Star Wars (1977 - present)

15152545657248

Comments

  • edited January 2016 Posts: 4,813
    You're not the only one.
    I LOVE Han Solo- but part of his cool factor is his mysterious past!'
    I'd also be more excited for an Ewan McGregor starred Kenobi movie. He was the one good thing about the prequels
  • Seven_Point_Six_FiveSeven_Point_Six_Five Southern California
    edited January 2016 Posts: 1,257
    You're not the only one.
    I LOVE Han Solo- but part of his cool factor is his mysterious past!'
    I'd also be more excited for an Ewan McGregor starred Kenobi movie. He was the one good thing about the prequels

    I agree with that. He was an excellent casting choice. I suppose that may be one of the biggest factors in why I would prefer an Obi Wan film: I believe McGregor as Obi Wan, but whoever is cast as a young Solo will have some very large shoes to fill.
  • Posts: 5,767
    mepal1 wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    mepal1 wrote: »
    Firstly, i havn't yet seen SWTFA (must do soon), but now that the film has been out a while, a different perspective is been given to the film from critics and the public.
    It appears that many people, mainly Star Wars fans, are very dissappointed with the film, anyone who reads the reviews at IMDB will see the rating for the film is very low indeed (that is rating from the public). In fact there are whole pages one after another that state the film, as a movie is good, but as a SW film it is truly poor.
    If you read the latest reviews together with the George Lucas interview, you will see that Disney had no intention of taking risks, and developing the Star Wars saga, as Lucas had done with the prequels. In fact Lucas said he didn't want anything to do with the Star Wars Disney version, as he knew they would not take risks and develop the story as he had done with the prequels, and solely just wanted to cash in on his original film, by just making a modern day copy of it.
    This is what Disney has done, and to great effect, as the hype Disney created to go and see the film has clearly worked, but as now people have had time to reflect on the film, it is apparent that the new film is a very shallow version of the original, i.e things just happen in the film, with no explanation at all, and many things are just a copy.

    The test for Disney now, is that they are going to have to come up with some thing new for the next film.

    When i have actually seen the film, i will come back with my own personal thoughts on the film, but i thought i'd just post what people are now saying about the film.
    I suggest you watch the film first before you start claiming things based on comments from a website that is known for its frequent inaccuracy.

    Re: Disney had no intention of taking risks: Making any new Star Wars movie is an immense risk, especially after the reception the prequels got.

    Re: wanted to cash in on his original film/hype Disney created: Lucas is the grandmaster of cashing in. The pr for TFA was minimal in comparison with the prequels. Correct me if I´m wrong, Lucas had returned the production cost of Ep I before the actual start of the film just by selling merchandise.
    Of course Disney wants to cash in. They bought SW from Lucas for a horrendous sum of money, they have to make some cash.

    Re: now that people have had time to reflect: You just have to scan a few recent pages of this thread to see how critical most members are, yet still most find TFA a great experience even after multiple watchings. Me included by the way.

    Its quite clear to me you didn't understand one word of my post. I started off by saying that i havn't seen the film yet. I was just merely pointing out the facts of the current criticisms made by some people on the film, including Lucas, that the film doesn't bring in anything new story wise to the franchise.
    It will be interesting to see when Disney come to make the follow up film, whether they can find the talent to come up with something completely new.
    Then I´m sorry I so misunderstood your post. But grammatically, I see no way around interpreting some of what you wrote as supposed facts you state, and not quotes from imdb members:
    mepal1 wrote: »
    If you read the latest reviews together with the George Lucas interview, you will see that Disney had no intention of taking risks, and developing the Star Wars saga, as Lucas had done with the prequels. In fact Lucas said he didn't want anything to do with the Star Wars Disney version, as he knew they would not take risks and develop the story as he had done with the prequels, and solely just wanted to cash in on his original film, by just making a modern day copy of it.
    This is what Disney has done, and to great effect, as the hype Disney created to go and see the film has clearly worked, but as now people have had time to reflect on the film, it is apparent that the new film is a very shallow version of the original, i.e things just happen in the film, with no explanation at all, and many things are just a copy.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    edited January 2016 Posts: 23,587
    I'm seeing a lot of lists floating on the Internet where people put TFA in a third place or higher, despite the often cited critique. I suppose that shows how much many of us have been forcing ourselves to truly love the other films in the series when it's usually just Star Wars and Empire we really genuinely like from start to finish. It's like me saying I love the Romero Dead series when in fact I only truly love Night and Dawn.

    Don't get me wrong, I can still have a very good time watching Jedi, Phantom Menace, Clones and Sith, but yeah, TFA had no trouble climbing above all four of these in my final rankings. Even if it brings up familiar elements in more or less the same way as before and with more or less the same stakes, it feels sooooo good, sooooo delicious after the prequel trilogy, which I don't loath but can recognise as lacking the magic that SW, ESB and TFA bring. I don't want those overcomplicated politics, the chewing gum love story and droid Force users anymore. This is back to basics and that's why I love TFA almost to equal measures as I do SW and ESB.

    Putting TFA above Jedi proved challenging at first for I sincerely enjoy that film too. But Jedi is where the cracks are showing. It's basically about tying up a few loose ends from the previous two films and then redoing the Battle of Yavin too. Granted, the throne room scenes are EXCELLENT! But the Ewoks are a fundamental flaw. Ergo, spectacular as the Battle Of Endor - and I'm talking about the great space dog fights, mind - may be, Jedi is the lesser of the two when compared to TFA, at least IMO.
  • edited January 2016 Posts: 5,767
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    I'm seeing a lot of lists floating on the Internet where people put TFA in a third place or higher, despite the often cited critique. I suppose that shows how much many of us have been forcing ourselves to truly love the other films in the series when it's usually just Star Wars and Empire we really genuinely like from start to finish. It's like me saying I love the Romero Dead series when in fact I only truly love Night and Dawn.

    Don't get me wrong, I can still have a very good time watching Jedi, Phantom Menace, Clones and Sith, but yeah, TFA had no trouble climbing above all four of these in my final rankings. Even if it brings up familiar elements in more or less the same way as before and with more or less the same stakes, it feels sooooo good, sooooo delicious after the prequel trilogy, which I don't loath but can recognise as lacking the magic that SW, ESB and TFA bring. I don't want those overcomplicated politics, the chewing gum love story and droid Force users anymore. This is back to basics and that's why I love TFA almost to equal measures as I do SW and ESB.

    Putting TFA above Jedi proved challenging at first for I sincerely enjoy that film too. But Jedi is where the cracks are showing. It's basically about tying up a few loose ends from the previous two films and then redoing the Battle of Yavin too. Granted, the throne room scenes are EXCELLENT! But the Ewoks are a fundamental flaw. Ergo, spectacular as the Battle Of Endor - and I'm talking about the great space dog fights, mind - may be, Jedi is the lesser of the two when compared to TFA, at least IMO.
    I was shocked by myself when I watched ROTJ not long ago. When Luke and Leia raced those bike things I remembered, "oh shit, next thing the f**** Ewoks are coming". But then, when they did appear, I actually found them funny in an amusing way :\"> .
  • edited January 2016 Posts: 1,098
    boldfinger wrote: »
    mepal1 wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    mepal1 wrote: »
    Firstly, i havn't yet seen SWTFA (must do soon), but now that the film has been out a while, a different perspective is been given to the film from critics and the public.
    It appears that many people, mainly Star Wars fans, are very dissappointed with the film, anyone who reads the reviews at IMDB will see the rating for the film is very low indeed (that is rating from the public). In fact there are whole pages one after another that state the film, as a movie is good, but as a SW film it is truly poor.
    If you read the latest reviews together with the George Lucas interview, you will see that Disney had no intention of taking risks, and developing the Star Wars saga, as Lucas had done with the prequels. In fact Lucas said he didn't want anything to do with the Star Wars Disney version, as he knew they would not take risks and develop the story as he had done with the prequels, and solely just wanted to cash in on his original film, by just making a modern day copy of it.
    This is what Disney has done, and to great effect, as the hype Disney created to go and see the film has clearly worked, but as now people have had time to reflect on the film, it is apparent that the new film is a very shallow version of the original, i.e things just happen in the film, with no explanation at all, and many things are just a copy.

    The test for Disney now, is that they are going to have to come up with some thing new for the next film.

    When i have actually seen the film, i will come back with my own personal thoughts on the film, but i thought i'd just post what people are now saying about the film.
    I suggest you watch the film first before you start claiming things based on comments from a website that is known for its frequent inaccuracy.

    Re: Disney had no intention of taking risks: Making any new Star Wars movie is an immense risk, especially after the reception the prequels got.

    Re: wanted to cash in on his original film/hype Disney created: Lucas is the grandmaster of cashing in. The pr for TFA was minimal in comparison with the prequels. Correct me if I´m wrong, Lucas had returned the production cost of Ep I before the actual start of the film just by selling merchandise.
    Of course Disney wants to cash in. They bought SW from Lucas for a horrendous sum of money, they have to make some cash.

    Re: now that people have had time to reflect: You just have to scan a few recent pages of this thread to see how critical most members are, yet still most find TFA a great experience even after multiple watchings. Me included by the way.

    Its quite clear to me you didn't understand one word of my post. I started off by saying that i havn't seen the film yet. I was just merely pointing out the facts of the current criticisms made by some people on the film, including Lucas, that the film doesn't bring in anything new story wise to the franchise.
    It will be interesting to see when Disney come to make the follow up film, whether they can find the talent to come up with something completely new.
    Then I´m sorry I so misunderstood your post. But grammatically, I see no way around interpreting some of what you wrote as supposed facts you state, and not quotes from imdb members:
    mepal1 wrote: »
    If you read the latest reviews together with the George Lucas interview, you will see that Disney had no intention of taking risks, and developing the Star Wars saga, as Lucas had done with the prequels. In fact Lucas said he didn't want anything to do with the Star Wars Disney version, as he knew they would not take risks and develop the story as he had done with the prequels, and solely just wanted to cash in on his original film, by just making a modern day copy of it.
    This is what Disney has done, and to great effect, as the hype Disney created to go and see the film has clearly worked, but as now people have had time to reflect on the film, it is apparent that the new film is a very shallow version of the original, i.e things just happen in the film, with no explanation at all, and many things are just a copy.

    No problem, i'am seeing the film tonight for myself, i'am sure its going to be excellent. :)

    Yes, i did realise, that the rating for the film was high on IMDB, except for the fact that a
    large percentage of the user reviews were totally negative towards the film, which was a surprise, together with GL's comments from his interview that he thought that Disney had been very negative, with their approach in moving the franchise forward.

    I see George Lucas has made an apology to Disney, as he had earlier referred to them as 'White Slave Traders'. Wasn't a very smart thing of GL to of said, after being paid an astronomical $4 billion for his franchise.

  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,333
    George could always go to Assylum and make Space Conflicts.

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Is SW based on the legend of Orion?

    After all, Orion was called the skywalker, he has a sword and a belt.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,333
    Star Wars based on the old Flash Gordon serials of the 30's.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    It is based on lots of things-Flash Gordon, Tolkien, Kurosawa, Dr Doom...Probably the Orion myth as well.
  • Posts: 11,189
    ...Greek mythology, the Nazi's, World War 2 dogfights, Metropolis etc.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    The Wizard Of Oz.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Is that about the grail, the original non-christian concept of it?
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Thanks, I would love to read that book. I am reading something similar on the web currently.
  • Posts: 1,098
    Just seen SWTFA, pretty good film overall, though like some have said there were some major plot holes, particularly the one concerning the 'Rey' Character. But hey, it was more enjoyable than the prequel films. Star of the film for me was 'BB8'. :)
  • Posts: 1,314
    Why is it a plot hole. It's a so far unexplained. It'll be explained in the next one. It's a plot hole why obi wan is on tattoo me in Star Wars by that logic.
  • Posts: 1,098
    Matt007 wrote: »
    Why is it a plot hole. It's a so far unexplained. It'll be explained in the next one. It's a plot hole why obi wan is on tattoo me in Star Wars by that logic.

    ......without giving away spoilers, i'am referring to the use of the force.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    mepal1 wrote: »
    Matt007 wrote: »
    Why is it a plot hole. It's a so far unexplained. It'll be explained in the next one. It's a plot hole why obi wan is on tattoo me in Star Wars by that logic.

    ......without giving away spoilers, i'am referring to the use of the force.
    Nothing was really explained here, but as @Matt007 said, it probably will be in the next installments.
  • Posts: 1,098
    bondjames wrote: »
    mepal1 wrote: »
    Matt007 wrote: »
    Why is it a plot hole. It's a so far unexplained. It'll be explained in the next one. It's a plot hole why obi wan is on tattoo me in Star Wars by that logic.

    ......without giving away spoilers, i'am referring to the use of the force.
    Nothing was really explained here, but as @Matt007 said, it probably will be in the next installments.

    Well they sure have got a lot of things to explain in the next film or two?

    Anyway, it was a very good fun film. Was surprised to find out that BB8 was actually a real robot (remotely controlled of course), and not a CGI creation.
    Very clever how they figured out a way to make BB8 move, and keep his head upright!

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    I read that Bumbercatch and Tom Cruise also had cameos as stormtroopers in TFA. Nothing is confirmed, though.
  • Posts: 1,098
    I read that Bumbercatch and Tom Cruise also had cameos as stormtroopers in TFA. Nothing is confirmed, though.

    Tom Cruise is too short to be a stormtrooper. ;)
  • Posts: 5,767
    mepal1 wrote: »
    I read that Bumbercatch and Tom Cruise also had cameos as stormtroopers in TFA. Nothing is confirmed, though.

    Tom Cruise is too short to be a stormtrooper. ;)
    If they really had a cameo, it must be the two troopers coming round the corner, hearing Kylo Ren have a fit, and turn around and leave again.
    Or one of them was the stormtrooper with the electrified tonfa? Although my guess there would be that it was one of the Indonesian guys, Iko Uwais or Yayan Ryuhan.
    Other than that, I can´t recall any noteworthy stormtrooper.

  • edited January 2016 Posts: 1,098
    The only cameo that can be clearly identified as a stormtrooper in the film is D.Craig as he has a speaking part, in the scene where he sets 'Rey' free, unintentionally.
  • Posts: 1,314
    Ha I just saw my predictive text changed tatooine to tattoo me.

    I dunno about plot holes. I get the feeling people want everything handed to them on a plate up front rather than leaving things open ended these days. There are some big ones in spectre and skyfsll but I consider them logic issues rather than unexplained things.

    We know Star Wars is a 3 film story arc. I would bet big that rey had prior training as a child.

    My main issue was star killer base. The depth of the trench is like thousands of miles deep. That's a lot of land to shift and would probably alter all sorts of physics of the planet. Not to mention how it took the energy from the sun.

    But if take this any day over trade routes, blue screen and the new song and dance number in jabbas palace.
  • Posts: 5,767
    Matt007 wrote: »
    My main issue was star killer base. The depth of the trench is like thousands of miles deep. That's a lot of land to shift and would probably alter all sorts of physics of the planet. Not to mention how it took the energy from the sun.
    On my second viewing I too couldn´t avoid thinking, with the bucks it must have cost to build that thing they could have easily bought the Resistance!
    But then again, we´re talking about technology we don´t understand. After all, the physical challenges of the Star Killer Base aren´t really that much bigger than the question where Darth Vader got all that metal for his Death Star ;-). I´m sure the article is hidden somewhere on these pages that calculated not only how many planets they had to empty of ore to get that much metal, but also how much time it would take to produce metal from ore in such quantities.
    And then imagine a production flaw in one of the production plants, and the Death Star falls apart because that. Good thing it didn´t come to that!

  • Posts: 1,098
    Why does C3PO have a red arm?
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Some of you may never have seen the real Jabba. Here he is.

  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,333
    mepal1 wrote: »
    Why does C3PO have a red arm?
    To set up a funny joke. :P
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,692
    mepal1 wrote: »
    Why does C3PO have a red arm?
    He heard Chewie was coming, so he attached a spare just in case he won at chess again.
  • Posts: 1,098
    chrisisall wrote: »
    mepal1 wrote: »
    Why does C3PO have a red arm?
    He heard Chewie was coming, so he attached a spare just in case he won at chess again.

    If you people were any funnier.........i might actually Laugh! :D
Sign In or Register to comment.