Show, but LOST, I remember what could’ve been…
I really liked the Dharma Initiative aspect of it, was hoping that they’d go somewhere with it…
I think it’d be cool for someone to make a videogame based off it now
Telltale Games style, or something else?
The eternal metric of a good show hitting a point in season 3 or 4 where every episode opens 20 more questions than it answers, making me wonder if its going to Do a Lost on me and just fall apart. (ahem-Yellowjackets&Severance-ahem)
I think it’s important when making a show to actually have an end in mind, yknow?
deleted by creator
Man in the High Castle tv show. The premise was interesting, Nazis taking over the US and the population figting back. However, the show quickly devolved into a confusing mess.
Nazis are in charge of the US government, yet there’s other Nazis on the run from the Nazis in charge? And they’re hiding bibles? I was left scratching my head wondering if there were any characters that weren’t Nazis. I guess it’s a story about how bad guys always turn on each other?
Also The Witcher season 1 tv show. I’ve never played the games before and knew nothing about it. I was hoping the tv series would be my introduction to the games, but… what in the actual fuck. Was the director drunk? Is this a show about medieval fantasy time travel and I’m just not getting it?
As far as the witcher and time travel kind of. At some point in the future there was a disaster and Earth was destroyed. However some humans and lots of monsters from alternate realities ended up in the world of the Witcher. Elves and dwarves were the original inhabitants.
Humans used a mix of genetic engineering they had and magic taught to them by the elves to make the Witchers. The Witchers helped solve the massive monster problem and the world ended up with humans mostly on top.
Witchers age very slowly and if not killed can live a very long time. Powerful magic users are basically the same. So the stories from session 1 are spread over about 80 years with some long lived characters.
The first book that season 1 is primarily based on is also different from the other books. It’s a bunch of short stories that are based on classic stories. So there is Sleeping Beauty, Snow White, Beauty and the Beast, etc.
I own the Witcher 3. Should I start there? Cause you just made me very interested.
Witcher 3 the game is a fine place to start. I’d say you can start in any of the games and Book 1 the Last Wish, Book 2 Sword of Destiny, or Book 3 Sword of Destiny. The games were in line with the books cannon but telling there own story. The popularity of the games made Sapkowski write more and they have now diverged somewhat. Here are some notes on all of them as far as a starting place.
Last Wish (book): Short stories based on classic stories. Good intro to the world and the writing style. No main plot so it can be skipped or read later without much problems. The Sleeping Beauty story is the opening cinematic of Game 1.
Sword of Destiny (Book): More short stories but we introduce a lot of the main characters in the rest of the books.
Blood of Elves (book): This is where the main story of the Witcher starts proper. After this you should read them in order.
Witcher 1 (game): Game play is ok but I think has the most interesting ideas and storytelling. It has the choose between two bad choices and find out later what the effect is. It doesn’t spoon feed you the lore and there are lots of hints about what is going on you can catch if you are paying attention. For example echinops grow where terrible crimes were committed if the crime wasn’t atoned for. Every place you find a echinops growing is a clue as to the nature of what happened there.
There is another great non obvious story element that I love. I think it’s more fun to know this and see how it plays out in the game. I recommend reading the spoiler but it’s up to you.
Main Villain
Alvin the boy who almost dies in the barghest attack in part 1 is also the main villain Jacques de Aldersberg. Towards the end of the game Alvin goes back in time and grows into the adult Jacques de Aldersberg. The various things you say to Alvin will change what Jacques says during the game. And when you kill Jacques at the end you use your silver blade. He looks so upset saying “That sword is for monsters.”
Witcher 2 Assassins of Kings (game): Improved gameplay with much more focus on combat and combat mechanics. Better graphics. Ok story but nothing compared to 1. The combat is very hard early and is required so that can be a drawback.
Witcher 3 Wild Hunt (game): The best game as far as gameplay. Fun lots different things to do and a solid story. It’s a very Ciri focused story and thus can spoil some of the books somewhat. As far as a starting place you are going to have a lot of fun but it does throw a fair amount of characters at you and expect you to know them. Also the spoiler from 1 is specifically confirmed at one point so if you don’t want that beware.
If you didn’t actually finish high castle, it just keeps getting good weirder.
I felt like the story was amazing for season 1. Season 2 went downhill quickly because of the easy love triangle plot line. The main saving gave was the Rufus ‘Obergruppenführer Smith’ Sewell amd his son toryline. I couldn’t even tell you if I’ve seen/remember one episode of season 3.
Season 1 is based on the first book, which was made some a bunch of serials in a fiction magazine. It’s honestly pretty spot on with the book and the following books and seasons are fully linear.
The witcher Netflix series was a mess behind the scenes. I think some of the writers were taking it as opportunity to show off their ‘abilities’ and were writing OC instead of the witcher.
Man in the High Castle tv show. The premise was interesting, Nazis taking over the US and the population figting back. However, the show quickly devolved into a confusing mess.
Unfortunately the case for a good portion of Philip K. Dick’s work… Schizophrenia, amphetamines, and misogyny can do that I guess.
But when he was good… He was the best of his genre. Literally imo…
Man in the High Castle
Although I liked the series, the “supernatural” elements in it really threw me off. I would still recommend the series but be clear that it is science fiction and doesn’t always adhere to physical limitations as we know them, without getting any more specific than that.
1st season had 2-3 timelines going at once, no time travel (this time) just poorly executed non-linear story telling
ahhh yeah Man in the High Castle, that’s one where you oughta just read the book
i’m ditto w/u on how annoying constant time displacement is in television YES EVEN ANDOR DAMMIT
Is this a show about medieval fantasy time travel and I’m just not getting it?
The three main perspectives it follows take place at different points in and over different amounts of time but each one is internally completely linear and then they all end the season at the same point as each other. Basically, the less you’re making an effort to follow the plot the easier it is to follow because keeping track of the interconnectedness distracts you from the straightforward character stories.
This isn’t me trying to convince you to go back, to be clear, I’m just hoping this will give you some closure.
Highlander II
The Dark Tower
It’s a long list but these two were painful.
Mind you, Highlander II would’ve made more sense as a non-Highlander movie that just revolves around space aliens dealing with Earth having a planetary shield now. As a sequel to Highlander its premise was really weird.
Highlander 2 is unsalvageable. That movie sucked so bad it wasn’t even fun to watch with friends to make fun of it
Fuck The Dark Tower. That movie doesn’t exist for me. Total waste.
The premise of Highlander 2 was awful, too, though.
The Fall Guy. The show had a very simple premise (stunt crew moonlights as bounty hunters) that really couldn’t hold up after multiple seasons. The movie just floundered trying to do too much, and ended up far too inside baseball for normal viewers to really identify with.
I never watched the show, but I loved the movie. Almost every character feels competent and clever, so they do at least something that surprised me. There are a few points that hinge on details that feel a bit contrived, but I appreciated that the climax wasn’t just a physical fight between good guy and bad guy. The main characters have emotional problems that are believable and get resolved. Plus, it’s just a little campy.
I think the “inside baseball” that you mentioned gave the world more depth. It felt “lived in”.
I’ll give you that the movie does try to cram a lot into the time, though. It feels a little rushed.
Yeah, rushed is part of it as well for a full 120+min movie.
And, I should say, I also loved the movie and was disappointed to see mostly negative reviews afterward, but I get it. I initially loved the fact that 87North, the director’s own production company, is both listed in the opening credits and is the company making the movie in the movie. But as the final (contrived to look awesome, which is the point, not the actual plot points) moments wrap up, it felt like it was as much an industry commercial for the director’s own production company as it was a movie just being a movie. Maybe that’s a selling feature and I overthought it, but it sort of took me out of it.
Christian Bale faking an actually decent London accent, Gerard Butler being a loveable scot, and Matthew McCaughnehey doing his best Norse/Spartan Warrior impression?
Horrible acting all around (except Bale at times), the lead female character was basically there to soothe/flirt with the lead (wish i was joking), you can barely understand anyone, and yet really impressive set/castle and overall atmosphere. You believe you are there, and that the world is gone.
Huge gaps in logic on the hunting patterns of dragons, helicopters seem to run on infinite fuel, and the final plan to take down the main dragon is just stupid at best… but the execution of fighting dragons in the air with nets dropped by guys without parachutes was a phenomenol air sequence.
Also, the dragon CGI holds up. You never quite see it, but when you do, you believe it’s there, and the CGI team did a great job with consistency in that the dragons are always depicted expelling fluid that they ignite, and you see it every time they cast fire.
Phenomenol movie, and one of the best opening 5 minutes in terms of origin story. Just a lot of bad acting, and some questionable feats in logic plot-wise.
It took me a while to figure out what movie you were talking about. But it’s “dragons invade the modern world, with Christian Bale!” (I can’t remember the name)
Eragon: Returns
I’d watch this, but only because sometimes I need to watch bad movies
One of the movie series I was sad to see die before it even began. Read the whole series of books.
reign of fire
Christian Bale is English. His accent in Reign of Fire is not far off his normal accent.
You are shitting me!
He’s crazy good at assimilating accents so a lot of people don’t realise. Here’s his real accent (apologies for the YouTube link).
his real accent sounds fake… I don’t believe it…
I’m a crazy, or did you completely fail to mention what movie you’re describing?
I remember being extremely well entertained by awesome dragons, and that’s it. Which means you’re probably correct.
What Bale’s native accent?
I know it’s a British one, I was wondering what region, since OP was talking about his London accent.
its vaguely welsh, but I actually can’t tell
Nah it’s not welsh at all, he was born there but grew up entirely in England.
Dark City (1998) could definitely fit the bill, it has so many unique ideas for that time in film and you can see there’s of all sorts of future sci-fi movies in it from the matrix to inception, it’s a very visually ugly movie and the acting is subpar but as a premise it’s super interesting. Generally I think remakes are a waste of time and money but I’d love to see this movie with a proper budget and modern technology
Jennifer Connelly is the best part of the movie
I just watched this! It felt like the director wanted to go real big with it but technology just wasn’t there with effects. It also tried very hard to be a mindfuck movie but also kept spoiling the twists somehow lol. Overall solid 7+ movie.
The city itself was interesting as hell
Just joking. I really liked the movie for its style and the frightening bad guys in all sizes. Also Kiefer Sutherland with a mad scientist touch.I really like that movie. But watch the directors cut, for the love of all that’s good! It removed the narration at the beginning that gave away the whole plot. Much better that way.
Idiocracy.
Loved the idea. Film itself… meh
I think I read that the studio insisted on changes that annoyed Mike Judge. Pootie Tang met the same fate. They should have just let professional comedians release whatever but some studio executive didn’t get the jokes and was like, “This movie won’t appeal to suburban fathers over 45.” or whatever.
In my experience, it often comes out that all of the shitty parts of comedy movies are not the fault of the creators. But comedians aren’t given creative freedom like Scorsese or whomever and also are like, “Make whatever edits you want. I made a stupid movie with my friends. You got my check?”
yeah read that Caddyshack was made in florida instead of california because they didn’t want the studios breathing down their necks.
I feel the opposite, the premise is a defence of eugenics that looks like it was written by that mother-goose ass neo-natalist nerd couple
The actual film is a decent turn off your brain stoner comedy
I am 100% convinced they had a masterpiece and then test audiences didn’t get it and they went and changed everything around and added the prologue and gave away the entire twist at the start by explicitly telling the viewer where and when we are. Also made the dinosaurs weird for … reasons…?
Oof. Having the statue of liberty there on the opening credits of Planet of the Apes
Like that, yes.
Wow, I watched that on opening night and there were like three people in the whole room. I don’t remember much about it, but what really bugged me was the whole start of the film. A spaceship that is designed to travel fully automatically and immediately fails when there’s a small asteroid field in its path? Absolute BS.
They Live (1988)
I will upvote you, but i must disagree. It was executed flawlessly for 75% of the film. Hell, even the “project 2025” beat towards the end was pretty spot on.
If I may ask, what would you have done to change what you didn’t like?
I wonder what the original screenplay looked like. It starts so powerfully, but takes such a vivid downturn at the end to appeal to the masses demanding shootouts and explosions. I suspect the ending was rewritten in order to get green lit for production, because the original ending might’ve been too cerebral for general audiences. I imagine the original ending probably made you think, and generally that’s not what the masses like from their movies. Kind of ironic considering the plot of the film, don’t you think?
I’ve never seen the movie, but I’ve always wanted to. Have you researched an original screen play? You might get lucky with a leak somewhere.
The fight scene where the main character was trying to get Keith David’s character to try on the glasses… that was legendary. I’ve never seen another (serious) fight scene come close to how hard it made me laugh. 10/10 for that. I imagine Roddy was so familiar with fight choreography from being a professional wrestler that he just got the green light to go ALL OUT and both actors nailed it.
Please excuse all the replies, I just love discussing the movie. It’s still one of my favorites, but I would love to see some other production company film a different ending and release an alternate version with a powerful ending. Think how “Arrival” (Amy Adams, Jeremy Renner) made you feel at the end. I feel like “They Live” could’ve been that good, but maybe it was before it’s time, and they had to cater to the box office of the time.
The premise was powerful, the plot and character development were good, but it seems like the ending of the screenplay got rewritten, and it wound up being a standard issue Rambo-style shoot em up, when it had the opportunity to end on a different, more powerful note that left the viewer thinking about how this relates to themselves, and our own society.
In Time (2011). Time is currency in the dystopia in the film - paying for something decreases your lifespan, earning wages increases it.
The movie sets up a really cool class structure, wherein there are rich people born with/inheriting hundreds of thousands of years of life, and poor people barely managing to scrape enough hours to stay alive until they can earn more the next day. There are segmented areas of the city that cost years to get into.
Overall incredible premise, but the story wasn’t exceptional beyond a couple of the cool mechanics you might expect based on said premise.
And Justin Timberlake is good at pop music
In time is absolutely an idea that I wish would get revisited for a TV show.
When I was a kid, for some reason, I loved the original West World movie, which is about 20% high concept and 80% “how do we copy terminator when all we have are a bunch of random Wild West, medieval and classical back lots?”
Obviously a few years ago HBO picked it up for a show, and that first season explores some of the richest philosophy I’ve seen on TV, in the way only Sci-Fi can; by building characters and technology directly around their philosophical takes and stress testing them. Also simultaneously it created an incredibly compelling story and characters. All of this stemmed from the idea “what if there was a wild west theme park manned by perfectly realistic animatronics?”
In Time may not have the cult classic reputation of the first Westworld but it’s got appeal and charm, while being basically only interesting in it’s high concept, and therefore perfect to pull apart and explore an HBO style branching plot. I bet you could get Justin Timberlake to appear in it again too, for added audience appeal. A show like this can also explore multiple characters in different classes, and those who interact with both. It’s just wasn’t that suited to a movie.
I loved the original West World movie, which is about 20% high concept and 80% “how do we copy terminator when all we have are a bunch of random Wild West, medieval and classical back lots?”
I’m sorry what? ‘West World’ came out in 1973, ‘The Terminator’ came out in 1984. Am I missing something here?
Agree. Great premise and decent world building in the film, but it just felt like a generic action thriller after 30 mins.
The punisher 2004. It’s fun.
Battlefield Earth. It’s a get drunk and veg kinda movie for me. It fucking sucks. But I like it.
Mutant Chronicles, except i don’t think about it normally, but immediately comes to mind when somebody asks similar question. Also it wasn’t mediocre, it was incredibly bad and the second biggest disapointment movie ever for me (worst was Starship Troopers 2).
Premise seems pretty cool (mutant/zombie machine), and I guess it’s kind of a cool but forgettable action flick?
I played a lot of tabletop and card games in this universe in 90’s so i was pretty excited for a movie, and while it was forgettable (but also bad) action flick its main fault was that it has basically nothing in common with the Mutant Chronicles universe.
It’s like getting “Lord of the RIngs” movie, but about some gang war in a village southeast of Umbar.
It’s like getting “Lord of the RIngs” movie, but about some gang war in a village southeast of Umbar.
I mean. I would watch that.
In this case i would like to recommend some books for you:
- The Last Ringbearer by Kirill Yeskov
- Ring of Darkness series by Nik Perumov
Basically unlicenced Middleearth fanfics written by Russian authors but a good ones and getting officially published in multiple countries.
thanks, starred your comment!
Not a film, but a novel:
Starflight 3000 by R.W. Mackelworth
If I remember, it was about this asteroid called “The Biosphere” that got hollowed out and sent on relativistic speeds through deep space to seed other solar systems with human colonies. The inside of it was set up like a giant rural town with massive skies, and a foot print the size of New York. And that’s a cool ass premise.
But the book was so fucking milquetoast and bland. I could not tell you anything about the protagonist, their challenges, or anything.
The Last Jedi was an amazing deconstruction of Star Wars. I don’t think better execution would have helped it with a fan base that wants to be stuck in the past reliving the hero’s journey ad nauseam but it had a lot more potential than you see on screen.
It’s a bad star wars movie because of the hyperspace ram.
SciFi inherently requires suspension of disbelief and so I find the way these types of stories ground themselves is through the rules they set. For example fire/explosions don’t really make sense in space but its a consistent thing so w/e.
Hyperspace ramming breaks the entire concept of Star wars BC why hasn’t anyone done it before? Its the perfect weapon for asymmetrical warfare, its cheap and its very effective. Imagine how a weapon like that could be used with a robot piloting a junk ship, why even build a death star just strap a bunch of garbage to a hyperspace drive and ram it into a planet. Its so effective that every fight in the future needs to consider it as well.
I’d defend this movie far more if it didn’t do this. But it didn’t only damage its own movie it damaged every story star wars has told retrospectively.
As I recall, hyperspace is like a pocket dimension. They just speed up a whole lot to enter hyperspace. So you can’t collide with things ‘in hyperspace’, but only as you’re going really fast while transitioning to hyperspace, which is quite a bit more limited in capability.
Hyperspace drives are expensive, and droids are sentient (so its still suicidal). Using it as a weapon would be like having an shotgun in an fps game, where the first 5 feet is extremely lethal to really big targets, whereas anything after that is a waste of time. Also each shot is $10k.
The real question would be why didn’t she just splat against the cruiser’s shields as they established that was a problem in the previous movie (when they need to hyperspace through the shielding of that planet), unless they had a Galaxy Quest moment where they forgot to flip the shields on.
I guess I am thinking of droids as not having free will even if they are sentient.
I don’t find the expense of a hyperdrive to be a valid point though mostly because even if they are expensive they can’t be that expensive. Han Solo has one and he never seemed like a character with money. I.e. an individual likely wouldn’t be able to try this but an army, with unquestioning soldiers and an immoral general would absolutely try it imo. 1 life/ship lost to kill a fleet is a worthwhile trade
As far as I know all droids in Star Wars have free will.
Han Solo gambled and won the Falcon from Lando (who appears well off), it was definitely too expensive for him to have bought normally.
I think the hyperspace battering ram is funky, but I believe it was less that it was a good tactical idea and more of the First Order being extremely arrogant by not having their shields up, not using a tractor beam, and not just sending a smaller ship forward to close the gap and blowing it up.
I think the movie wanted to show that they were savoring the victory and were willing to draw it out as they believed the rebels were drowning in hopelessness.
So actually to add onto this, this was bothering me so I had to look into it further:
I was very incorrect - Hyperspace isn’t a pocket dimension per se and you can hit things while moving through hyperspace. The reason they ‘sometimes’ get past shields is because shields have a refresh rate so it may be able to phase through if you get it just right.
I’m more with you on this now, its a little ridiculous that no ones really tried to weaponize hyperdrive engines.
i love TLJ so much i skipped the rest of the movies
if you also like TLJ you should watch Kagemusha and When the Last Sword is Drawn and 13 Assassins
How Ben and Luke tell the story of how the latter nearly killed his nephew could’ve used better execution/storytelling, that alone would significantly reduce the amount of discussion on how the movie “killed his character”
I really hate what they did to Luke’s character. It felt like they deliberately trashed him and everything he stood for so some random nobody gimmick character doesn’t look as 2-dimensional. :(
The Ben Swolo memes were hilarious though.
I think I’m really unusual in that I dislike almost everything after IV. I think the first film was brilliant, back when Lucas was fighting for money and had to rely on vision and didn’t have Campbell to advise with. Introducing cutesy characters strictly for marketing, they all lacked the charm of the original.
I know I’m an exception. Nearly everyone liked V and/or VI more. Everyone dunks on Jar Jar, but I could not stand the Ewoks. It was so disgustingly blatant.
At the time I was dying for sequels, and when they finally came I was so disappointed. You know, I think I just realized that it was the Vader/Luke connection that sunk it for me. That all of the major characters had to be related somehow made the universe smaller, and more petty. They only got worse after that; I think I watched all of I-III, but I actively hated those.
Anyway, I think there might have been a path, and I’m no story teller so I couldn’t fix it, but I think the while thing went off the rails after IV.
Good friends have told me the Mandelorian was good, but “Baby Yoda” represents everything I loathed about the series and I refuse to watch it.
Anyway, what were you saying about the Hero’s Journey? Maybe I should watch The Last Jedi, because while the Campbell formula worked for the first film, it didn’t improve any of the sequels, so maybe I’d like it. As long as there are no obviously pandering character designs that exist clearly because they can easily be marketed as toys. Looking at you, BB-8.
Out of curiosity, have you seen Andor at all?
I won’t push you to watch Star Wars since it seems like you’ve landed where you have for good reason, but if in the event you were looking to give any piece of Star Wars media another chance, Andor is the one I’d choose.
Over Mandalorian?
Absolutely. But that’s just my preference.
Mandalorian is really just a spaghetti western with a Star Wars skin. It has cool moments, but also doesn’t take itself too seriously, a mix of action and comedy, and though the individual episode plots are contrived, they know the more important things is really just spending time with the characters. But if you don’t like the characters, then the whole thing kinda falls apart, like what happened with the boring Boba Fett spinoff.
Andor is a spy drama which goes all in on the gravity of its plot. It’s not lighthearted, doesn’t have goofy moments or mascot characters, and despite taking place immediately before the original trilogy, it’s not riding the coattails of nostalgia. An almost 100% human cast with no helmets or painted skin also makes it easier for the quality of acting to really shine on the screen.
Merely being different doesn’t inherently make one better than the other, but what makes Andor stand apart for me at least is that it is the only Star Wars property I know of that was not at all made for children. Not that it’s crass or gory or full of profanity, but it tackles topics like fascism and genocide that could never be as thoroughly explored in any other Star Wars property intended for children.
Sold. I’ll watch it.
Andor is an incredible espionage thriller and I do absolutely love it.
This is also why I liked Rogue One and also the series “Rebels.”
It made the Empire believable, and the Rebels really are an insurgency, the galactic situation is dire and against overwhelming odds. It doesn’t just feel like a hero fantasy.
(Rebels can sometimes, it’s geared to a younger audience, but it takes itself surprisingly seriously in a great way.)
There are a bunch of adorable space critters that you’ll think are that when you’re watching the movie, and they certainly were marketed and merchandised like crazy, but they’re actually there due to the unwanted presence of adorable Earth critters during filming. They couldn’t shoot the scenes without including these birds that lived where they were shooting so the solution they came up with was CGI-ing weird faces on them and including some close-ups to make them look deliberate.
I’m also pro-TLJ, but I do think it could have done with a few tweaks to the script to catch some stuff. In terms of how it looked and was acted on the moment-to-moment scale they nailed it though, so I’m not sure if that falls under “better execution”
I mean it’s a high budget Disney film, the script should be the only place for improvement.
True, but I would argue that TLJ actually did substantially better than the Disney and Star Wars averages on the visual front. Not necessarily in terms of the technical execution of the effects since they’re always basically as good as they get for the time in both Disney and Star Wars stuff, but in terms of the composition of shots
I understand your point, but imagine you go to the movies expecting to watch [something you like] and it’s actually a two hours long lecture on how [something you like] is dumb and bad.
with a fan base that wants to be stuck in the past reliving the hero’s journey ad nauseam
This seems counter to most complaints I’ve seen about the movie that they just rehashed the original trilogy.
That is an apt criticism of TFA and TRoS, but not TLJ at all.
TLJ takes a bunch of the exact same elements from the original trilogy including the young jedi training in a remote location, the empire/first order finding the secret rebel base with the main characters escaping at the last moment, the protagonist being captured by their rival and being brought before the sith leader where they wind up battling, the protagonist finding out that they’re related to their rival, the hermit jedi master sacrificing themselves etc, etc, etc. The last trilogy is just a recycling of the original to the point that they had to add stupid dialog like “it’s salt” in a vain attempt to convince people that they aren’t just copy and pasting major plot points from the original
TFA and RoS are rehashes, TLJ is a deconstruction
That seems like a distinction without a difference.
Just for the fun of it, I took a screenshot of Google AIs take on the “deconstruction” argument:
“Challenging the Chosen One narrative”
Rey’s parents were “nobody” yet so were Luke Skywalker’s parents. The final film is titled “The Rise of Skywalker” on her path to becoming the chosen one.
“Revisiting Luke’s Heroism”
Rehashes the same failures Obi Wan felt for not preventing Anakin from going to the dark side.
“Undermining Jedi Ideals”
Irrelevant point that could just as easily signify the film’s creator’s not being familiar with the intricacies of the source material.
“Exploration of Failure and Complexity”
Throughout all the films, the rebels are constantly facing failures. They get attacked, captured, fail to prevent events from occurring, etc.
“Subverting Expectations”
An expression ripped straight from the final season of GoT and widely mocked. This film didn’t subvert any of my expectations as it all plays out quite predictably in Disney fashion where the “good guys” come out on top in the end. The fact that this argument is even made illustrates the similarity to the previous films which set an expectation for how things are going to play out. I don’t see how they really differed in any meaningful way as it all plays out the same in the end.
i ain’t arguing with a machine
Well, I mean nobody has actually made any defense for the movie here other than repeating the word “deconstruction” without elaborating any further, and I’m not going to do a deep dive and write out a counter argument to my own position, so the machine will have to do. For all we know this is the same machine that Disney used to recycle these old plot points for TLJ 😆
Only losers and goobers use AI to make their argument for them. Try thinking like a real human.
I didn’t use AI to make my argument for me. I used AI to make their argument since nobody was willing to actually make an argument outside of saying the movie is a “deconstruction” three separate times without stating what they mean or how it isn’t just a blatant ripoff of the older films.
Disagree. The first two sequels kept making a defeated bad empire stronger and stronger without any explanation. The rebels then suddenly became just 400 to 20 people. A different type of journey would have been welcomed with open arms if clever enough.
And I think embracing the jedi, but killing the wars aspect, rather than trying to destroy the jedi but keeping the wars it would have been a much better answer to the franchise.Never watched it, but am intrigued. How so?
Rian Johnson is a master of deconstructing genres.
if you went this long without watching it I won’t spoil it but to say the themes are not typical of the rest of the franchise and the fans hated it for that.
I love Rian Johnson’s other work, especially Brick and Knifes Out.
I also love Star Wars.
I thought TLJ was dreadful though. He was just a really bad fit for it IMO. Has nothing to do with not being open to change, but it has to be the right change. “Can you hear me now?” gags and Luke casually tossing away an item that had been set up as important in the previous film were not the right changes.
Luke casually tossing away an item that had been set up as important in the previous film were not the right changes.
Agreed big time. This felt less like “cleverly unexpected” and more just a total disrespect for the source material.
“Hey remember the symbol of hopeful optimism you followed through trials and tribulations for 3 movies a long time ago? He’s now a cynical burnout drunk uncle lol. Isn’t that sooo unexpected but relatable and grim? SUBVERTED! I’ll take my Oscar now…”
It felt like if some grimdark-TV-bros got ahold of a sequel to the LOTR trilogy, and we were to suddenly find Aragorn a heartless wannabe totalitarian ruler in the middle of a bitter divorce with Arwen. There would also be silly gags where he drunkenly shatters Andúril trying to cut a melon or something, and the kids absolutely loathe him because dysfunctional interpersonal drama is trendy. “Didn’t expect that, did you?? Lol!”
…Then being told your expectations were childish and stupid when you find yourself upset by this. Lol
suddenly find Aragorn a heartless wannabe totalitarian ruler in the middle of a bitter divorce with Arwen. There would also be silly gags where he drunkenly shatters Andúril trying to cut a melon or something, and the kids absolutely loathe him because dysfunctional interpersonal drama is trendy.
This is hilariously horrifying to imagine! 😁
