Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 28, 2024, 11:17:04 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Star Wars ep IX: The Rise Of Skywalker

Started by mothman, April 12, 2019, 06:23:23 PM

Previous topic - Next topic
Who did the effects for that explosion, Terry Gilliam??

Replies From View


Glebe


Ferris


Kelvin

I saw a leaked trailer for that new live action "Mandalorian" series earlier today, and I came to a realisation. I'm beginning to hate Stars Wars. The same characters, the same music, the same ships. the same aliens, the same stories, the same factions, the same planets, the same weapons, the same ideas, over and over and over again. I'm absolutely fucking sick of it. In four years, Disney have driven one of the world's most beloved series into the ground, and milked it's udders dry with a savagery that George Lucas could only dream about. There is absolutely nothing new to say about that universe, or if there is, there is no motivation for something that original to be said.

Dr Syntax Head

Quote from: Kelvin on April 14, 2019, 10:10:55 PM
I saw a leaked trailer for that new live action "Mandalorian" series earlier today, and I came to a realisation. I'm beginning to hate Stars Wars. The same characters, the same music, the same ships. the same aliens, the same stories, the same factions, the same planets, the same weapons, the same ideas, over and over and over again. I'm absolutely fucking sick of it. In four years, Disney have driven one of the world's most beloved series into the ground, and milked it's udders dry with a savagery that George Lucas could only dream about. There is absolutely nothing new to say about that universe, or if there is, there is no motivation for something that original to be said.

It's the cult of Star Wars that killed it for me. Everything everywhere has Star Wars on it and you're some kind of pariah if you don't worship at the temple of Star Wars every day of your life. I loved the original 3 films but my nostalgic feelings for return of the Jedi are now dead thanks to society and some very rich people making a fuck ton of money off it.

madhair60


Dr Syntax Head

Temple. There's no christian god in Star Wars

I want it to be really nihilistic, with everything and everyone getting destroyed.

dr beat

Worth bearing in mind that there was a period between the mid-80s to the mid-90s where Star Wars was pretty much totally forgotten, or at least it was a case of a generation (I was born in 1977) putting away childish things so to speak.  It seemed to come back around 96/97 when they brought out the remastered VHS versions of the OT, which sparked a nostalgia effect, although that itself was prefigured around 1994 by trip-hop types, e.g. James Lavelle etc, referencing it.

greenman

Quote from: Kelvin on April 14, 2019, 10:10:55 PM
I saw a leaked trailer for that new live action "Mandalorian" series earlier today, and I came to a realisation. I'm beginning to hate Stars Wars. The same characters, the same music, the same ships. the same aliens, the same stories, the same factions, the same planets, the same weapons, the same ideas, over and over and over again. I'm absolutely fucking sick of it. In four years, Disney have driven one of the world's most beloved series into the ground, and milked it's udders dry with a savagery that George Lucas could only dream about. There is absolutely nothing new to say about that universe, or if there is, there is no motivation for something that original to be said.

I'm happy to see the setting of the originals recreated well in good cinema(Rouge One being the only example of that IMHO) but as mentioned the style Abrams has brought to the table really isn't that. He makes hackish blockbusters that depend on shoving individual bits of nostalgia in your face every 30 secs inbetween terrible jokes and constant quick cut action. People quickly grew tired of it with Star Trek and I suspect the same will be true of Starwars, Disney made a massive short termist error hiring him in the first place IMHO.

Urinal Cake

#101
I'm not sure what people expected from Disney. They are the medieval pig sty latrine of content

Ferris

Quote from: madhair60 on April 14, 2019, 10:24:50 PM
"Worship at the church of Star Wars"?

When the last one came out, my grocery store was using Star Wars characters to sell lettuce.

Death Star on romaine, elderly Luke Skywalker on iceberg. That was the end for me.

Edit: apparently it was the full Dole range. I don't even know what character this is. According to google, there were Death Star bananas. Search "Dole Star Wars" if you want to see the depths of Star Wars depravity under Disney.


popcorn

Quote from: Kelvin on April 14, 2019, 10:10:55 PM
I saw a leaked trailer for that new live action "Mandalorian" series earlier today, and I came to a realisation. I'm beginning to hate Stars Wars. The same characters, the same music, the same ships. the same aliens, the same stories, the same factions, the same planets, the same weapons, the same ideas, over and over and over again. I'm absolutely fucking sick of it. In four years, Disney have driven one of the world's most beloved series into the ground, and milked it's udders dry with a savagery that George Lucas could only dream about. There is absolutely nothing new to say about that universe, or if there is, there is no motivation for something that original to be said.

I've never been a big Star Wars fan, but I was cheered by the Disney acquisition. It felt like the right home for the franchise after the wilderness years. I recall posting here saying that it was like hearing that your postie had recovered after a serious illness. You just want the best for him.

Anyway, TFA came out and I thought it was on the whole rather good. Safe, yes, but I agreed with Abrams' philosophy that starting off "classic" was the best place to begin a new story, and besides I think the film doesn't get enough credit for its innovations - particularly Kylo Ren, who is a really neat new exploration of the light/dark side stuff.

More than anything, it felt like a genuine movie event. It was exciting! But now there's a new film every 45 minutes. Solo bombed and everyone reckons it's because the market is sick of Star Wars. It feels like it's true. Maybe the franchise just can't support ten films a week like the Marvel universe can. I much prefer the idea of waiting two or three years for a really special new film.

I do credit Last Jedi for at least being bold, but the end result was more confused than anything, really. And it still looks mostly the same as the others.

greenman

Quote from: popcorn on April 15, 2019, 05:00:04 AM
I've never been a big Star Wars fan, but I was cheered by the Disney acquisition. It felt like the right home for the franchise after the wilderness years. I recall posting here saying that it was like hearing that your postie had recovered after a serious illness. You just want the best for him.

Anyway, TFA came out and I thought it was on the whole rather good. Safe, yes, but I agreed with Abrams' philosophy that starting off "classic" was the best place to begin a new story, and besides I think the film doesn't get enough credit for its innovations - particularly Kylo Ren, who is a really neat new exploration of the light/dark side stuff.

More than anything, it felt like a genuine movie event. It was exciting! But now there's a new film every 45 minutes. Solo bombed and everyone reckons it's because the market is sick of Star Wars. It feels like it's true. Maybe the franchise just can't support ten films a week like the Marvel universe can. I much prefer the idea of waiting two or three years for a really special new film.

I do credit Last Jedi for at least being bold, but the end result was more confused than anything, really. And it still looks mostly the same as the others.

I felt TFA was really a lot like Abrams original Trek film, minus some of the more interesting castings and a few semi originals ideas the latter had. Its really a very slight film indeed that operates very strongly on nostalgia and I think we saw with Trek that style had a very limited shelf life.

I suspect the big problem was how much Disney paid for Starwars, it ment they were very conservative in hiring someone like Abrams and indeed I suspect in the nature of Last Jedi. To me that feels like a film that desperately wants to be ESB but simply doesn't have the balls to achieve it, isn't willing for example for Luke to have any kind of force philsopy beyond the Jedi we know and isn't willing to have Rey move beyond a bland hero position or Kylo to move beyond a villain position.

Quote from: popcorn on April 15, 2019, 05:00:04 AM
I've never been a big Star Wars fan

Quote from: popcorn on April 15, 2019, 05:00:04 AM
Anyway, TFA came out and I thought it was on the whole rather good. Safe, yes, but I agreed with Abrams' philosophy that starting off "classic" was the best place to begin a new story, and besides I think the film doesn't get enough credit for its innovations - particularly Kylo Ren, who is a really neat new exploration of the light/dark side stuff.

Sorry for cutting up your post, but I want to talk about these two specific parts.

TFA is probably fine if, as you say, you have never been a big Star Wars fan. It's well-suited to casual viewers who watched the original films a couple of times but never had a close relationship with the franchise.

However, if you are a big fan and you grew up playing the games, reading the novels and comics, and re-watching the trilogy on an annual basis, then TFA is huge disappointment. The Expanded Universe material repeatedly recycled and rehashed elements of the originals. Another planetary superweapon, another dark lord in a mask, another roguish space pirate with a secret heart of gold. If you have experienced all of these tropes to the point of exhaustion, then 'Episode IV remake' is the worst thing TFA could possibly be.

And Kylo Ren is not innovative. Similar things were done in the EU, particularly in the KOTOR games.

Bad Ambassador

I remember in the RLM review of Rogue One (I think) Rich Evans noting that the dirty secret about Star Wars is that it's a very limited universe, with only a very small number of possible stories. Far from being an entire galaxy of adventure, the options availalbe for films is so restrictive that it's surprising the Weiss/Benioff and Johnson trilogies are still moving forward. What can they possibly be about and how will they appeal to audiences, when much if not most of Star Wars's appeal to the general public is the characters rather than the setting?

greenman

Quote from: Bad Ambassador on April 15, 2019, 11:35:09 AM
I remember in the RLM review of Rogue One (I think) Rich Evans noting that the dirty secret about Star Wars is that it's a very limited universe, with only a very small number of possible stories. Far from being an entire galaxy of adventure, the options availalbe for films is so restrictive that it's surprising the Weiss/Benioff and Johnson trilogies are still moving forward. What can they possibly be about and how will they appeal to audiences, when much if not most of Star Wars's appeal to the general public is the characters rather than the setting?

Honestly though the likes of RLM and Stuckman always seem to be pushing for Starwars to remain limited to a handful of similar stories and characters, that kind of analysis that glories in the more mundane aspects of the craft of film making and business.

There reactions to TFA and Rogue One for me were entirely backwards, the latter was accused on being purely nostalgia when in reality I'd say the former was far more guilty of this. Rogue One actually seemed like something rather different plot wise, very little focus on the force/jedi/skywalkers and showing the Rebel characters are far more morally dubious.

I think Disney took exactly the wrong message from those films as well, TFA being a massive short term success ment they thought they could get away from pushing the same kind of film out repeatedly. Rogue One though still made $500 million+ in the US whilst aiming more at a hardcore fanbase in a fashion I think would have been more sustainable.

Kelvin

Quote from: Bad Ambassador on April 15, 2019, 11:35:09 AM
I remember in the RLM review of Rogue One (I think) Rich Evans noting that the dirty secret about Star Wars is that it's a very limited universe, with only a very small number of possible stories. Far from being an entire galaxy of adventure, the options availalbe for films is so restrictive that it's surprising the Weiss/Benioff and Johnson trilogies are still moving forward. What can they possibly be about and how will they appeal to audiences, when much if not most of Star Wars's appeal to the general public is the characters rather than the setting?

I've often thought about him saying that, and whether I actually agree with it or not. I still think a film or trilogy that actually took a risk and moved outside what we've already seen so many times could breath new life into the series. A trilogy in the distant past or far future, with very different tech.

popcorn

Quote from: Default to the negative on April 15, 2019, 10:47:19 AM
Sorry for cutting up your post, but I want to talk about these two specific parts.

TFA is probably fine if, as you say, you have never been a big Star Wars fan. It's well-suited to casual viewers who watched the original films a couple of times but never had a close relationship with the franchise.

However, if you are a big fan and you grew up playing the games, reading the novels and comics, and re-watching the trilogy on an annual basis, then TFA is huge disappointment. The Expanded Universe material repeatedly recycled and rehashed elements of the originals. Another planetary superweapon, another dark lord in a mask, another roguish space pirate with a secret heart of gold. If you have experienced all of these tropes to the point of exhaustion, then 'Episode IV remake' is the worst thing TFA could possibly be.

And Kylo Ren is not innovative. Similar things were done in the EU, particularly in the KOTOR games.

I suppose my impulse would be to take whatever cool things had been done in the comics, games etc and see if they could be used in a sort of "canon" sense for a big new film - which from the sounds of it is similar to what they did? I suppose this would be similar to how the Marvel films have (as is my understanding) adapted several major stories from the comics, but not in a directly linear way.

I maintain that the big missed opportunity of the new films has been with Rey - she should be ferocious, half-feral, someone we fear could turn to the dark side, not this nicey-nicey Oxbridge lass.

Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth

For all its flaws, I'd say Rogue One does successfully capture the the tone of the the original trilogy - Other than the robot making sarcy comments, everyone else is playing it straight, unlike the constant  humour in TFA and TLJ (which has more in common with the prequels). Watching it and complaining that the series is limited seems a bit off, given that it's not really attempting to do anything different (lip service attempts at moral ambiguity aside).

Abrams is a decent enough director in his own right, but by gum he's bad at Star Wars. The Force Awakens managed to pander and miss the mark at the same time. The Last Jedi was deeply flawed, but at least it tried. The thought that this next one is going to undo it all, in favour of old plotlines and Abrams' mystery box guff is disappointing.

Shit Good Nose

#111
Quote from: Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth on April 15, 2019, 02:22:46 PM
For all its flaws, I'd say Rogue One does successfully capture the the tone of the the original trilogy - Other than the robot making sarcy comments, everyone else is playing it straight, unlike the constant  humour in TFA and TLJ (which has more in common with the prequels). Watching it and complaining that the series is limited seems a bit off, given that it's not really attempting to do anything different (lip service attempts at moral ambiguity aside).

Abrams is a decent enough director in his own right, but by gum he's bad at Star Wars. The Force Awakens managed to pander and miss the mark at the same time. The Last Jedi was deeply flawed, but at least it tried. The thought that this next one is going to undo it all, in favour of old plotlines and Abrams' mystery box guff is disappointing.

Still, better than Aliens eh?


No, I am joking there.  I'm not sure I agree that Rogue One captures the tone of the original trilogy - sarcy droid aside, it's far too po-faced for that - (I actually think Solo is, so far, the only one that comes close), but it is, by FAR, the best Star Wars film since the original trilogy, and genuinely pretty decent in its own right.

I thought TFA was okay, but a largely redundant remake of A New Hope, whilst The Last Jedi is an absolute abomination - as I've mentioned many many times in numerous threads, it was between that and Guardians of the Galaxy 2 for the worst film I saw in 2017.

Although my expectations for the next one are set at rock-bottom, it'll nevertheless be interesting to see how it goes what with the backlash about TLJ and the problems with Solo.

...but probs better than Aliens...

kalowski

Quote from: Kelvin on April 15, 2019, 01:42:51 PM
A trilogy in the distant past or far future, with very different tech.
All of these trilogies are set in the distant past: "A long time ago"

Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth

Quote from: Shit Good Nose on April 15, 2019, 03:01:53 PM
Still, better than Aliens eh?


No, I am joking there.  I'm not sure I agree that Rogue One captures the tone of the original trilogy - sarcy droid aside, it's far too po-faced for that - (I actually think Solo is, so far, the only one that comes close), but it is, by FAR, the best Star Wars film since the original trilogy, and genuinely pretty decent in its own right.

I thought TFA was okay, but a largely redundant remake of A New Hope, whilst The Last Jedi is an absolute abomination - as I've mentioned many many times in numerous threads, it was between that and Guardians of the Galaxy 2 for the worst film I saw in 2017.

Although my expectations for the next one are set at rock-bottom, it'll nevertheless be interesting to see how it goes what with the backlash about TLJ and the problems with Solo.

...but probs better than Aliens...
Don't you ever get tired of being wrong?

Mister Six

Quote from: popcorn on April 15, 2019, 05:00:04 AM
More than anything, it felt like a genuine movie event. It was exciting! But now there's a new film every 45 minutes. Solo bombed and everyone reckons it's because the market is sick of Star Wars. It feels like it's true. Maybe the franchise just can't support ten films a week like the Marvel universe can.

Because the Marvel Cinematic Universe has more scope, or at least the source material does. In terms of scale you can have everything from street-level villains in Spider-Man to universe-shattering ones in Infinity War; in terms of tone, there's the faint grimness of Winter Soldier to the outright wackiness of Thor: Ragnarok; in terms of style, Marvel has clearly been angling each new franchise around a particular theme, gimmick or aesthetic (Ant-Man = heist movies; Dr Strange = psychedelia; Guardians = classic rock and wacky comedy; Black Panther = Afrofuturism, black identity politics and for some reason James Bond pastiches; Captain Marvel = 90s references and female identity politics). And all of that is because they have 50-ish years of comics to draw on.

Star Wars, on the other hand, has a relatively small, interlinked collection of characters and places (excluding the extended universe stuff, which most people, including probably Disney creatives, are only vaguely aware of at best) and Disney's inherent conservatism isn't going to give people much scope to do anything too different. Even with those restrictions what we're getting is absurdly reductive though. Every film has some combo of dashing rogue, focused and intense young talent, doomed older mentor and gimmicky/wacky comedy robot.

What they should have done was an initial trilogy (actually four parts would have made sense for the story they are apparently trying to tell), make it into a big event, and then diversify afterwards with new stories in new parts of the galaxy, diversifying into TV shows and web stuff too, to try out more outre ideas.

But they had to go into the shareholders meeting and justify spunking a fortune on the Star Wars brand by promising an imminent and vast return at the inevitable expense of the franchise's longevity, so this is what we get.

Zetetic

Quote from: Kelvin on April 15, 2019, 01:42:51 PM
I've often thought about him saying that, and whether I actually agree with it or not. I still think a film or trilogy that actually took a risk and moved outside what we've already seen so many times could breath new life into the series. A trilogy in the distant past or far future, with very different tech.
Then why set it in Star Wars? What's there left?

'The Force', I guess, which I'm not sure really has that much mileage - and certainly very little special to it. (KotOR is perhaps interesting to consider.)

Kelvin

Quote from: Zetetic on April 15, 2019, 04:56:41 PM
Then why set it in Star Wars? What's there left?

'The Force', I guess, which I'm not sure really has that much mileage - and certainly very little special to it. (KotOR is perhaps interesting to consider.)

Well, because you could still echo the themes of the original Star Wars films, but with an aesthetic and society that is distinctive enough to give it some new life and original ideas.  A very different type of sith/Jedi, or a different style of force culture entirely. You could still have lightsabers, and some of the core iconography, but with none of the tired old trappings of the empire and existing charachters. A new perspective on it all.

It's difficult to gauge exactly how far you can go in a new direction, before it stops being Star Wars.

On the one hand, Star Wars is derived from other genres, like Westerns and Samurai films. If those genres can produce varied and mature works, then you might expect that Star Wars could do the same.

On the other hand, there is something fundamentally frivolous about Star Wars. You could try to make a socio-political Deadwood set in Mos Eisley, but people would probably laugh at that.

Mister Six

Or it could be the new Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. I think there's definitely room for that kind of thing on telly, and Disney should have been exploring that with Netflix partnerships or something already.

Replies From View

Quote from: greenman on April 15, 2019, 09:44:08 AM
TFA

Every time somebody says this I think they are talking about "Episode 1:  The Fantom Anus".

Good isn't it.