When a good number of critics and STAR WARS fans start talking about how Lucasfilm and the Disney Studios need to recapture the "magic", I could not help but wonder what "magic" to which they were referring. The "magic" of Disney's first film in the franchise, "STAR WARS: EPISODE VII - THE FORCE AWAKENS"? The six films that George Lucas had produced between 1977 and 2005? Or the "magic" of the franchise’s Original Trilogy? If these fans and critics were referring to the "magic" of the Original Trilogy, I find this demand rather ironic. And I find it personally ironic, considering that it took me several years to appreciate that particular trilogy after it first came out, long ago. Do I want the "magic" of the Original Trilogy to be repeated? No. Not really. Or should I say . . . not literally. In the words of F. Scott Fitzgerald, "you can’t repeat the past". But a person can move on and experience or create something new in his or her life. And in regard to a movie, a novel or any other works of art . . . a person can create something new, while at the same time, pay homage to a past work of art or form a narrative connection to it. I am a big fan of the Original Trilogy movies, the Prequel Trilogy movies, "ROGUE ONE: A STAR WARS STORY" and "SOLO: A STAR WARS STORY". Even though it took a few years to appreciate them, I became a big fan of the Original Trilogy. And one of the reasons why I am such a big fan of the Prequel Trilogy films, "ROGUE ONE" and "SOLO" is that while having a connection to the Original Trilogy from a narrative point of view, those five films managed to offer something new to the franchise. The Prequel Trilogy had depicted the downfalls of Anakin Skywalker aka Darth Vader, the Jedi Order, and the Galactic Republic. The trilogy also conveyed how these calamities led to the emergence of the Galactic Empire and the Sith in the form of Emperor Sheev Palpatine. And the trilogy did all of this with a great deal of ambiguity that I found more than satisfying. This ambiguity was also on display in stand alone movies like "ROGUE ONE" and "SOLO". "ROGUE ONE" not only told the story of the theft of the Death Star plans; but with a great deal of brutality hardly ever seen in previous movies of the STAR WARS franchise. "SOLO"conveyed the origins of Han Solo, one of the leading characters from the Original Trilogy. Unlike the STAR WARS films before it, "SOLO" gave audiences more than a mere peek into the criminal underworld within the STAR WARS saga. Ironically, the leading protagonists of both stand alone films were not Force sensitive individuals. The Original Trilogy was not perfect. Neither were the Prequel Trilogy, “ROGUE ONE” and “SOLO”. I believe that the two trilogies and the two stand alone films had their flaws. But for me, their virtues . . . in which originality happen to be one of them … far outweighed their flaws. However, I cannot say the same about the first two films featured in the recent Sequel Trilogy, produced by Lucasfilm and the Disney Studios. I am willing to give the trilogy points for conveying some originality. None of the three major protagonists is a white male. The main antagonist, who is constantly compared to Anakin Skywalker aka Darth Vader, did not come from an obscure background and/or upbringing. And this same antagonist had killed his evil mentor halfway into the trilogy. Despite these bouts of originality, I am simply not that impressed by this new trilogy. I believe there are too many plot holes and inconsistent characterizations for me to regard it as worthy entertainment. Worse, I feel that the trilogy’s first two films had borrowed just a bit too much from the 1977-1983 movies for me to regard it as truly original. In fact, the Sequel Trilogy’s overall narrative seemed to be a re-hash of the Original Trilogy’s Rebel Alliance-Galactic Empire conflict and the rise of Luke Skywalker as Jedi Knight. And the numerous plot holes make me begin to wonder if the trilogy’s main narrative was ever outlined in advance. When people talk about recapturing the "magic" of the past . . . or the Original Trilogy, I find myself wondering what exactly do they want. Do they want a re-hash of the Original Trilogy? If so, the Sequel Trilogy seemed to be fulfilling that demand. Or perhaps this demand is centered around having major protagonists who are white males. Who knows? But if these fans and critics are referring to the "spirit" of the 1977-83 trilogy, then I am at a loss. What exactly is this "spirit" or "magic"? I cannot help but wonder if an answer my last question might be riddled with pitfalls. I believe it could easily be perceived in so many ways. Personally, I simply want a STAR WARS movie that not only connects to any of the previous films in the franchise, but also provide something truly original . . . and well-written. The movie does not have to be perfect. I have yet to see a perfect movie - even one from the STAR WARS franchise. Nor do I expect it to be. But I hope that the franchise’s future movies . . . whether they are parts of a serial or merely a stand alone . . . will be a lot better than the first two Sequel Trilogy films.
I have exact the same opinion! I can watch the OT, PT and RO almost once a year, but the sequels not so much. It's almost a remake and I just don't care for the new characters, and its seems that they didn't plan this trilogy trough. And I feel like that the message is " if you are old you are obsolete and have to die". Like Lor San Tekka, Han, Luke, Admiral Ackbar, probably Leia in the next one.
My guess might be that they're referring to all the hooplahoohaa that occured with "The Force Awakens", which did a good job of using the original template as a carbon copy. But by the time they got to the new death planet star thing, the magic largely disappeared. And TLJ, while not perfect, is nowhere near the flop people bestow upon it. Influence and occasional homage, sure. But as often and as brazen TFA had? Eps I-III added to the canon, while imperfect in different ways. RO and Solo both took existing scituations, which amounted to 2 minutes onscreen in the original trilogy, and tried bloating each case to a 2+ hour extravaganza. That's a lot of padding. RO tries to fit in, but doesn't - critics have gone into the movie's ending and how it doesn't blend with ANH, especially regarding the in-universe technology that the Rebels had, if nothing else... Excellent point. The shown brutality. AHN doesn't do much here, except fry Aunt Beru and Unkie Owen into crispy protein snack chips. It's brutal but not quite the same scale. But comparing RO to, say, Order 66 that ROTS had, ROTS managed to do it a lot better. Even if they sledgehammered in "66" since "666" would be too much homage to something else... ANH still told the scenario of stolen plans succinctly and effectively. RO uses a lot of established canon imagery, but only laid the ground work for a bigger universe (which likely won't be explored any time soon thanks to backlash?) TFA meandered and made a bunch of superheroes that could do anything on cue and regardless of lack of any training. Han had some nice moments... The OT were clearly made up as they went along and the 1977 original has a lot of Samurai films to be thankful for. It's not very original in some ways. Great f/x for the time, but the movie wouldn't have worked if the f/x weren't so busy. If viewers remembered all 3 movies, they would have - at the time- wondered what's up with Luke and hot-for-brother Leia too, since she apparently knew all along she was his bro and had magic powers. (And a simple analysis shows how Luke had no special powers since he was lobbing rats from a speeder a few hundred meters away... like the medallion a person wears in the belief it gives one powers but it's only due to determination and practice instead...) Just with shiny glow in the dark laser swords. Thankfully TESB, the one some critics loathed back in 1980, ignores all that and tells us it's all real and then sells us that fantastic ending proving that incest is forever as Darth is Luke's daddy. Seriously, you're going to go there for seemingly no other reason to entertain? You really think the mass audiences (not just the niche people, including the non-white fans who've been screaming the identical problems with the Disney continuation of the franchise!!!) are wanting more white men??!! How many facepalm emoticons are needed right now?????? The absurdity is almost laughable except it's eminently sad. Why not get a time machine and tell them at the time about what they were unintentionally and not intentionally doing. It's not 1977 anymore. It's not 1950. It's not 1850, 1300, or 8 zillion BC. Please don't conflate the past as present or vice-versa, that's helping nothing. I implore you: Go to youtube, look up "Gospel according top Mark with a c", and watch some of his Disney Star Wars videos. If you're going to be so prejudiced about whites, please do note that he is not white so maybe you will listen to him make the identical damn case everyone else has when criticizing the story structure, etc. SMH. Here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCPyMbYIzr0iKLv6nGOCX_WA Enjoy.
Same here, but I am a tad more doubtful. TLJ needed some editing of some scenes because characters sometimes got to place to place for no seeming reason, and keeping most of the deleted scenes as they added necessary narrative (including how they got to point B from point A), but the movie is nowhere near its apparent "worst Star Wars movie ever" reputation.
I'm very happy with both The Force Awakens and The Last Jedi, so for me there's no need for the movies to recapture the magic, since they never lost it.
Lucky for Lucasfilm (and us) the new movies weren't made to please you specifically. They were mostly made for a mix of the old fans and the new audience. They're still kids' movies at their core and that is who they're meant to appeal to first and foremost. If you're not a kid anymore and you don't like what's in a kids' movie...well that's just too bad.
The magic of seeing it for the first time through the eyes of a seven year old? Like I told a friend recently, Disney doesn't know what fans want because fans don't know what they want—as a whole. I want a solid story, not fan service, not rewarmed left overs. I expected better from Kasdan and Johnson. I mean, Toy Story 3 and Looper. What the hell happened? (I have my suspicions.) I enjoyed Solo, but it was such fan service it didn't lend anything new to the Star Wars story. Here's some details about some things you already know about. (I think it flopped because of its lack of the Force and lightsabers.) I would have liked to have seen the Lord and Miller version given how good Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs and The Lego Movie were—and 21 Jump Street had it's moments. I don't how Kathleen hires directors, but if I was doing a movie, I'd hire directors whose body of work matched the kind of movie I wanted to make. It would have been a different Star Wars movie, but maybe it would been better. I'm 49 encroaching on 50, and I don't look to Star Wars to recapture the wonder of my childhood. I understand the movies are meant for a vastly younger audience, and shouldn't be over complicated by adult themes. I'll look to Blade Runner and Ghost in the Shell for that. My son is an eight grader who is into Fortnite and YouTube. Star Wars is interesting to him, but I wouldn't say he's a fan. The Transformers movies had the magic for him. As mentioned above, The Force and Lightsabers set Star Wars apart from other sci-fi fantasy. That's part of the magic, the romantic sword and sorcery. Do more of that, Disney. You're known for it.
The magic is long gone because Hollywood is run by people who greenlight weak and derivative scripts. This has been the norm since the 1990s. Star Wars is no different from any other genre blockbuster that Hollywood produces and the public consumes. Had the prequels or sequels been produced in 1980s, they would have been much better. These days, I only enjoy smaller films and movies based on books. I see about one movie a year in the theater, but I walked out during the last one.
That was what I liked about it, I liked getting to learn about the details of the things we got references to in the original trilogy. But I also read a lot of Star Trek books, and a couple of my favorites are about 400 pages long and exist entirely to explain one line of dialouge in TNG and one in DS9, so I like these kinds of stories in general.
Yes. Unfortunately, we never got to three Death Stars in the concept art. Yes, indeed. Same here. In fact, Solo took something I was largely uninterested in (Corellia and Han's origins) and made it more enjoyable.
The magic is gone because we aren't eight anymore. These franchises caught many of us when we were very young and still impressionable. I am a huge fan of the original Star Trek. Though if I had started watching it in my 20's, when I had experienced more of the world, I doubt I would have been as impressed.
^I agree that the magic of childhood has a special hold on our first impressions and memories. Nothing can compete with them. Still, I think Hollywood in general is a toilet, and has been for the last 25 plus years, and new Star Wars films are about as good as one could expect. Obviously people still like them, otherwise studios would stop making them.
Thus far, the new films have exceeded my expectations, though I generally try to avoid having expectations but they are still there, I'll admit.
I wasn't a big fan of the Star Wars movies as a child. I didn't appreciate them until I was at least 18 years or older.
The thing about these two films of the proposed trilogy, which this series will continue to generate after I die, is according to head honchette Kathleen Kennedy is these films are targeted for me. Judging from what I'd seen I found those films to be insulting to my gender. I don't think I'm entitled to everything just because I'm the opposite sex, I strongly feel everything I want to pursue I should earn it. None of those female characters, especially Rey, in Kennedy's Star Wars are very smart, and they seem to get things accomplished because the terrible writing made it so. Another thing I find annoying is Hollywood's continued trend of shitting on great characters from the past just to make their new characters look better. Luke Skywalker was a great character, a symbol of hope and achievement; I followed his journey to becoming a strong man, and shared his shock, grief, and victories. It was a novel, a person every living being can look up to and imagine his future would be prosperous. Return of the Jedi did that for me. But to do like what was done to him in The Last Jedi was sad and pathetic, and mean spirited- - it's like taking a dump on the Martin Luther King Jr. memorial in Atlanta and then making a documentary of how much you've cherished the man. Luke Skywalker in the Last Jedi didn't anger me, but it made me sad because this is not the character I grew up with. It's simply not the character, and I said to my man and my friends with tears running down my face that I will not see Solo or any other Star Wars movie in the theatres until Disney clean up this mess. You don't do this to characters like Luke Skywalker, it's unforgivable.
I agree, I also haven't seen Solo and not going to see EP9 in the cinema, and my wife and most of my friends have the same opinion