• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

The Last Jedi - Actually Widely Hated?

I really liked the TLJ after my first viewing at the Cinema and then brought the Blu Ray many months later and turned it off halfway through (not re-watched it since). The entire middle section of the movie is deeply flawed and unlike TFA just doesn't hold up to re-watching IMO. I still like the opening act and the final act but dam the whole Casino section and the stupid slow space chase from the Empire is dull.

I have no problem with the fate of Luke, the scenes with Rey/Kylo are strong and engaging to watch but this entire SAGA feels like they missed a story somewhere along the line (feels rushed). The use of Snoke leaves a big ugly taste in my mouth too.

At the moment the Sequel Trilogy feels exactly like it is...

Different people writing/directing sections of a Trilogy with little planning going into the overall arc before Episode 7 even came out. I will never understand why Disney didn't hire one team to do the entire trilogy with 3 year gaps not 2.
 
Since I haven't posted in this thread yet, I just want to go back to the original question.
No, I don't think the hate is anywhere near as widespread as certain people like to pretend it is. It seems to me that it's just a small number of very, very loud people who just can't shut the hell up already.
It always amazes me in these kinds of situations the difference in behavior between the people who like something vs the people who don't. The ones who like it, will just say they liked and explain why just once or twice, or when specifically prompted, but then the people who hate it just can't stop talking about how much they hate it, and will take every opportunity, even in situations that have nothing to do with it, to tell everybody how much they hate it. This site is pretty much the only socializing I do, so I can only judge by what I see here, but I've seen people drag their hate of Star Trek: Discovery, and TLJ into threads that aren't even about Star Wars or Star Trek. Somebody will mention a show or movie, and the other person will just go off on some tangent about how much they hate DSC or TLJ. I really think that kind of behavior makes them seem a lot more hated than they really are, because it just draws a lot more attention than someone saying they liked it and then moving on.
 
This forum is one of the most civil. If you try to follow truly public forums like Facebook and YouTube comments, the old imdb boards and the rottentomatoes boards you'll probably end up giving up all hope in humanity.
 
crookeddy said:
This forum is one of the most civil. If you try to follow truly public forums like Facebook and YouTube comments, the old imdb boards and the rottentomatoes boards you'll probably end up giving up all hope in humanity.
Click to expand...
Hence the reason why I don't go to those places. Not worth the gray hair, in my opinion.
 
fireproof78 said:
Doesn't change the fact that I will be respectful to the person. Calling it wishful thinking isn't couching it. It's noting that people have valid opinions on this matter, even if there is ignorance.
Click to expand...

I made a distinction between the people who genuinely don't know about JJ Abrams' involvement in TLJ and those who are aware of that and yet still expect him to "undo" what Rian did.

Also, I don't agree that the people who fall into the latter camp have a valid viewpoint; they're just legitimately wrong.
 
DigificWriter said:
I made a distinction between the people who genuinely don't know about JJ Abrams' involvement in TLJ and those who are aware of that and yet still expect him to "undo" what Rian did.

Also, I don't agree that the people who fall into the latter camp have a valid viewpoint; they're just legitimately wrong.
Click to expand...

You keep saying it's a fact that they are wrong, but it won't be a fact until the movie comes out, and they are proved wrong. You continue making the mistake of taking things said in official interviews at face value.
 
HugeLobes said:
It was still hugely popular when it relaunched in the 90s. Obviously it wouldn't hold up as 'visionary' now, but the writing itself is still excellent, and those 'archetypes as old as storytelling itself' are part of what made SW so popular. Maybe the biggest part.
Click to expand...

Yes they did, but that doesn't really address my point. SW became so iconic not because of Luke on the hero's journey per se, but because of the new way that archetype was presented, the scale, the visuals, the epic scope. There was nothing new being done in terms of story telling, no new ground being broken and that in itself was commented on by many critics of the day.

Yes there was a lot going on below the surface but the film succeeded primarily because it was a spectacle of an order pretty much unseen prior, not for the intellectual content which only became apparent in retrospect and review. Audiences were not engrossed by the commentary on abuse of power, the real world political allegory or the religious symbolism, they were engrossed by the loveable characters and the (for the time) breathtaking excitement and adventure.

It was one of several films which heralded the birth of the blockbuster and became ingrained in the public consciousness because of that. In that regard it set the template for Jurassic Park, LOTR and Prince of Thieves as much as it did for genre space operas.

Had the franchise been opened at the time with TFA or TLJ those would seem no less groundbreaking to contemporary audiences than ANH did. Equally if we were to be presented tabula rasa with ANH today we would not react in anything approaching the way we did then.

That's why I talk about the importance of considering nostalgia when looking at the film's legacy, our perceptions of it are clouded by it's place in our own memories and the greater story of the history of film making. It's a legendary film but context matters and the significance of that legend can easily be misread.
 
crookeddy said:
You keep saying it's a fact that they are wrong, but it won't be a fact until the movie comes out, and they are proved wrong. You continue making the mistake of taking things said in official interviews at face value.
Click to expand...

Two things:
1) A comment like this makes me think you're someone who would be okay with certain individuals making up their own facts and trying to peddle them as the truth, but that's not how the world works.

2) I've sat in an informal setting with several individuals directly associated with Lucasfilm and heard them speak at length about the behind-the-scenes processes of Star Wars, and have also interacted directly with other people who not only have an "insider's view" of the franchise but who also understand how films are made in general, and have personally heard all of these people make it quite clear that JJ Abrams fully supported what Rian Johnson did and is not going to "undo" or contradict it, so this is not me "taking things said in official interviews at face value", it is me relying on personal experience to make an unequivocal and provable statement regarding a point of view that runs completely contrary to fact.
 
Last edited:
Spot261 said:
Had the franchise been opened at the time with TFA or TLJ those would seem no less groundbreaking to contemporary audiences than ANH did.
Click to expand...

Groundbreaking in terms of visual effects, that's it. These movies just aren't as well written as the originals. Remember Avatar? The highest grossing movie of all time? Nobody cares about it now because it was a visual spectacle with nothing behind it. If TFA or TLJ had been released in the 70s, I think that's pretty much how they'd be remembered. Of course, you can't really say since they owe so much to the originals.

Spot261 said:
Equally if we were to be presented tabula rasa with ANH today we would not react in anything approaching the way we did then.
Click to expand...

Well, yeah, I'm not disputing that, and I'm not saying nostalgia isn't powerful. ANH is no longer as revolutionary as it used to be, but quality remains. I think you're overestimated how much nostalgia sways people's appreciation of the original movies.
 
While I would say there are many reasonably admirable traits to the original films, I'm not sure that "well-written" is a term I'd use to describe them. I would say they're written to the style of source material that they're trying to emulate, but whether that material is objectively well-written...well...
 
DigificWriter said:
I've sat in an informal setting with several individuals directly associated with Lucasfilm and heard them speak at length about the behind-the-scenes processes of Star Wars, and have also interacted directly with other people who not only have an "insider's view" of the franchise but who also understand how films are made in general, and have personally heard all of these people make it quite clear that JJ Abrams fully supported what Rian Johnson did and is not going to "undo" or contradict it, so this is not me "taking things said in official interviews at face value", it is me relying on personal experience to make an unequivocal and provable statement regarding a point of view that runs completely contrary to fact.
Click to expand...

This sounds like one of those Digi-fic things that you are a writer of...
 
crookeddy said:
This sounds like one of those Digi-fic things that you are a writer of...
Click to expand...

This went from a conversation to you being an *** for no reason whatsoever, but just for the record, the people I was talking about are Lucasfilm Story Group members Matt Martin and Pablo Hidalgo, Star Wars.Com contributor and insider Bryan Young, and How Stuff Works contributor and Stuff You Missed in History Class co-host Holly Frey, and the location was several panels at Salt Lake FanX Comic Con where I was just one of thousands of attendees in the room when these comments and statements were made.

Nice try, though.
 
fireproof78 said:
It's funny because Abrams acknowledges that as a mistake. It's like he might have learned from his mistakes or something because he is a professional and good at his job.
Click to expand...

Eh--he's ok, but the last ten years have shown him to be a bit overrated. He's not a blithering incompetent like Berman and Braga or Chibnall, but he doesn't have the magic touch either. If learning from his mistakes is possible, then Episode IX will be MUCH different than TLJ.

HugeLobes said:
No, I'm suggesting they're either completely ignorant of Khan or don't care about him. Khan is no Joker. Star Trek fans know who here is. To the average moviegoer, Khan is either just a name or someone unknown. Ask 100 people in the street and way more would know about the Joker than Khan.
Click to expand...

I will agree that more people know the Joker than Khan for a variety of reasons. No argument there. But, in the Star Trek universe, Khan is probably the best known singular villain by far. I think Khan is known in the mainstream. And using him was a big deal that Abrams really blew in EVERY capacity.

HugeLobes said:
Not disagreeing, but only for recognition among fans. Star Trek fans were not the main audience for that movie.
Click to expand...

I think you, and others, overestimate the ignorance of the casual fan, or underestimate just how mainstream TOS is. And I think the definition of Star Trek fan is broader than many people recognize. There are different degrees of fandom to be sure--the type of person that would post on a board like this one is probably more knowledgeable than one who doesn't, but that doesn't mean the one that doesn't wouldn't know Khan. Khan is a big deal. I think your statement might be more accurate with different characters like say, Harry Mudd. Gary Mitchell.

HugeLobes said:
I feel like TFA took the safest, easier course and succeeded, while TLJ took a riskier, more original approach and failed. Even though I think TLJ is worse than TFA, I kinda like it more.
Click to expand...

The first sentence is a fair statement. As for the second one, everyone is entitled to their opinion, and yours is actually interesting. I hated TLJ, but can't fault what you're saying and why.

But I actually think that those that LIKED the movie are the vocal minority, not those that hated it.
 
Rey's parentage could still go either way. Are we supposed to just take Darth Emo's word at face value? :rolleyes:

Kor
 
Kirk Prime said:
I will agree that more people know the Joker than Khan for a variety of reasons. No argument there. But, in the Star Trek universe, Khan is probably the best known singular villain by far. I think Khan is known in the mainstream.
Click to expand...

I really doubt Khan's place in the mainstream. The vast majority of moviegoers simply don't know or don't care about him. He might be the best known villain, but who else would even be on that list that people on the street would recognize?

I guess what I'm driving at with this Khan thing is that the people who actually care about him being in the movie would be big enough fans to see the movie anyway.

Kirk Prime said:
But I actually think that those that LIKED the movie are the vocal minority, not those that hated it.
Click to expand...

Solely based on my own experience, I would totally agree with this.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top