OaktownBear said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

Someone derisively referred to it as an Avengers movie. Well, I think that is the problem. That is exactly what they are. ALL OF THEM. Good Avengers movies.

---

I find it strange when people complain about Star Wars being too much like Marvel movies, because frankly, most of those Marvel movies are pretty good. They are decent stories, well-made, sometimes with some interesting themes to them. Those first two Captain America movies are good entertainments with some ideas about what it means to be a hero. The first Iron Man movie is a fun ride that is also about a guy learning to believe in himself again. Guardians of the Galaxy is a super-fun space adventure that is also about finding a new family after having lost an old one.

Sure, some of them are sub-par and some are overstuffed. Same with Star Wars. I can still enjoy a good one when it comes along.

---

And herein lies the root of the disagreement. As oaktown so eloquently put it, it's just a matter of ones expectations.

I'm fine with the marvel movies. They are made to make money and entertain. They are fine when you watch it and then you completely forget about it after. Fight club coined the phrase, "single serving friend". That's what marvel movies are, single serving movies. And that's fine.

But with Star Wars, I'm sorry, but I expect more. I disagree with oaktown that it's just a meh story. It's an amazingly original universe. With wonderful characters and worlds to discover. You also already have one of the best movie scores already built in.

So if you're the director, with a chance to make a movie truly transcendent, why not take it. Abrams is a coward, we all knew that, so force awakens was predictably pure fan service.

But I feel like with last Jedi, rj was conflicted. He wanted to say something. He wanted to make a great movie. But there's also this tremendous pressure to make a marketable movie. Thus the stupid porg puffin thing, the bad jokes and the dumbed down dialogue. That's why the movie just felt so uneven. It's a guy wanting to make something thought provoking and challenging but also pulled by the weight of box office expectations.

If it's me, I go all in. That's obviously easy for me to say from my couch, but that's my mindset. You get one shot at making dark knight or the matrix or Lotr. You get one shot at greatness. Take it. F everything else. That's my expectation for a Star Wars movie.

Unrealistic? Sure. But if no one is willing to do it, big budget movies are only going to get worse and worse. And our expectations for such movies will only go lower and lower.

---

My main disagreement with you is I just don't know what you are seeing when you watch A New Hope. Your characterization of what you would do with the movie reminds me of the singer who jazzes up the National Anthem and everyone asks why they don't just sing the damned thing.

The original trilogy is the poster child and basically the originator of modern day shameless merchandizing in movies. I get it if you don't like porgs, but if you don't, that has to be a criticism of the whole franchise. As syc said, at least the porgs are just kind of thrown in and not made an integral part of the story.

Dumb Jokes? Like "I'd rather kiss a wookie". Like R2 playing chess with Chewbacca? Like "Don't get cocky, kid" Like the site gag with R2 and C3PO walking across the hallway in the middle of a battle and not getting hit by like a thousand blasters going off all around them. Like falling into a garbage masher. Like everyone's favorite character, Han Solo, telling a joke about every third line he uttered. Like R2 and C3PO doing a droid version of Laurel and Hardy through the whole movie? I would love to do a count of jokes in each of the movies and do a comparison.

Part of what made the original trilogy good was that it didn't take itself too seriously as many of its predecessors in the sci-fi genre did and as some of its fans do.

My issue with the universe created in the original trilogy is that other than the battle between Vader and Luke and whether one can be turned to the dark or the light, the baddies are the height of evil and the goodies are the height of good. It takes until movie 7 before it can be contemplated that one storm trooper out of millions might question. There is no doubt that the empire is 100% evil. The republic is 100% good. (which again, leads to the question, why are so many willing to sign up to support and lay down their lives for pure evil?)

And come on. The philosophical underpinning of the movies is, there is a force. May it be with you. It is a quest movie. Plain and simple.

And this is where I really disagree with people about Luke's treatment here. Does it occur to anyone that yeah, a kid plucked off a backwater planet and basically told he is the hope for good in the galaxy might go off idealistically fighting for the cause. But that when he wins and the galaxy falls into hell anyway, and when he realizes "the force" has taken his father from him, and has taken his nephew from him and that there seems to always be someone willing to use the force for the dark side (and by the way, they seem to come from his family a lot) and that the result is that the galaxy is pretty much always oppressed and after 30 years of this shyte says "you know what? this force thing effing sucks". Anything else makes Luke an effing lobotomized dimwit. Frankly, it is about time someone questioned it. I'm surprised the galaxy hasn't rounded up every jedi and killed them and their entire families in an attempt to wipe out the scourge that constantly leads to misery.

Quite honestly, Luke's role in LOTJ is the best thing in the new series. It brings a reality that the original never had.

My biggest issue with the last two movies is that they were so determined to kill off the old characters. I don't know why they had to do that. Han Solo is still the best character in the movies, and Luke just got good. I agree that no one wants to see a bunch of old guys running around with light sabers, but I think the complexity of older characters with life experience could have added to the plots, as I think they have. Now they have cleared the decks for Rey and Ren, and frankly, we've seen that story before.

But honestly, back to your point. Lucas was very much concerned with making a marketable movie. If he hadn't been, the big budget movie may never have become a thing because the studio would have lost its shirt. That was what made Star Wars so good. The ultimate entertainment value. Had he spent his time trying to "say" something, it would have been a disaster. I really don't see the great insights he imparted. The story line at base was a standard, Hollywood, quest plot. He surrounded it with greatness, especially special effects that for people who had been watching Star Trek just 10 years prior, were incredible.

---

You are looking at a new hope through a contemporary lens. Lucas himself has said "people think of them now as conventional, but at the time I couldn't make them because they said they were too expiremental."

Lucas actually had to get out of Hollywood and moved to he Bay Area to make new hope cause he felt too restricted by the studio. He had to make his own special effects studio cause the 20th century fox one was too antiquated. Lucas pioneered new camera technology, new filming styles, and new sound techniques. Most importantly to me was John williams' film score, the first of its kind that used leitmotifs. I consider binary sunset one of the greatest scenes ever filmed.

According to Lucas, "you can really only have breakthroughs like that when you are able to take risks on something that isn't obviously commercial or going to be socially acceptable. "

Look I'm not asking every Star Wars movie to be a classic. What I'm asking for is the attempt to be great. Attempt to ignore as many outside influences as possible and make the movie the way you want to make it. According to your vision. Not the studios vision. Not the fanboys vision. Not the public at large's vision.


Jackson's lotr isnt a classic because it says something. It's because Jackson put his heart and soul into that movie. He had a clear vision for the movie and he went to painstaking lengths to make his vision a reality. Every detail was meticulously thought out. And if people didn't like his vision, f them.

Nolan had the same attitude when he made dark knight. The wachoski brothers the same when they made matrix.

And that's all I'm asking for. Have a vision and do your best to not let in outside influences. And if people don't like your movie, f'em.

You can't watch last Jedi and think that's what rjs vision for the movie originally was.

I'm a firm believer that art should always be pushing forward. But that can't happen unless you have artists willing to push the boundaries. In this day and age, when music and movies are such huge money makers, it's getting harder and harder to get artists willing to push the boundaries. Especially when it comes to big budget movies. My fear is that in the future, big budget movies will all look and feel the same. That's why I put a premium on taking chances and following your own vision.

Which is also why you can't compare last Jedi directly to new hope. One would hope that movies have progressed over the last 40 years. In my opinion, you should be comparing new hope to all the other movies made in the 70's and then compare last Jedi to all the other movies made now. And then tell me, which one was more revolutionary.

ducky23 said:

---

You can't watch last Jedi and think that's what rjs vision for the movie originally was.

---

I do. Or at least I think it's his vision for what he'd want his own Star Wars movie to be. The original vision is still George Lucas'.

ducky23 said:

---

I'm a firm believer that art should always be pushing forward. But that can't happen unless you have artists willing to push the boundaries. In this day and age, when music and movies are such huge money makers, it's getting harder and harder to get artists willing to push the boundaries. Especially when it comes to big budget movies. My fear is that in the future, big budget movies will all look and feel the same. That's why I put a premium on taking chances and following your own vision.

Which is also why you can't compare last Jedi directly to new hope. One would hope that movies have progressed over the last 40 years. In my opinion, you should be comparing new hope to all the other movies made in the 70's and then compare last Jedi to all the other movies made now. And then tell me, which one was more revolutionary.

---

I will not try to claim that The Last Jedi is anywhere near as revolutionary as the first Star Wars or the rest of the original trilogy. Most likely no new Star Wars movie can be, because it will always have to add to what Lucas originally built and can't start on its own foundation.

But if I compared The Last Jedi to every other big special-effects blockbuster I saw this year (all of which are also new chapters for existing franchises), I'd say it was the best one with the most personal vision.

ducky23 said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

Someone derisively referred to it as an Avengers movie. Well, I think that is the problem. That is exactly what they are. ALL OF THEM. Good Avengers movies.

---

I find it strange when people complain about Star Wars being too much like Marvel movies, because frankly, most of those Marvel movies are pretty good. They are decent stories, well-made, sometimes with some interesting themes to them. Those first two Captain America movies are good entertainments with some ideas about what it means to be a hero. The first Iron Man movie is a fun ride that is also about a guy learning to believe in himself again. Guardians of the Galaxy is a super-fun space adventure that is also about finding a new family after having lost an old one.

Sure, some of them are sub-par and some are overstuffed. Same with Star Wars. I can still enjoy a good one when it comes along.

---

And herein lies the root of the disagreement. As oaktown so eloquently put it, it's just a matter of ones expectations.

I'm fine with the marvel movies. They are made to make money and entertain. They are fine when you watch it and then you completely forget about it after. Fight club coined the phrase, "single serving friend". That's what marvel movies are, single serving movies. And that's fine.

But with Star Wars, I'm sorry, but I expect more. I disagree with oaktown that it's just a meh story. It's an amazingly original universe. With wonderful characters and worlds to discover. You also already have one of the best movie scores already built in.

So if you're the director, with a chance to make a movie truly transcendent, why not take it. Abrams is a coward, we all knew that, so force awakens was predictably pure fan service.

But I feel like with last Jedi, rj was conflicted. He wanted to say something. He wanted to make a great movie. But there's also this tremendous pressure to make a marketable movie. Thus the stupid porg puffin thing, the bad jokes and the dumbed down dialogue. That's why the movie just felt so uneven. It's a guy wanting to make something thought provoking and challenging but also pulled by the weight of box office expectations.

If it's me, I go all in. That's obviously easy for me to say from my couch, but that's my mindset. You get one shot at making dark knight or the matrix or Lotr. You get one shot at greatness. Take it. F everything else. That's my expectation for a Star Wars movie.

Unrealistic? Sure. But if no one is willing to do it, big budget movies are only going to get worse and worse. And our expectations for such movies will only go lower and lower.

---

My main disagreement with you is I just don't know what you are seeing when you watch A New Hope. Your characterization of what you would do with the movie reminds me of the singer who jazzes up the National Anthem and everyone asks why they don't just sing the damned thing.

The original trilogy is the poster child and basically the originator of modern day shameless merchandizing in movies. I get it if you don't like porgs, but if you don't, that has to be a criticism of the whole franchise. As syc said, at least the porgs are just kind of thrown in and not made an integral part of the story.

Dumb Jokes? Like "I'd rather kiss a wookie". Like R2 playing chess with Chewbacca? Like "Don't get cocky, kid" Like the site gag with R2 and C3PO walking across the hallway in the middle of a battle and not getting hit by like a thousand blasters going off all around them. Like falling into a garbage masher. Like everyone's favorite character, Han Solo, telling a joke about every third line he uttered. Like R2 and C3PO doing a droid version of Laurel and Hardy through the whole movie? I would love to do a count of jokes in each of the movies and do a comparison.

Part of what made the original trilogy good was that it didn't take itself too seriously as many of its predecessors in the sci-fi genre did and as some of its fans do.

My issue with the universe created in the original trilogy is that other than the battle between Vader and Luke and whether one can be turned to the dark or the light, the baddies are the height of evil and the goodies are the height of good. It takes until movie 7 before it can be contemplated that one storm trooper out of millions might question. There is no doubt that the empire is 100% evil. The republic is 100% good. (which again, leads to the question, why are so many willing to sign up to support and lay down their lives for pure evil?)

And come on. The philosophical underpinning of the movies is, there is a force. May it be with you. It is a quest movie. Plain and simple.

And this is where I really disagree with people about Luke's treatment here. Does it occur to anyone that yeah, a kid plucked off a backwater planet and basically told he is the hope for good in the galaxy might go off idealistically fighting for the cause. But that when he wins and the galaxy falls into hell anyway, and when he realizes "the force" has taken his father from him, and has taken his nephew from him and that there seems to always be someone willing to use the force for the dark side (and by the way, they seem to come from his family a lot) and that the result is that the galaxy is pretty much always oppressed and after 30 years of this shyte says "you know what? this force thing effing sucks". Anything else makes Luke an effing lobotomized dimwit. Frankly, it is about time someone questioned it. I'm surprised the galaxy hasn't rounded up every jedi and killed them and their entire families in an attempt to wipe out the scourge that constantly leads to misery.

Quite honestly, Luke's role in LOTJ is the best thing in the new series. It brings a reality that the original never had.

My biggest issue with the last two movies is that they were so determined to kill off the old characters. I don't know why they had to do that. Han Solo is still the best character in the movies, and Luke just got good. I agree that no one wants to see a bunch of old guys running around with light sabers, but I think the complexity of older characters with life experience could have added to the plots, as I think they have. Now they have cleared the decks for Rey and Ren, and frankly, we've seen that story before.

But honestly, back to your point. Lucas was very much concerned with making a marketable movie. If he hadn't been, the big budget movie may never have become a thing because the studio would have lost its shirt. That was what made Star Wars so good. The ultimate entertainment value. Had he spent his time trying to "say" something, it would have been a disaster. I really don't see the great insights he imparted. The story line at base was a standard, Hollywood, quest plot. He surrounded it with greatness, especially special effects that for people who had been watching Star Trek just 10 years prior, were incredible.

---

You are looking at a new hope through a contemporary lens. Lucas himself has said "people think of them now as conventional, but at the time I couldn't make them because they said they were too expiremental."

Lucas actually had to get out of Hollywood and moved to he Bay Area to make new hope cause he felt too restricted by the studio. He had to make his own special effects studio cause the 20th century fox one was too antiquated. Lucas pioneered new camera technology, new filming styles, and new sound techniques. Most importantly to me was John williams' film score, the first of its kind that used leitmotifs. I consider binary sunset one of the greatest scenes ever filmed.

According to Lucas, "you can really only have breakthroughs like that when you are able to take risks on something that isn't obviously commercial or going to be socially acceptable. "

Look I'm not asking every Star Wars movie to be a classic. What I'm asking for is the attempt to be great. Attempt to ignore as many outside influences as possible and make the movie the way you want to make it. According to your vision. Not the studios vision. Not the fanboys vision. Not the public at large's vision.


Jackson's lotr isnt a classic because it says something. It's because Jackson put his heart and soul into that movie. He had a clear vision for the movie and he went to painstaking lengths to make his vision a reality. Every detail was meticulously thought out. And if people didn't like his vision, f them.

Nolan had the same attitude when he made dark knight. The wachoski brothers the same when they made matrix.

And that's all I'm asking for. Have a vision and do your best to not let in outside influences. And if people don't like your movie, f'em.

You can't watch last Jedi and think that's what rjs vision for the movie originally was.

I'm a firm believer that art should always be pushing forward. But that can't happen unless you have artists willing to push the boundaries. In this day and age, when music and movies are such huge money makers, it's getting harder and harder to get artists willing to push the boundaries. Especially when it comes to big budget movies. My fear is that in the future, big budget movies will all look and feel the same. That's why I put a premium on taking chances and following your own vision.

Which is also why you can't compare last Jedi directly to new hope. One would hope that movies have progressed over the last 40 years. In my opinion, you should be comparing new hope to all the other movies made in the 70's and then compare last Jedi to all the other movies made now. And then tell me, which one was more revolutionary.

---

Actually, much of this we are in agreement with if you look at all of my posts. A New Hope is one of the great movies of all time precisely for all the reasons you say. As I said, it was groundbreaking at the time. None of the other Star Wars movies will be as great for that reason. All the things that Lucas broke ground on, everyone has followed. Two of the great components - the score and the special effects - are commonplace now. Not only that, but how are you going to break new ground on the score now? How are you going to break new ground on special effects (another issue with the Matrix). CGI has made it so any studio can make special effects so realistic that there really isn't anything as astounding to be done as Lucas did.

I agree with what Lucas said about the movie from a TECHNICAL perspective. But all of those things were to deliver a higher level of entertainment. He didn't set out to make a Bergman film and to hell with whether the audience likes it. Maybe to hell with whether the STUDIO likes it, but everything was driven to entertain.

I agree that you can't watch the latest movie and say - gee the special effects are as good, the score is as good, the plot is as entertaining, so the movies are equal. They have to be seen in context of time. But what you are doing is equally unfair. You criticize the movie as not living up to the original because of flaws like dumb jokes that were present in the original. I would say there is a responsibility to the franchise to maintain the tenor of the franchise. If you want to experiment, get your own platform.

Ripping a movie for not being "great" the way you describe it is a pretty tough standard to hold it to. And not one that any of the movies have passed since 1977. For any movie to be great in that way is a miracle. But you are asking that of the 8th sequel in a franchise that carries all the baggage of back story and expectation. Frankly, I don't think you will find greatness in the 9th movie of a franchise. Partially, because people still want to see Star Wars when they go to the theater. I seriously doubt that any director takes on Star Wars in order to achieve greatness because if greatness is what they want to achieve, they need to make their own movie in their own universe with their own story. You don't achieve greatness 40 years in to another guy's story. I think your ask is not fair and to be honest is just a cover for the fact that you want to be as blown away as you were in 1977 and that is not going to happen.

The fair standard to judge the movie by is against the other movies in its time not against classic movies of another age. It isn't Citizen Cane. It isn't Casablanca. And it isn't a New Hope. It is a good movie. It won't make AFI's top 100. It is fair to wish it was as groundbreaking as the original, but it isn't fair for so many people to tear it to shreds because it can't live up to that.

OaktownBear said:

---

Actually, much of this we are in agreement with if you look at all of my posts. A New Hope is one of the great movies of all time precisely for all the reasons you say. As I said, it was groundbreaking at the time. None of the other Star Wars movies will be as great for that reason.

---

And yet many people consider The Empire Strikes Back to be a better film than Star Wars was. Why is that?

The new films probably shouldn't have had the old characters back. The new films have to do service to the old characters and also develop new characters and give us a reason to care about their fates. They accomplish neither.

Star Wars films have never been known for great writing or great acting. There are cringeworthy moments in all of them. As a child, those cringeworthy moments weren't cringeworthy because we didn't know any better. But even allowing for that, these new films contain way more cringeworthy moments that the originals I think it's possible to have a well-written Star Wars film if someone with the talent to do so took on the challenge, but these films aren't it. The one thing I will give this film credit for is that at least it tried to be original, which was the fatal flaw of The Force Awakens.

sycasey said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

You can't watch last Jedi and think that's what rjs vision for the movie originally was.

---

I do. Or at least I think it's his vision for what he'd want his own Star Wars movie to be. The original vision is still George Lucas'.

ducky23 said:

---

I'm a firm believer that art should always be pushing forward. But that can't happen unless you have artists willing to push the boundaries. In this day and age, when music and movies are such huge money makers, it's getting harder and harder to get artists willing to push the boundaries. Especially when it comes to big budget movies. My fear is that in the future, big budget movies will all look and feel the same. That's why I put a premium on taking chances and following your own vision.

Which is also why you can't compare last Jedi directly to new hope. One would hope that movies have progressed over the last 40 years. In my opinion, you should be comparing new hope to all the other movies made in the 70's and then compare last Jedi to all the other movies made now. And then tell me, which one was more revolutionary.

---

I will not try to claim that The Last Jedi is anywhere near as revolutionary as the first Star Wars or the rest of the original trilogy. Most likely no new Star Wars movie can be, because it will always have to add to what Lucas originally built and can't start on its own foundation.

But if I compared The Last Jedi to every other big special-effects blockbuster I saw this year (all of which are also new chapters for existing franchises), I'd say it was the best one with the most personal vision.

---

I would say this. Lucas had a vision for Episodes 1-3. He expressed it and got burned by audiences panning it. Episode 7 had zero vision. It was a greatest hits album. It was a complete copy of Episode 4 with some 5 and 6 thrown in. They might as well have remade the original script. Now it was entertaining, but vision - no. And it has an 88% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes.

Episode 8 actually advances a story line that is different and is getting hammered for it. Especially trying to give Luke some actual depth of character. 51% audience score. Frankly, I think this movie is significantly better than 7, but obviously the nostalgia play worked. I wonder if what Star Wars fans really want is for 4-6 to be remade over and over with new character names. The would deserve it if the next movie is just Return of the Jedi all over again.

OaktownBear said:

---

I would say this. Lucas had a vision for Episodes 1-3. He expressed it and got burned by audiences panning it. Episode 7 had zero vision. It was a greatest hits album. It was a complete copy of Episode 4 with some 5 and 6 thrown in. They might as well have remade the original script. Now it was entertaining, but vision - no. And it has an 88% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes.

Episode 8 actually advances a story line that is different and is getting hammered for it. Especially trying to give Luke some actual depth of character. 51% audience score. Frankly, I think this movie is significantly better than 7, but obviously the nostalgia play worked. I wonder if what Star Wars fans really want is for 4-6 to be remade over and over with new character names. The would deserve it if the next movie is just Return of the Jedi all over again.

---

Just because you advance a different storyline doesn't absolve you for writing a poor story. There's always an opportunity to write a good story within any existing framework. There could have been three good Matrix movies, but instead there was only one because they ran out of ideas for the story after the first one. There could have been a great prequel for Star Wars, but the story was poor and the most important thing, the motivation for Darth Vader to become Darth Vader was weak. I don't believe Lucas ever had a coherent vision for Episodes 1-3. I think he wrote himself into a corner like so many writers do in a long story, just as George R.R. Martin has done in A Song of Ice and Fire. You waste too much time on unimportant stuff and don't leave enough time to deal with the important parts of the story.

The problem now with Episodes 7-9 is if it wasn't within the Star Wars franchise, who would be invested in the outcome of Episode 9? I'm certainly not. The chessboard has been cleared so that it's just Rey vs. Ren with some useless sideplot for Finn to justify why he was ever a main character in the story to begin with. Aside from Chewbacca and the droids, we don't have any old characters to kill off in this next one. What are they gonna do with all that freedom? Probably not much.

OaktownBear said:

---

sycasey said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

You can't watch last Jedi and think that's what rjs vision for the movie originally was.

---

I do. Or at least I think it's his vision for what he'd want his own Star Wars movie to be. The original vision is still George Lucas'.

ducky23 said:

---

I'm a firm believer that art should always be pushing forward. But that can't happen unless you have artists willing to push the boundaries. In this day and age, when music and movies are such huge money makers, it's getting harder and harder to get artists willing to push the boundaries. Especially when it comes to big budget movies. My fear is that in the future, big budget movies will all look and feel the same. That's why I put a premium on taking chances and following your own vision.

Which is also why you can't compare last Jedi directly to new hope. One would hope that movies have progressed over the last 40 years. In my opinion, you should be comparing new hope to all the other movies made in the 70's and then compare last Jedi to all the other movies made now. And then tell me, which one was more revolutionary.

---

I will not try to claim that The Last Jedi is anywhere near as revolutionary as the first Star Wars or the rest of the original trilogy. Most likely no new Star Wars movie can be, because it will always have to add to what Lucas originally built and can't start on its own foundation.

But if I compared The Last Jedi to every other big special-effects blockbuster I saw this year (all of which are also new chapters for existing franchises), I'd say it was the best one with the most personal vision.

---

I would say this. Lucas had a vision for Episodes 1-3. He expressed it and got burned by audiences panning it. Episode 7 had zero vision. It was a greatest hits album. It was a complete copy of Episode 4 with some 5 and 6 thrown in. They might as well have remade the original script. Now it was entertaining, but vision - no. And it has an 88% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes.

Episode 8 actually advances a story line that is different and is getting hammered for it. Especially trying to give Luke some actual depth of character. 51% audience score. Frankly, I think this movie is significantly better than 7, but obviously the nostalgia play worked. I wonder if what Star Wars fans really want is for 4-6 to be remade over and over with new character names. The would deserve it if the next movie is just Return of the Jedi all over again.

---

There is some evidence that the Rotten Tomatoes audience score has been "gamed" a little bit by unhappy hardcore fans and might not be an accurate picture of the entire audience's reaction.

http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2017/12/20/the-curious-case-of-the-last-jedi-and-its-rotten-tomatoes-audience-score

AFAIK in the live in-person audience surveys the movie has scored well.

I did like some of the humor. the best was when the bad guys blasted Luke with everything they had ... Luke emerges apparently untouched, and then faints a gesture brushing off some dust from his shoulder

theater laughed at that one

You guys are geeks. Every last one of you.

NYCGOBEARS said:

---

You guys are geeks. Every last one of you.

---

Correct!

NYCGOBEARS said:

---

You guys are geeks. Every last one of you.

---

i resemble that remark...

calgldnbear said:

---

NYCGOBEARS said:

---

You guys are geeks. Every last one of you.

---

i resemble that remark...

---

Me too.

OaktownBear said:

---

Actually, much of this we are in agreement with if you look at all of my posts. A New Hope is one of the great movies of all time precisely for all the reasons you say. As I said, it was groundbreaking at the time. None of the other Star Wars movies will be as great for that reason. All the things that Lucas broke ground on, everyone has followed. Two of the great components - the score and the special effects - are commonplace now. Not only that, but how are you going to break new ground on the score now? How are you going to break new ground on special effects (another issue with the Matrix). CGI has made it so any studio can make special effects so realistic that there really isn't anything as astounding to be done as Lucas did.

I agree with what Lucas said about the movie from a TECHNICAL perspective. But all of those things were to deliver a higher level of entertainment. He didn't set out to make a Bergman film and to hell with whether the audience likes it. Maybe to hell with whether the STUDIO likes it, but everything was driven to entertain.

I agree that you can't watch the latest movie and say - gee the special effects are as good, the score is as good, the plot is as entertaining, so the movies are equal. They have to be seen in context of time. But what you are doing is equally unfair. You criticize the movie as not living up to the original because of flaws like dumb jokes that were present in the original. I would say there is a responsibility to the franchise to maintain the tenor of the franchise. If you want to experiment, get your own platform.

Ripping a movie for not being "great" the way you describe it is a pretty tough standard to hold it to. And not one that any of the movies have passed since 1977. For any movie to be great in that way is a miracle. But you are asking that of the 8th sequel in a franchise that carries all the baggage of back story and expectation. Frankly, I don't think you will find greatness in the 9th movie of a franchise. Partially, because people still want to see Star Wars when they go to the theater. I seriously doubt that any director takes on Star Wars in order to achieve greatness because if greatness is what they want to achieve, they need to make their own movie in their own universe with their own story. You don't achieve greatness 40 years in to another guy's story. I think your ask is not fair and to be honest is just a cover for the fact that you want to be as blown away as you were in 1977 and that is not going to happen.

The fair standard to judge the movie by is against the other movies in its time not against classic movies of another age. It isn't Citizen Cane. It isn't Casablanca. And it isn't a New Hope. It is a good movie. It won't make AFI's top 100. It is fair to wish it was as groundbreaking as the original, but it isn't fair for so many people to tear it to shreds because it can't live up to that.

---

I think we do mostly agree. One thing though is that I've never ripped last Jedi for not being a great movie. In some of my previous posts, I praised rj for taking a ton of risks. I just think that he didn't go all the way and he still made too many artistic decisions based on outside influences. But it's absolutely reasonable to disagree with that take since no one really knows what's going on in his head.

And I do not judge movies based on whether they are great or not. I judge movies on whether they try to be great. That's why I've never been that sour on the prequels cause the effort was there, the execution was just plain awful. And I've never criticized a movie like Batman v Superman cause I thought at least they were trying to do something radically different from marvel.

I think people need to support directors when they take chances. Even when they fail. Instead (and you've alluded to this) the exact opposite is happening. People praise super safe, fan service movies like force awakens and rip last Jedi cause it doesn't live up to their perceived expectations. That's extremely dangerous cause it just encourages more abrams type movies.

My only other disagreement is that you said a subsequent Star Wars movie could never truly be great cause for a movie to be great the director has to create their own story and own universe.

I think dark knight is a perfect example of why that's not necessarily true. Nolan's Batman movies were more or less a reboot. And he took the same story and made it his own.

Where rj got f'ed is cause abrams got to make the first one. Abrams basically had a blank slate (like Nolan did), if he wanted to take it. He could've made something that looked and felt completely different from the originals. But he played it safe, of course. (This is why my first choice was Ben affleck, quality film maker who isn't a fanboy and who would bring a competely different aesthetic texture to the franchise).

Once abrams establishes the look and feel of the initial movie, rj had no choice but to more or less follow. He did his best to break away from abrams, but in the end, it's all abrams' fault.

ducky23 said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

Someone derisively referred to it as an Avengers movie. Well, I think that is the problem. That is exactly what they are. ALL OF THEM. Good Avengers movies.

---

I find it strange when people complain about Star Wars being too much like Marvel movies, because frankly, most of those Marvel movies are pretty good. They are decent stories, well-made, sometimes with some interesting themes to them. Those first two Captain America movies are good entertainments with some ideas about what it means to be a hero. The first Iron Man movie is a fun ride that is also about a guy learning to believe in himself again. Guardians of the Galaxy is a super-fun space adventure that is also about finding a new family after having lost an old one.

Sure, some of them are sub-par and some are overstuffed. Same with Star Wars. I can still enjoy a good one when it comes along.

---

And herein lies the root of the disagreement. As oaktown so eloquently put it, it's just a matter of ones expectations.

I'm fine with the marvel movies. They are made to make money and entertain. They are fine when you watch it and then you completely forget about it after. Fight club coined the phrase, "single serving friend". That's what marvel movies are, single serving movies. And that's fine.

But with Star Wars, I'm sorry, but I expect more. I disagree with oaktown that it's just a meh story. It's an amazingly original universe. With wonderful characters and worlds to discover. You also already have one of the best movie scores already built in.

So if you're the director, with a chance to make a movie truly transcendent, why not take it. Abrams is a coward, we all knew that, so force awakens was predictably pure fan service.

But I feel like with last Jedi, rj was conflicted. He wanted to say something. He wanted to make a great movie. But there's also this tremendous pressure to make a marketable movie. Thus the stupid porg puffin thing, the bad jokes and the dumbed down dialogue. That's why the movie just felt so uneven. It's a guy wanting to make something thought provoking and challenging but also pulled by the weight of box office expectations.

If it's me, I go all in. That's obviously easy for me to say from my couch, but that's my mindset. You get one shot at making dark knight or the matrix or Lotr. You get one shot at greatness. Take it. F everything else. That's my expectation for a Star Wars movie.

Unrealistic? Sure. But if no one is willing to do it, big budget movies are only going to get worse and worse. And our expectations for such movies will only go lower and lower.

---

My main disagreement with you is I just don't know what you are seeing when you watch A New Hope. Your characterization of what you would do with the movie reminds me of the singer who jazzes up the National Anthem and everyone asks why they don't just sing the damned thing.

The original trilogy is the poster child and basically the originator of modern day shameless merchandizing in movies. I get it if you don't like porgs, but if you don't, that has to be a criticism of the whole franchise. As syc said, at least the porgs are just kind of thrown in and not made an integral part of the story.

Dumb Jokes? Like "I'd rather kiss a wookie". Like R2 playing chess with Chewbacca? Like "Don't get cocky, kid" Like the site gag with R2 and C3PO walking across the hallway in the middle of a battle and not getting hit by like a thousand blasters going off all around them. Like falling into a garbage masher. Like everyone's favorite character, Han Solo, telling a joke about every third line he uttered. Like R2 and C3PO doing a droid version of Laurel and Hardy through the whole movie? I would love to do a count of jokes in each of the movies and do a comparison.

Part of what made the original trilogy good was that it didn't take itself too seriously as many of its predecessors in the sci-fi genre did and as some of its fans do.

My issue with the universe created in the original trilogy is that other than the battle between Vader and Luke and whether one can be turned to the dark or the light, the baddies are the height of evil and the goodies are the height of good. It takes until movie 7 before it can be contemplated that one storm trooper out of millions might question. There is no doubt that the empire is 100% evil. The republic is 100% good. (which again, leads to the question, why are so many willing to sign up to support and lay down their lives for pure evil?)

And come on. The philosophical underpinning of the movies is, there is a force. May it be with you. It is a quest movie. Plain and simple.

And this is where I really disagree with people about Luke's treatment here. Does it occur to anyone that yeah, a kid plucked off a backwater planet and basically told he is the hope for good in the galaxy might go off idealistically fighting for the cause. But that when he wins and the galaxy falls into hell anyway, and when he realizes "the force" has taken his father from him, and has taken his nephew from him and that there seems to always be someone willing to use the force for the dark side (and by the way, they seem to come from his family a lot) and that the result is that the galaxy is pretty much always oppressed and after 30 years of this shyte says "you know what? this force thing effing sucks". Anything else makes Luke an effing lobotomized dimwit. Frankly, it is about time someone questioned it. I'm surprised the galaxy hasn't rounded up every jedi and killed them and their entire families in an attempt to wipe out the scourge that constantly leads to misery.

Quite honestly, Luke's role in LOTJ is the best thing in the new series. It brings a reality that the original never had.

My biggest issue with the last two movies is that they were so determined to kill off the old characters. I don't know why they had to do that. Han Solo is still the best character in the movies, and Luke just got good. I agree that no one wants to see a bunch of old guys running around with light sabers, but I think the complexity of older characters with life experience could have added to the plots, as I think they have. Now they have cleared the decks for Rey and Ren, and frankly, we've seen that story before.

But honestly, back to your point. Lucas was very much concerned with making a marketable movie. If he hadn't been, the big budget movie may never have become a thing because the studio would have lost its shirt. That was what made Star Wars so good. The ultimate entertainment value. Had he spent his time trying to "say" something, it would have been a disaster. I really don't see the great insights he imparted. The story line at base was a standard, Hollywood, quest plot. He surrounded it with greatness, especially special effects that for people who had been watching Star Trek just 10 years prior, were incredible.

---

Look I'm not asking every Star Wars movie to be a classic. What I'm asking for is the attempt to be great. Attempt to ignore as many outside influences as possible and make the movie the way you want to make it. According to your vision. Not the studios vision. Not the fanboys vision. Not the public at large's vision.

---

Thats how we ended up with one of the worst movies made and two more prequels.

ducky23 said:

---

Where rj got f'ed is cause abrams got to make the first one. Abrams basically had a blank slate (like Nolan did), if he wanted to take it. He could've made something that looked and felt completely different from the originals. But he played it safe, of course. (This is why my first choice was Ben affleck, quality film maker who isn't a fanboy and who would bring a competely different aesthetic texture to the franchise).

Once abrams establishes the look and feel of the initial movie, rj had no choice but to more or less follow. He did his best to break away from abrams, but in the end, it's all abrams' fault.

---

I don't think it's as bad as you do, but I do agree that most of the real problems in The Last Jedi stem from the half-assed setup Abrams gave us in The Force Awakens. Johnson has to spend a lot of time either correcting or justifying stuff that Abrams left hanging.

NYCGOBEARS said:

---

calgldnbear said:

---

NYCGOBEARS said:

---

You guys are geeks. Every last one of you.

---

i resemble that remark...

---

Me too.

---

You know you are a GEEK when:

Your daughter and all three granddaughters (youngest 18)

Tell you they have never seen any of the Star Wars movies,

ANY !!!

sp4149 said:

---

NYCGOBEARS said:

---

calgldnbear said:

---

NYCGOBEARS said:

---

You guys are geeks. Every last one of you.

---

i resemble that remark...

---

Me too.

---

You know you are a GEEK when:

Your daughter and all three granddaughters (youngest 18)

Tell you they have never seen any of the Star Wars movies,

ANY !!!

---

So it is your job as a GEEK to go forth and proselytize and convert them to the Star Wars faithful.

Have them join you in watching a marathon: Start with The New Hope. Then jump back to Rogue One (as the only preliminary you really need). Then Empire strikes back. then Return of the Jedi. Then The Force awakens.

I'm enjoying reading thru this thread. For me, the first three and these last two have been great popcorn fluff. Aside from the Princess Leia superman move and the Luke *** departure, I had no real issues with TLJ, and was overall entertained.

Then the other day I went and saw Three Billboards and was thinking throughout the movie what a masterpiece it was how it was able to use humor to offset all the tragedy. Then the wife and I proceeded to pick it apart over dinner as easily as if it were a Star Wars movie...

GivemTheAxe said:

---

sp4149 said:

---

NYCGOBEARS said:

---

calgldnbear said:

---

NYCGOBEARS said:

---

You guys are geeks. Every last one of you.

---

i resemble that remark...

---

Me too.

---

You know you are a GEEK when:

Your daughter and all three granddaughters (youngest 18)

Tell you they have never seen any of the Star Wars movies,

ANY !!!

---

So it is your job as a GEEK to go forth and proselytize and convert them to the Star Wars faithful.

Have them join you in watching a marathon: Start with The New Hope. Then jump back to Rogue One (as the only preliminary you really need). Then Empire strikes back. then Return of the Jedi. Then The Force awakens.

---

That's what I was thinking. If your own daughter has never seen Star Wars, whose fault is that?

I won't rehash many of the critiques of this film. Full disclosure: I was 7 when the original SW movie came out. Got all the action figures, fighters, etc. Wasn't a fan of the prequels, though I think ROTS was good. ESB is my favorite. I think Rogue One is probably 3rd favorite movie in the SW franchise. I have a 13 year old son who loved TLJ and is a SW fanatic. So I keep my opinion to myself on TLJ.

I'll say this first: whatever anyone thought of The Force Awakens or JJ Abrams - it IS Episode 7. The starter episode to the last 3 movies of the original series (the Skywalker series). You can say it was a tribute movie (probably was) or you can say it was total fan service. Its still Episode 7 - and in that regard, that's what the next movies need to be based on. I think you have to have some continuity with things established in EP7 in order to have an EP8 that has context in setting up the final curtain for the Skywalker series.

I think I've seen all sorts of critiques of the film. These are the most glaring that I will just list but not go into depth on.

Princess leia in space (Carrie Poppins) - silly scene (should have killed her off there)
Casino Planet sequence - unnecessary
Rose - not sure what her role was. A likable character but not really necessary to the fundamental plot line. She goes back to Canto Bight to free the animals but not the slave kids?
Holdo - her character is a plot device and a wasted performance by Laura Dern
Benicio - another wasted performance.
Slow speed chase - Speed 2 in space.
Snoke - powerful force user that we don't know any origins about, yet he comes to lead the FO and is responsible for Rey and Kylo connecting - but is killed off
Phasma - why did we even need to see or have this character?
Finn - and his character arc is? He had a somewhat "romantic" relationship with Rey only to have her save Finn from his suicide run.
Rey - likable enough but is a Mary Sue - can't do anything wrong and beats Luke in a stick battle. No training. No nothing. Bests Luke.

Ok so as I said - things were established in TFA. My main gripe is that we don't know what happened from ROTJ to now. Specifically...

Rebellion wins, Republic restored. Then...what happened?? How did the FO reduce the Rebellion, then Republic, and now Resistance...to less than a handful of people??

Luke's lightsaber - how was it found? How did Kylo get it.

Rey's parents - all of her visions, the cuts of Kylo and the Knights of Ren, her parents seemingly blasting off from Jakku. Obi-wan talking to her. All of this somehow establishes some importance to at least how she got on Jakku, not necessarily perhaps her parents importance.

I hear alot about how Rian Johnson has made a "risky" movie. A movie that breaks the mold of the SW franchise. I disagree. If anything (and this is at my most cynical), this movie is a set piece for most of these characters to get their own movies - ala The Avengers and Justice League. Disney didn't buy Lucasfilm to simply make three more films. So in that sense, I think this movie was meant to throw away what JJ Abrams established because it had too. These characters have to stand on their own, for now.

But back to the concept of risk. If Rian Johnson/Disney wanted to take a risk, the risk would have followed the character arc of Luke and his belief that the Jedi/Sith must end - that all this force stuff, the pointless insight - all of it must end. If I take Luke's character at his word, then he has to be talking about a 3rd way or a nuanced view of the force. The risk would have been for Rey going with Kylo after their battle with the guards. The risk would have been for Kylo to leave the FO, for Rey to leave the Resistance and to figure things out on their own.

But we don't get that. She leaves to go back to the Resistance and he simply goes back to lead the FO. And we are back to square one - good v evil. So we have a set up for the eventual clash between the two, his death and a hoped for return to establishment of the Republic. Which is kinda where things picked up in the 2nd act of ROTJ. My two cents.

MoragaBear said:

---

Agree with most of this:

https://twitter.com/i/moments/950503625075318784?t=1&cn=ZmxleGlibGVfcmVjc18y&refsrc=email&iid=5bebdc11b5064753926a332f90ee1f42&fl=4&uid=3054715124&nid=244+273027073

---

Thanks, Moraga. Great read.

MoragaBear said:

---

Agree with most of this:

https://twitter.com/i/moments/950503625075318784?t=1&cn=ZmxleGlibGVfcmVjc18y&refsrc=email&iid=5bebdc11b5064753926a332f90ee1f42&fl=4&uid=3054715124&nid=244+273027073

---

Its an interesting take but I disagree.

I'm not sure how his act in projecting himself to face Ben would somehow "ignite" the Rebellion or Resistance or whatever its called. Plus - he's already a legend. Is he creating a new one? In TFA, its established that people know about him. He's the legendary Luke Skywalker.

Also, since no one really quite understands the Force - apart from Rey, Ben and Leia - his act in TLJ would hardly be understood by anyone in the galaxy. The only people that actually saw it were the FO and 15 or so rebels.

The writers arguments about him ending the Jedi seems plausible. But if this is about good v evil, Light versus Dark - then is Luke's decision simply to let the Dark side overcome the light to avoid conflict? From what we know about the Force - and historical battles between Jedi and Sith, the only thing that has held peace and the old Republic together was the Light. Palpatine and Vader overcame the Light until Luke came along. Luke sees good in his father and helps him redeem himself.

Finally, if the message from the writer and perhaps the movie was to signify Luke's act as ending violence or conflict - it wasn't properly conveyed in the movie. The ending to the movie and the manner in which Luke dies suggests that Luke has merely "kicked the can down the road" for other people to deal with it. That's hardly the Luke we know from the previous films and certainly the film can't possibly portray the writer's intent to let the Dark side rise further over the Light.

I think I would have liked it more if I hadnt watched the cartoon series.
Some of the storyline was kind of stupid with the whole chasing the ship thing. Between Clone Wars and Rebels you can see that writers have actually came up with more compelling material even though a lot of it is meant for kids, so I think that would be my biggest complaint about it. I admit though I was still entertained.

Ok finally got around to seeing this last night. Theater was pretty packed so the movie still has some legs.

Asked my wife for her three big thoughts on the film. To quote:

"1. Rey has the most flawless skin of any person who has ever lived. It's insane given the huge screen filling closeups that she doesn't have a wrinkle or blemish. Can't be real.

2. Why was Laura Dean wearing some clingy purply dress? Didn't look like something a general would wear.

3. There's going to be an awkward love triangle between Rose, Rey and Finn."


This is a woman who has seen every Star Wars movie, loved the original Star Trek and didn't miss an episode of the rebooted BattleStar Galactica.

My insight from this was every movie goer experiences the film in their own way, and their $15 counts just as much as anyone else's. You have to evaluate a film based on how it makes you feel, not on individual plot points. The whole is always greater than the sum of its parts.

MoragaBear said:

---

Who's to say that the rules of space are the same in the Star Wars galaxy?

---

Because it takes place in a galaxy far far away...from the Milky Way I presumed. Perhaps its so far away it's in a different universe altogether?

Great thread (and why I love BI)

For me it has always come down to acting (or lack thereof). Hamil, Ford and yes, Fischer just are not that good of actors. Why Lucas got them while he needed to blow the budget on Special effect for A New hope. Meanwhile (and just watch a master at his craft) Sir Alex Guinness simply dominates every scene he is in - It is frankly amazing for a movie he despised.

The subsequent movies have always struggled in that regard.

And interestingly, the next best movie in the entire franchise, Rogue One, also stars two actors with good chops. Jones who is frankly quit good in nearly everything she is in, and Diego Luna who isn't as well known but who has been a great actor in Mexico/Latin America for a good 2 decades.

Lucas did not provide a very rich canvas. It is the most silly of space operas when you sit back and think about it (the Force, the weird Jedi and Empire as politics, the almost comical "reboot" of Episode 7). Star Trek has ALWAYS been a far better example of world building (both pale in comparison to Babalyon 5 but I disgress ;-)

PS. It also helps for Rogue One that the force LARGELY is kept out of the center of the plot. Still there ("the force is with me and i am one with the force") but it isn't some McGruffin that is pulled out to get you through the road block or allow you to grab a light saber just in the nick of time as the Abominable Snowman makes an appearance and Rudolph is no where to be found.

socaltownie said:

---

Great thread (and why I love BI)

For me it has always come down to acting (or lack thereof). Hamil, Ford and yes, Fischer just are not that good of actors.

---

I think it's quite a stretch to say that Harrison Ford isn't a good actor.

I'd say Adam Driver is as good an actor as anyone in the franchise.

Oscar Isaac is also legit. Shows how bad the writing is that his character is just not memorable.

ducky23 said:

---

Oscar Isaac is also legit. Shows how bad the writing is that his character is just not memorable.

---

He's barely even a character in Force Awakens. I liked that Last Jedi at least gave him something to do.

The movie I want to see is The First Jedi