Excerpts from the Legends article;
“Like many objects in the galaxy, chairs could also function temporarily as ad hoc weapons.”
“Han Solo owned a chair considered to be the “most comfortable chair ever designed.””
The fact that someone actually sat down at wrote this, presumably with a straight face, amuses me.
Well, the opening flash-back has a bald Whitaker, meaning that it most likely was from before the re-shoots (trailers had a bald Whitaker on Jedha as well). And from what Edwards has described it seems that it was Jedha, and mostly Scarif that was re-shot.
There is of course the whole thing about Edwards initially assuming that Disney wouldn’t let them kill off all the main characters, but I don’t know if that only affected the script or if they actually changed the shooting of the Scarif scenes that drastically.
Really? I honestly though he was one of the more interesting characters both times I was watching the movie. Chirrut was fun and all, but he remains the same throughout the entire story. Baze mostly just has a change at the very end. Bodhi is actually important to the plot, has personality (I’m not saying that the others doesn’t), character development, interacts a lot with the main characters, etc. He felt a lot less like a secondary character compared to Chirrut and Baze, and had a story arc much more comparable to Jyn and Cassian.
Also, “coward”? I don’t see how either Bodhi or Finn counts as cowards. Not particularly heroic from the start, sure, but that doesn’t make them cowards. Also, Bodhi was a pilot, not a soldier. That’s actually why I found him interesting. Unlike Chirrut and Baze he wasn’t used to fighting, yet he does find strength in the end and makes a huge contribution to saving the day.
Why does so many people not like Bodhi? I though he was one of the more identifiable of the characters. He has much more character development than say, Chirrut (which has basically none), and even Baze.
People keep saying that Galen should have mentioned the exhaust port. Galen didn’t have the schematic for the entire DS. Remember, he only designed parts of it. He didn’t know about the exhaust port, only that the power core was designed by him to be unstable.
As for the broadcast, wasn’t Raddus’ ship directly above the Scarif antenna? Or do I remember that incorrectly. Plus, they were in the middle of a battle, and it was Raddus who got in touch with Bodhi so maybe they were the only one’s receiving the transmission?
Also having Jyn and Cassian cut down by Vader is probably a tad too dark, even for a movie like RO. Their current death is sad, but has a victorious and heroic quality to it as well. Cut down by Vader would have felt very sudden and brutal.
I do however agree that the whole Stardust thing is somewhat weird. But it works well narrative-wise, so I don’t see that as a big problem. However, if I can stretch the possibilities somewhat, he could planted the name as a clue to Jyn and the rebels to use. After all I doubt that many people would have known that “stardust” was a reference to his daughter (except maybe Krennic). I also don’t see why they would have objected to the name out of context; Death-star, star-dust, big space station that reduces planets to rubble. It’s quite a stretch (not to mention somewhat of a morbid comparison) but I wouldn’t call the whole thing “beyond far fetched.” It is a weird inconsistency though.
(I’m sure the EU will explore this at some point.)
And as for the main characters abandoning Saw’s men to die. I noticed while watching the film that all of his men had disappeared to somewhere before K-2SO showed up with the U-Wing.
I was also paying extra close attention to Vader’s speech during his first appearance this time around. I don’t really have too much to add, other than that I personally can’t hear anything wrong with it other than that James Earl Jones doesn’t quite have that extra punch in his voice anymore (which is to be expected at his age). But I honestly can’t find the big flaws in his dialogue or the incorrect voice modulation that some people are talking about. I honestly couldn’t hear it. I’m not doubting that it is ever so slightly different, after all imitating analogue sound editing form the 70’s can’t be too easy, but I fail to hear anything overly wrong with it.
(PS. Most of the redness of his eyes are reflections from the red lights in his lair, not from the eyes themselves.)I also agree that there wasn’t really much to suggest to Vader that the rebel at the end of the hallway had the DS plans. Vader’s only goal was to get into the ship before it escaped.
Just FYI you can see the Partisans group around some X-wing’s briefly (with the black & white paint job) during the Death Star firing at the city you do not however see them leave and you don’t unfortunately see them show up on Scarif. Those scenes were cut.
True. I guess canonically they escaped in their own ships despite it never being shown in the film. It’s the kind of detail that I guess would only annoy, or even be noticed, by fans like us. Most people probably never even thought about that they disappeared.
Well, I just came back from a somewhat overdue second viewing of the film and I have a few nitpicks to nitpick.
I actually think the score is fairly good. It’s definitely not as good as anything Williams would have made, but what does that really mean? That it is below the music of one of the greatest Hollywood composers that’s ever lived? Giacchino didn’t exactly leave a lot of room for improvement, and equaling Williams isn’t exactly easy either. Yes, the score lacks a certain amount of memorable moments, but it sounds appropriate for the setting, and it serves it’s purpose. Also I really like the Jedha/Saw theme. It’s very different from what we’ve heard in a SW film before and it’s actually kind of unnerving. It immediately gives you the right idea of what kind of place Jedha is and what kind of people Saw and his men are. If anything, I think that theme alone deserves some praise. I agree that the Rebel theme could have been used a little more, but that’s a little nitpicky I think, especially since this film is about finding that sense of loyalty and hope that we take for granted in the events of the OT, so it makes sense that it would only show up during the final battle of RO. Also I don’t see why the Imperial march should have bee used more than the brief moment that it got. It never appeared in ANH so it would be somewhat inconsistent, and despite its name it really is Vader’s theme. And it does appear very briefly during his second appearance.
Also, when it comes to Saw, I think many people overlook just how mentally unstable he is. The way he talks, his mannerisms, how his mind wonders at times, his mood swings when talking to Jyn. He’s clearly lost his mind over the years. Which makes sense, I mean has’t he canonically been a resistance fighter for nearly 30 years without a break? Not to to mention that there’s very little left of him at all. I don’t agree with the criticism that he just “gives up.” He’s done his fighting, he’s made his sacrifices, and there’s not really any fighting left in him anyway. Keep in mind he doesn’t do any fighting in the film, probably wouldn’t be able to. After all he walks with a cane, has a poorly put together mechanical foot, has serious breathing problems, etc. Unlike Vader he doesn’t exactly have access to a lot of high-tech equipment. He’s barely holding together as it is. He seems to just be a leader at this point in his life.
(I also noticed that he unplugged something from his suit right before he dies.)
And as for the main characters abandoning Saw’s men to die. I noticed while watching the film that all of his men had disappeared to somewhere before K-2SO showed up with the U-Wing.
I was also paying extra close attention to Vader’s speech during his first appearance this time around. I don’t really have too much to add, other than that I personally can’t hear anything wrong with it other than that James Earl Jones doesn’t quite have that extra punch in his voice anymore (which is to be expected at his age). But I honestly can’t find the big flaws in his dialogue or the incorrect voice modulation that some people are talking about. I honestly couldn’t hear it. I’m not doubting that it is ever so slightly different, after all imitating analogue sound editing form the 70’s can’t be too easy, but I fail to hear anything overly wrong with it.
(PS. Most of the redness of his eyes are reflections from the red lights in his lair, not from the eyes themselves.)
I also agree that there wasn’t really much, if anything, that suggested to Vader that the rebel at the end of the hallway had the DS plans. Vader’s only goal was to get into the ship before it escaped.
That works too. The new movies (plus the new EU from what I’ve gathered) has re-mystified the Force quite a bit. And you could technically argue that it did similar things in the OT.
Anyone else think Chirrut was portrayed as being a little to powerful in his use the force? I am assuming he used the force to sense his surroundings and fight. I really didn’t want there to be any new force users in this movie. I like the idea of him as a temple guardian who believes in the force for protection… but the way it was executed they basically made him almost a Jedi in all but name only…
According to the RO Visual Guide the Guardians of the Whills has a form of martial arts called zama-shiwo meaning “the inward eye of the outward hand” which allows Chirrut to have complete control of his body and senses. He also has some kind of device powered by a tiny kyber crystal embedded in his staff which released a small harmonic sound which apparently helps him navigate his surroundings.
So he’s basically just the SW equivalent of Zatoichi the blind swordsman.
He could of course have the slightest sliver of Force abilities though. The Force is after all supposed to be created by all living beings according to Yoda, so I don’t see why someone not specifically Force-sensitive can’t tap into some basic abilities. And back in the 80’s Lucas did consider the Force to be attainable to everyone, whereas some just had a much stronger natural connection to it (like the Skywalkers). Pablo Hidalgo has also stated that someone doesn’t have to be Force-sensitive to be affected by it, stating in a tweet “You can disbelieve in it, but still have it. I’m sure Ol Ben would attribute Han’s amazing piloting and “luck” to the Force. Han wouldn’t.” You could argue that this is more or less what Baze does at the end of the film as well.
Nah.
I’m still calling it Disney Wars to differentiate it from the OT.
Why not just use “ST” (“sequel trilogy”) like most people here do?
The anthologies still need a designation though.
And leaving your own baseline is a very rare thing.
I feel like I’ve kind of done that. I was born in '89 and grew up on LucasArts games and Bantam paperbacks, but after movies stopped coming out in '05 I became a lot more passive in my fandom, largely because I wasn’t wild about the direction the EU took after jumping back to Del Rey. For six or seven years my relationship with Star Wars consisted of just watching the OT once or twice a year and maybe firing up an old computer game once in a blue moon, but then in college I got back into it in a big way, and when the Disney buyout and subsequent reboot were announced, I resolved to follow as much of it as I could, because I’d always felt I missed out on ever keeping up with the Dark Horse comics just because of when I was born. At this point, I’m as invested in the current iteration of Star Wars as I was in the 90s version. I’ve got a major soft spot the Legends stuff I grew up with, but I’m fine with the fact that it’s over and it doesn’t interfere at all with my ability to embrace current material.
Sounds like you have a very flexible baseline, which is probably the most practical approach.
I myself however have completely moved away from my own early 2000’s perception of SW, and have more-or-less adopted the 70’s, 80’s, and especially the 90’s as my preferred SW baseline(s). I do watch the new movies, but I just can’t get into the new canon. I’m sure it’s a mixed bag of good and bad like the old canon, but I have a hard time getting invested in any post-PT EU. I know it’s silly, but I get really annoyed whenever I see a battle-droid in a OT setting, or other similar things that I’ve seen in the new material.
Well the new movies are with the EU in mind so I’m pretty sure it was never intended to be an actual sub-plot.
(For all we know the story group may have added it all once it was decided to give Dr. Evazan a cameo.)
I wish generallyfrivolous would return to off-topic (if he has to be on this site at all).
Not my fault Lucas sold the franchise down the river. Star Wars is like a novel that’s really great for 200 pages, and then nosedives into unreadable trash for the remaining 500 pages.
That’s a weird comparison. It’s not like it’s all one single film. Books get sequels, prequels ans spin-offs too. And it’s not like anyone is forcing you to read them. If you only like the first novel then nothing is stopping you from enjoying just that one book.
Lawrence Kasdan might beg to differ. In his first draft of the ROTJ script, he even wrote dialogue making it explicit that Leia suffered a “fate worse than death.”
All that proves is that it was considered at some point. A lot of dark stuff from ROTJ ended up not being used. What I’m saying is that it’s over-analyzing to claim that it might actually be, or ever have been, canon.
You guys do know that ROTJ was made to be a child-friendly movie right? Heck, now it’s even a Disney movie. The EU is a completely different matter, sure, but the old one made it physically impossible, and the new one is owned by Disney.
Jabba took a very dignified political leader and princess, put her in a revealing costume and had her chained up to himself as a slave to humiliate her. I honestly don’t think it needs any more explanation than that.
Can someone tell me why the EU even existed in the first place? Without it the franchise wouldn’t be so polluted and discourage people from getting into SW.
EUs are good at keeping interest alive while kids wait for the next movie. It also gives the studio an added income between movie tickets and home video sales. Also for many fans the EU is synonyms with the franchise.
It’s not so much the idea of an EU that is the problem, but rather that they tend to get out of hand at some point.
Also I really don’t see how the EU discourages people from watching SW. I doubt that most people even know it exists, or at the very least give it any serious thought.
Well, ignoring the lack of any narrative reasons to thrown in Dr. Evazan and Ponda Baba in RO, at least the in-universe explanation is quite fascinating.
Can someone explain to me what’s wrong with Vader’s dialogue? (Not counting that James Earl Jones sounds older, or the voice modulation.) I can’t remember his dialogue word for word (I might have forgotten some odd lines), but as I was watching the film I thought it was fine. I especially thought his “don’t choke on your aspirations” line was spot on.
I’ve read elsewhere that some people feel that Vader isn’t supposed to say snarky things like that, which I don’t get at all. The OT had several moments of Vader being snarky and intimidating at the same time.
I disagree. That line was totally out of character for Vader. Quippy Vader is not. Im quickly going though my head as I type this and I cannot recall one line from Vader in the OT where he quipped. He was always business. Help me jog my memory.
One of the things that I personally always liked about Vader was how he could be quippy and serious at the same time. He wasn’t just physically imposing he would often express with wit as well in the form of clever, and often somewhat humorous, threats.
Listen to this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4OD2iDljrI&t=69s
Now that sounds Like Vader and it’s not Vader but it is James Earl Jones.
Kind of an odd excerpt you chose. He just growls.
However, earlier in the video, he really does sound like Vader.
https://youtu.be/h4OD2iDljrI?t=13
I think James Earl Jones just doesn’t have the same punch in his voice any more due to his age. That Stargate clip is after all 20 years old, so his voice sound much closer to Vader in the OT.
Can someone explain to me what’s wrong with Vader’s dialogue? (Not counting that James Earl Jones sounds older, or the voice modulation.) I can’t remember his dialogue word for word (I might have forgotten some odd lines), but as I was watching the film I thought it was fine. I especially thought his “don’t choke on your aspirations” line was spot on.
I’ve read elsewhere that some people feel that Vader isn’t supposed to say snarky things like that, which I don’t get at all. The OT had several moments of Vader being snarky and intimidating at the same time.
Apparently Billie Lourd will have a “bigger” role in ep. VIII;
http://www.starwarsnewsnet.com/2016/12/billie-lourd-to-have-a-bigger-role-in-star-wars-episode-viii.html
(Of course “bigger” doesn’t really mean that much considering she only had one short line in TFA.)
According to Pablo Hidalgo the RO “ending never changed”;
http://www.starwarsnewsnet.com/2016/12/pablo-hidalgo-clarifies-bits-about-rogue-one-a-star-wars-story.html
A bit odd, considering all the trailer shots suggesting a very different ending, but I’m guessing that he’s simply referring to the overall fates of the characters.
I think one of the biggest problem with being a fan of a franchise as large and long-lasting as SW is having to deal with a franchise version of shifting baselines. What I mean by that is that every generation sees SW very differently. If you were a kid back in the late 70’s or early 80’s then to you SW means the OT, Kenner figures, Marvel comics, etc. If you were a 90’s kid it still means just the OT, but also Dark Horse comics, Thrawn trilogy, Jedi Academy books, LucasArts video games, Shadows of the Empire, Special Editions, etc. I grew up in the early 2000’s so to me it was the OT and the PT, SW Lego, Hasbro toys, Darkhorse and Lucasarts still, etc. The funny thing as that the two latter were fairly similar, especially since they followed the same EU canon, but kids today have a completely different baseline. To them SW means Disney, Marvel (again), OT, PT, ST, and anthology films, etc.
The point I’m trying to make is that franchises, despite being focused on the same core; movies, novels, etc. never can nor will stay the same. A 90’s fan may have had a fair amount of things in common with the 80’s fan, and more-so to the later 2000’s fan, but the fan from the early 2000’s has very little in comm wit the 80’s fan. Likewise I don’t think any of these have much in common with the Disney SW generation.
I think every franchise will at some point start to feel like it has grown away from you. Many Star Trek fans currently feel quite left out now that the remakes are new and popular and many younger people basically just ignores TOS. That makes sense to the current generation of kids based on the kinds of film and TV series they’re used to, but for those who consider TOS to be Star Trek this is pretty weird and frustrating.
And leaving your own baseline is a very rare thing. Although I get the feeling that many of the “younger” members on this forum has done just that. I grew up during the early 2000’s, but I’m much more of a fan of SW from the 90’s.
And add to all of this the fact that SW really is the only franchise were the original films aren’t available in an un-tampered form, causing this baseline disassociation to feel even weirder and more intrusive. If you’re a Star Trek fan and like the TOS you can always just buys the Blu-Ray and watch the original episodes, with or without the new effect. With SW you don’t really have that option.
(Anyway, that was a long and rambling post, but I hope some of it made any sense.)
Did anyone see this pilot? I don’t remember her… Was she in the film?
Well, I can’t say that I remember this woman specifically, but I do remember there being a female X-Wing pilot in the battle over Scarif.
I don’t really see why every character needs a backstory. When the whole point is to make a standalone movie where none of the characters will return in a sequel, the I don’t really see how backstory would be necessary unless directly related to the plot, e.g. Jyn’s relation to Galen.
I think RO can be fairly compared to movies like f.ex. John Carpenter’s The Thing in terms of how the characters are developed. What’s so brilliant about the writing of that film is that it never wastes any time explaining anyone’s backstory. All that we need to know about those characters are revealed to us through how they all cope with the same intense situation. There was never a “when I was a kid…” or “back home I was…” type of dialogue, all that we need to learn about their personalities comes from how they react to the crisis that is at the center film. That in my opinion is good economical writing. Granted, this method is not for every type of movie, but I think that this is the kind of story that RO tries to be. Which makes sense when you got a war movie focused on one specific threat and one specific important mission. RO isn’t really a “character film”, yet it still manages to explore several characters’ personalities and implied backgrounds based on how they behave throughout the story.
Also SW does have the benefit of having one of the most elaborate EUs in existence, so if you are just dying to know the life story of Chirrut or Bodhi, or any other character, I’m sure there’s going to be some novel or comic that will explore this at some point.
I’m actually kind of curious to see what the fan editors might end up doing with this film. Unlike TFA this film is a lot easier to reconcile with the more old school fans who prefer Legends material. (F.ex. since there was no caption identifying Vader’s castle as being on Mustafar, I imagine someone could easily just add “Vjun” or “Bast Castle” to it, etc.)
I’m still a bit confused over why Mustafar was never identified by a caption though. Did they think that too many people might not know the name? Or were they simply trying to keep the PT references to a minimum?
