MovieChat Forums > Recognizer > Replies
Recognizer's Replies
Yes, I've been following his progress videos on this, and have seen his recent trailer for the edit. Can't wait to see the full thing!
Yes. Or in The Last Jedi wherein a spaceship is used as a light-speed battering ram.
I've since revised my opinion on the Strange/Thanos portal thing though. It's not a plot hole. Strange said that out of all the millions of possible futures he saw, there was only one where the Avengers could win, and that future involves letting Thanos get what he wants. "Tony ... it was the only way ..."
I suppose you could play "why didn't they just ..." with any story, but that'd take the fun out of it. At a certain point, you just have to accept that, while characters might have done various things, they simply didn't. Real life is kind of like that too.
Don't forget a pair of steel testicles hanging off the bottom of an AT-AT ...
Yeah, that pissed me off too. In my view, Disney doesn't get to tell me that EU is not canon. Thrawn/Heir to the Empire trilogy is brilliant, and would have made fantastic films. There was no reason to discard the EU material, Disney just did it because they could.
Well, good thing there are internet forums for you to continue posting on about not caring, right?
While it is your prerogative not to care, it is equally Hans (or anyone else's) prerogative to post their view on this board, regardless of whether or not you agree with it. That's the point of a forum like this - for people to share their views and possibly discuss/debate them with others. Ad hominem attacks are not helpful, and in future will be reported.
This film has bigger problems than this scene
Because it's Star Wars. Seems like I naively expected JJ to be different for this :/ Maybe I expected that he'd grown/developed as a director. I stand corrected.
Really? So having the lightsaber call to Rey, her subsequent visions, Maz's answer to Han when he asks her where she got the lightsaber, Maz asking Han who Rey is, then the camera cutting away before he can answer ... what's all that then? More of Abram's infamous "mystery box" shit? To me, those elements constitute a clear set-up. If Abrams didn't intend that, then he shouldn't have written it that way.
Awards not make one great.
When you're writing the middle act of a 3-act play, it needs to have continuity with and be consistent with the first act, otherwise it's incoherent. That's just common sense, not a question of fan theories.
Abrams very clearly set up several plot threads and character arcs in TFA, none of which were pursued by Johnson. Indeed, he seems to have deliberately subverted many of them. That's not a case of violation of fan theories, it's a case of violation of the basic definition of "trilogy" and the (reasonable) expectation everyone has had for decades of what a trilogy is and the rules of continuity they must follow.
Johnson thought it would be edgy to violate those rules. He was wrong.
In fact Strange could have done it easily, since he does it earlier in the film to one of Thanos' underlings. This issue is a major plot hole, as far as I'm concerned. It broke my suspension of disbelief during an otherwise good movie.
Obviously not, as she asks Han who Rey is. Han clearly knew something (or at least suspected it) as the scene cuts away before we hear his answer.
... Even Phasma shows up, having miraculously survived Finn holding her at gunpoint at Starkiller Base.
TL;DR - Every male character in TLJ is portrayed either neutrally or negatively (mostly negatively), whereas every female character is portrayed positively, usually in the form of being shown as morally superior to men. This is the core problem that many fans have with it. If it were one or two examples, you might be able to shrug it off, but this is a pervasive and very obvious gender inequality. As I said, it is entirely possible to portray women positively without also denigrating men. Unfortunately, TLJ is an example of the latter, not the former.
While I might disagree with some points in the second paragraph, I concur with the core thesis in the first one - KK clearly has a misandrist agenda, not merely a feminist one. I also endorse and fully support true feminism, which is about equality of the sexes, not one gender having special privileges over the other.
It's entirely possible to portray strong, capable female characters without it being at the expense of men. For example, in Alien, Aliens and even Alien 3, Lt. Ripley is portrayed as a very strong, independent, smart, highly capable and resourceful woman - but so are the men in the films. Ripley's positive attributes stand on their own merits, not by making men look weak, stupid or incompetent. Another example is Sarah Connor in Terminator 1 and 2.
Now, let us compare The Last Jedi. Luke gives up on the galaxy and hides on an island, Poe is a mindless, insubordinate fighter jock who just wants to "blow stuff up", Finn is a coward and would-be deserter who was denied making a heroic sacrifice and instead is sent on a pointless errand, and the veteran Admiral Ackbar is unceremoniously killed. On the FO side, Hux comes across as a bumbling idiot, Ren is a child throwing a tantrum, Snoke can't even tell Ren is about to kill him, and the commander of a dreadnaught lacks the basic strategic and tactical skills to command a landspeeder. And the (male) code slicer betrays our heroes.
However, the female characters are another matter: Holdo is in the right at all times, even when subordinates legitimately want to know the plan, and is the one that makes a heroic sacrifice. Rose's sister also makes a heroic sacrifice, and Rose catches Finn trying to escape, and prevents him from making a heroic sacrifice later. She also saves a bunch of animals. Leia and Rey can seemingly effortlessly use the Force, despite having had little to no formal training, even to the extent of surviving in the vacuum of space ...
As long as it's not some "conceived by the midichlorians" bullshit.
I thought it was better than R1 in a lot of ways, probably due to me actually being interested in Han's back-story much more than how the rebels got the Death Star plans. It was good to finally see the infamous Sabaac game.
Overall, I felt entertained by the end of it, unlike TLJ or R1. TLJ I was actually bored well before the end of the film.
Hmmm, never thought of it that way, but yeah, I can see your point. It did seem to revolve more around Clarke's character. She probably demanded it due to her high status because of GoT.
I actually had fun watching Solo, and walked out feeling that it was an enjoyable, albeit average film. Specific scenes were great (particularly the infamous Sabaac game), but others were a disappointment (Kessel run). Some bits of Rogue One were cool, but on the whole I didn't enjoy it as much.
I felt entertained by the end of Solo, which is more than can be said for TLJ! I was never really bored in Solo, or just waiting for the film to end, whereas I was in TLJ, even on the first viewing.
All 3 movies would essentially form one long movie
Pretty much. If IX opens with the Falcon dropping out of hyperspace with the remaining Resistance on board, then all 3 form one continuous narrative.
Even if it was the best-selling, it doesn't mean squat. Good box-office does not equal quality. Plenty of shit films in history that made a motza.