|
Waffles Inc. posted:I don't think you have to worry since I think TFA is taking great pains to ensure the baddies are explicitly not Sith, and only Sith dole out the title of Darth Yea it does seem like their purposely keeping the Sith out of it so they can save the "return of the sith" storyline, possibly for the next trilogy. I wonder if they'll have the self-control to NOT do a Palpatine or Vader clone story.
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 21:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 18:11 |
|
|
They're already doing a Vader clone story.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 21:23
|
|
|
Waffles Inc. posted:I think Luke's presence puts everything in kind of a rough spot, because when it comes to any sort of confrontation you've really only got three options: Yayan Ruhian, the 47 year old guy who did choreography work on and also played Mad Dog in The Raid and Prakoso in The Raid 2 is also one of three cast members from those movies choreographing Star Wars (the real reason there's a sword on tonfa fight out of nowhere  ) so I'm hoping this is the case. I could definitely see their influence even in the way Ren flips out and attacks that console, and the Ren/Rey fight is excellent because of it.Not to say that Star Wars needs fighting with The Raid's level of graphic violence or to have MUCH more of it, but I am hoping we can see a longer battle or two to really see these guys cut loose running fights with characters that can jump and do force stuff compared to real humans. Though I guess my ideal Luke at this point wouldn't even use a lightsaber now though and just walk around calmly as whatever's laying around slams into anyone trying to hurt him like how Vader completely clowns him at the end of Empire, hold out his hand to stop blaster fire cold like Vader does, looks at someone as they're about to hit him and they just miss, that kind of stuff. Or on the opposite end the way Master Wu handles this chump in Swordsman II: Asia the Invincible at 1h19m41s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GhowGyVfdnY Neo Rasa fucked around with this message at 21:42 on Jan 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 21:25
|
|
|
The thing about the whole Finding Luke motivation is that Leia is wrong. While Leia is wise enough to know that the First Order is an actual problem, she isn't wise enough to know how to actually deal with it. She just goes back to doing things like she's in the Rebel Alliance. She's not getting Luke because there is a clear reason to get Luke. She's getting Luke because he stopped Vader and the Emperor in the last movie. She's getting Luke because that's how Star Wars works. Any justification for Luke reigniting the Jedi or whatever is not really in the text of the film and it's ultimately irrelevant because it's clear that Luke himself is not what actually matters. While Luke is found in the end of the film. The film is no longer about finding Luke. It's about Rey finding Luke. Rey's going to be the one who saves the day, not Luke. The dramatic question is if Rey is just going to repeat the journey that Luke went on, or can the universe actually change. That's what I think a lot of people are not getting about Starkiller Base. Its threat is not a physical one but an existential one.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 21:27
|
|
|
Schwarzwald posted:I think there is more to it than that, although her reasons are personal. She kills stormtroopers for the same reason she fights Unkar Plutt's goons. Don't forget she goes after Finn because BB-8 thinks he did something untoward to the original owner of that jacket. She has a sense of right and wrong that she attempts to live by, and enforces when she has the power to do so. She gets involved and only really waffles about getting involved when it conflicts with her own quest to re-unite/wait for her family.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 21:37
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:The thing about the whole Finding Luke motivation is that Leia is wrong. While Leia is wise enough to know that the First Order is an actual problem, she isn't wise enough to know how to actually deal with it. She just goes back to doing things like she's in the Rebel Alliance. She's not getting Luke because there is a clear reason to get Luke. She's getting Luke because he stopped Vader and the Emperor in the last movie. She's getting Luke because that's how Star Wars works. Any justification for Luke reigniting the Jedi or whatever is not really in the text of the film and it's ultimately irrelevant because it's clear that Luke himself is not what actually matters. I would hope that the series continues to be an ensemble and Rey is not the only character who has any impact, just as Lando, R2, Han, Leia, Wedge, and Anakin all save the day at different times in the original movies.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 21:39
|
|
|
Maybe Kylo is a title for the leader of the Knights of Ren and he is really Darth Ben.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 21:55
|
|
|
Or Kylo is just a portmanteau of Skywalker and Solo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
Parachute posted:Maybe Kylo is a title for the leader of the Knights of Ren and he is really Darth Ben. Ren Ben.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 22:12
|
|
|
Sometimes a name is just a name.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 22:15
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Instead everyone will be named Death-O Ren. Yeah this is my guess. I think "Knights of Ren" is a red herring to imply that Kylo is the leader, when really it's like saying "Darth Knights" and having Vader, Sidious, Maul etc be a member.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 22:18
|
|
|
I think Rey probably does have a bit of a hero complex, hinted at with her collecting Rebellion memorabilia/cosplay and making her own action figures. Presumably her arc will be (and has kinda been) about exploring the ramifications of actually being a hero.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 22:20
|
|
|
Guy A. Person posted:Yeah this is my guess. I think "Knights of Ren" is a red herring to imply that Kylo is the leader, when really it's like saying "Darth Knights" and having Vader, Sidious, Maul etc be a member. I think Snoke says "Even you, the Master of the Knights of Ren..." at some point.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 22:21
|
|
|
Beeez posted:I think Snoke says "Even you, the Master of the Knights of Ren..." at some point. Something like that. He's explicitly called out as their leader.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 22:22
|
|
|
Neo Rasa posted:Is that the reason he's not blown back 10 feet and is instead just wounded? awww 
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 22:22
|
|
|
Guy A. Person posted:Yeah this is my guess. I think "Knights of Ren" is a red herring to imply that Kylo is the leader, when really it's like saying "Darth Knights" and having Vader, Sidious, Maul etc be a member. We see other knights of ren in the flashback, I recall. They're listed in the credits as 'other knights of ren' or something.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 22:23
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:The thing about the whole Finding Luke motivation is that Leia is wrong. While Leia is wise enough to know that the First Order is an actual problem, she isn't wise enough to know how to actually deal with it. She just goes back to doing things like she's in the Rebel Alliance. She's not getting Luke because there is a clear reason to get Luke. She's getting Luke because he stopped Vader and the Emperor in the last movie. She's getting Luke because that's how Star Wars works. Any justification for Luke reigniting the Jedi or whatever is not really in the text of the film and it's ultimately irrelevant because it's clear that Luke himself is not what actually matters. Doesn't it have something to do with getting her kid back or fighting Snoke with jedi powers?
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 22:34
|
|
|
Kylo Ren just took his name Ben Solo and reversed it to Solo Ben, and then replaced SOB with KRY because that's basically his character.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 22:49
|
|
|
Beeez posted:I think Snoke says "Even you, the Master of the Knights of Ren..." at some point. I remember it as "even your Knights of Ren.." (emphasis mine) or something similar. Which does imply that he founded them but is still ambiguous.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 22:50
|
|
|
porfiria posted:I feel like they sort of left open how super skilled Jedis fight in the New Trilogy (tm). Rey has no idea what she's doing, obviously, and I thought they sort of implied that Kylo is basically at Luke in ANH levels of training--Snoke's summons at the end is kind of a reverse Yoda thing. Would be perfect. (although I think you mean later on in the scene when he beats her fighting with a reed. Effortless.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 22:55
|
|
|
Terry Grunthouse posted:Kylo Ren just took his name Ben Solo and reversed it to Solo Ben, and then replaced SOB with KRY because that's basically his character. That's how we got HAL from 2001, so I could believe it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 22:55
|
|
|
Guy A. Person posted:I remember it as "even your Knights of Ren.." (emphasis mine) or something similar. Which does imply that he founded them but is still ambiguous. "Even you, master of the Knights of Ren, have never faced such a challenge"
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 22:59
|
|
|
^^^Kylo is the leader of the Knights of Ren, but I think they existed before he joined them and became their master. Just saw Force Awakens for a 2nd time. Still a good movie, maybe the best in the series (although I still have yet to re-watch episodes 3, 5, and 6 in modern context) I think Rey is definitely the younger sister of Kylo. He seems to know who she is, but I don't think Snoke does. Han gives her a couple of guilty looks, like he knows that she is his missing daughter who they hid away on a desert planet, to protect her from her evil brother. After Rey and Finn split up in Maz's castle, Maz asks Han "So, who's the girl?" The film cuts to Rey looking around the castle, presumably while Han explains her identity to Maz.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 23:05
|
|
|
Chill Penguin posted:^^^Kylo is the leader of the Knights of Ren, but I think they existed before he joined them and became their master. Most of that could also be explained if she's Luke's kid, too, though. Which is the theory I personally subscribe to. He could feel bad for his long-lost niece who he hasn't seen since Luke vanished. And then she'll marry Finn, giving him her last name, which will be the beginning of the next generation of Skywalkers. It's like poetry, it rhymes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 23:42
|
|
|
the actual twist is that rey is the one who went bad first and it was originally called the knights of rey
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 23:44
|
|
|
 My feels.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 00:20
|
|
|
piratepilates posted:Well now you've lost me, the design work of the prequels is one of the few things I thought it had going for it. This is a purely subjective assessment, so you're free to disagree, but the visual aesthetic of the prequels, to me runs the gamut of "doesn't look like Star Wars" to "offensively bad." Ralph McQuarrie's original designs of almost everything in the OT had a coherent, unique and timeless visual style, an old "70s Sci-Fi Magazine" kind of look, a style that looked big and mythic and even sometimes vaguely psychedelic.              It's impossible to overstate how central McQuarrie was to the design, look and feel of Star Wars. Even things like Darth Vader wearing a breathing apparatus were his idea. The biggest problem with the visual aesthetic of the prequels, and here we are not even talking about how poor a lot of the CGI and bluescreening looks, is that what happened is that Lucas went to several different artists and said "take this established Star Wars thing and re-interpret it, make it look smoother and more colorful and cleaner," and what's worse, it looks exactly like that's what happened. You might say that's it's "realistic" that stuff from that era would look newer and cleaner, but the question is if that's a good idea for a visual medium, especially a visual medium with a distinct and established style that people like. Also, having many different cooks designing the look of the movie means that the movie has no coherent visual design; you can have mirror-shined Naboo vehicles and dirty clunky racing pods and things that look kinda like TIE fighters in the same movie. Again, you can argue that this is "realistic," different cultures would have different styles and designs, but the question is if it's a good idea to have this kind of design incoherence in a movie. I think they actually kind of realized this, because by Episode 3 it seems like almost everything was designed by one artist, Ryan Church. I was surprised to learn this because a lot of those elements looked so different. Even with only one artist the work is a mess. Sometimes you can tell he's trying to ape McQuarrie:  But far more often his work looks nothing like McQuarrie's and is far too busy in linework, composition and colors:    Now, I want to stress that Church is not a bad artist. He's done design work for a ton of movies, including Force Awakens, and it seems generally good. The problem here is that he's basically operating as a bunch of different artists in one guy. He's trying to: -Make designs that are in his own style -While conforming to the insanely cluttered colorgasm George Lucas wanted -While also looking Star Wars-y and reminiscent of McQuarrie -All while having to conform to a bunch of different elements and styles representing vastly different cultures' concepts of design and architecture. It all boils down to a movie whose look is cluttered, tonally inconsistent, visually incoherent and overcomplicated to the point of being baffling to watch at points. Tezzor fucked around with this message at 00:48 on Jan 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 00:21
|
|
|
Bongo Bill posted:Even so, Starkiller Base isn't just a Death Star. There's some very strong symbolism and imagery associated with it. It's a forest planet like the ones that the last two Death Star attacks were launched from, turned into a cyborg like Darth Vader and General Grievous were. It pulls the light out of the sky and diverts it to the darkest ends, but the light can nevertheless be restored. And in terms of face value, it seems like a no-brainer that a Death Star built decades later and saving money/time with an organic base would be a stronger doomsday weapon. Really, the only real issue with Starkiller is that it isn't given enough time, and as a result competes poorly with the far more engaging character drama. I listed my own personal reading on this, but I'm not going to declare other people wrong for disliking it; if it feels like a weak link to most, then it's a weak link to most.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 00:31
|
|
|
2nd panel irresponsible chewie
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 00:34
|
|
|
Chewbacca lived on Kashyyyk from before Kylo's birth until after his fall to the dark side. He joined up with Han once he "went back to the only thing {he} was ever good at". BULLSHIT FUCKIN' COMIC
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 00:36
|
|
|
Tezzor posted:This is a purely subjective assessment, so you're free to disagree, but the visual aesthetic of the prequels, to me runs the gamut of "doesn't look like Star Wars" to "offensively bad." Ralph McQuarrie's original designs of almost everything in the OT had a coherent, unique and timeless visual style, an old "70s Sci-Fi Magazine" kind of look, a style that looked big and mythic and even sometimes vaguely psychedelic. Were you confused when Cloud City didn't look like the Millenium Falcon?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 00:36
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Were you confused when Cloud City didn't look like the Millenium Falcon? Cloud city actually did look a lot like the same architectural and design style as the Millennium Falcon in the original concept art, which is a benefit of having one artist designing your film without too much interference.  
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 00:45
|
|
|
McQuarrie was no doubt a badass, but the art direction in the PT (and OT of course) is near flawless, sorry. It's got exactly the 50s pulp serial look that a story that takes place 30 years before the grunged up late 70s early 80s sci fi era OT should. Nothing about it is incoherent or confusing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 01:03
|
|
|
Plus, I always loved how you could see the designs evolve into their OT versions. Hell, even the hairstyles started to turn all 1970s by RotS.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 01:07
|
|
|
I like how the Rebels show makes everything look even a bit more like McQuarrie's art
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 01:09
|
|
|
Tezzor posted:It all boils down to a movie whose look is cluttered, tonally inconsistent, visually incoherent and overcomplicated to the point of being baffling to watch at points. I disagree entirely, but thanks for posting all the concept art. I hadn't seen most of it before.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 01:10
|
|
|
Prolonged Priapism posted:It's got exactly the 50s pulp serial look yeah but did you know there is no america to have the 50s diner aesthetic come from, therefore
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 01:10
|
|
|
The design of the droids and vehicles in the Separatist Army was dope  
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 01:13
|
|
|
Random observations from seeing TFA again: With the prequels fresher in my mind, Hosnian really doesn't look anything like Coruscant-- it's a city, but it just looks like a big city and not a Coruscant city. The railing on the balcony that Resistance lady with the cut subplot is in looked like stone, which you probably wouldn't see on Coruscant. Starkiller Base is such a cool Star Wars setting, since it really gets right to the heart of the whole life, people, the natural, the force vs. technology, machines, the artificial conflict that you see again and again in Star Wars and especially A New Hope. The movie's jokes are actually funny, which coming off from the prequels is nice to see. I'm enjoying watching the prequels again-- much more than I thought I would-- but one thing that keeps on bothering me is that they're full of jokes and almost none of them land. To us, right now, in the year 2016, Star Wars itself kind of occupies the same place in our culture that the old serials and pulpy science fiction that influenced Lucas did for him and his generation, doesn't it? TFA's self-referentiality is really interesting in light of that. (And, of course, within the actual world of the story all of that wrestling with the legacy of the events of the OT can also be read as a story about the characters' relationship with history.) Maz owns.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 01:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 18:11 |
|
|
Tezzor posted:This is a purely subjective assessment, so you're free to disagree, but the visual aesthetic of the prequels, to me runs the gamut of "doesn't look like Star Wars" to "offensively bad." Ralph McQuarrie's original designs of almost everything in the OT had a coherent, unique and timeless visual style, an old "70s Sci-Fi Magazine" kind of look, a style that looked big and mythic and even sometimes vaguely psychedelic. This is a cool post and you're right that OT has a pretty rad consistent 70's sci-fi look but can't you agree that the PT aesthetic is (even if it's not to your taste) also supremely consistent and full of pretty rad flash-gordon-y 50's-style sci-fi looks?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2016 01:15
|
|
