Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Desslok

The Spoilerrific Super Duper Episode Seven Megathread!

Recommended Posts

 

 

 

Your expectations weren't realistic.  When a company lays out $4 billion for something, yes, it's all business decisions. I'm positive they don't care if you're insulted either.

 

If it's unrealistic for them to do something other than put out a re-run of old movies, then I feel bad for you with your acceptance of mediocrity.

 

Sorry, I'm just not as happy with zero effort storytelling as you are, I guess.  

 

They really shouldn't care if I'm insulted, when they've got people like you out there defending their lousy, no-effort cash grab, and blaming the honest, realistic viewer for having standards.

 

You better go out and buy a few more random things with a SW logo slapped on the side to offset the 2nd and 3rd viewings that I won't be going to see.

 

You don't need to feel sorry for me because I don't for you.  Disney still doesn't care what you think.  Neither do I.  They also put your money in their pocket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And let me be clear: if TFA had simply borrowed thematically from the OT, even heavily, that would have been a positive in my mind.  But to defend "playing it safe" to the extent of simply swapping out a few character names and reorganizing a few scenes of near-identical OT material...if that's all you wanted, then you got your Ep. 7 when they released the OT Special Editions: visually appealing, a few tiny bits of new content, same old story.

 

I don't agree its just a simple rehash of the OT. In fact I would say it did what you asked. Changing Character Names and Reorganizing OT Material is not very accurate account of what we got. While it does pay Homage to the OT with a number of Nodds. It is not the simple remake as you laid out it out to be. 

 

So which New characters are just clones of the OT Characters with new names? 

Finn - As far as I can tell the closest would be Luke, but that is not really that close. He does wield a lightsaber.  Does do the Helmet remove with line I'm here to rescue you, but that has more to do that he can't pilot a ship. Some of his scenes relate to being like Han, but only in the slightest sense. 

Poe - I mean, You can argue Poe somewhat fits in Han's archtype of a Cocky Pilot, but he isn't a smuggler and Han wasn't that much of a Soldier. He does have Leia's dedication to the Resistance. I would argue he is probably similar to Han if he had become a Rebel Pilot instead of a Smuggler. 

Rey - She is the one who is most like any single OT Character besides BB8. Being the New Luke of the New Trilogy. Beyond all the obvious parallels between them. I would say she is a far stronger character than Luke was in ANH. More like him in ESB.  If anything she is a Luke with traits from Han and Leia. 

BB8 - The New R2D2 without any argument there. It really is like a baby Astromech. 

Kylo Ren - Go with Vader, but he reminds me more of Anakin in the PT than Vader from the OT. He has a number of Vader's Halmarks, but that is more of who the Character is suppose to be than a simple rehash. 

Maz - You can say Orange Female Yoda and fulfills a similar role in a sense, but not exactly. Not Force Sensitive as far as we can tell. She has been around much like Yoda, but we only know so much at this point. 

 

That is a few and I am not including any Original Characters cause really that is pointless.

What we have is people who share similar traits who coexist  in the same universe. People do fulfill certain roles with in the story as others have during the OT, but we are not getting the same Characters with new names. The similarities fall into a reasonable expectation for characters in a Sequel for New Characters. Now if you want to look at what roles they fulfill. That is reasonable, but it won't make them the same characters.  

 

Let talk about the the Non Character Elements since that is where most of the argument really is. 

 

Similar Elements 

Jakku = Tatooine 

Star Killer Base = Death Star

Small force of Star Fighters assaulting Super Weapon

Imperials vs Resistance = Imperials vs Rebels - While it is clear on how similar they are on this point. The fact that their is a Republic is a Major Difference even though we really don't see it we know that it does exist. 

 

Major Nodds 

Trench Run - This is not really the same and vaguely similar. In ANH there  is like 10 minutes of people flying down the Trench. In TFA we have less than a Minute of Poe ducking into the Trench to take a shot. Nodd to the Trench Run in ANH? Yes, but that is about it. 

Flying through the wreckage on Jakku - ESB Astroid and Death Star II Attack.  

Maz's place - Canteena Scene (Rather go there than Mos Eisley)

Scene on Falcon when Han' says its all true - It is a direct Nodd to when Han made the Hokie Religion Comment.

 

When you look at it. TFA has definitely paid Homage to the OT. That is something to be expected from just the trailers. Something that people say we don't have in the PT. (Which is a good things in some ways) It does copy some plot points and yes that is playing it safe. This film never had the freedom Story wise that Ep 8 is going to get, but that doesn't mean its not fresh with new things. 

To say it flat out copies characters and just renames them is really a weak argument as I have shown.  It does have a ton of Nodds to the OT, I did not even try to list them all. The Similar Elements and Nodds surrounded the New Story we got.  It was a New Story. While it isn't completely Original that does not mean its a simple rehash of the OT.

It accomplished a lot of things in a short time. We had a Reintroduction after 30 years. We are talking about in both Movie and Real World time. New characters to not just introduce, but we had to care about them before it was over. It maybe passing on the torch, but it had to be more than "So here are the new guys and say goodbye to the old". That was done during the events taking place with in the story. They did it all very well and it still felt like Star Wars from Start to Finish. 

 

If you feel there is too much Homage and not enough New Content. That is not an unreasonable thought, but it doesn't make it a paint by the numbers rehash. I will not say it is the greatest ever, but its hard to deny it is back to a good place. With more on the way. 

 

How realistic the expectations for this movie should be. I would say similar to what people expected from the First Hobbit Movie. Personally, I think they went far above that. The aim was not to make an Oscar Winning Star Wars Movie. It was to make a Good Star Wars Movie that will appeal across the board and pave the way for things to come. They accomplished that very well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

It does copy some plot points and yes that is playing it safe. This film never had the freedom Story wise that Ep 8 is going to get, but that doesn't mean its not fresh with new things. 

You're just making excuses for fantastically lazy storytelling.

 

I like the nods (I'm not sure if I'm missing some sort of a reference that you're making by using the proper noun "Nodd" or if it's a trick of autocorrect or English not being your primary language...regardless, it's not a distinction that seems germane to the discussion).  I really do like them.  The stylistic and thematic connections to the OT were my favorite part of TFA (without which, it becomes truly just a subpar space action movie with a weak story and unconvincing antagonists).  I think you're being a bit quick to jump the gun and read in my posts what you want to respond to rather than what I'm actually saying.

 

My problem isn't with the general visual similarities with the OT, it's with the blatant ripping off of huge chunks of the actual story.  And no, it's not a valid excuse to just say, "This movie had to be bad so that the next two can be even awesomer!"  Not only is that a paper thin defense, but it's really an admission that the story was lousy, and an attempt at misdirection away from the core of the issue, that being this specific movie.  My problem is with the fact that they had 6 movies of things that had already been done, two of which had a lot of overlap, and even with just that very small list of "already done", they couldn't get outside of that to give us anything at all else.  

 

It's even worse when you consider that the prequels were handcuffed by the OT (that meaning that regardless of what happened, Obi-wan had to survive, Anakin had to become Vader, the Emperor had to live, and various other variables that otherwise might have been able to be altered for a more compelling story had to be fixed in order to agree with the state of affairs in which ANH opens), and they *still* managed to tell an original, creative story distinct from the OT.  With the prequels, it was awkward delivery of original ideas.  With TFA it's a pretty delivery...but of ideas that have already been done, and done pretty well, in the OT.  Given the choice...honestly...I'm not sure if I'd rather have original ideas in a crummy package or old ideas in very slightly different packaging.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 think you're being a bit quick to jump the gun and read in my posts what you want to respond to rather than what I'm actually saying.

 

It's surprising that you even tried to jump to this. Which is a lazy argument and I would say beneath you. Especially, when it is clear I have read and responded to specific points in your posts. My last post went far beyond tossing cheap excuses. Did you even read it or you just jumping on what you think it says. 

 

 

My problem isn't with the general visual similarities with the OT, it's with the blatant ripping off of huge chunks of the actual story.  And no, it's not a valid excuse to just say, "This movie had to be bad so that the next two can be even awesomer!"  Not only is that a paper thin defense, but it's really an admission that the story was lousy, and an attempt at misdirection away from the core of the issue, that being this specific movie.  My problem is with the fact that they had 6 movies of things that had already been done, two of which had a lot of overlap, and even with just that very small list of "already done", they couldn't get outside of that to give us anything at all else.  

 

 

You want to claim it ripped off Huge Chucks of Actual Story. While I did say there are direct similarities to this and even listed them. The only real one you can throw down is as a blatant Rip off is story around StarKiller Base. Yes they already had this kind of Super Weapon before. Bad Guys have very dangerous Super Weapon, not to Original of an idea, but they did more than just copied that. They evolved it into an even better plot device.

It was not just used as the threat of a super weapon, but a device to further the story beyond this movie into the next one. In comparison, The destruction of Alderaan was felt only in ANH. It really did not have an impact on ESB that StarKiller Base will have on Ep 8. Before you say we don't know that. We know the Republic lost just their Leadership, but also a significant portion of their fleet. That is a significant event that will carry over. 

Honestly, it is not a ground breaking idea, but it is a simple plot point. They could have made it as part of a New Super Star Destroyer, but they went with a more Iconic Look. Why? It appeals to the General Fanbase. If you want Lazy, they could have just went with it actually being another Death Star that was hidden away before or just after RotJ. Something that has us asking Really? 

 

As for you comment on this movie has to be bad so the others can be better. When have I given such a silly comment. When did I say this movie was bad for starters? You come closer to that comment by saying this movie sucks cause its to much like the OT. If you want to throw my use of New Era as similar to that. Okay, but it really doesn't fit. As I have more than once clarified my point. 

 

As for Nodd, It probably should be Nod. It is to reference that the film makers recognize to similar events in previous movies. Kinda like the reference of Easter Eggs in movies/games. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The only real one you can throw down is as a blatant Rip off is story around StarKiller Base. 

Good thing they didn't open with the Empire/First Order hunting down a droid (oh wait...) containing secret data (oh wait...) on a desert planet (oh wait...) sent on a mission from an agent of the Resistance/Rebellion (oh wait...) who eventually has a run in with a desert scavenger (oh wait...) and is soon after introduced to the force-sensitive main character eking out a living in the desert (oh wait...).  

 

Also a good thing that they don't blast away from that desert planet and get that droid and it's data back to the Rebellion/Resistance just in time for them to realize that the Empire/First Order is bearing down on them in the Impossibly Huge Planet Destroying Battle Station of Doom (oh wait...), which destroys a planet we never see before it's blown up and don't care about it at all (oh wait...) and juuuuuust before it wipes out the Rebel/Resistance base planet, the director decides to rip off a different movie, but still definitely in the same franchise, and have the heroes lead the way in a three-part action finale to 1) sneak onto the planet to knock out the technical macguffin (oh wait...), 2) launch a surprise attack in their ships to assault the Impossibly Huge Planet Destroying Battle Station of Doom (by flying down...get this...a trench...and in case you haven't been beaten over the head enough with recycled stuff, let's not leave out material we can also rehash from RotJ, we'll make them fly into the superstructure too), and 3) due to complications in part one, we will also have a lightsaber battle on said Impossibly Huge Planet Destroying Battle Station of Doom while all of the rest is going down.

 

Which of those parts wasn't aired in the screening of TFA that you saw that led you to believe that "The only real one you can throw down is as a blatant Rip off is story around StarKiller Base."?

 

 

They evolved it into an even better plot device.

It was not just used as the threat of a super weapon, but a device to further the story beyond this movie into the next one.

Oh really?  Since this is a spoiler thread already, please just let me know how this new humongous spherical battle station and it's destruction have more impact in Episode 8 than the OT's humongous spherical battle station had in Episode 5.  I don't even care if you spoil Ep. 8's plot for me.  Since you know what happens, please let me know.

 

 

 

 

Honestly, it is not a ground breaking idea, but it is a simple plot point. They could have made it as part of a New Super Star Destroyer, but they went with a more Iconic Look. Why? It appeals to the General Fanbase. If you want Lazy, they could have just went with it actually being another Death Star that was hidden away before or just after RotJ. Something that has us asking Really? 

If this reimagining of the DS didn't have you asking "Really?", nothing would have.  They could have literally made it another Death Star, flown down the trench, put a torpedo down its exhaust port and blown it up, and as long as Harrison Ford flatly delivered a line asking if he'd be needed to bail out Poe from a bad situation, safely lampshading, there would be people in here defending it.  They made superficial changes in a handful of areas (this is R2-D2, but he's slightly different and *totally* not R2-D2, this is Tatooine, but it's slightly different and *totally* not Tatooine, this is Darth Vader, but he's slightly different and *totally* not Darth Vader, this is the emperor, but he's slightly different and *totally* not the emperor...Luke, Death Star, etc.), used 85% ANH and 15% RotJ and called it a new movie.

 

 

 

It's surprising that you even tried to jump to this. Which is a lazy argument and I would say beneath you. Especially, when it is clear I have read and responded to specific points in your posts. My last post went far beyond tossing cheap excuses. Did you even read it or you just jumping on what you think it says. 

The difference is that I'm making claims and backing them up with evidence that supports it.  You're doing nothing but saying, "No, you're not right.  The movie was good.  Starkiller base isn't another death star.  The story is new and different." with absolutely nothing to support your position beyond you saying so.  I'm saying "Hey, this is a re-hash of ANH because of this, and this and this." and you're coming back with, "No."

 

All of your rebuttals rely completely upon telling me what I'm saying so that you can then respond to what you'd rather respond to.  And even then, when you're putting words in my mouth, you aren't making a well-supported counter argument.  You're just stating your position and leaving it at that.

 

Looking at the main hero's they did some creative reorganization to disguise how much was ripped off, and had they taken that much time and effort to disguise the rest of the entire movie, it would have helped.  Instead of just giving the same characters different names, they also took the time to shuffle up their qualities.  We still have the brash pilot, the naive idealist, the headstrong youth, etc. they're just not always assigned to the same characters, and some of those characters look different.  Honestly, these characters are the best part of the new movie, and it's only saving grace from being an embarassment as an addition to the Star Wars franchise.  Even the EU, known for being lousy, was ridden harshly by the fanbase any time it fell back on the cash cow of "giant super weapon, daring raid, charming rogue, earnest pilot who turns out to be force sensitive"...I find it sad, but amusing, that that same fan base is willing to give that same tired formula a pass just because the medium is big budget motion picture instead of comic book or novel.

 

Ultimately, I really don't care what you thought of the movie one way or another.  If you enjoyed it, that's great, and I'm happy for you.  I was entertained while I watched, but within 24 hours, the afterglow of "omg star warzzz" had worn off, and I was able to make a more fair evaluation and admit to myself that, for all the space ships and lasers, it was nothing more than rearranged chunks of OT plot with a new, younger cast.  I'm not asking you to share in my disappointment, but to tell me I'm wrong for pointing out the obvious suggests more than a little bit of denial.  It's okay to like a blatant re-hash, just don't pretend it's anything other than that.  Heck, I *loved* Ten Things I Hate About You back in high school.

 

 

 

As for you comment on this movie has to be bad so the others can be better. When have I given such a silly comment. When did I say this movie was bad for starters? You come closer to that comment by saying this movie sucks cause its to much like the OT. 

To this, I can't really say it better than you did up above, I was responding more to an overall sentiment to that effect generally expressed by the community, and not to something said by you specifically.  As you did, I used your post as a sort of "jumping off point" as you phrased it, and I do apologize for the mistaken implication that I was putting that one on you.

 

For the record though, I don't want to say "the movie sucks".  I thought it was entertaining, but the entertainment came completely from the short term surface value of lasers and space ships, and a secondary value of fun characters, not from any sort of distinction of having a creative or original story to tell, for furthering the Star Wars lore, or for making me care, at all, about anything I saw on screen.  Even the Kylo/Han scene fell completely flat, to me (though Ford shares as much of the blame for that as anything the writers or director did or didn't do).  For a rough equivalent, the entertainment I got from TFA was roughly the same as what I got from Abrams' 2009 Star Trek...but that's as a non-Trek fan who'd never seen a single ST movie or show before that one.  I think from what I heard from big ST fans when the Abrams announcement came down, that he did for Star Wars with TFA exactly what he did for the ST franchise with that one: a hip modern-looking reboot with a lame story with a good cast that he tried to make viewers take seriously by blowing up planets, having a very angry villain, awkward, forced tie-ins to the existing lore, and over-the-top action sequences.  In the areas where he could have really done great things, he did little but borrow heavily (if not exactly) from what more creative people had done before him, and in areas where he *had* to do it himself, he came up with some thoroughly average plot, and tried to inject gravitas by scaling things up to the planetary scale.  It's not that either of these was a *bad* movie, but in the case of TFA, it was just an unoriginal and uninspired *Star Wars* movie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The only real one you can throw down is as a blatant Rip off is story around StarKiller Base. 

Good thing they didn't open with the Empire/First Order hunting down a droid (oh wait...) containing secret data (oh wait...) on a desert planet (oh wait...) sent on a mission from an agent of the Resistance/Rebellion (oh wait...) who eventually has a run in with a desert scavenger (oh wait...) and is soon after introduced to the force-sensitive main character eking out a living in the desert (oh wait...).  

 

Also a good thing that they don't blast away from that desert planet and get that droid and it's data back to the Rebellion/Resistance just in time for them to realize that the Empire/First Order is bearing down on them in the Impossibly Huge Planet Destroying Battle Station of Doom (oh wait...), which destroys a planet we never see before it's blown up and don't care about it at all (oh wait...) and juuuuuust before it wipes out the Rebel/Resistance base planet, the director decides to rip off a different movie, but still definitely in the same franchise, and have the heroes lead the way in a three-part action finale to 1) sneak onto the planet to knock out the technical macguffin (oh wait...), 2) launch a surprise attack in their ships to assault the Impossibly Huge Planet Destroying Battle Station of Doom (by flying down...get this...a trench...and in case you haven't been beaten over the head enough with recycled stuff, let's not leave out material we can also rehash from RotJ, we'll make them fly into the superstructure too), and 3) due to complications in part one, we will also have a lightsaber battle on said Impossibly Huge Planet Destroying Battle Station of Doom while all of the rest is going down.

 

Which of those parts wasn't aired in the screening of TFA that you saw that led you to believe that "The only real one you can throw down is as a blatant Rip off is story around StarKiller Base."?

 

Neither Movie Opened with  Empire/FO hunting a droid. While it it a plot device used by both movies early on. It is a parallel not a rip off. As are everything else you put in that section.  There is a difference between making parallels between movies and a rip off. It is not just hitting similar points, but the context of those points. While TFA does share many plot points with things across the OT they are not identical to each other. I can sit here and break down the difference, but you made you mind up it is too similar for your liking. 

 

The reason I jumped on StarKiller Base as the Rip Off is because it is the one plot device that drawing its parallel to the OT is more about its design than function in the movie. As I put in the other post they could have gone other Designs that functions with the same effect on the story.  

 

You find it lazy story telling, but that is because they did their job in making those parallels. They didn't make you work for them. 

 

 

 

 

 

It's surprising that you even tried to jump to this. Which is a lazy argument and I would say beneath you. Especially, when it is clear I have read and responded to specific points in your posts. My last post went far beyond tossing cheap excuses. Did you even read it or you just jumping on what you think it says. 

The difference is that I'm making claims and backing them up with evidence that supports it.  You're doing nothing but saying, "No, you're not right.  The movie was good.  Starkiller base isn't another death star.  The story is new and different." with absolutely nothing to support your position beyond you saying so.  I'm saying "Hey, this is a re-hash of ANH because of this, and this and this." and you're coming back with, "No."

 

All of your rebuttals rely completely upon telling me what I'm saying so that you can then respond to what you'd rather respond to.  And even then, when you're putting words in my mouth, you aren't making a well-supported counter argument.  You're just stating your position and leaving it at that.

 

Looking at the main hero's they did some creative reorganization to disguise how much was ripped off, and had they taken that much time and effort to disguise the rest of the entire movie, it would have helped.  Instead of just giving the same characters different names, they also took the time to shuffle up their qualities.  We still have the brash pilot, the naive idealist, the headstrong youth, etc. they're just not always assigned to the same characters, and some of those characters look different.  Honestly, these characters are the best part of the new movie, and it's only saving grace from being an embarassment as an addition to the Star Wars franchise.  Even the EU, known for being lousy, was ridden harshly by the fanbase any time it fell back on the cash cow of "giant super weapon, daring raid, charming rogue, earnest pilot who turns out to be force sensitive"...I find it sad, but amusing, that that same fan base is willing to give that same tired formula a pass just because the medium is big budget motion picture instead of comic book or novel.

 

Ultimately, I really don't care what you thought of the movie one way or another.  If you enjoyed it, that's great, and I'm happy for you.  I was entertained while I watched, but within 24 hours, the afterglow of "omg star warzzz" had worn off, and I was able to make a more fair evaluation and admit to myself that, for all the space ships and lasers, it was nothing more than rearranged chunks of OT plot with a new, younger cast.  I'm not asking you to share in my disappointment, but to tell me I'm wrong for pointing out the obvious suggests more than a little bit of denial.  It's okay to like a blatant re-hash, just don't pretend it's anything other than that.  Heck, I *loved* Ten Things I Hate About You back in high school.

 

 

When have I not brought something to support my point? When have I posted your wrong? I haven't in my posts. I have taken the time to read your posts and reply back to specific points in them. Something you have already tried to accuse me of not doing before I post.  Looking back through the posts, You make a statement and I am the one bring the evidence to support how I feel your post most of the time is not accurate, not wrong. I have not gone after you saying that you just are hating. I have not said you should not be disappointed if you are. I have gone after the way you represent some things. I have even supported some of your own points. Why cause they are not wrong and in that post were accurate. 

You want to make accusations of putting words in your mouth. If I took what you posted in the wrong light then clarify. Which you did before and I replied in turn about getting that clarification. So I don't know where you are getting this idea I am just saying your wrong and you should love it. Cause I haven't.

As for you commentary on the fan base. It far from a fair and accurate assessment. That sounds like an angry rant. Looking into the context of things like: Dashing Rogue is very general. It is something can fit on various characters with diversity.  Force Sensitive Pilot - That is specific and I can get your issue on that. I remember when they hinted that Han and Wedge might be force sensitive in the EU. Not really a fan of the idea, interesting as it was. Unnecessary and took away from those characters. Daring Raid that falls into the context of the story. As I see it not really used as much in the movies as in the EU. Looking at the Main Characters: Yes the new characters fit into the Roles of Dashing Pilot, Naive Idealist, and Headstrong Youth that the OT Heroes held. That does not make them the same characters at all. Poe is a Dashing Pilot, but he is an Idealist more than the other two. Both Rey and Finn are Headstrong Youths and Naive to a certain point. They are an amalgamation of the traits that we got from the OT Heroes.  That is without going into the characters themselves. One of the goals was for this movie to give us the Characters that we cared about moving forward. It did that. 

 

 

 

 

 

As for you comment on this movie has to be bad so the others can be better. When have I given such a silly comment. When did I say this movie was bad for starters? You come closer to that comment by saying this movie sucks cause its to much like the OT. 

To this, I can't really say it better than you did up above, I was responding more to an overall sentiment to that effect generally expressed by the community, and not to something said by you specifically.  As you did, I used your post as a sort of "jumping off point" as you phrased it, and I do apologize for the mistaken implication that I was putting that one on you.

 

For the record though, I don't want to say "the movie sucks".  I thought it was entertaining, but the entertainment came completely from the short term surface value of lasers and space ships, and a secondary value of fun characters, not from any sort of distinction of having a creative or original story to tell, for furthering the Star Wars lore, or for making me care, at all, about anything I saw on screen.  Even the Kylo/Han scene fell completely flat, to me (though Ford shares as much of the blame for that as anything the writers or director did or didn't do).  For a rough equivalent, the entertainment I got from TFA was roughly the same as what I got from Abrams' 2009 Star Trek...but that's as a non-Trek fan who'd never seen a single ST movie or show before that one.  I think from what I heard from big ST fans when the Abrams announcement came down, that he did for Star Wars with TFA exactly what he did for the ST franchise with that one: a hip modern-looking reboot with a lame story with a good cast that he tried to make viewers take seriously by blowing up planets, having a very angry villain, awkward, forced tie-ins to the existing lore, and over-the-top action sequences.  In the areas where he could have really done great things, he did little but borrow heavily (if not exactly) from what more creative people had done before him, and in areas where he *had* to do it himself, he came up with some thoroughly average plot, and tried to inject gravitas by scaling things up to the planetary scale.  It's not that either of these was a *bad* movie, but in the case of TFA, it was just an unoriginal and uninspired *Star Wars* movie.

 

 

I don't really need to go into most of this. If this was the goal of the last few posts to get me to lay the fight they won't. Bravo that was pretty awesome move. I think most of our commentary in the previous posts has more to do with this than the points we have made directly to each other. I might be reading more into it.. 

 

I do want to hit the Star Trek.  What I think most ST Fans really don't want to say is Thank You to JJ. Star Trek was dead. When he took it there was nothing in production across any medium. Star Trek was done. He brought Star Trek back for death. Now, I am not going to say it was the greatest, but it wasn't bad and it did what the franchise needed. So I don't take a lot of the hate from them seriously. Of course when i say this I usually get. Well another director could have done it. My normal reply. Okay, lets see the Michael Bay Star Trek. 

 Note: I have nothing against Michael Bay as a director in general. It comes to the Script he is working with. I don't think we would have gotten a better script than what they got in reboot. 

Relating that to JJ and Star Wars. The movie was not up to your standards. Cool, actually thanks for being that person. We need those people. I am just saying don't be the person that puts the Reader up for the Oscar instead of the Dark Knight, because it is a more original script and not a better movie. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Neither Movie Opened with  Empire/FO hunting a droid. 

 

Seriously?  Have you ever actually watched ANH?  I've seriously got to question if you're just willing to make up any excuse necessary to avoid criticizing TFA if you're really going to say that ANH didn't begin with the Empire hunting down data that was contained in a droid.  More specifically, data held by a Rebel, and entrusted into an astromech droid which was then sent off into the desert with the mission of getting said data back to the Rebellion.

 

 

 

. While it it a plot device used by both movies early on. It is a parallel not a rip off. As are everything else you put in that section.  There is a difference between making parallels between movies and a rip off. It is not just hitting similar points, but the context of those points. While TFA does share many plot points with things across the OT they are not identical to each other. I can sit here and break down the difference, but you made you mind up it is too similar for your liking. 

Just the same, I'm not saying that you can't like it, but it's simply nonsense to say "it's not the same plot, it's a parallel!".  By that low standard, you could just as accurately argue that ANH Special Edition was a great standalone movie that shared many parallels with the ANH released in 1977.  If you're okay with re-dressing the same story with new actors and some slight visual updates, that's okay, but don't make it out to be more than what it really is: the same story, with a few small elements changed just enough that the majority of the fan base will be willing to ignore it.

 

If you're going to say that it's okay that they directly lifted all of the things I mentioned...because it's just a parallel, then you're simply just not willing to admit any shortcoming in the storytelling at all, and there's little I can say to try (nor would I want) to convince you to pull your head from the sand.  I think a lot of the positive reception right now is the movie afterglow.  I saw a lot of this sort of giddy justification even of TPM when it came out, and for the first 6-8 months after its release...then after people had time to really think about what they watched, the overall favorable opinion gradually waned until the overall response leveled out at a sigh and an eyeroll.  I fully expect TFA's legacy to be "better than the prequels, but only because they did nothing but repackage the OT".

 

 

 

I do want to hit the Star Trek.  What I think most ST Fans really don't want to say is Thank You to JJ. 

There again, putting words in others' mouths that you'd like to respond to.  "This is what I want you to say so that my response works."  If you just want to give your take, just do it.  Don't dictate someone else's opinions to frame your own.

 

 

 

Star Trek was dead. When he took it there was nothing in production across any medium. Star Trek was done. He brought Star Trek back for death. Now, I am not going to say it was the greatest, but it wasn't bad and it did what the franchise needed.

So...pretty much what you're saying about TFA?  Sure, there's a lot more SW material being produced, but the takeaway of "not the best, but it's what the franchise needed"?  If so, that may be completely and totally accurate.  They've gotten everyone talking about, and buying, Star Wars again.  Good job for them on the business front.  I guess I'm just coming from a position of wanting more than a flashy action movie to boost merchandise sales.

 

 

My normal reply. Okay, lets see the Michael Bay Star Trek. 

 Note: I have nothing against Michael Bay as a director in general. It comes to the Script he is working with. I don't think we would have gotten a better script than what they got in reboot. 

Relating that to JJ and Star Wars. The movie was not up to your standards. Cool, actually thanks for being that person. We need those people. I am just saying don't be the person that puts the Reader up for the Oscar instead of the Dark Knight, because it is a more original script and not a better movie. 

Honestly, I'm of the opinion that a Michael Bay Star Wars movie would have been every bit as good as TFA.  No joke.  A few more explosions, dodging of those explosions, gratuitous slow-mo, and flatter dialogue, but I also believe that in exchange for the cheese, we'd have gotten, at the very least, a better story than what we got with TFA, especially considering the source material they had to work with.  I haven't seen all of his Transformers movies, but I did see the first two, and both of them had a more original, creative story than TFA, so yeah, why not?  The biggest issue I'd have with a Bay Ep. 7 would be his likely casting and dialogue choices (I don't want to see Megan Fox as Rey struggling to deliver lines with more emotion than a wooden plank), but honestly, the dialogue was pretty bad for the prequels too, and Bay doesn't target the 8-12 demographic, which was my biggest lack of connection with the prequels...which had an original story to tell.

 

So yeah, to sum it up, more over-the-top, worse casting and dialogue, but a story a little more discernible from ANH?  I'll take it.  It'd still likely rank below all three OT movies for me, but whereas I'd put RotS over a close tie between AotC and TFA, in that case, I'd imagine that the Bay Ep. 7 would be closer to being tied with RotS.

Edited by hydrospanner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Neither Movie Opened with  Empire/FO hunting a droid. 

 

Seriously?  Have you ever actually watched ANH?  I've seriously got to question if you're just willing to make up any excuse necessary to avoid criticizing TFA if you're really going to say that ANH didn't begin with the Empire hunting down data that was contained in a droid.  More specifically, data held by a Rebel, and entrusted into an astromech droid which was then sent off into the desert with the mission of getting said data back to the Rebellion.

 

 

 

. While it it a plot device used by both movies early on. It is a parallel not a rip off. As are everything else you put in that section.  There is a difference between making parallels between movies and a rip off. It is not just hitting similar points, but the context of those points. While TFA does share many plot points with things across the OT they are not identical to each other. I can sit here and break down the difference, but you made you mind up it is too similar for your liking. 

Just the same, I'm not saying that you can't like it, but it's simply nonsense to say "it's not the same plot, it's a parallel!".  By that low standard, you could just as accurately argue that ANH Special Edition was a great standalone movie that shared many parallels with the ANH released in 1977.  If you're okay with re-dressing the same story with new actors and some slight visual updates, that's okay, but don't make it out to be more than what it really is: the same story, with a few small elements changed just enough that the majority of the fan base will be willing to ignore it.

 

If you're going to say that it's okay that they directly lifted all of the things I mentioned...because it's just a parallel, then you're simply just not willing to admit any shortcoming in the storytelling at all, and there's little I can say to try (nor would I want) to convince you to pull your head from the sand.  I think a lot of the positive reception right now is the movie afterglow.  I saw a lot of this sort of giddy justification even of TPM when it came out, and for the first 6-8 months after its release...then after people had time to really think about what they watched, the overall favorable opinion gradually waned until the overall response leveled out at a sigh and an eyeroll.  I fully expect TFA's legacy to be "better than the prequels, but only because they did nothing but repackage the OT".

 

 

Look, I get you don't like one of the early plot points is droids with data. But that is not the opening of the movies. ANH, the capture of the Rebel ship is the opening. R2D2 is sent away with the plans, but the Empire doesn't start hunting for him right then. The hunting for the pod is the what happens resulting in them realizing it was in a droid.  Going into TFA, The opening is what happens in the Village on Jakku. Yes Poe send BB8 away with the map, but that is a result of his decision to stay behind and not because its the only option. The hunt for the BB8 comes almost 10-15 minutes later.  Neither movie has the droids being hunted in the opening, but are early first act pieces. 

 

Paralleling events is a story device and can be used to great effect, which I find they did that in TFA. I don't consider it a short coming in their story telling, because it fulfilled its purpose in the movie. You may not like it, but that does not mean it has to be a short coming period. If it is one of the things you feel is a short coming that is fine, but that does not mean my opinion will change in 6 months or 6 years. What giddy justification am I having? My mind did not change 6 months after TPM. It is still the same now as it was then. It was an okay movie. As Space Fantasy outside of Star Wars, a fairly good movie. As a Star Wars Movie not so good and I rank it just above AotC. Right now I would Rank this movie along side ANH, ESB is my favorite followed closely by RotJ. ANH/TFA are a hair behind that. It is a Great Space Fantasy Movie outside of Star Wars. With in Star Wars. It is still Really Good, but not my favorite. It does have me looking forward to what is next. Especially with the Director we have for Ep 8.  If you want to talk Legacy, TFA's will be bringing faith back to the fans. It will get a special place for a lot of people as their faith in LucasFilm has been restored. 

 

 

 

 

I do want to hit the Star Trek.  What I think most ST Fans really don't want to say is Thank You to JJ. 

There again, putting words in others' mouths that you'd like to respond to.  "This is what I want you to say so that my response works."  If you just want to give your take, just do it.  Don't dictate someone else's opinions to frame your own.

 

Star Trek was dead. When he took it there was nothing in production across any medium. Star Trek was done. He brought Star Trek back for death. Now, I am not going to say it was the greatest, but it wasn't bad and it did what the franchise needed.

So...pretty much what you're saying about TFA?  Sure, there's a lot more SW material being produced, but the takeaway of "not the best, but it's what the franchise needed"?  If so, that may be completely and totally accurate.  They've gotten everyone talking about, and buying, Star Wars again.  Good job for them on the business front.  I guess I'm just coming from a position of wanting more than a flashy action movie to boost merchandise sales.

 

 

Putting words in their mouths? No, It was my thoughts on it. Which are based on talking to other people, a number of them are people I know who have been Star Trek Fans from before the JJ Era. It is more than a fair assessment when you consider what Star Trek Nemesis did to the franchise. No matter how bad we consider the Prequels they are still better than Nemesis.  I am personally a fan of both Star Wars and Star Trek. With Star Wars being number 1, but it is personally hard for me to see there is no New Star Trek on TV. Star Trek has always been a major TV Standard. When Nemesis tanked it was not long before Enterprise followed. 

 

Yes, you can say what JJ did for Star Trek, he repeated in for the Star Wars in theaters with TFA. The question now is where do they take the Franchise. That is something we can look forward too. There is a plan in place and because of who is writing and directing Ep 8. I think you will get a little more of what you want then. 

 

 

As for a Micheal Bay Star Trek or Star Wars. Considering how the last 2 Transformers Films turned out. Which would probably give us something less Original by looking at those sequels. Expect more paint by the numbers greatest hits of the OT. The OT look and feel is what LucasFilm was looking for.  

Bay is a great director, but his biggest weakness falls into him relying completely on someone else Script. So, even if Bay did Direct TFA it is doubtful it would be to different in the Story itself. Probably because JJ, Ardnt, and Kasdan would have still written the script.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neither Movie Opened with  Empire/FO hunting a droid.

Seriously?  Have you ever actually watched ANH?  I've seriously got to question if you're just willing to make up any excuse necessary to avoid criticizing TFA if you're really going to say that ANH didn't begin with the Empire hunting down data that was contained in a droid.  More specifically, data held by a Rebel, and entrusted into an astromech droid which was then sent off into the desert with the mission of getting said data back to the Rebellion.

 

. While it it a plot device used by both movies early on. It is a parallel not a rip off. As are everything else you put in that section.  There is a difference between making parallels between movies and a rip off. It is not just hitting similar points, but the context of those points. While TFA does share many plot points with things across the OT they are not identical to each other. I can sit here and break down the difference, but you made you mind up it is too similar for your liking. 

Just the same, I'm not saying that you can't like it, but it's simply nonsense to say "it's not the same plot, it's a parallel!".  By that low standard, you could just as accurately argue that ANH Special Edition was a great standalone movie that shared many parallels with the ANH released in 1977.  If you're okay with re-dressing the same story with new actors and some slight visual updates, that's okay, but don't make it out to be more than what it really is: the same story, with a few small elements changed just enough that the majority of the fan base will be willing to ignore it.

 

If you're going to say that it's okay that they directly lifted all of the things I mentioned...because it's just a parallel, then you're simply just not willing to admit any shortcoming in the storytelling at all, and there's little I can say to try (nor would I want) to convince you to pull your head from the sand.  I think a lot of the positive reception right now is the movie afterglow.  I saw a lot of this sort of giddy justification even of TPM when it came out, and for the first 6-8 months after its release...then after people had time to really think about what they watched, the overall favorable opinion gradually waned until the overall response leveled out at a sigh and an eyeroll.  I fully expect TFA's legacy to be "better than the prequels, but only because they did nothing but repackage the OT".

 

Look, I get you don't like one of the early plot points is droids with data. But that is not the opening of the movies. ANH, the capture of the Rebel ship is the opening.

I don't think that's fair to what Hydrospanner has been saying. I don't think they said there's anything wrong with it as a plot point, only in that it's repetitious and frankly over-conservative. Whilst yes, the "opening" if you choose to define it narrowly, is one ship eating another, but the opening storyline is, as hydrospanner says, a captured rebel hiding some information in a droid which then flees to be acquired by our Force-sensitive hero in the desert, call to adventure, etc. etc. They're not wrong. And you're over-reaching and trying to apply overly narrow definitions in an effort to argue that these aren't massive re-dos of the key plot elements from ANH.

Honestly, you can be not bothered by the same things hydrospanner is bothered by and that's fine. But I think you sound way off base in trying to claim they aren't as hydrospanner says.

At least as far as Star Wars, as I have no interest or knowledge in the Star Trek sub-thread and am not venturing there.

Edited by knasserII

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think that's fair to what Hydrospanner has been saying. I don't think they said there's anything wrong with it as a plot point, only in that it's repetitious and frankly over-conservative. Whilst yes, the "opening" if you choose to define it narrowly, is one ship eating another, but the opening storyline is, as hydrospanner says, a captured rebel hiding some information in a droid which then flees to be acquired by our Force-sensitive hero in the desert, call to adventure, etc. etc. They're not wrong. And you're over-reaching and trying to apply overly narrow definitions in an effort to argue that these aren't massive re-dos of the key plot elements from ANH.

Honestly, you can be not bothered by the same things hydrospanner is bothered by and that's fine. But I think you sound way off base in trying to claim they aren't as hydrospanner says.

At least as far as Star Wars, as I have no interest or knowledge in the Star Trek sub-thread and am not venturing there.

 

 

As for how I am looking at an Opening in the movie, It is not all that narrow. ANH's opening is often listed to the First 8 Minutes of the Film which ends with the ejected escape pod. Still not hunting Droid at that point. TFA's hunt starts even later. It is not all that narrow. Unless you consider the whole first act the opening of the movie. 

 

If you don't agree with me that is fine. It is no different than me disagreeing with Hydrospanner. If all your going to say is "But I think you sound way off base in trying to claim they aren't as hydrospanner says." then why post? Like her post or bring your own opinion in.  Otherwise you are just giving a your wrong cause I said so response. 

I wouldn't say you are being fair to what she said. I can not speak for her, but from what I have seen does not consider those things being conservative at all, but instead being lazy story telling. Which I don't consider it being lazy, but I do think they played it safe and conservative.  
Edited by TakeshiMasaki

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Look, I get you don't like one of the early plot points is droids with data. But that is not the opening of the movies. ANH, the capture of the Rebel ship is the opening. R2D2 is sent away with the plans, but the Empire doesn't start hunting for him right then. The hunting for the pod is the what happens resulting in them realizing it was in a droid.  Going into TFA, The opening is what happens in the Village on Jakku. Yes Poe send BB8 away with the map, but that is a result of his decision to stay behind and not because its the only option. The hunt for the BB8 comes almost 10-15 minutes later.  Neither movie has the droids being hunted in the opening, but are early first act pieces. 

If you're willing to split hairs to that degree to defend TFA's...ahem "heavy borrowing" from ANH, then there's really no point at which it would make sense for you to admit that TFA is anything but a wholly original work, so it's not worth the effort to try and convince you.  I mean, by that rationale, they're also totally different because the droid in question wasn't a three-legged white, blue, and silver droid, so that's different right there.

 

To get that technical, though, even TFA doesn't begin with a hunt for a droid in the desert, it begins with a star destroyer flying overhead and a group of dropships full of stormtroopers heading for Tat-...I mean Jakku.  (On that note, I really thought that the "huge ship flying overhead from above the camera shot" was one of the few things they *could have* shamelessly ripped from the OT...and they didn't!  Not upset by that, just surprised that they'd make that shot their own, but so very little of the rest of the movie.)

 

Then again, we could get even more technical and claim they all started with an opening script...though the actual specific text of that script was different...hmm...

 

 

 

Yes, you can say what JJ did for Star Trek, he repeated in for the Star Wars in theaters with TFA.

So an overall very milquetoast portrayal of a rich and detailed setting that does nothing to make its own contribution to that lore, but instead relies on callbacks to past greatness and surprisingly good character chemistry to buoy what might otherwise be a criminally forgettable chapter, long term?  That, when given the golden opportunity of a familiar universe that he didn't need to introduce or establish, allowing him to totally focus on telling his story within the context, and being given the greenlight to make huge changes, he instead decided to punt that opportunity elsewhere and choose to only add drama to his film through acts of wanton destruction against targets that he hasn't given us enough information on to care about (or even know who they are)?  Agreed.

 

 

 

The question now is where do they take the Franchise. That is something we can look forward too.

I would say there's nowhere to go but up...but that would be disingenuous.  I didn't hate TFA, despite what it may seem; I just think that my dissatisfaction seems the more intense because of the nigh-unanimous love the film is currently getting from the fanbase, which I'd chalk up to equal parts fanboy love and relief that we got a not-prequel.  I found it an entertaining movie, but entertaining in spite of, not because of, it's story, and as a totally separate quality from any connection to the rest of Star Wars.  

 

 

 

There is a plan in place and because of who is writing and directing Ep 8. I think you will get a little more of what you want then. 

Not only is that mostly speculation, but wasn't that plan in place when they made TFA?  If that plan includes intentionally giving us a dud of a story like this, it's a fairly lackluster plan.  I really do hope that 8 & 9 will blow me away, but the meek, tame, and unoriginal nature of 7 (not to mention its box office success) gives me absolutely no reason to suspect the folks in charge will do anything to disrupt the cash flow...after all, if it ain't broke...

 

 

 

As for how I am looking at an Opening in the movie, It is not all that narrow.

Except that you're strictly cherry picking what you consider "opening" by defining it very specifically as "that part before what you're talking about", and even at that, you're nitpicking semantics.  Instead of "opening", with whatever technical specificity you attach to the term, substitute in "main focus of the plot for the first third of the movie" and my point still stands.  Such a distinction with so little direct bearing on the argument is kind of a red herring, only slightly better than picking apart spelling or grammar.

 

 

 

 

from what I have seen does not consider those things being conservative at all, but instead being lazy story telling. Which I don't consider it being lazy, but I do think they played it safe and conservative.  

While the two are distinct and separate issues, I'd tend to agree with both lazy and conservative.  But where I could have dealt with conservative, had it been achieved through showing us a movie we hadn't seen before, when they chose to do it in the style of "chase a droid with valuable data across a desert, into space, and ultimately to the good guys in our big space battlewagon...blow up a random planet on the way and then have said good guys launch a desperate attack on said battlewagon, blowing it up with seconds to spare", that's the absolute minimum effort required to be conservative and still have a movie.  While I'd prefer a less conservative approach, I can certainly see the rationale behind wanting to go that route...but the way in which they achieved that was so bush-league that the only thing they could have done to put even less effort in would have been to literally splice in old, unused ANH footage for a few scenes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, I'm of the opinion that a Michael Bay Star Wars movie would have been every bit as good as TFA.  

**** it, hydro!

I agree with your criticism for TFA being a generally unoriginal plot structure, but Michael Bay?

Come on, if you're going to advocate for better screenwriting and storytelling you really should pick a hypothetical director who isn't famous (notorious?) for movies that focus on flash over substance. I also want the next two episodes to tell original, powerful stories and I absolutely do not trust Bay to give us that. Of "People to direct Star Wars" Michael Bay is pretty far down the list. I mean, he's above George, but that ain't saying much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think that's fair to what Hydrospanner has been saying. I don't think they said there's anything wrong with it as a plot point, only in that it's repetitious and frankly over-conservative. Whilst yes, the "opening" if you choose to define it narrowly, is one ship eating another, but the opening storyline is, as hydrospanner says, a captured rebel hiding some information in a droid which then flees to be acquired by our Force-sensitive hero in the desert, call to adventure, etc. etc. They're not wrong. And you're over-reaching and trying to apply overly narrow definitions in an effort to argue that these aren't massive re-dos of the key plot elements from ANH.

Honestly, you can be not bothered by the same things hydrospanner is bothered by and that's fine. But I think you sound way off base in trying to claim they aren't as hydrospanner says.

At least as far as Star Wars, as I have no interest or knowledge in the Star Trek sub-thread and am not venturing there.

 

As for how I am looking at an Opening in the movie, It is not all that narrow. ANH's opening is often listed to the First 8 Minutes of the Film which ends with the ejected escape pod. Still not hunting Droid at that point. TFA's hunt starts even later. It is not all that narrow. Unless you consider the whole first act the opening of the movie.

No, I don't accept that. There's no formal definition of the "opening of a movie" saying "8 minutes or earlier". Nor could there be as movies vary greatly. The first eight minutes of There Will Be Blood are a man you know nothing about scrabbling with some rocks. The first eight minutes of Moulin Rouge give you the main character, his background, motivation, the setting and the ending of the story too! Plots and story elements are unrolled at different paces in different films and it is entirely fair to say that the first elements of story in ANH are droids having vital plans hidden from them by the rebels from the empire and that this is the opening story in TFA as well. I repeat, you're trying to construct artificial and narrow definitions of your own in order to reject Hydrospanner's points. Even by your own curious definitions "often listed to the First 8 minutes", you concede that this includes the plans being loaded into R2-D2 and them beginning their flight from the Empire.

So yes, "narrow". Also, precisely how are defining "the whole first act"? Because I don't recognize ANH as having anything so clear cut as a "first act." I think you're just throwing out terms that sound good but to me are merely confusing. I don't know what you mean by "the first act of ANH" and I don't think anybody else intuitively does either. If you said "the first act of Romeo and Juliet", that would be a sensible statement. Of ANH? Not so much.

If you don't agree with me that is fine. It is no different than me disagreeing with Hydrospanner. If all your going to say is "But I think you sound way off base in trying to claim they aren't as hydrospanner says." then why post?

Because I think your argument is flawed and because I believe I can point out where. You ask me why I post if all I'm going to say is that "you sound way off base"? Well, because I actually said a lot more than that - I gave reasons why.

Like her post or bring your own opinion in.  Otherwise you are just giving a your wrong cause I said so response.

Clearly untrue. My post is just above yours for anyone to see. Nowhere have I said you're wrong just because I said so. I gave reasons. And it's also not for you to say I can't support someone else but can only 'Like' their post.

I wouldn't say you are being fair to what she said. I can not speak for her, but from what I have seen does not consider those things being conservative at all, but instead being lazy story telling. Which I don't consider it being lazy, but I do think they played it safe and conservative.

I can't speak with authority about the writer and director's motivations. Laziness is unlikely, directing a movie is a lot of work even for a small project let alone this one. I'll accuse a film director of many things perhaps, but seldom laziness. But fearful, overly risk-averse, unimaginative, derivative and staid - I'll regretfully lay all those charges at their feet. But motivation and intent aren't really that important at the end of the day, outcome is. And on that outcome I think hydrospanner's argument is mostly fairly spot on and your counterpoints are unfair to what they've actually said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for how I am looking at an Opening in the movie, It is not all that narrow. ANH's opening is often listed to the First 8 Minutes of the Film which ends with the ejected escape pod. Still not hunting Droid at that point. TFA's hunt starts even later. It is not all that narrow. Unless you consider the whole first act the opening of the movie. 

That is some serious hair-splitting.

Yes, the opening sequence is different, but the plot points of the movie are essentially the same.

Synopsis: Bad guys attacking the good guys to find the McGuffin, a lot of good guys get killed and the antagonist makes a display of being a badass, but one of the heroes manages to hide the McGuffin in a droid before being captured. The bad guys figure this out and start hunting the droid on a desert planet. Meanwhile the droid is briefly captured by some junk dealers, but is eventually delivered to a young, poor force sensitive protagonist. The McGuffin droid is the catalyst which inspires the FS protagonist to leave the desert planet and join up with the good guys. Our heroes escape the planet just in time using a heavily modified YT-1300.

 

The point hydro is making is that it is impossible to tell whether I'm describing the beginning of ANH or TFA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, I'm of the opinion that a Michael Bay Star Wars movie would have been every bit as good as TFA.

**** it, hydro!

I agree with your criticism for TFA being a generally unoriginal plot structure, but Michael Bay?

Come on, if you're going to advocate for better screenwriting and storytelling you really should pick a hypothetical director who isn't famous (notorious?) for movies that focus on flash over substance. I also want the next two episodes to tell original, powerful stories and I absolutely do not trust Bay to give us that. Of "People to direct Star Wars" Michael Bay is pretty far down the list. I mean, he's above George, but that ain't saying much.

I'd be interested to see what Michael Bay would be like if someone actually put some constraints on the guy instead of throwing money at him and saying "here, blow up anything you like". I mean "The Rock" was a good film - very tightly constructed. There were even, and I can't believe I'm actually saying this, some quite good character bits in the first Transformers movie (when he wasn't slowly moving a camera around Megan Fox's body). The biggest problems with Michael Bay as far as I can see are nobody ever stopping him from doing whatever he wants (at all) and a lurid fascination with all things US Military. If someone just handcuffed the guy for the duration of the production and said "you can only have one explosion, one tank, but as much of anything else you like", I'd be quite interested to see what he produced.

Now having defended the director of Transformers 4, I'm going to go and have a looooong shower. :(;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it was kept entirely unoriginal for the fact that episode seven was a movie made for the fans in a Love Letter kind of way. The orignal movie is 35 years old now, thus there are a good chunk of this generation that have never seen it and would think it was absolute rubbish when they did. Why? Because expections is different now then it is today, and humans in general are a very superficial people; we like things to look orderly and nice, even if we have to exclude gigantic chunks of essential information to do so. It's precisely how politics is allowed to function! XD

 

In a sense it's the closest we will see to a remake of the OT using today's graphics, because this movie is essentially there first and foremost to hook in people who have never seen the movies before, or had seen the sequels and weren't really all that impressed. The kind of fellows that don't have the blindest slight of interest nor inclination to watch the old movies while providing a nod to those that did. Could it have been more original? Definately, but the audience probably wants to see at least one more deathstar being blown up with modern theRe and I dare say it won't be long before we see another super weapon get nuked before the end of the last movie. Though hopefully they will actually mount it on a Star Destroyer this time. XD

 

I'm alright with all this, I enjoyed the movie enough that those facts didn't distract me. I am less alright with seeing it on my news feed all the time and copious over analysis of what is and always have been a set of very simple movies in all senses of the arguement. I won't be re-watching it, but for £7 it was fun and chances are episode 8 will probably be the time when we see whether this retro-trip was just a one off, or a continuing trend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

**** it, hydro!

I agree with your criticism for TFA being a generally unoriginal plot structure, but Michael Bay?

Come on, if you're going to advocate for better screenwriting and storytelling you really should pick a hypothetical director who isn't famous (notorious?) for movies that focus on flash over substance. I also want the next two episodes to tell original, powerful stories and I absolutely do not trust Bay to give us that. Of "People to direct Star Wars" Michael Bay is pretty far down the list. I mean, he's above George, but that ain't saying much.

 

Sorry! :D

 

Notice, I specifically didn't say "better", but rather "every bit as good as".  Meaning nothing more than having a few really great points and redeeming qualities, but a few really glaring flaws that average out to a general lukewarm reaction to the film, where the best thing I can say about it would be, "That movie isn't a bad one."  It'd be visually entertaining, plenty of action and explosions, an overall military/war tone, with decent enough protagonists going about their adventure.  What we would trade in a bit of character depth would yield dividends in showing us a movie we haven't seen already in this universe.  Maybe not great screenwriting or storytelling, but there's precious little of that going on with TFA to give up anyway.  True, Bay wouldn't be my first choice to do a SW movie, but after seeing what Abrams did with it, while he'd have been below Abrams before I saw TFA, now, hindsight being what it is, I'd put them on at least even footing.  

 

It's important not to look at it as "Could Bay have done a better job of making TFA?" but rather, "Could Bay have delivered an overall better Episode 7?", and while the answer isn't a definitive yes, it's also not a definitive no...and honestly, the more I think about it, given tight enough reins from Lucasfilm/Disney, the real answer is probably more uncomfortably close to "Probably" than many would like to admit.  He probably wouldn't have given us a character as wonderful and compelling as Rey, but as much as I really, truly do like her, one character does not a movie make.  In exchange for taking Rey from "wonderful" to "okay", and accepting 3-4 scenes of over-the-top stunts and explosions, we'd have seen the overall plot of the movie maybe not go from "already done, literally, in this series" to "pretty good, and something refreshing and new for the Star Wars franchise".  

 

 

 

You said I was over reaching, but how exactly was I?

Probably somewhere around the point where you define the scope of the comparison you're willing to consider as the very narrow window in which the beginning of the two movies are a few minutes out of sync.

 

Rather than this 8 minute figure you keep citing, let's go to the first 25.  Suddenly, your distinction is a lot harder to suss out, generally suggesting that you specifically chose the specific minute mark at which the point you were making wasn't completely invalid.  You're the one who keeps invoking this 8 minute limit (citing that it's "often listed"...not sure by whom or what bearing that has on the overall point being made), without accepting that the 8 minute mark means nothing when we're not talking about the two films syncing up (never mind that we do get a lot of film time showing the dropships coming in, and the initial shooting of the settlement with the whole blood-on-the-helmet thing...meaning that the whole ANH-line "put the data into the astro droid and send him off into the desert" thing may occur much closer to the 8:01 mark than you account for).

 

Basically, your focus on the arbitrary 8 minutes is over-reachingin teh same way it'd be overreaching to say that Starkiller Base isn't a Death Star knock-off because it's actually the size of a planet...and the massive laser is on the equator, not the northern hemisphere...and the blast is orange, not green...so it's clearly, totally different.  In short, ignoring the forest of similarity for the one tree that is different.

**Edited for my garbage formatting**

Edited by hydrospanner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did something weird just happen?

 

A moment ago I could swear I saw a post from someone saying that hyperspace determines the acts of ANH (which is a fun and clever idea); and another post from Takeshi demanding to know why I thought they were unfair (which has already been explained at length in my earlier posts to them).

 

Now both have just vanished. ???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did something weird just happen?

 

A moment ago I could swear I saw a post from someone saying that hyperspace determines the acts of ANH (which is a fun and clever idea); and another post from Takeshi demanding to know why I thought they were unfair (which has already been explained at length in my earlier posts to them).

 

Now both have just vanished. ???

Yes. I posted about hyperspace being act breaks, but don't see it anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Did something weird just happen?

 

A moment ago I could swear I saw a post from someone saying that hyperspace determines the acts of ANH (which is a fun and clever idea); and another post from Takeshi demanding to know why I thought they were unfair (which has already been explained at length in my earlier posts to them).

 

Now both have just vanished. ???

Yes. I posted about hyperspace being act breaks, but don't see it anymore.

 

 

Well it was a good post, and will grow in legend no doubt to become a great one. :)

 

However it seems to have vanished for good and taken my Like with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I think it was kept entirely unoriginal for the fact that episode seven was a movie made for the fans in a Love Letter kind of way.

I'm okay with someone writing me a love letter.

 

I'm less okay with realizing that they got 90% of their love letter by copying one I got from someone else 40 years ago. ;)

 

And yes, something weird happened.  Almost ate my post too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it was a good post, and will grow in legend no doubt to become a great one. :)

 

However it seems to have vanished for good and taken my Like with it.

 

In thirty years, there will be a url back to the post hidden away inside a robot. Google, having become it's own government entity and now enforcing the use of G+, will hunt this robot down across the desert plains of Mars. The Resistance will clash with the Google Empire in a massive space battle over the red planet, eventually discovering that the Moon is a super weapon. Brave rebel pilots will fly a desperate mission to blow up the Moon before it can destroy Earth.

That's Episode X, directed by myself. The director's cut will feature a lot of shots of Megan Fox that for some reason never made it into the film, but we recorded them in bluray anyway.

 

The reviews will read, "Still better than Attack of the Clones"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Well it was a good post, and will grow in legend no doubt to become a great one. :)

 

However it seems to have vanished for good and taken my Like with it.

 

In thirty years, there will be a url back to the post hidden away inside a robot. Google, having become it's own government entity and now enforcing the use of G+, will hunt this robot down across the desert plains of Mars. The Resistance will clash with the Google Empire in a massive space battle over the red planet, eventually discovering that the Moon is a super weapon. Brave rebel pilots will fly a desperate mission to blow up the Moon before it can destroy Earth.

That's Episode X, directed by myself. The director's cut will feature a lot of shots of Megan Fox that for some reason never made it into the film, but we recorded them in bluray anyway.

 

The reviews will read, "Still better than Attack of the Clones"

 

clap.gif

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
Sign in to follow this  

×