- No text -

Because I haven't seen it yet! Otherwise I would have. The weather turned bad here, and I need rebuild my rear differential in my Jeep tomorrow anyway. I'm hoping to see it next week or next weekend.

I hear good things, and I can't wait!

I won't post spoilers for now. But wow. So, was it perfect? No. It has its problems. But it was very enjoyable, and I actually cared about just about all of the characters and events taking place. And things felt like they were occurring logically and in a way that made sense, whereas VII sometimes got muddy, broke my suspension of disbelief at times, and was basically Episode IV (even though I thoroughly enjoyed VII and haven't gotten sick of watching it still). I'm pretty sure I'll end up seeing Rogue One another one or two times with friends and family, and I'm pretty excited to do so.

Very Halo Reach, but in a good way.

Not sure how I feel about CGI people though.

Very Halo Reach, but in a good way.

Those would seem to negate each other.

So the gameplay was good, but the story was uninteresting and you didn't care about the characters?

Very Halo Reach, but in a good way.

Those would seem to negate each other.

So the gameplay was good, but the story was uninteresting and you didn't care about the characters?

Movie was good, story was uninteresting and we knew how it ended, I didn't care about the characters, retcons annoyed me, but overall it was more than the sum of its Halo Reach parts.

It's really well made, top to bottom. Looks beautiful, great action, lots of fun moments. But I didn't care about any of it. As deeply flawed as TFA was, I was invested in the characters and their struggles. Even when the plot was dumb or overly darrivitive, I cared about their personal journeys.
Rogue One is certainly less flawed than TFA, but it doesn't spend enough time with any of the characters for any of the emotional weight to hit home. And that's the main thing I look for in a Star Wars movie.

It's really well made, top to bottom. Looks beautiful, great action, lots of moments. But I didn't care about any of it. As deeply flawed as TFA was, I was invested in the characters and their struggles. Even when the plot was dumb or overly darrivitive, I cared about their personal journeys.
Rogue One is certainly less flawed than TFA, but it doesn't spend enough time with any of the characters for any of the emotional weight to hit home. And that's the main thing I look for in a Star Wars movie.

I pretty much agree. I think it's the Halo Reach of the Star Wars movies, with many of its attendant strengths and weaknesses. Both owe a debt to the Magnificent Seven of course.

with the Reach comparison.

Though a badass unstoppable super villain Vader caming down the hallway that you are trapped in in order to mess you up gets a solid 5.

One of my favorite things ever put to film.

It's really well made, top to bottom. Looks beautiful, great action, lots of fun moments. But I didn't care about any of it. As deeply flawed as TFA was, I was invested in the characters and their struggles. Even when the plot was dumb or overly darrivitive, I cared about their personal journeys.
Rogue One is certainly less flawed than TFA, but it doesn't spend enough time with any of the characters for any of the emotional weight to hit home. And that's the main thing I look for in a Star Wars movie.

I deeply enjoyed it from the look at the fracturing Rebel Alliance to how the Empire operates internally to the Halo Reach grand finale with all its spectacular moments. But there was something about the characters and that did not resonate with me. I'm not even sure what yet! I just have this vague feeling that I'm excited to rejoin Rey and Fin and Poe for another movie, but this group? I'd be ok if we never see them again. (Which, as it goes, is quite easy to pull off... :p)

On the plus side, I loved seeing this tale of heroism:

It is a period of civil war.
Rebel spaceships, striking
from a hidden base, have won
their first victory against
the evil Galactic Empire.

During the battle, Rebel
spies managed to steal secret
plans to the Empire's
ultimate weapon, the DEATH
STAR, an armored space
station with enough power
to destroy an entire planet.

Now we've seen this, and despite whatever flaws it was still pretty awesome. :)

On the plus side, I loved seeing this tale of heroism:

It is a period of civil war.
Rebel spaceships, striking
from a hidden base, have won
their first victory against
the evil Galactic Empire.

During the battle, Rebel
spies managed to steal secret
plans to the Empire's
ultimate weapon, the DEATH
STAR, an armored space
station with enough power
to destroy an entire planet.

Now we've seen this, and despite whatever flaws it was still pretty awesome. :)

Yeah, gives me chills. :)

Now I'm interested.

I didn't like it as much as VII. I thought VII was a decent star wars movie.

I really disliked the uncanny valley CGI people, particularly Leia. Everyone knows who it was. They didn't have to show the creepy wax face.

Seems to happen all the time with Rogue Squadron.

Won't tell on them, though :)

Yeah. They made that story a lot better than it was before. Before, Leia was the head of the team who stole the plans (who got them on Toprawa) and got the plans beamed to her, then talked to her dad about it.

Iirc the radio adaptation was only slightly different, but was considered at the same level of canon as the movies, as in, the most canon canon could be. Disney dumped all non film story, and I can't blame them since this is better, but meh.

I didn't like it as much as VII. I thought VII was a decent star wars movie.

I really disliked the uncanny valley CGI people, particularly Leia. Everyone knows who it was. They didn't have to show the creepy wax face.

Yeah, it's been implicit in the media narrative that the crew that is now in charge of Star Wars had learned the right lessons from Lucas's mistakes. Less definitely would have been more for the CGI characters.

Though a badass unstoppable super villain Vader caming down the hallway that you are trapped in in order to mess you up gets a solid 5.

That was the thing of my nightmares this weekend. (okay, not really nightmares, but gee whiz that was scary!)

Won't tell on them, though :)

Wasn't me on twitter! (Maybe facebook tho'). Thing is, I *KNOW* how it's spelled, however my fingers betray me. Just like I know how to properly use its vs it's. I think my fingers have turned to the dark side.

I didn't like it as much as VII. I thought VII was a decent star wars movie.

I really disliked the uncanny valley CGI people, particularly Leia. Everyone knows who it was. They didn't have to show the creepy wax face.

To me, she looked flawless. It was Tarkin that was creepy.

I didn't like it as much as VII. I thought VII was a decent star wars movie.

I really disliked the uncanny valley CGI people, particularly Leia. Everyone knows who it was. They didn't have to show the creepy wax face.

To me, she looked flawless. It was Tarkin that was creepy.

Too much expression and color on Tarkin's face.

- No text -

I didn't like it as much as VII. I thought VII was a decent star wars movie.

I really disliked the uncanny valley CGI people, particularly Leia. Everyone knows who it was. They didn't have to show the creepy wax face.

To me, she looked flawless. It was Tarkin that was creepy.

Too much expression and color on Tarkin's face.

It's the motion. It's always been how it moves.

I didn't like it as much as VII. I thought VII was a decent star wars movie.

I really disliked the uncanny valley CGI people, particularly Leia. Everyone knows who it was. They didn't have to show the creepy wax face.

To me, she looked flawless. It was Tarkin that was creepy.

Too much expression and color on Tarkin's face.

It's the motion. It's always been how it moves.

Specifically, the fact that it is ALWAYS moving. He never just holds an expression. It's like the animators are afraid to let a single muscle on his face stay still for even a moment.

- No text -

Rogue One is certainly less flawed than TFA, but it doesn't spend enough time with any of the characters for any of the emotional weight to hit home. And that's the main thing I look for in a Star Wars movie.

In a New Hope, Luke doesn't 'answer the call' until FOURTY ONE minutes into the film. Think about that for a second. We get to know Luke for THIRTY TWO minutes before his parents are killed and he sets off on his adventure. That is literally a quarter of the movie.

In that 32 minutes, everything is set up so that we know exactly who Luke is. His hopes. Dreams. Frustrations. His relationship to his aunt and uncle, and to Obi Wan. We know everything about him.

I didn't really know much about Jyn at all. What are her hopes, dreams, and frustrations? When Luke tells Obi Wan he can't go with him to Alderaan, we know exactly why he would say and feel that. I don't know why Jyn would help or not help the rebellion really.

A feel like a lot of film makers these days have a very good sense of story pacing, but they are almost too good in the sense that we are whisked along and caught up in the adventure without taking the quiet time we need to dramatize it.

But DAT Dunkirk prologue though… :-D

- No text -

And I've never been a fan of the Star Wars films in general.

The universe always lent itself to some really great stories, though, which led to some pretty fantastic things (Republic Commando, Tartakovsky's Clone Wars, The Old Republic stuff). Star Wars could be gritty without being grimdark, and The Force Awakens was a definite step in the right direction, but it followed a bleh Mary Sue to a fault, and lacked focus.

Rogue One sets itself apart because it's a small story with real impact, it works to fix age-old inconsistencies and flaws that have haunted Star Wars for ages, and it's fun and full of memorable moments. No small task, but the movie does this while telling its own story of a small team with different ideals coming together to do a single task: Deliver the message.

"Y'all got on this boat for different reasons, but you've all come to the same place. So now I'm asking more of you than I have before. Maybe all..."

Sure, we didn't spend ages with the individuals in the ensemble, but we knew why they were doing the things they were doing, and ultimately, they were the ones who set off the events of Episode IV, which would never have happened if they hadn't gone Rogue. Much like the events of the Halo franchise couldn't have happened without Noble team's sacrifice.

Rogue One could have worked better as a miniseries, exploring each of the individual characters, and we could have done without the mind-reading animal, but in the end, this was the best film in the Star Wars universe, and took a simple segment of the original Crawl, and presented it in a way that made sense and expanded the franchise in a way none of the films have before.

Now I have my fingers crossed for a Republic/Imperial Commandos film.

That guy was very good with deliberately moving from one expression to another. CGI Tarkin was a bit too human for that. :p

I didn't like it as much as VII. I thought VII was a decent star wars movie.

I really disliked the uncanny valley CGI people, particularly Leia. Everyone knows who it was. They didn't have to show the creepy wax face.

To me, she looked flawless. It was Tarkin that was creepy.

Too much expression and color on Tarkin's face.

It's the motion. It's always been how it moves.

Specifically, the fact that it is ALWAYS moving. He never just holds an expression. It's like the animators are afraid to let a single muscle on his face stay still for even a moment.

It's called restraint. Reminds me of how 343 bragged about their motion capture in Halo Anniversary, where they changed Keyes from being somewhat stiff to being Hammy MacHamfist, playing to the balcony.

And I've never been a fan of the Star Wars films in general.

Well, there you go. EXPLAINS A LOT.

With some exceptions (like Cruel), I do think original Star Wars fans perceive the universe and the movies differently. Lucas started losing some of us with the ewoks.

I'm happy about the new movies. They're better than the prequels by a long shot, but the bar doesn't get much lower than that.

And I've never been a fan of the Star Wars films in general.

Well, there you go. EXPLAINS A LOT.

Keep in mind that I watched them a number of times growing up (even as school events), and I flat-out thought that they sucked.

It wasn't until I watched the Despecialized editions with Sammy a couple of years ago that I really looked back on and enjoyed them for what they were as products of their time. They weren't great, but the universe was solid, and Empire used a lot of my favorite storytelling devices.

With some exceptions (like Cruel), I do think original Star Wars fans perceive the universe and the movies differently. Lucas started losing some of us with the ewoks.

Sammy loved the Ewoks, and wasn't a huge fan of TFA, so yeh, everyone sees things a bit differently.

Heck, the prequel trilogy angered me with how stupid it was while putting itself into the original trilogy's universe and timelines as canon... But I liked TFA, and love R1.

I guess I'm a fan of stories rather than demanding that a director spoonfeed me into caring about individual characters. I don't need to know the whole story of a character to understand that they are part of a story.

I'm happy about the new movies. They're better than the prequels by a long shot, but the bar doesn't get much lower than that.

Yeh, I still haven't shown Sammy the prequels, but I think I might, just to give her better appreciation for the new films.

And I've never been a fan of the Star Wars films in general.

Well, there you go. EXPLAINS A LOT.

Keep in mind that I watched them a number of times growing up (even as school events), and I flat-out thought that they sucked.

It wasn't until I watched the Despecialized editions with Sammy a couple of years ago that I really looked back on and enjoyed them for what they were as products of their time.

So you didn't actually watch the Star Wars trilogy growing up then, did you? You watched an approximation. Look online for the Silver Screen edition, which is a good quality scan of a decent 35mm print. It's as close as you are going to get to seeing it how it really was.

I cannot stress enough how shitty the special editions are. Even seemingly simple things like adjusting the shots and timing of edits in the Death Star trench run take what was one of the best action sequences ever put on film, and turned it into something with far less excitement and tension.

And I've never been a fan of the Star Wars films in general.

Well, there you go. EXPLAINS A LOT.

Keep in mind that I watched them a number of times growing up (even as school events), and I flat-out thought that they sucked.

It wasn't until I watched the Despecialized editions with Sammy a couple of years ago that I really looked back on and enjoyed them for what they were as products of their time.

So you didn't actually watch the Star Wars trilogy growing up then, did you? You watched an approximation. Look online for the Silver Screen edition, which is a good quality scan of a decent 35mm print. It's as close as you are going to get to seeing it how it really was.

But I'm not a neckbeard tho.

I cannot stress enough how shitty the special editions are. Even seemingly simple things like adjusting the shots and timing of edits in the Death Star trench run take what was one of the best action sequences ever put on film, and turned it into something with far less excitement and tension.

Eh, the timing in a shot between the despecialized edition and a "Silver Screen" edition isn't going to affect how I see a film. Sure, I'm a huge fan of composition and editing techniques, but the original trilogy had far more problems that weren't exacerbated by Lucas's retouches.

And I've never been a fan of the Star Wars films in general.

Well, there you go. EXPLAINS A LOT.

Keep in mind that I watched them a number of times growing up (even as school events), and I flat-out thought that they sucked.

It wasn't until I watched the Despecialized editions with Sammy a couple of years ago that I really looked back on and enjoyed them for what they were as products of their time.

So you didn't actually watch the Star Wars trilogy growing up then, did you? You watched an approximation. Look online for the Silver Screen edition, which is a good quality scan of a decent 35mm print. It's as close as you are going to get to seeing it how it really was.

But I'm not a neckbeard tho.

I cannot stress enough how shitty the special editions are. Even seemingly simple things like adjusting the shots and timing of edits in the Death Star trench run take what was one of the best action sequences ever put on film, and turned it into something with far less excitement and tension.

Eh, the timing in a shot between the despecialized edition and a "Silver Screen" edition isn't going to affect how I see a film. Sure, I'm a huge fan of composition and editing techniques, but the original trilogy had far more problems that weren't exacerbated by Lucas's retouches.

I must have misunderstood. I thought you meant that you watched the special editions growing up, then later in life saw the despecialized edition with Sammy for the first time.

I guess I'm a fan of stories rather than demanding that a director spoonfeed me into caring about individual characters. I don't need to know the whole story of a character to understand that they are part of a story.

I love how you take me saying things like "I care about character development and good writing" and turn that into "spoonfeed me into caring about individual characters" ;p

Like have the most bare minimum of standards when it comes to writing turns me into a snob lol

* disclaimer - Korny and I rib each other over stuff like this all the time, so imagine me saying these words with a big non-confrontational grin on my face :)

I didn't like it as much as VII. I thought VII was a decent star wars movie.

I really disliked the uncanny valley CGI people, particularly Leia. Everyone knows who it was. They didn't have to show the creepy wax face.

To me, she looked flawless. It was Tarkin that was creepy.

Too much expression and color on Tarkin's face.

It's the motion. It's always been how it moves.

Specifically, the fact that it is ALWAYS moving. He never just holds an expression. It's like the animators are afraid to let a single muscle on his face stay still for even a moment.

It's called restraint. Reminds me of how 343 bragged about their motion capture in Halo Anniversary, where they changed Keyes from being somewhat stiff to being Hammy MacHamfist, playing to the balcony.

Ok, can we just draw attention to "Hammy MacHamfist" and how that's the best thing I've read all month XD

Back on topic though... There's a moment (and I literally mean moment) in Episode 2 where the animators delivered exactly the kind of subtlety you're talking about here. I jumped out at me in the theatre.

This scene, at the 20 second mark:

There's about 1.5 seconds where Watto stops wiggling his face around constantly and you actually see a glimpse of realistic facial expressions. I remember watching the DVD with the commentary track and one of the lead animators pointed out how happy he was with that precise moment for the very reason we're talking about. Too bad that lesson couldn't carry over to Tarkin in Rogue One.

Rogue One could have worked better as a miniseries, exploring each of the individual characters,

I totally agree with this.

and we could have done without the mind-reading animal,

and this

but in the end, this was the best film in the Star Wars universe,

Couldn't agree less on this... sort of... I think it is one of the least flawed movies in the franchise, but fails to deliver where it really counts (emotional impact of any kind)

and took a simple segment of the original Crawl, and presented it in a way that made sense and expanded the franchise in a way none of the films have before.

This is part of what I find so fascinating about this style of movie, and one of the big points that people's opinions of the film turns on. Rogue One is set right smack in the middle of the Star Wars timeline, and it connects directly to the movies before and after it. So it only makes sense that it leverages that timeline in certain ways, and hopefully enriches it as well. I think they delivered plenty of the latter, but not enough of the former. By which I mean I feel like Rogue One does a better job of adding context to and depth to the other movies (A New Hope in particular) than it does of leveraging the rest of the franchise to help make it a compelling movie to watch.

For example: Captain America Civil War is part of an ongoing series. It works well as a self-contained movie. Everything you need to know about the characters' perspectives and motivations is communicated within the film, their points of view are understandable and relatable, the tension and conflict all works. But if you've been following the Marvel movies from the beginning, it is even better. That familiarity helps create deeper investment in the characters, adding even more weight to the entire scenario. It leverages its place within an ongoing series effectively, but not at the cost of working as a standalone film.

Rogue One leverages the Star Wars films in purely superficial ways. The look and sound of everything (which is fantastic. Credit where it is due), the ships, the locations, the design aesthetics, etc. There are a few moments where R1 leverages the rest of the franchise in a slightly deeper way...

like when it comes to Darth Vader. We finally get a glimpse of Vader in his ominous prime, and it is by far the highlight of the movie. As a long time Star Wars fan, the final 2 minutes of the film had me thrilled. But at the same time, that scene sticks out like a sore thumb from the rest of the movie because if you take the "OMG VAAAADR" nerdgasm out of the equation, it comes completely out of nowhere, brings neither resolution nor payoff to anything that came before it. I read an interview with one of the filmmakers earlier this year, back when it was first confirmed that Vader would be in the movie. He said Vader's part would be small, but important. He also talked about how Vader is this mysterious figure to the rebels at this point. How they've heard rumors about this agent of the emperor who can supposedly do impossible things but nobody knows if its true or if he's even real. WHY IS NONE OF THIS IN THE FILM? Imagine how much BETTER than final scene would have been if it there had been any kind of dramatic lead up to it. It could have been the moment when Vader is truly revealed to the rebels, and they get their first real glimpse of who they are dealing with, and all the shock and horror that comes along with that. Instead, the scene is treated as masturbatory fan service.

Again, it's a great scene. But as it stands, it doesn't serve the movie at all. It serves A New Hope. And for a lot of fans, maybe that's enough? I guess I just need a movie to do more than remind me of how great a bunch of other movies are. But that's usually as far as Rogue One goes. Well produced action sequences set in a universe we know and love, glimpses of characters we already care about, and a new cast of characters that struggles to justify their own inclusion other than to fulfil their assigned plot devices.

:p

I see people do it all the time. The joke's been making the rounds in Red Dwarf fandom (where the titular ship is sometimes referred to as "the small rouge one") for some time now.

I didn't like it as much as VII. I thought VII was a decent star wars movie.

I really disliked the uncanny valley CGI people, particularly Leia. Everyone knows who it was. They didn't have to show the creepy wax face.

To me, she looked flawless. It was Tarkin that was creepy.

Too much expression and color on Tarkin's face.

It's the motion. It's always been how it moves.

Specifically, the fact that it is ALWAYS moving. He never just holds an expression. It's like the animators are afraid to let a single muscle on his face stay still for even a moment.

It's called restraint. Reminds me of how 343 bragged about their motion capture in Halo Anniversary, where they changed Keyes from being somewhat stiff to being Hammy MacHamfist, playing to the balcony.

Ok, can we just draw attention to "Hammy MacHamfist" and how that's the best thing I've read all month XD

Back on topic though... There's a moment (and I literally mean moment) in Episode 2 where the animators delivered exactly the kind of subtlety you're talking about here. I jumped out at me in the theatre.

This scene, at the 20 second mark:

There's about 1.5 seconds where Watto stops wiggling his face around constantly and you actually see a glimpse of realistic facial expressions. I remember watching the DVD with the commentary track and one of the lead animators pointed out how happy he was with that precise moment for the very reason we're talking about. Too bad that lesson couldn't carry over to Tarkin in Rogue One.

Okay, okay, I'll admit it. Those three seconds of the prequels were good.

Well, I finally saw it today, and thoroughly enjoyed it. What a fun experience. :)

Okay, okay, I'll admit it. Those three seconds of the prequels were good.

The best part was actually:

Anakin: You are in my very soul, tormenting me... what can I do? If you're suffering as much as I am, please, tell me!

Dude in the back of the theatre: WE ARE!

- No text -

Instead of having devoid of brain doofus-bo and all around chump Anakin betraying the entire galaxy because some guy he barely knows sorta kinda promised him that he would help him try to find a technique that might be able to maybe prevent his wife from possibly dying, we could have an awesome story about family and a fracturing Rebel Alliance and a powerful new super weapon that we have to find a way to stop.

Then just rewrite Episode II so it ends right before this new Episdoe III and Episode I that ends just before the new Episode II and we could have a pair of great trilogies...

Instead of having devoid of brain doofus-bo and all around chump Anakin betraying the entire galaxy because some guy he barely knows sorta kinda promised him that he would help him try to find a technique that might be able to maybe prevent his wife from possibly dying, we could have an awesome story about family and a fracturing Rebel Alliance and a powerful new super weapon that we have to find a way to stop.

Then just rewrite Episode II so it ends right before this new Episdoe III and Episode I that ends just before the new Episode II and we could have a pair of great trilogies...

As we were leaving the theater, my brother and I had a similarly-themed conversation about this. My biggest argument in favor of redoing the prequel trilogy was basically "Jimmy Smits isn't that old!"
Which is really a great argument any way you look at it.

- No text -

And things felt like they were occurring logically and in a way that made sense

That was something I noticed while I was watching it as well. At every point in the film, it was clear to me why each character (or group) was doing what they were doing, or going where they were going.

I'm not sure that surprised me, exactly, but it was something I was conscious of.

Not sure how I feel about CGI people though.

I dunno either. I didn't really get any "uncanny valley" feelings from Tarkin, but... I still KNEW he wasn't real, and that felt weird?

I can't really decide whether Leia was in uncanny valley territory. I sort of felt like "yes" for a moment, but only for a moment. So again, it might just have been because I knew what I was seeing wasn't real, not because it actually looked wrong. Or maybe it did. I dunno.

- No text -

Interesting. I'd never looked into the background to that bit of story before.

I guess I'm a fan of stories rather than demanding that a director spoonfeed me into caring about individual characters. I don't need to know the whole story of a character to understand that they are part of a story.

I love how you take me saying things like "I care about character development and good writing" and turn that into "spoonfeed me into caring about individual characters" ;p

Like have the most bare minimum of standards when it comes to writing turns me into a snob lol

This is a good way to summarize how I see your view (and the view of some others here and elsewhere) of the film. ;)

No fun allowed!

I guess I'm a fan of stories rather than demanding that a director spoonfeed me into caring about individual characters. I don't need to know the whole story of a character to understand that they are part of a story.

I love how you take me saying things like "I care about character development and good writing" and turn that into "spoonfeed me into caring about individual characters" ;p

Like have the most bare minimum of standards when it comes to writing turns me into a snob lol

This is a good way to summarize how I see your view (and the view of some others here and elsewhere) of the film. ;)

No fun allowed!

That is ridiculous. Superfluous language when simple direct sentences will do.

I guess I'm a fan of stories rather than demanding that a director spoonfeed me into caring about individual characters. I don't need to know the whole story of a character to understand that they are part of a story.

I love how you take me saying things like "I care about character development and good writing" and turn that into "spoonfeed me into caring about individual characters" ;p

Like have the most bare minimum of standards when it comes to writing turns me into a snob lol

This is a good way to summarize how I see your view (and the view of some others here and elsewhere) of the film. ;)

No fun allowed!

I know you're not talking about me because that guy likes the prequels. (Why couldn't the New Yorker let Anthony Lane review the movie? At least he'd be funny.)

I don't like to have anything spoonfed to me in narratives, but RO made too many of the central characters enigmatic to the point where you didn't care enough about them when you needed to. That and overplaying the CGI-animated actors were my only criticisms of the film, and a big part of my disappointment in it has to do with these unforced errors that kept a really good film from being something remarkable.

- No text -

I guess I'm a fan of stories rather than demanding that a director spoonfeed me into caring about individual characters. I don't need to know the whole story of a character to understand that they are part of a story.

I love how you take me saying things like "I care about character development and good writing" and turn that into "spoonfeed me into caring about individual characters" ;p

Like have the most bare minimum of standards when it comes to writing turns me into a snob lol

This is a good way to summarize how I see your view (and the view of some others here and elsewhere) of the film. ;)

No fun allowed!

That is some of the crappiest writing I've seen in a respected magazine in a long, long time.

Not only is it pretentious to the point of absurdity, it doesn't even make SENSE! How can something be half-baked and overcooked at the same time?

I feel like he wrote a quick review, then ran it through Google Translate a few dozen times, changing languages every time.

- No text -

- No text -

Oh, I just assumed they were trying out a new "High school kids trying to sound intelligent" section or something. I can only assume the author keeps a thesaurus extremely close and consults it often.

How can something be half-baked and overcooked at the same time?

Sir, I invite you to my kitchen.

Seriously, though, I do agree. Those few select paragraphs made me want to do this:

Those few select paragraphs made me want to do this:

You mean those few sentences?

Each of those "paragraphs" was a single sentence, which makes them even worse than you thought.

Not only is it pretentious to the point of absurdity, it doesn't even make SENSE! How can something be half-baked and overcooked at the same time?

You could... overcook only one half of the thing??

- No text -

- No text -

- No text -

- No text -

- No text -

Rogue One is certainly less flawed than TFA, but it doesn't spend enough time with any of the characters for any of the emotional weight to hit home. And that's the main thing I look for in a Star Wars movie.

In a New Hope, Luke doesn't 'answer the call' until FOURTY ONE minutes into the film. Think about that for a second. We get to know Luke for THIRTY TWO minutes before his parents are killed and he sets off on his adventure. That is literally a quarter of the movie.

In that 32 minutes, everything is set up so that we know exactly who Luke is. His hopes. Dreams. Frustrations. His relationship to his aunt and uncle, and to Obi Wan. We know everything about him.

I didn't really know much about Jyn at all. What are her hopes, dreams, and frustrations? When Luke tells Obi Wan he can't go with him to Alderaan, we know exactly why he would say and feel that. I don't know why Jyn would help or not help the rebellion really.

A feel like a lot of film makers these days have a very good sense of story pacing, but they are almost too good in the sense that we are whisked along and caught up in the adventure without taking the quiet time we need to dramatize it.

But DAT Dunkirk prologue though… :-D

It's interesting, because I just re-watched ep IV with my son (he's 3 and really didn't care at all, except to point out whenever Darth Vader was on screen by yelling "Dat Dar Gader! He Good Guy!!!"... poor kid, one day he'll realize how wrong he was, only to discover later that he was right all along... he's in for some confusing years, but I digress)... So I watched ep IV (special edition) and I have to say:

First, every single change in the special editions was the wrong call. From Greedo shooting first completely changing the character of Han Solo to the stupid badly animated sequences of droids punching each other and jawas falling off of giant horse camel things, to adding fifty X-wings to the space combat, they were all wrong. They turned the setting into a joke, made the movie feel more comical, and removed the ambiguity of character from some key players.

Second, the movie sucks until the moment they rescue Princess Leia. It is slow, uninspired, and uninteresting. Yes, we get to learn that Luke is a whiny bitch, but we don't like him as a whiny bitch. Of course, we do grow to like him over the course of the film, and for that reason it works perfectly, but those opening 40 minutes are very, very poorly paced with lots of time spent sans dialogue or action. It's a very dated style that is very much of the time it was made, whereas - once Leia's rescue is in full effect - the rest of the film is perfectly modern in style and pacing. Her dialogue and character bring the whole thing to life, and suddenly the ensemble gels brilliantly.

---

Now to Rogue 1.

This film is dark as fuck compared to the original Star Wars films. I wanted someone to live, and I'm disappointed that they all went out like that. A couple of the deaths were well done and well earned, but a couple felt cheap and meaningless to me, which is a shame. It was like if you took the first Christopher Nolan Batman movie and said it was a prequel to the second Tim Burton Batman film.

That being said, the ending was so goddamn on point that it made me want to instantly watch ep IV again. Why it isn't being shown as a double-feature is beyond me. The seamless tie-in was great.

One last thing - it's completely unclear why certain members of the "team" actually joined up. Not the randos at the end, but the main guys. No one really questioned it, but it only made sense to me in a "they want to live" sort of way, until the end when obviously that's not why they went with it. I would have appreciated a little more dialogue in the prison to explain how they all became friends and not just guys who are in prison together.

All in all, however, I felt it was a better and more complete film than TFA, if a bit outside the general themes of the Star Wars universe.

I didn't like it as much as VII. I thought VII was a decent star wars movie.

I really disliked the uncanny valley CGI people, particularly Leia. Everyone knows who it was. They didn't have to show the creepy wax face.

I thought it was a look-alike?

R2-D2 and C3PO never needed to be in the film, for example.

The whole Vader sequence at the end was great, but - just as you said - came completely out of nowhere.

and I fully agree with your critique of how this film fits into the universe. It works as a prologue to another film, but not as well as its own story. Holy hell did I not ever really care about the fact that those people died. I would have been invested in them if a couple had lived, because I'd be curious as to whether they would show up again, but as it stands I just watched a movie that is well summed up in a few lines of text in the crawl at the beginning of the next film. Sure it gives weight and import to the events of ep IV (and does so in spades, I believe), but as a stand alone film the ending was flat. You get all of the climax without any of the resolving action.

Second, the movie sucks until the moment they rescue Princess Leia. It is slow, uninspired, and uninteresting. Yes, we get to learn that Luke is a whiny bitch, but we don't like him as a whiny bitch. Of course, we do grow to like him over the course of the film, and for that reason it works perfectly, but those opening 40 minutes are very, very poorly paced with lots of time spent sans dialogue or action. It's a very dated style that is very much of the time it was made, whereas - once Leia's rescue is in full effect - the rest of the film is perfectly modern in style and pacing. Her dialogue and character bring the whole thing to life, and suddenly the ensemble gels brilliantly.

I file this with "Star Wars was good for its time." I kind of hate this notion of a "dated style" as if film has made a steady progression in the direction of quality. There is an argument to be made that the best year for American cinema was 1939--I'm sympathetic toward that argument.

The problem with Rogue One is there isn't enough down time--give me the "dated style" if it lets me see the characters as more than action heros.

Which I guess is because it kind of is, and that not strictly a bad thing. But I feel like they tried much too hard to hit those nostalgia buttons, to the film's detriment. There were scenes and characters in this film that felt like they were only included to for the sake of making cameos and saying "hey look, these characters are from...!".

Not to be all negative - I enjoyed the overall film, I really like the main antagonist, a major plot hole got filled in, Mads was great, and there were some subtler allusions to previous films which worked. But it felt extremely formulaic. The "From the beginning you know the end", Halo Reach thing can work. But for this I also knew the beginning, middle, cameos, twists, mid-act setpieces, character beats and everything inbetween.

Tl;Dr - TFA was basically a retread but felt new and exciting. This was new and different but felt like a retread

Plus the final 30 seconds were suuuuuuuper stupid. No buildup, no reasonable expectation for it, just a smug, nonsensical "See what we did here guys?". One they'd basically already alluded to not 2 minutes prior, which I thought was quite clever. But I guess it was too subtle and they really had to hammer it home that "]GUYS DOESNT THIS SCENE LOOK FAMILIAR?"

I hated the "seamless tie-in."

What the hell was she doing there? They'd already made a much better, visual allusion to the opening scenes of ep. IV, complete with Vader's good appearance of the two (dont get me started on how bad his first appearance was). But instead of letting that reference speak for itself (and it wasn't exactly subtle!) they shoehorned her in, having been mysteriously present onboard that random escape ship the whole time but somehow wasn't important enough to mention in the plot outside one vague exchange.

Plus that creepy, creeeeeepy uncanny valley. Blugh.

- No text -

That being said, the ending was so goddamn on point that it made me want to instantly watch ep IV again. Why it isn't being shown as a double-feature is beyond me. The seamless tie-in was great.

I too totally wonder why they aren't showing a double features in select theaters. Tho' I will say this, I took a quick glance at Episode IV this weekend and it's shocking to see the difference between the two in regards to the special effects. If you pair the escape at the end of Rouge One with the chase scene at the opening of A New Hope, it would be jarring & it would make the original feel really really really dated.

One last thing - it's completely unclear why certain members of the "team" actually joined up. Not the randos at the end, but the main guys. No one really questioned it, but it only made sense to me in a "they want to live" sort of way, until the end when obviously that's not why they went with it. I would have appreciated a little more dialogue in the prison to explain how they all became friends and not just guys who are in prison together.

In prison? Jyn was the only one in prison. Oh, wait, you mean when the 3 were being held by Saw Gerrera by the rebel pilot. Meh, their driving values were established well enough for me to understand why they decided to go w/ Jyn & her last ditch effort.

One last thing - it's completely unclear why certain members of the "team" actually joined up. Not the randos at the end, but the main guys. No one really questioned it, but it only made sense to me in a "they want to live" sort of way, until the end when obviously that's not why they went with it. I would have appreciated a little more dialogue in the prison to explain how they all became friends and not just guys who are in prison together.

In prison? Jyn was the only one in prison. Oh, wait, you mean when the 3 were being held by Saw Gerrera by the rebel pilot. Meh, their driving values were established well enough for me to understand why they decided to go w/ Jyn & her last ditch effort.

In deleted footage from one of the trailers, Baze made a comment about the destruction of Jedha as their motivation. Having directly observed the danger of the Empire's secret weapon, it makes sense that the surviving Keepers of the Whills would want to help find a way to stop it, even at the risk of their own lives. But I didn't need this spoonfed to me through dialogue, or through a 20-minute scene of Baze and Chirrut crying into the sunset while John Williams' score blared in the background the same way the classic Star Wars films (and their fans) would want it, so I'm glad that the line was cut from the final product; I'm a fan of subtlety.

The problem with Rogue One is there isn't enough down time--give me the "dated style" if it lets me see the characters as more than action heros.

This whole exchange here reminds me of how some people say that Breaking Bad is "slow" for the first two seasons. But they say it in a way that lets you know that they think that's a bad thing.

But the thing is, the reason Breaking Bad is good is because of how much time they spend setting up the world and characters. Walt's transformation is only significant if you understand what he was like in the beginning.

One last thing - it's completely unclear why certain members of the "team" actually joined up. Not the randos at the end, but the main guys. No one really questioned it, but it only made sense to me in a "they want to live" sort of way, until the end when obviously that's not why they went with it. I would have appreciated a little more dialogue in the prison to explain how they all became friends and not just guys who are in prison together.

In prison? Jyn was the only one in prison. Oh, wait, you mean when the 3 were being held by Saw Gerrera by the rebel pilot. Meh, their driving values were established well enough for me to understand why they decided to go w/ Jyn & her last ditch effort.

In deleted footage from one of the trailers, Baze made a comment about the destruction of Jedha as their motivation. Having directly observed the danger of the Empire's secret weapon, it makes sense that the surviving Keepers of the Whills would want to help find a way to stop it, even at the risk of their own lives. But I didn't need this spoonfed to me through dialogue, or through a 20-minute scene of Baze and Chirrut crying into the sunset while John Williams' score blared in the background the same way the classic Star Wars films (and their fans) would want it, so I'm glad that the line was cut from the final product; I'm a fan of subtlety.

Oh, and those of us who wanted more characterization aren't fans of subtlety? Could you please be a little more subtle with your condescension?

So much could have done with a few scenes--Cruel is not quite right. We didn't need 20 more minutes. A good writer and director could have had 5 minutes more, and it could made a big difference.

- No text -

I kind of hate this notion of a "dated style" as if film has made a steady progression in the direction of quality.

It kind of does. The techniques and technology available today absolutely enable you to create a higher quality film than you could in 1900.

I kind of hate this notion of a "dated style" as if film has made a steady progression in the direction of quality.

It kind of does. The techniques and technology available today absolutely enable you to create a higher quality film than you could in 1900.

Certainly this is true for some markers of "quality." I'm pretty confident that some of what falls under the description of "dated style" are what I'd describe as trends that aren't particularly reliant on technology.