|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Jan 2, 2018 14:56:55 GMT -5
some people expect far too much, Asking for a main plot that is more than "follow them until they run out of gas" is asking too much? I'm not asking for genius, but something more than an 8th grader could dream up would be nice. Perhaps strangely (or not) I didn't see that as "the main plot". In the context of this being the centre of the trilogy there were a number of more intriguing plots superseding it. As for importance, in the overall trilogy story line, it was pretty much irrelevant. Cheers Gary |
|
|
|
Post by Bonzo on Jan 2, 2018 15:37:32 GMT -5
Asking for a main plot that is more than "follow them until they run out of gas" is asking too much? I'm not asking for genius, but something more than an 8th grader could dream up would be nice. Perhaps strangely (or not) I didn't see that as "the main plot". In the context of this being the centre of the trilogy there were a number of more intriguing plots superseding it. As for importance, in the overall trilogy story line, it was pretty much irrelevant. Cheers Gary It just proves to me that as with TFA, more time, thought, and effort was put into making a visual wiz bang flick vs making a great movie story with a well written script and meaningful characters. It's much the way of the cinematic world now with all the CGI. I find that most of these types of movies all have the same problem anymore. It's a shame. Considering Star Wars is basically the new crown jewel at Disney, and under everyone's microscope, one might hope they would step up their game as high as they could provide. I just don't think they accomplished that here, at all. I'm just not part of the current modern society group that considers mediocrity as acceptable, good enough, or even good. |
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Jan 2, 2018 17:21:16 GMT -5
Perhaps strangely (or not) I didn't see that as "the main plot". In the context of this being the centre of the trilogy there were a number of more intriguing plots superseding it. As for importance, in the overall trilogy story line, it was pretty much irrelevant. It just proves to me that as with TFA, more time, thought, and effort was put into making a visual wiz bang flick vs making a great movie story with a well written script and meaningful characters. It's much the way of the cinematic world now with all the CGI. I find that most of these types of movies all have the same problem anymore. It's a shame. Considering Star Wars is basically the new crown jewel at Disney, and under everyone's microscope, one might hope they would step up their game as high as they could provide. I just don't think they accomplished that here, at all. I'm just not part of the current modern society group that considers mediocrity as acceptable, good enough, or even good. Obviously dramaturgists, story line and script writers are totally separate from the special effects and CGI people. My understanding is that for the most part they weren't even located in the same country. Hence one does not detract from the other. In a total movie budget sense the time spent by the D, SL and SW's is an almost insignificant cost, so I doubt that they were constrained by budget. Of course in the editing phase there may be sacrifices made in one or more areas due to running time, but I didn't get the sense from the single watching that much story line was left on the editing floor. My personal view is that the Star Wars universe/story line is hugely constrained, in that there are a large number of must have's in a Star Wars movie. This makes telling a complex story next to impossible, similarly leaving no running time available for much character development. As a result we have always seen only the main characters develop, that we the audience can attach to, the rest are simply cannon fodder. I also have the view that by not choosing quality actors in leading roles Star Wars has always deliberately limited its character complexity and hence story line development. In summary, it's a Star Wars movie and we shouldn't expect it to be anything else. Cheers Gary |
|
|
|
Post by Bonzo on Jan 2, 2018 18:19:39 GMT -5
Obviously dramaturgists, story line and script writers are totally separate from the special effects and CGI people. My understanding is that for the most part they weren't even located in the same country. Hence one does not detract from the other. In a total movie budget sense the time spent by the D, SL and SW's is an almost insignificant cost, so I doubt that they were constrained by budget. Of course in the editing phase there may be sacrifices made in one or more areas due to running time, but I didn't get the sense from the single watching that much story line was left on the editing floor. Semantics. Your physical separation and actual budget discussion are exacting details not associated with the point. You're being too literal. The point is that in some shape or form, in some mix, they either didn't get the best writers, didn't take any time to actually think the story through, or the director just didn't care about story. Although in the case of Disney, one has to wonder if it wasn't corporate office lawyers or toy marketers really in charge making the calls. I'm sure their are other things in play here, but my point being that it's like they gave 2 crappy writers 2 days to write the entire script and then gave the visual effects people 2 years to make the movie. And then hired a visual effects guy for a director. In the case of TFA, it became known after the fact that JJ Abrams basically rewrote the movie as he went as not to "hurt any feelings" or "piss anyone off" or "not stray too far from what he thought people wanted." In other words, he played it safe by not doing anything not already done. The result was a poor pointless movie. Except in the case of the TFA, R1, and now TLJ, none of the characters are ones we attach to, and that's the problem. R1 is the best example. It was a decent movie, but when the 2 main characters die at the end and not one single person in the movie theater cries or has any feeling for the loss, that's poor film making 101. I've felt it was more to not have any actor baggage dragged into the mix and to keep things fresh. Of course in the supporting actor category that's not been the case. Alec Guinness, Peter Cushing, Ewan McGregor, Pernilla August, Christopher Lee, Samuel Jackson etc. Perhaps it is a modern telling of a Star Wars movie, maybe. And that could be the problem. As I stated before, almost all modern movies of this sort don't do a good job of telling complete well thought out stores anymore, with characters that you end up loving. I find that many directors have lost the ability to make films in such a way to make the audience / character connection happen. It's a lost art that most don't have. And unfortunately with our "faster and bigger is better and more" society the way it is, it's totally accepted and embraced. People can dog 1,2 & 3 all they want, but they do a better job than these last 3 movies in that realm. |
|
|
|
Post by gus4emo on Jan 2, 2018 18:23:14 GMT -5
It just proves to me that as with TFA, more time, thought, and effort was put into making a visual wiz bang flick vs making a great movie story with a well written script and meaningful characters. It's much the way of the cinematic world now with all the CGI. I find that most of these types of movies all have the same problem anymore. It's a shame. Considering Star Wars is basically the new crown jewel at Disney, and under everyone's microscope, one might hope they would step up their game as high as they could provide. I just don't think they accomplished that here, at all. I'm just not part of the current modern society group that considers mediocrity as acceptable, good enough, or even good. Obviously dramaturgists, story line and script writers are totally separate from the special effects and CGI people. My understanding is that for the most part they weren't even located in the same country. Hence one does not detract from the other. In a total movie budget sense the time spent by the D, SL and SW's is an almost insignificant cost, so I doubt that they were constrained by budget. Of course in the editing phase there may be sacrifices made in one or more areas due to running time, but I didn't get the sense from the single watching that much story line was left on the editing floor. My personal view is that the Star Wars universe/story line is hugely constrained, in that there are a large number of must have's in a Star Wars movie. This makes telling a complex story next to impossible, similarly leaving no running time available for much character development. As a result we have always seen only the main characters develop, that we the audience can attach to, the rest are simply cannon fodder. I also have the view that by not choosing quality actors in leading roles Star Wars has always deliberately limited its character complexity and hence story line development. In summary, it's a Star Wars movie and we shouldn't expect it to be anything else. Cheers Gary I agree somewhat, IMO in Episode VII and VIII, there has been good character development, and good acting behind them, and will continue to develop in Episode IX, setting up the new trilogy...... |
|
|
|
Post by Bonzo on Jan 2, 2018 18:36:24 GMT -5
setting up the new trilogy...... According to my die hard Star Wars friend who reads the books and stays in the know, it's supposedly actually going to be the complete opposite. The new trilogy is supposedly going to go to opposite side of the galaxy and have very little if anything to do with the Star Wars we know. Basically, starting fresh with all new characters. Perhaps the story will do a hand off of sorts (as TLJ already eludes to), but according to what he's found out so far, it's going to be almost a total reboot. And he's excited about it, because he's fed up with these new movies, their stupid story lines, wimpy characters, and how they have dishonored the characters of old. Of course he hopes the third installment can redeem it, because he loves all things Star Wars. |
|
|
|
Post by gus4emo on Jan 2, 2018 19:04:31 GMT -5
setting up the new trilogy...... According to my die hard Star Wars friend who reads the books and stays in the know, it's supposedly actually going to be the complete opposite. The new trilogy is supposedly going to go to opposite side of the galaxy and have very little if anything to do with the Star Wars we know. Basically, starting fresh with all new characters. Perhaps the story will do a hand off of sorts (as TLJ already eludes to), but according to what he's found out so far, it's going to be almost a total reboot. And he's excited about it, because he's fed up with these new movies, their stupid story lines, wimpy characters, and how they have dishonored the characters of old. Of course he hopes the third installment can redeem it, because he loves all things Star Wars. Your friend is one of millions, not because it's not going his way means he has to hate it.....Ren and Rey are being played by perfect picked actors, leading the charge..... |
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Jan 2, 2018 19:54:09 GMT -5
My personal view is that the Star Wars universe/story line is hugely constrained, in that there are a large number of must have's in a Star Wars movie. This makes telling a complex story next to impossible, similarly leaving no running time available for much character development. As a result we have always seen only the main characters develop, that we the audience can attach to, the rest are simply cannon fodder. Except in the case of the TFA, R1, and now TLJ, none of the characters are ones we attach to, and that's the problem. R1 is the best example. It was a decent movie, but when the 2 main characters die at the end and not one single person in the movie theater cries or has any feeling for the loss, that's poor film making 101. I believe I made that exact same point earlier, Rogue 1 had one of the best Star Wars leading role actors in Felicity Jones who was able to develop the character within the constraints of the movie. I can't speak for others but I didn't cry in the end because I already knew that they were going to die from A New Hope. As a result I went into the movie knowing exactly what their fate was. Cheers Gary |
|
|
|
Post by musicfan on Jan 3, 2018 6:46:07 GMT -5
Poor film making is if no one cries? ThAt is the dumbest comment I have read on here In Some time
|
|
|
|
Post by Bonzo on Jan 3, 2018 9:36:23 GMT -5
Poor film making is if no one cries? ThAt is the dumbest comment I have read on here In Some time If there are 2 main characters that are in 90% of a movie, and they both die, and no one in the audience feels any loss for those characters, then yes, that's poor film making. If you think that's dumb I can't help you there. EDIT: I need to clarify here, that sadness or crying aren't the only 2 indicators of what I'm talking about. "Emotional feeling" is what I'm really referring to. Depending on the type of movie or character, laughter could be the result of someone's death (like say the movie Lock Stock and 2 Smoking Barrels). Or if it's the villain who dies, happiness could be the resulting emotion (like if they ever kill off Negan in Walking Dead). So there are different emotions for different situations. Sadness and crying aren't always the case when someone dies. But shear LACK of any emotion what so ever when a main character dies is a strong sign of poor film making. That's R1. |
|
|
|
Post by Bonzo on Jan 3, 2018 9:44:26 GMT -5
I can't speak for others but I didn't cry in the end because I already knew that they were going to die from A New Hope. As a result I went into the movie knowing exactly what their fate was. I get what you are saying, but I don't buy it either. Great movies/actors draw out emotion even if you know the pending doom in advance. For R1, looking for an actual tear might be extreme, because with the way it was made, there wasn't any depth of pain or loss what so ever. It was like, "oh well, they died, so what." Not quite the same, but another tell is movies that you watch repeatedly and they still make you laugh or cry every time you see it. Those films have the ability to suck you in every time. |
|
|
|
Post by jmilton on Jan 3, 2018 10:08:54 GMT -5
I still cry during Forrest Gump...
“Run Forrest, RUN!”
|
|
|
|
Post by Bonzo on Jan 3, 2018 10:10:54 GMT -5
Your friend is one of millions, not because it's not going his way means he has to hate it Your use of the double negative has me a bit confused. I assume you meant to say that "since the movies are not going his way, the way he wants, then he has to hate them." Yes? If so, I can tell you with him it's not the case. If anything he's been a loyal a$$. Frankly, he treats Star Wars much like some people treat their religion. He actually incorporates them into his life. We have discussed and argued about TFA ever since the beginning. He was so in love with TFA when it first came out, he even named his new cat Poe. It's only now after he's watched it multiple times that he realizes it's not all he originally thought it was. He admits to being so caught up in his blind love of Star Wars that he couldn't see straight. With TLJ, his rose colored glasses were off, and he's not thrilled with it. His exacts words were "very disappointed." Rey has some moxy and I like her okay. She certainly came across better in this new movie than TFA. On Ren however we will need to agree to disagree, because IMO Adams Driver's casting was a very poor choice. Kylo Ren is the least intimidating "biggest pu$$y" bad guy of all the Star Wars villains. And his casting has a huge part to play in that. His acting hasn't been much better. |
|
|
|
Post by gus4emo on Jan 3, 2018 11:17:01 GMT -5
Your friend is one of millions, not because it's not going his way means he has to hate it Your use of the double negative has me a bit confused. I assume you meant to say that "since the movies are not going his way, the way he wants, then he has to hate them." Yes? If so, I can tell you with him it's not the case. If anything he's been a loyal a$$. Frankly, he treats Star Wars much like some people treat their religion. He actually incorporates them into his life. We have discussed and argued about TFA ever since the beginning. He was so in love with TFA when it first came out, he even named his new cat Poe. It's only now after he's watched it multiple times that he realizes it's not all he originally thought it was. He admits to being so caught up in his blind love of Star Wars that he couldn't see straight. With TLJ, his rose colored glasses were off, and he's not thrilled with it. His exacts words were "very disappointed." Rey has some moxy and I like her okay. She certainly came across better in this new movie than TFA. On Ren however we will need to agree to disagree, because IMO Adams Driver's casting was a very poor choice. Kylo Ren is the least intimidating "biggest pu$$y" bad guy of all the Star Wars villains. And his casting has a huge part to play in that. His acting hasn't been much better. I respect your opinion, now back to your friend, keep an eye on him, loving Stars Wars as a religion is not good, one more twist in the story might make him go postal...... |
|
|
|
Post by Bonzo on Jan 3, 2018 11:50:29 GMT -5
now back to your friend, keep an eye on him, loving Stars Wars as a religion is not good, one more twist in the story might make him go postal......  Oh you bet I will!  |
|
|
|
Post by pop on Jan 3, 2018 12:11:18 GMT -5
It was F'ng TERRIBLE!!!! Worst Star Wars movie ever. At least in the prequels there was plenty of Jedi Lore. This movie makes Jar Jar Binx look like a hero.
|
|
|
|
Post by musicfan on Jan 3, 2018 12:16:31 GMT -5
Poor film making is if no one cries? ThAt is the dumbest comment I have read on here In Some time If there are 2 main characters that are in 90% of a movie, and they both die, and no one in the audience feels any loss for those characters, then yes, that's poor film making. If you think that's dumb I can't help you there. EDIT: I need to clarify here, that sadness or crying aren't the only 2 indicators of what I'm talking about. "Emotional feeling" is what I'm really referring to. Depending on the type of movie or character, laughter could be the result of someone's death (like say the movie Lock Stock and 2 Smoking Barrels). Or if it's the villain who dies, happiness could be the resulting emotion (like if they ever kill off Negan in Walking Dead). So there are different emotions for different situations. Sadness and crying aren't always the case when someone dies. But shear LACK of any emotion what so ever when a main character dies is a strong sign of poor film making. That's R1. so I am assuming you took an exit poll of EVERY person in the theater? otherwise your statement again is rediculous...or did your "friend" that is a star wars diehard give you that "fact" one too? |
|
|
|
Post by Bonzo on Jan 3, 2018 14:02:59 GMT -5
so I am assuming you took an exit poll of EVERY person in the theater? otherwise your statement again is rediculous...or did your "friend" that is a star wars diehard give you that "fact" one too? Uh bouy.  |
|
|
|
Post by gus4emo on Jan 3, 2018 20:38:55 GMT -5
It was F'ng TERRIBLE!!!! Worst Star Wars movie ever. At least in the prequels there was plenty of Jedi Lore. This movie makes Jar Jar Binx look like a hero. Are you sure you weren't watching Space Balls, lol.....I've seen it twice, second time in IMAX, it was F'ng SPECTACULAR!!!!!!!! |
|
|
|
Post by brubacca on Jan 3, 2018 20:44:06 GMT -5
I thought we had to take double blind exit polls for the results to be valid?
|
|
