BiggsFan44

RogueLeader said:

Hey Biggs, which version of the deleted scene were you planning to use that is offline now?

Someone could add to this or correct me if I’m wrong, but I thought I remember seeing someone trying to polish that deleted scene so it could be usable, since as-is it is very dirty.

Maybe someone knows what I’m talking about, but I would suggest going through both the fan edit threads and the preservation threads.

I think there is someone who was fixing up the deleted scene of Luke looking up at the space battle, and I think he said he was also going to work on the Tosche station scenes. If you find those threads you could try to message those people directly about it.

Otherwise, I’d suggest going with oojason’s idea, and try to have the film match the source, giving the movie a grindhouse or discovered rough cut feel. I definitely think it would be cool to have an extended edition of the film in that sort of style.

EDIT: I also know that some people were attempting to work on recreating an earlier cut of the film that was very inferior to final version. I’m not sure if they ever finished it but I think that would be a wonderful project that could demonstrate what could have been and the power of editing.

Good advice, and yeah, I did plan to grab a copy of the special features disc from a… website, but it’s not there anymore.
I do think I might go the grindhouse route with something from the Spleen, I just wish my footage wasn’t run through YouTube compression.

Anchorhead said:

BiggsFan44 said:

What does time on this forum have to do with it?

Quite a bit.

Disagree.

DrDre said:

BiggsFan44 said:

DrDre said:

BiggsFan44 said:

DrDre said:

BiggsFan44 said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

RogueLeader said:

You can’t equate Marvel and Star Wars and say if there is no Marvel controversy then Lucasfilm must be doing something wrong. I understand why people compare them, but they’re not the same

It’s not just Marvel. Star Wars has become a poster boy for fan toxicity in the eyes of the media. Its fans are at war with each other over the future of the franchise. I would say the franchise is in a deep crisis, yet LFM seems to be oblivious to this, or is ignoring it altogether.

What are they supposed to do to fix this? I can’t think of any feasible solution. You speak out against toxicity, fans complain that you’re calling everyone toxic. You make a movie doing something interesting, fans complain it’s not what they want. You make a movie catering to fans, fans complain it’s not what they want. You make no movies, fans complain that the franchise is dying. You make lots of movies, fans complain that the franchise is dying. The truth is there’s no winning. Star Wars as a franchise just has a lot of shitty fans. This has been true and obvious for almost two decades now. There’s nothing anyone can do to change that.

I think it’s too easy to blame the fans. The fact is that TFA and RO were generally well recieved by fans and critics alike, despite being derivative and rife with fan service. Evidently something changed after the release of TLJ.

People realized that TFA was hollow.

I don’t agree. TFA served its purpose of mostly being a nostalgia trip, and while most felt it was derivative of ANH and very safe, I think only relatively small minority actually truly disliked it.

“Served its purpose”.
Like I said before, the “this movie needed to ease people back in with nostalgia and the next movies could be different” line doesn’t work when TFA locked in the nostagliamax art direction and Rebels vs Empire rehash, among other things.
Rebooting ANH made the entire trilogy stillborn.

I agree it didn’t make things easy for RJ, but the existence of the New Republic, and the fringe government nature of the FO left its sequel with enough possibilities to take things in a different direction, despite TFA’s tendency to copy ANH. TFA ends with both the New Republic, and the FO suffering a major defeat. It was TLJ that turned the FO into an organisation with unlimited resources like the Empire, the Resistance into rebels, and prevented the New Republic from being an active participant in the rest of the story.

I mean, the FO was already more resource rich than the Empire, if the third (and bigger badder) Death Star is anything to go by.

Considering that SKB apparently was also their home world I don’t necessarily agree. I would have argued after TFA, that they put most of their resources into turning their homeworld into a super weapon. The FO seemed more like the rebels in TESB to me, forced to hide on an ice cube in the unknown regions.

1. Nothing in the movie implies that SKB is their homeworld.
2. SKB is somewhere in the neighborhood of Hosian Prime, as shown in the movie.

DrDre said:

BiggsFan44 said:

DrDre said:

BiggsFan44 said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

RogueLeader said:

You can’t equate Marvel and Star Wars and say if there is no Marvel controversy then Lucasfilm must be doing something wrong. I understand why people compare them, but they’re not the same

It’s not just Marvel. Star Wars has become a poster boy for fan toxicity in the eyes of the media. Its fans are at war with each other over the future of the franchise. I would say the franchise is in a deep crisis, yet LFM seems to be oblivious to this, or is ignoring it altogether.

What are they supposed to do to fix this? I can’t think of any feasible solution. You speak out against toxicity, fans complain that you’re calling everyone toxic. You make a movie doing something interesting, fans complain it’s not what they want. You make a movie catering to fans, fans complain it’s not what they want. You make no movies, fans complain that the franchise is dying. You make lots of movies, fans complain that the franchise is dying. The truth is there’s no winning. Star Wars as a franchise just has a lot of shitty fans. This has been true and obvious for almost two decades now. There’s nothing anyone can do to change that.

I think it’s too easy to blame the fans. The fact is that TFA and RO were generally well recieved by fans and critics alike, despite being derivative and rife with fan service. Evidently something changed after the release of TLJ.

People realized that TFA was hollow.

I don’t agree. TFA served its purpose of mostly being a nostalgia trip, and while most felt it was derivative of ANH and very safe, I think only relatively small minority actually truly disliked it.

“Served its purpose”.
Like I said before, the “this movie needed to ease people back in with nostalgia and the next movies could be different” line doesn’t work when TFA locked in the nostagliamax art direction and Rebels vs Empire rehash, among other things.
Rebooting ANH made the entire trilogy stillborn.

I agree it didn’t make things easy for RJ, but the existence of the New Republic, and the fringe government nature of the FO left its sequel with enough possibilities to take things in a different direction, despite TFA’s tendency to copy ANH. TFA ends with both the New Republic, and the FO suffering a major defeat. It was TLJ that turned the FO into an organisation with unlimited resources like the Empire, the Resistance into rebels, and prevented the New Republic from being an active participant in the rest of the story.

I mean, the FO was already more resource rich than the Empire, if the third (and bigger badder) Death Star is anything to go by.

RogueLeader said:

So they did it to deprive fans of fan service?

When people say TFA was all fan service?

It was “fan” service.

DrDre said:

BiggsFan44 said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

RogueLeader said:

You can’t equate Marvel and Star Wars and say if there is no Marvel controversy then Lucasfilm must be doing something wrong. I understand why people compare them, but they’re not the same

It’s not just Marvel. Star Wars has become a poster boy for fan toxicity in the eyes of the media. Its fans are at war with each other over the future of the franchise. I would say the franchise is in a deep crisis, yet LFM seems to be oblivious to this, or is ignoring it altogether.

What are they supposed to do to fix this? I can’t think of any feasible solution. You speak out against toxicity, fans complain that you’re calling everyone toxic. You make a movie doing something interesting, fans complain it’s not what they want. You make a movie catering to fans, fans complain it’s not what they want. You make no movies, fans complain that the franchise is dying. You make lots of movies, fans complain that the franchise is dying. The truth is there’s no winning. Star Wars as a franchise just has a lot of shitty fans. This has been true and obvious for almost two decades now. There’s nothing anyone can do to change that.

I think it’s too easy to blame the fans. The fact is that TFA and RO were generally well recieved by fans and critics alike, despite being derivative and rife with fan service. Evidently something changed after the release of TLJ.

People realized that TFA was hollow.

I don’t agree. TFA served its purpose of mostly being a nostalgia trip, and while most felt it was derivative of ANH and very safe, I think only relatively small minority actually truly disliked it.

“Served its purpose”.
Like I said before, the “this movie needed to ease people back in with nostalgia and the next movies could be different” line doesn’t work when TFA locked in the nostagliamax art direction and Rebels vs Empire rehash, among other things.
Rebooting ANH made the entire trilogy stillborn.

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

RogueLeader said:

You can’t equate Marvel and Star Wars and say if there is no Marvel controversy then Lucasfilm must be doing something wrong. I understand why people compare them, but they’re not the same

It’s not just Marvel. Star Wars has become a poster boy for fan toxicity in the eyes of the media. Its fans are at war with each other over the future of the franchise. I would say the franchise is in a deep crisis, yet LFM seems to be oblivious to this, or is ignoring it altogether.

What are they supposed to do to fix this? I can’t think of any feasible solution. You speak out against toxicity, fans complain that you’re calling everyone toxic. You make a movie doing something interesting, fans complain it’s not what they want. You make a movie catering to fans, fans complain it’s not what they want. You make no movies, fans complain that the franchise is dying. You make lots of movies, fans complain that the franchise is dying. The truth is there’s no winning. Star Wars as a franchise just has a lot of shitty fans. This has been true and obvious for almost two decades now. There’s nothing anyone can do to change that.

I think it’s too easy to blame the fans. The fact is that TFA and RO were generally well recieved by fans and critics alike, despite being derivative and rife with fan service. Evidently something changed after the release of TLJ.

People realized that TFA was hollow.

Mocata said:
Disney is all about brand integrity after all.

You are detached from reality.

DominicCobb said:

BiggsFan44 said:

DominicCobb said:

Why is this topic even still open? Hasn’t it been proven again and again that seemingly the only point here is to talk about the ST, which could easily be done in the review threads?

My OP is not about the ST beyond it being a part of SW.

Then why are all your posts about your personal issues with the ST (that have nothing to do with the series being a “cohesive saga”)?

“All my posts” are not. The are plenty that are simply trying to communicate what the question my OP was asking is.

Collipso said:

BiggsFan44 said:

DominicCobb said:

Why is this topic even still open? Hasn’t it been proven again and again that seemingly the only point here is to talk about the ST, which could easily be done in the review threads?

My OP is not about the ST beyond it being a part of SW.

the thread is you complaining about the ST though.

In response to others posting opinions I don’t share.

DominicCobb said:

Why is this topic even still open? Hasn’t it been proven again and again that seemingly the only point here is to talk about the ST, which could easily be done in the review threads?

My OP is not about the ST beyond it being a part of SW.

dahmage said:

Now since this is obviously just a “you hate the Last Jedi” thread I am done posting here.

I hate TFA far more. TLJ at least didn’t feel like “I’m smarter than Lucas watch me fix SW: The Movie.”
The Luke plot had potential in another, better trilogy status quo.
I liked Old Man Luke, but he died for no reason, and Rey and Kylo are still hollow, empty characters.
And again, it’s not even about that. It’s about that in relation to the fact that PT haters are acting like these movies are some kind of a return to form for Star Wars.

dahmage said:
you are the first person that I’ve heard of describing this as a ‘tonal clash’.

It’s a scene right out of a parody.
The laser that’s going to kill “what we love” fires in center frame right as they lean in for the kiss after Rose’s “saving what we love” speech.

I have never EVER seen a more utterly insane development in the SW community than people who think that the ST isn’t a fucking joke compared even to the PT, let alone the OT.

It’s like the people who bashed the PT for years just shut down when movies worse than the PT come out.
Maybe because they know that they’re the reason why these new movies are cinematic abortions.

dahmage said:

BiggsFan44 said:

dahmage said:

BiggsFan44 said:

dahmage said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Mocata said:

ChainsawAsh said:

Okay, this is where I stop, because all of this is 100% “I don’t like the ST so I’m going to rail against it and find every avenue I can to attack it” and not a discussion of keeping canonical cohesion of a saga across multiple decades and filmmakers. Which is the discussion I was hoping to find when I opened this thread.

I’m amazed this thread is still going, but thanks for the break down of what is really going on in all of these monolithic quote trees. Not liking the ST is fine. But claiming the real reason they don’t work is because they don’t follow the prequels enough is just bonkers. Nobody was going to pay however many millions to invite comparisons to that debacle. Things that leave a bad taste need a strong pallet cleanser after all.

Since you brought it up, I’d say that “debacle” is a much more accurate description of the ST (so far) than the PT.
It doesn’t get more cringeworthy than than the unfortunate juxtaposition of Rose’s “saving what we love” speech with the laser blasting “what they love” in center frame as they lean in for the kiss.

And people thought “I don’t like sand” was bad. Yeesh.

Stop, my sides are hurting.

Do you honestly disagree?

I don’t know if there’s much point in me clarifying. but yes I 100% disagree and I really think you did not understand what actually was happening in that scene with rose and Finn.

I get that some people think that finn might have actually destroyed the laser but I think that that is the wrong conclusion and I am not alone.

Had she not redirected his misguided heroics he would have ended up dead and the laser would have still blown through the door. Not a winning strategy to have your few remaining Rebels die ‘heroically’.

Right, but the point is that it was poorly communicated and left you to puzzle it out later.
Like, I could say that the point of the sand line is that Anakin came from Tatooine, but you wouldn’t think that that makes it better.

If you agree, then why do you still believe /post otherwise? I am left to believe you are trolling this site.

I don’t agree that Anakin’s line is bad. I’m just showing how explaining the intended point to someone who thinks a scene doesn’t work will not usually change their minds, since they don’t like it BECAUSE they think the point was poorly made.

dahmage said:

BiggsFan44 said:

dahmage said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Mocata said:

ChainsawAsh said:

Okay, this is where I stop, because all of this is 100% “I don’t like the ST so I’m going to rail against it and find every avenue I can to attack it” and not a discussion of keeping canonical cohesion of a saga across multiple decades and filmmakers. Which is the discussion I was hoping to find when I opened this thread.

I’m amazed this thread is still going, but thanks for the break down of what is really going on in all of these monolithic quote trees. Not liking the ST is fine. But claiming the real reason they don’t work is because they don’t follow the prequels enough is just bonkers. Nobody was going to pay however many millions to invite comparisons to that debacle. Things that leave a bad taste need a strong pallet cleanser after all.

Since you brought it up, I’d say that “debacle” is a much more accurate description of the ST (so far) than the PT.
It doesn’t get more cringeworthy than than the unfortunate juxtaposition of Rose’s “saving what we love” speech with the laser blasting “what they love” in center frame as they lean in for the kiss.

And people thought “I don’t like sand” was bad. Yeesh.

Stop, my sides are hurting.

Do you honestly disagree?

I don’t know if there’s much point in me clarifying. but yes I 100% disagree and I really think you did not understand what actually was happening in that scene with rose and Finn.

I get that some people think that finn might have actually destroyed the laser but I think that that is the wrong conclusion and I am not alone.

Had she not redirected his misguided heroics he would have ended up dead and the laser would have still blown through the door. Not a winning strategy to have your few remaining Rebels die ‘heroically’.

Right, but the point is that it was poorly communicated and left you to puzzle it out later.
Like, I could say that the point of the sand line is that Anakin came from Tatooine, but you wouldn’t think that that makes it better.

And also, the jarring tonal clash is still there even in your version, since the laser was apparently going to kill “what we love” either way.

DrDre said:

BiggsFan44 said:

dahmage said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Mocata said:

ChainsawAsh said:

Okay, this is where I stop, because all of this is 100% “I don’t like the ST so I’m going to rail against it and find every avenue I can to attack it” and not a discussion of keeping canonical cohesion of a saga across multiple decades and filmmakers. Which is the discussion I was hoping to find when I opened this thread.

I’m amazed this thread is still going, but thanks for the break down of what is really going on in all of these monolithic quote trees. Not liking the ST is fine. But claiming the real reason they don’t work is because they don’t follow the prequels enough is just bonkers. Nobody was going to pay however many millions to invite comparisons to that debacle. Things that leave a bad taste need a strong pallet cleanser after all.

Since you brought it up, I’d say that “debacle” is a much more accurate description of the ST (so far) than the PT.
It doesn’t get more cringeworthy than than the unfortunate juxtaposition of Rose’s “saving what we love” speech with the laser blasting “what they love” in center frame as they lean in for the kiss.

And people thought “I don’t like sand” was bad. Yeesh.

Stop, my sides are hurting.

Do you honestly disagree?

Yes, he honestly has a different opinion from you. You might try to respect him for that fact, rather than act like a ****.

Uh… he believed all the response my post warranted was to let me know that it was laughable.
Don’t look to me for the start of the disrespect chain.

dahmage said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Mocata said:

ChainsawAsh said:

Okay, this is where I stop, because all of this is 100% “I don’t like the ST so I’m going to rail against it and find every avenue I can to attack it” and not a discussion of keeping canonical cohesion of a saga across multiple decades and filmmakers. Which is the discussion I was hoping to find when I opened this thread.

I’m amazed this thread is still going, but thanks for the break down of what is really going on in all of these monolithic quote trees. Not liking the ST is fine. But claiming the real reason they don’t work is because they don’t follow the prequels enough is just bonkers. Nobody was going to pay however many millions to invite comparisons to that debacle. Things that leave a bad taste need a strong pallet cleanser after all.

Since you brought it up, I’d say that “debacle” is a much more accurate description of the ST (so far) than the PT.
It doesn’t get more cringeworthy than than the unfortunate juxtaposition of Rose’s “saving what we love” speech with the laser blasting “what they love” in center frame as they lean in for the kiss.

And people thought “I don’t like sand” was bad. Yeesh.

Stop, my sides are hurting.

Do you honestly disagree?

Mocata said:

ChainsawAsh said:

Okay, this is where I stop, because all of this is 100% “I don’t like the ST so I’m going to rail against it and find every avenue I can to attack it” and not a discussion of keeping canonical cohesion of a saga across multiple decades and filmmakers. Which is the discussion I was hoping to find when I opened this thread.

I’m amazed this thread is still going, but thanks for the break down of what is really going on in all of these monolithic quote trees. Not liking the ST is fine. But claiming the real reason they don’t work is because they don’t follow the prequels enough is just bonkers. Nobody was going to pay however many millions to invite comparisons to that debacle. Things that leave a bad taste need a strong pallet cleanser after all.

Since you brought it up, I’d say that “debacle” is a much more accurate description of the ST (so far) than the PT.
It doesn’t get more cringeworthy than than the unfortunate juxtaposition of Rose’s “saving what we love” speech with the laser blasting “what they love” in center frame as they lean in for the kiss.

And people thought “I don’t like sand” was bad. Yeesh.

DuracellEnergizer said:

BiggsFan44 said:

ChainsawAsh said:

Alright, I’ll try to find your “examples” from throughout the thread and respond to them.

First, Yoda:

For example, I was just watching TLJ and I got to the scene with Yoda. Yoda is a puppet in TLJ when he was CG in the PT. The problem for me is that these movies are supposed to be installments in the same story, and yet that illusion is shattered into a million pieces when things like puppet Yoda

Yoda in TLJ is supposed to look as much like he did in ghost form in ROTJ as possible. He’s a puppet in the end of ROTJ when he’s a ghost. It would, in my opinion, be more immersion-breaking for him to be CGI and appear as he did 20 years before his death. It would be a different story (and an entirely different can of worms) had Lucas replaced ESB/ROTJ Yoda with a CGI model, but he never did. So, chronologically, you see (I) CGI/puppet (depending on the version of TPM you watch) > (II) CGI > (III) CGI > (V) Puppet > (VI) Puppet > (VIII) Puppet. You really think that (I) CGI/puppet > (II) CGI > (III) CGI > (V) Puppet > (VI) Puppet > (VIII) CGI would have been more cohesive when looked at as a full saga?

The Maz Kanata argument is invalid to me because she never appeared in any film prior to TFA, so there’s an infinite amount of freedom in her appearance. You’d have an argument if she appeared in TFA as CGI and was suddenly a puppet in TLJ, or something, but as it stands you’re creating a comparison where there isn’t one.

Yoda being CG might strain the link up with the OT, but the strain doesn’t come from what my thread is about, which is how we can consider this all to be one universe if creators are passing judgement on the quality of the depiction of supposedly equally canonical events.

So Lucas broke the cohesion of “one universe” by changing Yoda from a puppet to CGI first. Yet it’s the ST you’re railing against for going back to the puppet. That seems like a double standard to me - villifying ST filmmakers for changing a thing from one film to the next while excusing Lucas from doing the same because you prefer his movies.

On to other things…

or TFA being like the anti-prequel in much of its approach

How?

are pretty much rebuttals of earlier installments.

How are they rebuttals? Do they claim that the earlier movies never happened, wiping them from continuity the way every Highlander sequel has done to the film that came before it? No.

how can the fact that people can’t stop picking and choosing elements they like and don’t like from the movies (that goes for fans and creators alike) not completely destroy the illusion that ALL of these events from ALL of these movies and shows take place in the same universe?

It…doesn’t? I don’t understand how it does, and I’ve yet to see an explanation from you as to how this is the case in your mind.

the fact that TCW Anakin maybe should have been closer to Hayden, but also that they aren’t really AS different as Hayden detractors claim, and late season Lanter Anakin was as “unlikable” as Anakin ever was, especially in arcs like the second Clovis arc.

Did you just refute your own argument about Anakin in the same sentence in which you brought it up? Because I think you did.

I’d argue that the ST betrays the spirit of the series more than the PT did though. And that’s a larger problem than things like why Owen didn’t recognize 3-P0.
TFA is a waste of 200 million dollars because it copies a movie but makes it worse (And the argument that the first Disney SW movie needed to feel “familiar” is moot, since TFA locks the entire trilogy into a “big bad Empire vs. scrappy rebels” redo, complete with locking in the stale aesthetic/art direction), and TLJ writes Luke so incredibly OOC that he can’t be considered the same character who said “You’ve failed, your highness. I am a Jedi, like my father before me.”

Okay, this is where I stop, because all of this is 100% “I don’t like the ST so I’m going to rail against it and find every avenue I can to attack it” and not a discussion of keeping canonical cohesion of a saga across multiple decades and filmmakers. Which is the discussion I was hoping to find when I opened this thread.

The Rosetta Stone of TFA is this- it doesn’t even have a scene that explains the political scenario to the level ANH did with the Tarkin round table scene, simply because the PT had “too much politics.”
TFA is so OBVIOUSLY reactionary, you trolling bantha.

BiggsFan44 said:

ChainsawAsh said:

BiggsFan44 said:

ChainsawAsh said:

Alright, I’ll try to find your “examples” from throughout the thread and respond to them.

First, Yoda:

For example, I was just watching TLJ and I got to the scene with Yoda. Yoda is a puppet in TLJ when he was CG in the PT. The problem for me is that these movies are supposed to be installments in the same story, and yet that illusion is shattered into a million pieces when things like puppet Yoda

Yoda in TLJ is supposed to look as much like he did in ghost form in ROTJ as possible. He’s a puppet in the end of ROTJ when he’s a ghost. It would, in my opinion, be more immersion-breaking for him to be CGI and appear as he did 20 years before his death. It would be a different story (and an entirely different can of worms) had Lucas replaced ESB/ROTJ Yoda with a CGI model, but he never did. So, chronologically, you see (I) CGI/puppet (depending on the version of TPM you watch) > (II) CGI > (III) CGI > (V) Puppet > (VI) Puppet > (VIII) Puppet. You really think that (I) CGI/puppet > (II) CGI > (III) CGI > (V) Puppet > (VI) Puppet > (VIII) CGI would have been more cohesive when looked at as a full saga?

The Maz Kanata argument is invalid to me because she never appeared in any film prior to TFA, so there’s an infinite amount of freedom in her appearance. You’d have an argument if she appeared in TFA as CGI and was suddenly a puppet in TLJ, or something, but as it stands you’re creating a comparison where there isn’t one.

Yoda being CG might strain the link up with the OT, but the strain doesn’t come from what my thread is about, which is how we can consider this all to be one universe if creators are passing judgement on the quality of the depiction of supposedly equally canonical events.

So Lucas broke the cohesion of “one universe” by changing Yoda from a puppet to CGI first. Yet it’s the ST you’re railing against for going back to the puppet. That seems like a double standard to me - villifying ST filmmakers for changing a thing from one film to the next while excusing Lucas from doing the same because you prefer his movies.

On to other things…

or TFA being like the anti-prequel in much of its approach

How?

are pretty much rebuttals of earlier installments.

How are they rebuttals? Do they claim that the earlier movies never happened, wiping them from continuity the way every Highlander sequel has done to the film that came before it? No.

how can the fact that people can’t stop picking and choosing elements they like and don’t like from the movies (that goes for fans and creators alike) not completely destroy the illusion that ALL of these events from ALL of these movies and shows take place in the same universe?

It…doesn’t? I don’t understand how it does, and I’ve yet to see an explanation from you as to how this is the case in your mind.

the fact that TCW Anakin maybe should have been closer to Hayden, but also that they aren’t really AS different as Hayden detractors claim, and late season Lanter Anakin was as “unlikable” as Anakin ever was, especially in arcs like the second Clovis arc.

Did you just refute your own argument about Anakin in the same sentence in which you brought it up? Because I think you did.

I’d argue that the ST betrays the spirit of the series more than the PT did though. And that’s a larger problem than things like why Owen didn’t recognize 3-P0.
TFA is a waste of 200 million dollars because it copies a movie but makes it worse (And the argument that the first Disney SW movie needed to feel “familiar” is moot, since TFA locks the entire trilogy into a “big bad Empire vs. scrappy rebels” redo, complete with locking in the stale aesthetic/art direction), and TLJ writes Luke so incredibly OOC that he can’t be considered the same character who said “You’ve failed, your highness. I am a Jedi, like my father before me.”

Okay, this is where I stop, because all of this is 100% “I don’t like the ST so I’m going to rail against it and find every avenue I can to attack it” and not a discussion of keeping canonical cohesion of a saga across multiple decades and filmmakers. Which is the discussion I was hoping to find when I opened this thread.

The Rosetta Stone of TFA is this- it doesn’t even have a scene that explains the political scenario to the level ANH did with the Tarkin round table scene, simply because the PT had “too much politics.”
TFA is so OBVIOUSLY reactionary, you trolling bantha.

Love it when members with one-day-old accounts call 14-year veterans of the site trolls.

Clearly you’re not interested in having an actual conversation. Thanks for the new signature quote, though. Bye.

What does time on this forum have to do with it? You’re not going to troll people who share your opinions.
Also, you know I’m right about TFA.

lawl

I suspect there’s indeed a “trolling bantha” in this thread, but it isn’t ChainsawAsh.

Who’s the suspect?

dahmage said:

BiggsFan44 said:

This was kind of a ramble, but it’s something i’ve been wanting to get off my chest for a while. Any thoughts?

Do you feel better now that you aired your ST hate?

See my previous replies to this question, please.
Perhaps the one where I talk about Anakin.

DominicCobb said:

BiggsFan44 said:

RogueLeader said:
I just think you are at the point of thought that this a terrible movie even though there is still a lot to love about this film. Like others have said, I feel like you made this thread to find people to agree with your opinions rather than be open-minded about anything else.

Again, it’s not even about quality.
Let’s use Anakin instead of TFA since you people get hung up on defending JJ- how can early TCW Anakin, who is basically

1. A different character than movie Anakin
2. Clearly Filoni’s response to failings he perceived with movie Anakin

be said to exist in the same story as an alternate version of that character?
How can different be the same?

You know Lucas was heavily involved in TCW, especially in the early years right?

I do, although I was under the impression that he become more involved as it went along, since Gilroy and co say season one was a little more “just them”, and Filoni talks about how GL started to become excited about the potential around season 3.
That also explains why TCW Anakin became more and more like Hayden’s portrayal as the show continued, in both character and appearance (visually, they shaved down his chiseled-by-god-himself jaw and gave him Hayden’s slighty forward shoulders).
I also know that GL often gave in to Filoni, like with the Order 66 chip.

RogueLeader said:
I just think you are at the point of thought that this a terrible movie even though there is still a lot to love about this film. Like others have said, I feel like you made this thread to find people to agree with your opinions rather than be open-minded about anything else.

Again, it’s not even about quality.
Let’s use Anakin instead of TFA since you people get hung up on defending JJ- how can early TCW Anakin, who is basically

1. A different character than movie Anakin
2. Clearly Filoni’s response to failings he perceived with movie Anakin

be said to exist in the same story as an alternate version of that character?
How can different be the same?

EDIT: The “ease back into SW” party line is moot since TFA locked all three movies into a visual and narrative rehash, not just itself. At the VERY least, it did that more than George was going to.

ChainsawAsh said:

BiggsFan44 said:

ChainsawAsh said:

Alright, I’ll try to find your “examples” from throughout the thread and respond to them.

First, Yoda:

For example, I was just watching TLJ and I got to the scene with Yoda. Yoda is a puppet in TLJ when he was CG in the PT. The problem for me is that these movies are supposed to be installments in the same story, and yet that illusion is shattered into a million pieces when things like puppet Yoda

Yoda in TLJ is supposed to look as much like he did in ghost form in ROTJ as possible. He’s a puppet in the end of ROTJ when he’s a ghost. It would, in my opinion, be more immersion-breaking for him to be CGI and appear as he did 20 years before his death. It would be a different story (and an entirely different can of worms) had Lucas replaced ESB/ROTJ Yoda with a CGI model, but he never did. So, chronologically, you see (I) CGI/puppet (depending on the version of TPM you watch) > (II) CGI > (III) CGI > (V) Puppet > (VI) Puppet > (VIII) Puppet. You really think that (I) CGI/puppet > (II) CGI > (III) CGI > (V) Puppet > (VI) Puppet > (VIII) CGI would have been more cohesive when looked at as a full saga?

The Maz Kanata argument is invalid to me because she never appeared in any film prior to TFA, so there’s an infinite amount of freedom in her appearance. You’d have an argument if she appeared in TFA as CGI and was suddenly a puppet in TLJ, or something, but as it stands you’re creating a comparison where there isn’t one.

Yoda being CG might strain the link up with the OT, but the strain doesn’t come from what my thread is about, which is how we can consider this all to be one universe if creators are passing judgement on the quality of the depiction of supposedly equally canonical events.

So Lucas broke the cohesion of “one universe” by changing Yoda from a puppet to CGI first. Yet it’s the ST you’re railing against for going back to the puppet. That seems like a double standard to me - villifying ST filmmakers for changing a thing from one film to the next while excusing Lucas from doing the same because you prefer his movies.

On to other things…

or TFA being like the anti-prequel in much of its approach

How?

are pretty much rebuttals of earlier installments.

How are they rebuttals? Do they claim that the earlier movies never happened, wiping them from continuity the way every Highlander sequel has done to the film that came before it? No.

how can the fact that people can’t stop picking and choosing elements they like and don’t like from the movies (that goes for fans and creators alike) not completely destroy the illusion that ALL of these events from ALL of these movies and shows take place in the same universe?

It…doesn’t? I don’t understand how it does, and I’ve yet to see an explanation from you as to how this is the case in your mind.

the fact that TCW Anakin maybe should have been closer to Hayden, but also that they aren’t really AS different as Hayden detractors claim, and late season Lanter Anakin was as “unlikable” as Anakin ever was, especially in arcs like the second Clovis arc.

Did you just refute your own argument about Anakin in the same sentence in which you brought it up? Because I think you did.

I’d argue that the ST betrays the spirit of the series more than the PT did though. And that’s a larger problem than things like why Owen didn’t recognize 3-P0.
TFA is a waste of 200 million dollars because it copies a movie but makes it worse (And the argument that the first Disney SW movie needed to feel “familiar” is moot, since TFA locks the entire trilogy into a “big bad Empire vs. scrappy rebels” redo, complete with locking in the stale aesthetic/art direction), and TLJ writes Luke so incredibly OOC that he can’t be considered the same character who said “You’ve failed, your highness. I am a Jedi, like my father before me.”

Okay, this is where I stop, because all of this is 100% “I don’t like the ST so I’m going to rail against it and find every avenue I can to attack it” and not a discussion of keeping canonical cohesion of a saga across multiple decades and filmmakers. Which is the discussion I was hoping to find when I opened this thread.

The Rosetta Stone of TFA is this- it doesn’t even have a scene that explains the political scenario to the level ANH did with the Tarkin round table scene, simply because the PT had “too much politics.”
TFA is so OBVIOUSLY reactionary, you trolling bantha.

Love it when members with one-day-old accounts call 14-year veterans of the site trolls.

Clearly you’re not interested in having an actual conversation. Thanks for the new signature quote, though. Bye.

What does time on this forum have to do with it? You’re not going to troll people who share your opinions.
Also, you know I’m right about TFA.

RogueLeader said:

BiggsFan44 said:

Empire vs Rebels 2.0 was not in Lucas’ story. Sorry.

"The important thing to know was this, throughout the entire guided imagery phase, Lucas was involved.

And what ideas were born in the guided imagery phase?

Kira (Rey/Thea) as a scavenger on a desert planet.

Skylar/Finn/Sam as Kira’s friend.

Kira finding a “map” to Luke Skywalker by the end of the film.

Luke being in hiding somewhere and dealing with some heavy emotional issues.

The nebulous concept of the Jedi Killer (Talon as Jedi Killer is just one possibility, the earliest Jedi Killer art really changes the appearance up, from non-human to human to Talon to Knight of Ren looking dude, to perhaps even Snoke himself.

Han Solo was back to his smuggling ways.

Leia was in a position of power.

The Neo-Empire was a thing (just not called First Order yet).

There was a “shadowy puppeteer” behind Talon/the Jedi Killer.

A final confrontation between Rey/Thea/Kira and the “Jedi Killer” on an snow planet.

The Neo-Empire having a superweapon.

A Yoda-like creature to move the story along (eventually Maz).

A graveyard of imperial stuff on various planets, including Jakku.

A forest planet w/ a castle (what eventually becomes Maz’s stronghold).

A green planet with a WWII style “Republic base.”

Kira/Rey/Thea living in an AT-AT.

Again, lots and lots of pictures of Kira/Rey/Thea wandering the junkyards of her world and being a gearhead/techie/scavenger.

Luke’s hiding spot was always either an island or a forest planet that was gorgeous.

This is all from the guided imagery phase! Where Lucas’ treatment was still being reworked by himself, Kennedy and Arndt! And before J.J. was a) officially announced as director, and b) even really that involved!

This phase went up until June of 2013."

Much of this information comes from the Art of the Force Awakens.

And I don’t have sources on hand, but I’ve seen convincing arguments on TFN for Luke in TLJ not really jiving with Campbell.

Then bring them when you get the chance.

The rest I just disagree with. Also Rey has less reason to fall for Kylo than Padme did Anakin, AKA basically none.

Star Wars fans in the 2000s would have laughed at you if you even thought Padme had much of a reason to fall for Anakin. Now, I think she did, but most fans didn’t. And Rey and Kylo’s mind literally became one, feeling all of their own hopes, fears and insecurities in a single moment. I think they know each other on a deeper level than anyone else knows them.

You didn’t address the first point you quoted.
Lucas didn’t hit the reset button in his version.
It wasn’t Empire vs Rebels 2.
It was Empire vs a functioning New Republic.

ChainsawAsh said:

Alright, I’ll try to find your “examples” from throughout the thread and respond to them.

First, Yoda:

For example, I was just watching TLJ and I got to the scene with Yoda. Yoda is a puppet in TLJ when he was CG in the PT. The problem for me is that these movies are supposed to be installments in the same story, and yet that illusion is shattered into a million pieces when things like puppet Yoda

Yoda in TLJ is supposed to look as much like he did in ghost form in ROTJ as possible. He’s a puppet in the end of ROTJ when he’s a ghost. It would, in my opinion, be more immersion-breaking for him to be CGI and appear as he did 20 years before his death. It would be a different story (and an entirely different can of worms) had Lucas replaced ESB/ROTJ Yoda with a CGI model, but he never did. So, chronologically, you see (I) CGI/puppet (depending on the version of TPM you watch) > (II) CGI > (III) CGI > (V) Puppet > (VI) Puppet > (VIII) Puppet. You really think that (I) CGI/puppet > (II) CGI > (III) CGI > (V) Puppet > (VI) Puppet > (VIII) CGI would have been more cohesive when looked at as a full saga?

The Maz Kanata argument is invalid to me because she never appeared in any film prior to TFA, so there’s an infinite amount of freedom in her appearance. You’d have an argument if she appeared in TFA as CGI and was suddenly a puppet in TLJ, or something, but as it stands you’re creating a comparison where there isn’t one.

Yoda being CG might strain the link up with the OT, but the strain doesn’t come from what my thread is about, which is how we can consider this all to be one universe if creators are passing judgement on the quality of the depiction of supposedly equally canonical events.

So Lucas broke the cohesion of “one universe” by changing Yoda from a puppet to CGI first. Yet it’s the ST you’re railing against for going back to the puppet. That seems like a double standard to me - villifying ST filmmakers for changing a thing from one film to the next while excusing Lucas from doing the same because you prefer his movies.

On to other things…

or TFA being like the anti-prequel in much of its approach

How?

are pretty much rebuttals of earlier installments.

How are they rebuttals? Do they claim that the earlier movies never happened, wiping them from continuity the way every Highlander sequel has done to the film that came before it? No.

how can the fact that people can’t stop picking and choosing elements they like and don’t like from the movies (that goes for fans and creators alike) not completely destroy the illusion that ALL of these events from ALL of these movies and shows take place in the same universe?

It…doesn’t? I don’t understand how it does, and I’ve yet to see an explanation from you as to how this is the case in your mind.

the fact that TCW Anakin maybe should have been closer to Hayden, but also that they aren’t really AS different as Hayden detractors claim, and late season Lanter Anakin was as “unlikable” as Anakin ever was, especially in arcs like the second Clovis arc.

Did you just refute your own argument about Anakin in the same sentence in which you brought it up? Because I think you did.

I’d argue that the ST betrays the spirit of the series more than the PT did though. And that’s a larger problem than things like why Owen didn’t recognize 3-P0.
TFA is a waste of 200 million dollars because it copies a movie but makes it worse (And the argument that the first Disney SW movie needed to feel “familiar” is moot, since TFA locks the entire trilogy into a “big bad Empire vs. scrappy rebels” redo, complete with locking in the stale aesthetic/art direction), and TLJ writes Luke so incredibly OOC that he can’t be considered the same character who said “You’ve failed, your highness. I am a Jedi, like my father before me.”

Okay, this is where I stop, because all of this is 100% “I don’t like the ST so I’m going to rail against it and find every avenue I can to attack it” and not a discussion of keeping canonical cohesion of a saga across multiple decades and filmmakers. Which is the discussion I was hoping to find when I opened this thread.

The Rosetta Stone of TFA is this- it doesn’t even have a scene that explains the political scenario to the level ANH did with the Tarkin round table scene, simply because the PT had “too much politics.”
TFA is so OBVIOUSLY reactionary, you trolling bantha.