I’m mostly lurking and don’t usually post much, but at the moment, I have no interest at all to even read the Star Wars part of the forum. I guess I’ll keep visiting Off-Topic, but don’t be surprised if you don’t see me for the rest of the year.
Not heavyening?
It’s like so many other long-standing franchises that have a cult following. You just can’t win for losing while trying to be the slightest bit creative.
So maybe they shouldn’t try? Leave the originals and make some new franchise instead of trying to reboot an old one.
Just a thought.
That is literally “some people just don’t want any new Star Wars movies”. If you think that way, why don’t you just not watch the new movies?
I don’t see how buying Fox changed anything.
Buffy is a Disney Princess now.
Aynthing regarding a possible OOT release.
https://twitter.com/botnikstudios/status/940627812259696643
AI writes Harry Potter chapter. Brilliant.
Yes. That’s also my guess.
So, no mention of the OOT after the deal either means they are not interested in it or they are already working on it. Just like no mention of the OOT before the deal either meant they were not interested in it or they were already working on it. I don’t see how buying Fox changed anything. We either get it or we don’t and all we can do about it is wait.
Because including a rival product would ruin his business.
Unfixed.
Fixed.
Maybe keep the sigh out of political debates? Would that be a comromise that everyone can live with?
I never said it doesn’t need compelling characters. I said the movie not being character-driven is a different issue than not liking the characters.
I really think you need to differentiate between movies that simply have characters and character-driven movies. If you call any movie that has characters interacting “character-driven”, then what’s the point of using that word anyways? For me, a character-driven movie is a movie that is primarily about the characters, more than other movies. The word becomes completely meaningless, if it can be applied to 99% of all movies.
I’m not here to argue about the characters of R1. My problem was with your assertion that it “didn’t even attmept” to be character-driven. You presented ‘not being character-driven’ as a criticism in itself and I think that’s not valid. Movies can be good, without being character-driven.
Sure, you can say you find the story boring and making the movie more character-driven would improve it. That’s fine. And you can say you find the characters bland, so they should be improved, and that’s fine, too. I disagree with that, but at least, these are valid ways to criticise the movie.
If R1 didn’t even attempt it, why blame it for not being character-driven? Or does every movie need to be character driven?
“At least The Phantom Menace tried to make a step-in-the-poop joke that isn’t completely tasteless, they horribly failed, but at least they tried. I can’t say the same of Citizen Kane.”
R1 barely attempted to have characters at all. If the Death Star and other iconic Star Wars imagery weren’t in it, then nothing about the film would be even remotely memorable.
And your analogy is not worth addressing.
You still didn’t answer if every movie needs to be character-driven.
Of course not, but it is important when the main plot isn’t compelling or interesting, especially since we know exactly how it’s going to turn out. We know they’ll get the plans, so it would seem logical to have it be character driven since the main plot is straightforward and already spoiled.
R1 was advertised as a war movie in the Star Wars universe and I think the comparison is quite fitting. It focuses on a small part of the whole, it isn’t really about character development and the outcome is known by practically everyone.
For me, it’s perfectly fine that R1 didn’t attempt to be more than that, so it shouldn’t be judged by a standard that it didn’t even intend to reach. It was always meant to tell a straight-forward story, that we already know. The main selling point is to show how it happend.
I think that almost every movie should have you caring about the characters one way or the other. Having boring characters is generally a sign of bad film-making. But not every movie needs to advance primarily by characters going through a phase of big changes, which is what I would understand by character-driven.
My phrasing was a bit off, but R1 didn’t seem to make much effort to have compelling characters. Most were without personality and the ones that were interesting got little focus.
That’s a different issue, then. And all I can say is, well, yeah, that’s just, like, your opinion, man.
Maybe a movie about stealing an enigma machine from the Nazis? Doesn’t that sound exciting, even though we already know the outcome?
If R1 didn’t even attempt it, why blame it for not being character-driven? Or does every movie need to be character driven?
“At least The Phantom Menace tried to make a step-in-the-poop joke that isn’t completely tasteless, they horribly failed, but at least they tried. I can’t say the same of Citizen Kane.”
R1 barely attempted to have characters at all. If the Death Star and other iconic Star Wars imagery weren’t in it, then nothing about the film would be even remotely memorable.
And your analogy is not worth addressing.
You still didn’t answer if every movie needs to be character-driven.
I think that almost every movie should have you caring about the characters one way or the other. Having boring characters is generally a sign of bad film-making. But not every movie needs to advance primarily by characters going through a phase of big changes, which is what I would understand by character-driven.
If R1 didn’t even attempt it, why blame it for not being character-driven? Or does every movie need to be character driven?
“At least The Phantom Menace tried to make a step-in-the-poop joke that isn’t completely tasteless, they horribly failed, but at least they tried. I can’t say the same of Citizen Kane.”
So you’re not denying that ROTS has no characters or emotion? I call that progress.
No story, no characters, no emotion, nothing
Jut like ROTS.
You really have to use a dry wine for this, otherwise it’s just too sweet.
SW:ANH
I found your problem. You should watch Star Wars. That’s a much better movie than A New Hope.
Eyeroll
Where did you dig up that old fossil?
I’m not saying drop it, but controlling the way you live your life is a bit much. I don’t see Disney forcing everyone to wear Mickey Mouse Club ears and sing It’s A Small World After All under pain of death anytime soon.
It’s more like Universal Paperclips. You start out with the intention of creating the products that people want one at a time, then eventually it becomes financially untenable to do anything but release the Hypno-Drones.
Thanks for that link.