Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker (Post-release)
- Thread starter Vivek
- Start date
Joek3rr
Master Member
I'm still not entirely convinced he did "survive." Something about the way Palpatine's body looks says he's actually dead.
ThreadSketch
Well-Known Member
Scarecrow Joe
Sr Member
Nice review of the details and curiosities seen on TROS. Full of spoilers of course but totally neutral.
Interesting article about how TROS is doing at the box office. Apparently moviegoers who were apathetic about it have start to change their minds after actually experiencing it. It reached the 500 million and is heading surely for the 1 billion mark. It also established a new record of pre sales.
screenrant.com
In other news, locally the poll here is showing:
Positive to mostly positive reviews: 77.4%
Negative to mostly negative reviews: 22.6%
Thats a significant approval rate, considering how loud the hating crowd tries to be (and how some even down voted the movie without seeing it). Gives a new meaning to term "the silent majority".
Interesting article about how TROS is doing at the box office. Apparently moviegoers who were apathetic about it have start to change their minds after actually experiencing it. It reached the 500 million and is heading surely for the 1 billion mark. It also established a new record of pre sales.
Rise of Skywalker Has Second Biggest Christmas Box Office of All-Time
This franchise belongs in December, apparently.
screenrant.com
In other news, locally the poll here is showing:
Positive to mostly positive reviews: 77.4%
Negative to mostly negative reviews: 22.6%
Thats a significant approval rate, considering how loud the hating crowd tries to be (and how some even down voted the movie without seeing it). Gives a new meaning to term "the silent majority".
Well I took my son to watch it as I promised, and on second viewing, my opinion has softened only very slightly.
I still can't help believe that JJ could've taken what Rian did with Luke and Kylo and really made a compelling arc for both in this film. Luke could've been a presence in Kylo/Ben's story, to explain that being a Skywalker was a heavy burden, but one that Luke now realises is not supposed to fit in the old Jedi style of beliefs, ways of thinking and all that. It could then tie into Qui-gon's and ESB Yoda's teachings of living in the moment and trusting your feelings then and there, not trying to look beyond the horizon for something that might not happen.
For me, that could've then been explored further as he meets the Emperor etc, and culminates in Ben being redeemed and with Anakin's force ghost also appearing at the end, both he and Ben finally learn that letting go of fear etc, shows them how to cheat death and resurrect Rey, (Though i'd have preferred Anakin, Luke and Leia perhaps giving up their identities in the Force forever for Ben to live after Rey's death).
I feel that would've still kept the emphasis on Anakin being the Chosen One and finally defeating the Emperor, not only physically, but completely rejecting the lies and manipulations of his fears in the PT. As well as keeping the Skywalkers the main focus, despite them all being gone at the end. Then Rey being alive, forming the Order of Skywalker.
Mind you, I'm not particularly gifted with a creative mind
I still can't help believe that JJ could've taken what Rian did with Luke and Kylo and really made a compelling arc for both in this film. Luke could've been a presence in Kylo/Ben's story, to explain that being a Skywalker was a heavy burden, but one that Luke now realises is not supposed to fit in the old Jedi style of beliefs, ways of thinking and all that. It could then tie into Qui-gon's and ESB Yoda's teachings of living in the moment and trusting your feelings then and there, not trying to look beyond the horizon for something that might not happen.
For me, that could've then been explored further as he meets the Emperor etc, and culminates in Ben being redeemed and with Anakin's force ghost also appearing at the end, both he and Ben finally learn that letting go of fear etc, shows them how to cheat death and resurrect Rey, (Though i'd have preferred Anakin, Luke and Leia perhaps giving up their identities in the Force forever for Ben to live after Rey's death).
I feel that would've still kept the emphasis on Anakin being the Chosen One and finally defeating the Emperor, not only physically, but completely rejecting the lies and manipulations of his fears in the PT. As well as keeping the Skywalkers the main focus, despite them all being gone at the end. Then Rey being alive, forming the Order of Skywalker.
Mind you, I'm not particularly gifted with a creative mind
I think Mark Hamill put it best, regarding big box office takes and quality....
As with parties with drooling mouths who tap their brakes and crane their necks at a car wreck, don’t assume that either curiosity, or a compulsive reactionary need to see what everyone else is looking at, translates into a quality viewing experience.
As with parties with drooling mouths who tap their brakes and crane their necks at a car wreck, don’t assume that either curiosity, or a compulsive reactionary need to see what everyone else is looking at, translates into a quality viewing experience.
Last edited:
Thing is, he is right, but as an actor he doesn't actually have to worry about the financial aspects of the business in the way that the head of these studios have to.
It'd be fantastic if they could all make excellent films all of the time, but they have shareholders to please, staff to pay etc, and sometimes a big dumb money making film, can ease those concerns, allowing them to manage their business.
I think we can get caught up in the ways of an ideal world, and forget the realities.
Scarecrow Joe
Sr Member
Totally different from just curiosity. People who have actually seen the movie give an opinion afterwards. That number seems to go in favor of the movie. Looking at an accident for curiosity sake is an absurd comparison....the hamburger one is even more ridiculous but thats what happen when you must NEED to grasp anything that sustains your crooked view of the facts. The movie while not perfect has been reviewed mostly positive. Not only HERE but elsewhere too.
My statement, following-up on Mark Hamill’s comment, was non-specific to TROS and more broadly applied to understanding that a large box office take does not equal quality.
If one does not believe that simple curiosity is a driver in getting butts in seats of a movie theater, then I encourage one to consider how movies are marketed and why hooking the curiosity of non-fans of an ongoing franchise is a necessary element of a large box office take.
Here is a perfect example:
Last edited:
Scarecrow Joe
Sr Member
Again.....reviews are made AFTER the fact. They are not only a measure of curiosity. In terms of box office initial numbers may reflect curiosity, those are the first weekend numbers. The numbers have started to show an increase after the first initial (weekend=curiosity?) ones. That translates into people actually enjoying the movie, spreading the word. Those first weekend numbers showed that as you say curiosity was indeed a factor but the mostly positive reviews given by people who saw it are maintaining a steady increase at the box office. Those numbers show a majority not a minority. Of course box office numbers dont mean a high quality perfect film but they do reflect a mostly good, enjoyable film. One enjoyed by the majority. If in doubt look at that truly major flop Cats....
Again...and I am not emotionally tied to proving a point on any one film so I will leave this as my last point on this subject, which is a general point of view the I’m offering for consideration.
Pull the list of the top 25 current all-time box office champions and lay the consensus of their reviews (both critics and audience reviews) over the top of them and see if large box office hauls always equated to a universally hailed movie-watching experience for all of these films.
Otherwise, I feel pretty solid that I have weighed the evidence in my point of view. If anyone disagrees and feels compelled to add the “last word” on the subject, I’m fine with that.
Pull the list of the top 25 current all-time box office champions and lay the consensus of their reviews (both critics and audience reviews) over the top of them and see if large box office hauls always equated to a universally hailed movie-watching experience for all of these films.
Otherwise, I feel pretty solid that I have weighed the evidence in my point of view. If anyone disagrees and feels compelled to add the “last word” on the subject, I’m fine with that.
Last edited:
Scarecrow Joe
Sr Member
No they are not always equated with universally hailed movies. Never said that but yet....why try to insist I did? My point is quite simple. TROS as it sits now has proven to be be mostly positive reviewed film and not a flop. Even the poll here seems to point to that direction. Here! I believe some here are having a very difficult time accepting what is a measured, objective fact. They hoped for a flop, they didnt get one. That is my point and its a verifiable one.
Its funny but box office numbers are good when they seemed to prove the hating crowd argument. There were people here bringing that up when the initial weekend numbers were thought to be pointing at a flop. They were valid then. Now that there is a different story same numbers are ridiculed? Not valid? Where is the objectivity here? It makes as much sense as people critiquing a movie without seeing it! Is that....logical in any way?
Its funny but box office numbers are good when they seemed to prove the hating crowd argument. There were people here bringing that up when the initial weekend numbers were thought to be pointing at a flop. They were valid then. Now that there is a different story same numbers are ridiculed? Not valid? Where is the objectivity here? It makes as much sense as people critiquing a movie without seeing it! Is that....logical in any way?
HMSwolfe
Master Member
Ahh yes, the only metric by which films are judged in terms of quality, the audience reaction…that means this film here is good, right?
Oh wait, that’s Transformers 1…
While entertainment value is indeed a part of whether or not a film is considered “good” or “successful”, it’s also the most subjective, and general audiences of general audience films are the least discerning when it comes to quality. It’s mob mentality. It’s what makes a lot of live performances. It’s the environment and audience with which it is viewed, and each individual viewer’s ability to detach from the mob and analyze their own reaction to a film. That’s what made the OT special—they were the really the first big blockbusters, but appealing to a general audience didn’t mean stuff was just happening all over the place, like someone dangling keys in front of a cat or baby. They may not be “Citizen Kane”, as someone pretentiously made reference to as if it were the pinnacle of cinema, but it’s long-lasting appeal has proven to be through the quality of the films and not due to nostalgia, or just special effects, or by pop-culture prevalence, by the simple fact that many people who weren’t even alive when any of the OT were released love the films.
Oh wait, that’s Transformers 1…
While entertainment value is indeed a part of whether or not a film is considered “good” or “successful”, it’s also the most subjective, and general audiences of general audience films are the least discerning when it comes to quality. It’s mob mentality. It’s what makes a lot of live performances. It’s the environment and audience with which it is viewed, and each individual viewer’s ability to detach from the mob and analyze their own reaction to a film. That’s what made the OT special—they were the really the first big blockbusters, but appealing to a general audience didn’t mean stuff was just happening all over the place, like someone dangling keys in front of a cat or baby. They may not be “Citizen Kane”, as someone pretentiously made reference to as if it were the pinnacle of cinema, but it’s long-lasting appeal has proven to be through the quality of the films and not due to nostalgia, or just special effects, or by pop-culture prevalence, by the simple fact that many people who weren’t even alive when any of the OT were released love the films.
Scarecrow Joe
Sr Member
Poor thing, I already established that. My point was explained before. The film has not been a flop, like you wished it would be. Sorry. You can keep rationalizing it ANY way you want, you can keep on belittling anyone who dares to enjoy it.... The fact is......wait for it....the MAJORITY liked it. That just rubs you in all the wrong ways, right? Even the majority of your peers here, liked it. We of course are the lesser beings. The not too smart ones. That how you and your crowd sees things? Oh well...... Keep retorting.
Zuiun
Sr Member
This is not entirely true and subject to a LOT of revisionist history by Lucas himself.
His original treatment was a convoluted mess, until some of his filmmaker friends (Francis Ford Coppola, for one) talked some sense to him. Then he abandoned his original story outline and created a self-contained, one-off story for Star Wars on the assumption that this was his one chance to tell the story.
When it became clear he was going to be able to make more films, THAT'S when things got messy. Vader was never intended to be Luke's father in Star Wars (now hastily renamed to A New Hope). In fact, the original screenplay for Empire featured a conversation with Luke and his Force Ghost dad, Anakin, who was decidedly NOT Vader. And the mention of "there is another" in Empire was never intended to be Leia -- it was going to be a completely new character. It was around this time that Lucas started giving interviews stating that he planned a total of 9 films, 3 prequels and 3 sequels. This "other" was supposed to be the focus of the 3 sequel films. while the prequels were going to be the adventures of Anakin and Obi-Wan.
When making Jedi, Lucas realized that introducing a new vital character in the third film would be messy. He was also giving up on his notion of making 9 films, so he revised his plan again and made Leia the "other" and suddenly Luke's sister. But even that plot thread was reduced to the point where it became nearly inconsequential to the overall story. It was meant to be a revelation on the level of Vader being Luke's father, but at the time of the release I remember it falling kind of flat.
By the time the 90's rolled around, Lucas had entirely abandoned his notion of 9 films to the point of denying that was ever the plan (despite many interviews contradicting this). Now insisting that his plan all along was to tell the story of the rise and fall of Anakin.
The point being, the original films were full of nearly as much WTF pulling the rug out from under the audience moments as the new trilogy, but audiences have been much more forgiving of it over the years. The original films are full of plot holes, inconsistencies, and just really weird choices, but we love them anyway.
Axlotl
Master Member
Just can't keep your trolling confined to one thread, can you?
What exactly is your goal here, with this crusade you're on?
It seems to have less to do with the actual movie and more to do with people you just don't like.
Zuiun
Sr Member
One thing that I think some people here keep forgetting (and so why it's hard for them to grasp your point) is that Star Wars was never made for fanboys.
Lucas didn't slavishly adhere to the Joseph Campbell "hero's journey" school of thought in order to appeal to a small section of ultra-enthusiastic, highly opinionated audience members. He stuck to that narrative for MASS APPEAL. He wanted to tell a story that was available and understandable to the widest possible audience.
That has been the ethos of Star Wars all along. The movies are made to appeal to a general audience, not the loudest dissenters in fan forums.
And the box office numbers reflect that. General audiences did not hate The Last Jedi and are not hating this film in the way that those loud voices wish they were.
Toadmeister
Sr Member
Yeah I know.
Similar threads
