DrDre

Here’s the final reel:

Here’s reel 5:

Chewtobacca said:

DrDre said:

A shot by shot regrade destroys the color relationships between shots, and thus cannot really be seen as an accurate representation of what was seen in theatres in 1977.

If the shots in the reference print differ from each other, but individual LUTs accurately match each shot from the target (4k77, the BD, whatever) to each shot from the reference, then surely the color relationships should be preserved? By “color relationships between shots”, I assume that you mean the inconsistencies in color that occur from shot to shot.

I mean a shot by shot regrade, that aims to improve consistency without the use of a reference. Additionally, if an accurate reference was available, a target like 4K77 would not need a shot by shot regrade, because the accurate relationships between shots are already preserved. Color matching a a number of representative shots of the target to the reference would be enough to get the entire target to closely match the reference.

Here’s reel 4:

I was looking at 4K77 v1.0, and wondered whether there’s a possibility to significantly improve the colors, and color consistency without doing a shot by shot regrade. A shot by shot regrade destroys the color relationships between shots, and thus cannot really be seen as an accurate representation of what was seen in theatres in 1977. A reel by reel correction with a superior LUT would preserve these relationships. This small project aims to do just that. I’ve thusfar completed the first three reels. Here’s how they look:

These results are very close to the colors of the 1997 SE, a technicolor color grading minus the green cast.

I misunderstood oojason, and lost my cool. We sorted it out, but I want to apologize to him here as well, as I painted him as being unfair, unreasonable, and snarky, which he wasn’t.

yotsuya said:

DrDre said:

yotsuya said:

StarkillerAG said:

yotsuya said:

StarkillerAG said:

yotsuya said:

DrDre said:

A good and balanced analysis by the channel Films&Stuff of why TROS doesn’t work as a film for many (12 min):

The broken structure of Rise of Skywalker

https://youtu.be/HQrNK8NYevI

While it may not work for some, a great many seem to love this film, including myself. I found his argument that because we didn’t see landings that indicated a problem to be silly. And his analysis that Rey redid her journey in one film is off. Star Wars has always had a larger structure than a single film, but each film has always followed the 3 act structure and this one did as well Rey goes on her final journey - her final test if you will.

Maybe you loved it, and that’s fine, but the majority of audiences didn’t, which seems to indicate that there’s something wrong with the pacing and structure of the movie. That’s what the video is about, it isn’t about not having any shots of the heroes landing on a planet, although that is part of the pacing problem.

Sequel movies have a hard job in coming back to revisit the same characters and places with a new story. They were never going to please everyone. I think they set up to please the people who wanted to be entertained and I think they succeeded.

That’s my main problem with the movie. JJ didn’t want to make a meaningful movie, he didn’t even want to make a good movie, he just wanted a big dumb blockbuster that lots of people would enjoy without really thinking about it.

The box office numbers are not final yet, but it has done very well. People have wanted to see it and keep seeing it.

All Star Wars movies are blockbusters. And many think they have good stories, but I can find reviews clear back to 1977 calling them mindless drivel for the masses.

The old-fashioned reviewers who thought the OT was drivel were a minority. Those movies were universally praised by almost everyone else. There’s a reason why Star Wars and Empire consistently rank high on film critics’ top 100 movies lists.

The box office numbers are still disappointing. Keep in mind that most people were expecting this movie to make almost as much as TFA, and the ones who successfully predicted the current box office numbers were labeled as pessimists.

I was predicting around the same as TFA. And it is close to that, though still not quite there.

What alternate universe are you living in? 1 billion dollars isn’t anywhere near TFA’s insane 2 billion dollar gross. TROS has no chance of making as much as TFA or even TLJ.

Sorry, I mistyped. I meant TLJ. And it is getting pretty close, at least as I see it.

The numbers indicate that the critic score is way off on RT. The audience has not been that divided and a great many love it and have called it the best Star Wars since the originals.

Where are you getting this from? The audience reception is almost as divided as TLJ, and even the people who like it know it isn’t even close to being as good as the OT.

The people you talk to and communiate with maybe. The ones I see mostly loved it. I guess it all depends on what circles you are in. And like I said, the people I know personally who have seen it have all (save one) loved it. Lots of die hard Star Wars fans among them.

From other people outside OT. Literally for every negative impression of it I’ve read here, I’ve read another elsewhere that praises it in very high terms. And of the people I personally know who have seen it, the worst review was “I’ll have to think about it”. So I’m seeing the numbers to make that 86% on RT accurate. And the box office numbers agree that it is a popular movie. The best performing movie of a trilogy is always the first. Three for three.

But people (well, other Star Wars fans specifically) are praising this as an amazing movie. I think it is an amazing movie. So I know where they are coming from. I don’t think this trilogy has risen to quite the quality of the OT, but it has gotten closer than Lucas did with the PT. People whose writing skills I trust and who blasted Abrams for Star Trek Into Darkness have admitted this one was well done. So while a great many around here and probably other similar online groups may have found something wrong with it, the numbers do not indicate a majority hated it or thought it was bad. Even the critics, as harsh as they were, leaned a tiny bit in favor of it (the RT critic score never dropped below 50%).

Once again, are you living in an alternate universe? Where is this universal praise you’re talking about? I’ve seen reactions to this movie from all across the internet, and almost all of them are mixed to negative. I haven’t seen a single person (except you) who thinks this movie was anywhere near as good as the OT. Even the people who like it admit it could have been so much better. If you love the movie that’s fine, I’m glad you were satisfied by it. But don’t pretend that everyone else loves it just to get validation for your personal feelings.

I’m not pretending everyone loved it. I’m saying that I see that 86% audience rating on RT as accurate. It matches the personal feedback I’ve gotten.

So, you accept the 86% feedback on RT, which is seen as notoriously unreliable both in a positive, and a negative sense, because it fits with your personal perception, but ignore the lackluster 6.9 rating on imdb, or the fact that its has the lowest cinema score of any of the films (some would argue the cinema score is the most accurate, since it is done by direct polling of the general audience), or the fact that it has the worst RT review score of any of the films (52%). Look this is not the worst movie ever, and certainly not the best, but I would say it is an accurate statement, that its reception is pretty lackluster in general, pretty poor critically, with even the majority of its proponents agreeing it is a very flawed film, and its box office, while still pretty good when compared to the average blockbuster, falls well below expectations, and can thus be classified as dissappointing. So, while I would say it is inaccurate to state a majority hated or disliked this movie, I would say it is equally inaccurate to say a majority liked it as much as you do.

From a statistical perspective, any voluntary rating system is suspect. If you really want a valid rating you’d need to do a randomized national poll. Any rating that asks people to voluntarily rate something is going to be easily skewed by a group who have a reason to give their opinion. I expect the general consensus on this site to be skewed to rating these new movies lower. I did expect to see some negative opinions from those people I know personally (and I know face to face offline) and I have not seen the negative comments from any of them. That is why I see the 86% as accurate because it is matching closer to what I’m hearing from people I know than the 52% critic score.

As for the IMDB score, I don’t now how they arrive at that number so I can’t comment. The only thing I can say is that their highest rated film is The Shawshank Redemption with 9.3 out of 10. The Star Wars films are rated as follows:
Ep 1 - 6.5
Ep 2 - 6.5
Ep 3 - 7.5
Ep 4 - 8.6
Ep 5 - 8.7
Ep 6 - 8.3
Ep 7 - 7.9
Ep 8 - 7.0
Ep 9 - 6.7
Rogue One - 7.8
Solo - 6.9
When you consider that only 4 films have a 9.0 or higher, that is a pretty tough rating system. Also, only 450 films are rated 8.0 to 8.9. That’s out of all films ever which is well over 50,000. That means those 454 films rated 8.0 or higher are less than 1% of all films. 6.7 doesn’t get TROS in the top 1000 (even TLJ isn’t at 7.0), but still, it isn’t a bad rating. But IMDB also offers the Metacritic score.
Ep 1 - 51
Ep 2 - 54
Ep 3 - 68
Ep 4 - 90
Ep 5 - 82
Ep 6 - 58
Ep 7 - 81
Ep 8 - 85
Ep 9 - 54
Rogue One - 65
Solo - 62
How many of us on OT.com would agree that ROTJ rates that low? Or TESB? These are voluntary rating systems that are at the whim of those who decide to give a rating. It is not a scientific assessment and not accurate. People on Metacritic did not like ROTJ and barely rate it higher than ATOC, TROS or TPM. and under Rogue One, Solo, ROTS TFA and TLJ. I’m sure from some opinions I’ve seen around here, that there are some who agree with that, but I don’t. I really don’t think most voluntary ratings have much to offer except to confirm our own feelings. I think the RT Audience score for TROS matches what I’ve heard. I think their audience score for TLJ is way off. I think Metacritic is way off on Eps 1, 5, 6, 9 and Rogue One. I think not having Star Wars and TESB in the top 10 on IMDB is wrong.

Yes, but here’s the problem. For every person, that has friends who generally like the film, there is another person, who has friends who generally dislike the film. So, of all the measures discussed such anecdotal evidence is the most unreliable. I will agree the general audience like the film better than the critics. However, when presented with an 86% RT audience score, which is not seen as very reliable (even you yourself doubt the TLJ RT audience score), I compare the various audience measures, and come to the conclusion, that it is a positive outlier in a positive, but overall rather mixed response.

I’m working on improving the colors of the v1.0 no DNR version. The aim is to do a reel by reel regrade, that retains the relationships of the colors between shots as seen on the print, but eliminate the green cast seen in many of the shots of v1.0. I’ve finished the first two reels. Here are a few samples.

4K77 v1.0 no DNR:

4K77 v1.0 no DNR regraded:

oojason said:

DrDre said:

oojason said:

DrDre said:

yotsuya said:

StarkillerAG said:

yotsuya said:

StarkillerAG said:

yotsuya said:

DrDre said:

A good and balanced analysis by the channel Films&Stuff of why TROS doesn’t work as a film for many (12 min):

The broken structure of Rise of Skywalker

https://youtu.be/HQrNK8NYevI

While it may not work for some, a great many seem to love this film, including myself. I found his argument that because we didn’t see landings that indicated a problem to be silly. And his analysis that Rey redid her journey in one film is off. Star Wars has always had a larger structure than a single film, but each film has always followed the 3 act structure and this one did as well Rey goes on her final journey - her final test if you will.

Maybe you loved it, and that’s fine, but the majority of audiences didn’t, which seems to indicate that there’s something wrong with the pacing and structure of the movie. That’s what the video is about, it isn’t about not having any shots of the heroes landing on a planet, although that is part of the pacing problem.

Sequel movies have a hard job in coming back to revisit the same characters and places with a new story. They were never going to please everyone. I think they set up to please the people who wanted to be entertained and I think they succeeded.

That’s my main problem with the movie. JJ didn’t want to make a meaningful movie, he didn’t even want to make a good movie, he just wanted a big dumb blockbuster that lots of people would enjoy without really thinking about it.

The box office numbers are not final yet, but it has done very well. People have wanted to see it and keep seeing it.

All Star Wars movies are blockbusters. And many think they have good stories, but I can find reviews clear back to 1977 calling them mindless drivel for the masses.

The old-fashioned reviewers who thought the OT was drivel were a minority. Those movies were universally praised by almost everyone else. There’s a reason why Star Wars and Empire consistently rank high on film critics’ top 100 movies lists.

The box office numbers are still disappointing. Keep in mind that most people were expecting this movie to make almost as much as TFA, and the ones who successfully predicted the current box office numbers were labeled as pessimists.

I was predicting around the same as TFA. And it is close to that, though still not quite there.

What alternate universe are you living in? 1 billion dollars isn’t anywhere near TFA’s insane 2 billion dollar gross. TROS has no chance of making as much as TFA or even TLJ.

Sorry, I mistyped. I meant TLJ. And it is getting pretty close, at least as I see it.

The numbers indicate that the critic score is way off on RT. The audience has not been that divided and a great many love it and have called it the best Star Wars since the originals.

Where are you getting this from? The audience reception is almost as divided as TLJ, and even the people who like it know it isn’t even close to being as good as the OT.

The people you talk to and communiate with maybe. The ones I see mostly loved it. I guess it all depends on what circles you are in. And like I said, the people I know personally who have seen it have all (save one) loved it. Lots of die hard Star Wars fans among them.

From other people outside OT. Literally for every negative impression of it I’ve read here, I’ve read another elsewhere that praises it in very high terms. And of the people I personally know who have seen it, the worst review was “I’ll have to think about it”. So I’m seeing the numbers to make that 86% on RT accurate. And the box office numbers agree that it is a popular movie. The best performing movie of a trilogy is always the first. Three for three.

But people (well, other Star Wars fans specifically) are praising this as an amazing movie. I think it is an amazing movie. So I know where they are coming from. I don’t think this trilogy has risen to quite the quality of the OT, but it has gotten closer than Lucas did with the PT. People whose writing skills I trust and who blasted Abrams for Star Trek Into Darkness have admitted this one was well done. So while a great many around here and probably other similar online groups may have found something wrong with it, the numbers do not indicate a majority hated it or thought it was bad. Even the critics, as harsh as they were, leaned a tiny bit in favor of it (the RT critic score never dropped below 50%).

Once again, are you living in an alternate universe? Where is this universal praise you’re talking about? I’ve seen reactions to this movie from all across the internet, and almost all of them are mixed to negative. I haven’t seen a single person (except you) who thinks this movie was anywhere near as good as the OT. Even the people who like it admit it could have been so much better. If you love the movie that’s fine, I’m glad you were satisfied by it. But don’t pretend that everyone else loves it just to get validation for your personal feelings.

I’m not pretending everyone loved it. I’m saying that I see that 86% audience rating on RT as accurate. It matches the personal feedback I’ve gotten.

So, you accept the 86% feedback on RT, which is seen as notoriously unreliable both in a positive, and a negative sense, because it fits with your personal perception, but ignore the lackluster 6.9 rating on imdb, or the fact that its has the lowest cinema score of any of the films (some would argue the cinema score is the most accurate, since it is done by direct polling of the general audience), or the fact that it has the worst RT review score of any of the films (52%). Look this is not the worst movie ever, and certainly not the best, but I would say it is an accurate statement, that its reception is pretty lackluster in general, pretty poor critically, with even the majority of its proponents agreeing it is a very flawed film, and its box office, while still pretty good when compared to the average blockbuster, falls well below expectations, and can thus be classified as dissappointing. So, while I would say it is inaccurate to state a majority hated or disliked this movie, I would say it is equally inaccurate to say a majority liked it as much as you do.

The first reply in this very thread, by yourself below, referred to RT - apparently ‘notoriously unreliable both in a positive, and a negative sense’ - to paint the film as ‘looking to be a disaster’ with a score of 54%.

DrDre said:

It’s at 54% now on RT, and 53 on metacritic. The reviews on youtube are very similar in tone to the critic reviews. It’s looking to be a disaster. For reference TPM is at 53% on RT.

Disaster in terms of its critics’ score, which is perfectly reliable. It’s the audience score I was referring to as being unreliable, which has been controversial for years now. I thought that was obvious, as I refer to the RT critics’ score in my reply to yotsuya (now being at 52%). Why would I do that, if I thought it was unreliable? I also think it was clear, yosuya was speaking about the 86% audience score, which I called into question.

I was attempting to highlight you both using the same site to enforce your respective personal viewpoints / perceptions on the film - and yet also try to dismiss / negate each other’s view for using the same site.

RT has both approved critic scores and audience scores, eh? And one is reliable, whilst the other is not?

Got it. Or I think I’m starting to get it…
 

Sorry, but you’re comparing apples and oranges. The critic score is based on critics’ reviews, that can be validated directly, as they are made available on RT. It’s reliability has never been called into question (although the merits of the score itself has been debated, and compared to for example metacritic’s scoring method). The audience score has been controversial for years now, as you probably well know, and has been widely debated, and dismissed since the review bombing days of TLJ. Since those days and the subsequent Captain Marvel RT audience score controversy a lot of people understandably have little faith in the RT audience score. However, I fail to see how that relates to the reliability of a completely different measure on a completely different, and much more verifiable group of critics. So, I think you are being rather unfair, and unreasonable here. The snark is also not appreciated.

oojason said:

DrDre said:

yotsuya said:

StarkillerAG said:

yotsuya said:

StarkillerAG said:

yotsuya said:

DrDre said:

A good and balanced analysis by the channel Films&Stuff of why TROS doesn’t work as a film for many (12 min):

The broken structure of Rise of Skywalker

https://youtu.be/HQrNK8NYevI

While it may not work for some, a great many seem to love this film, including myself. I found his argument that because we didn’t see landings that indicated a problem to be silly. And his analysis that Rey redid her journey in one film is off. Star Wars has always had a larger structure than a single film, but each film has always followed the 3 act structure and this one did as well Rey goes on her final journey - her final test if you will.

Maybe you loved it, and that’s fine, but the majority of audiences didn’t, which seems to indicate that there’s something wrong with the pacing and structure of the movie. That’s what the video is about, it isn’t about not having any shots of the heroes landing on a planet, although that is part of the pacing problem.

Sequel movies have a hard job in coming back to revisit the same characters and places with a new story. They were never going to please everyone. I think they set up to please the people who wanted to be entertained and I think they succeeded.

That’s my main problem with the movie. JJ didn’t want to make a meaningful movie, he didn’t even want to make a good movie, he just wanted a big dumb blockbuster that lots of people would enjoy without really thinking about it.

The box office numbers are not final yet, but it has done very well. People have wanted to see it and keep seeing it.

All Star Wars movies are blockbusters. And many think they have good stories, but I can find reviews clear back to 1977 calling them mindless drivel for the masses.

The old-fashioned reviewers who thought the OT was drivel were a minority. Those movies were universally praised by almost everyone else. There’s a reason why Star Wars and Empire consistently rank high on film critics’ top 100 movies lists.

The box office numbers are still disappointing. Keep in mind that most people were expecting this movie to make almost as much as TFA, and the ones who successfully predicted the current box office numbers were labeled as pessimists.

I was predicting around the same as TFA. And it is close to that, though still not quite there.

What alternate universe are you living in? 1 billion dollars isn’t anywhere near TFA’s insane 2 billion dollar gross. TROS has no chance of making as much as TFA or even TLJ.

Sorry, I mistyped. I meant TLJ. And it is getting pretty close, at least as I see it.

The numbers indicate that the critic score is way off on RT. The audience has not been that divided and a great many love it and have called it the best Star Wars since the originals.

Where are you getting this from? The audience reception is almost as divided as TLJ, and even the people who like it know it isn’t even close to being as good as the OT.

The people you talk to and communiate with maybe. The ones I see mostly loved it. I guess it all depends on what circles you are in. And like I said, the people I know personally who have seen it have all (save one) loved it. Lots of die hard Star Wars fans among them.

From other people outside OT. Literally for every negative impression of it I’ve read here, I’ve read another elsewhere that praises it in very high terms. And of the people I personally know who have seen it, the worst review was “I’ll have to think about it”. So I’m seeing the numbers to make that 86% on RT accurate. And the box office numbers agree that it is a popular movie. The best performing movie of a trilogy is always the first. Three for three.

But people (well, other Star Wars fans specifically) are praising this as an amazing movie. I think it is an amazing movie. So I know where they are coming from. I don’t think this trilogy has risen to quite the quality of the OT, but it has gotten closer than Lucas did with the PT. People whose writing skills I trust and who blasted Abrams for Star Trek Into Darkness have admitted this one was well done. So while a great many around here and probably other similar online groups may have found something wrong with it, the numbers do not indicate a majority hated it or thought it was bad. Even the critics, as harsh as they were, leaned a tiny bit in favor of it (the RT critic score never dropped below 50%).

Once again, are you living in an alternate universe? Where is this universal praise you’re talking about? I’ve seen reactions to this movie from all across the internet, and almost all of them are mixed to negative. I haven’t seen a single person (except you) who thinks this movie was anywhere near as good as the OT. Even the people who like it admit it could have been so much better. If you love the movie that’s fine, I’m glad you were satisfied by it. But don’t pretend that everyone else loves it just to get validation for your personal feelings.

I’m not pretending everyone loved it. I’m saying that I see that 86% audience rating on RT as accurate. It matches the personal feedback I’ve gotten.

So, you accept the 86% feedback on RT, which is seen as notoriously unreliable both in a positive, and a negative sense, because it fits with your personal perception, but ignore the lackluster 6.9 rating on imdb, or the fact that its has the lowest cinema score of any of the films (some would argue the cinema score is the most accurate, since it is done by direct polling of the general audience), or the fact that it has the worst RT review score of any of the films (52%). Look this is not the worst movie ever, and certainly not the best, but I would say it is an accurate statement, that its reception is pretty lackluster in general, pretty poor critically, with even the majority of its proponents agreeing it is a very flawed film, and its box office, while still pretty good when compared to the average blockbuster, falls well below expectations, and can thus be classified as dissappointing. So, while I would say it is inaccurate to state a majority hated or disliked this movie, I would say it is equally inaccurate to say a majority liked it as much as you do.

The first reply in this very thread, by yourself below, referred to RT - apparently ‘notoriously unreliable both in a positive, and a negative sense’ - to paint the film as ‘looking to be a disaster’ with a score of 54%.

DrDre said:

It’s at 54% now on RT, and 53 on metacritic. The reviews on youtube are very similar in tone to the critic reviews. It’s looking to be a disaster. For reference TPM is at 53% on RT.

Disaster in terms of its critics’ score, which is perfectly reliable. It’s the audience score I was referring to as being unreliable, which has been controversial for years now. I thought that was obvious, as I refer to the RT critics’ score in my reply to yotsuya (now being at 52%), who was talking about the audience score. Why would I do that, if I thought it was unreliable?

marsthgodofwar said:

The biggest change in ESB was the color grading. Where Hoth was originally white, in the SE it is blue. I am torn on the change, because I grew up with the SE color grade and I never hated it.

This is actually not true. The Hoth sequences were originally blue theatrically, but then turned white for the subsequent home video releases.

yotsuya said:

StarkillerAG said:

yotsuya said:

StarkillerAG said:

yotsuya said:

DrDre said:

A good and balanced analysis by the channel Films&Stuff of why TROS doesn’t work as a film for many (12 min):

The broken structure of Rise of Skywalker

https://youtu.be/HQrNK8NYevI

While it may not work for some, a great many seem to love this film, including myself. I found his argument that because we didn’t see landings that indicated a problem to be silly. And his analysis that Rey redid her journey in one film is off. Star Wars has always had a larger structure than a single film, but each film has always followed the 3 act structure and this one did as well Rey goes on her final journey - her final test if you will.

Maybe you loved it, and that’s fine, but the majority of audiences didn’t, which seems to indicate that there’s something wrong with the pacing and structure of the movie. That’s what the video is about, it isn’t about not having any shots of the heroes landing on a planet, although that is part of the pacing problem.

Sequel movies have a hard job in coming back to revisit the same characters and places with a new story. They were never going to please everyone. I think they set up to please the people who wanted to be entertained and I think they succeeded.

That’s my main problem with the movie. JJ didn’t want to make a meaningful movie, he didn’t even want to make a good movie, he just wanted a big dumb blockbuster that lots of people would enjoy without really thinking about it.

The box office numbers are not final yet, but it has done very well. People have wanted to see it and keep seeing it.

All Star Wars movies are blockbusters. And many think they have good stories, but I can find reviews clear back to 1977 calling them mindless drivel for the masses.

The old-fashioned reviewers who thought the OT was drivel were a minority. Those movies were universally praised by almost everyone else. There’s a reason why Star Wars and Empire consistently rank high on film critics’ top 100 movies lists.

The box office numbers are still disappointing. Keep in mind that most people were expecting this movie to make almost as much as TFA, and the ones who successfully predicted the current box office numbers were labeled as pessimists.

I was predicting around the same as TFA. And it is close to that, though still not quite there.

What alternate universe are you living in? 1 billion dollars isn’t anywhere near TFA’s insane 2 billion dollar gross. TROS has no chance of making as much as TFA or even TLJ.

Sorry, I mistyped. I meant TLJ. And it is getting pretty close, at least as I see it.

The numbers indicate that the critic score is way off on RT. The audience has not been that divided and a great many love it and have called it the best Star Wars since the originals.

Where are you getting this from? The audience reception is almost as divided as TLJ, and even the people who like it know it isn’t even close to being as good as the OT.

The people you talk to and communiate with maybe. The ones I see mostly loved it. I guess it all depends on what circles you are in. And like I said, the people I know personally who have seen it have all (save one) loved it. Lots of die hard Star Wars fans among them.

From other people outside OT. Literally for every negative impression of it I’ve read here, I’ve read another elsewhere that praises it in very high terms. And of the people I personally know who have seen it, the worst review was “I’ll have to think about it”. So I’m seeing the numbers to make that 86% on RT accurate. And the box office numbers agree that it is a popular movie. The best performing movie of a trilogy is always the first. Three for three.

But people (well, other Star Wars fans specifically) are praising this as an amazing movie. I think it is an amazing movie. So I know where they are coming from. I don’t think this trilogy has risen to quite the quality of the OT, but it has gotten closer than Lucas did with the PT. People whose writing skills I trust and who blasted Abrams for Star Trek Into Darkness have admitted this one was well done. So while a great many around here and probably other similar online groups may have found something wrong with it, the numbers do not indicate a majority hated it or thought it was bad. Even the critics, as harsh as they were, leaned a tiny bit in favor of it (the RT critic score never dropped below 50%).

Once again, are you living in an alternate universe? Where is this universal praise you’re talking about? I’ve seen reactions to this movie from all across the internet, and almost all of them are mixed to negative. I haven’t seen a single person (except you) who thinks this movie was anywhere near as good as the OT. Even the people who like it admit it could have been so much better. If you love the movie that’s fine, I’m glad you were satisfied by it. But don’t pretend that everyone else loves it just to get validation for your personal feelings.

I’m not pretending everyone loved it. I’m saying that I see that 86% audience rating on RT as accurate. It matches the personal feedback I’ve gotten.

So, you accept the 86% feedback on RT, which is seen as notoriously unreliable both in a positive, and a negative sense, because it fits with your personal perception, but ignore the lackluster 6.9 rating on imdb, or the fact that its has the lowest cinema score of any of the films (some would argue the cinema score is the most accurate, since it is done by direct polling of the general audience), or the fact that it has the worst RT review score of any of the films (52%). Look this is not the worst movie ever, and certainly not the best, but I would say it is an accurate statement, that its reception is pretty lackluster in general, pretty poor critically, with even the majority of its proponents agreeing it is a very flawed film, and its box office, while still pretty good when compared to the average blockbuster, falls well below expectations, and can thus be classified as dissappointing. So, while I would say it is inaccurate to state a majority hated or disliked this movie, I would say it is equally inaccurate to say a majority liked it as much as you do.

A good and balanced analysis by the channel Films&Stuff of why TROS doesn’t work as a film for many (12 min):

The broken structure of Rise of Skywalker

https://youtu.be/HQrNK8NYevI

RogueLeader said:

There’s a few other amusing parallels with ROTJ outside the obvious, too. Not only do we have a left-field heritage twist with Rey Palpatine, but Finn fills in the role as back-up Force-sensitive like Leia did. We also get the nature vs technology theme with the Orbaks on the Star Destroyer. Sigh.

This video nails how I feel about TLJ now:

Revisiting the Last Jedi (and why it is alright)

https://youtu.be/qlOnKW_gFLE

Like me the guy disliked the film, but has kind of come around to liking many elements of it, and feels there’s a great film at its core. The guy goes through what he feels are the strong, and weaker elements of the film in a pretty balanced manner.

Fated-Dualist said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

StarkillerAG said:

DominicCobb said:

StarkillerAG said:

DominicCobb said:

How important is it really to this story? The First Order is trying to take over the galaxy, the Resistance is trying to stop it. Is a lot more information than that really important to the stories of these new characters? The logistics of the New Republic are no more important to Rey’s story than they are to the Mandalorian’s.

When one of the main characters of the story is the ruler of the galaxy, you should expect to have at least some explanation of how the system works. It’s fine to not explain anything for a small-scale TV show like The Mandalorian, but the sequels have events that happen on a galactic scale, so the movies should at least give us some broad idea as to the political situation.

I mean, Snoke is neither a main character nor the ruler of the galaxy, so I’m not sure that’s the most salient point.

I was referring to Kylo.

I thought we were talking about TFA. I feel like the political situation is pretty unconfusing in both TLJ and TROS.

Yes, but in some ways it is actually worse, since the message is, that even when the Resistance blows up the First Order’s big gun, a major victory in ANH, and the start of the Galactic Civil War, the rest of the galaxy is conveniently too scared, or too lazy to take on what is left of the First Order. Then in TROS these scared or lazy systems, which in TLJ apparently didn’t have the means to resist, or worse didn’t want to, just conveniently come crawling out of the woodworks at the end of the movie in a massive show of force. In other words these systems could have kicked the First Order, which was a lot smaller than the Final Order apparently, out of the galaxy any time they wanted to, but they didn’t because it wasn’t convenient for the story at that time. It’s really quite appalling the way the bigger picture was handled throughout the entire trilogy in my view.

Appalling?

A few wars or rebellions in real life start like this though. It takes time for people to muster the strength and courage to fight, or even the realisation that THEY themselves need to fight (that nobody else is going to do it for them) - and sometimes they may need a final push, or a reminder of how awful it actually is now (or was before) that can stir them into action.

This is not how invasions by a foreign power work. There isn’t a single country that was attacked by the Nazis in WW2, that didn’t put up a fight at least for a while. Most of them didn’t last very long, but that is beside the point. Yet, in the ST we are supposed to believe the entire galaxy just gives up, and allows the FO to overrun them, even though they clearly have the means to stop them, as is evident in TROS.

The story of Luke Skywalker (Jedi Knight! 😉) returning to fight the First Order on Crait will have likely have spread throughout the galaxy too given time - to give both hope and belief to people there is a chance, and a need, to fight against those who wish to oppress them.

The destruction of SKB, an actual victory, rather than a symbolic one, should be enough reason to come to the Resistance’s aid. Yet, rather than being the symbol of a new hope, as in the first film, it is met with cynicism, and apathy.

A message from Palpatine… broadcast throughout the galaxy that he’ll be back in charge soon and everyone will have to submit to his will again - backed up by a demonstration of the firepower he now in the Star Destroyer blowing up that planet - could inspire or trigger people to take up the fight too.
 

Really? And the actual destruction of the New Republic’s capital does not?

It is also made clear in TROS by the Imperial Officer at Exegol that these are just people - it is a fleet of people - who have only just come together to fight Palpatine and his newly announced oppression, and is not an orginised fleet in the way Rebel fleets in the Original Trilogy were.

This is a running theme in the ST. The FO is a fringe government, but they act just like the Empire, and have infinite resources. The Resistance is a military group supported by the New Republic, but they act just like the Rebellion. The rebel fleet in TROS are “just people”, but it is the largest armada, you have ever seen. To me this is why much of what happens in the ST so hollow. Fleets, resources, evil overlords, and Force powers are just pulled out of thin air, or conjured, whenever the script requires it. Lando musters an entire fleet of random people from all over the galaxy in a matter of hours, the way a kid goes home to get his brothers to help him fight the neighbourhood bullies. There’s no sense of time, or scale, and it ultimately ends up feeling totally inconsequential. One fleet that comes out of nowhere destroys another fleet, that comes out of nowhere.

DominicCobb said:

StarkillerAG said:

DominicCobb said:

StarkillerAG said:

DominicCobb said:

How important is it really to this story? The First Order is trying to take over the galaxy, the Resistance is trying to stop it. Is a lot more information than that really important to the stories of these new characters? The logistics of the New Republic are no more important to Rey’s story than they are to the Mandalorian’s.

When one of the main characters of the story is the ruler of the galaxy, you should expect to have at least some explanation of how the system works. It’s fine to not explain anything for a small-scale TV show like The Mandalorian, but the sequels have events that happen on a galactic scale, so the movies should at least give us some broad idea as to the political situation.

I mean, Snoke is neither a main character nor the ruler of the galaxy, so I’m not sure that’s the most salient point.

I was referring to Kylo.

I thought we were talking about TFA. I feel like the political situation is pretty unconfusing in both TLJ and TROS.

Yes, but in some ways it is actually worse, since the message is, that even when the Resistance blows up the First Order’s big gun, a major victory in ANH, and the start of the Galactic Civil War, the rest of the galaxy is conveniently too scared, or too lazy to take on what is left of the First Order. Then in TROS these scared or lazy systems, which in TLJ apparently didn’t have the means to resist, or worse didn’t want to, just conveniently come crawling out of the woodworks at the end of the movie in a massive show of force. In other words these systems could have kicked the First Order, which was a lot smaller than the Final Order apparently, out of the galaxy any time they wanted to, but they didn’t because it wasn’t convenient for the story at that time. It’s really quite appalling the way the bigger picture was handled throughout the entire trilogy in my view.

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

Probably worth mentioning as well that even if you’re not a fan of the ST, the last two movies got 93% and 91%. So even if you weren’t personally expecting it to be good, it wasn’t unreasonable that most would suspect it’d be in the same ballpark as the last two.

It wasn’t unreasonable, but at least to some of us, the critics ratings didn’t tell the whole story.

My point is that regardless of how you think you’ll feel about it and how you think non-critics will receive it, it wasn’t unreasonable to suspect that it would get a high RT score, because the last two films did.

DrDre said:

Broom Kid said:

DrDre said:
Additionally, not everyone’s expectations for this film’s quality, or its reception were very high.

Again, I’m not saying expectations for quality needed to be “very high.” High 70’s/low 80’s isn’t “very high.” But there’s a big gulf between even low 70s and where it is (53)

That gulf is a big reason why it’s earnings are where they are. Expectations didn’t need to be “very high” for the reality to be jarring, and for that jarring reality to negatively affect the box-office somewhat significantly.

I didn’t expect it to get into the high 70s, low 80s. I expected it to be in the low to mid 60s. While it came out a bit worse than that, I would not have expected the film to have done much better, if it had a 65% RT score.

To my point, unless you predicted the film would be significantly worse than TFA and TLJ, I’m not sure why you would think it would score that much lower than those two, which you already don’t think are good.

Because I felt there was a danger, JJ and Disney in general would want to please everyone. Like they say, if you try to please everyone, you end up pleasing no one. After Palpatine was introduced as the big bad, I also expected the film to be rather heavy on fan service, and Star Wars tropes, and to thus be more in line with TFA, backtracking somewhat from the direction TLJ took the story, which I felt would not go over well with many critics.

Broom Kid said:

DrDre said:
Additionally, not everyone’s expectations for this film’s quality, or its reception were very high.

Again, I’m not saying expectations for quality needed to be “very high.” High 70’s/low 80’s isn’t “very high.” But there’s a big gulf between even low 70s and where it is (53)

That gulf is a big reason why it’s earnings are where they are. Expectations didn’t need to be “very high” for the reality to be jarring, and for that jarring reality to negatively affect the box-office somewhat significantly.

I didn’t expect it to get into the high 70s, low 80s. I expected it to be in the low to mid 60s. While it came out a bit worse than that, I would not have expected the film to have done much better, if it had a 65% RT score.

DominicCobb said:

Probably worth mentioning as well that even if you’re not a fan of the ST, the last two movies got 93% and 91%. So even if you weren’t personally expecting it to be good, it wasn’t unreasonable that most would suspect it’d be in the same ballpark as the last two.

It wasn’t unreasonable, but at least to some of us, the critics ratings didn’t tell the whole story.

Broom Kid said:

I don’t know how you can disagree that people feel it’s bad. People obviously feel that it’s bad. Bad movies still make money (Michael Bay’s very existence is proof of this phenomenon) - but that’s a different argument than the one I’m making, which is that this movie would have made MORE money had it not been bad. TFA was well-regarded! But it was well-regarded because of it’s safeness. That reputation came immediately, and further, was considered a very smart move. The studio CEO basically admitted as much in his recent biography. Had this movie been “safe” along the same lines, it likely would have gotten a better reception and avoided the word of mouth that is obviously hurting it at the box-office. Movies with good word of mouth don’t have the Friday-to-Saturday drops this film had early in its run. Movies with good word of mouth don’t get those drops AT ALL, really.

The general audience can like it more than the critical reception and the movie can still be overall poorly recieved if the critical reception is low enough. Batman v. Superman (or similarly, Suicide Squad) is the example I keep coming back to here, and I think it’s very much applicable.

Again, this isn’t to say that had the movie been good that the predictions around 700mil DOM and 1.5bil WW would have won out. Its ceiling probably would have been +/- 20mil of The Last Jedi’s numbers. But I don’t think the numbers we’re seeing now could have happened without the film coming in THIS far under anyone’s expectations, quality-wise.

Because it has mixed reviews, meaning a slight majority of critics liked the film. Bad movies get RT scores of <40%, implying that a vast majority of critics dislike the film. Additionally, not everyone’s expectations for this film’s quality, or its reception were very high. Mine weren’t. I didn’t expect it to be the worst movie ever, nor do I think it is a truly bad movie. I think it has a weak story, and a weak script, but I also believe JJ has a talent to make even the worst screenplay come to life. So, as pure popcorn entertainment, I think the movie works. However, like I said, I feel the numbers indicated interest in the franchise was waning, and TLJ didn’t really leave TROS with story threads to get people pumped for this film, and so I didn’t think it was likely, it would come close to TLJ’s total BO.

DominicCobb said:

I’m not sure how anyone could be saying it might not break a billion. They’d have to pull it from theaters to accomplish that.

DrDre said:
but given the recent history, and Abrams’ reputation, I don’t think many people expected a masterpiece. Hence, this outcome was not all that suprising to some of us.

If you look at the Tomatoemeter (i.e. the only “review” that matters for the vast majority of the audience), TROS has 53%, which is a massive drop off from the next lowest rated Abrams film (Mission: Impossible III, which also disappointed). Regardless of your personal feelings on TFA, that film was a mostly unanimous success, with a 93% rating. That’s a very significant difference from TROS. Even the flop Solo had a 70%.

There’s a difference between not getting overwhelmingly positive reviews and getting bad reviews. 53% is far outside the realm of what people have come to expect from things like Star Wars and Marvel.

Like I said, I think the film was better recieved by fans, and the general audience, than critics, many of whom viewed it as a capitulation to TLJ’s critics. In any case, I expected mixed reviews from critics, though perhaps a bit more positive than they were in the end. I didn’t believe anything other than it being a truly great film could push it beyond TLJ’s numbers. When they announced Palpatine’s return, there was an air of desperation in the way they approached this film in my view. This coupled with waning interest in the brand led to my own predictions for this film.

Broom Kid said:

DrDre said:
but given the recent history, and Abrams’ reputation, I don’t think many people expected a masterpiece. Hence, this outcome was not all that suprising to some of us.

The quality of the film being this poor was pretty surprising to a large number, which is why the word of mouth hit the film’s legs as hard as it did. There’s a pretty big gulf between masterpiece and The Rise of Skywalker, and it wasn’t an either/or proposition - Masterpiece vs. Stinker, record-breaker vs giant disappointment, etc. I’m not saying people were expecting a masterpiece - just that pretty much nobody expected it to be THIS bad. And being this bad is obviously, absolutely having a big effect on its box-office. Which is why I’m saying I don’t think those early projections would look accurate now had the film not done its damndest to turn off the general audience, which was a factor I don’t think anyone making those projections was accounting for.

If it were a masterpiece obviously its box-office would be better. But even if it was barely as well-regarded a film as The Force Awakens (i.e. safely serviceable), the numbers wouldn’t be where they are now.

I disagree, that people feel it is that bad. It had mixed reviews, and pretty much any audience measure (RM, imdb, etc) indicate most fans, and the general audience like it better than the critics. I would argue most would say, it is a flawed, but entertaining film. I also disagree with your assessment of TFA, which was very well recieved by critics, fans, and general audience alike. It was only over time, that its reputation began to suffer, and its weaker elements, that at first were seen as not detrimental to the film, began to soil its reputation.

Broom Kid said:

DrDre said:
Good reviews might have boosted the numbers somewhat, but even the opening weekend indicated a final BO of around the 1 billion mark. Also, let’s not forget TPM’s inflation adjusted BO is $1.8 billion, the third most financially successful film in the franchise, so evidently the financial success of a Star Wars film is not strongly correlated with its reviews.

Good reviews would have definitely boosted the numbers, as the interest in the film began declining markedly as the early word began coming in that the film was not only possibly the worst of the sequel trilogy, but maybe the worst film since Phantom Menace, whose repuatation has only declined since its 1999 premiere. The film’s opening weekend was definitely stunted by its word of mouth, which points to how big a factor it’s quality was in damaging its own box-office. Essentially - post-premiere, the film’s legs started shrinking IMMEDIATELY. It was a Batman v. Superman situation more than anything.

TPM was also the first Star Wars film since 1983, which is good to keep in mind. Word of mouth during that summer was better than Rise of Skywalker’s word of mouth is this winter. I don’t think anyone early-estimating the numbers it wound up at was doing so under the assumption the movie was going to be what it ended up being.

(anecdotally: I remember much discussion on the early internets about how Titanic’s record WOULD have been broken in 1999 had The Phantom Menace actually been good. Not to say such analysis had merit - hell not to say mine does either, obviously! But there were definitely conversations as to how Phantom Menace’s quality did hinder it at the box-office somewhat)

Well, I for one didn’t have high expectations for this film before it was released. TLJ was a highly divisive film, and no matter how anyone felt about it, it didn’t leave many story threads unresolved, and didn’t end on a cliffhanger. So, TROS was fighting an uphill battle from the beginning. Add to this, that the anticipation for this film seemed very tepid for most of the time leading up to its release, which prompted me to look into some sentiment analysis, leading to the prediction it would not do record breaking numbers at the box office. Had the film been the second coming, perhaps word of mouth would have carried it a lot further, but given the recent history, and Abrams’ reputation, I don’t think many people expected a masterpiece. Hence, this outcome was not all that suprising to some of us.