Reelo
Sr Member
This, as well as the last 2 minutes of RotS where Luke and Leia are given to their respective foster parents, with Williams' music underneath.
Star Wars: The Force Awakens (Post-release)
- Thread starter Vivek
- Start date
Makes some good rebuttal to That Huffington post review.
https://m.facebook.com/notes/matty-...-awakens-the-rise-of-idiot-/10153163095086277
https://m.facebook.com/notes/matty-...-awakens-the-rise-of-idiot-/10153163095086277
JD
Master Member
Possibly more about the Force in these movies than you can possibly imagine...
http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2...mid=0de856&cmp=em-data-na-na-newsltr_20160106
http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2...mid=0de856&cmp=em-data-na-na-newsltr_20160106
cayman shen
Master Member
JD
Master Member
Hence the article mentions "Applied Force" or "discernable Force use" and even the ten Force abilities they "tallied." I'm sure - like you are - that the Force comes into play a lot more than mentioned, but the article presents a fairly lengthy, in depth and fun measurement of measurable Force use in the Original Six.
Just think: 4,025+ hours went into producing this article - and that doesn't take into account tallying the data, writing the article or designing the page it's all present on. At US minimum wage - this article cost nearly $30,000 to produce (theoretically, at least).
cayman shen
Master Member
kristen jones
Master Member
Well, he DID say:
"Now, keep in mind I’m not a professional reviewer or even a journalist. I’m just a regular guy who has spent the better part of his life dedicated to studying story structure, plot, character, scene study and script development while working on twenty some-odd motion pictures over the last seventeen years. I might not be the guy to question the Huffington Post’s lofty review, but I’ll give it a shot."
Honestly, I found his tone refreshing. of course that's probably because he clearly feels as frustrated by the "internet horse****" as I do. I agreed with every single point he made. points--by the way--which were all backed up with either dialog or scenes directly from the film, or with ordinary common sense.
I think he killed it, frankly. Good on him :thumbsup
Last edited:
JD
Master Member
Yes, I read that.
You'd think someone trying to justify his points by saying that he's dedicated the better part of his life to studying story structure and other nonsense would be a little better prepared to write without a chip on the shoulder or with a little more basic grasp of... (gasp) storytelling and plot. I understand liking a movie, but there's a point where we have accept the weaknesses that come along with it - there's nothing wrong with letting the good outweigh the bad or enjoying a movie for what it is.
The guy claims to have "analyzed the story structure and plot. I got to know the characters, both new and old, and came to understand the motivations and performances of the actors portraying them" along with his already mentioned studies of story structure - you'd think he could do better than this.
Look at his explanation for the first "plot hole For starters, the guy only mentions the headline of this (and all of the?) "unforgivable plot hole" and ignores the rest of the information given - doesn't mention that Finn lied about getting the shields down, glazes over that the Resistance really had little, if any, plan and he even really ignores the HP main bullet point (it's even in bold)... makes me wonder if this guy has even seen the original Star Wars.
Sure, the HP article is basically click bait and it's sensationalized. Are these plot holes unforgivable? (Some aren't even plot holes or are just pitpicky) No - the author of the HP piece even starts out with "I loved the film. Seriously, I did. ... Why can't we just admit that BB-8 is adorable, Finn is hilarious, Rey is badass, seeing Han and Chewie again was awesome, the special effects were tremendous, Poe is Soloesque, Kylo Ren is intriguing, and this movie makes absolutely no sense whatsoever?" Is that really any worse than this guy's claims about not being a journalist, and that being a student nonsense?
This guy's rebuttal to the article is fanboy posturing at its worst (and that says a lot based on posts here).
Maybe I'm the only one that likes to nitpick and come up or read others explanations about plot holes or other devices that were left unsaid, off screen or just ignored.
Last edited:
kristen jones
Master Member
I just simply don't agree with you at all. Sorry, but I don't and I can't apologize for it. The "plot holes" are NOT plot holes.. just as he pointed out that they weren't.
80% of the things that the Huff Po writer called "plot holes" were shown to have been a case of him either not paying attention to the dialog/scenes of the film, or having been willfully ignored in order to give him something to rant about.
Did he have a chip on his shoulder? YES. I suppose I do too, because I really hate it when people pick at something and claim to have discovered "plot holes" when it's clear they just weren't paying attention or didn't get it.
80% of the things that the Huff Po writer called "plot holes" were shown to have been a case of him either not paying attention to the dialog/scenes of the film, or having been willfully ignored in order to give him something to rant about.
Did he have a chip on his shoulder? YES. I suppose I do too, because I really hate it when people pick at something and claim to have discovered "plot holes" when it's clear they just weren't paying attention or didn't get it.
It fills my heart with joy to read posts on my FB and Twitter feeds of families going to enjoy this film together. I'm amazed how many of my friends wives are speaking up about how much they enjoyed this movie and had no interest in the franchise previously. I think some of these "pundits" should go see this film with a group of kids and let their experience partially inform their opinions.
cayman shen
Master Member
This ^ I know so many people who were not SW nerds who came out of the theater stupidly happy.
Heisenberg07
Active Member
Yep...I made my wife go to the premiere with me on 12/17. She has zero interest in SW...I mean zero. She liked the movie a lot. So much so that she admitted to me days later that she is now "intrigued" enough to want to sit down and watch the OT with me. In my opinion TFA is a slam dunk because it shows us old time fans Disney knows what we want and what a SW film should be and it is breeding a whole new group of fans. I also just talked to a buddy of mine who is a casual fan and he and his family have now seen the movie 3 times at the request of his wife and jr high aged kids, 2 girls and a boy. Home run SW is back!!!
kristen jones
Master Member
Yes indeed....despite a vocal minority's attempt to nay say it, Star Wars IS back! :thumbsup
"Plot Hole" enthusiasts be like:
JD
Master Member
Sigh. You "simply don't agree with (me) at all" - but, then you basically state the same thing I did by saying this guy had a chip on his shoulder. :confused You keep that up and "someone" might take you off the "blind faith SW list" and not speak to you again.
Again, if you read my comments - it's less about the (cough, cough) "facts" this guy presents and much more about the way he opted to present them. Again, as I said in my first post this is "...less a rebuttal than a poorly written diatribe and while some of his rebukes might not be too bad if he could write them without the chip on his shoulder."
Had this guy actually written a well thought out, meaningful note or post (and I know he's not an author) - more concerned with addressing the actual elements in the HP article and in a mature, rational way... well, then we might have something. Instead we get name calling and expletives (c'mon - Star Wars still has a young audience) and often points that totally miss the mark.
It's not unreasonable to think that HP author is much more a casual Star Wars fan than the other guy (and all of us). Again, I don't agree with the term unforgivable and I guess he played loosely with the term "plot hole" (while I do suggest re-reading the HP opening paragraphs again, the author does use those terms in them) - but, it stands to reason these are questions that other casual viewers may have had (and there seem to be a lot of them). Maybe the author could've done his research and all that - but, that becomes less a representation of Joe Moviegoer and more akin to those of us in fandom - and it also gives us something to talk about and nitpick - sadly some folks would rather rant about it.
Does that make it lazy journalism? I don't think so - glancing through that article, it sure seems to touch on a lot issues I have and have seen elsewhere. Is there filler in the article? YES - and he basically acknowledges that in the opener.
- - - Updated - - -
That actually seems a whole heck of a lot more like the guy who wrote the response to the plot hole article. Just saying...
Laspector
Master Member
I will agree with that. I came back from the Christmas holiday and my boss asked me if I had seen it (she knows I am a big SW geek), and I told her "twice" and she began to discuss the movie with me. I was completely taken aback. Never in my wildest dreams would I have ever guessed that she would go see it.
JD
Master Member
I get asked about it, too (and I'm up to 5 times now). At the gym, at work and other social gatherings - it's awesome that Star Wars is back and that so many friends (be them close friends or extended) seeing the movie and wanting to talk about it - even if it's briefly.
No one is denying SW is back. It's great that it's back - you can't escape it, it's everywhere.
Similar threads
