I don’t think it was a stroke of genius as much as literally the easiest way they could do that and get Leonard Nimoy in the film.
Definitely a fair point about the previous movies though. They had not been good for a very long time.
Episode IX Speculation and Discussion
- Thread starter INACTIVESamusAranX
- Start date
I don’t think it was a stroke of genius as much as literally the easiest way they could do that and get Leonard Nimoy in the film.
Definitely a fair point about the previous movies though. They had not been good for a very long time.
I expect an overreaction to The Last Jedi backlash and thus a mediocre movie which ticks all the boxes of fan expectations and provides nothing of substance.
In other words, more Solo but with the sequel trilogy characters.
In other words, more Solo but with the sequel trilogy characters.
It was a popular enough move that it influenced the X-men and Terminator series of films (with varying success). Either way it was a new direction for the movie franchise and it worked, critically and commercially. It's a shame this momentum wasn't maintained.
I'd be fine with that. Solo was an entertaining adventure, which is all Star Wars films need to be. I don't watch them expecting substance.
This is the great tragedy of our times.
Why? Since when have Star Wars movies ever been about much more than just 'goodies versus baddies'? I'd argue the prequel trilogy delved into the political side of the universe but that's about it.
Since the OT and then never again. Sure, it was goodies vs. baddies. Or, if you like, protagonists vs. antagonists. Kind of a basic narrative building block...
They took stock characters and gave plenty of them a huge amount of depth for a space adventure movie. You get this fantastic spiritual angle with the original depiction of the Force and one of the most interesting antagonists of all time in Darth Vader. The original movies had a ton of substance.
So when I see this character:
Turned into this:
Or a confrontation like this:
Turned into something like this:
Well, I think that's mighty sad.
To get all Shakespeare about it:
It is a tale. Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing.
Last edited:
I don't have a problem with any of those scenes. RO & ROTS are two of my favourite films in the franchise.
You don't think there's maybe a little more going on in terms of character in the OT scenes?
Maybe. I can't say it's ever concerned me. I enjoy these films for what they are. Fantasy escapism. I enjoy Star Trek for more character stuff and deeper themes.
The OT is fantasy escapism, but that's far from all. The Darth Vader character in those first scenes is complex, nuanced, and intelligent. The writing in the OT trilogy is well above even some of the best Star Trek, and themes go right to the core. I'm sorry, but I find it kind of sad when you say the difference doesn't really concern you.
The new movies are just fantasy escapism. That's fine, but the series used to be so much more than that before every single aspect was cheapened.
The new movies are just fantasy escapism. That's fine, but the series used to be so much more than that before every single aspect was cheapened.
I still don't class any Star Wars film as containing a great deal of substance. Good, reasonably well defined and written characters and the spiritual side of things with the force do not make these films particularly deep in any way.
They are still just good v evil fantasy sci-fi action movies at their core. Find it as sad as you like but that's what they are.
They are still just good v evil fantasy sci-fi action movies at their core. Find it as sad as you like but that's what they are.
Yes, they are good vs. evil at their core, but they also contain very deep characters and strong dialogue. You don't need to be discussing political or social themes to be 'particularly deep in any way'. The strength of the OT has always been the ability to combine sci-fi action with a deeper meaning. These movies were partially based on Jungian psychology, for God's sake!
If these were 'just good v evil fantasy sci-fi actioon movies', they wouldn't have become so vastly popular.
I don't believe this is true at all. Humanity has a fascination with good and evil, wanting to see such things are highly entertaining and engrossing. It's called the "monomyth" for a reason, my friend.
Star Wars had staying power largely because of how it played with familiar tropes. The world was far more unfamiliar, so the characters had to be kind of familiar. Now that the world is established, I absolutely love the fact that the ST is trying something different with that world and those characters. That's very Jungian psychology as well as Greek tragedy woven in.
As for TFA (since my browser ate the reply): I rewatch that film with my dad and my kids, primarily. My dad absolutely loves TFA and TLJ and is fun for him. I love that. I love that fact that he can just sit down and enjoy the film, and now demand it "be deep." I think there is depth there, but it is necessary or a requisite to be a "Star Wars" film.
I think these Star Wars movies are as deep as people want them to be. Some find incredible depth in the PT, while others enjoy the ST. That is the art of storytelling. It's why I absolutely love ST 09 and ST ID is because the story and the characters engage me in a very deep way. Not everyone has that experience with every film. I have friends who thought "Fight Club" was the deepest movie at the time. I found it rather pedestrian
This statement is complete nonsense. They've become vastly popular precisely for that reason. They have a very wide appeal to a large demographic because of their simplicity and accessibility for general audiences.
Because they have that and they go deeper. They have the simple stuff and the deeper stuff. I have literally answered this multiple times today, and it's been acknowledged that there's more going on with the characters in the OT scenes than ROTS and RO.
But:
Oh well, I guess that doesn't matter then.
I've studied literature for years, and I continue to attend conferences to this day. The OT works with themes and characters just like a work of literature. It's not difficult or inaccessible like some HIgh Modernism or whatever, but it does work on that level.
Well, why don't people like the new movies as much then? You yourself said Solo was what you're looking for in a SW movie, and it was a pretty huge disappointment for Disney. TFA was a big hit at the time that has somewhat cooled over the years. What's up? All these are simple and accessible for general audiences.
It's almost like they're missing a certain something. Like maybe you need something more than good vs. evil?
I'm afraid it's this statement that is "complete nonsense". Solo made Disney reassess their entire approach to the SW.
Last edited:
I think it depends on the scene, personally. But, I'm also the guy who finds more interest in a the brief clip of the look on Kelvin Kirk's face in ST 09 than a long soliloquy in "Julius Caesar."
I think it's more a cultural thing, of people moving on and a matter of expectations on the part of audiences, not because it's "missing something." It's not that simple.
Not sure that means the content of the film. I think its more a matter of the BTS and production style, i.e. increased release time .
It is exactly that simple. That's like saying people don't like The Simpsons now because of cultural changes. Maybe that's a part of it, but the main reason is the show has lost its magic.
If the new movies somehow struck that perfect combination of entertaining adventure and deeper meaning, people would love them. What we're seeing with the new movies is the entertaining adventure part without what made the OT so unique, and it's already an approach that's falling apart.
I'm not even saying those films are bad, they're just failing to live up to expectations.
In fact, I don't even need to leave the OT to make this point. ROTJ is unanimously considered to be the worst movie, and it was arguably the one with the most entertainment/action. The best bits were the culimination of Darth/Luke. Leia and Han's arcs had been pretty well tied up by Endor, which is probably why their ROTJ storyline feels slightly redundant.
ESB, generally the most well-regarded movie, is the one where relatively little happens. You'll often hear younger views call it their least favorite for that very reason. What it does have is the best dialogue and a lot of that more unique Force exploration that made the films feel so special.
But damn, haven't you seen Brando do it?
Last edited:
That's fair. I think the expectations are part of the problem though, meaning that audience members are hunting for specific things to make it "Star Wars" rather than appreciating the narrative presented. At least, that's what I'm noticing.
Again, I am the outlier. I can appreciate ESB from a film stand point, and even a dialog standpoint, but I do not enjoy it, save for choice parts (i.e. asteroid scene, Luke's training, Han and Leia). I'm not saying it isn't the most developed film, but I think it lacks something that keeps me wanting to go back to that.
Now, I agree about ROTJ as well, but I think that is more because of the dissatisfaction Lucas had with the original Star Wars. However, for me, it has some of the more intense emotional moments that keep me coming back, in addition to the space battle.
Sure. I love it when its acted well. But, I still prefer smaller moments of facial expressions that I can really identify with the character. I think that's why I enjoy Abrams' style so much as he does have the high pacing, but there are a lot of little moments where he allows the actor to exude emotion without dialog. It flows very well, and it's why ST 09 and ID, as well as TFA appeal to me. It isn't the action and the adventure per se. It's the characters and what is going on in their mind that keeps me hooked in.
Acknowledged by who? You? You may find depth in these movies, but that is based on your personal life experiences, It doesn't make it a fact. My personal life experiences as a lifelong sci-fi fan means I take enjoyment from those elements from the OT - see what I did there?
What 'depth' have you even cited yet other than saying you study literature and that these movies work like a piece of literature? I bet most movies work as a piece of literature as literally thousands of them are based on books. All you are doing there is stating the obvious to be frank.
Correct. The only opinion that matters to me whilst I'm watching a movie is mine.
Again, this is just your subjective opinion. I'd like to wager if you ask 10 or 1000 people why they like the Star Wars movies a huge majority of them will cite the action, characters and visuals as the main draw, not this. Where do you think the term 'pew pew' comes from?
People do like the new movies, and you will find plenty on here. TFA was an absolute smash hit and was received well critically. RO & TLJ were both major hits and again were received well critically. Only Solo was a box office disappointment, but it was still received fairly well. There's a lot of fan backlash over TLJ on the internet, mainly because TLJ is clearly the Star Trek into Darkness of the sequel trilogy. To say people don't like the new movies is wrong. Some people don't like them, but as we have no real way of measuring this, I'll go off the reviews and box office numbers for now.
