CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › Star Wars: The Last Jedi (2017) Post-Release
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Star Wars: The Last Jedi (2017) Post-Release - Page 119

post #5901 of 7633
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post
 

I like that Rey is pushy toward both the scavenger that tries to wrangle BB-8 and Finn during that repair scene. It establishes an innate trait, a strong will, that is later in the movie amplified by the Force. 

 

blah blah Mary Sue etc etc

 

You're right: the main thing going on with Rey is her independence vs. wanting to have company and belong. With both BB8 and Finn, she starts of initially bolshy before quickly warming up to them, and in TLJ her rejecting Luke's advice and going right into the lion's den is motivated purely by wanting a friend who's going through something similar. 

 

So I retract my criticism of Abrams's character work! I think I remember him saying that Ford's injury made them rethink the Rey-Finn dynamic and make them more pally, faster. 

post #5902 of 7633
Quote:
Originally Posted by RexBanner View Post
 

bolshy

Had never heard of this word before. I thank you.

post #5903 of 7633
I'm super late to the party, had to wait until my daughters were back before I could go. What seems to be the consensus around the film? I'm gonna try go back and catch up with some of the thread but that's aloooooot of pages. My youngest loved it, I found it alright, enjoyable but not terribly memorable.
post #5904 of 7633
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andronicus View Post

What seems to be the consensus around the film?


People who enjoy fun enjoyed the movie.
post #5905 of 7633
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andronicus View Post

What seems to be the consensus around the film?

post #5906 of 7633
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andronicus View Post

What seems to be the consensus around the film? 

 

War! The Post-Release Thread is crumbling under attacks by the ruthless 'People who did not like the movie'. There are heroes on both sides. Evil is everywhere. 

post #5907 of 7633
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andronicus View Post

I'm super late to the party, had to wait until my daughters were back before I could go. What seems to be the consensus around the film? I'm gonna try go back and catch up with some of the thread but that's aloooooot of pages. My youngest loved it, I found it alright, enjoyable but not terribly memorable.

 

Recap: itsatumor dug it, loved the script. As did everyone else in this thread, including Freeman. 

 

Barry didn't like it.

post #5908 of 7633

Additional recap: Kate appears to be contributing to the thread via at least three accounts and does that oh-so-enjoyable thing of talking to itself.

post #5909 of 7633
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andronicus View Post

I'm super late to the party, had to wait until my daughters were back before I could go. What seems to be the consensus around the film? I'm gonna try go back and catch up with some of the thread but that's aloooooot of pages. My youngest loved it, I found it alright, enjoyable but not terribly memorable.

Those who found Last Jedi lacking broadly seem to fall into three camps:

1. Those pulled out of the film because their understanding of what these characters (mainly Luke) would behave like in these circumstances isn't what the filmmaker chose to do.

2. Those pulled out of the film because another film with plot and emotional beats pulled from prior films doesn't stand on its own for them.

3. Those unable to enjoy the good parts because they were bogged down by the style of humor, sublight OJ chase, and the Were-Cats of Space Vegas.

It's succeeded in re-contextualizing both other post-Disney Star Wars films for both those who enjoyed it and those who found it lacking.

Rogue One remains the best new Star Wars film.
post #5910 of 7633
Quote:
Originally Posted by RexBanner View Post

... When it comes to newness, something I'm struggling to wrap my head around is the narrative that The Last Jedi changed the series. I loved the film, but I don't think it did anything dramatically new - it had new characters going through new experiences and doing new things and it had a few new uses of the Force,  but in a well-established world with a lot of the standard Star Wars narrative tropes everyone likes (a throne room, space battles, fights against armoured villains, desperate chases, choices between good and evil). It subverted some audience expectations, but it didn't subvert anything about the rules, morals, or basic set-up of the Star Wars universe. 

Which is, I'd argue, exactly what a sequel in a series should do: tell a new story that builds on the previously established world and relationships. 

'The Last Jedi  has changed Star Wars forever/is a big 'Fuck you!' to George Lucas and J.J. Abrams' seems to be this film's, 'The Force Awakens is the film Star Wars needed it to be' - a corny line to round off a review with, rather than something that actually means anything.

I'm with you 100% on this. My close, personal, first-name-basis friend Rian may have upended a bunch of specific expectations born of The Force Awakens, but The Last Jedi doesn't feel particularly revolutionary. Certainly no more that the prequels were, with their injection of explicit politics. And as I've brilliantly argued upthread, my close, personal, first-name-basis friend JJ's BIG QUESTIONS around Snoke and Rey's bloodline and how Maz got a hold of The Blue etc. are still on the table if JJ wants to pick them up.

Rian hasn't shut the door on anything. In having Ghost Yoda bonk Real Luke on the head he even leaves the door open for Ghost Luke to interact with the physical galaxy far, far away.
post #5911 of 7633
Quote:
Originally Posted by Analog Olmos View Post


Those who found Last Jedi lacking broadly seem to fall into three camps:

1. Those pulled out of the film because their understanding of what these characters (mainly Luke) would behave like in these circumstances isn't what the filmmaker chose to do.

2. Those pulled out of the film because another film with plot and emotional beats pulled from prior films doesn't stand on its own for them.

3. Those unable to enjoy the good parts because they were bogged down by the style of humor, sublight OJ chase, and the Were-Cats of Space Vegas.

It's succeeded in re-contextualizing both other post-Disney Star Wars films for both those who enjoyed it and those who found it lacking.

Rogue One remains the best new Star Wars film.

Also racists/sexists and those obsessed with hyperspace fuel.

post #5912 of 7633
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post

Also racists/sexists and those obsessed with hyperspace fuel.

Yeah but fuck those people, they don't get their own bulletpoint!
post #5913 of 7633
always marginalized...
post #5914 of 7633

Worrying about how Maz got the blue lightsaber is so silly in a movie that also has Kylo worshipping at the altar of Vader's melted helmet. How did either of them get those things?

 

They went and got them, that's how. Both are characters that care about the Force, so they went and got artifacts imbued with said Force. 

post #5915 of 7633

I have to say, my biggest disappointment was not that 'Ghost Yoda'(tm Bucho LLC) showed up....but that 'Ghost Vader' and 'Ghost Kenobi' didn't and weren't bickering in the background like an old, married, couple.  Comedy gold opportunity missed.

post #5916 of 7633

Yoda stomping his little footsies and laughing was so fucking lit though. 

post #5917 of 7633
shimmy shimmy sham sham leggies!


they should've had McGregor appear as Obi-Wan Ghostobi complaining to Luke,

"I really didn't appreciate your snide reference about how I was the one that trained Vader..."
post #5918 of 7633
post #5919 of 7633

Maz having Luke's lightsaber never seemed that intriguing a question to me - like, I totally buy that Abrams and Kasdan had her say 'A good question - for another time!' because - 

 

'Well, Luke lost it as the Empire were taking over Cloud City, and when an ugnaught cleaned it out one of the vents a few months later he handed it over to the stormtrooper garrison. One of my pirate pals raided said garrison after the Emperor died, and he found this amongst a pile of confiscated artworks and Sheev's voluminous collection of erotic novels. He dumped it here for safe-keeping, and I asked if I could keep this because he owed me a favour.'

 

- is a bit dry and mundane. The alternative is that she explicitly says, 'The Force guided it to you - it's the will of the Force that you have it', which is the kind of thing that's best left very vaguely implicit. 

post #5920 of 7633
Quote:
Originally Posted by RexBanner View Post
 

Maz having Luke's lightsaber never seemed that intriguing a question to me - like, I totally buy that Abrams and Kasdan had her say 'A good question - for another time!' because - 

 

 

- is a bit dry and mundane. The alternative is that she explicitly says, 'The Force guided it to you - it's the will of the Force that you have it', which is the kind of thing that's best left very vaguely implicit. 

Exactly. It's not important how it got to Maz, it's important how it got to Rey.

 

But even if you want to know how Maz got it, it's in a room full of artifacts. She collects old junk. Case closed. 

post #5921 of 7633

-deletes his Tales of The Lightsaber EU manuscript and walks into the night- 

post #5922 of 7633
Han thought it was important

he's dead now


As I mentioned earlier, I completely forgot about the mystery of Luke's saber from the last movie. So clearly, I never thought the actual answer was important.

All that mattered was that it was more ammunition to use against the movie that it pointed it out and brushed it off in 2 seconds because everything was RUN RUN RUN GO GO GO.

Cumulatively representative of the movie's issues!

There's no story for how the sword came to cross Rey's path either. The Force is using whatever is at its disposal to get Rey to Luke. The totem could've been Luke's ceremonial Jedi pantaloons if that's what Maz happened to have collected.

"Those are Luke's pants! And they have called to YOOOOU!!!"


Forwakens' climactic showdown comes to a head as Rey swings dirty pants at Kylo.
Edited by mcnooj82 - 1/2/18 at 11:20am
post #5923 of 7633

What is weird about the lightsaber in TFA is the story, confirmed by Mark Hamill, that at one point Episode VII opened with - 

 

Quote:
"I can tell you now, the original opening shot of [Episode] VII, the first thing that came into frame was a hand and a lightsaber, a severed hand," Hamill reveals in a video Q&A with The Sun timed to May the 4th. "It enters the atmosphere [of the desert planet Jakku] and the hand burns away.

 

http://mashable.com/2016/05/04/star-wars-hand/#U9aOi5TQ8gq2

 

That would require an explanation, but I can't imagine any answer which wouldn't be totally nuts. It seems like the thing a concept artist might storyboard while spitballing ideas, rather than something a screenwriter would entertain - especially when TFA stuck to the OT tradition of opening on Star Destroyers. It'd certainly be striking, but I don't think it'd be a great idea to open a family film with a lingering shot of a severed hand. 

 

Plus the logistics and coincidences necessary to explain it... it'd be hyper-drive fuel and the idea of need-to-know confidential military information x 10000.  

post #5924 of 7633
"TRAITORRRRRR!!!! Those pantaloons! They don't belong to you!!"

"COME GET IT!!!"
post #5925 of 7633

I'm pretty sure Abrams thought Maz saying "a good question, for another time!" is the equivalent of world-building dialogue from the earlier movies, like Han mentioning a "bounty hunter on Ord Mantell" or, burrrrr, the bit about the "nest of gundarks" in Attacks of the Clones. Something never meant to be expanded on, except for in lame EU stuff only fanboys care about.

 

Yet here we are two years later with everyone so concerned about those things that this series has never been about. These movies never fill in the blanks! And when they do people complain (the prequels). And even those raise more questions. Aurra Sing sure looks important, guess we'll see her later. Who is Sifo-Dyas? A question, for another time! Maybe we got the prophecy of the Chosen One wrong? The next three movies won't ever mention the prophecy again! 

 

The beauty of the movies is we're thrown in and have to pick up on what's happening. It's a bad line from Maz, Abrams's stupid mystery box, but the answer does not matter. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RexBanner View Post
 

What is weird about the lightsaber in TFA is the story, confirmed by Mark Hamill, that at one point Episode VII opened with - 

 

 

http://mashable.com/2016/05/04/star-wars-hand/#U9aOi5TQ8gq2

 

That would require an explanation, but I can't imagine any answer which wouldn't be totally nuts. It seems like the thing a concept artist might storyboard while spitballing ideas, rather than something a screenwriter would entertain. It'd certainly be striking, but I don't think it'd be a great idea to open a family film with a lingering shot of a severed hand. 

 

Plus the logistics and coincidences necessary to explain it... it'd be hyper-drive fuel and the idea of need-to-know confidential military information x 10000.  

I imagine in earlier drafts with Kira seeking Luke out, the lightsaber itself was the MacGuffin and had the same function as the map in BB-8. Which, in retrospect, makes a lot of sense. 

post #5926 of 7633
HAN: "where did you get that???"

MAZ: "an auction after a labor union dispute on Canto Bight. you DON'T want to know!"


It's not just a bad line if that's what JJ was going for. Because the other examples you cite are self contained as "OTHER STORIES".

And Luke's sword from EMPIRE is not just some random detail to brush off for fans. It's got baggage that Ord Mandell and nests of gundarks don't.
post #5927 of 7633
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post

HAN: "where did you get that???"

MAZ: "an auction after a labor union dispute on Canto Bight. you DON'T want to know!"

Admittedly the 30 seconds we see of Maz during her floaty webcam cameo in TLJ is a much better handling of worldbuilding much more in line with the original movies. It paints a story in brief, rather than asking a question that will never be answered.

post #5928 of 7633
I have questions! Where did Maz get a cool drone FaceTime camera THAT agile and quick??
post #5929 of 7633

 

post #5930 of 7633
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post

 

The beauty of the movies is we're thrown in and have to pick up on what's happening. It's a bad line from Maz, Abrams's stupid mystery box, but the answer does not matter. 

I imagine in earlier drafts with Kira seeking Luke out, the lightsaber itself was the MacGuffin and had the same function as the map in BB-8. Which, in retrospect, makes a lot of sense. 

 

Hear hear! An awful lot of the twisted-panties reaction to TLJ is a consequence of Abrams's reputation and the out-sized influence Lost had on culture - and it's not Abrams's fault at all. (I loved Lost, thought 1/3rd of the last season was sappy rubbish, but the vast, vast majority of the mysteries were explained, and OF COURSE a story is about what happens to the characters first and foremost). 

 

I was guilty of this: I went into TFA expecting Rey to be a Skywalker, and I left the film irritated that he hadn't just out and out said it - this was because I figured that was the obvious direction to go, and because I thought that, if TFA followed ANH so closely, clearly they were setting up another family reveal.

 

Then, when I rewatched the film on blu-ray, removed from expectations, I came away thinking Rey - who's told by Maz that she knows the truth, that her family aren't coming back - was just a random, and that Luke, Leia, and Han wouldn't abandon any of their kids like that anyway. Sure enough, that's what Abrams and Kasdan intended, and that's what Rian Johnson thought too. 

 

People seem trained to think everything needs explained, or else the story doesn't work. The lightsaber, the Knights of Ren - these aren't things that need explained for the story to work (there should be more in TFA about the Republic-First Order dynamic though). But in the post-Lost world of genre film, TV, and literature internet culture, every little odd detail or bit of world-building needs to be addressed lest they be a dropped ball or a plot hole.

post #5931 of 7633
Alluding to things that sound like interesting stories without stopping to exposit the shit out of them for the sake of worldbuilding is maybe just a wee bit different from having one character explicitly raise a question only to brush it off with "oh, yeah, that's actually a really interesting story, trust us, but we're not going to bother telling the audience about it."
post #5932 of 7633

Yeah, I said above it was the bad version.

post #5933 of 7633
post #5934 of 7633
JJ's proclivities are not TFA's biggest problem. I'd enjoy the hell out of that film if they were all it had going on.

Those problems are like acne. Ditto the humor in Last Jedi. These are surface issues.

That both films use the basic STRUCTURE of the first two films of the prior series is the osteosarcoma that's killing it.

I've seen a lot of films that make choices I disagree with. The only other movies I've seen that repeat structural story beats verbatim like these films (or verbatim with a twist!) are straight-up reboots. And for parts 7 and 8 of a series that should be a criminal offense.

I'm glad folks are enjoying these films. I enjoy parts of both of them! But the structural copying is just really unforgivable to me, and will forever stand in the way of these films being able to stand on their own.
post #5935 of 7633
Olmos, don't you see? It's like poetry.
post #5936 of 7633
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post
 

 

 

This guy gets it.  The worst thing about internet film criticism* is how it has fostered this often-unspoken attitude that films are somehow this challenge, and that liking them means you have fooled or somehow defeated.  Which is just dumb on a cosmic level. Enjoying a leisure activity should mean you are winning, not losing, at it. 

 

*speaking largely of the armchair/youtube variety; of everyone that actually reviews things in a professional capacity, the only one I can think of who actually approaches movies in such an adversarial manner is Armond White


Edited by Schwartz - 1/2/18 at 1:52pm
post #5937 of 7633
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post
 

 like Han mentioning a "bounty hunter on Ord Mantell"

Wasn't the bounty hunter on Ord Mantell a reference to the animated section of the Star Wars Christmas Special, which was Boba Fett's first appearance?

post #5938 of 7633
Quote:
Originally Posted by Analog Olmos View Post



That both films use the basic STRUCTURE of the first two films of the prior series is the osteosarcoma that's killing it.

I've seen a lot of films that make choices I disagree with. The only other movies I've seen that repeat structural story beats verbatim like these films (or verbatim with a twist!) are straight-up reboots. And for parts 7 and 8 of a series that should be a criminal offense.

I'm glad folks are enjoying these films. I enjoy parts of both of them! But the structural copying is just really unforgivable to me, and will forever stand in the way of these films being able to stand on their own.
 

 

Repeats of structure is not an automatic minus for me.  It's one of the reasons I have no problem with CREED being another ROCKY/underdog sports movie narrative.

 

Clearly, that did not become an issue for me with LAST JEDI as it did with FORWAKENS.

 

With FORWAKENS, it was the arbitrary way things were repeated that gradually sapped the energy from me.  After Han Solo and Starkiller Base take over the movie, the narrative felt empty.  It was just playing through remixed elements of New Hope, Empire, and Return of the Jedi... and despite the fun new characters livening up things here and there, the actual execution of the plot felt so arbitrary because the film's thematic concerns were SO hollow.

 

I don't think LAST JEDI has that specific problem when it comes to repeating structures from various star war.  Is it based HEAVILY on the structure of EMPIRE and RETURN OF THE JEDI?  Absolutely, but the thematic contextualization of how those story beats and sequences are used is very different.

 

The movie opens with the Rebellion/Resistance having to escape before their base is destroyed?  Check.  But the one in LAST JEDI results in a heavy cost that affects the rest of their continuing evasion of the First Order.  

 

Another student seeking out a master?  Check.  But this one has a bitter old husk of a man who reluctantly decides to teach the student WHY she shouldn't want to be what she wants to be... and the story comes to be about her breaking him out of that funk.

 

And I feel the LAST JEDI does this with nearly ALL of its POETIC CALLBACKS to the other movies.


Edited by mcnooj82 - 1/2/18 at 12:39pm
post #5939 of 7633
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fafhrd View Post
 

Wasn't the bounty hunter on Ord Mantell a reference to the animated section of the Star Wars Christmas Special, which was Boba Fett's first appearance?

Haven't ever seen that. But even if it is, the Christmas Special is supplementary material at best that the average moviegoer doesn't need to have seen in order to understand the movie. 

post #5940 of 7633
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwartz View Post
 

 

This guy gets it.  The worst thing about internet film criticism* is how it has fostered this often-unspoken attitude that films are somItehow this challenge, and that liking them means you have fooled or somehow defeated.  Which is just dumb on a cosmic level. Enjoying a leisure activity should mean you are winning, not losing, at it. 

 

*speaking largely of the armchair/youtube variety; of everyone that actually reviews things in a professional capacity, the only one I can think of who actually approaches movies in such an adversarial manner is Armond White

Right. I really think a lot of fanboys are bothered by TLJ because it, in the case of Snoke and the blue lightsaber, doesn't supply them with the currency they need to prove their fandom. 

post #5941 of 7633
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post

 

I don't think LAST JEDI has that specific problem when it comes to repeating structures from various star war.

 

Me neither. TLJ didn't repeat ESB is any way meaningful enough for me to be irritated. Similar things happened, for sure: the hero visits a mentor, the baddies chase the heroes from their base, 'Join me' - but these all played out way differently, and went different places, and happened in a different order, than they did in ESB. 

 

I think TFA manages to do new stuff with Imperials chasing an escaped droid on a desert planet, and Rebels (essentially) infilitrating an Imperial base - the ANH stuff only becomes a real problem when Starkiller Base blows up the Republic and then aims its sights on the Resistance base. The film throws away its own, good story - we need to fuckin' get a hold of Luke! - so that it can straddle ANH's - the First Order is going to blow us up; we need to take out their planet killer!

post #5942 of 7633
Quote:
Originally Posted by RexBanner View Post
 

 

The film throws away its own, good story - we need to fuckin' get a hold of Luke! - so that it can straddle ANH's - the First Order is going to blow us up; we need to take out their planet killer!

I believe the ONLY time in LAST JEDI that even bothers to bring up stupid STARKILLER is when an awestruck Rose meets Finn.

 

Rose is the ultimate FORWAKENS FAN!!!

 

She's so sweet!  FORWAKENS is the movie that disney needed to make to bring her into the fold!

post #5943 of 7633
Quote:
Originally Posted by RexBanner View Post
 

 

Me neither. TLJ didn't repeat ESB is any way meaningful enough for me to be irritated. Similar things happened, for sure: the hero visits a mentor, the baddies chase the heroes from their base, 'Join me' - but these all played out way differently, and went different places, than they did in ESB. 

 

I think TFA manages to do new stuff with Imperials chasing an escaped droid on a desert planet, and Rebels (essentially) infilitrating an Imperial base - the ANH stuff only becomes a real problem when Starkiller Base blows up the Republic and then aims its sights on the Resistance base. The film throws away its own, good story - we need to fuckin' get a hold of Luke! - so that it can straddle ANH's - the First Order is going to blow us up; we need to take out their planet killer!

Yeah, what Olmos thinks of as copied structures I think of as intertextuality. TLJ is directly responding to Empire Strikes Back, and one way it does that is through mimesis. But where this is a good thing for TLJ and a bad thing for TFA is the former recontextualizes the mimesis in order to comment on it (and, in fact, the entire series). The Force Awakens, however, uses mimesis in a completely shallow way without anything on its mind.

post #5944 of 7633
Quote:
Originally Posted by RexBanner View Post

Me neither. TLJ didn't repeat ESB is any way meaningful enough for me to be irritated. Similar things happened, for sure: the hero visits a mentor, the baddies chase the heroes from their base, 'Join me' - but these all played out way differently, and went different places, than they did in ESB. 

Starts with an escape from a Rebel base.
Young Jedi gets mentored by an old Master.
Heroes spend the movie on the run from the Empire.
Join me and rule the Galaxy.
Imperial Walkers lead an assualt on a rebel base.
Sigh.

I'm glad it didn't repeat enough for you to not find the whole enjoyable. But the fact is that different OUTCOMES of the scenarios it's repeating doesn't change the fact that the bones of the thing are the bones of another, older, film. You can like it, but you can't really argue it's its own thing.

Last Jedi is "Empire, But Different" to an only slightly lesser degree than Force Awakens was "A New Hope, But Different."

I'm not saying it's wrong to like these films for what they are. But when did it become asking too much for a film to just have its own story told its own way, instead of telling someone else's story differently?
post #5945 of 7633
Quote:
Originally Posted by Analog Olmos View Post



I'm not saying it's wrong to like these films for what they are. But when did it become asking too much for a film to just have its own story told its own way, instead of telling someone else's story differently?

couldn't that be a criticism of your favorite ROGUE ONE as well?

 

it's not using anything that's necessarily a star war plot (though it eventually becomes a repeat of the Han and the Rebel fleet for RETURN OF THE JEDI), but it was still pitched as a movie based on doing a star war version of a heist/dirty dozen movie (a very reliable genre narrative!)

 

And I was totally looking forward to that!  I really fooled myself into enjoying it that first time too!

 

and then woof!

 

that second viewing just killed the first two thirds...

 

oh man, aside from being hesitant about Edwards (because of dullzilla), I was so in the bag for that movie...

 

 

 

I think the sins of FORWAKENS repeating the past are greater than that of LAST JEDIs, which I actually think did a very commendable job of continuing from what JJ set up in interesting ways.  In terms of potential to try something new, FORWAKENS technically had the blankest slate.  It just had to succeed in NOT BEING THE PREQUELS, I guess?  


Edited by mcnooj82 - 1/2/18 at 12:43pm
post #5946 of 7633

Personally, a big part of why I reacted to TLJ so much more positively is that it didn't call to mind Empire as directly and constantly as TFA did with its "rhyming couplet".  Yes, there are walkers attacking rebels on an ice planet, but it was the finale rather than the opening, Luke's final "duel" is not at all like Empire's, and the low-speed chase felt fundamentally different from the hide-n-seek game the Falcon plays upon leaving Hoth.  

 

Everyone's mileage is their own, obviously, but TFA feeling like a direct remake in terms of form as well as content is pushed it into a different realm for me.  With TLJ, the form is different enough that the familiar content feels like it's been recontextualized rather than regurgitated.

post #5947 of 7633
Quote:
Originally Posted by Analog Olmos View Post
But when did it become asking too much for a film to just have its own story told its own way, instead of telling someone else's story differently?

 

Realistically?  Probably around the 5th or 6th entry in a franchise.

post #5948 of 7633

and remember the conventional wisdom!

 

there are really only seven plots possible!

 

and that's why forwakens fails

 

it was the seventh entry!  there was still another one left!!!

post #5949 of 7633
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwartz View Post


With TLJ, the form is different enough that the familiar content feels like it's been recontextualized rather than regurgitated.

Like you said YMMV for sure... but even when it works (and I'll readily agree it works WAY better in Last Jedi than in TFA)... I'm left asking "Why are these movies regurgitating or recontexrualizing stuff that's come before anyway?? Why can't they just tell their own fucking story?"

Was having a Jedi master train a Jedi wannabe in a remote location the only possible script options for the second film in a series? How about visiting a dark side cave for a vision? Literally no other choices to be made with a blank sheet of paper in front of you?

It's not the quality of HOW it was done that bugs me. It's that it's being done at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post

couldn't that be a criticism of your favorite ROGUE ONE as well?

it's not using anything that's necessarily a star war plot (though it eventually becomes a repeat of the Han and the Rebel fleet for RETURN OF THE JEDI), but it was still pitched as a movie based on doing a star war version of a heist/dirty dozen movie (a very reliable genre narrative!)

I think there's a pretty huge difference between drawing from another genre of film for a structure to build your movie off of, or even another movie of the same genre, and taking the structure from another film in your own series and just zigging when they zagged.

I do find it interesting that everyone seems to agree the third act of Rogue One is where everything is really firing on all cylinders.... and yet that's where we have the super-silly grocery store claw game and the echos to JEDI of the overhead battle while the team on the ground races against the clock.
post #5950 of 7633
Quote:
Originally Posted by Analog Olmos View Post

Like you said YMMV for sure... but even when it works (and I'll readily agree it works WAY better in Last Jedi than in TFA)... I'm left asking "Why are these movies regurgitating or recontexrualizing stuff that's come before anyway?? Why can't they just tell their own fucking story?"

Was having a Jedi master train a Jedi wannabe in a remote location the only possible script options for the second film in a series? How about visiting a dark side cave for a vision? Literally no other choices to be made with a blank sheet of paper in front of you?

 

We're definitely living in a time of deconstruction and recontextualization when it comes to these big properties coming back and actively deciding to be continuations.  This may be an unfortunate time for you to watch legacy-quels!

 

I mean, did you enjoy CREED at all?  On paper, it's really just the same plot, right?  Though, on your behalf I'd argue (as I have before), that there are only so many places an underdog sports movie about boxers can go compared to the options available in a galaxy far far away.

 

Was it a problem when FURY ROAD was mostly a stripped down repeat of THE ROAD WARRIOR in terms of its basic plot?

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Analog Olmos View Post



I think there's a pretty huge difference between drawing from another genre of film for a structure to build your movie off of, or even another movie of the same genre, and taking the structure from another film in your own series and just zigging when they zagged.

I do find it interesting that everyone seems to agree the third act of Rogue One is where everything is really firing on all cylinders.... and yet that's where we have the super-silly grocery store claw game and the echos to JEDI of the overhead battle while the team on the ground races against the clock.
 

I actually don't think it's that huge a difference at all.  Both are trading on things VERY familiar... and I'd argue that ROGUE ONE goes through many of its genre formula's beats about as arbitrarily as FORWAKENS did with star war milestones.

 

And I'd argue that people agree that the final third of ROGUE ONE is where things finally start cooking because it's now REALLY operating on established star war iconography and story beats.  And because the objectives for the characters are finally at a video-game level degree of simplicity that Gareth Edwards (or whoever actually finished the movie) can actually handle after botching the character drama of the first two thirds of the movie.

 

It's like... "FINALLY.  At least I can take solace in comfort food!"

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Focused Film Discussion
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › Star Wars: The Last Jedi (2017) Post-Release