be like the decision to have almost all the significant characters in the OT Caucasian human men, not to down play Beru or the Cantina twins or the woman straining peas in Mos Eisley.

They cut Koo Stark out of the first film. But oh gosh too many women now Jeeze Louise (or should that be Louis?).

Tobar said:

Boy is Pittrek gonna be in for a treat when they announce they’ve cast Jennifer Lawrence as young Han Solo!

I’d watch it actually. I’d watch anything with Jennifer Lawrence 😃

pittrek said:
No clue who Darth Zannah, Lumiya or Darh Cogness are, but that’s not my point. I think it’s not a wise “dramatic” decision to have a young female hero in the main movies and AT THE SAME TIME to have a young female hero as the lead character in the spin-off movie. It’s like if every Star Trek show had a young overacting Canadian playing the captain. I just hope her sidekicks won’t be a young black guy and a “cute” non-humanoid droid.

Well my point was that gender doesn’t seem to matter when the character is competent so it doesn’t matter.

Well but that’s the whole problem - the ONLY reason they’re doing it as a E4 prequel is that they want to use pre-existing things well known to the general public. It’s a business decision, not an artistic decision. That’s the whole reason why these spin-off movies do exist.

If it ends up being a good film why would it matter they’re trying to hit our nostalgia g-spot?

Tobar said:
That was AMAZING! Anyone that wasn’t excited by that is DEAD INSIDE.

I can’t necessarily imagine contrarians who hate most things and condescend to people who happen to enjoy things feel very good on the inside. Why else would they try to tear other people down for what they like?

I think Vader should make a cameo at the end. He should come in to take control of the situation and discover where the plans were transmitted. If they do show him, I hope they get his costume right.

They already did… https://scontent-iad3-1.cdninstagram.com/t51.2885-15/e35/12747577_1664945460421434_1798709718_n.jpg

The helmet in RO even looks as unpolished as in ANH next to ESB.

The size of the helmet has always been out of proportion, maybe except in ROTS.

But it does feel OT doesn’t it?

I wander who the cloaked figure is, why does he have Imperial Guards custoding him (could it be Palpatine?) and why do the steps release smoke…

Oh, al polished floors to the Empire are an addition that comes straight from TFA. OT Star Destroyers and sets had dull floors I think. (everything reflective screams non-used universe to me in star wars).

So as you see, all my complaints are just nitpicks. I’m in for this movie.

I believe it was decided at some point in the evolution of the canon that the white uniforms in ANH belong to the Imperial Security Bureau, which is depicted as something like the Soviet KGB. Not sure if that still holds for the Disney era.

Tobar said:

Mithrandir said:

Oh, and polished floors to the Empire are an addition that comes straight from TFA. OT Star Destroyers and sets had dull floors I think. (everything reflective screams non-used universe to me in star wars).

Looks pretty shiny to me:

=P

That’s reflective, but not 100% polished. It does look used. Compare it with TFA.