Spoilers Rogue One: A Star Wars Story - Grading & Discussion

[davejames]

There are always war movies about the little important things that allowed the larger campaigns to happen, or the war to continue for one side or the other. Take the upcoming Dunkirk film for example. It is about the evacuation of the Brititsh and Allied troops from France using every ship and boat that could possibly get there and back the England, saving the Army, while ditching their equipment on the beaches, not to return for four years after D-Day. It is an important eve, but not one there is a bigger story to be told for other major campaigns, or the Battle of Britain which takes place not too long after that. Yet it will still likely be a good movie.

Well yeah, when you're talking about real world wars and historical events, that automatically lends a weight and importance to every story about it you can tell. And those are stories that usually feel like they deserve to be told.

But as far as fictional scifi wars go, I'm not sure the same thing applies. And learning about how exactly some rebels got their hands on the Death Star plans that ultimately ended up inside R2 just doesn't feel like a story that was crying out to be told (except perhaps in comic book form or something).

That being said though, I still liked the movie enough to give it a B and thought it was pretty well executed for the most part. There are just a few things that keep me from ranking it as one of the best of the best.

 

[LJones41]

Is there some kind of backlash growing against the Jyn Erso character? I hope not. I thought she was one of the best things about the movie.

I think the bigger problem for me though is this never feels like a story that really needs to be told. Or at least not in the form of a huge, big-budget movie. Especially 40 years after we already watched that original Death Star get destroyed and the story has long ago moved on.

None of the other movies, aside from the 1977 one had to be told, if one must be honest. But since the other six were made, why not "Rogue One"? After all, an EU (excuse me, "Legends") novel was written about the theft of the Death Star plans. Why not a movie?

 

[Ithekro]

If one has decided that Star Wars should expand its universe beyond the idea that the story has to be about the Skywalkers, than one needs to find ways to start telling stories about that universe in ways that will still keep the audience at least somewhat grounded at first. The PT centered around the known character of Obi-wan Kenobi as our grounding point and then tells us the story of the fall of the Republic and of Anakin Skywalker. The Clone Wars cartoons give us an expanded look into a larger conflict we only get to see the beginning and ending of in the PT. These shows give us more insight into how the Republic was changing into the Empire and how the citizens of the galaxy were coming to dislike and distrust the Jedi. It also expands on the story and especially the personality of Anakin Skywalker, while also focusing on other characters over the course of the six or so seasons.

Star Wars: Rebels goes even farther by actually distancing itself from the Skywalkers almost entirely while still telling about the beginnings of what would eventually be called the Rebel Alliance or the Alliance to Restore the Republic. However it still focuses on Jedi characters.

Rogue One takes these steps and puts them on the big screen for general audiences, as the stigma of "its a cartoon" still happens for Clone Wars and Rebels. Also there are no Jedi present. So to dip the toe into the expanding Star Wars universe, one takes a known event that was not expanded on and link it to all the other pieces. Rogue One connects elements of the PT, the OT, TCW, and ST:R together into a feature film. It touches on the TFA a tad as well, but indirectly. The attempt is to make the Star Wars universe basically real to film so that in the future any story could be told in that universe using the tools, settings, and styles provided. Sort of like what the newer "Battlestar Galactica" attempted to do with "Caprica" and "Razor" in expanding the universe so any story could be told in it. Star Wars has always had the "lived in" look, and with all the old EU materials out there, the Universe is massively expanded, but limited to collected sourcebooks and visual dictionaries and the like connecting the dots. Any tale can be told in Star Wars. It is just a matter of if the audience is willing to watch it. Rogue One is the test case for more later films, while TFA was the test to see if people still wanted more Star Wars films at all.

 

[Venardhi]

None of the other movies, aside from the 1977 one had to be told, if one must be honest.

Like any story, a movie has to make an argument for itself or it is irrelevant. That is what people mean by "it needed to be told." A story has to be about something. Rogue one dabbled in themes but it offered no new perspective or compelling take on them. They touched on a few that could have made for a really strong and meaningful story (doing evil for the greater good, finding meaning in a life lived for an ideal if the ideal never comes to be, extremism, fear vs hope, etc.) but seemed to be actively pushing them away.

Rogue One takes these steps and puts them on the big screen for general audiences, as the stigma of "its a cartoon" still happens for Clone Wars and Rebels.

The stigma against The Clone Wars and Rebels isn't because they're animated, but that they're just not very good. They do nothing to rise above the low expectations of their audience or medium.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

So many stories don't NEED to be told, but it can be cool to read them, hear about them or watch them.

If you admit they did not need to be told, then that's another way of saying it was sort of pointless.

I am of the opinion that this wasn't a character movie, but an event movie, and that in event movies, the characters are only there to move the story along. I was hardly emotionally invested in any of them, nor was that the point. It was sad to seem them die, sure. But because they lost there lives for something so important, while history will never remember them. How many small but necessary victories have we had in so many wars, where the people responsible for those victories are never remembered? Countless. And that's what this was about. The struggle of freedom. Not about Jyn, or Cassian. Not about Saw, or K2. So yeah, I feel this movie did that very well. The amount of death and destructon was staggering and overwhelming. As it would be in real life.

By telling this story, the filmmakers were trying to sell audiences on the idea that they were important--wanting fans to forever alter the way they saw ANH with names & faces one could say, "without these specific characters, the rebels would've lost"

The true feel of the faceless, unsung characters in war was covered in the ANH crawl:

During the battle, Rebel spies managed to steal secret plans to the Empire's ultimate weapon, the Death Star...

No other explanation or exploration of the event was required, which is reinforced by the fact many continue to ask the question: "why did we need to see this story?"

 

[plynch]

That's absolutely ridiculous.

There's only one movie I've ever prematurely walked out of ( which just so happens to be the only one Siskel ever walked out of ), and it deserved it.

This one did not.

I got where he was coming from.

The more I think about it, this movie is almost insulting. A boring thing made by a corporation to get money from us. It is so pedestrian, such a rehash, a bunch of parts that make a big gray, corporate, pew-pew, explosive-laden, joyless (oh, except for the gray Hitchhiker's Marvin knock-off droid who just. isn't. funny.) World War Two accomplish-the-mission movie that I've seen a jillion times before. If it weren't for the cinematography and music, I think I would want my money back.

Just like the next Trek movie, I am definitely consulting reviews before I see the next installment in this "franchise." That word is telling, a business word, i.e. one more identical installment of a chain concept. I want a human being who wants to tell stories at the heart of it, not Disney stockholders needing more product to serve up to a gullible "consumer" public.

 

[Mage]

Insulting???

Yup, fanboys have found a new low. If you actually think this movie insults you, you've never been insulted in your life. If this is your lowpoint, I congratute you on a near perfect excistence. My God.....

 

[Venardhi]

Disney doesn't need you to defend them from fanboys. Argue the merits of the film.

 

[LJones41]

If you admit they did not need to be told, then that's another way of saying it was sort of pointless.



By telling this story, the filmmakers were trying to sell audiences on the idea that they were important--wanting fans to forever alter the way they saw ANH with names & faces one could say, "without these specific characters, the rebels would've lost"

The true feel of the faceless, unsung characters in war was covered in the ANH crawl:



No other explanation or exploration of the event was required, which is reinforced by the fact many continue to ask the question: "why did we need to see this story?"

I honestly don't care whether or not the story of "Rogue One" needed to be told. "The Empire Strikes Back" wasn't really needed after "A New Hope". But I enjoyed it anyway, along with the other movies that followed it. I enjoyed the expansion of the saga. Just as I had enjoyed "Rogue One", which is basically another expansion of the story.

But if you didn't like the movie or felt that making it was a waste of time . . . well, so be it.

 

[Tosk]

Same. No story needs to be told. How weird.

 

[Ithekro]

If you admit they did not need to be told, then that's another way of saying it was sort of pointless.

It is fiction, it is all pointless from that point of view. No story needs to be told in fiction, but they are told regardless and people want to hear a tale now and again.

Sometimes I think some people either are way too jaded in life or have seen too many movies that they just can't enjoy themselves anymore unless the film has some deep meaning or some other such thing. It is entertainment in the end....all of it. From Plan 9 from Outer Space to Citizen Kane.

 

[Venardhi]

There is nothing more frustrating than conversing with the willfully obtuse.

 

[DonIago]

^Starting the new year on an ironic note?

 

[Reverend]

The stigma against The Clone Wars and Rebels isn't because they're animated, but that they're just not very good. They do nothing to rise above the low expectations of their audience or medium.

Uh, what now? What weird, alternate universe shows have you been watching?

There is nothing more frustrating than conversing with the willfully obtuse.

You know I've found there's a simple solution to that.

 

[JoeZhang]

Like any story, a movie has to make an argument for itself or it is irrelevant.

The argument for most people is "was that worth two hours of my time" - It was fairly light forgettable popcorn entertainment - that's all it aspired to be and all most of the audience need it to be. If you needed it to be more than that, well that's your choice but it's not a more valid option than any other no matter how much you repeat yourself.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

I honestly don't care whether or not the story of "Rogue One" needed to be told. "The Empire Strikes Back" wasn't really needed after "A New Hope.

Lucas had a larger story planned, which contained elements that would form what occurred in TESB. It was part of the story he developed, so it needed to be told. The R1 story was not, hence the only necessary reference appearing in ANH's opening crawl.

 

[Beagleman]

There is not as single story that needs to be told, not one. Storytelling is a (beautiful) luxury.

 

[Mage]

Disney doesn't need you to defend them from fanboys. Argue the merits of the film.

Sir yes sir!

 

[Reverend]

Lucas had a larger story planned, which contained elements that would form what occurred in TESB. It was part of the story he developed, so it needed to be told. The R1 story was not, hence the only necessary reference appearing in ANH's opening crawl.

You clearly have no idea how the original movies were developed. Lucas didn't start out with some grand story to tell, he developed a world and spent four whole drafts trying to figure out what kind of story he could tell in it. Pretty much the same thing happened in TESB & RotJ. Sure, he had a rough idea of Luke's arc in the sense that he was on a "heroes journey", but the details never crystallised until each film was well into development.

At one point "the other" wasn't Leia at all, but some other character who would be the focus of a (then theoretical) second trilogy. At another point, Ben Kenobi was a half-machine veteran Jedi who'd served with Luke's father (a fact that Luke was well aware of) and Darth Vader was a totally different person. At one point the Death Star didn't even appear wasn't even mentioned until the third aft, right after the plans being in R2 was revealed. At one point the McGuffin was 'the' kyber crystal. At another it was 'a' kyber crystal that used to be Ben's, was stolen by the Sith and he wanted it back (at that point, the crystals were what allowed the Jedi to focus and use the force.) At one point, for about five minutes the 'Luke' character was a female.
I could go on about this for ages, from Lando being a surviving clone, to the twin Death Stars over Had Abbadon to Wookiees flying starfighters, and force ghosts recorporealising, but you get the idea.

It wasn't just the plot either, the world itself continued to evolve with each iteration. What started off as pretty much just straight up, fairly dense 'Flash Gordon' fan fiction ended up being almost entirely it's own thing, drawing on the works of Kurosawa, John Ford, more than a little 70's political commentary (no, that stuff was not unique the the prequels!), with Joseph Campbell's myth-making theory being a fairly late incorporation.

In short: the process was entirely fluid, both in the broad strokes and the fine details. Despite certain fans' insistence, Lucas never pretended it was anything but. So yeah, none of the original movies "needed" to be told as each was an entity unto itself *and* part of a larger canvas. Just like 'Rogue One'.

 

[JoeZhang]

At one point "the other" wasn't Leia at all, but some other character who would be the focus of a (then theoretical) second trilogy.

If I remember correctly the second trilogy would be part of a production line made by other people that would allow Lucas to concentrate on making "proper" films.