Star Wars Lives!

@LHoffman:

@frimmel:

On the one hand I’m digging all the justification of my cynicism. On the other it is so terribly sad to be right in this case.

True. It could have been a great thing for the Star Wars universe/franchise, but it is sad to think that not just this film, but what proceeds from it, could ruin Star Wars to some degree.

I wonder how long it will take for people in general to realize how hollow this film is. Someone suggested that Disney/Abrams was playing it safe on this film; trying to hit all the correct cues and avoid all of the prequel stumbles. The hypothesis (or hope) was that after this film gains warm acceptance the writers/directors/studio will have the fan’s trust and blessing to actually become creative. I can understand that thought, but I find it hard to believe that it is THE PLAN. I just doubt any studio’s ability to shy away from a formula to make money these days.

Studios don’t care if what they put out is good or new or actually creative or even how we feel about it. They care that we pay to see it. So maybe they do care that we at least like it enough to see the next one.

I keep reading a lot of people saying they enjoyed it in the theater but it falls apart on them if they think about it too much. A lot of “wait for the next one.” Product cinema at its finest.

@frimmel:

A lot of “wait for the next one.” Product cinema at its finest.

The worst.

Never been a Star Wars fan - and did not get beyond the second film - but have read a VERY positive critical review.

My wife may drag me to it ….

frimmel’s reply #137 nailed it.  Just nailed it.

I just got back from the theater.  I love Star Wars, and I loved this movie.  They copied IV a bit too much, but I figure they’re playing it safe - risky to change too much (all the hate for Episode I).

I love I-VI every one, and now VII.  Will buy it as soon as it comes out.  Would go to the theater to watch it again, but hesitate because there are so many people there - all the crying, the talking, the noise……

@frimmel:

I keep reading a lot of people saying they enjoyed it in the theater but it falls apart on them if they think about it too much.

I think it all depends on what you want from them.  I’ll see what happens after I think about it for awhile.  Like I said, though, none of the sins of the first 6 were enough to make me actually dislike them.

Colored laser swords!  Space ships!  Funny lines!  Good guys die sometimes!  Force powers!  Interesting story!  Laser swords!  Exotic locations and funny aliens!  Space pubs!  Laser swords!

See, I got what I wanted, so I am a happy customer.

I saw Episode VII tonight with my son and I have to say that it doesn’t have anything in common with Star Wars.
A flying Millenium Falken or some X_Wings or some Lightsaber doesn’t make it automatically a Star Wars Movie.

We want to identify our selfs with the Person of interest. For Example: I can watch Fynn and understand what he is doing and what his goals may be in that Movie. I can’t do that with other characters because the Minute I think about them, the Scene is a diffrent one. Nothing explained, just like in the Trailer when the voice says: Who are you?? -Exactly! Who are you??

We were able to grow with Luke and see what he is after.
Not with this characters in E7.

I can immediatly Name you a couple of Imperial Generals, not a single one from E7. Why is that??
I have to admit Frimmel is right and my worst fears came true.

JJ resetted the Star Wars universe like in Star Trek.
Toooo man Running Gags for nothing.

The movie reminded me a Little of Green Lantern.

We will continue our debatte about this movie, don’t want to spoil anything yet!

Sincerely AeV

This was product cinema, a “just good enough” tentpole movie to set up a new series. It’s not an unmitigated disaster like most of the prequels, but by no means is it noteworthy or even particularly memorable.

For positives I’ll say I liked Fin and Rey. They were both drawn out well enough and acted capably, and I enjoyed their budding chemistry. I also enjoyed the divorced parents dynamic of Han and Leia, individually they each performed OK. The special effects were much crisper than the prequels and were not a distraction.

But to pick up on aequitas et veritas’s point, one huge flaw in this film is the lack of a strong villain. Andy Serkis’s Wizard of Oz hologram was mildly intimidating, but General Hex and Kylo Ren are totally limp, pale and watered down versions of Grand Moff Tarkin and Darth Vader. Tarkin didn’t need a contrived fascist-style speech to be evil, Peter Cushing did it with an insidious combination of civility and malice.

And Kylo Ren. My goodness, what a lame henchman. He’s what prequel Vader would have been like in a suit. His helmet removal was laughable, and his character overall was very poorly developed despite being so important to the plot. And I will NEVER accept Han’s fate.

Starkiller Base is a big, dumb plot device that makes big, dumb explosions. That Han jokes about the ease with which it can be taken down removes any drama in the final battle, and the battle itself is very underwhelming. I have to say I’m shocked the dogfighting scenes in general were pretty weak: they felt like video game footage. Doesn’t seem like JJ has any idea on how to shoot such sequences. The last act just feels too casual, as if this is a rote sabotage mission and attack run with nothing at stake. Also where was this precious Resistance Fleet? Where did all the Mon Calamari Star Cruisers and Nebulon-B Frigates go? Wouldn’t antique Y-wings and advanced B-wings been better suited for a bombing run? What happened to those? How about A-wings?

Also I’m sick and tired of Jedi getting cut to ribbons by rogue apprentices, maybe they’re not worth training en masse after all.

@General:

This was product cinema, a “just good enough” tentpole movie to set up a new series. It’s not an unmitigated disaster like most of the prequels, but by no means is it noteworthy or even particularly memorable.

Slight deviation from the matter at hand, since I haven’t seen Force Awakens yet… I know it is the trendy refrain that the Prequels were terrible, not Star Wars, etc… but I really don’t think they are as abjectly terrible as so many say. Maybe this is because I first saw these movies between the ages of 11 and 15 and I can’t objectively see them again for the first time. But I have at least one reason as to why.

Compared to the Original trilogy, the Prequels are all a step below in nearly every regard: acting, visual effects, the cast, tone, etc… However, and in spite of the many faults, there are positive elements, chief of which is the story arc for Ep I - III. Star Wars I-VI is very much the story of Darth Vader; the Prequels in particular exist for no other reason. Strip away the on-screen blunders and I think the vast storyline for the Star Wars galaxy, The Republic, the Jedi and Darth Vader/the Empire is quite excellent. Again, implementation is poor in many ways; often it is like watching a tv soap opera. But personally, I will take a great story that lacks somewhat in implementation over a shallow, re-hashing of an already established story. Maybe I am in the minority.

Ep I, II and III are frequently wooden and often stray into outright opera-level plot declaration and emotional statements. They also reveal too much about the Star Wars universe, which sheds much of the mystery and wonder of the franchise. The plot is somewhat complex, at least compared to Ep IV - VI. This is both good and bad. Many people deride the Prequels (Ep I in particular) for opening the plot with statements on “taxation of trade routes”; somehow implying that such material is too esoteric (and therefore boring) for Star Wars. The entire plot of the galactic struggle in the Prequels is predicated on this split between the Republic and various economic and industrial factions. Granted, this is generally a background element and not constantly elaborated on, but it gives very plausible reason for why things occur as they do. Maybe my appreciation of this background and complicated story comes from me being primarily a Star Trek guy. A good story means more to me than the number of explosions, laser swords, throwback references and funny quips. You can argue that such a nuanced story is not Star Wars - because it is definitely more muddied than the Original trilogy. But I obviously don’t believe that a complex plot detracts from the enjoyment. Rather I think it is necessary for the story that was to be told. To some level, the prequels, by their very nature, have to be different than the Original trilogy. Again, the implementation is poor in many respects, but it is intellectually compelling if nothing else. There are plenty of explosions and crazy sword fights in it too.

Am I overvaluing originality? I don’t believe so. But if I am it is only because there is a tremendously apparent lack of it in the film industry and media in general today.

As another side note, this was quite eye-opening. Even if I think 90% of it is BS. It is some darn well framed and supported BS. I just have a hard time believing that writers/producers/directors think about think about their scripts to the extent of making the entire film full-blown subliminal allegory.

Digging Deeper- Jurassic Park: Finding the Lost World  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEf6UQuzvPo

Can this be applied to The Force Awakens?

I could possibly buy that Steven Spielberg, with his decade spanning experience, creative authority and self-aware filmmaking, is capable of doing this with The Lost World. It is much more difficult to imagine that Jurassic World continued that deep intro/extrospection. Jurassic World seemed entirely, like The Force Awakens, the revival of a beloved franchise with the sole intent to capitalize on billions of dollars in nostalgia. However, after watching Jurassic World, I remember having the distinct thought that the masses in the film were a direct representation of the people in the theater seats. But that is as far as I got with the impression of having been punked.

Can anything so smart be attributed to JJ Abrams in any of his creations, most pertinently The Force Awakens? In one sense, making a movie that is entirely a subliminal commentary on itself or the industry implies a great deal of directed intent and intelligence. However, can this redeem a film that is still a poor action/visual spectacle that is unabashedly rides the same plot, characters and success of the past? I would say no.

At least The Lost World had a different, more complicated story with new and interesting characters. The plot is actually a reasonable extension of the events in Jurassic Park. I have always thought it is underrated.

I have not read any of your post. I’m heading to watch Star Wars tonight with my family.

Nice to have you back, Worsham.
Enjoy the film.

So, finally saw the movie a couple days ago. It was about as I expected content-wise, though not as painful to watch as I anticipated. I thought the first 30 minutes were actually quite good and engaging, but it was pretty much downhill from there. John Boyega does a better job with Fin than the trailers indicated. Rey is a very worthy Star Wars character and she is acted perfectly; definitely the best in the film.

Kylo Ren is simply a poor villain. His personal conflict does not have much weight and is not given enough background. Adam Driver gave it a good effort, but he could not do much with how his character was written or edited. Even so, he was able to make Ren creepy and bordering on perverted during the interrogation scene with Rey. The Darth Revan cues of his costume and voice are good and I do like how he is not as menacing to his troops as Vader is. However, in that respect Ren is inconsistent. He is often fair or reasoned with subordinates, giving him a calmer and more thoughtful presence than Darth Vader. Yet more than once he totally flies off the handle with rage and destroys things. I found these two aspects hard to reconcile and they made him (and his inner turmoil) less believable. Going back to the costume, I like it and I do not like it. I like the style but I do not think it fits for how Ren’s character is portrayed. He wears a mask that alters his voice, but why? It is only for show because clearly (unlike Vader and any other Sith in the movies) he has no injuries to cover up. Establishing a character as fearsome, anonymous and dangerous via a dark shroud and a mask suggests certain things… but once Kylo Ren removes the mask and we see nothing more than a long-haired adolescent who is essentially a rebel without a cause, whatever gravitas was established is forever lost. Maybe that was intended, but I can’t tell.

I liked how the lightsaber fight(s) were less like the lightning fast duels of the prequels and more methodical, heavy handed affairs of the original trilogy. Rightly so because the continuity is closer to Ep IV-VI and these are un or semi-trained force users rather than Jedi Knights and Sith at the height of their skill. That said, Kylo Ren was still a poor excuse for a Jedi-Sith-Force user whatever-he-is. Some of his force manipulations were cool, but his sword fighting was sub-par from what should be expected. The incompetent Fin gave better than he should have and Ren was essentially defeated by Rey, who had never touched a lightsaber before.

BB-8 was also a much better character / sidekick droid than I expected. He was funny and endearing for a modern audience in the same way that I am sure R2-D2 was in the 1970s and 80s (and still is). BB-8 is more like a highly capable pet than a mechanical companion and that serves his character well. Particularly in his interaction with Poe Dameron, who speaks of him like his dog.

Poe Damaron was also good. I like Oscar Isaac and think he is perfect for the character. Poe is like a mix of Wedge and Han as they were in IV-V-VI. His part in the Force Awakens was rather limited and kind of boxed in his character, but I liked him. I think there is promise here.

Han was okay. And just barely okay. There were a couple of glimmering moments, but overall I found him to be less like the Han Solo of old. It is also difficult to get used to a guy his age still doing all the things he used to and wearing a variation of his original getup. I think what happens to him in the film is heavily due to the fact that Harrison Ford simply did not want to play Han Solo anymore. It showed a bit and I think the events support that. Without giving away more than I just did, I think the scene of his “fate” is both way too quick and lacking in almost every way. There was little emotional impact for me as an audience member and perhaps even less from the characters that have a relationship with Han Solo. I will try to leave it at that but overall I felt it was poorly done and tragically swift for the character’s legacy and import.

My favorite part of the movie, BY FAR, was the very end. I won’t say what that is yet, but seeing that guy just turn around and stare, not saying a word was absolutely amazing. The most Star Wars thing in the entire movie and it almost made up for a lot of the bad stuff. That was very, very cool.

That was pretty much all of the good I can muster for this movie. Everything else is either average (not very interesting), poor or outright bad.

On a whole, it does give potential for future films, but only if the story is good. I can look beyond bad special effects and fan service, but if future stories are as derivative and use as much recycling of locales, character types and poorly contrived plots, then it will all be a terribly shameful waste.

That was a better critical review than almost every one I’ve read out there, and many of them were probably paid to do it.  I agree with much of what you said, especially about Ren, Rey, and BB-8

Final scene didn’t strike me nearly as much as it did you - I liked the rotating panning of the Scottish hillside the best.  (But the fact that it made me think of Scotland I guess ruined the immersion)

@Gamerman01:

That was a better critical review than almost every one I’ve read out there, and many of them were probably paid to do it.  I agree with much of what you said, especially about Ren, Rey, and BB-8

Final scene didn’t strike me nearly as much as it did you - I liked the rotating panning of the Scottish hillside the best.  (But the fact that it made me think of Scotland I guess ruined the immersion)

Thanks for the compliments. I like to review things I am knowledgeable about or can at least speak intelligently of. I also am interested to hear what the people on A&A.org have to say because they are both intelligent and often have compelling perspectives. It’s nice to keep the dialogue going if nothing else.

I certainly have more to say, but most of it is more on the critical side. Much of it I am sure has been written of already.

@LHoffman:

Thanks for the compliments.

Credit where it’s due  :-)

Yes, great review Hoff… well worded. I also watched it recently and was very impressed with most of it. With a cultural icon film as influential as Star Wars, almost everyone will walk away from it with thoughts that stick in their heads (good or bad). Hoffman laid out a great analysis of the villain and I agree with him 100% even if I didn’t know I had the same opinions about him until Hoffman explained it to me.

For me it was the story lines, the plot twists, and overall script structure I was fixated on as it was all too familiar, I can understand why JJ Abrams wanted to “play it safe” as far as story goes considering how the prequels faired among public scrutiny. However, it is quite fair to label the force awakens as a remake of the original 2 films in my opinion, as I can easily chop the entire film into 10 minute segments and compare them scene for scene with a New Hope and the Empire Strikes Back.

But don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying this is a bad thing. In fact what makes the obvious so palatable is that everything seemed fresh. Like I said earlier, I agree that Kylo Ren reminded me more of a spoiled teen that was denied the keys to his dad’s car, rather than a savage mercenary using a fierce army to conquer the universe and enslave all jedi knights… but everything else was new and vibrant even if the obvious parallels were there. The desert planet provided great panoramic visuals as the same landscape did for the original… The bar maiden at the new Canteen played the wise and unassuming character which was just a fresh take on Yoda, and speaking of the bar… what a great sequence that was, although it will be hard for most of us to compare it to the original scenes, especially knowing that the new band jingle was far more forgettable than the original tune… and finally the new faces of the rebellion are very fresh, and I had no problem with any of them… even Adam Driver’s facial bone structure is unique enough to carry our attention through his scenes and I think the only reason for the mask is the whole Kylo knights order, or to be more like his grand father.

For the fan boys there was enough visuals to awaken their hibernating imaginations and allow them to forget the fact that Han Solo leading a team to take down the shields while the rebellion’s ace pilot and loyal squadron wait to fly their mission to the centre of the “round weapon” to shoot at “something” that will start a “chain reaction” which will destroy it… is, well… you know, a recycled story line. For the 90s babys who were let down by the prequels to the first movies they may or may not have seen, the force awakens will provide them with a buffet of everything they should have got from George Lucas in his second crack at it.

But in George Lucas’s defence, I honestly felt that the battles between the X-wing and tie fighters were more intense in a New Hope. I know many will disagree with me due to the upgrades in digital effects, however… I just felt more was at stake, tensions were higher, and the odds were tougher against the death star… so the force awakens dropped the ball a tad with me when building up the tension for what should have been the most exciting scenes of the whole movie. Still, it’s really awesome to have a Star Wars film to watch, that actually feels like you’re watching Star Wars. I especially appreciate the control JJ had not to over stay his welcome on many of the action sequences, and his transitions from story layer to story layer was very fluid and didn’t feel forced at all.

8.5 /10

I saw the film over the holidays.  I had done my best to avoid learning anything significant about the movie prior to seeing it, so I knew almost nothing about the characters and the plot; I don’t know if the writers assumed that the audience would have any advance knowledge of the new episode, but at any rate I found it to be a huge disappointment.  The film struck me as being a remix of many elements of the previous films, and in particular of the original trilogy, and as a result it came across as being shockingly unoriginal.  I found many parts of the story to be unengaging, including the quest (announced in the opening scroll) that supposedly drives the plot.  The writers don’t seem to have given much thought to whatever is supposed to have happened in the galaxy, politically and militarily, since the fall of the Empire at the end of Episode VI and the start of Episode VII.  As far as I could figure out, this galaxy of millions of worlds now seems to consist of a reconstituted Republic that lives on one planet, a revamped Empire (the First Order) that lives on a super Death-Star, and a Rebellion that lives in scattered places here and there.  And I can’t at all figure out the part about a “Republic-supported Rebellion.”  If the Republic is now in charge, and the Rebellion is helping the Republic fight a resurgent outlaw neo-Empire, why is the Rebellion called a Rebellion, given that they’re on the same side as the established legitimate regime?

@Young:

But in George Lucas’s defence, I honestly felt that the battles between the X-wing and tie fighters were more intense in a New Hope. I know many will disagree with me due to the upgrades in digital effects, however… I just felt more was at stake, tensions were higher, and the odds were tougher against the death star… so the force awakens dropped the ball a tad with me when building up the tension for what should have been the most exciting scenes of the whole movie.

I for one completely agree. Supposedly there was an above average use of practical (non-digital) special effects in Force Awakens, however much of the ship battles still seemed too reliant on cgi and looked artificial. Much of the battle sequences not looking entirely real stems from what I would call artificial camera angles: placement or track of a camera which could not realistically be achieved if the scene was being filmed with completely real action. For example, if the Millennium Falcon was actually dogfighting with Tie Fighters outside your window right now, would you be able to get a camera following 70 feet behind the Falcon through all its loops, rolls and twists?   Of course not, which is why it looks very fake when watching it in a movie. In general, George Lucas employed a mounted camera on ship exteriors, cockpit view shots and standard panoramas to focus in A New Hope and the other original trilogy films. This lent a sense of realism to (many) older films which is often absent from action/effects shots in newer films. I know Christopher Nolan is a big advocate of using plausible camera placement to enhance the realism of his films. Watch Interstellar and you will really notice.

The non-realistic camera angles are usually far more visually dynamic, but a normal movie-watcher innately knows that it makes the scene feel fake. Lately, I think they have become a gimmick for enhancing the 3-D watching experience. 3-D works better when you have things flying at you as you speed through a tangled mess of wreckage. But are we supposed to be on a virtual roller coaster or watching a film?

I have the same issues too CWO Marc. Is the “Resistance” a military arm (like a StarFleet) of the “Republic” used to do battle with the “First Order” on their frontier? This is starting to sound a little Star Trek-y (nothing wrong with that but this is Star Wars) and I have to wonder if the poorly executed political elements of the prequels played a role in this ambiguous setup that included only a throwaway mention of the Senate in Hux’s Hitler-style speech. At least in A New Hope the Senate is mentioned in a context that paints the setup of the galaxy as that of Rome.

I was also very annoyed to keep hearing about this precious Resistance “Fleet” with nary a throwaway shot of recycled Mon Calamari Star Cruisers and Corellian Corvettes. Instead at one point in my second viewing I heard a technician say during the Starkiller battle that “half their fleet” has been destroyed. So their fleet consisted a bunch of modified X-wings? Stupid nitpick but I felt the screenplay was littered with holes, including overuse of ‘light side’ and ‘dark side.’ There are many other ways to describe good and bad. I’m also not sure why Starkiller Base was never mentioned in the opening crawl and is introduced about halfway into the movie for such an important plot element. The battle itself is underwhelming and very anti-climactic. There are some good shots here and there, but Poe effortlessly squeezes his fighter into the oscillator room, casually takes out the targets and waltzes right out. Not nearly as dramatic as the previous two Death Star runs.

And if you’re going to go down the flashback/vision route with Anakin’s lightsaber, you better acknowledge the good and the bad, specifically the time it belonged to its original owner in the prequels. Very convenient to show the Cloud City hallway and use audio clips from A New Hope and Empire. I would rather the old artifact be Luke’s saber from Jedi.

That’s a very good observation LHoffman on camera angles, I do need to watch Interstellar again. The Falcon chase on Jakku was more disorienting than thrilling. I just don’t think JJ knows how to shoot ships or dogfights.

@General:

Hux’s Hitler-style speech.

The bad-guy portrayal was possibly the most annoying aspect of the film for me. That would include the Republic/Resistance-First Order relationship mentioned above.

But what I am specifically talking about is the jarringly stark portrayal of the First Order. First, they are essentially the Empire with a new name: same ships, same soldiers, same superweapon, same mysterious talking hologram. Lack of originality aside, they feel thin compared to the Empire. Perhaps naturally so, because they are not the government in power as the Empire was. Yet they are portrayed as far more militarily capable and superior than the completely impotent Republic. It is a weird dynamic.

Secondly, the First Order’s military and leadership image is that of late 1930s National Socialists. They use the same colors, theatrics, rhetoric, parade banners… Hux is an over-acted and unimpressive general-stooge who is completely one-dimensional and a ridiculous facsimile of Adolf Hitler. For WWII history people such as myself and all here, I can only assume this deliberate imitation was somewhat insulting in its simplicity. Now… I do understand the the Empire was very much created in that same image, but it is not nearly so overtly paralleled.

Third, why were all of the First Order officers and leaders a bunch of posh British white people? The Resistance was incredibly diverse, with a Latin American (Isaac), a black Englishman (Boyega), a strong British female main character (Ridley), plus a multitude of other alien and human races including the first time I have ever seen Asians in Star Wars. It’s as if the First order is comprised entirely of white, haughty aristocrats. Whether or not that was a politically safe play I don’t know and to be honest I really don’t care. I just think it makes the First Order bland and further unrealistic. While the majority of the Naval Officers in Ep IV-VI were white men with British accents, not all of them were and I honestly do not recall their accents being so obvious. Maybe I need to re-watch the originals.

I believe there was some proposed reason for this in the Expanded Universe material which stated that Palpatine was something of a human-supremacist and did not want other races in positions of power or military rank. However, as we all know very well now, all the EU material is meaningless, so they need another reason.

Lastly: Supreme Leader Snoke.   What an awful name. Not very scary. Maul, Dooku, Vader, Grievous, Plagueis, Sidious…     Snoke.

His image and presentation, beyond being utterly derivative, was too defined. He looked like a mix between ET and the stereotypical big headed aliens at Area 51. Unlike the Emperor hologram in Empire Strikes Back, we saw everything there was to see with Snoke; he really wasn’t mysterious in the slightest. Nor did he exude any particular Force-filled presence. He just looked like an old alien on an exaggerated throne. And apparently this theory is no good anymore (http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Popular-Supreme-Leader-Snoke-Theory-Just-Took-Major-Hit-103707.html). But then again, don’t they just deny everything until they want to reveal it?