Sign In

rocknroll41

User Group
Members
Join date
20-Feb-2016
Last activity
2-Mar-2021
Posts
220

Post History

Post
#1414112
Topic
The Marvel Cinematic Universe
Time

NFBisms said:

I just wish it were more confident in itself.

I’m not a huge fan of how they had to take an entire third of the show out to hit us over the head with Outside The Hex exposition from [lame] characters spouting faux-science at computer monitors. It’s just relatively uninteresting. Monica Rambeau and her team are the typical weak, generic blockbuster stuff that I could do without.

We should have stayed exclusively with the sitcom stuff and slowly discovered what was off through Vision. How it all came to be didn’t even have to be as convoluted or fleshed out as it ended up being, especially when the important parts of it are really just Wanda’s emotions and psyche.

I commend that they even did something like this in the first place, but those ambitions are held back by trying to cater to all attention spans. This could have been really good, and not just mildly interesting.

I agree that the sitcom stuff is more interesting than the SWORD stuff and should’ve remained as the main focus of the show.

Post
#1413368
Topic
The Marvel Cinematic Universe
Time

RicOlie_2 said:

SPOILERS ahead:

I felt like there wasn’t really enough of an explanation of how Wanda got such crazy powers. They seem to come from nowhere…her grief maybe. I don’t know how the comics handle it, but I feel like something was missing on that score.

Other than that though, it was amazing! And the after credits scene… Just when I thought it couldn’t get crazier.

My interpretation is that she was born with powers and that the more trauma she goes through, the more powerful she becomes.

Post
#1412885
Topic
Unpopular Opinion Thread
Time

Omni said:

Pretty sure George didn’t give a shit about him either, hence how he died on ROTJ. I must say, with as much Boba Fett fanboy-ism going on after Mando, I like his silly death scene more and more - we shouldn’t be thinking too much of the bad guys, focus on the heroes, dammit!

I agree. Ever since “I am your father,” Star Wars has had this idea that every villain needs to be super complex, and while I understand the desire to make every villain seem “real,” sometimes a simple mustache-twirler that pushes the conflict and moves the plot along is all you need. Save the breathing room for the heroes!

Post
#1412597
Topic
Unpopular Opinion Thread
Time

JadedSkywalker said:

I think Star Wars is the best by a hair, Empire is better in a lot of ways just not as fun. Return is the weakest and uneven but still has its moments.

To me all three films, i mean the real versions are one piece. They tell a complete story i find it hard to consider them separately. Although i know Leia was never intended to be the sister, or Vader Luke’s father. The story of the original film when viewed as a standalone thing is very different from what came later. Star Wars itself not the SAGA is a different beast. A simple happy go lucky comic book movie, not some grand Epic.
A movie serial like Buck Rogers or Flash Gordon. Tells a simple story and is self contained.

I’m more of a “comic serial” person and not a “grand epic” person so I prefer seeing sw77 separate from the rest, but I understand why most others feel differently and respect that!

Post
#1412398
Topic
Unpopular Opinion Thread
Time

SparkySywer said:

I don’t really think TFA screwed over TLJ & TRoS that hard. Redoing the Rebels v Empire conflict was a mistake, but they could have brought in the Republic military as late as in Episode 9, and there’s more interesting subtext to the conflict you can read into TFA and TLJ.

They don’t develop on the new concepts of the ST that much, but TLJ picks up the slack enough that I don’t think it’s a problem. At least in TFA’s case.

The Knights of Ren should’ve been cut, because there’s not really anything you could do with them. That’s kind of indefensible, but it’s not that big a deal either.

I don’t really know what else could be a case of TFA screwing over the rest of the ST, though.

Rey’s identity shouldn’t have been a mystery, Poe should’ve died early on as planned (so that Finn could have his role instead of just being a jedi decoy for Rey), and if they were gonna put Luke on an island, then maybe don’t have him standing all elegantly with Jedi robes. I get that they wanted to take artistic license there for the sake of making the ending of TFA feel “hopeful,” but in-universe, it would’ve made more sense to just have him already in rags and maybe just sitting on a rock looking all sad or something. Make it clear right away to the audience that we’re getting a sad hermit Luke.

Post
#1412269
Topic
Unpopular Opinion Thread
Time

Servii said:

rocknroll41 said:

I feel like a lot of people THINK they like TFA, but really they just like it cause it did just barely enough to be passable, while also avoiding anything inevitable that it knew would piss people off, thus putting all the burden onto Episode 8.

JJ Abrams is very much a people pleaser. He sets up plot points and mysteries that win over people’s initial interest, while deliberately ignoring or glossing over the the less popular implications of those plot points. He’s not a great long term planner, but he’s very good at getting people excited.

True, but “drumming up excitement” at the expense of telling a genuine story longterm goes against my ethos, hence why I’ve grown to dislike TFA/TRoS, and at the same time grow to like TLJ.

Post
#1412148
Topic
Unpopular Opinion Thread
Time

Servii said:

Episode numbers were a mistake.

The Mandalorian should never have brought in preexisting characters.

TLJ didn’t derail the sequel trilogy. TFA already did, halfway through its running time. TLJ just made people aware of the derailment.

Geonosis is the coolest looking planet shown in the saga.

Watto and Nute Gunray are worse than Jar Jar.

I agree with all of this (except for your fourth point)! Happy to find a like-minded individual!

Post
#1412062
Topic
Unpopular Opinion Thread
Time

ATMachine said:

That’s the problem with making stories instead of giant multimedia franchises. Stories naturally have a beginning, a middle, and an end. Which conflicts with the franchise-minded imperative to keep a constant stream of content going as long as possible, to wring every last cent out of the brand.

For that very reason, I think Star Wars is at it’s best when it’s anthological. That’s why I prefer stuff that feels loose and indefinite (the original film, TCW, TLJ, Solo, etc.). Whenever Star Wars tries to be grandiose and operatic, it works for a little while (ESB), but eventually runs itself into a dead-end corner (TRoS).

Post
#1411892
Topic
Unpopular Opinion Thread
Time

Servii said:

Cthulhunicron said:

The Star Wars universe is pretty limited, and I don’t think there’s really anywhere for the story to go.

Hypothetically, the universe has limitless potential for new stories to tell and settings to explore, but since the people in charge of this IP are unwilling to step outside of the franchise’s comfort zone and make anything too unfamiliar, it will continue to stagnate, and the universe will shrink. This isn’t just Disney’s fault or modern Lucasfilm’s fault, by the way. This was a problem under George, as well. The franchise is too fettered to its past.

So, if movies can’t actually have their quality measured, then what’s the point of lists like the AFI Top 100? Why create official rankings of movies that are generally considered great if there’s no way to actually quantify that?

For the same reason I might get bored one day and decide to make a personal ranking and/or put up a fan poll somewhere.

In other words: it’s purely for recreational fun, and it doesn’t matter whoever is making said list. Some places that make these lists you speak of just so happen to be more popular than others, is all. But as a poster above mentioned: “Objectively Popular” does not equal “Objectively Good.”

Post
#1411869
Topic
Unpopular Opinion Thread
Time

Mocata said:

Lol why is this even a debate. The atomic weight of gold can be objectively measured. Citizen Kane being a better movie that The Room cannot be measured. ‘Better’ and ‘worse’ are not mathematical things. If an alien lands tomorrow he could say that The Phantom Menace is a good movie, but he won’t say that one plus one equals three.

Couldn’t have said it better myself!

Post
#1411824
Topic
Unpopular Opinion Thread
Time

theprequelsrule said:

imperialscum said:

theprequelsrule said:

imperialscum said:

SparkySywer said:

rocknroll41 said:

Servii said:

Rodney-2187 said:

I’ve already seen opinions of TFA and TLJ improve.

The OT is revered because it’s a well made set of films.

Art is subjective. If the OT was as objectively well-made as you say then why did places like Time Magazine and Empire Magazine shit on ESB when it was new? We also mustn’t forget that a lot of people also crapped on RotJ up until TPM was released.

Art is subjective, and the quality of a movie is subjective. But the OT is undeniably popular, and not simply just because it’s old or because le Star Wars fans are le dumb. It’s also incredibly influential, in a way the PT and ST, like them or not, never will be.

Agreed completely. As I stated so many times on these forums, films are purely subjective, there are no two ways about it.

Still OT has something special that extremely few films ever had or ever will.

To say “purely subjective” is a rather extreme position. There may be an element of subjectivity, but there objective elements. Is Britney Spears as good a musician as Mozart?

I think you do not understand the basic concept of objective/subjective. As a scientist and an engineer, I have a very clear idea of what objective and subjective is. The definitions of objective and subjective are actually pretty simple. Objective is something that can be quantifiable by a metric. On the other hand, subjective is something that cannot be quantifiable.

Are there some elements of films that can be quantifiable by certain metrics? Yes, there are. For example, like how many words from the script were faithfully reproduced in the actual dialogue in the film (you will get a percentage score). However none of the elements that are quantifiable really matter when we think about “how good the film is”. When we say “how good the film is”, we pretty much think of purely subjective elements. So what I said still essentially holds true.

And yes, Britney Spears can be as good a musician as Mozart, since it completely depends on an individual opinion. Music is also an art and therefore completely subjective thing too. Unless you will come up with objective metrics, such as “notes per second”, to quantify “goodness”, which does not make sense at all, as it does injustice to some of the great minimalist composers, like John Adams.

So taste cannot be measured? Talent can’t be measured? At least not by any quantifiable metric? Editing skill and decisions in film making, the pacing of the script, quality of special effects, composition of shots? These are all subjective by your definition, yes?

Not that you asked me, but that’s certainly how I would define it, yes.

Post
#1411720
Topic
Unpopular Opinion Thread
Time

Servii said:

Rodney-2187 said:

I’ve already seen opinions of TFA and TLJ improve.

I’ve actually seen the opposite happening. When TFA came out, it was met with an overwhelmingly positive reaction from the vast majority of people. As time has gone on, though, I’ve noticed that fan perception of the movie has soured. TLJ’s perception is still just as split between love and hate as it always was.

I think it’s important for love of a franchise to never be unconditional. We’re not obligated to love whatever new content a brand produces. Fans ought to be critical of subpar material when they see it. Otherwise, if corporations are able to put out content and have it be praised and profitable regardless of quality, then they’ll pay less and less attention to quality in the future. Star Wars content is not inherently good just because it’s Star Wars. The OT is revered because it’s a well made set of films. It had to earn that distinction. Modern Star Wars has been able to stand on the OT’s shoulders, coasting on fan good will and nostalgia while often not being able to stand on its own. We all want Star Wars to be the best it can be. We know it can be better than what it’s become now. There’s nothing wrong with calling attention to that.

I’ve noticed some feelings of TFA souring and some feelings of TLJ warming towards positivity, but overall, yeah it’s not much different from when either film was new. TRoS, on the other hand, is one that nobody ever seems to talk about, and nobody ever really has. It seems like most people have just written that one off altogether (can’t say I blame them, either).

Post
#1411718
Topic
Unpopular Opinion Thread
Time

theprequelsrule said:

imperialscum said:

SparkySywer said:

rocknroll41 said:

Servii said:

Rodney-2187 said:

I’ve already seen opinions of TFA and TLJ improve.

The OT is revered because it’s a well made set of films.

Art is subjective. If the OT was as objectively well-made as you say then why did places like Time Magazine and Empire Magazine shit on ESB when it was new? We also mustn’t forget that a lot of people also crapped on RotJ up until TPM was released.

Art is subjective, and the quality of a movie is subjective. But the OT is undeniably popular, and not simply just because it’s old or because le Star Wars fans are le dumb. It’s also incredibly influential, in a way the PT and ST, like them or not, never will be.

Agreed completely. As I stated so many times on these forums, films are purely subjective, there are no two ways about it.

Still OT has something special that extremely few films ever had or ever will.

To say “purely subjective” is a rather extreme position. There may be an element of subjectivity, but there objective elements. Is Britney Spears as good a musician as Mozart?

Apples to oranges. Comparing a classical orchestra composer to a pop singer, or comparing a movie made by an actual filmmaker (Citizen Kane) to a movie made by a mentally-ill person who’s likely a runaway criminal (The Room) is not the same thing as simply comparing one Star Wars movie to another Star Wars movie.

Post
#1411649
Topic
Unpopular Opinion Thread
Time

Both of you make fair points, but the OT also had an entire generation of existing alone (at least as far as movies are concerned) to “stand on its own.” If the ST was made immediately after the OT (which I believe was the plan at one point), things would be very different. But because an entire generation went by (16 years for the PT and 32 years for the ST), both of the latter trilogies had to in some way or another metaphorically “respond” to the pop culture influence of the OT. I’m in the minority in that I don’t think the OT is as “holy” as most people do, but I’ll stop trying to push that argument because, frankly, I forgot that I was posting on a forum called originaltrilogy.com

Post
#1411638
Topic
Unpopular Opinion Thread
Time

Servii said:

Rodney-2187 said:

I’ve already seen opinions of TFA and TLJ improve.

The OT is revered because it’s a well made set of films.

Art is subjective. If the OT was as objectively well-made as you say then why did places like Time Magazine and Empire Magazine shit on ESB when it was new? We also mustn’t forget that a lot of people also crapped on RotJ up until TPM was released.

Post
#1411622
Topic
Unpopular Opinion Thread
Time

fmalover said:

I suggest a little experiment.

Try watching TLJ after watching the OT, and you’ll find it works pretty well as a coda to the saga.

I’ve posted previously that if it were up to me, I would have started the ST with TLJ or at the very least a movie that bears a strong resemblance to it.

I’ve thought about this as well. Each ST film seems to work best when they’re each viewed as a self-contained coda to the OT (rather than a trilogy themselves), and TLJ especially best fits this angle.

Post
#1411619
Topic
Unpopular Opinion Thread
Time

Servii said:

theprequelsrule said:

Servii said:

theprequelsrule said:

Servii said:

theprequelsrule said:

Servii said:

theprequelsrule said:

Servii said:

I like you too. I definitely plan to keep checking back and posting regularly. It’s good to talk this stuff out with people in a place that doesn’t feel like an echo chamber.

That’s really interesting to know about the 2001 books. I had never heard before about him saying that. That’s a great way to explore alternative stories branching from a single point of origin, and I would love to see Star Wars do something similar to that. I like to view the unaltered OT as existing in its own bubble of canon, while the Special Editions and the Prequels and Sequels are all off in a different timeline, essentially.

SW77 is partly my favorite because of how well it stands on its own. The franchise could have ended after one movie and it would still be considered one of the great science fantasy classics.

The issue I have with the ST is that they got the original staring actors back. It makes it tough to see them like that, you know? The PT did not have them so it is easier to dismiss.

Yeah, I know what you mean. They really wanted to give the ST this outward sense of legitimacy by bringing everybody back. It felt like the old gang was coming back together. Lucasfilm had one chance to reunite them and give them a worthy sendoff. They couldn’t afford to just “wing it” with the plot or settle for a mediocre story. If you’re going to continue the stories of those beloved characters post-RotJ, it had better be respectful to those characters, and it had better be worth people’s time. And I don’t think it was.

Michael Arndt struggled with the TFA script because it kept morphing into being about Luke! Disney did not want that - there was almost certainly a mandate to introduce new characters (especially a female protagonist) that younger people could “identify” with.

This is a classic case of a corporation underestimating it’s audience. You really think that a trailer featuring Luke, Han, Leia (even old) kicking ass and taking names would make younger people not want to see a NEW Star Wars? Luke Skywalker is cool because he has a lightsaber. Toy sales reflect this; the kids don’t want Rey and Finn toys.

The way I see it, if you write new characters that are compelling enough, then you wouldn’t have to worry about the OT characters overshadowing them. If the OT heroes keep having the spotlight gravitate back towards them in your script, then maybe that’s a sign you need to improve your new characters. It’s not that hard to have the audience care about new people while still getting a thrill out of seeing the old cast back in action. Just have Luke be a Dumbledore or Gandalf-like figure to a new generation of Jedi. It’s not that hard.

Agreed. Instead they just settled on rehashing the OT with Rey as Luke. So who cares? Been there. Done that. Now your main protagonist is the least interesting character. Oops.

Having Finn as the protagonist would have been much more interesting.

Absolutely. Finn was by far my favorite character in TFA. It’s a shame what they did to John Boyega. His character had so much potential. Plus, who better to fit the message of “Heroes can come from anywhere” than a former Stormtrooper?

What happened to Boyega?

I just mean the way they deliberately sidelined his character, in later drafts of TFA as well as in the next two sequels, after JJ initially cast him to be the male lead. There’s a great video that goes into detail about it by this guy called Okiro. The video’s called “Finn, the Lost Protagonist.”

Yeah as I’ve said elsewhere on here before, I think they shoulda stuck to the plan of killing Poe early on in TFA, so that Finn could have more room to breathe.