Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker

thrawn527 posted:

Especially when J.K. Rowling was originally talking to Disney about a Harry Potter theme park land, and talks fell through. This is Disney playing catch up.

The goofy Avatar park was their first foray into that and a definite response to HP world, but also a gigantic gamble because it came right inbetween the years where people give a poo poo about Avatar.


I personally am excited to see Galaxy's Edge someday. I'd never buy a $200 saber because anything bought in a theme park is crap quality, but just seeing the props would be neat. I'm a hell of a lot more excited for that park than I am for magical Palpatine possessions in Star Wars 9.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker

man nurse posted:

This thread sucks and I am unironically excited for more Star Wars.

maybe we should have a "speak positively about star wars" thread to combat this "mercilessly poo poo on star wars" thread

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker

Gonz posted:



More high rez shots of the Sith Trooper.

All these shots are of a toy/model, not from the movie, right? I mean it'll probably look basically the same but still

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker

sigher posted:

Has Disney said anything about ever releasing the theatrical versions of the OT? My hard drive with the despecialized versions poo poo the bed and I've been wanting to watch the OT recently.

I should probably just assume that we'll never get those versions again; or Disney will pull some bullshit and make them only available on Disney+.

I honestly don't really get the obsession with the original theatrical release. From what I can tell the changes they made are either (a) good, (b) quick and forgettable, or (c) one awful CGI musical number that I wish I hadn't just remembered.

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker
Reading this thread makes me both happy and sad because everyone I talk to casually about the sequel trilogy says TFA had so many great ideas and set up such a great trilogy then shits all over TLJ nonstop. Most of them don't really even know what to think about TROS other than that they didn't like it, which they blame on TLJ being so bad and impossible to recover from. It makes me happy that others agree with me (in this thread), sad that the sequel trilogy sucked so much overall.

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker
I also rewatched TRoS despite already deciding it was the worst Star Wars movie of all time. But hey, I was kinda intoxicated and maybe I would like it more if I just enjoyed the ride. Nope, ride is unenjoyable.

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker

Blood Boils posted:

It's not just Rise that was hacked up by Disney executive committee, all the new films have been.

The blame on Abrams (or whoever) is misplaced

Honestly, I don't know how making one of these movies isn't the most frustrating loving things in the world.

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker

Neo Rasa posted:

Yeah that owns.

With Disney wanting to milk anything, odds of Alden Ehrenreich appearing in it at some point?

I still actually want a Solo sequel. I do not want a Cassian Andor series, but hey, I'm open to the idea of it being good.

Speaking of milking anything, what are the odds that Disney doesn't somehow include the Skywalkers in a future series, somehow?

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker
It's very frustrating that an imaginative property like Star Wars can be so beloved that it becomes a product crafted by focus groups and market research. It's the exact opposite of what happened with the prequels.

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker

MasqueradeOverture posted:

They do that for the first one, they forgo it for the middle entry then go "Whoops! Our Bad" when fanboys get pissed at its direction instead of sticking to their guns and make the last one a reactionary focus-tested homunculus.

The good thing at least is that now that the OT characters are out of the picture, they can pretty much do whatever they want without as extreme of a fear of push-back / excessive executive meddling.

As one of the "I liked TLJ" people that makes it extra irritating. I seriously don't know how they'll ever just give someone creatively competent the freedom to create a continuous trilogy. Maybe Feige will save us.

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker
I gave into some clickbait article that made me irrationally angry, in which it alleges Kathleen Kennedy is out (yay) but is being replaced by JJ Abrams / Bad Robot (noooo) and they are bringing George Lucas back as creative lead (what?)


edit: to be clear I'm aware this is ludicrous

Glottis fucked around with this message at 23:38 on Jul 22, 2020

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker
The parsecs thing is so dumb. Just accept that the line is a tiny, tiny error that doesn't even really matter rather than insane mental gymnastics to make it make sense. There are much more glaring errors that would benefit from explanation.

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker
I enjoy both Solo and Rogue One and they're basically opposite interpretations of how to make a Star Wars movie that takes place in the same universe as the original trilogy. Somehow they both worked for me. Neither are "great movies" though.

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker
This latest chunk of conversation has been largely about how things make sense in context with the established universe and lore. Amusingly, Solo and Rogue one took that poo poo as seriously as they could, because it was basically the marketing strategy that it all fit in. The sequel trilogy has demonstrated about 100 times that they couldn't give less of a poo poo, though, so even trying to explain anything in them is a waste of time.

That said they should have still made a story that was interesting, even if the things happening didn't make sense in the universe. I think they failed on both.



(still love TLJ though)

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker
I'm perfectly OK with some minor retcons like Mandalorians using carbonite. It being untested was an interesting element in ESB but if it instead had been an existing way to do things it wouldn't have really changed the story at all.

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker

This poo poo actually makes me sad. Give Alden Ehrenreich some credit, or at least accept that the character could look a little different. I know it's just for fun, though.


The Bee posted:

I thought The Force Awakens was a good yet overly safe movie, and it'd be up to the sequels to bring the new era to greatness.

I thought The Last Jedi was a very interesting but dissonant movie, and whether it'd end up loved or hated would depend on how the last movie picks up what it put down.

Then Rise of Skywalker happened.

I think if anything, being a trilogy somehow made these three movies worse. How does that even happen?

Exact same except I loved TLJ right away, and still love it, but it's definitely made worse by being in this trilogy. TRoS just tanked everything.

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker
No, the objects are supposed to have been force teleported. I agree with you that the sequels went hog wild with force power expansions compared to all previous movies. However I, as a TLJ fan idiot, really thought the Force Teleconference kinda fit in with the old stuff. People can talk to the dead, maybe they can talk to each other. JJ clearly also liked the idea and wanted to 'and-then' it beyond what loving makes sense.

That said the force handoff crap was one of the very few parts of the movie I found kinda satisfying. I dunno.

I just wish they'd MCU-ize Star Wars. Make a movie about some people that can do X. Make a movie about some people that are fighting for Y. Make a movie about some people that are descended from Z. Put them all together LATER and it'll be fun. Give everyone some time to shine. Rogue One did well and those characters are explicitly dead. Cmon.

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker
Was it not a force magic power thing when Luke could hear Obi-Wan from behind the grave and then make some impossibly hard shot with his eyes closed?

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker

Crazy Joe Wilson posted:

You can't sell Imperial stormtrooper toys if they're actual fascists. Lindsay Ellis on youtube had a good video on how the new Star Wars are pretty devoid of any actual internal motivation for the First Order, and how the old Star Wars managed to do the fascist aesthetics while also pointing out the Empire was actually bad, not misunderstood.

Let me correct myself, you can't sell Imperial Stormtroopers if they're actual fascists and you're worried that will give you a bad image. Tons of toy companies make bad guy toys all the time, Disney has just been relentlessly obvious about trying to present the right social image* in the U.S. Market.

I'm kind of curious if that's explicit, because now that I think about it I don't have any concept in my head of what the actual people in the stormtrooper suits actually felt like. All they say is poo poo like "Hey!" and "Rebel scum!" or whatever, nothing really indicating they are mindless or frothing or reluctant. Obviously it can't be as full with conflicted soldiers as Disney thinks, but whatever.

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker

cargohills posted:

Guy Henry apparently played a young version of a Cushing character in something else before (I don't remember what) so had some prior experience with imitating him. Plus he sort of has the cheekbones.

I saw him in Harry Potter recently for the first time after seeing Rogue One, and unfortunately the dude just moves his face like a strange zombie which (in my opinion) totally amplified the uncanny valley poo poo. I still think they should have just recast the character.

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker

Neo Rasa posted:

Kylo also in Force Awakens, when he suspends that blaster bolt early on in the movie, that's something we've never seen in the movies before. He's an interesting casting choice/"character design" because he's clearly an extremely powerful force user but also so prone to raging out that he tries to brute force everything.

You got me thinking. I think the only force powers we see in TFA that were ever seen in the movies before is (1) Rey using the jedi mind trick once and (2) Kylo doing standard telekinesis once on the lightsaber at the end. Everything else was new - holding, mind reading, etc. This idea holds pretty much true for the rest of the sequel trilogy, where each film has like 1 or 2 instances of an "old" power and a bunch of new random stuff.

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker

I'm 4 minutes in and holy poo poo this video sucks.

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker
I think the odds of Disney not trying to pull the nostalgia strings with future Star Wars movie are 1 in 100000000. That's literally all they know how to do in ALL of their tentpole movies.

Is it the same problem in the comics? At least with Marvel movies they can pull some rando character from the comics that only the super nerds know. Does current canon even have distinct characters in the comics?

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker

Doctor Spaceman posted:

Doctor Aphra is a breakout character from the newer Star Wars comics and it's just a matter of time before she appears in live action.

She seems pretty coupled temporally with the OT and does poo poo with Vader a lot. If Disney could get some competent writers they could take the good parts and separate her, but aren't the comics supposed to be 100% canon? I was hoping there were characters that kinda had their own mini-universe, so to speak.

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker

josh04 posted:

The corkscrew jump is self-justifying, sorry

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ve1889zS030

thank you for posting this because I immediately had to explain that fantastic meme to some of my friends

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker

thrawn527 posted:

Because no one cared back then. It was just some silly movie no one had heard about. Mark Hamill tells the story about how he passed the script around to his friends, who passed it around to their friends, who all thought it was the silliest thing they had ever read. That all changed 3 years later.

He also tells a great story about when he was told the "I am your father" twist for ESB. That Kershner pulled him aside on the day of shooting and told him, "What I'm about to tell you, only I know, and George Lucas knows, so if it leaks, we'll know it was you." Which I've always thought was hilarious.

Do you have a decent youtube link to him telling those anecdotes? Always enjoy seeing him talk about OT stuff. I honestly don't know how that dude remained so... normal? all these years.

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker
Seriously. Time skips not only let you tell more of a story but leave openings for stuff like that. Just another reason why ending a move like TFA on a direct cliffhanger that HAS to be addressed is stupid beyond belief.

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker

Schwarzwald posted:

I agree, but that's a movie that Disney would never, ever make.

did you see Infinity War?

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker
oh my god one of my friends had that and I completely forgot it existed. Seemed surprisingly not rickety as a child.

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker
I got a headache just trying to remember all the dumb poo poo in that movie in order to pick the example that sticks out the most. Honestly it's just a mess from start to finish.

I think I'll go with the "I made Snoke" line followed by a vat of Snokes that he literally made for some reason. If he just has a massively force-sensitive person printer why not make an army of those? Why did Palpatine even have to be behind Snoke at all?

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker
I don't know why it amuses me that this thread shifted from "star wars spoilers" to "complaining about star wars but no spoilers about actually released new star wars content", but it does

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker
Yikes, I forgot how janky the original one looked.

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker

Crazy Joe Wilson posted:

So I heard somewhere recently that Timothy Zahn offered to write the Disney Sequel Trilogy but got turned away, any truth to that?

You mean like a single person that is responsible for creating a unifying arc? That's LITERALLY insane.


2house2fly posted:

You know what always bugged me? Towards the end of Empire Strikes Back everyone starts pronouncing Han's name differently

I'll admit it, I did enjoy the Solo throwback to that fact.

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker

Cartoon Man posted:

Sheev used the dark side to time travel a clone back to this era and orchestrate the hyperspace accident.

The Star Wars Lego Holiday Special did time travel as a joke, but it's only a matter of... it'll happen sooner or later.

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker
I for one thought Luke's appearance was fun as hell. Yeah it was clearly a CGI Luke, but it didn't look as weird as the previous ones. I guess I don't hold Star Wars content to a high standard when it comes to fight choreography.

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker
Eventually there will be remakes of everything that has been proven to be lucrative and the license is available.

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker
Just finished rewatching all of the SW movies in release order, and my god, TRoS is clearly the worst. Prequels aged better than we expected.

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker
https://io9.gizmodo.com/the-rogue-squadron-pilots-we-want-in-patty-jenkins-star-1846003856

(a) I completely forgot that Patty Jenkins is doing Rogue Squadron. Previously I thought "hey she's pretty competent" and was excited, but unfortunately I've now seen WW1984.

(b) I'm almost certain that none of these weirdos will show up. Wedge might be referenced or something. Somehow they'll find a way to stick CGI Luke in there, though.

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker

Vintersorg posted:

Rogue One is easily the best of the new movies. By a million miles.

It's far from perfect but this is true

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Glottis
May 29, 2002

No. It's necessary.
Yam Slacker
Another thing Rogue One has going for it is the planet effects (viewing from space or whatever). The planets looked more realistic than in any other SW movie to me.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply