Star Wars:The Rise Of Skywalker

[libra]

LOL I am sure any excitement soon disappeared once anyone actually saw any of the prequels, especially the first one. The only thing that’s compelling about the prequels is the levels of derision engendered by their plots and dialogue.

I was thinking about this the other night - in a way it's the most awesome troll ever. Lucas didn't want another cult - so he made the movies great for kids or anyone who doesn't take this stuff too seriously. It's entertainment, it doesn't have to make sense. A whole generation of kids grew up loving these movies and not understanding why their parents don't. Then one day they figure out that it's all just silly.

Of course, there's still people who cult around the prequels. Including those who enjoy them on the same level as Monty Python - because they're silly. 

eeerh... you do realize that the Monty DELIBERATELY made their movies as DUMB as possible in the name of NONSENSE
- when Lucas's sequel are dumb just because... well, they are BAD, SHITTY movies that suck so much.



LMAO

[catdlr]

Just for Fun...

THUMB WARS IX: The Thighs of Skyskipper - Teaser


OEDEWORLD
Oct 2, 2019

Tie your grandma up and change her name to Louie because it's time for the epic conclusion of the Skyskippers. All will be revealed...

THUMB.COM

[Scylla]

Sombody call for a rebel fleet?

A short tease ahead of tonights trailer.

[Oersted]

The three original movies were great fun because they focused on characters and not effects, and because they didn't take themselves too seriously. The universe presented was all new and exciting. It's all been downhill since then, primarily because effects took center-stage and because the acting became wooden, self-important and stifled.

We don't want to see just special effects. We want to see people we care about go through all sorts of exciting stuff. How the Ef do they expect us to care about actors we know are dead recreated with special effects?

[Scylla]

TRAILER

[MATTBLAK]

And the trailer being on YouTube? Do not - I repeat, do not read the comments for this trailer on YouTube. That is not a reverse-psychology ploy. Don't...

[sanman]

This movie was disappointingly bad, mainly due to bad writing and a formulaic approach.

It was like a shopping list of re-hashed favorite scenes from across the story franchise, especially Return of the Jedi.
These were arranged in a treasure hunt type of format that has them hopping from place to place in a mad dash.
Each stopover featured its obligatory distinct locale, as per an algorithmic routine.

Everything is stitched together through various blatantly contrived and even absurdly contradictory story script acrobatics.

Rey is again very over-powered, able to perform stupendous feats with relative ease using the Force. Nobody ever feels like they were ever at serious risk of suffering harm, and emotional bonds between characters just suddenly appear on cue, without actually feeling earned.

The visuals are of course very slick and over-the-top, which may perhaps give this film an appeal to younger viewers who have no investment in or attachment to the original trilogy.

The image of Disney and J J Abrams are probably going to take a hit over their handling of what's been a popular space opera story franchise.

[Khadgars]

This movie was disappointingly bad, mainly due to bad writing and a formulaic approach.

It was like a shopping list of re-hashed favorite scenes from across the story franchise, especially Return of the Jedi.
These were arranged in a treasure hunt type of format that has them hopping from place to place in a mad dash.
Each stopover featured its obligatory distinct locale, as per an algorithmic routine.

Everything is stitched together through various blatantly contrived and even absurdly contradictory story script acrobatics.

Rey is again very over-powered, able to perform stupendous feats with relative ease using the Force. Nobody ever feels like they were ever at serious risk of suffering harm, and emotional bonds between characters just suddenly appear on cue, without actually feeling earned.

The visuals are of course very slick and over-the-top, which may perhaps give this film an appeal to younger viewers who have no investment in or attachment to the original trilogy.

The image of Disney and J J Abrams are probably going to take a hit over their handling of what's been a popular space opera story franchise.

I appreciate your comments, not saying they are invalid, but after the Last Jedi this is a master piece imo.  It did a lot to undo the disaster the last film was 

[MATTBLAK]

I expected it to be better than 'The Last Jedi' - and it was. I expected to dislike it more - I didn't. The true heritage of Rey was always going to be a 50/50, either she's a Kenobi, or she's a ..... And those who guessed the other; well you were right. Those who didn't guess right? You were wrong, time to get over it - let's not be whiny b1tches about it... I was wrong and then I saw the full trailer a couple months back and then went - ah; I see where Abrams is going with this. Those who claimed that Rey was a 'Mary Sue' all this time simply were not paying attention - she was never going to be that, because to reveal who she truly was way ahead of time would have spoiled half the plot of the final film. Abrams, Disney et-all were never going to be that stupid.

There are a lot of long time Star Wars fans who have been hating on the sequel trilogy, because of a completely understandable but misguided sense of ownership over the franchise. You don't own it, guys - you consume it. BIG difference. You can vote with your wallet but that's where your influence began and more or less ended. I'm still really angry with JJ Abrams for what he did to the Star Trek franchise, which I still feel a much larger sense of ownership of, because I've been a fan since the 1960s and it was something that didn't need rebooting or changing (much). But I got over it!!

If I liken 'The Rise of Skywalker' to a plane that has now landed after a 42 year flight: even though it didn't make a perfect landing without damage - it managed to be a landing we can all walk away from, in one piece. And any landing you can walk away from is - as they say - one that...

...Never mind. I give the film 7/10 or 3.5 stars out of 5. Is the film good? It's good enough.

And thank Christ we don't have to avoid or watch those feverish, fanboi 'Theory' videos on YouTube anymore. There's one raving lunatic on YouTube who should have been put in a straitjacket for the OCD, seven-videos-per-week crap he was making to desperately try and guess what was going to happen. But hang on - that joker is now going to claim he's some sort of prophet or fan genius because one of his 200 theory videos was correct. God Almighty, spare us...

[Athelstane]

It's not about a sense of ownership.

It's about bad writing. And that's the problem with the sequels.

[hektor]

The sequel trilogy leads me to reevaluate positively the prequel trilogy. At least Lucas went for an original story, with the commercial war, the politics on Coruscant and within the Jedi order, and had beautiful worlds like Naboo. This is not a simple patchwork of copies of the best pieces of the original trilogy.

[MATTBLAK]

It's not about a sense of ownership.

It's about bad writing. And that's the problem with the sequels.

Yes - bad writing comes into it - I'm a writer and I wanted to b1tchslap Rian Johnson for some of the writing for 'The Last Jedi'. But I have also seen people time and again, using 'bad writing' as a Strawman for their sense of ownership and sometimes misogyny towards strong female characters - particularly the new ones. And some people want their franchises to be nice, safe and comfortably predictable. But that is not Art, I would argue: that is mere product. Science Fiction and Fantasy often thrives best when it takes big chances. But in the past - not just in this day and age - taking chances would not sell you tickets. Even George Lucas would admit that the original 'Star Wars' was not taking chances in many respects. He might be the first to tell you that 'Star Wars' always was a tribute and a repackaged mashup of classic mythologies and particularly; Cowboy Westerns, Samauri, and 'Flash Gordon' tropes and plots. I think we might all recognize that.

[Athelstane]

It's not about a sense of ownership.

It's about bad writing. And that's the problem with the sequels.

Yes - bad writing comes into it - I'm a writer and I wanted to b1tchslap Rian Johnson for some of the writing for 'The Last Jedi'. But I have also seen people time and again, using 'bad writing' as a Strawman for their sense of ownership and sometimes misogyny towards strong female characters - particularly the new ones.

Yes, that happens.

But really - sorry, I know I'm flogging a dead horse here - Rey really *is* a classic Mary Sue.

It's not like sci-fi/sci-fantasy lacks for fleshed out strong female protagonists with big (largely male) fanbases: Ripley in the ALIEN movies; Sarah Connor in the first couple TERMINATOR films; . . . heck, Leia herself in STAR WARS! Too often the shoe is on the other foot, with many critics feeling somehow obliged to defend a flat character against obnoxious amazing people.

And it's not Daisy Ridley's fault; she's one of the more naturally likable and charismatic actors in the new films. But she's given a one dimensional arc to work with, sadly. Rian Johnson's attempt to create some tension and growth with a temptation in TLJ falls flat, because her character is simply, utterly overpowered.

Both the prequels and the sequels are poorly written, just poorly written in different ways. With the prequels, it's just poor writers (principally Lucas) doing poor writing, from plot to dialogue (modestly salvaged at points in REVENGE OF THE SITH thanks to script polishers). Abrams and Kennedy clearly had more gifted writers to work with, but the result consistently looks like too many chefs in the kitchen, lurching one way and then another to meet imagined expectations. The one irony is that I think it has given many people a better appreciation of the prequels: yes, with the qualified exception of ROTS they're bad movies, but at least they're the result of a clear, consistent vision and narrative by Lucas.

[MATTBLAK]

I would argue that she might have started out that way - but she had to end up as something else, otherwise why bother introducing new characters at all? The new films had to - they simply could not carry on only with 60-something actors and characters. And certainly not with all-white and mostly male ones. And I'm more that demographic than I am Rey/Daisy Ridley!

Some little background: I was born in the 1960's. I am a multi-decade veteran of 'Geek Culture' before that was even a label or appellation. I am a veteran of Star Trek fandom from the beginning of the 1970's and also of Doctor Who, Gerry Anderson, DC, Marvel and classic SF novels as well. When 'Star Wars' debuted in 1977 I wasn't initially a fan. So many people raved about the special effects and the casual, lived-in and used look of that technology and universe. I didn't get the fuss - because I had already seen those effects and universes in my mind's eye, because of all the novels I read even as a kid, and all the comics I read/looked at. When 'The Empire Strikes Back' came out - that's when I became a Fan. I'm a writer - I've had three stories published in anthologies (no; you haven't heard of them) and I have written 'Fan Fiction' for Star Trek, Star Wars, Doctor Who, Gerry Anderson Etc for many years. And I know 'Mary Sue' doesn't mean what many people think it means.

Mary Sue is largely a literary creation, birthed from Fan Fiction by authors who create a talented, know-all, do-all character that they insert into an existing universe to interact with established beloved characters to either save their hides or ruin their successes - because the Fan Fiction author wants to use them as their avatar to put a stamp on that Universe. Did JJ Abrams do that with the character of Rey? Yes - and NO. Because Abrams is a professional writer, director and producer who makes real, 'popcorn' movies. He was given custody of the Star Wars universe because Lucas didn't want it anymore - he fricken sold it!! If Lucas had created the character of Rey or someone like her - would Boomer and some Millennial fans be shrieking that she's a 'Mary Sue'? I'd bet you my entire collection of 'Expanded Universe/Legends' novels (below) that they would not. Now; I would say that 'George could do No Wrong' but I know better - there are plenty of fans who really don't like the prequel Trilogy. But I say - except for a few miscast actors and some ill-advised minor characters - the prequel Trilogy is just Fine. 'The Rise Of Skywalker' is Fine or at least good enough.

Also: most Jedi and Force-sensitive characters must be Mary Sues, right?! I mean; they arrive with abilities that other characters don't have, talents and luck others don't have... Then maybe all Jedi's are Mary Sues - they become instant heroes don't they? Don't worry about it - even Palpatine must be one, too: he has convenient offspring that give him some background, because even after all these years, we don't know much about him. George sized him just right to be the Big Bad, with little or no background. So he must be the Evil Mary Sue Bwah-Hah-Hah!!

You know what?! To paraphrase another famous Disney Franchise: Why don't we all just "Let It Go..."

...P.S: if anyone wants to read my Star Wars/Star Trek crossover FanFic Novella - just ask. Guaranteed mostly free of any Mary Sues.

[JAFO]

At least it's getting better reviews than Cats.

[Athelstane]

I would argue that she might have started out that way - but she had to end up as something else, otherwise why bother introducing new characters at all? The new films had to - they simply could not carry on only with 60-something actors and characters. And certainly not with all-white and mostly male ones. And I'm more that demographic than I am Rey/Daisy Ridley!

Some little background: I was born in the 1960's. I am a multi-decade veteran of 'Geek Culture' before that was even a label or appellation. I am a veteran of Star Trek fandom from the beginning of the 1970's and also of Doctor Who, Gerry Anderson, DC, Marvel and classic SF novels as well. When 'Star Wars' debuted in 1977 I wasn't initially a fan. So many people raved about the special effects and the casual, lived-in and used look of that technology and universe. I didn't get the fuss - because I had already seen those effects and universes in my mind's eye, because of all the novels I read even as a kid, and all the comics I read/looked at. When 'The Empire Strikes Back' came out - that's when I became a Fan. I'm a writer - I've had three stories published in anthologies (no; you haven't heard of them) and I have written 'Fan Fiction' for Star Trek, Star Wars, Doctor Who, Gerry Anderson Etc for many years. And I know 'Mary Sue' doesn't mean what many people think it means.

Mary Sue is largely a literary creation, birthed from Fan Fiction by authors who create a talented, know-all, do-all character that they insert into an existing universe to interact with established beloved characters to either save their hides or ruin their successes - because the Fan Fiction author wants to use them as their avatar to put a stamp on that Universe. Did JJ Abrams do that with the character of Rey? Yes - and NO. Because Abrams is a professional writer, director and producer who makes real, 'popcorn' movies. He was given custody of the Star Wars universe because Lucas didn't want it anymore - he fricken sold it!! If Lucas had created the character of Rey or someone like her - would Boomer and some Millennial fans be shrieking that she's a 'Mary Sue'? I'd bet you my entire collection of 'Expanded Universe/Legends' novels (below) that they would not. Now; I would say that 'George could do No Wrong' but I know better - there are plenty of fans who really don't like the prequel Trilogy. But I say - except for a few miscast actors and some ill-advised minor characters - the prequel Trilogy is just Fine. 'The Rise Of Skywalker' is Fine or at least good enough.

Also: most Jedi and Force-sensitive characters must be Mary Sues, right?! I mean; they arrive with abilities that other characters don't have, talents and luck others don't have... Then maybe all Jedi's are Mary Sues - they become instant heroes don't they? Don't worry about it - even Palpatine must be one, too: he has convenient offspring that give him some background, because even after all these years, we don't know much about him. George sized him just right to be the Big Bad, with little or no background. So he must be the Evil Mary Sue Bwah-Hah-Hah!!

You know what?! To paraphrase another famous Disney Franchise: Why don't we all just "Let It Go..."

...P.S: if anyone wants to read my Star Wars/Star Trek crossover FanFic story - just ask. Guaranteed mostly free of any Mary Sues.

1. I'm really not seeing the Lucas argument much: Honestly, he torched most or all of his credibility with the disasters of the prequels. Attack of the Clones should have been sufficient for someone to stage an intervention (an intervention which required locking him up in a room while any future SW films were in production). Anakin remains a butt of jokes to this day, thanks to his cringingly bad dialogue and constant emo posturing - he's a badly written character, just badly written in a different way from Rey.

2. There was unquestionably a need for new major characters in any new trilogy. One would hope they'd be well written ones, though. Other franchises have managed it: the Avengers (with the awful exception of Captain Marvel); Mad Max with Furiosa; and so on.

And it's a shame to see how little was made of Poe and Finn, by the way, both characters with real potential as written in TFA. Poor Finn is basically reduced to comic relief. The sequels need to be Rey's story (or whatever lead character is in her place), but the supporting major characters deserve better than what they got.

3. Jedi are powerful beings, but they hardly need be Mary Sues or Gary Stus. Luke was not a Mary Sue; Obi Wan was not a Mary Sue; even Yoda was not a Mary Sue. (To be sure, you could have Alec Guinness reading from a C++ manual, and he would still make a great character out of it.) The reveal of her parentage in TROS is not a fix here, only an explanation. An overpowered character with no development is still an overpowered character with no development, however well explained it might be.

A new set of Star Wars films was never going to make everyone happy. But it's obvious that Kathleen Kennedy never really understood the property and what made it work, and when you factor in a studio obsessed with maximizing box office return, it's not a surprise to see the infamous turnover of writers and directors on these films.

[woods170]

I watched it this afternoon at Pathe's Ede.

IMO it's OK. Not bad. Not very good either. Just OK.
I'm not bothered by the obvious plot-holes because plot-holes are present in other episodes of the Star Wars saga as well.
I'm not bothered with the supposed bad writing because it isn't any worse than Episodes 1 to 3.

I just wish the director would have made the movie 10 to 15 minutes longer to slightly lessen the pace. Because it is quite hectic.

[sanman]

Here's my theory on what happened with this sequel trilogy, jaded and conspiracy-laden though it may be.

In 2011, the Game of Thrones TV series emerged onto the entertainment landscape and quickly established itself as a firm success. That story was premised on a particular twist - that an age-old savior-prophecy of a 'chosen one' was to be fulfilled this time by a pair of lovers (Jon Snow and Danaerys Targaryen), one of whom who has to tragically kill the other in order to save the world. In Hollywood, where plagiarism travels faster-than-lightspeed, a lightbulb went off in somebody's head, with the thought that this same idea could be repurposed for the Star Wars story franchise, to hopefully breathe new life into it along with a new round of profits. Thus the idea of "Star Wars: A New New Hope" was born, featuring Rey and Kylo Ren as the new pair.

The head of Disney's newly-purchased Lucasfilm, Kathleen Kennedy, was tasked to oversee the production of this new trilogy while not having any over-arching story plan for it beyond just an imported cloned premise. In contrast to Game of Thrones, there was no George R R Martin working on more novels and having the outlines of a broader story arc, and given that George Lucas was retired from the franchise after having cashed out, he had no real role or stake in architecting such an arc.

Disney, like a well-tuned corporate empire, has then efficiently brought together a bunch of big name talents to mechanically execute on a plan that had a seed, but no soul. And the results of this are plain for all to see.

J J Abrams, who originally made his name in television and had landed the Star Trek movie reboots, has likewise shown up to do this movie for the paycheque, while also re-capitulating what entertained him in his youth. And that's what he's done in this movie - re-hashed what was done before.

The power of the paycheque and the quarterly profit statement has prevailed, while inspiration and originality have taken a backseat to plagiarism and performing on command.

A lack of vision gave way to free-form arbitrary plot contrivance, which was passed off as pleasing the masses.
Rules and conventions that had evolved for a story universe were cast aside for expediency, and this was branded as boldness and originality.

Original Star Wars: I have a story to tell you.
New Star Wars: It's time for me to $ell a $tar War$ $tory again, so just take whatever I can come up with

This is akin to farming fertile land until it becomes dry dust.

[ChrisWilson68]

At least it's getting better reviews than Cats.

Lowest bar ever.  Disney really got lucky that the next biggest movie opening this week was Cats.

Or maybe it wasn't luck.  Maybe all the other studios knew that it would be suicide to send a good movie up against Star Wars, so they used this week as an opportunity to take out the trash.

[Oli]

In 2011, the Game of Thrones TV series emerged onto the entertainment landscape and quickly established itself as a firm success. That story was premised on a particular twist - that an age-old savior-prophecy of a 'chosen one' was to be fulfilled this time by a pair of lovers (Jon Snow and Danaerys Targaryen), one of whom who has to tragically kill the other in order to save the world. In Hollywood, where plagiarism travels faster-than-lightspeed, a lightbulb went off in somebody's head, with the thought that this same idea could be repurposed for the Star Wars story franchise, to hopefully breathe new life into it along with a new round of profits. Thus the idea of "Star Wars: A New New Hope" was born, featuring Rey and Kylo Ren as the new pair.

The first few seasons of GoT were anything but an "age-old savior-prophecy". It's not like that in the books either.

Instead it's inspired by all the generic save-the-world superhero theme park ride trash that dominates the big screen nowadays.