Jump to content
ZoSoRose

STAR WARS: RISE OF SKYWALKER - SPOILERS!!!

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Dazey said:

I'd disagree with that. As bad as TLJ and ROS are, the prequel trilogy movies are infinitely worse. The sequels may be shit but at least they didn't make Darth Vader into a spotty teenager who was a whiny little bitch. 

The prequels also completely ruin the "No, I am your father" moment which is kindof a big deal is it not?

Nah. The prequels are pretty bad, but they aren't a disaster that makes the OT meaningless. TFA was a good flick, better than I and II will ever be, but 8 and 9 cripled this trilogy so bad that the prequels don't look that bad next to it and they WERE bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, PatrickS77 said:

Yeah. Looks like it. I don't care too much about Darth Maul. And while I view Menace more favourible than I used to, it's still the one I want to watch least. Too much desert, too much Jar Jar, too much pod racing, too much of that kid, too much Liam Neeson (who I kinda consider boring), McGregor not really shining in the role yet and just wrong pacing. But the other moments are quite alright.

I saw Phantom Menace on opening night and actually really loved it at the time. It didn't stand up to repeated viewing. Saw Clones on release too and thought it was awful. Didn't bother going to see ROTS and to this day I've still not watched the whole thing. Tried a bunch of times and I just get about half way through and turn it off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Chewbacca said:

Nah. The prequels are pretty bad, but they aren't a disaster that makes the OT meaningless. TFA was a good flick, better than I and II will ever be, but 8 and 9 cripled this trilogy so bad that the prequels don't look that bad next to it and they WERE bad.

The problem is that they by definition come before the OT therefore they have an impact on the story and the characters. You can't watch the prequels without affecting your perception of the characters in the OT whereas you can see the ST purely because it doesn't really impact narratively on what happened before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Dazey said:

I saw Phantom Menace on opening night and actually really loved it at the time. It didn't stand up to repeated viewing. Saw Clones on release too and thought it was awful. Didn't bother going to see ROTS and to this day I've still not watched the whole thing. Tried a bunch of times and I just get about half way through and turn it off.

Yeah, well. Saw all of them in the cinma, was disapointed with Menace, while happy that Star Wars was back. Enjoyed Attack and Revenge so much more. Both in the cinema and  on repeat viewings. But then again, I read the comics, read the books and played the computer games, so I have a different access than one who just watched the OT. Maybe you should watch the complete Revenge to have a valid opinion though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, PatrickS77 said:

Yeah, well. Saw all of them in the cinma, was disapointed with Menace, while happy that Star Wars was back. Enjoyed Attack and Revenge so much more. Both in the cinema and  on repeat viewings. But then again, I read the comics, read the books and played the computer games, so I have a different access than one who just watched the OT. Maybe you should watch the complete Revenge to have a valid opinion though.

Does it suddenly turn into Citizen Kane at the halfway mark then? :lol: 

Edited by Dazey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dazey said:

Did it suddenly turn into Citizen Kane at the halfway mark then? :lol: 

No. But then you kinda knew what was coming. The extensive worlds and characters. The opulency of it all, while the OT is rather reduced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Dazey said:

The problem is that they by definition come before the OT therefore they have an impact on the story and the characters. You can't watch the prequels without affecting your perception of the characters in the OT whereas you can see the ST purely because it doesn't really impact narratively on what happened before.

Yes, but it cripples their achievements. After starkiller fired, and with the knowledge we now have that Palpatine is behind it all and with a new fallen Skywalker, we were back to where we were by the begining of episode IV. With the prequels, Vader was still Vader, him being a crybaby when young is irrelevant, he changed into Vader nevertheless, Palpatine was still Palpatine, Obi Wan was still Obi Wan and so on...

Thanks to the sequels, Luke is not the character who went thru the hero's journey and achieved his objectives anymore and saw light in Vader, he's a grumpy failure that tried to kill his nephew, even if he was going to give up, he went all the way there, completely out of his character and what his more mature and resolved self from the EU would never do.

Vader also had the short end, his prophecy was no more. Palpatine survived and so on. The prequels did not touch that. 

Edited by Chewbacca
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Dazey said:

The problem is that they by definition come before the OT therefore they have an impact on the story and the characters. You can't watch the prequels without affecting your perception of the characters in the OT whereas you can see the ST purely because it doesn't really impact narratively on what happened before.

Is that true though? I feel like saying to them celebrating on Endor at the end of Return of the Jedi,

''All a complete waste of time!! You have just wasted your life being in the rebel alliance people. Congratulations. You two (Han and Leia) shag and produce a son who sort of turns to the dark side, and sort of doesn't, and then sort of does (he cannot really make up his mind); he ends up committing patricide Han so you'd better watch him! The Emperor Palpatine actually survived his epic fall and explosion so you shouldn't look so happy there Luke! Luke, you are going to turn into one of the Bee Gees when you grow older and live on a little island milking strange creatures. The Emperor? The Emperor has in fact been a naughty boy and has been spreading his oats with his deformed Sith codger so there will be more Palpatines. There are star destroyers and Tie-fighters still about to be built, and fascist uniforms to be worn by people with English accents, so the empire survived really, except it will be renamed the First Order. There will even be Death Star type constructions which are destroyed in the exact same manner as the Death Stars you lot destroyed, so engineering clearly won't improve''. 

Edited by DieselDaisy
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Chewbacca said:

Yes, but it cripples their achievements. After starkiller fired, and with the knowledge we now have that Palpatine is behind it all and with a new fallen Skywalker, we were back to where we were by the begining of episode IV. With the prequels, Vader was still Vader, him being a crybaby when young is irrelevant, he changed into Vader nevertheless, Palpatine was still Palpatine, Obi Wan was still Obi Wan and so on...

Thanks to the sequels, Luke is not the character who went thru the hero's journey and achieved his objectives anymore and saw light in Vader, he's a grumpy failure that triednto kills his nephew, even he was going to give up, he went all the way there, completely out of his character and what his more mature and resolved self from the EU would never do.

Vader also had the short end, his prophecy was no more. Palpatine survived and so on. The prequels did not touch that. 

 

2 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Is that true though? I feel like saying to them celebrating on Endor at the end of Return of the Jedi,

''All a complete waste of time!! You have just wasted your life being in the rebel alliance people. Congratulations. You two (Han and Leia) shag and produce a son who sort of turns to the dark side, and sort of doesn't, and then sort of does (he cannot really make up his mind); he ends up committing patricide Han so you'd better watch him! The Emperor Palpatine actually survived his epic fall and explosion so you shouldn't look so happy there Luke! Luke, you are going to turn into one of the Bee Gees when you grow older and live on a little island milking strange creatures. The Emperor? The Emperor has in fact been a naughty boy and has been spreading his oats with his deformed Sith codger so there will be more Palpatines. There are star destroyers and Tie-fighters still about to be built, and fascist uniforms to be worn by people with English accents, so the empire survived really, except it will be renamed the First Order. There will even be Death Star type constructions which are destroyed in the exact same manner as the Death Stars you lot destroyed, so engineering clearly won't improve''. 

I guess I just find it easier to ignore the shit that came after as it technically doesn't influence the events of the proper films. :shrugs: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DieselDaisy said:

Is that true though? I feel like saying to them celebrating on Endor at the end of Return of the Jedi,

''All a complete waste of time!! You have just wasted your life being in the rebel alliance people. Congratulations. You two (Han and Leia) shag and produce a son who sort of turns to the dark side, and sort of doesn't, and then sort of does (he cannot really make up his mind); he ends up committing patricide Han so you'd better watch him! The Emperor Palpatine actually survived his epic fall and explosion so you shouldn't look so happy there Luke! Luke, you are going to turn into one of the Bee Gees when you grow older and live on a little island milking strange creatures. The Emperor? The Emperor has in fact been a naughty boy and has been spreading his oats with his deformed Sith codger so there will be more Palpatines. There are star destroyers and Tie-fighters still about to be built, and fascist uniforms to be worn by people with English accents, so the empire survived really, except it will be renamed the First Order. There will even be Death Star type constructions which are destroyed in the exact same manner as the Death Stars you lot destroyed, so engineering clearly won't improve''. 

Out of likes, but that's why I kinda came to hate the ST (which got worse from movie to movie) and think it's a colossal waste of time. It did nothing to move things along, just shit on everything, set things back and gave us a rehash, just in bad.

Edited by PatrickS77

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

Your ''incest plot'' concerns one kiss which was done to make Han jealous. It cannot be compared with the sudden changes, flip-flopping between villains, characters doing a dramatic volte-face, etc etc, in the Disney films. Not sure I agree about Carrie Fisher's acting. And yes, the original trilogy is light years - pardon the expression - better.

PS

About children watching them, I am currently introducing my nephew to them: IV-VI. He can stumble on the prequels and Disney shit if he stumbles on them but I'll not be the one to introduce them to him.

You guys are literally making me lol with your thin justifications of a gigantic plot hole lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, RussTCB said:

You guys are literally making me lol with your thin justifications of a gigantic plot hole lol

Name one plot hole in the original trilogy as gigantic as Palpatine mysteriously surviving, or the sudden flip-flop on Rey's parentage?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think A New Hope and especially Empire Strikes Back are far better films, but they weren't exactly masterminded years in advance/following an exact plan. Yes, Lucas did write a multi-chapter "The Star Wars", but that changed a lot over time. When "Star Wars" was released in 1977, Darth Vader was a dude, and Darth was just his first name, not a title. The father reveal was an addition during development of Empire:

https://www.quora.com/Did-George-Lucas-know-that-Darth-Vader-was-Lukes-father-during-the-production-of-Episode-4

https://www.quora.com/When-the-original-1977-Star-Wars-was-made-did-George-Lucas-already-know-that-Darth-Vader-was-going-to-be-the-father-of-Luke-and-Leia

When Yoda says "there is another", he wasn't referring to Leia, but another Jedi who would be revealed. The plot of ROTJ cribbed from what was supposed to be Episode IX. Leia being Luke's sister was an addition after Empire, hence the incestuous kiss:

https://www.quora.com/When-Yoda-says-there-is-another-Skywalker-in-Return-of-the-Jedi-is-he-referring-to-Rey-from-the-Force-Awakens

Quote

Now, in the earliest iterations of the story, this is referring to Luke’s twin sister Nellith. In the very earliest outlines and drafts, like the first draft of ESB by Leigh Brackett, Anakin appears as a Force ghost and is clearly NOT Vader, and the original plan is the sister was hidden far away from Luke and was among other things trained by Anakin’s ghost. She was going to feature in a sequel trilogy that would include Luke defeating the Emperor after searching out his long-lost sister. Vader’s defeat, iirc, would feature in the third OT film as a dramatic arc conclusion, but not the ultimate end of the war.

At some point in the writing of ESB, Kasdan and Lucas decided to omit Anakin’s ghost and instead go for the Big Reveal we all know and love. The plan, though, was still that Luke’s sister would be a new character.

At some point Lucas decided he did not want to put the time and energy, mental and physical, into jumping right into a sequel. Instead he’d wrap things up in the third film. That worked well as far as condensing Vader and Anakin into one character went, and if anything made defeating the Emperor more satisfying, but it also meant they had Yoda’s comment about “another” hanging and only one movie to deal with it. Their choices were finding a way to cram a brand-new character into the film somehow, or they had to pick someone available audiences already knew. By deciding to keep it a sister, that reduced their options down to about one.

That said, all these decisions were guided by one man. With the sequel trilogy, you have Abrams and Johnson with diametrically opposed views of what they want to say and do with a Star Wars film, and it makes no sense to have them share a trilogy. TLJ makes much of TFA redundant, as does TROS with TLJ.

Edited by Amir
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, RussTCB said:

You guys are literally making me lol with your thin justifications of a gigantic plot hole lol

It simply is not a plot hole.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, RussTCB said:

You guys are literally making me lol with your thin justifications of a gigantic plot hole lol

It’s only a plot hole if Luke and Leia knew they were siblings at that point in the movie. They didn’t so it isn’t. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Amir said:

I think A New Hope and especially Empire Strikes Back are far better films, but they weren't exactly masterminded years in advance/following an exact plan. Yes, Lucas did write a multi-chapter "The Star Wars", but that changed a lot over time. When "Star Wars" was released in 1977, Darth Vader was a dude, and Darth was just his first name, not a title. The father reveal was an addition during development of Empire:

https://www.quora.com/Did-George-Lucas-know-that-Darth-Vader-was-Lukes-father-during-the-production-of-Episode-4

https://www.quora.com/When-the-original-1977-Star-Wars-was-made-did-George-Lucas-already-know-that-Darth-Vader-was-going-to-be-the-father-of-Luke-and-Leia

When Yoda says "there is another", he wasn't referring to Leia, but another Jedi who would be revealed. The plot of ROTJ cribbed from what was supposed to be Episode IX. Leia being Luke's sister was an addition after Empire, hence the incestuous kiss:

https://www.quora.com/When-Yoda-says-there-is-another-Skywalker-in-Return-of-the-Jedi-is-he-referring-to-Rey-from-the-Force-Awakens

That said, all these decisions were guided by one man. With the sequel trilogy, you have Abrams and Johnson with diametrically opposed views of what they want to say and do with a Star Wars film, and it makes no sense to have them share a trilogy. TLJ makes much of TFA redundant, as does TROS with TLJ.

As a new film maker, he couldn't be sure of the success of the movie and that he could make 3 movies. And really, why does it matter whether he had a plan or not? He pulled it off and it's barely noticeable, that he made it up as he went along. For the prequel trilogy he had a plan and stuck to it. Disney is a billion dollar company and knew from the get go they were making 3 movies and yet they failed to come up with a story for 3 movies and failed to plan accordingly, letting one hired director paint them in a corner to the point that it unraveld the whole thing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

Name one plot hole in the original trilogy as gigantic as Palpatine mysteriously surviving, or the sudden flip-flop on Rey's parentage?

I already did, along with Carrie's bad acting overall, coupled with her shifting accent. You didn't address the latter and claimed the first one just isn't that big of a deal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, RussTCB said:

I already did, along with Carrie's bad acting overall, coupled with her shifting accent. You didn't address the latter and claimed the first one just isn't that big of a deal. 

It isn't a case of me not addressing or dismissing, but simply not agreeing with you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DieselDaisy said:

It isn't a case of me not addressing or dismissing, but simply not agreeing with you. 

You don't agree that Carrie has an accent in some scenes and not in others? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RussTCB said:

You don't agree that Carrie has an accent in some scenes and not in others? 

What accent(s) are we discussing here? If I was going to signal out anyone for bad acting in the original trilogy, it would be Hamill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DieselDaisy said:

What accent(s) are we discussing here? If I was going to signal out anyone for bad acting in the original trilogy, it would be Hamill.

Carrie is (poorly) attempting a British accent with the "I thought I recognized your fowl stench..." line. Then for the rest of the movie, she doesn't attempt an accent. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, RussTCB said:

I already did, along with Carrie's bad acting overall, coupled with her shifting accent. You didn't address the latter and claimed the first one just isn't that big of a deal. 

I liked her presence in the original films, like I wouldn't want anyone else to portray her character but it's undeniable her acting was really bad and I remember watching a documentary about her where they spliced together a scene where she talked in a British accent and then American one and she joked about how ridiculous it was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@RussTCB and @DieselDaisy the weird British accent scene with Leia and Tarkin in the original Star Wars was an improv idea by Carrie that has since been retconned in the starwars universe as being some sorta formality, where politicians are required to speak in British accents to one another whenever they have a formal meeting. It’s stupid... but it works, I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Rovim said:

I liked her presence in the original films, like I wouldn't want anyone else to portray her character but it's undeniable her acting was really bad and I remember watching a documentary about her where they spliced together a scene where she talked in a British accent and then American one and she joked about how ridiculous it was.

See below. 

3 minutes ago, rocknroll41 said:

@RussTCB and @DieselDaisy the weird British accent scene with Leia and Tarkin in the original Star Wars was an improv idea by Carrie that has since been retconned in the starwars universe as being some sorta formality, where politicians are required to speak in British accents to one another whenever they have a formal meeting. It’s stupid... but it works, I guess.

Right on. Don't get me wrong, I'm just trying to shit on the woman or anything. I'm just saying that the original trilogy is not perfect. 

I grew up on those movies and love them too. I'm just saying they're far from perfect. To act like this new trilogy came in and ruined perfection just isn't accurate IMO. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×