Spoilers Rogue One: A Star Wars Story - Grading & Discussion
- Thread starter Commander Richard
- Start date
That can be enough. In the animated Clone Wars series--the Umbarans looked to have more advanced tech
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Umbaran_Militia
Tiger tanks were among the best in WWII. The Germans still lost though.
I seem to remember that the Empire was going to use X-Wings, but that the Rebels took over the line.
Then too DS II was still under construction--and I don't see thet shaft that allowed ships to fly inside as anything but a temporary serviceway.
Had DS II been finished--I don't see any way of bringing it down from the outside--save a trip on a Tardis.
Another boneheaded move by the Emporer
Yup. More information on Rogue One from one of the horse's many mouths. The three gentlemen interviewed here are Leland Chee, Pablo Hidalgo, and Matt Martin of the Lucasfilm Story Group. In other words, they're the consultants on all things canon in the Star Wars universe. Some of the contentious points from the film are tackled here, but I look at it this way; if these guys' explanations don't cut it for you, no explanation will.
I really don't get the love for text on establishing shots. It was inconsistently used and never the slightest bit relevant.
As they stated in the above linked video, the reason Mustafar wasn't labelled was because they didn't want to tip the audience off as to who was about to appear. I'm pretty sure every other planet that got an establishing shot got a label and their function was quite clearly to minimise the risk of the average viewer getting lost. Not just by naming the planet/moon/asteroid station but also in describing what it is and why it's significant. Indeed given how much they had to jump around early on I think it helped even most hardcore fans keep up.
Lah'mu didn't get a label.
Was anyone who knows the name Mustafar not tipped off anyways? As soon as they cut to the big field of lava it seemed obvious to me what was about to happen.
The important planets were all named in dialogue. It just wasn't necessary and like Skywalker above, it was just one more thing that kept me from getting fully involved in the film. We've had like 15 planets on screen in the Star Wars saga up to this point and none of them needed text on screen to establish them. If they're important enough that the audience MUST know the name, that is easily done (and was done in most cases) through dialogue.
edit: Going back to check, its actually more like 25 (not including the new ones in Rogue One)
Last edited:
Or any number of other planets in the SW universe.
For a guy that's not a SW nut, it was appreciated.
I can't believe I just read all these posts refused a simple planet name on the screen
The stylistic flourish just doesn't suit the genre IMO and adds nothing. I don't remember the name of any planet but Jedha or Scarif and only because they were mentioned on screen repeatedly. Throwing up a title isn't going to make it more memorable if it doesn't matter. The Erso farm could have been on literally any planet and it wouldn't have made a difference. Same with the prison they broke Jyn out of, and wherever Cassian's intro was. If too many locations was making it hard to follow, the natural answer is to have fewer locations and stop skipping around so much.
Well that was part of the prologue so it wouldn't make a lot of sense to put one right in the first establishing shot. Besides, it doesn't really matter to the audience what planet that was as it doesn't pertain to the plot.
This is one of my bigger criticisms of the film. There are way too many locations, and if labels were necessary, that should have been the tip off that there were way too many locations.
It isn't like a real world movie, were you get a brief label tag so you have some idea of location and possibly relevant geography or politics. It's simply a label, and a distracting one, at that, since it was so inconsistently used.
Very distracting and frustrating.
If it were just a name, I might agree, but the names came with a brief description which I feel justifies their inclusion as it add some much needed context to the scenes.
Yes it does jump around quite a bit, but I think if certain events were condensed into just one planet, people would rightfully call bullshit at such co-incidences. Also, part of this stems from the reshoots where they added on those introductory scenes with Cassian's contact & Jyn's prison break.
As I've said before, think of it like a WWII espionage movie or even globe trotting films like Bond, Borne & Indiana Jones. All of them have some variation of the place name labels (the map & red line in the case on Indy) and for good reason. When the story needs to travel and the place actually matters to the plot, one needs a simple way to visually communicate to the audience where they are and why. Not every city has an instantly recognisable landmark like Big Ben or the Golden Gate Bridge one can simply throw up in the establishing shot, so labels are usually the way to do that.
This was classified as a war film. So in some respected it is like some WWII films where the story jumps between the two sides of the war and from location to location because the characters are not in the same place for the entire movie. You got some people in Washington DC, some in Tokyo, some in Pearl Harbor, some on one carrier, some on another carrier, and some on yet another carrier. Then later on you'll get pilots someplace over the sea near an island, which will be labeled so you have a clue where they are and sometimes when.
Rogue One didn't jump around nearly that much, nor has quite as many characters, but they were in places we didn't know.
Rogue One didn't jump around nearly that much, nor has quite as many characters, but they were in places we didn't know.
Rogue One has crossed the $1 billion mark.
That makes it the fourth highest grossing film of 2016 at the moment, and the third highest grossing Star Wars film (after the Force Awakens and the Phantom Menace). Not adjusted for inflation. The Force Awakens have over twice the gross of either TPM or RO presently. But RO is still in theaters, but would need another 150 million or so to top Captain America.
^ I didn't know that The Phantom Menace had made over $1 billion. That's impressive.
For a while it looked like Rogue One was really inching its way to a billion.
For a while it looked like Rogue One was really inching its way to a billion.
The Harrison Ford-less Han Solo movie will be the real test. Although, at this point, Star Wars seems to be rather bullet-proof.
Similar threads
- Sticky
- Poll
