Star Wars: The Last Jedi (Post-release)

What did you think of Star Wars: The Last Jedi?

  • It was great. Loved it. Don't miss it at the theaters.

    Votes: 154 26.6%
  • It was good. Liked it very much. Worth the theater visit.

    Votes: 135 23.4%
  • It was okay. Not too pleased with it. Could watch it at the cinema once or wait for home video.

    Votes: 117 20.2%
  • It was disappointing. Watch it on home video instead.

    Votes: 70 12.1%
  • It was bad. Don't waste your time with it.

    Votes: 102 17.6%

  • Total voters
    578
...

Not sure why you mean it should be kep within a TV series. Nevertheless, it sure as hell wasn't explored in the movies coz As it was mentioned before, Rey is inherently good, and unlike Luke she had absolutely no sign of falter, temptation or anything.
...

Because the mechanics of a real movie do IMO not allow you to develop and explain such a complex concept within the time boundaries of the format. Movie: one story, start middle end. series episode: overall story arc, various plots, enough time to explore various stories, characters, sub-arcs, subplots etc.
 
Because the mechanics of a real movie do IMO not allow you to develop and explain such a complex concept within the time boundaries of the format. Movie: one story, start middle end. series episode: overall story arc, various plots, enough time to explore various stories, characters, sub-arcs, subplots etc.
I think it could be done. But you need to set it up over multiple movies. TLJ was the perfect opportunity to start the ball rolling but all it did with regards to this is said that there might be a ball. If ep9 is the conclusion then I agree it would be rushed to introduce, develop and pay off such concept. But then again, Rey is very much like the Jedi ideal, naturally good, no real temptation or failures, so don’t know how that would be the route.
 
I think it could be done. But you need to set it up over multiple movies. TLJ was the perfect opportunity to start the ball rolling but all it did with regards to this is said that there might be a ball. If ep9 is the conclusion then I agree it would be rushed to introduce, develop and pay off such concept. But then again, Rey is very much like the Jedi ideal, naturally good, no real temptation or failures, so don’t know how that would be the route.

Exactly what I am aiming at. And if you do develop something like that over a couple of movies, you get a series. And then we are closer to a TV format than a movie format. I am starting to have problems with the Marvel movies. They more and more feel to me like TV movies than "real" movies. It is because I am not introduced to anything new, you are thrown into the action, you know the stakes for the heroes are there but not too high (although e.g. Thor 3
seeing Odin die and Thor losing an eye
was a surprise) but there is that build up to the great infinity war that we all know about, which makes it mandatory to NOT miss one of the movies (and I do have a problem keeping up with them, and having a teen fan girl in the family is not helping), I do not get the satisfaction of a story that is FINISHED!
It may be the old age, but I LIKE things getting finished. I can hardly rewatch LOTR, because life kind of does not allow me to spend around 9 hours just to watch movies anymore. Same goes for TV series. I cannot revisit TV series, because I simply do not have the time to do so. But anyways, I am rambling.

My main concern is: Movies once were larger than life, and much larger than the little screen. In format, splendor and mythology. I sometimes fear that people are going to forget how good movies are made. The VISUALS of a CINEMATIC movie are different to those of a TV movie. Anyone remember Lawrence of Arabia? David Lean? I just googled him and what do I find? This here: http://www.starwars.com/news/the-cinema-behind-star-wars-lawrence-of-arabia

And we are not seeing that class of director anymore. And the accompanying DP´s even less, I dare say. Everything is watered down. To smaller screens and smaller minds.
 
My main concern is: Movies once were larger than life, and much larger than the little screen. In format, splendor and mythology. I sometimes fear that people are going to forget how good movies are made. The VISUALS of a CINEMATIC movie are different to those of a TV movie. Anyone remember Lawrence of Arabia? David Lean? I just googled him and what do I find? This here: http://www.starwars.com/news/the-cinema-behind-star-wars-lawrence-of-arabia

And we are not seeing that class of director anymore. And the accompanying DP´s even less, I dare say. Everything is watered down. To smaller screens and smaller minds.
THIS. It's so true it hurts. I said it myself that because of the nature of today's cinema there is just no way for a next James Cameron, John Carpenter, George Lucas, Wes Craven, Steven Spielberg or Ridley Scott to be able to grow and mature themselves into a really class director. Start small, make a miracle from a modest budget, like Halloween, Jaws, Star Wars, Elm street, Alien, then take the next step and gradually build reputation and portfolio.
Talented directors are quickly snapped up by big corps, much like Rian Johnson was. He made a couple of movies that were promising, here's this mammoth multi-million dollars production, do your stuff again. Most of the time if these movies tank they'll take the blame and disappear, if not they'll get signed for more and just become part of the corp, again, much like Rian Johnson, and they'll make movies as industrial workers.
 
... and they'll make movies as industrial workers.

Which would not be the worst thing, since industrial workers simply know their ...errrrr... "sith"... They have routine, which helps. IIRC Hitchcock was a highly effective director. And so was e.g. John Ford, a master at epic visuals. Huge output, I can´t remember ever reading about a movie of them being mediocre works of art. When you look at their careers one can see that they indeed learned their craftsmanship (!), the basis for being a successful artist.

Yes, Rian Johnson got a lot of praise for his body of work before TLJ, but compared to seasoned directors it looks rather thin.

Ah, ain´t these great times to be an internet desk jockey...
 
Which would not be the worst thing, since industrial workers simply know their ...errrrr... "sith"... They have routine, which helps. IIRC Hitchcock was a highly effective director. And so was e.g. John Ford, a master at epic visuals. Huge output, I can´t remember ever reading about a movie of them being mediocre works of art. When you look at their careers one can see that they indeed learned their craftsmanship (!), the basis for being a successful artist.

Yes, Rian Johnson got a lot of praise for his body of work before TLJ, but compared to seasoned directors it looks rather thin.

Ah, ain´t these great times to be an internet desk jockey...
I was reading about the temple of doom last night on wiki and one of the things that caught my eye is that when they finished the first cut, Lucas and speilberg sat down and realized that the movie was too exciting. They didn't let their audience catch their breath and absorb.

So they did everything they could to slow it down. Adding establishing shots and matte paintings wherever they could

Now, as shaky as that film was, it takes really confident film makers to recognize that.

People always made fun of Lucas for telling his actors to be "faster and more intense" but that is really the name of the game these days.

Because if your film is intense enough, people won't notice the glaring plot contrivances and rushed process until they leave the theatre.



Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
 
As I've repeatedly griped elsewhere, compression has been my biggest issue with Star Wars since ROTJ. The stories need room to grow and breathe organically. My idealized re-write (that I started more recently, after the sequel trilogy started, and well after my original re-writes) is shaping up to be on par with the MCU as far as letting the characters and story threads evolve at the pace that actually works for the setting. Each arc has nine episodes. First trilogy establishes this new spatial and temporal setting and develops the central Hero (Obi-Wan, Luke, and Rey, respectively), taking them up to the crisis point. Second trilogy is them learning how to rise to the challenge and resolve the big threat. Third trilogy is reaping the consequences -- good of bad -- and introducing the nascent Hero for the next cycle.

I have a recent re-watch of Babylon 5 to thank for putting that in my head. When Zathras is clarifying things for the principals, when they were confused about him identifying more than one of them as "The One".

All Minbari belief is around three. Three castes: worker, warrior, religious. Three languages: light, dark, and grey. The nine of the Grey Council. Three times three. All is three. As you are three... As you are one. As you are The One. (points at Sinclair) You are The One who was. (points at Delenn) You are The One who is. (points at Sheridan) You are The One who will be. (gesturing briefly at them again in turn) You are the beginning of the story... and the middle of the story... and the end of the story -- that creates the next great story.

Which makes me think about the mythological underpinnings Joe was drawing from -- the Trinity of Christianity, the three Fates, the three Furies, etc. In my initial uncollapsing, I had focused on expanding the Luke films back out to the six Lucas had planned, then the six for Obi-Wan. But I still had issues, and it wasn't until I was reminded of the fractal threes that it clicked. And as much fun as it is to take all the words and moments (including scenes cut for run-time, pacing, etc.) and string them together in a sequence and pacing that makes it all work better... it's also frustrating as hell knowing this is what could so easily have been and wasn't. Because of so many stupid little things.

The MCU has shown us that long-form storytelling in a movie theater is possible today. That it's not a relic of the '40s and '50s that has no place any more. And it would have prevented all the issues I have with the new films skipping over so much needed info for the audience to follow what the [redacted] is going on!

Ditto. I don't get it either. I mean, I kinda get people disliking the fangirl response to Finn, but her character seems basically genuine to me. She's a nobody who became a somebody, just like Rey and Finn.

Plus, Kelly Marie Tran is adorable as Rose, but also a frustrating mix of cute and beautiful IRL.

kelly-marie-tran-stills-at-star-wars-the-last-jedi-premiere-in-london-2017-12-12-06.jpg


She's intelligent and fun and funny and aware and I am paying a lot more attention to her now.

--Jonah
 
Last edited:
:facepalm I never thought in a million years that I would say this...but...I would rather have Jar Jar than Rose. Every scene with her was just so irritating. More irritating than sand.

Yes. I know you feel that way. Boy howdy, I know. I don't feel that way. I think this is maybe the second time I've said so -- the first being back in December. There are times I feel like your repetition of your position is an attempt to convince me and others like me. As if, if you say it often enough, I'll go "Oh my god -- he's right! She is more annoying than Jar-Jar! What a fool I've been!" Except that's not going to happen. Maybe find something new to say...? I've seen enough of your commentary on other things to usually respect your thinking and expression of it. Your strident vitriol against the new Star Wars stuff is a striking contrast, and getting a little aggravating for those of us who do, after careful consideration, actually like it.

--Jonah
 
Yes. I know you feel that way. Boy howdy, I know. I don't feel that way. I think this is maybe the second time I've said so -- the first being back in December. There are times I feel like your repetition of your position is an attempt to convince me and others like me. As if, if you say it often enough, I'll go "Oh my god -- he's right! She is more annoying than Jar-Jar! What a fool I've been!" Except that's not going to happen. Maybe find something new to say...? I've seen enough of your commentary on other things to usually respect your thinking and expression of it. Your strident vitriol against the new Star Wars stuff is a striking contrast, and getting a little aggravating for those of us who do, after careful consideration, actually like it.

--Jonah

CRAZY TOM.jpg

- - - Updated - - -

Ben And Luke.jpg
 
As I've repeatedly griped elsewhere, compression has been my biggest issue with Star Wars since ROTJ. The stories need room to grow and breathe organically. My idealized re-write (that I started more recently, after the sequel trilogy started, and well after my original re-writes) is shaping up to be on par with the MCU as far as letting the characters and story threads evolve at the pace that actually works for the setting. Each arc has nine episodes. First trilogy establishes this new spatial and temporal setting and develops the central Hero (Obi-Wan, Luke, and Rey, respectively), taking them up to the crisis point. Second trilogy is them learning how to rise to the challenge and resolve the big threat. Third trilogy is reaping the consequences -- good of bad -- and introducing the nascent Hero for the next cycle.

I have a recent re-watch of Babylon 5 to thank for putting that in my head. When Zathras is clarifying things for the principals, when they were confused about him identifying more than one of them as "The One".



Which makes me think about the mythological underpinnings Joe was drawing from -- the Trinity of Christianity, the three Fates, the three Furies, etc. In my initial uncollapsing, I had focused on expanding the Luke films back out to the six Lucas had planned, then the six for Obi-Wan. But I still had issues, and it wasn't until I was reminded of the fractal threes that it clicked. And as much fun as it is to take all the words and moments (including scenes cut for run-time, pacing, etc.) and string them together in a sequence and pacing that makes it all work better... it's also frustrating as hell knowing this is what could so easily have been and wasn't. Because of so many stupid little things.

The MCU has shown us that long-form storytelling in a movie theater is possible today. That it's not a relic of the '40s and '50s that has no place any more. And it would have prevented all the issues I have with the new films skipping over so much needed info for the audience to follow what the [redacted] is going on!



Plus, Kelly Marie Tran is adorable as Rose, but also a frustrating mix of cute and beautiful IRL.

https://www.celebskart.com/wp-conte...ast-jedi-premiere-in-london-2017-12-12-06.jpg

She's intelligent and fun and funny and aware and I am paying a lot more attention to her now.

--Jonah


G’day Jonah ,

I like and agree with what you’ve shared regarding the trilogies , and wishing it were so too !. It’s crying over spilt milk now ... so to speak ;)

I don’t have a problem with the actress who played Rose , but rather with how she was written and portrayed in the film , along with so many other characters - especially the established ones !:facepalm

It just wasn’t believable and nonsensical to boot ... IMO .

:cheersGed
 
Never watched Star Trek, just wasn't interested, but everyone was telling how great the Wrath of Khan is, so I watched it last night. It was enjoyable, and just made me think how much better TLJ would have been if the whole Canto Blight bit was cut along with the fuel-related slow space chase and have a similar space-chase that's a fight of wits and skills. I've always loved the Hunt for Red October and thought something similar could work, and Khan proves that it can be a tense and exciting chase where characters are explored and developed.
 
Last edited:
Watching the making-of documentary and it's impressive they got Frank Oz, that is great, they used the original Yoda molds... awesome! The casting looked great, then a minute later they show off the finished puppet.. and what the actual frak? He's all bloated and... looks terrible. Fan sculpts found on this board looks better...... truly boggles the mind!!

:facepalm
 
Watching the making-of documentary and it's impressive they got Frank Oz, that is great, they used the original Yoda molds... awesome! The casting looked great, then a minute later they show off the finished puppet.. and what the actual frak? He's all bloated and... looks terrible. Fan sculpts found on this board looks better...... truly boggles the mind!!

:facepalm
Glad I'm not the only one who thinks that. Everyone kept saying it's so great to see a puppet instead of CG (which is true), but I was just sitting in the cinema watching it and in my head it constantly went "puppet, puppet, puppet, puppet"...Same in Phantom Menace. I don't get it either where it went pear-shaped, but never once in ESB or ROTJ I think it's a puppet.
 
I finally watched The Last Jedi. I waited to see it at home. That's what I usually do when I'm not overly excited enough to see a movie in theaters. I didn't see any of the trailers either. I remember posting that The Force Awakens was too much of a homage movie. And with the sequel I needed to know Luke's story and how he went missing or was defeated.

I watched The Last Jedi twice to be sure. After seeing it the first time I was shocked. But I wanted to get the full feel for the story and see if maybe I missed anything that would change my mind. I really didn't want to watch it a second time but I did. To say the movie is problematic is putting it lightly. There is some stuff seemingly straight from the Prequels in The Last Jedi and characters and scenes that I thought were cartoonish. At times it feels like a side story or something from a Clone Wars or Rebels episode not a mainline Star Wars movie. Not that all of the mainline Star Wars movies are good, I'm talking the Prequels and to some extent The Force Awakens. But this is really the realm of authorized / official fan fiction now.

We have two movies in this new trilogy that have tons of homages to the Original Trilogy and when they decide to go off on a tangent, make up stuff that doesn't make sense or they do exactly like almost every bad reboot or sequel we've seen in that another hero is not what you think he is when he's older. He's defeated in a flashback. And of course dies at the end in a sacrifice to save the day. But he's really there just for nostalgia and to "hand off" the series to the younger generation. Is this really needed and how many times do we need to see this trope in modern movies? It is not risky film making when it's been done before. Also, if any of these directors, producers, writers, etc. really liked these characters, they wouldn't put them in those situations. Nor would fans come up with explanations to try and explain why the actions are in character or acceptable just because the character is older. Some people don't have character changes just because they get older.

And another thing, if Rey turns out to be some kind of meta female empowerment character, meaning that anyone can be the strongest Jedi (read strongest woman), that will be the worse thing ever. I'm not anti-women and I didn't like the Dark Knight Rises anyone can be Batman ending twist either. But I think with The Last Jedi, they are now leaning towards the anyone can be the strongest Jedi. JJ Abrams might not be able to resist making a twist with her parents though. And this might be the opposite of the Empire Strikes Back scene. I find it hard to believe that Rey's parents were really nobody. That would make her not only a liar or unable to admit the truth during these two movies, but a character that has some kind of psychological trauma or Post Traumatic Stress Disorder from her abandonment. And that lie was also sold to us by Abrams with that flashback scene in The Force Awakens and reinforced with all the homage to Luke's A New Hope scenes.

I still can't believe they got rid of the Extended Universe for these two movies. That these are the stories they thought were good enough. Also how some are so supportive about the character changes or motivations. I guess these people don't like characters like Mara Jade or some of the stories after Return of the Jedi where the characters are still youthful and heroic.

After Attack of the Clones, I knew Revenge of the Sith wouldn't be that good. Now after The Last Jedi and with JJ Abrams' track record I don't have much faith in the final movie in this new trilogy. JJ Abrams' best movie to me is The Force Awakens, a homage movie. How much can we expect now? I hope I'm wrong though. But I have a bad feeling about it.
 
Re: Yoda... It was taken from the original moulds. I have a feeling a lot of visual issues many (including me) have with this movie have to do with choices of lenses and film stock. The saturation seems... weird. And a lot of stuff seems so wide-angle as to be almost visibly distorted.
 
This thread is more than 3 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top