|
Post by kuatorises on Jun 23, 2017 17:47:27 GMT
I agree with that statement, however I think it has become a little too easy to just right things off as "a remake" of some previous movie. When two movies share some things, it doesn't automatically make the latter a ripoff. I’m also with you on Looper. That is one hell of a good sci-fi movie. I watched some of your review of Alien Covenant. I liked it. It's not without its flaws, but I did enjoy it. Good point! There are always going to be things that ring familiar (hehe "ring") in the SW mythos (new and old). TFA went a little too far with that ( Starkiller base wasn't needed). Still liked the film, but that element was the most distracting. Thanks! We're constantly trying to improve our review style, so any feedback is great. I don't think it was necessary either, but I almost look at it is an inside joke at this point. Like mocking the fact that the Empire and The First Order can't come up with anything else other than big super weapons. That being said, I don't want to see another one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2017 19:02:43 GMT
Interestingly enough, I don't see anyone who dislikes TFA or defends the Prequels actually insulting anyone...yet, PT defenders actually get insulted for their opinion, and are seemingly insulted by others thinking TFA is a pile of crap. I understand there's emotional attachment, but there's rarely a constructive back and forth. I read through a lot of the threads on the old site. The personal insults and endless hyperbole were doled out a plenty on both sides. And still are on this site. And I read plenty of "Kathleen Kennedy the femi-nazi" comments, "you're all too stupid to realize Abrams sold you a crappier version of ANH" comments, "the fact that you love TFA shows how poorly you understand film," comments and I was called a plethora of names. I always tried to stay on target with reasonable, canon-based arguments. But it always got chippy real fast. I would never throw out the first insult, but I would certainly retort with one. I'm guilty, I admit. What you say is true: I also witnessed PT defenders insulted in the same way. But also what you say is true in another sense and it goes back to what I said earlier. Debates are going to happen. We all have preferences. But in my opinion, I saw a pattern develop: OT traditionalists giving shit to PT defenders and PT defenders exacting their revenge on the TFA board. I honestly don't know that TFA haters actually hate TFA nearly as much as they claim, but I'm pretty sure they hate PT critics even more. For the record, I'm not a PT hater. I don't think it measured up to the OT overall, but I do think that it actually had some higher highs than the OT. I also think it was unique (I will certainly capitulate that the PT is "more unique" than TFA) and, in my opinion, the plot was deeper and better layered than the OT's plot. I just think there were some low lows in the PT that bring its overall value down below the OT.
|
|
ryboto
Sophomore
@ryboto
Posts: 776
Likes: 724
|
Post by ryboto on Jun 23, 2017 19:33:02 GMT
I dislike TFA more than I dislike PT haters. Honestly, it's so far removed from the SW universe as I've come to know it that it's a jarring and obvious transition. That's why I keep coming back to discuss it. I see so many faults with it beyond even what we saw as unforgivable with the PT. Still, that's me and my opinion.
I've had discussions where I was called many names and I never replied to a single one, I just replied to the 'apologists' points with my own counterpoints. In the end, the only times I've written negative posts was when I was blatantly trolling Furious after he would post inflammatory things. ALL IN GOOD FUN.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2017 21:35:46 GMT
You obviously have much enthusiasm borne out of the new EU. And it's given you much confidence to perceive that the quality of the new EU writing means that TFA is all part of that same level of quality of writing. But IMO much of the embodiment of the novelization didn't make it onscreen because it is a retcon work that was a made to clean up a poorly written script from a bad writer in Abrams. And Rian Johnson has the task and responsibility to further clean up Abrams rehash and poor fanfic elements from TFA that he dropped in Johnson's lap. In addition to doing a much better job at harmonizing and encompassing the new EU to the onscreen finished product. Or did Kathleen Kennedy and Abrams being the producer force Johnson to rigidly follow the formula and production process of TFA just because it made 2 billion dollars? If they do the latter in episode 8 and eventually 9, then the new EU will become another one of Abrams dead-end mystery boxes that never culminates onscreen. First of all, this was a thoughtful, mature post. If I had gotten responses of this magnitude from you on the old site, I wouldn't have been so quick to dismiss you. I've left the part that I thought was most relevant for me to address. While your points are all well-made above, I disagree. And I think this is where pro-TFA and anti-TFA critics take different paths. Well, first of all, you seem to have a negative history with Abrams. I have little to no history with him. I didn't watch Lost, so I don't care. I didn't see Cloverfield, so I don't care. I didn't see Super 8, so I don't care. The only Abrams material I consumed before TFA were the first two Star Trek remakes (now those were remakes). I'm not a Trekkie, so I'm coming from this perspective as a blasphemous non-Trekkie, but I like those two movies waaaaay better than the originals. So Abrams has never let me down before. He and I have a clean slate. Now, into the analysis. From what I can tell, there were a lot of things that the Anti-TFA crowd didn't like about TFA's plot, some of which are just flat-out taste-oriented and others that are supposed plot holes needing to be shored up by supplemental materials. An example of the former is the idea to not have Luke in the movie until the last scene. Personally, I thought that was brilliant. I think doing it that way set up the most emotional scene in all seven episodic films. I don't think I would have had that feeling if Luke had been in the movie earlier. It's only because we've already gone through so much drama and heartache (not to mention this longing that we all felt...like, when the heck is he going to show up and help his out-gunned friends?) up until that point that we get the pay-off we need to have that big feeling. I remember I played back that scene a dozen times upon my first at-home viewing and I got choked up watching him have two separate epiphanies and those two looks on his face. In my opinion, that nostalgic feeling would have been half as powerful if he showed up halfway through the movie. As for Kennedy's role in moving him back so he wouldn't get in Rey's way? GOOD. That's exactly what needed to be done. We had three new principal characters and four new major supporting characters to get to know in this film. I agree 100%. There was no room for Luke in this movie. Now, on to the supposed plot holes. I'm just being honest with you: I didn't need those supplements to understand or explain TFA. This is what used to drive me crazy about arguing with you and the rest of the TFA haters. You'd assume a plot direction that has not been revealed yet and you'd tear down this straw man relentlessly. Let's take Luke for instance, because that was a big complaint. I must have read four different theories about why Luke disappeared, followed by the originator of the theory bashing this motivation as not following Luke's character history. But for me, it's like, "hold your horses, boys, we have no idea yet why he left." But too late. This is now reason to hate Jar Jar Abrams! Well hell, when I watched the movie the first time, I immediately assumed that Luke left to discover new knowledge or Jedi techniques to defeat a new kind of opponent with as-of-yet-unseen-in-the-movies power attributes. I assumed this because why else would he try to find a Jedi Temple. He didn't leave and go to the fucking bar or a U2 concert. He left to find a temple. Why the hell else would he search for that unless he was trying to learn something that needed to be applied to whatever method would be used to defeat Snoke. If that's the case, then it makes perfect fucking sense that he left. It would be in-line with his character from TESB if he stayed around and tried to punch it out with the bad guys, but it would be adverse to his ROTJ character that was mature enough to back away from a fight and find a different way through if the fight itself was unwinnable. But hey, a lot of haters out there said, "So Luke just gave up?" That's not consistent with his character, fuck Abrams! Or "So if Rey is Luke's daughter, then that just makes Luke a deadbeat dad! Fuck Abrams!" The list goes on and on. And I'm watching all these potential plot lines get shredded and I'm like, "not only do I think you guys misinterpreted the film, but you guys are going off on some pretty wild tangents and then crucifying the filmmakers for something they didn't even do. Not yet at least." But for argument's sake, what are some examples of things that were possible holes that were cleared up or retcon'd in supplements? As for Johnson cleaning things up? I have a hard time believing that there was no rough outline for the entire trilogy before TFA went into pre-production. Furthermore, yes, there is cleaning up to do, but this is the case for all multi-part stories. In ANH, we had no idea who Luke's parents were. In TESB, we found out who his dad is. Why is it such a problem that in TFA we don't know Rey's lineage/history and it's up to TLJ to tell us? I mean, no offense, but why the fuck would you even make Episodes VIII and IX if everything was comfortable and spelled out in TFA? The whole point of a planned trilogy is to provide mystery and tension in the first part, partial-revelation and additional new complication in the second part, and full-revelation and culmination in the third part.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2017 23:21:59 GMT
"The whole point of a planned trilogy is to provide mystery and tension in the first part, partial-revelation and additional new complication in the second part, and full-revelation and culmination in the third part. " Shhhh... you're going to give away what they are doing here!! lol. Not sure why that won't go in the quote box, shows what I know about editing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2017 0:17:35 GMT
"The whole point of a planned trilogy is to provide mystery and tension in the first part, partial-revelation and additional new complication in the second part, and full-revelation and culmination in the third part. " Shhhh... you're going to give away what they are doing here!! lol. Not sure why that won't go in the quote box, shows what I know about editing. Dang it! What happened to all the hot and spicy banter on this thread?!? I polished off two bags of popcorn over that! Oh well. At my age you can only take so much excitement for so long anyway. Oh... You can always designate what's in the quote box by prefixing the text with quote bracketed with [ ] and then suffixing it with /quote and bracketed with [ ]. But someone else probably knows more about that than I do.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2017 16:08:38 GMT
Dang it! What happened to all the hot and spicy banter on this thread?!? I polished off two bags of popcorn over that!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2017 17:53:26 GMT
Dang it! What happened to all the hot and spicy banter on this thread?!? I polished off two bags of popcorn over that! Oh don't get me wrong. All the philosophical discussions, personal perspectives, and lore extrapolation is great stuff also. It's all about variety! Now I could sit here and chat you up on the merits of variety in debate/discussion characteristics until my tongue goes numb. Or I could break open another bag of popcorn and watch you get back to your in-depth discussions. 🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2017 18:38:16 GMT
Oh don't get me wrong. All the philosophical discussions, personal perspectives, and lore extrapolation is great stuff also. It's all about variety! Now I could sit here and chat you up on the merits of variety in debate/discussion characteristics until my tongue goes numb. Or I could break open another bag of popcorn and watch you get back to your in-depth discussions. 🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿 Well, "follow" if you're going to follow.
|
|