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
sztriki said:
...
Take ESB then. Irvin Kershner didn't even want to make it initially, because he thought there's no point trying to top Star Wars. When he was convinced to do it by his agent he approached the story and the film trying to figure out what can be done and where it can grow. He said "I knew I wanted humour in it but I couldn't have gags. I knew I wanted a love story but I couldn't have smooching and a lot of kissing". So I'm all for unique ideas and visions but understand what you're dealing with first. One of the main reasons Alien Covenant didn't work is because Ridley seemingly forgot what made Alien great or doesn't understand it anymore.
Click to expand...

Yes, looking at ESB makes it easier for me to cope with TLJ. Still, TLJ is way less good craftsmanship than ESB is. And you know what I attribute that too, mostly?
Kersh turned 60 when he made ESB. ALL of the newer movies were made by comparably YOUNG directors, with JJA being the one with the largest body of work under his belt.

I dare say that we see so many flawed larger projects because of the directors being rather unexperienced due to "young" age.

Early work by Rian Johnson AND Steven Yedlin, the DP on TLJ:

Review of "Brick" from 2006. Interestingly enough, some of the flaws that the critic points out are very similar to what I feel is not right in TLJ:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
sztriki said:
One of the main reasons Alien Covenant didn't work is because Ridley seemingly forgot what made Alien great or doesn't understand it anymore.
Click to expand...

That is so wrong it has totally redefined wrong. Secondly its Sir Ridley. But this is not the proper venue for such a discussion.

- - - Updated - - -

DaddyfromNaboo said:
Yes, looking at ESB makes it easier for me to cope with TLJ. Still, TLJ is way less good craftsmanship than ESB is. And you know what I attribute that too, mostly?
Kersh turned 60 when he made ESB. ALL of the newer movies were made by comparably YOUNG directors, with JJA being the one with the largest body of work under his belt.

I dare say that we see so many flawed larger projects because of the directors being rather unexperienced due to "young" age.

Early work by Rian Johnson AND Steven Yedlin, the DP on TLJ:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKo8hj40dPg

Review of "Brick" from 2006. Interestingly enough, some of the flaws that the critic points out are very similar to what I feel is not right in TLJ:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pjam5ZwOdrI
Click to expand...

God bless you.
 
Last edited:
Whichever way you look at it Lucasfilm have always had difficulty positioning the Star Wars brand way before Disney purchased it.
Even George Lucas didn't truely understand it . He openly despised it for years, despite what it brought him ,and have we all forgotten how he absolutely refused to consider having anything to do with it for decades?
I understand why George choose Disney. If you take the Prequels and then all the alterations he made to the original trilogy its fairly clear that the actual Star Wars we get today are "closer" to his original vision of it if the circumstances would have allowed him to make them as he exactly wanted back then when the OT was conceived .
Critically, it was the people he was working with that made the essentail difference. They tempered what the OTSW became, a more balanced work than campy sic fi like "Flash Gordon" . And it was achieveing that fine balancing act between a "youthful "but not "childish" adventure, an imaginative but grounded universe that did not seem overly fantastical, a story just complex enough to interest adults but still simple to keep the kids enthralled and , more than anything, an overall visual impact that still manages to take your breath away today.
It was the loss of all those people from the production of the prequels that made them what they are. George lost and couldn't replace those essential personel from the OT that made such a difference to them. So what we got when he finally returned to it WAS purely his vision without any one to moderate it and the series suffered for that. No one provided critical feedback to supplement and improve on GLs weaknesses .
And its essentially the same problem today. Having spent a vast sum of money on it Disney needed produce on the investment . But in all fairness to Kathleen Kennedy and Disney the sale of Lucasfilm and the SW IP was as much a shock to them as us. They are still struggling to get the right team of people into manage it. I've read "Space Opera" since I was a boy ,from the "Lensman" stories, through classics like "Dune" and "The Foundation" (which would bore the pants off many here), to todays more complexly plotted cyberpunk/AI influenced series like "The Culture", "The Expanse" and the stories of Peter J. Hamilton . Its a damn difficult genre to get right all the time, and SW is by far one of the most successful and easily accessible to a general audience.
I honestly don't think they want to intentionally upset the fans of the OT, the PT or even the NT. Customers who hate the product no longer BUY that product and revenue loss is not what an entertainment business wants from its brands. But getting the right blend of elements into a Star Wars film is hugely problematic. Go too high concept sci fi most people will simply be confused by new ideas . Copy it, many will be bored by the simple repetition of concept and plots. Focus towards the kids , some teenagers and adults will feel patronised by the disregard for coherent and sensible story telling .
And before everyone starts yelling well how come Marvel has done it, lets look closely at that. Kevin Feige started work in 98 on Marvel films because of his extensive knowledge of that universe and for every "Blade" and "X2" we also had an "Elektra", "Blade:Trinity", "Daredevil" or "Hulk". Infact what defines the Marvel films between 1998 -2007 was there were clearly as many disasters as successes, and that was because not every director understood what the characters and comics delivered for its fans.
BUT what changes in 2007 was that Kevin Fiege got to be President of Marvel and he knew exactly what a fan of the comics, both the old and new wanted and the films we get after that ARE his coherent vision of that Universe, supported by directors and teams of people that clearly understand how that universe, characters and its likely target audience expect it to work. Which is why it now it consistently hits the bullseye without ever really going widely off mark.
So its unsurprising Lucasfilm and Disney are struggling with SW. I genuinely believe because of the way its being handled SW is in danger of becoming isolated from those that might stabilize its future, because much like GL did , they don't completely understand the fan base or the range of it. I just think its got to be managed a bit differently, I'm uncertain how, maybe allow a more robust and challenging environment where storylines and scripts are critised before production because just a few changes to TLJ would have made it a much better film for me, but thats the challenge they need to face.
 
Last edited:
DaddyfromNaboo said:
Yes, looking at ESB makes it easier for me to cope with TLJ. Still, TLJ is way less good craftsmanship than ESB is. And you know what I attribute that too, mostly?
Kersh turned 60 when he made ESB. ALL of the newer movies were made by comparably YOUNG directors, with JJA being the one with the largest body of work under his belt.

I dare say that we see so many flawed larger projects because of the directors being rather unexperienced due to "young" age.
Click to expand...
Agreed, as I said before it seems to be a trend to snap up young directors who had success and throw them in the middle of these massive projects.


Mr Webber said:
That is so wrong it has totally redefined wrong. Secondly its Sir Ridley. But this is not the proper venue for such a discussion.
Click to expand...
Don't get me wrong, Ridley is brilliant, he directed 2 of my favourite movies and 1492 that only a handful of people seem to like but I think is fantastic. I wasn't that huge on the Martian but whatever was good in it was Ridley's work. But I do get the feeling from reading his interviews regarding Blade Runner and Alien that he strayed off from the core of those. Regarding Covenant, that may have been studio pushing for certain things, I admittedly enjoyed the David storyline much more than anything with the actual aliens.
 
PantheraGem said:
Even though I agree with you, it doesn't matter. If Johnson wanted to just discard what JJ did, don't take the job. Now we have what feels like two reboots in a row. The movies don't gel, at all.
Click to expand...
I don't think it was necessarily discarding what JJ did, he just handled a few things differently. I liked that he had a different view and I don't think what he "undid" was anything major that affected the plot.

AnubisGuard said:
^Thats a great point re the lightsaber. The irony of having TFA treat a saber with the same reverence that we do as prop enthusiasts is that it reduced my interest in the prop. I care far more about the saber after seeing TLJ treat it as a tool to tell a story and not a fetish object.
Click to expand...
I loved seeing the Graflex saber back although I didn't care much for how they did it.

Mr Webber said:
Any comment on what was written above that, which was a coherent and polite response to a direct question by someone else? Or did you just want to make a pointless smart*** comment?
Click to expand...
Not sure what you're talking about or what your point is. I added a post to the forum that addressed some issues with TLJ - if you're not interested, don't read them.

Mr Webber said:
To quote someone else describing you in another thread "JD you are ten of the most boring people I know :D Bye.
Click to expand...
Dude, you've got some Wookie dripping from your chin. Get a grip. And boy, be grateful you don't know me.

Usagi Pilgrim said:
I'm not one to defend JD, & he didn't need anyone to, so this is just a helpful explanation of his post-

He was replying to someone saying JJ would have to clean up Rian's mess. He then stated, in detail & in a very relevant way, some things that JJ did in TFA that he felt were issues that Rian fixed.

Doesn't look like he responded with a "pointless, smart***" comment, but evidently, a pointless dumb*** response to him was the choice to be made.


Stuff like this is maddening.
Click to expand...
Thanks, Usagi. The Rian "undoing" some things JJ did was something I had in the back of my mind for a while - there are a few bits that I missed. I think it's interesting that Rian did counter or undo a few things JJ did - it will be interesting to see what JJ might do if those elements were important enough plot points to him. While I do think Rian had a free hand with the TLJ, I'm fairly certain JJ had some input working with the SW story group.

I'd reply to more but my boring, smartass just got home from work and a 2-alarm fire. Still trying to thaw out.
 
Last edited:
sztriki said:
Don't get me wrong, Ridley is brilliant, he directed 2 of my favourite movies and 1492 that only a handful of people seem to like but I think is fantastic. I wasn't that huge on the Martian but whatever was good in it was Ridley's work. But I do get the feeling from reading his interviews regarding Blade Runner and Alien that he strayed off from the core of those. Regarding Covenant, that may have been studio pushing for certain things, I admittedly enjoyed the David storyline much more than anything with the actual aliens.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. He`s copped a lot of cheap shots over his "Too ****ing long" comment about BR2049 but think of it this way. I`ve done my head in as to why 2049 wasnt a box office success, I truely cant explain it, theres no good reason for it especially when you look at the amount of money TLJ has dragged in.

There is literally daylight between the two films in terms of quality and gravitas and Im being kind to TLJ there. So, even though I would have happily sat through a four hour version of 2049, when Scott says it was too long, chances are he was right. Some have totally misunderstood his passion and frustration over 2049`s failure and mistakenly went for the easy road of calling him arrogant.
 
JD, its not playing fair when you end the post with a 2 fire alarm day thing. I was ready with a comment to make it a three fire day but even I cant let rip on a first responder in the community. Damn.
 
Mr Webber said:
JD, its not playing fair when you end the post with a 2 fire alarm day thing. I was ready with a comment to make it a three fire day but even I cant let rip on a first responder in the community. Damn.
Click to expand...
This is a forum discussing Star Wars. It's supposed to be fun - yes, sometimes it get s a little heated and stupid at times. I don't get the need for personal attacks - and can get as guilty with that as the next guy. It still baffles me why you opted to attack me for my post. I'm gonna go thaw out now, 6° is too cold for that crap.
 
JD said:
This is a forum discussing Star Wars. It's supposed to be fun - yes, sometimes it get s a little heated and stupid at times. I don't get the need for personal attacks - and can get as guilty with that as the next guy. It still baffles me why you opted to attack me for my post. I'm gonna go thaw out now, 6° is too cold for that crap.
Click to expand...

Well, you took the time to select one part of my post and make some cracks that finished with a childish :D Bye like they were some kind of brilliant statements. Slightly provocative?

The term personal attacks are being thrown around a lot lately and its kinda lightweight really. Surely someone who deals with real life dangerous situations on a daily basis can take a little humour based ribbing, but hey, everyone`s different.

It was only a quote from somebody else anyway and I didnt see you declare that a personal attack at the time. I might need to get a grip but you may need to lesson the grip.
 
Last edited:
HanSolo2187 said:
...From the interviews I've heard from Rian, he didn't have any guidance or restrictions on where he could go with the script...
Click to expand...

If that was/is the case it begs to ask the question if he even saw TFA?

Whether people liked or disliked TFA we were taken down a very specific path with all these plot devices, visions, and visual clues that were simply dismissed within a matter of seconds - TLJ picks up right where TFA ends. I too have an issue with the direction. UNLESS there is something bigger coming for us with the next movie it's been a difficult pill to swallow.
 
Bryancd said:
If the only "hardcore" fans were people posting here, yes. But I took 6 kids aged 2-14 to TLJ and they loved it. There are your new "hardcore" fans. And I was born in 1968, I'll be there on opening day with my son until the day I die.
Click to expand...

Agreed! They are passing the torch to a new generation of fans. That's a WONDERFUL thing! But...

Tthey could have treated the Skywalker story line with a bit more care and creativity. As I mentioned, Han got one more adventure before we said our emotional goodbyes. That was tough! I felt little to nothing but frustration seeing Luke fade away. It fell flat and missed the mark - to many of the hardcore original fans. :)

- - - Updated - - -

JD said:
Starkiller took out the entire system, 5 planets including Hosnian Prime.
Click to expand...

That's such a cool name "Hosnian Prime" :)
 
Mr Webber said:
Fair enough. He`s copped a lot of cheap shots over his "Too ****ing long" comment about BR2049 but think of it this way. I`ve done my head in as to why 2049 wasnt a box office success, I truely cant explain it, theres no good reason for it especially when you look at the amount of money TLJ has dragged in.

There is literally daylight between the two films in terms of quality and gravitas and Im being kind to TLJ there. So, even though I would have happily sat through a four hour version of 2049, when Scott says it was too long, chances are he was right. Some have totally misunderstood his passion and frustration over 2049`s failure and mistakenly went for the easy road of calling him arrogant.
Click to expand...

I saw lot of critics of TLJ and last year BvS. There was always this arguement that it is too long. Not from all critics, especially in reviews and critics from North America. It kinda feels like the Americans don't really like long movies. I mean TLJ was too long caused by unecessary side plots. BvS was way too short. I mean this movie should have kicked off the DCEU and it felt rushed. The Ultimate Edition is much better and the extra time made sense in this movie. Why is there this 2h line which is a sin to cross?
 
The Brahma Bull said:
I saw lot of critics of TLJ and last year BvS. There was always this arguement that it is too long. Not from all critics, especially in reviews and critics from North America. It kinda feels like the Americans don't really like long movies. I mean TLJ was too long caused by unecessary side plots. BvS was way too short. I mean this movie should have kicked off the DCEU and it felt rushed. The Ultimate Edition is much better and the extra time made sense in this movie. Why is there this 2h line which is a sin to cross?
Click to expand...
Because if you keep it under 2 hrs you can screen your movie more in a day and sell more tickets.
 
A couple of weeks removed from seeing TLJ, and time has tempered my anger enough that I've given much time to attempting to dovetail what I saw with both my personal expectations (admittedly unreasonable), and continuity expectations (quite reasonable methinks, IMO).

I have to confess I just saw a guy - RJ - that just wanted to gets his fingerprints all over something beautiful.

The incredibly high hopes of seeing Ben as - at the very least - a person of interest, were quashed by his being painted as a faceless dark/light push-pull foil for "Rey's dilemma" (did his expression ever change in the movie?). When he had the moment of hesitation before firing on the bridge (and his mother), I thought that was going to be a turning point in tone, and we would get even more insight and anguish with Ben. Instead, our payoff was one of the more ridiculous scenes in cinematic history. Clearly, the ST is "Rey's story" when in the hands of RJ.

All the while, no Knights of Ren, the ridiculous caricature that was Snoke (hanging out in some Flash Gordon-ish throne room); not to mention a terrible suspense contrivance, an unnecessary reimagining of an iconic hero, the whole thing being a parody-level yuckfest...

As Jyn Erso said, "You can't talk your way around this". Did it entertain you? Great. Was it Star Wars? You can't deny that it's up for debate.

The beauty is, there was so little advancement of anything worthwhile or memorable, that the whole movie can quickly be dismissed in the opening crawl for IX as a dream Finn had while going under the knife.

You can do it JJ, the Force is strong with you. PLEASE, IT HAS TO BE.
 
Keycube said:
. Clearly, the ST is "Rey's story" when in the hands of RJ.
Click to expand...

Rian Johnson gave his explanation as to why he didn't bother to give anything in regards to Snoke's background because TLJ was "Rey's story" and "from her perspective, it doesn't matter who Snoke is". But TLJ isn't just Rey's story - it's Ben Solo's story and it's Luke's story as well - both of which are greatly influenced by who Snoke is an what he has done to date:

- Ben wouldn't have gone down the Dark path if it weren't for Snoke (pointed out many times in TFA and TLJ) and destroyed everything that Luke built up (Jedi academy, etc).
- Luke wouldn't have gone into exile if it weren't for Snoke
- Han wouldn't have left Leia and his son if it weren't for Snoke
- The First Order wouldn't be what it is if it weren't for Snoke coming out of the ashes of the Empire.

To dismiss any information about him as "unnecessary" in the story was a disservice to TFA and the overall trilogy arc.
 
HanSolo2187 said:
To dismiss any information about him as "unnecessary" in the story was a disservice to TFA and the overall trilogy arc.
Click to expand...

Unnecessary specifically for the story demands of THIS film. He doesn’t imply or suggest it might be important to JJ’s story or any other corner of Star Wars. I think Ep. IX will very much delve into the psyche of Kylo and how Snoke influenced and guided him may be of great story import.
 
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.

Similar threads

janglesworthy
Star Wars Tales of The Empire D+ animated series
Replies
15
Views
691
Halliwax
Halliwax
JediG60racer
Star Wars Outlaws (video game)
2 3
Replies
41
Views
1,155
HeartBlade
H
Captain Dunsel
Back In Theaters: Star Wars OT & PT
Replies
9
Views
530
Rawktrooper
Rawktrooper
Captain Dunsel
Was “Tropic Thunder” The Last True Comedy??
2 3
Replies
57
Views
2,268
Riceball
Riceball
_Lee_
Star Wars sequel trilogy.
6 7 8
Replies
144
Views
7,423
Greenie
Greenie
Back
Top