|
Post by Warrior of Aror on Jul 5, 2016 14:32:42 GMT
I've only seen the movie once so far (the day before last), and I had accidentally seen a few spoilers for it, but overall I thought Star Wars VII was a pretty good movie. If it were just a standalone movie. But it was way too similar to the first movie in terms of plot. They did a pretty good job with the characters (except, oddly enough, for Rey. She was just the 2d "I'm a strong Disney princess, I can do everything by myself, and men are so annoying for being instinctively protective" type person. Maybe she'll get better later ...)
I did very much like that they were shying away from CGI and opting for more real world effects. That was a big positive. To end on another bad note though, the entire movie kept bringing up questions that I'm not even sure they want to answer satisfactorily. (I'm not talking about Rey's backstory and everything else). For instance, are we ever going to figure out what happened between Han and Leia?
I won't disown the new movies until I've seen all of them. The Force Awakens wasn't bad it just wasn't great.
|
|
|
Post by WookieeElf on Jul 5, 2016 14:41:38 GMT
I think the whole Han and Leia thing was explained? After Ben turned into Kylo, Han left. He thought Leia didn't want to see him, and Leia knew he needed to cope his own way. Judging by the timeline, it looks like they got married soon after the Battle of Endor.
I loved the whole less-CGI thing. It was brilliant.
I don't really understand why people are so negative about it. I think it was a brilliant start for the next trilogy. Yeah, it borrowed some themes from A New Hope, but that doesn't make it a carbon-copy with a female OC in Luke's place.
|
|
|
Post by Warrior of Aror on Jul 5, 2016 14:48:23 GMT
But ... why? I mean, they must not have had a very good relationship if they leave each other the moment something bad happens. I don't know ... it just didn't seem like it was at all a realistic explanation so I assumed that there was more to it ... I don't know.
|
|
|
Post by NightBlade on Jul 5, 2016 14:56:41 GMT
Yeah the Han and Leia thing was one of those super vague glossed-over plot holes. I agree, it wasn't awful, just not great. It was mediocre. And the carbon-copy MC was probably theost disgusting part to me, with the retoasted plot being close second.
|
|
|
Post by Elethia Arvell on Jul 5, 2016 17:35:56 GMT
I'm with WookieeElf. The Force Awakens, while it has similarities to the other films, is not a copy of any of them. I believe a Star Wars film ought to have parallels- it makes it feel more connected. History does repeat itself, afterall. I don't think Rey was super femenist at all. She's just an innocent girl (which is rare for movies these days). The most dangerous part of her character is the fact that she's a Mary Sue, but even that is excusable because so was Luke. 0_0 For the most part, I like Rey. She is honest and genuine, and though she is strong, she was certainly not against accepting help from people. If it's the not-taking-Finn's-hand thing that seems femenist, I would disagree. In her situation, I wouldn't have taken his hand either: holding hands while running is not helpful at all. ;D
I think the Han and Leia relationship will be expanded upon a bit in the next film, but even if it isn't it's easy enough to see what happened. Their personalities remained the same after they got married, so naturally they would have relationship issues, same as always. When you think about their relationship, they were always arguing and bantering, and marriage wouldn't change that. It doesn't surprise me that Han left. Despite his journey from scoundrel to hero, he was still an emotional escapist, and Leia would have been too prideful to call him back.
|
|
|
Post by Leilani Sunblade on Jul 9, 2016 1:35:03 GMT
So I finally watched TFA and can therefore take part in this discussion: I liked TFA. Was it perfect? No. But I enjoyed it. I liked the characters (though I would've liked to see more backstory for some of them, I think). The plot was very similar to the other films, but I don't think it was too bad (and given history's tendency to repeat itself even in the real world, it's not entirely surprising.)
Also, for once, hearing so much about a movie beforehand came in useful, as I knew who characters were when they came onscreen and didn't have to spend too much time confused.
|
|
|
Post by Aviar Goldeneagle on Jul 9, 2016 9:25:41 GMT
But why do they have to have *third* Death Star? I enjoyed the movie, but I think it's plot is too similar to 4 and 6. Also, I think the lack of backstory could be a good thing, as long as we get to figure it out in episodes 8 and 9.
|
|
|
Post by Leilani Sunblade on Jul 9, 2016 11:18:27 GMT
Aviar Goldeneagle: In-universe? Because someone thought "Hey, this Death Star actually worked pretty well up until people blew it up! Maybe we can make it even better and more effective and harder to blow up this time! And then, boom! Everyone we hate is dead!" Out-of-universe, because someone said "Well, everyone knows the Death Star . . . and the First Order is an Empire wanna-be, and Kylo Ren is a Darth Vader wanna-be, so naturally they'd gravitate towards something that was used by the Empire . . . but they'd probably want to make it bigger and better, like, say, a planet instead of a moon! Yeah! Let's go with that!"
|
|
|
Post by Warrior of Aror on Jul 9, 2016 14:35:39 GMT
That validation still doesn't do it for me. Whether it was logical in-universe or not, it still felt like a cop out. I mean, that is part of the reason why so many people didn't like the Hobbit movies. It's that there are so many different things in the Force Awakens that are practically a carbon copy of the other movies.
|
|
|
Post by WookieeElf on Jul 9, 2016 14:46:57 GMT
You also have to understand that this is a new trilogy. It had been ten years since the last Star Wars movie came out, and TFA was geared to appease old fans and gain new ones. If they didn't add the 'copying', too many new fans might have been left in a ditch, confused about what's going on. By 'copying', they were able to have some sort of explanation as to what was going on, and leave teasers for the next movie by making you guess about certain characters and plot points. That being said, my dad thinks in the next movie Luke and/or Leia will die at Kylo's hand and I disagree with him 100%. First off, it's Luke and Leia, the Force-sensitive twins who took down the Empire. Secondly, Luke trained Kylo when he was Ben. Thirdly, JJ Abrams knows that if he kills off anyone else from the main trio he's dead. After Han, everyone would be out for blood.
|
|
|
Post by Warrior of Aror on Jul 9, 2016 14:53:18 GMT
The prequel trilogy (though it had plenty of faults) was both an addition to the series and original.
|
|
|
Post by Ellron Silvertree on Jul 9, 2016 16:37:38 GMT
2 things. First, Abrams had to make it feel like a Star Wars movie. Part of doing that had to be making callback to the original movies. Did it go over the top? Maybe. But he has a really hard job ahead of him. Second, Abrams isn't directing the next movie.
|
|
|
Post by WookieeElf on Jul 9, 2016 17:34:14 GMT
@ellron He's helping with the scripts.
|
|
|
Post by Ellron Silvertree on Jul 9, 2016 19:57:47 GMT
Oh, that makes sense.
|
|
|
Post by Kirenyth Fireblade on Jul 9, 2016 20:05:33 GMT
Who's directing episode VIII?
|
|
|
Post by Aviar Goldeneagle on Jul 9, 2016 23:25:46 GMT
|
|
|
Post by NightBlade on Jul 10, 2016 3:18:22 GMT
When it comes down to it, there was very little that could be done to successfully continue the Star Wars movies, and they just didn't pull ot off. There simply wasn't anything great or exceptional or unique about VII. Carbon-copy plotline, already overused plot elements, and agonizingly stale main character. Sorry to bash so hard but I don't deal well in light terms x) and that's honestly how I feel. Abrams had to save his own skin and couldn't innovate.
|
|
|
Post by Kirenyth Fireblade on Jul 10, 2016 12:49:10 GMT
Hey, at least it wasn't as carbon-copy as the Sandlot 2!
|
|
|
Post by Elytra on Jul 10, 2016 23:51:45 GMT
...Sorry to bash so hard but I don't deal well in light terms x)... Haha I know how you feel.
|
|
|
Post by Kirenyth Fireblade on Jul 28, 2016 1:55:35 GMT
FINALLY saw Woodlawn! That movie is AWESOME!!!!!!! And Sean Astin is my new favorite actor
|
|
|
Post by NightBlade on Jul 29, 2016 16:26:43 GMT
David White might be my favorite, but I love Astin. When I watched that movie I was like "NO WAY IT'S SAMWISE FRIGGIN GAMGEE"
|
|
|
Post by Kirenyth Fireblade on Jul 29, 2016 16:31:03 GMT
Samwise with '70s sideburns xP
|
|
|
Post by NightBlade on Jul 29, 2016 18:34:00 GMT
xD yup
It's cool how Samwise and Gimli (their actors) are both either Christian or pro-Christian
|
|
|
Post by WookieeElf on Jul 29, 2016 20:13:50 GMT
But Sean Astin supports Hillary Clinton.
|
|
|
Post by NightBlade on Jul 29, 2016 20:36:53 GMT
*supported And he's still a Christian
|
|
|
Post by WookieeElf on Jul 29, 2016 21:50:18 GMT
Wait he changed his mind??
|
|
|
Post by NightBlade on Jul 29, 2016 22:17:58 GMT
He supported her years ago for governor or some other sort of office. I haven't heard anything of her supported him now
|
|
|
Post by WookieeElf on Jul 29, 2016 22:28:02 GMT
Ah. It's on Insta, sadly. From a few months ago. He's still supporting her.
|
|
|
Post by NightBlade on Jul 29, 2016 22:31:01 GMT
Now?? D:
|
|
|
Post by WookieeElf on Jul 30, 2016 0:53:29 GMT
Sadly, yes. Sam has betrayed the Fellowship.
|
|