|
Kly posted:you guys are hilarious. my wifes only seen TFA, knows nothing about star wars and was able to follow and enjoy rogue one just fine lol what is wrong with you goons Ugh how am i supposed to know the death star is a superweapon it only blew up part of a planet. You have to be really dumb to be unable to follow the plot.
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 13:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 12:49 |
|
|
I saw it with Koreans who haven't seen the other movies and who had the vaguest awareness of the films and they liked it and understood it. A space wizard doesn't really need that much explanation. You see a dude doing magic in a movie that is not striving for realism, and everyone in the audience realizes "oh, this story has wizards." Or, "oh that blind monk clearly wasn't just faking his magic." You probably also deduce that the religious reverence everyone shows for "the force" has something to do with the space wizards too. Especially when one of them is constantly praying to it. You don't need to have some dude give a monolog. If anything it should be praised for showing rather than telling?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 13:54
|
|
|
Chirrut wasnt faking anything.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 13:58
|
|
|
That's what I said?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 14:04
|
|
|
Missed the "n't" on "wasn't". Sorry.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 14:10
|
|
|
BillBear posted:The thing that makes the least sense is when Plinkett brought up his "context" argument which made no loving sense. The other films are the context lol. Of course you'll be confused about the force and who the empire is if you jump into the franchise with a spin off. " WHO'S MEANT TO BE THE BAD GUY??" oh loving gee I wonder who it could be? Tarkin? The near cameo appearance who's sole point is to remind you Krennic isn't the top dog? Vader? The guy with like 2 tiny scenes? Or Krennic, the guy who sets the whole plot into motion and spends the whole film trying to finish his death machine, crush the rebels and has gently caress loads of screen time? God I really can't tell guys. That video sucked hard. It ties into his comments in his first review about how from the very first shot of a new hope we understand the context of the movie; a small, plucky rebellion escaping from an all powerful and resourceful empire. A new hope creates its own context while rogue one largely depends on the original trilogy for context.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 15:57
|
|
|
Calaveron posted:It ties into his comments in his first review about how from the very first shot of a new hope we understand the context of the movie; a small, plucky rebellion escaping from an all powerful and resourceful empire. A new hope creates its own context while rogue one largely depends on the original trilogy for context. What are people not understanding about the opening of Rogue One? The movie is about how a family man who is a brilliant engineer and scientist is forced against his will to make a super weapon for a resourceful empire. It's clear and spelled out from the start. The characters straight up say this.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 16:01
|
|
|
Understanding what is going on in ANH is kind of helped by the scrolling text which fills you in on what's going on in this film, which is evidently part 4 of a series. That is literally the "first shot" of ANH.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 16:03
|
|
|
I said come in! posted:What are people not understanding about the opening of Rogue One? The movie is about how a family man who is a brilliant engineer and scientist is forced against his will to make a super weapon for a resourceful empire. It's clear and spelled out from the start. The characters straight up say this. It's a condescending complaint I only see coming from people who completely understand everything about the movie. It's always worded like "but but but how could the mere casual moviegoer ever possibly comprehend the setting of Star Wars?!?!" Missing the forest for the trees of Star Wars being built around a bunch of universal stories and character types that are as old as time. A New Hope doesn't even need its opening crawl, you learn the entire set up of the movie in the first like two minutes of it. Neo Rasa fucked around with this message at 17:22 on Jan 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 17:18
|
|
|
Fuzz posted:Except the part where they said it stands apart from the main trilogy but ties in, literally from the start. Indeed, there's a Skywalker in the film for about five minutes. This is about the little guys and their story concludes with the end of this move instead of extending to 9+ other ones. quote:Even MCU movies still have some semblance of internal consistency so you can jump into most of them and still have an idea of what's going on in that specific franchise without having seen every single other one. You could watch Cap 1-3 without seeing any of the other films and still understand all the major plot points of Civil War because they show you synopses or backstory highlights in the news footage or from a random aside. Cap 3 is Civil War. I'm not really sure what's unclear with what was happening in Rogue One. Jyn's mom was murdered, father abducted and forced to engineer WMDs. Jyn gets raised by guerilla terrorists in a holy city, gets ditched by replacement father/mentor figure who went off the moral deep end, gets recruited by a larger group rebelling against the WMD faction, joins a team that acquires the intel needed to stop the WMD.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 18:07
|
|
|
Fuzz posted:There was a literal row about Star Trek 2 because Spock's death was leaked out and was meant to be a secret, such that they went back and reshot the entire opening to have the Kobayashi Maru sequence where Spock "dies" to throw people off. This isn't true at all. Spock's death was indeed leaked (by Roddenberry), but the entire Kobayashi Maru sequence, Spock's death and all, was in the shooting script that Meyer wrote. The only additional shooting on the movie was the "remember" insert in engineering, a little bit on the bridge at the end (McCoy saying "he's really not dead, as long as we remember him") and the sequence on the Genesis planet showing that Spock's torpedo soft-landed. Meyer actually wasn't involved with any of that shooting at all (as originally filmed, Spock was dead-dead), so Harve Bennett directed those little bits. Timby fucked around with this message at 18:17 on Jan 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 18:15
|
|
|
Neo Rasa posted:It's a condescending complaint I only see coming from people who completely understand everything about the movie. It's always worded like "but but but how could the mere casual moviegoer ever possibly comprehend the setting of Star Wars?!?!" Missing the forest for the trees of Star Wars being built around a bunch of universal stories and character types that are as old as time. The point of the opening crawl has always been to inform the audience that the story is part 4 of a larger saga, even when it was actually the first part. The idea being to prompt the audience to imagine this greater story for themselves.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 18:54
|
|
|
Timby posted:This isn't true at all. Spock's death was indeed leaked (by Roddenberry), but the entire Kobayashi Maru sequence, Spock's death and all, was in the shooting script that Meyer wrote. The only additional shooting on the movie was the "remember" insert in engineering, a little bit on the bridge at the end (McCoy saying "he's really not dead, as long as we remember him") and the sequence on the Genesis planet showing that Spock's torpedo soft-landed. Meyer actually wasn't involved with any of that shooting at all (as originally filmed, Spock was dead-dead), so Harve Bennett directed those little bits. Oh neat, I love hearing little stories like this that clear things up. The version I had heard was either from an interview with Nimoy and Shatner together or from some random Trek staffer, can't quite recall. I had always thought it was just the shots of Spock dying and Jim later asking him, "aren't you dead?" That were inserted in to throw people off, but totally didn't know Roddenberry leaked it... was that like some sort of petty gently caress you by him, since he hated Star Trek 2?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 18:54
|
|
|
The more I hear about Roddenberry the more I realize he was a crazy man.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 18:57
|
|
|
He was nuts and it's only because of fans crazier than him that Star Trek is still around.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 18:59
|
|
|
Fuzz posted:was that like some sort of petty gently caress you by him, since he hated Star Trek 2? Pretty much. Roddenberry was incredibly bitter about being blamed for The Motion Picture's production getting so out of control, and over his new title of "executive consultant" -- he had an office on the Paramount lot, received a pretty hefty salary, and was allowed to read and make notes on all Trek script drafts, but the producers didn't have to listen to a word he had to say. Harve Bennett basically had a form "that's nice, Gene, thanks for the notes" memo that he'd send every time Roddenberry started complaining, and Nick Meyer learned to just completely ignore him (until Roddenberry had a tantrum about Saavik being the traitor in the early drafts of The Undiscovered Country). He had a particularly vehement dislike of Bennett, and when it became clear that Spock's death was going to be in the final product, he leaked it to the fanzines. He had a similarly virulent reaction to finding out that the Enterprise was going to get whacked in The Search for Spock and by all accounts blew a gasket when he found out that Bennett's plan at the time was to move everyone over to the Excelsior, so he leaked that to the fanzines, as well, but Paramount decided to head him off at the pass and showed some shots of the Enterprise's destruction in the trailer for the movie. Vintersorg posted:The more I hear about Roddenberry the more I realize he was a crazy man. Well, he did spend ten years trying to get Paramount to produce his batshit insane Star Trek script that had the crew traveling back in time to 1963 to prevent the assassination of Jack Kennedy and ended with Spock being the second shooter on the grassy knoll... Timby fucked around with this message at 19:10 on Jan 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 19:08
|
|
|
B...but that sounds awesome?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 19:14
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvNdCjc-3Ps
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 19:23
|
|
|
So known rear end in a top hat and piece of poo poo William Shatner makes a web series making GBS threads on a man been dead for 25 years? What a stand-up guy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 20:34
|
|
|
TheMaestroso posted:So known rear end in a top hat and piece of poo poo William Shatner makes a web series making GBS threads on a man been dead for 25 years? What a stand-up guy. It's on Netflix, and they treat Gene fairly, for the most part. It's a bit suspect that Shatner waited until Majel Barrett died to make it, but she was hardly objective about Gene, either. Roddenberry was a nightmare to work with.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 21:53
|
|
|
Ammanas posted:Separate from the discussion of fat idiots with a YouTube channel, is it a good thing that you just listed 3 villians (should add Saw in there too) and none of them are clearly the antagonist in the film? It ties into the film feeling muddled and rudderless, bumping from one (very rad) set piece to another.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2017 22:18
|
|
|
Hodgepodge posted:The point of the opening crawl has always been to inform the audience that the story is part 4 of a larger saga, even when it was actually the first part. The idea being to prompt the audience to imagine this greater story for themselves. And way back in the beginning, there wasn't even the "Episode IV- A New Hope" at the beginning of the crawl!
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 00:19
|
|
|
MrMojok posted:And way back in the beginning, there wasn't even the "Episode IV- A New Hope" at the beginning of the crawl! I thought there was an "episode IV" there, but it has been a long time. e: looks like it didn't show up until ESB, when audiences suddenly were informed that they were watching part V rather than part II: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fm_4WaPbbK0&t=20s Hodgepodge fucked around with this message at 02:04 on Jan 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 02:01
|
|
|
Hodgepodge posted:I thought there was an "episode IV" there, but it has been a long time. There wasn't in the first theatrical release, but there was in the re-release around Empire.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 02:04
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:There wasn't in the first theatrical release, but there was in the re-release around Empire. It was probably there in the VHS I watched as a kid, then. Makes sense; as I understand it, Lucas didn't really flesh out much until after the first movie became a hit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 02:06
|
|
|
Yeah, they even removed the Episode IV part from the "unaltered" DVD's since it was meant to be the "theatrical" version (ironically altering that version of the movie), but Episode IV has been a subtitle since the 1979 rerelease and is as far as I know used in every medium since, including the Laser Discs that were used to make the DVD's.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 03:46
|
|
|
Hodgepodge posted:The point of the opening crawl has always been to inform the audience that the story is part 4 of a larger saga, even when it was actually the first part. The idea being to prompt the audience to imagine this greater story for themselves. The episode 4 tag wasn't originally in the film. The first theatrical run of A New Hope was just simply called Star Wars.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 14:16
|
|
|
Lucasfilm and the braintrust will be meeting in about a week to discuss what to do about Carrie Fisher's passing. Sources tell the Hollywood Reporter that Leia had an important part going into IX: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/carrie-fisher-episode-viii-how-star-wars-will-handle-leias-future-960849 If her reunion with Luke is in VIII, I'm guessing they may change the movie to have her succumb to the injuries she sustained from being blown out into space. If she doesn't meet with Luke in this movie, I guess they could reshoot and piece something together to make it work. I could feasibly see something like a conversation with Poe about the future will now happen with Luke swapped in instead. There's also the recasting path, or recast and Tarkinstein Fisher ontop of the performance ala Rogue One. I don't think either are best for the character or franchise though. Teek fucked around with this message at 17:45 on Jan 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 17:21
|
|
|
Teek posted:Lucasfilm and the braintrust will be meeting in about a week to discuss what to do about Carrie Fisher's passing. Sources tell the Hollywood Reporter that Leia had an important part going into IX: Leia already looked CGI in TFA. She looked less life like than CGI Yoda from PT.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 17:29
|
|
|
Teek posted:If her reunion with Luke is in XIII I think they're a ways away from hitting Episode 13. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 17:32
|
|
|
Whoops, subtract a V from that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 17:45
|
|
|
Teek posted:Lucasfilm and the braintrust will be meeting in about a week to discuss what to do about Carrie Fisher's passing. Sources tell the Hollywood Reporter that Leia had an important part going into IX: You know the answer is cgi liea already.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 17:48
|
|
|
Have Billie Lourd's character get possessed by Leia's force spirit or something and live on through her.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 18:12
|
|
|
Hodgepodge posted:B...but that sounds awesome? Seriously. I'd pay my $12 to watch that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 22:20
|
|
|
cgi leia will be flawless just like her appearance in R1 andI cant wait for edgelord spergs screaming tears as they leave the theater whining about how yoda from the prequels looked more realisticJerk McJerkface posted:Leia already looked CGI in TFA. She looked less life like than CGI Yoda from PT.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 22:23
|
|
|
Rogue One first thoughts (I didn't see a Rogue One thread) analysis of the entire plot, so read at your own peril. First thoughts about the film: I loved Rogue One and I thought it had a really good running theme that was awesome. The Destructive ambition for power will bring your own downfall. We see this in Rogue One manifest in a few ways, and I refuse to believe it kept happening for no reason. Like even the opening credits we get that Harry Potter-esque "By murdering this dude's family you're creating an enemy larger then ever before," thing that comes up. As the movie goes on we see that the Empire's need to kill and destroy only back fires, when 6 imperial storm troopers fire on a single unarmed monk. They end up killing themselves and defeating their chance to capture and stop the rebellion. It goes on later in the film when we see Tarkin forcing the director's hand, which causes him to lash out unpredictably. The Rebel Alliance tries to be destructive, fighting the empire the way the empire was fighting them, and they end up destroying a huge asset, and almost kill another. Another example, is when the rebel alliance shows up to blow up the planet shield thingy. If the Director wasn't on Edo, there wouldn't have been two star destroyers hovering over the planet, and their plan to crash one into the other (and both into the gate) wouldn't have worked! The Director ended up dooming the protection of the Death Star Plans, (which was the only way to find out about the Death Star's glowing weakness, because The Director had killed all the Engineers,) and Tarkin cemented it. He was so desperate to stop the transmission of the plans, he blew up the only copy of them they had. With that mistake he had doomed the Death Star, and the Imperial Forces to defeat by the alliance. If he hadn't blown up the planet, they could have found the hole and plugged it, but they're need for utter destruction and absolutes was too great. I thought this was a really clever film, and I'm stoked to see #8. Turtlicious fucked around with this message at 02:29 on Jan 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 02:27
|
|
|
Recast Leia and pretend that literally nothing happened.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 02:56
|
|
|
Turtlicious posted:Rogue One first thoughts (I didn't see a Rogue One thread) analysis of the entire plot, so read at your own peril. ah your special movie eyes failed to see the bad guy was in fact a play doh stop motion composite. youre supposed to pathetically brag that u were the smartest guy in the room who totally knew the 60 year old woman appearing as a 20 year old at the end was in fact not real. instead u focused on worthless symbolism and plot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 03:04
|
|
|
bring back old gbs posted:ah your special movie eyes failed to see the bad guy was in fact a play doh stop motion composite. youre supposed to pathetically brag that u were the smartest guy in the room who totally knew the 60 year old woman appearing as a 20 year old at the end was in fact not real. instead u focused on worthless symbolism and plot. oh no, but I like symbolism and plot...
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 03:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 12:49 |
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:Recast Leia and pretend that literally nothing happened. Ah, the ol' Albus Dumbledore approach.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 05:26
|
|