Sign In

ZkinandBonez

User Group
Trusted Members
Join date
5-May-2015
Last activity
18-Aug-2018
Posts
1443

Post History

Post
#1235017
Topic
Is <em>Revenge of the Sith</em> the Best or Worst Prequel?
Time

DominicCobb said:

ZkinandBonez said:

DominicCobb said:

It’s interesting seeing people say that TPM looked “the most like Star Wars.” Certainly in terms of shooting on film, less CGI overall and more practical effects and real locations it looks more like SW than the other two. But in terms of designs I’m not entirely sure I agree. They definitely had some leeway with the film’s setting being years before and on some different worlds, but I think in some areas things definitely went too far afield and look like they’re from a different franchise altogether.

Well, I was more going for the over-all “feel” of the film, not necessarily specific designs.

I’ve learned to really appreciate the designs in the PT in the last few years, and I actually think it’s a good thing that the PT looks very different from the OT. I even thinks it makes sense for it to feel different too, which is why I like ROTS, though I don’t complain when they do feel OT-like either.

As for straying too far from the OT designs/feel, I personally think AOTC, and to a lesser degree ROTS, are the biggest sinners there. I’m curious about what things in particular from TPM you’re referring to. I always felt that TPM balanced new and old concepts really well.

The ship, set, and costume designs in general are too ornate and (on the whole) lack the rugged, lived-in and (most importantly) utilitarian feel of the OT. Even if they are justified in universe because of the film’s areas of interest (rich Naboo and Coruscant), it just doesn’t feel quite right for a SW film to have that kind of stuff as a primary focus. If the out-there designs weren’t so abundant, it probably wouldn’t feel like a problem to me.

But that’s not all of it. Pretty much all CG aliens in the film look silly and out of place. Not to mention the Gungans and their underwater city, which straddles a line between somewhat inspired and just plain wacky.

I will say I’m a fan of the battle droids. I probably would’ve preferred them a tad bulkier but they look pretty good.

That’s interesting, I’ve personally always felt that the Gungan City was one of the most Star Wars-y things in the PT. It’s like a cross between the basic ideas behind Cloud City and the Ewok village. One of the biggest problems for me with the whole idea of an “OT aesthetic” is that we never really saw that much of the galaxy in those movies, only a tiny, tiny glimpse of it. Tatooine, Hoth and Endor hardly gave us a real sense of what the rest of the galaxy might look like. The shiny-ness and elegance of Cloud City, which btw is supposed to be a small mining operation, always justified the look of Coruscant (and the “fancier” PT locales) to me. Though I do agree that some of the designs are way too fancy. I especially think Kamino looks very out of place compared to both trilogies.

And, yes, the TPM aliens can be a tad silly, especially the pod-racers. I think that’s a side-effect of Lucas specifically wanting make aliens that would be impossible as people in suits.

The way I see it the PT is supposed to be a “fall of Rome” kind of story, as opposed to the gritty, 1970’s, WWII influenced interpretation of sci-fi vibe that we associate with the OT. I’ve always felt that the Empire, despite it’s obvious references to Nazi Germany, has more of a Soviet Union feel to it over-all. Everything they make is kinda drab and angular, like a lot of Russian architecture and engineering used to be. It’s a galaxy with all the colour and life sucked out of it, and naturally, to rebel against all that, the heroes are all swashbuckling pirates and rebels. In order for the PT to work, IMO, it had to be more colourful, formal, and regal to show that bygone golden age that Obi Wan alludes to in ANH. At east that’s how I see it, and what I believe Lucas was going for when he made the PT.

Post
#1234994
Topic
Is <em>Revenge of the Sith</em> the Best or Worst Prequel?
Time

DominicCobb said:

It’s interesting seeing people say that TPM looked “the most like Star Wars.” Certainly in terms of shooting on film, less CGI overall and more practical effects and real locations it looks more like SW than the other two. But in terms of designs I’m not entirely sure I agree. They definitely had some leeway with the film’s setting being years before and on some different worlds, but I think in some areas things definitely went too far afield and look like they’re from a different franchise altogether.

Well, I was more going for the over-all “feel” of the film, not necessarily specific designs.

I’ve learned to really appreciate the designs in the PT in the last few years, and I actually think it’s a good thing that the PT looks very different from the OT. I even thinks it makes sense for it to feel different too, which is why I like ROTS, though I don’t complain when they do feel OT-like either.

As for straying too far from the OT designs/feel, I personally think AOTC, and to a lesser degree ROTS, are the biggest sinners there. I’m curious about what things in particular from TPM you’re referring to. I always felt that TPM balanced new and old concepts really well.

Post
#1234982
Topic
Is <em>Revenge of the Sith</em> the Best or Worst Prequel?
Time

Story-wise I think ROTS is definitely the best PT films, visually however I think it’s the worst of the three.

Based purely on nostalgia I prefer TPM out of the three, but just practically speaking I think ROTS is the best of the PT over-all. It’ has the most solid story, fairly good good pacing, the acting (although a tad weird at times) is solid, and it feels like it actually matters. TPM and ATOC both feel like they’re just setting up a bigger story that we never really got to see (unless you count the Clone Wars series or the EU in general).

I’ve personally really warmed up to ROTS lately, and I even, dare I say it, think it’s a fairly good film just in general. AOTC is still a complete mess that’s hard for me to excuse even as a SW fan, though I still like the Obi-Wan scenes, and the first act is pretty solid for the most part. TPM’s biggest sin is just being kind of boring and telling a fairly unimportant story (it feels more like the plot of a SW tie-in novel). But I would say that it feels the most Star Wars-y of the three PT films, and visually I think it looks great. The practical effects are among some of the best I’ve seen (especially the miniatures), and the CG, though dated, is good for its time. That’s really my biggest gripe with ROTS, it looks really fake and the action is so over-the-top at times. Though when it calms down and focuses on the characters, I think it works pretty well. It’s a movie that I think suffers a lot from it not conforming to fan expectations.

Post
#1232007
Topic
Horizon - How To Film The Impossible - Remastered
Time

Great documentary, thanks for restoring it.

I got really bummed out when the “good” version was removed from YouTube a few years ago, and this version is such an improvement in every way. The high-res footage from the movies really helps to illustrate the points they were making in the documentary; like the white TIE’s overlapping the Falcon in shot SB19. I could never quite see what they were referring to in the either of the low-res VHS versions.

Post
#1227501
Topic
General Star Wars Random Thoughts Thread
Time

DuracellEnergizer said:

Mocata said:

In other random thoughts has anyone else ever noticed that the actor who play Jerec in Dark Forces II was the MI6 agent that tries to drug James Bond after he goes rogue in License to Kill? Probably just me.

I’ve noticed he’s the guy who interrogated Sinclair in that one episode of Babylon 5, and he was in an episode of Sliders, too.

He also played two different MacGyver villains, and a Nazi in an episode of Star Trek: Enterprise.

lovelikewinter said:

The two new Prequel-era books and the return of Clone Wars. Its like 2008 all over again. When Lucas’ Preqeul bias was rampant. At least I save some money I guess.

Well, if there’s fans of it, why not make more of it?

Post
#1227076
Topic
<em>Star Wars: The Clone Wars</em> To Return With New Episodes
Time

It seems likely that they’ll skip Dark Disciple and Son of Dathomir as they’ve already been turned into a novel and a comic series. I’d personally love to see the Dark Disciple story-arc in episode form, but finishing the half-completed episodes (which also focus more on more important main-characters like Anakin, Ashoka, etc.) seems to make more sense financially.

Post
#1226477
Topic
Has Star Wars finally &quot;jumped the shark&quot;?
Time

DominicCobb said:

ZkinandBonez said:

dahmage said:

ZkinandBonez said:

I’m curious as to how people would have reacted to the “flying Leia” scene had something similar been done back in the 80’s. I really think this scene has the most polarized reactions in the entirety of TLJ. Some people love it, and others think it’s complete nonsense. Even my first reaction was “is this brilliant or silly?”. Maybe it’s the obvious CG-look of the moment that puts people off?

Or maybe it’s the fact that many anticipated a Leia death scene,

then all of a sudden she “flies” back to safety (it’s pretty jarring the first time). Or maybe GotG vol.2 was still to fresh in people’s memory and all they could think of was Yondu’s Mary Poppins scene.

I personally think it’s a really interesting idea, but I can’t help but find the execution of the scene to be a tad off. It’s the wide-shot of her flying (this shot) that weirds me out a bit. But none of this makes it a “bad” scene in my mind. Plus, it’s a scene that to me gets less weird the more I watch it, though I can’t tell if that’s a good or bad sign.

emphasis mine, i agree with much of your post, but that part stands out, and i think it is impossible for most of us to effectively gauge what our subconscious was doing as we watched this, but i strongly suspect that our collective thought was “ok, this is how she dies”, and then we were all wrong.

That’s exactly what I thought the first time I saw TLJ, so when her hand suddenly started twitching and her eyes opened it really caught me off guard. It’s a scene I didn’t really appreciate until I saw it a second time. For me that actually applies to all of the new films; I don’t properly watch them on their own terms until I sew it a second time.

I think the Internet has shifted a lot of the focus on the actual production of movies, and as a result we’re simply watching movies differently than before. Nowadays we expect so much beforhand, and there’s such a diverse range of opinions, preferences and pre-suppositions. Back in the 80s people really just wanted more SW. Now people want their interpretation of what SW should be. And of course there’s no established template for what that is.

This feels spot on. I had a similar experience watching TFA the first time where I had trouble accepting what it actually was trying to do and didn’t fully love it until my second viewing. Didn’t make the same mistake with TLJ and went in with no expectations and allowed it to tell the story it wanted to tell. Loved it right away.

The new SW movies have really taught me the importance of not projecting your own ideas onto movies and judge them on their own terms. I still have issues with certain things, but I now try to only judge the quality of the filmmaking.

Post
#1226465
Topic
Has Star Wars finally &quot;jumped the shark&quot;?
Time

dahmage said:

ZkinandBonez said:

I’m curious as to how people would have reacted to the “flying Leia” scene had something similar been done back in the 80’s. I really think this scene has the most polarized reactions in the entirety of TLJ. Some people love it, and others think it’s complete nonsense. Even my first reaction was “is this brilliant or silly?”. Maybe it’s the obvious CG-look of the moment that puts people off?

Or maybe it’s the fact that many anticipated a Leia death scene,

then all of a sudden she “flies” back to safety (it’s pretty jarring the first time). Or maybe GotG vol.2 was still to fresh in people’s memory and all they could think of was Yondu’s Mary Poppins scene.

I personally think it’s a really interesting idea, but I can’t help but find the execution of the scene to be a tad off. It’s the wide-shot of her flying (this shot) that weirds me out a bit. But none of this makes it a “bad” scene in my mind. Plus, it’s a scene that to me gets less weird the more I watch it, though I can’t tell if that’s a good or bad sign.

emphasis mine, i agree with much of your post, but that part stands out, and i think it is impossible for most of us to effectively gauge what our subconscious was doing as we watched this, but i strongly suspect that our collective thought was “ok, this is how she dies”, and then we were all wrong.

That’s exactly what I thought the first time I saw TLJ, so when her hand suddenly started twitching and her eyes opened it really caught me off guard. It’s a scene I didn’t really appreciate until I saw it a second time. For me that actually applies to all of the new films; I don’t properly watch them on their own terms until I sew it a second time.

I think the Internet has shifted a lot of the focus on the actual production of movies, and as a result we’re simply watching movies differently than before. Nowadays we expect so much beforhand, and there’s such a diverse range of opinions, preferences and pre-suppositions. Back in the 80s people really just wanted more SW. Now people want their interpretation of what SW should be. And of course there’s no established template for what that is.

Post
#1226367
Topic
Has Star Wars finally &quot;jumped the shark&quot;?
Time

Mielr said:

ZkinandBonez said:

Fair enough. But quality of filmmaking has nothing to do with wheather or not something should/could be added the lore; that’s all I’m saying.

I agree that new things can and should be added—it’s just the way they’re added that has to feel right; like they belong, like they’ve always been there/been possible. Even if you’ve never seen something happen before, it should feel like it could have happened all along. I remember the first time everyone saw Jabba in ROTJ and how great and disgusting he was—he didn’t feel out of place, he was just…Jabba.

I didn’t mean to turn this into another TLJ-bashing thread. Just wanted to discuss the current perception of the Star Wars films with the public in general. I think the brand has been cheapened, and it’s going to affect the future of the franchise.

I get what you’re saying. I’ve had similar reactions to the new movies, I just tend to take these differences as a natural side effect of them being new movies, using new methods. Plus, it’s all very subjective; the new Star Trek films f.ex. does nothing for me at all. They just feel off. But I get why people like them.

Post
#1226362
Topic
Has Star Wars finally &quot;jumped the shark&quot;?
Time

Mielr said:

ZkinandBonez said:

Mielr said:

ZkinandBonez said:

Mielr said:

ZkinandBonez said:

Mielr said:

DominicCobb said:

Mielr said:

SilverWook said:

I was speaking more towards the people who think the human body blows up like a water balloon in space.

In a movie universe where spaceships and explosions can be heard in a vacuum, and often defy physics, giant slugs live inside an apparently airless asteroid, people with magical powers formally fight with improbable laser swords when a blaster would end things quicker, (see Obi-Wan vs. Grevious) and overgrown teddy bears kicked Imperial ass, Leia in space was the one bridge too far? I give up.

It wasn’t the improbability of Leia flying—we all know that films rely on suspending disbelief, and it was required many times in the OT, but it was more the TONE that struck me as so odd. The tone of the flying Leia scene was totally off, totally un-Star Wars-like, and I think that’s why so many people were like “WTF”?!

I’ve heard a lot of complaints about this scene, but never this. I’m honestly curious why you think so, in my mind tonally it’s one of the scenes that feels the most like classic Star Wars.

There was nothing in the OT that was tonally like that scene at all. It made me wonder if RJ had ever seen any of the OT films.

The “use the Force, Luke” scene in ANH, Ben’s Firce ghost & Luke calling out to Leia with the Force in ESB, Luke making Threepio hover, there were plenty of unexpected Force-scenes that did things we hadn’t seen before. Why would TLJ be any different?

The only thing that I personally find to be “tonally different” is the fact that it’s a CG moment that would have been hard to pull off in the 80’s. That scene overall (Kylo/Leia moment included) actually really reminds me of the end of ESB.

That was a voice in Luke’s head, not someone floating in space, and it was done multiple times in the OT.

I was thinking more the tone of those scenes; the music, the sense of mystery, the unexpectednes of it all (first time watching at least), etc. Pluss, like I mentioned, Luke made Threepio hover in ROTJ. It’s simpler than flying Leia, but hardly a subtle moment.

And why does TLJ have to conform to what the OT films did. They never limited themselves to what the previous film(s) did, and neither did TLJ.

The OT were the establishing films that set all of the rules in a new, unfamiliar world. The world is no longer new and unfamiliar, hence the rules. If the rules aren’t followed, then they might as well just make them as Marvel films, which is the direction they’re headed anyway.

“Rules”? Why does the OT have to be the rules? The OT showed very little of the galaxy, and is set in a time with only a handful of Force-users. There was always the implication that the Force could do so much more, so why limit it to what little we saw in the OT?

And who makes the “rules” anyway? George Lucas? Seeing how many people dismiss the PT, there really isn’t much of an official baseline for what can or can’t happen in these movies.

Mielr said:

Everything you mentioned was was done multiple times in the OT. It was established from the first film that Luke could hear Ben’s voice. It was established from the 2nd film that Jedis could use the force lift objects off the ground and see force ghosts. If they’d wanted to make someone fly in outer space “in the 80s” they could have. They were able to show Christopher Reeve fly as Superman, I don’t see why they couldn’t have done something similar.

Just because something like that never happened within the plot of three movies doesn’t mean it can’t happen within the world.

Plus, what about Palpatine’s Force-lightning. That was a pretty jarring addition to the lore that didn’t resemble anything seem before. At least “flying” Leia is consistent with levitation, telekinesis, etc.

I’m not saying anyone has to like this scene, or the film, or any of the new SW stuff, I just don’t get the point of the argument that these movies aren’t conforming to what we saw in the OT. We saw so little in the OT, it only makes sense for the new films to introduce weird new things, just like the OT did when they were new.

They could have at least conformed enough to make them good films, like the OT were. It’s not about “weird new things” it’s about quality. With the prequels, George Lucas misinterpreted what made the OT great. It wasn’t FX, it was the story. Which is something sorely lacking in the recent films.

Fair enough. But quality of filmmaking has nothing to do with wheather or not something should/could be added the lore; that’s all I’m saying.

Post
#1226357
Topic
Has Star Wars finally &quot;jumped the shark&quot;?
Time

Mielr said:

ZkinandBonez said:

Mielr said:

ZkinandBonez said:

Mielr said:

DominicCobb said:

Mielr said:

SilverWook said:

I was speaking more towards the people who think the human body blows up like a water balloon in space.

In a movie universe where spaceships and explosions can be heard in a vacuum, and often defy physics, giant slugs live inside an apparently airless asteroid, people with magical powers formally fight with improbable laser swords when a blaster would end things quicker, (see Obi-Wan vs. Grevious) and overgrown teddy bears kicked Imperial ass, Leia in space was the one bridge too far? I give up.

It wasn’t the improbability of Leia flying—we all know that films rely on suspending disbelief, and it was required many times in the OT, but it was more the TONE that struck me as so odd. The tone of the flying Leia scene was totally off, totally un-Star Wars-like, and I think that’s why so many people were like “WTF”?!

I’ve heard a lot of complaints about this scene, but never this. I’m honestly curious why you think so, in my mind tonally it’s one of the scenes that feels the most like classic Star Wars.

There was nothing in the OT that was tonally like that scene at all. It made me wonder if RJ had ever seen any of the OT films.

The “use the Force, Luke” scene in ANH, Ben’s Firce ghost & Luke calling out to Leia with the Force in ESB, Luke making Threepio hover, there were plenty of unexpected Force-scenes that did things we hadn’t seen before. Why would TLJ be any different?

The only thing that I personally find to be “tonally different” is the fact that it’s a CG moment that would have been hard to pull off in the 80’s. That scene overall (Kylo/Leia moment included) actually really reminds me of the end of ESB.

That was a voice in Luke’s head, not someone floating in space, and it was done multiple times in the OT.

I was thinking more the tone of those scenes; the music, the sense of mystery, the unexpectednes of it all (first time watching at least), etc. Pluss, like I mentioned, Luke made Threepio hover in ROTJ. It’s simpler than flying Leia, but hardly a subtle moment.

And why does TLJ have to conform to what the OT films did. They never limited themselves to what the previous film(s) did, and neither did TLJ.

The OT were the establishing films that set all of the rules in a new, unfamiliar world. The world is no longer new and unfamiliar, hence the rules. If the rules aren’t followed, then they might as well just make them as Marvel films, which is the direction they’re headed anyway.

“Rules”? Why does the OT have to be the rules? The OT showed very little of the galaxy, and is set in a time with only a handful of Force-users. There was always the implication that the Force could do so much more, so why limit it to what little we saw in the OT?

And who makes the “rules” anyway? George Lucas? Seeing how many people dismiss the PT, there really isn’t much of an official baseline for what can or can’t happen in these movies.

Mielr said:

Everything you mentioned was was done multiple times in the OT. It was established from the first film that Luke could hear Ben’s voice. It was established from the 2nd film that Jedis could use the force lift objects off the ground and see force ghosts. If they’d wanted to make someone fly in outer space “in the 80s” they could have. They were able to show Christopher Reeve fly as Superman, I don’t see why they couldn’t have done something similar.

Just because something like that never happened within the plot of three movies doesn’t mean it can’t happen within the world.

Plus, what about Palpatine’s Force-lightning. That was a pretty jarring addition to the lore that didn’t resemble anything seem before. At least “flying” Leia is consistent with levitation, telekinesis, etc.

I’m not saying anyone has to like this scene, or the film, or any of the new SW stuff, I just don’t get the point of the argument that these movies aren’t conforming to what we saw in the OT. We saw so little in the OT, it only makes sense for the new films to introduce weird new things, just like the OT did when they were new.

Post
#1226354
Topic
Has Star Wars finally &quot;jumped the shark&quot;?
Time

Mielr said:

ZkinandBonez said:

Mielr said:

DominicCobb said:

Mielr said:

SilverWook said:

I was speaking more towards the people who think the human body blows up like a water balloon in space.

In a movie universe where spaceships and explosions can be heard in a vacuum, and often defy physics, giant slugs live inside an apparently airless asteroid, people with magical powers formally fight with improbable laser swords when a blaster would end things quicker, (see Obi-Wan vs. Grevious) and overgrown teddy bears kicked Imperial ass, Leia in space was the one bridge too far? I give up.

It wasn’t the improbability of Leia flying—we all know that films rely on suspending disbelief, and it was required many times in the OT, but it was more the TONE that struck me as so odd. The tone of the flying Leia scene was totally off, totally un-Star Wars-like, and I think that’s why so many people were like “WTF”?!

I’ve heard a lot of complaints about this scene, but never this. I’m honestly curious why you think so, in my mind tonally it’s one of the scenes that feels the most like classic Star Wars.

There was nothing in the OT that was tonally like that scene at all. It made me wonder if RJ had ever seen any of the OT films.

The “use the Force, Luke” scene in ANH, Ben’s Firce ghost & Luke calling out to Leia with the Force in ESB, Luke making Threepio hover, there were plenty of unexpected Force-scenes that did things we hadn’t seen before. Why would TLJ be any different?

The only thing that I personally find to be “tonally different” is the fact that it’s a CG moment that would have been hard to pull off in the 80’s. That scene overall (Kylo/Leia moment included) actually really reminds me of the end of ESB.

That was a voice in Luke’s head, not someone floating in space, and it was done multiple times in the OT.

I was thinking more the tone of those scenes; the music, the sense of mystery, the unexpectednes of it all (first time watching at least), etc. Pluss, like I mentioned, Luke made Threepio hover in ROTJ. It’s simpler than flying Leia, but hardly a subtle moment.

And why does TLJ have to conform to what the OT films did. They never limited themselves to what the previous film(s) did, and neither did TLJ.

Post
#1226352
Topic
Has Star Wars finally &quot;jumped the shark&quot;?
Time

Mielr said:

DominicCobb said:

Mielr said:

SilverWook said:

I was speaking more towards the people who think the human body blows up like a water balloon in space.

In a movie universe where spaceships and explosions can be heard in a vacuum, and often defy physics, giant slugs live inside an apparently airless asteroid, people with magical powers formally fight with improbable laser swords when a blaster would end things quicker, (see Obi-Wan vs. Grevious) and overgrown teddy bears kicked Imperial ass, Leia in space was the one bridge too far? I give up.

It wasn’t the improbability of Leia flying—we all know that films rely on suspending disbelief, and it was required many times in the OT, but it was more the TONE that struck me as so odd. The tone of the flying Leia scene was totally off, totally un-Star Wars-like, and I think that’s why so many people were like “WTF”?!

I’ve heard a lot of complaints about this scene, but never this. I’m honestly curious why you think so, in my mind tonally it’s one of the scenes that feels the most like classic Star Wars.

There was nothing in the OT that was tonally like that scene at all. It made me wonder if RJ had ever seen any of the OT films.

The “use the Force, Luke” scene in ANH, Ben’s Force ghost & Luke calling out to Leia with the Force in ESB, Luke making Threepio hover in ROTJ; there were plenty of unexpected Force-scenes in the OT that did things we hadn’t seen before. Why would TLJ be any different?

The only thing that I personally find to be “tonally different” is the fact that it’s a CG moment that would have been hard to pull off in the 80’s. That scene overall (Kylo/Leia connection moment included) actually really reminds me of the end of ESB.

Post
#1226343
Topic
Has Star Wars finally &quot;jumped the shark&quot;?
Time

I’m curious as to how people would have reacted to the “flying Leia” scene had something similar been done back in the 80’s. I really think this scene has the most polarized reactions in the entirety of TLJ. Some people love it, and others think it’s complete nonsense. Even my first reaction was “is this brilliant or silly?”. Maybe it’s the obvious CG-look of the moment that puts people off? Or maybe it’s the fact that many anticipated a Leia death scene, then all of a sudden she “flies” back to safety (it’s pretty jarring the first time). Or maybe GotG vol.2 was still to fresh in people’s memory and all they could think of was Yondu’s Mary Poppins scene.

I personally think it’s a really interesting idea, but I can’t help but find the execution of the scene to be a tad off. It’s the wide-shot of her flying (this shot) that weirds me out a bit. But none of this makes it a “bad” scene in my mind. Plus, it’s a scene that to me gets less weird the more I watch it, though I can’t tell if that’s a good or bad sign.

Post
#1226128
Topic
Has Star Wars finally &quot;jumped the shark&quot;?
Time

It’s kind of hard to judge all of this though. I mean aren’t most people on this forum old enough to remember SW before the PT? Even the younger people here seems to have grown up with the PT (like myself), so I don’t think too many here really knows what the general consensus about the new movies really are. Though I personally wouldn’t go as far as saying “jumping the shark” (not yet anyway), I too feel like they’re overdoing it a bit. But then again I’m used to a more old fashioned formula of filmmaking, so I honestly have no idea what people under the age of twenty feel about the new method.

Post
#1225427
Topic
Is Star Wars catering to girls now?
Time

dahmage said:

LexX said:

When I saw TLJ the second time it was all too clear when half of the resistance seemed to be women to the point it just didn’t feel believable, just transparent. The contrast is so stark compared to the OT it’s ridicilous. If you’re really at war and showed people inside battleships there wouldn’t be 50% women. It’s not wrong, it’s not right, that’s just the way it is.

you are comparing this movie to your own past here on earth, and it is a fact that in the past there was a concept of ‘a woman’s place’.

I for one like the fact that Star Wars isn’t reflecting that past anymore.

I don’t think LexX was trying to refer outdated gender roles. The strange thing is that even in the modern world, even in the most progressive countries, there are rarely, if ever, any occupation or field of interest that is 50% men and 50% women. Even in liberal countries like Norway, where both men and women are “drafted”, more men choose the military as a career afterwards than women. Similarly there are certain occupations that are over-represented by women, just like some jobs have an abundance of men. I think that’s what he meant by; “It’s not wrong, it’s not right, that’s just the way it is.”

Of course I agree that this still doesn’t have to apply to a fictional universe. Also a Galactic Civil War (or two of them) I’d imagine would make people do more things out of necessity than preference.

Post
#1224629
Topic
Episode IX - Discussion * <strong><em>SPOILER THREAD</em></strong> *
Time

DominicCobb said:

ZkinandBonez said:

SilverWook said:

Chewie is likely safe. I don’t think Lucasfilm is going to want to revisit the Vector Prime reaction in this current fan climate.

Ironically, Chewie is probably going to be the only flesh-and-blood member of the original main-cast to survive in the new continuity.

I guess Chewie falls under the “don’t kill the dog” movie trope.

Yeah that, plus Chewie is one of the only characters who could continue to appear without anyone noticing the actor changing. And, since he’s a supporting character, he doesn’t face the burden of always (or ever) needing a compelling story arc in each film (like the droids).

Yeah, Chewie and the two droids are probably going to be in SW pretty much forever as they either don’t age or age very slowly, and, as you said, since the actors/performers can easily be replaced. Threepio is a bit of a problem though. I don’t really know how people would respond to replacing Anthony Daniels, but Chewie and Artoo are probably going to be in future SW content indefinitely.

Post
#1224595
Topic
Episode IX - Discussion * <strong><em>SPOILER THREAD</em></strong> *
Time

CHEWBAKAspelledwrong said:

Why is that ironic?

Irony (one definition): “a state of affairs or an event that seems deliberately contrary to what one expects

The old continuity made an effort to not kill any of the original main-characters, except for Chewie. And now the new series has pretty much done the complete opposite.

Post
#1224582
Topic
Episode IX - Discussion * <strong><em>SPOILER THREAD</em></strong> *
Time

SilverWook said:

Chewie is likely safe. I don’t think Lucasfilm is going to want to revisit the Vector Prime reaction in this current fan climate.

Ironically, Chewie is probably going to be the only flesh-and-blood member of the original main-cast to survive in the new continuity.

I guess Chewie falls under the “don’t kill the dog” movie trope.

Post
#1223270
Topic
What is your personal canon?
Time

The way I see it; a story (movie, book, etc.) can only be judged by what came before it. Therefore I don’t think ANH can be judged in relation to ROTS, but ROTS is definetely informed by ANH and the OT. F.ex; a comic story set during ANH published after the PT is obviously affected by both the OT, the PT, and the EU so far.

I guess movies (especially the OT) exist in two (technically three) continuities;
Simply as a film only affected by any previous films (if any),
or as it exists retroactively as a part of the larger EU(s).