Star Wars Megathread Episode IV: A New Thread: UNTAGGED SPOILERS? 1 WEEK BAN - Film, Television and Music

[QUOTE=153x;52997964]if not for some of the bad jokes and a few character arcs that were totally pointless filler, it was easily a 9/10. if I could watch an edit of the film with just luke/rey/kylo/snoke and a few other bits that actually mattered, that would be awesome.[/QUOTE] I saw this Youtube video on how A New Hope basically had a bunch of pointless shit in it and the editing made it waaaay better. Granted TLJ wasn't as bad but the comedy bits as a lot of people said and [sp]the Casino planet[/sp] along with [sp]the shoehorned animal scenes and Luke astral projecting across the universe and then randomly dying[/sp]. I also didn't like how [sp]they added in lightspeed kamikazes because they just invalidates a metric fuck ton of space battles. Why don't the rebels just use their older ships to blow the fuck out of Dreadnoughts?[/sp] [video]https://youtu.be/GFMyMxMYDNk[/video]

[QUOTE=proboardslol;52998131]- The Dark knight was better than Batman begins [/QUOTE] good god

Empire Strikes Back is like the epitome of relying on the other films. Not only would it not work as a stand alone movie, but it isn't even a self contained one with a real beginning and end. It just kind of starts and then it just kind of goes until it's over. I really think insisting that movie relying on other movies makes it a bad movie is total bullshit being made up by people who didn't like TLJ and want to put on a movie critic hat and declare why for a bunch of reasons whether or not they're even valid.

[QUOTE=Lone Wolf807;52998609][sp]Why don't the rebels just use their older ships to blow the fuck out of Dreadnoughts?[/sp] [/QUOTE] [sp]It's a risky maneuver that wastes a lot of resources even if it works and the only reason it worked in this case was because Hux told them to ignore the big ship and shoot the fleeing transport ships.[/sp]

The ram thing [sp]cannot work in most cases because if the timing is wrong or the distance is incorrect you'll just enter hyperdrive too late and cause no damage or too early and literally not touch your target at all. It was a really lucky desperation move.[/sp]

[URL="https://youtu.be/YuEnYHsD6vk"]YourMovieSucks[/URL] said it best [QUOTE]This movie is flawed and there's plenty of dumb things and cheeseball moments, but if you didn't want to see that why are you even watching a Star Wars film?[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;52997945]My opinion is that if a film relies on another one to be a good movie, it's a shitty movie.[/QUOTE] So the entire Harry Potter series, Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, most MCU films are all shitty movies then whats wrong with wanting to watch things that are meant to go together as a series and yes, the first films in the HP, LotR, SW series do rely on having sequels to further tell the story, they're a part of a bigger package. It's one thing if it uses the fame of a better film to get by, but there are a ton of films that are interdependent because they're a part of a [U]series[/U]. Watching most of the HP films (though not all, I'm sure you could skip 1 or 2 of them by reading a summery) helps give you a bigger picture of the world as a whole, just watching Chamber, Order, and part 2 of Deathly hollows would be an incomplete experience and ruin it.

[QUOTE=J!NX;52998657]So the entire Harry Potter series, Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, most MCU films are all shitty movies then whats wrong with wanting to watch things that are meant to go together as a series and yes, the first films in the HP, LotR, [B]SW series[/B] do rely on having sequels to further tell the story, they're a part of a bigger package.[/QUOTE] For LOTR/HP sure, but the original Star Wars was very much a contained package. It was when ESB was announced that Lucas said he wanted to release nine films total, which has now been a work in progress for nearly forty years. Anything past ANH is designed to fit in sequels, but ANH is very much a standalone experience.

[QUOTE=proboardslol;52998131] - Prisoner of Azkaban isn't good because it relies on chamber of secrets; to understand the film you may need to watch 1 & 2, but prisoner of Azkaban is good on its own (the best in the series) [/QUOTE] It's bad because it relies on 2 previous films but its good on its own and the best in the ser- what what are you even talking about. What. [editline]22nd December 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=proboardslol;52998131] - Kill Bill 1 is 1000x better than Kill Bill 2 [/QUOTE] I'm pretty sure Quentin himself wanted it to be a singular film. The films are practically one in the same, you can't have one without the other. This is like saying "Pulp fiction is 1000x better than Pulp fiction", it doesn't even make sense [QUOTE=proboardslol;52998131] - The wrath of Khan may rely on the show but not on Star Trek 1 [/QUOTE] This is different how??? [editline]22nd December 2017[/editline] people are saying films are bad for relying on others but are you able to actually explain why that makes it bad? Because If every film had to explain shit that happened in previous films every time, it would get as repetitive. Imagine if in every sequal that's meant to go together you'd have a guy just explains the plot for no reason out of the blue. Some films are meant to be one part of a bigger series.

[QUOTE=Lone Wolf807;52998609]I saw this Youtube video on how A New Hope basically had a bunch of pointless shit in it and the editing made it waaaay better. Granted TLJ wasn't as bad but the comedy bits as a lot of people said and [sp]the Casino planet[/sp] along with [sp]the shoehorned animal scenes and Luke astral projecting across the universe and then randomly dying[/sp]. I also didn't like how [sp]they added in lightspeed kamikazes because they just invalidates a metric fuck ton of space battles. Why don't the rebels just use their older ships to blow the fuck out of Dreadnoughts?[/sp][/QUOTE] Luke didn't [sp]randomly die it was explained earlier in the movie that the effort from doing what he did would kill someone. His death was handled perfectly if you ask me.[/sp]

[QUOTE=J!NX;52998657]So the entire Harry Potter series, Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, most MCU films are all shitty movies then whats wrong with wanting to watch things that are meant to go together as a series[/QUOTE] The thing everybody seems to be missing or ignoring here is that he was responding to somebody saying TLJ will be seen as better once Episode 9 comes along to fix things and tie up messy plot lines. We should not have to wait for a sequel to "patch" the middle film's problems.

I thought it was pretty flawed but still fucking great. A big part of the problem i think was the result of The Force Awakens being so mediocre and unoriginal as a set up. Given what Rian Johnson had to work with, i think he did some cool stuff with the story. They wasted Finn, though, he might as well not have been in it, a couple of the sub plots ended up not really amounting to anything in the overall story or developing the characters. But beyond that i thought it was really impressive. Well written, genuinely bold, and stylistically gorgeous. There was like no cool shit set up to make me excited for the next one, but tbh given that it'll probably have the same approach as the force awakens, I'm not really expecting much.

TLJ was filler crap that adds nothing to the franchise. They're not putting any thought whatsoever into this trilogy. LucasFilm is ran by a bunch of idiots.

[QUOTE=Bread_Baron;52998724]Luke didn't [sp]randomly die it was explained earlier in the movie that the effort from doing what he did would kill someone. His death was handled perfectly if you ask me.[/sp][/QUOTE] It's a trick that [sp]only dead people can normally do and Luke does it while alive and at the top of like 60+ years of age, so of course he'll eat dirt.[/sp] On top of this I'll add that [sp]when a Jedi becomes sufficiently attuned to the force they can reach a state of transcendence where they effectively enter the cosmic flow, astral projection is just the physical manifestation of that. At this point their body is effectively useless and only serves to anchor them to the mortal realm for a little while longer, as soon as they don't need it they don't have much of a reason to keep it. That's why Yoda fucks off into a space ghost in ROTJ exactly when he does and not at some random point in the future, he's trained Luke and has finally atoned for his past failures and accomplished his goal of keeping the Jedi alive, so he disappears. Obi Wan kind of was shoved ahead of schedule but ultimately still fulfilled his purpose by setting Luke on the right path.[/sp]

[QUOTE=dillspears;52998785]TLJ was filler crap that adds nothing to the franchise. They're not putting any thought whatsoever into this trilogy. LucasFilm is ran by a bunch of idiots.[/QUOTE] I doubt you'll be able to watch episode 7 and 9 while still feeling like you have the complete story. Sure there are parts which seem inconsequential, like the whole casino plotline, but to say that it adds absolutely nothing is straight wrong.

Rey is a boring main character. She's just too powerful.

[QUOTE=Speedhax;52998808]Rey is a boring main character. She's just too powerful.[/QUOTE] Probably haven't been paying enough attention then, considering the films make a frequent point that Rey has potential but also has a fundamental misunderstanding of the force as a concept and that everything she's done thus far is unimportant baby shit. Being able to lift objects with your mind is entry level. She has absolutely no control over the deeper aspects of her connection to the force and as such remains rather weak in terms of how powerful force users can actually end up being. Kylo Ren is technically stronger than she is but he's also limited by the fact he's fueled by baby rage.

[QUOTE=Zeos;52998055]And there are others that require the others to make sense too? Cool I can pull examples of the complete opposite as well? Back to the Future 2 is shit because its plot hinges on both the events of the first film directly, and ends on a dramatic cliffhanger for a third part. It's a fucking literature device that has existed forever, where there's a middle part that bridges the first and third acts of a larger story, while having a more condensed and more character driven rather story than plot progression[/QUOTE] You want to talk about literature devices? Then let's talk story arc. If a middle part's story's most exciting parts are what comes before the beginning and after the end, then yes, it's a terrible story. Does BTTF2 have its own exposition, rising action, climax, falling action, and resolution? If so, can it be appreciated on its own without having watched the other two movies? Is the self-contained story worth watching to begin with? If yes to these questions, then it's not reliant on other films to be worthwhile. It's a good film that happens to have a continued larger story arc that has its own, separate resolution in the final movie. If no to these questions, then it's not a very good movie, is it? It's either a straight-up incomplete story because it's missing one of the key elements of basic story structure, or it's so devoid of worldbuilding and basic context clues that it can't be understood without extensive prior knowledge of the subject and is thus poorly written for an audience of anything but fans who know the story by heart. The point I'm trying to get across is that, ideally, a trilogy's story pattern should look something like this: [t]https://i.imgur.com/k9Cvyxs.png[/t] If it doesn't, and it looks like this: [t]https://i.imgur.com/UXEtT6L.png[/t] Then yeah, that middle movie's pretty shit no matter how good the first, third, and overarching parts are.

[QUOTE=Speedhax;52998808]Rey is a boring main character. She's just too powerful.[/QUOTE] how? she hasnt even accomplished anything on her own. reys story so far is succeeding with the help of friends, the one exception you could maybe say is [sp]throwing the saber to kylo in the chamber scene to save him this time[/sp]. she has "raw power" but thats about it

[QUOTE=Ganerumo;52998121]The Dark Knight Toy Story 2 Empire Strikes Back The Godfather Part 2 The Good, The Bad and the Ugly (and For A Few Dollars More) Terminator 2 Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan Aliens Road Warrior (and Fury Road) Evil Dead 2 X-Men 2 Prisoner of Azkaban Skyfall Dawn of the Dead Mission Impossible Desperado Kill Bill 2 Hellboy 2 Shrek 2[/QUOTE] Those might mostly be be sequels, but none of them [B]rely[/B] on other movies to be good movies. Nor does Last Jedi. All of this is moot.

[QUOTE=Ganerumo;52998134]All of these films objectively "rely" on another film if only on virtue of their setting, characters and chronology. They're not necessarily better than the original let alone objectively so but they're still not "shitty", which is my point.[/QUOTE] I don’t mean to be pedantic but The Good, Bad, and the Ugly does not objectively rely on any other film. The “trilogy” is all very loosely connected in the sense that Clint Eastwood wears the same poncho in each film and has the same mannerisms. The movies take place in no particular order and Eastwood’s character is a blank slate in each installment. The films were marketed as a Trilogy in the US to help sell them to American audiences while the Director never considered them to be one.

[QUOTE]tiny vocal minority.[/QUOTE] [quote]4,441 [/quote] I'll take "what is ironic sample size" for 1000, Alex

This doesn't surprise me at all. Especially now that we know the rotten tomatoes user score was flooded with fake reviews by an alt-right manchild worried about the "gayification" of Luke and Poe.

Was anyone else kind of confused by the [sp]steamer fake out? I laughed because it seemed so out of place, it felt like something from spaceballs[/sp]

[QUOTE=The Jack;52998582]Without having seen TLJ, I thought FN was the main character for TFA. Was hoping he could use the force, honestly. The guy's just way more relatable than Rey. I didn't find her believable, she was too young to be the master of everything, but too old to be playing with helmets and waiting on her parents. Also wrong choice of accent. FN had motivations and goals.[/QUOTE] It's Finn not FN

[QUOTE=27X;52999056]I'll take "what is ironic sample size" for 1000, Alex[/QUOTE] How is it ironic? A good sample size is usually about 1000 people, so having over 4,000 is definitely not a bad thing.

More than 4000 people are grumpy with Star Wars, so their aggregation might be fundamentally sound, pretty sure the actual metric is more divided and fractious as a metric shit ton of people have seen this movie.

[QUOTE=27X;52999405]More than 4000 people are grumpy with Star Wars, so their aggregation might be fundamentally sound, pretty sure the actual metric is more divided and fractious as a metric shit ton of people have seen this movie.[/QUOTE] do you not know how statistics and extrapolation work? as long as the sample was random it's should be decently close to the real percentage.

I know exactly how extrapolation works and my issue isn't with the sample itself, it's where and how the sample was aggregated in the first place, namely surveymonkey. Confirmation bias is a thing.

If you want a visual spectacle but don't care about major plot holes, go and see The Last Jedi. Otherwise don't.