|
Post by Nalkarj on Dec 15, 2018 6:18:33 GMT
Sorry I haven’t been commenting, I’m trying to figure out how to capture a screenshot on this thing, there’s something funny that popped up on v2.0 that I wanted to show you all…
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Dec 15, 2018 6:20:06 GMT
She’s a smoke show. Maybe the second hottest girl ever in a Star Wars movie, behind Portman in II. ETA: Innit? Innit all the way. We’re singing the same tune on this one, Colden. I wonder if we will about Han. I don't have strong feelings, but I wanna discuss his character development in this flick with you guys. I can't decide if it, as well, fucks with his perfect arc in the OT or not. I go back and forth. My main issue: so we see Han as this selfish guy who only looks out for himself in IV, and over the three films we watch him become selfless and part of a larger cause, etc. etc. Does it "define down" Han's more dramatic shifts (trench save, carbonite freeze) if he was ALWAYS this really good guy who was basically forced entirely against his will, kicking and screaming, into "the life"? I kinda thought Han was always a shifty scumbag up UNTIL meeting the gang in the cantina. And even if he's not: is that a better story? Er. Am I articulating this well enough? It's like: Disney took the simple arc of "selfish > selfless" and added selfless at the beginning and selfish at the end. It's... weird? So he was a good dude, then a bastard badass smuggler but selfish prick, then a hero and a dad, then a... selfish prick?
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Dec 15, 2018 6:24:07 GMT
Sorry I haven’t been commenting, I’m trying to figure out how to capture a screenshot on this thing, there’s something funny that popped up on v2.0 that I wanted to show you all… OK, look at this. Am I seeing things, or is that a -1 bubble that popped up?
|
|
|
Post by No Morpho, Only Bánh mì on Dec 15, 2018 6:25:56 GMT
Sorry I haven’t been commenting, I’m trying to figure out how to capture a screenshot on this thing, there’s something funny that popped up on v2.0 that I wanted to show you all… OK, look at this. Am I seeing things, or is that a -1 bubble that popped up? That’s awesome. What, is this Reddit now?
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Dec 15, 2018 6:26:05 GMT
Sorry I haven’t been commenting, I’m trying to figure out how to capture a screenshot on this thing, there’s something funny that popped up on v2.0 that I wanted to show you all… OK, look at this. Am I seeing things, or is that a -1 bubble that popped up? That means someone disliked one of your posts. Happens to me all the time! I usually log in to see something like -27. I wonder why...
|
|
|
Post by No Morpho, Only Bánh mì on Dec 15, 2018 6:27:27 GMT
Innit all the way. We’re singing the same tune on this one, Colden. I wonder if we will about Han. I don't have strong feelings, but I wanna discuss his character development in this flick with you guys. I can't decide if it, as well, fucks with his perfect arc in the OT or not. I go back and forth. My main issue: so we see Han as this selfish guy who only looks out for himself in IV, and over the three films we watch him become selfless and part of a larger cause, etc. etc. Does it "define down" Han's more dramatic shifts (trench save, carbonite freeze) if he was ALWAYS this really good guy who was basically forced entirely against his will, kicking and screaming, into "the life"? I kinda thought Han was always a shifty scumbag up UNTIL meeting the gang in the cantina. And even if he's not: is that a better story? Er. Am I articulating this well enough? It's like: Disney took the simple arc of "selfish > selfless" and added selfless at the beginning and selfish at the end. It's... weird? So he was a good dude, then a bastard badass smuggler but selfish prick, then a hero and a dad, then a... selfish prick? May not like it, but I don’t think it ruins him. He can veer toward good, and fall back into bad habits and a destructive way of life. That’s classic gunslinger fare. He’s influenced by his surroundings, his needs, and his dick.
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Dec 15, 2018 6:30:13 GMT
Innit all the way. We’re singing the same tune on this one, Colden. I wonder if we will about Han. I don’t have strong feelings, but I wanna discuss his character development in this flick with you guys. I can’t decide if it, as well, fucks with his perfect arc in the OT or not. I go back and forth. My main issue: so we see Han as this selfish guy who only looks out for himself in IV, and over the three films we watch him become selfless and part of a larger cause, etc. etc. Does it "define down" Han’s more dramatic shifts (trench save, carbonite freeze) if he was ALWAYS this really good guy who was basically forced entirely against his will, kicking and screaming, into "the life"? I kinda thought Han was always a shifty scumbag up UNTIL meeting the gang in the cantina. And even if he’s not: is that a better story? Er. Am I articulating this well enough? It’s like: Disney took the simple arc of "selfish > selfless” and added selfless at the beginning and selfish at the end. It’s… weird? So he was a good dude, then a bastard badass smuggler but selfish prick, then a hero and a dad, then a… selfish prick? I think we agree. Character-wise, I don’t think the movie works as an origin story to the guy we meet in the cantina in Star Wars. He is, as you say, basically a good guy here, and his heroism feels random and, well, too heroic. There’s hardly a negative trait about the guy in the whole movie. Oddly enough, Lucas did the same thing with the Young Indy flashbacks and The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles–which I do, however, like. To be honest, like with Rogue One, when I made my mind up that it wouldn’t really feel like Star Wars, I liked the movie more, and I can’t really see this Han turning into Ford’s Han. It’s almost alternate-universe stuff–like, um, well, uh, Star Trek ’09 again.
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Dec 15, 2018 6:30:23 GMT
I wonder if we will about Han. I don't have strong feelings, but I wanna discuss his character development in this flick with you guys. I can't decide if it, as well, fucks with his perfect arc in the OT or not. I go back and forth. My main issue: so we see Han as this selfish guy who only looks out for himself in IV, and over the three films we watch him become selfless and part of a larger cause, etc. etc. Does it "define down" Han's more dramatic shifts (trench save, carbonite freeze) if he was ALWAYS this really good guy who was basically forced entirely against his will, kicking and screaming, into "the life"? I kinda thought Han was always a shifty scumbag up UNTIL meeting the gang in the cantina. And even if he's not: is that a better story? Er. Am I articulating this well enough? It's like: Disney took the simple arc of "selfish > selfless" and added selfless at the beginning and selfish at the end. It's... weird? So he was a good dude, then a bastard badass smuggler but selfish prick, then a hero and a dad, then a... selfish prick? May not like it, but I don’t think it ruins him. He can veer toward good, and fall back into bad habits and a destructive way of life. That’s classic gunslinger fare. He’s influenced by his surroundings, his needs, and his dick. Interesting. So beyond having to like rationalize it, you feel it coheres with a preexisting archetype? That's a stronger defense than I expected, candidly. I wasn't prepared for that!
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Dec 15, 2018 6:31:32 GMT
OK, look at this. Am I seeing things, or is that a -1 bubble that popped up? That means someone disliked one of your posts. Happens to me all the time! I usually log in to see something like -27. I wonder why… Except we don’t have a dislike option here! Right?
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Dec 15, 2018 6:32:39 GMT
I wonder if we will about Han. I don’t have strong feelings, but I wanna discuss his character development in this flick with you guys. I can’t decide if it, as well, fucks with his perfect arc in the OT or not. I go back and forth. My main issue: so we see Han as this selfish guy who only looks out for himself in IV, and over the three films we watch him become selfless and part of a larger cause, etc. etc. Does it "define down" Han’s more dramatic shifts (trench save, carbonite freeze) if he was ALWAYS this really good guy who was basically forced entirely against his will, kicking and screaming, into "the life"? I kinda thought Han was always a shifty scumbag up UNTIL meeting the gang in the cantina. And even if he’s not: is that a better story? Er. Am I articulating this well enough? It’s like: Disney took the simple arc of "selfish > selfless” and added selfless at the beginning and selfish at the end. It’s… weird? So he was a good dude, then a bastard badass smuggler but selfish prick, then a hero and a dad, then a… selfish prick? I think we agree. Character-wise, I don’t think the movie works as an origin story to the guy we meet in the cantina in Star Wars. He is, as you say, basically a good guy here, and his heroism feels random and, well, too heroic. There’s hardly a negative trait about the guy in the whole movie. Oddly enough, Lucas did the same thing with the Young Indy flashbacks and The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles–which I do, however, like. To be honest, like with Rogue One, when I made my mind up that it wouldn’t really feel like Star Wars, I liked the movie more, and I can’t really see this Han turning into Ford’s Han. It’s almost alternate-universe stuff–like, um, well, uh, Star Trek ’09 again. The difference is that they wrote the distinction into the ST reboot, which to me was fucking fantastic. I think that's better than every original Star Trek movie except Wrath of Khan. Believe it or not, I was thrilled to hear that JJ was directing TFA.
|
|
|
Post by No Morpho, Only Bánh mì on Dec 15, 2018 6:33:22 GMT
That means someone disliked one of your posts. Happens to me all the time! I usually log in to see something like -27. I wonder why… Except we don’t have a dislike option here! Right? Just the unlike. I think if you hit like 3 times, it double notifies the single outcome like. Don’t know about any minus, But I’ve been notified of a like, To find it absent.
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Dec 15, 2018 6:34:41 GMT
That means someone disliked one of your posts. Happens to me all the time! I usually log in to see something like -27. I wonder why… Except we don’t have a dislike option here! Right? Oh, yeah. Whoops. Maybe it's new?
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Dec 15, 2018 6:37:45 GMT
I wonder if we will about Han. I don’t have strong feelings, but I wanna discuss his character development in this flick with you guys. I can’t decide if it, as well, fucks with his perfect arc in the OT or not. I go back and forth. My main issue: so we see Han as this selfish guy who only looks out for himself in IV, and over the three films we watch him become selfless and part of a larger cause, etc. etc. Does it "define down" Han’s more dramatic shifts (trench save, carbonite freeze) if he was ALWAYS this really good guy who was basically forced entirely against his will, kicking and screaming, into "the life"? I kinda thought Han was always a shifty scumbag up UNTIL meeting the gang in the cantina. And even if he’s not: is that a better story? Er. Am I articulating this well enough? It’s like: Disney took the simple arc of "selfish > selfless” and added selfless at the beginning and selfish at the end. It’s… weird? So he was a good dude, then a bastard badass smuggler but selfish prick, then a hero and a dad, then a… selfish prick? I think we agree. Character-wise, I don’t think the movie works as an origin story to the guy we meet in the cantina in Star Wars. He is, as you say, basically a good guy here, and his heroism feels random and, well, too heroic. To this point, also: the part that really drove this home for me was the end, where you can credibly argue that Han's MUCH more heroic than in the climactic scene of Star Wars, where he just rides in like a maniac and whatever. Here he doubles back, makes a whole plan -- it's ridiculous, honestly. ETA: I also feel you can tell the ("origin") story of the player guy getting burned by his first love, but there's a way to do it without making him look like a schmuck. See: Casino Royale.
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Dec 15, 2018 6:39:31 GMT
So what’s the verdict on this one? You’re all caught up now! It’s… Wow. It’s been a whirlwind of a year, folks. Whenever everyone’s here I’ve got to be like Dorothy at the end of The Wizard of Oz and thank you all for my long Star Wars journey. But a preliminary thanks to you both. I liked it this one. I had more fun with it than Rogue One, though that’s a better movie, objectively-speaking. This one has so many different tones and moods and goes in so many different directions that I’m not sure the filmmakers knew where they wanted to go with it. And it feels unnecessary, underwhelming, indifferently directed, and somewhat cliché. But for all that there were a lot of scenes where I smiled along with the characters. That’s probably the best way to describe it–just fun. Not always great, and it’s not going to stick in my mind, but it is lighthearted and entertaining. Admittedly, in this series alone Star Wars is lighthearted, entertaining, fun– and a good movie, but that’s neither here nor there. But this one’s a fun Star Trek flick.
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Dec 15, 2018 6:41:06 GMT
Except we don’t have a dislike option here! Right? Just the unlike. I think if you hit like 3 times, it double notifies the single outcome like. Don’t know about any minus, But I’ve been notified of a like, To find it absent. That’s happened to me too, but I’ve never gotten the negative before. Unless it’s some sort of fluke?
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Dec 15, 2018 6:42:17 GMT
So what’s the verdict on this one? You’re all caught up now! It’s… Wow. It’s been a whirlwind of a year, folks. Whenever everyone’s here I’ve got to be like Dorothy at the end of The Wizard of Oz and thank you all for my long Star Wars journey. But a preliminary thanks to you both. I liked it this one. I had more fun with it than Rogue One, though that’s a better movie, objectively-speaking. This one has so many different tones and moods and goes in so many different directions that I’m not sure the filmmakers knew where they wanted to go with it. And it feels unnecessary, underwhelming, indifferently directed, and somewhat cliché. But for all that there were a lot of scenes where I smiled along with the characters. That’s probably the best way to describe it–just fun. Not always great, and it’s not going to stick in my mind, but it is lighthearted and entertaining. Admittedly, in this series alone Star Wars is lighthearted, entertaining, fun–and a good movie, but that’s neither here nor there. But this one’s a fun Star Trek flick. I think many ardent fans would argue that TFA is too.
|
|
|
Post by No Morpho, Only Bánh mì on Dec 15, 2018 6:42:42 GMT
Just the unlike. I think if you hit like 3 times, it double notifies the single outcome like. Don’t know about any minus, But I’ve been notified of a like, To find it absent. That’s happened to me too, but I’ve never gotten the negative before. Unless it’s some sort of fluke?
|
|
|
Post by No Morpho, Only Bánh mì on Dec 15, 2018 6:43:58 GMT
So what’s the verdict on this one? You’re all caught up now! It’s… Wow. It’s been a whirlwind of a year, folks. Whenever everyone’s here I’ve got to be like Dorothy at the end of The Wizard of Oz and thank you all for my long Star Wars journey. But a preliminary thanks to you both. I liked it this one. I had more fun with it than Rogue One, though that’s a better movie, objectively-speaking. This one has so many different tones and moods and goes in so many different directions that I’m not sure the filmmakers knew where they wanted to go with it. And it feels unnecessary, underwhelming, indifferently directed, and somewhat cliché. But for all that there were a lot of scenes where I smiled along with the characters. That’s probably the best way to describe it–just fun. Not always great, and it’s not going to stick in my mind, but it is lighthearted and entertaining. Admittedly, in this series alone Star Wars is lighthearted, entertaining, fun– and a good movie, but that’s neither here nor there. But this one’s a fun Star Trek flick. Fully agree! And thanks for doing the live reviewing. It’s been a blast!!!
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Dec 15, 2018 6:44:29 GMT
It’s… Wow. It’s been a whirlwind of a year, folks. Whenever everyone’s here I’ve got to be like Dorothy at the end of The Wizard of Oz and thank you all for my long Star Wars journey. But a preliminary thanks to you both. I liked it this one. I had more fun with it than Rogue One, though that’s a better movie, objectively-speaking. This one has so many different tones and moods and goes in so many different directions that I’m not sure the filmmakers knew where they wanted to go with it. And it feels unnecessary, underwhelming, indifferently directed, and somewhat cliché. But for all that there were a lot of scenes where I smiled along with the characters. That’s probably the best way to describe it–just fun. Not always great, and it’s not going to stick in my mind, but it is lighthearted and entertaining. Admittedly, in this series alone Star Wars is lighthearted, entertaining, fun– and a good movie, but that’s neither here nor there. But this one’s a fun Star Trek flick. Fully agree! And thanks for doing the live reviewing. It’s been a blast!!! Thanks! Been a blast for me too!
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Dec 15, 2018 6:56:05 GMT
Fully agree! And thanks for doing the live reviewing. It’s been a blast!!! Thanks! Been a blast for me too! Take a bow, mang. This has been cool. Let me ask you to speculate: do you think viewing the films in another order would've influenced your feelings about them individually and relative to one another? Such as: my modified Machete order: IV, V, I, II, III, VI Or: chronologically, in-universe: I, II, III, Solo, RO, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII Or do you think your general takeaway would be the same? One of my biggest criticisms of TPM is that it doesn't explain fucking anything despite Lucas saying (supposedly in earnest) that they're meant to be seen I-VI. Even the Jedi seem kind of terrifying and overpowered, I would think. Maybe not?
|
|