Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker **Spoilers from post 2076**

eviltimeban

Anyone who thinks the new movies are worse than the prequels... well I don't know what to say to that.

homerun_homer

Total flop and a financial loss for Disney

eviltimeban wrote: »

Anyone who thinks the new movies are worse than the prequels... well I don't know what to say to that.

For all that is wrong with the prequels, at least they had a through line, however badly it was handled. The sequel trilogy hasn't one and ends up just repeating the end of the original trilogy.

Homelander

eviltimeban wrote: »

Anyone who thinks the new movies are worse than the prequels... well I don't know what to say to that.

It's not a hard point of view to see.

The prequels have terrible acting and awful dialogue but they have a single consistent vision that spans three movies and offer wonderful imagination and world building.

The new trilogy has much better acting and in isolation they're decent movies/entertainment, but as a coherent, well structured trilogy it's pretty awful.

So yeah, I'm not saying they are worse, but they're certainly not any better to my mind anyway.

Relikk

They both have their flaws to balance them out. The prequels have a great story but are badly written, directed and for the most part, badly acted. For obvious reasons the sequels lack a cohesive story but in terms of the other aspects where the prequels were lacking, the sequels are light years ahead.

eviltimeban

So the prequels are bad movies, that tell a good story?

And the sequels are good movies, that tell a bad story?

Homelander

It's hardly that black and white but if you really want to be black/white about it, I think that's an accurate statement.

The prequels are a great story told badly, the sequels are a potentially great story completely muddled and thus told even worse in some respects, with much better production values.

LazySamaritan

peteeeed wrote: »

I've not clicked buy now yet.......yet
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Star-Wars-Skywalker-Limited-Complete/dp/B082WXCSKN/ref=sr_1_1_sspa?

Is that a book included with the set or is it the disc holder?

LazySamaritan

eviltimeban wrote: »

Anyone who thinks the new movies are worse than the prequels... well I don't know what to say to that.

Why do you think anything might need to be said?

Myself l, I don’t think they are worse because that means the Prequels are bad. They are not.

The Sequels are for the most part bad.

LazySamaritan

Homelander wrote: »

It's hardly that black and white but if you really want to be black/white about it, I think that's an accurate statement.

The prequels are a great story told badly, the sequels are a potentially great story completely muddled and thus told even worse in some respects, with much better production values.

Do you mean you think there was “potential for great story” in the Sequel story that they made of that the potential was in the hundreds of other different stories that they could have told?

Homelander

I think there was potential for the trilogy is it was. TFA was very safe but TLJ (ignoring some of the bad creative choices) looked to take it somewhere fresh and new, until TROS basically went "Remember Return of the Jedi! Let's play that classic hit again!"

At the end of the new trilogy we are exactly where we were at the end of ROTJ, and even worse, it undoes a lot of the depth to not just ROTJ but the entire span of 1-6.

Personally yes I would have preferred if they went somewhere different altogther, but the Kylo/Rey story arc was very decent and incredibly intriguing after TLJ (again, that's not an endorsement of everything TLJ did).... until JJ took a steaming dump on that film and decided he wanted to retcon everything.

I mean, talking about not being able to take people who think the prequels are better seriously....for me Rise of Skywalker is on-par with Attack of the Clones. Entertainment, but a bad movie.

eviltimeban

Really, what they should've done was made the sequels in the 90s when Ford / Hamill / Fisher were still comparatively young and active. That way they could've featured them as the stars, and told the continuation of their story.

It could've been based around Luke setting up a Jedi training academy / training Leia, and perhaps her falling to the dark side or something. Or Han Solo getting into some kind of trouble again. Who knows.

Then, once that story had been told, they could've made a new trilogy with perhaps similar characters as Rey / Poe etc, but without any Solo / Luke / Leia. Then they could've told any story they like.

All in all though, I like the new movies and I like the new characters. I'm looking forward to someday sitting down and watching them all again in order.

LazySamaritan

Homelander wrote: »

I think there was potential for the trilogy is it was. TFA was very safe but TLJ (ignoring some of the bad creative choices) looked to take it somewhere fresh and new, until TROS basically went "Remember Return of the Jedi! Let's play that classic hit again!"

At the end of the new trilogy we are exactly where we were at the end of ROTJ, and even worse, it undoes a lot of the depth to not just ROTJ but the entire span of 1-6.

Personally yes I would have preferred if they went somewhere different altogther, but the Kylo/Rey story arc was very decent and incredibly intriguing after TLJ (again, that's not an endorsement of everything TLJ did).... until JJ took a steaming dump on that film and decided he wanted to retcon everything.

I mean, talking about not being able to take people who think the prequels are better seriously....for me Rise of Skywalker is on-par with Attack of the Clones. Entertainment, but a bad movie.

I disagree that there was any potential in the Sequel story as it was. Abrams resurrecting Darth Vader, the Empire, the Death Star and the Rebellion killed it right in its development.

The only way it could have been saved was if Johnson had wiped all that stuff off the board with TLJ. Opening crawl declares the First Order is in tatters after losing Starkiller Base and Leia has rallied survivors of the Republic military and old allies and the film opens with the heroes in battle and ending the first order. And unknown to all a new evil is making its move.

While I would have preferred Luke to be in a happier place and to have survived the Sequels I do like what Johnson did write for him and Hamill is superb.

The island and throne room scenes are great.

And I love that Johnson did unexpected thing even by dropping the recurring lines, Wilhem scream, etc.

The space chase/code breaker subplot was good but but he dragged it out too long and they could have had a lot more action or adventure along the way. It wasn’t helped by the fact that Poe and Finn are go nowhere characters.

At least it was different though.

The other films were literally the same things over and over again.

I love the Prequels. Always have. I don’t agree with the “flaws” that people list but do agree there is some, that I wish such a thing had been shown, etc. However the positives (the imagination, the unexpected, the spectacle, the story, the VFX, etc) all over shadow any negatives.

It is not so for the Sequel Trilogy. The negatives far outweigh the positives.

I understand what you mean that depths of RotJ and the OT have been undone and while in the big picture I agree however I’m not as troubled by it as I once would have been because I can look at the first six as the whole story. The beginning and the end.

The Sequels are just Expanded Universe adaptions and don’t impact on the mythology for me any more than those old books did or the original Marvel comics. A Star Wars What If..? Or Elseworlds.

LazySamaritan

eviltimeban wrote: »

Really, what they should've done was made the sequels in the 90s when Ford / Hamill / Fisher were still comparatively young and active. That way they could've featured them as the stars, and told the continuation of their story.

It could've been based around Luke setting up a Jedi training academy / training Leia, and perhaps her falling to the dark side or something. Or Han Solo getting into some kind of trouble again. Who knows.

Then, once that story had been told, they could've made a new trilogy with perhaps similar characters as Rey / Poe etc, but without any Solo / Luke / Leia. Then they could've told any story they like.

All in all though, I like the new movies and I like the new characters. I'm looking forward to someday sitting down and watching them all again in order.

The Big Three’s age has nothing to do with anything.

They could have been the centre of this trilogy too and continued the story.

Nothing was stopping that except Abrams lack of imagination.

El Duda

Runaway hit highest gross beating The force Awakens

Can't believe someone thinks the VFX in the prequels are a positive. They look hideously dated and tacky now.

LazySamaritan

El Duda wrote: »

Can't believe someone thinks the VFX in the prequels are a positive. They look hideously dated and tacky now.

That is a ridiculous statement.

The Prequels VFX team were constantly bringing new ground. And Lucas was pushing them to do so.

And of course it is dated now just like ALL visual effects. Harryhausen, the OT, all of them get old.

You are missing the point.

El Duda

Runaway hit highest gross beating The force Awakens

They've always looked awful. They just look even more awful now.



I watched Alien in 4K recently and it holds up perfectly. Completely timeless. That was made in the late seventies.

peteeeed

LazySamaritan wrote: »

Is that a book included with the set or is it the disc holder?

Don't think it's a book

Should have included rogue one and solo too

LazySamaritan

peteeeed wrote: »

Don't think it's a book

Should have included rogue one and solo too

Well it is supposed to be a Skywalker Saga box and they are separate. By rights it shouldn’t only be 1 to 6 since the Skywalkers are nothing much to do with the last three.

No doubt there will be more box sets in the future and some will contain all the films.

johnny_ultimate

I’d struggle to think of any high-profile film directed quite as inertly as the prequel films. There’s zero dynamism to the staging or filming of most scenes, and it all feels so flat and lifeless as a result. That George Lucas has a staggering inability to write convincing dialogue and direct actors is of course the fatal blow, but they’re poorly directed in a host of unique, even fascinating ways.

cdgalwegian

Here's a through-line that I would've liked to have seen: The Skywalker saga finished in Episode VII, with the demise of both Luke and Leia, setting up a proper torch-passing arc. It could have been epic! It would also have had the benefit of being its own thing, and not A New Hope redux. The new protagonists, in the background (maybe/maybe not as padawans), could have been developing alongside the last jedi(s), until he (they) snuffed it, and allowing time for a new Big Baddie to emerge, or develop further. (The Kylo Ren character was interesting, and begs the question in relation to nostalgia vs novelty (as well as the essence of the force); was it essential to be seeing the 'turning to the dark side' trope of the first two trilogies in this last trilogy?)
Overall, this would have made it much like a real-life relay race, rather than the slow-motion one we got that kept changing direction in this trilogy, leaving a befuddled mess. At least Johnson had the kahunas- backed by everyone at DisWars- to belatedly get rid of one Skywalker (boo! hiss!).
It was the nostalgistas on social media that lead to the Great Undoing, as it has never been called, that lead to RoS. Johnson also tried to expand force sensitivity to more than just a small genealogical elite; after all, the best heroes are those to which us mere plebs can aspire to, rather than those that are completely separate from us.
Now, I have no idea how the SWEU in the books took life after ROTJ, but surely what is canon is what is finally on screen? But what finished up in RoS is the last chapter in the ennealogy, and the blame for this narrative mess mostly has to start at the start; with TFA. RoS was a blast to watch at the time as an action film, but the underlying narrative damage had been done: I wish the trilogy had kicked off on Skellig Island, where DisWars (preferably without Abrams) could have listened to that wise Irish (?) remark: "I wouldn't start from here if I were you".

Dades

Runaway hit highest gross beating The force Awakens

eviltimeban wrote: »

So the prequels are bad movies, that tell a good story?

And the sequels are good movies, that tell a bad story?

I'm somewhat in agreement with this, though I'd hesitate to say any of them are bad movies.
Could have been waaay better, some of them, but that doesn't mean bad.

The story of the prequels was fantastic. It just got bloated with so much political sh*te and completely overused special effects. And then there was the love story... and the dialogue.

Compare this with the frankly all-over-the shop story of the sequels. What a pity because they looked amazing, and the acting and dialogue were so much better.

All fun, but all tinged with disappointment as to what could have been.

Wedwood

The prequels problem was it needed to be a trilogy to meet up with episode 4. Revenge of the Sith told the whole story, Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones were basically just filler to get to Episode 3.

Similarly, the sequel story could have been told in two movies. Last Jedi has itself become its own Canto Bight - an unnecessary diversion that did little or nothing to move the story along.

Ironically, people are now looking for the rumored 3+ hour Director Cut for Rise of Skywalker, ignore Last Jedi and replace it with effectively an Abrams trilogy made up of Force Awakens and Rise, parts 1/2.

LazySamaritan

El Duda wrote: »

They've always looked awful. They just look even more awful now.



I watched Alien in 4K recently and it holds up perfectly. Completely timeless. That was made in the late seventies.

I was in the middle responding earlier but my battery ran out and what I was typing didn’t save and I have not the energy to type it all again.

I’m not clicking in that video (which I assume is some YouTube abnormal with too much time on his hands) because I t was you who criticised the VFX and I’d much rather you posted own opinion and examples and not someone else’s.

I haven’t seen Alien is a long long time so I’m not going to comment on that but if the VFX, etc. have aged better than Star Wars then great but Scott went out of his way to hide the “flaws” - Lucas was creating something different.

LazySamaritan

Dades wrote: »

I'm somewhat in agreement with this, though I'd hesitate to say any of them are bad movies.
Could have been waaay better, some of them, but that doesn't mean bad.

The story of the prequels was fantastic. It just got bloated with so much political sh*te and completely overused special effects. And then there was the love story... and the dialogue.

Compare this with the frankly all-over-the shop story of the sequels. What a pity because they looked amazing, and the acting and dialogue were so much better.

All fun, but all tinged with disappointment as to what could have been.

Can you tell what about the politics bloated the story?

I’ve heard this many times ( and a lot of people even call it “complicated”) but no one is ever able to answer. Based on your post you seem a reasonable sort so you could be the one to answer the question.

The political shenanigans only add up to a few minutes.

AMKC

Runaway hit highest gross beating The force Awakens

I went and seen the film again today for a second time and enjoyed it more. Sure maybe there is the odd bit that could have been done different or does not make sense but overall I actually think JJ Abrams done a good job ending it all. I did not rate the film last time but I think its a 9 out of 10 film.
The one thing that really bugged me was that the tie fightes now all have hyperdrives otherwise it could have been 10 out of 10.
I look forward to buying it on Blu-Ray when it comes out.

LazySamaritan

AMKC wrote: »

I went and seen the film again today for a second time and enjoyed it more. Sure maybe there is the odd bit that could have been done different or does not make sense but overall I actually think JJ Abrams done a good job ending it all. I did not rate the film last time but I think its a 9 out of 10 film.
The one thing that really bugged me was that the tie fightes now all have hyperdrives otherwise it could have been 10 out of 10.
I look forward to buying it on Blu-Ray when it comes out.

Do you mean the lightspeed skipping?

I don’t like that they’ve abandoned the rules of lightspeed that Lucas creates. It is the third time in two movies.

I think it is more interesting to work within the rules rather than throw them out.

It didn’t occur to me that TIEs shouldn’t have lightspeed (but maybe the First Order ones can) but I had been meaning to look up how they were able to follow the Falcon if it was jumping randomly? Or were being dragged into by the Falcon?

I know the movies and shows have never canonised the details but I always liked the rules of it in theEU.

1800_Ladladlad

Total flop and a financial loss for Disney

I put off going to see this on purpose and I went to see it today. I gave up 15 minutes into the film and I lost any of the enthusiasm or excitement I had left in me.

There were alot of unanswered questions and there were alot of scenes with no explanation that didn't make sense. Out of reflex, I reacted to the scenes and the storyline that didn't make sense, but then I asked myself,"what did you expect". I could list and go through them but tbh I can't be arsed. I'm sure its been hashed out on the thread since its release date. The identity politics were in the film, they just went by quickly and are not as in your face and forced as Johnsons.

This was a better film than TLJ but I hated that film so I suppose there wasn't really much JJ could do.

Sad

AMKC

Runaway hit highest gross beating The force Awakens

LazySamaritan wrote: »

Do you mean the lightspeed skipping?

I don’t like that they’ve abandoned the rules of lightspeed that Lucas creates. It is the third time in two movies.

I think it is more interesting to work within the rules rather than throw them out.

It didn’t occur to me that TIEs shouldn’t have lightspeed (but maybe the First Order ones can) but I had been meaning to look up how they were able to follow the Falcon if it was jumping randomly? Or were being dragged into by the Falcon?

I know the movies and shows have never canonised the details but I always liked the rules of it in theEU.

Yes thats wjat I mean. I thought that too. Maybe they were just following the Falcon into Hyperdrive but it would still be crazy if they were not designed for it or equipped with a hyperdrive.
I agree with you about the rules.

Tony EH

LazySamaritan wrote: »

Can you tell what about the politics bloated the story?

I’ve heard this many times ( and a lot of people even call it “complicated”) but no one is ever able to answer. Based on your post you seem a reasonable sort so you could be the one to answer the question.

The political shenanigans only add up to a few minutes.

As someone who absolutely loathes the prequels, I can never understand how they are associated with "too much politics". The politics in the prequels amounts to a trade blockade, orchestrated by "Darth Sidius", so his alter ego, Senator Palpatine can leverage more power out of the senate. It's minimal, to say the least.

The rest of the content in the prequels is limited to OTT and unconvincing swordplay between uninteresting characters and a thoroughly uncomfortable and fake "romance" between two people with zero chemistry, with a backdrop of a war that largely takes place off camera.

Unfortunately, this "too much politics" complaint was taken to heart by Disney, who then jettisoned the entire political situation into oblivion for their sequels, which I also loathe, so that everything that happens in them seems to just happen for no reason at all! We get no idea why any organisation even exists. Why is there a "resistance", what's the point of them? What has the New Republic been doing for the last 20 odd years. How, exactly, has the First Order been allowed to grow like they did? How can they "Reign" in 'The Last Jedi' by simply blowing up five planets and a few ships? How can Lando all of a sudden get together a gigantic armada of ships in a couple of hours to battle Palpatine's magic uber fleet, when even Leia couldn't get a single freighter to help her?

And those questions are just for starters.

As bad as I think the prequels films are, at least the explained what the hell was going on. They're filmed awfully, acted awfully and produced awfully, with some terrible characters and cringeworthy attempts at connections to the original films. But, at the very least, they has a semi logical story that made some sense, even if how it's developed on screen makes Darth Vader look like a complete idiot, who just cannot see who the obvious bad guy in the room was, and whose fall to the dark side happens in the most unconvincing way possible.

The sequels, on the other hand, explain absolutely nothing and end looking...just dumb, even in comparison to the prequels, and they are completely absent of any real story, or even remote logic.

Spon Farmer

Tony EH wrote: »

As someone who absolutely loathes the prequels, I can never understand how they are associated with "too much politics". The politics in the prequels amounts to a trade blockade, orchestrated by "Darth Sidius", so his alter ego, Senator Palpatine can leverage more power out of the senate. It's minimal, to say the least.

The rest of the content in the prequels is limited to OTT and unconvincing swordplay between uninteresting characters and a thoroughly uncomfortable and fake "romance" between two people with zero chemistry, with a backdrop of a war that largely takes place off camera.

Unfortunately, this "too much politics" complaint was taken to heart by Disney, who then jettisoned the entire political situation into oblivion for their sequels, which I also loathe, so that everything that happens in them seems to just happen for no reason at all! We get no idea why any organisation even exists. Why is there a "resistance", what's the point of them? What has the New Republic been doing for the last 20 odd years. How, exactly, has the First Order been allowed to grow like they did? How can they "Reign" in 'The Last Jedi' by simply blowing up five planets and a few ships? How can Lando all of a sudden get together a gigantic armada of ships in a couple of hours to battle Palpatine's magic uber fleet, when even Leia couldn't get a single freighter to help her?

And those questions are just for starters.

As bad as I think the prequels films are, at least the explained what the hell was going on. They're filmed awfully, acted awfully and produced awfully, with some terrible characters and cringeworthy attempts at connections to the original films. But, at the very least, they has a semi logical story that made some sense, even if how it's developed on screen makes Darth Vader look like a complete idiot, who just cannot see who the obvious bad guy in the room was, and whose fall to the dark side happens in the most unconvincing way possible.

The sequels, on the other hand, explain absolutely nothing and end looking...just dumb, even in comparison to the prequels, and they are completely absent of any real story, or even remote logic.

While disagree with you about the quality of the Prequels I am delighted to finally find someone besides myself who see’s the politics as it actually was. Even better that you are not a fan of the films.

I suppose Disney might have asked there be no politics but my inclination would be to blame Abrams himself.

I suspect he is the type who reacts to what seems to be the “popular opinion”. I’m all for the diversity (tired of looking at white guys), the charity, etc. but goes on a bit too much. And I don’t know about the charity money but his diversity goes nowhere.

The lack of any background, not just the politics was another wasted opportunity

That business with the fleet confounded me - sure Lando would be quite capable of inspiring people to action but it is ridiculous that he could succeed where Leia failed.

And why would allies rally to battle when they are told that the tyrant they thought was dead was so powerful that he came back with a fleet of few hundred or a few thousand planet killing ships but few Star Destroyers lead by a Darth Vader tribute act casuals then to lose hope?