Star Wars: The Force Awakens (2015)

Famm

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
11,041
794
I personally don't even mind the midichlorian thing as much as most, I'm kinda with Edge on that, it was just a physical marker of a greater force. It rubbed a lot of people the wrong way though and I understand why. Those kinds of details weren't really my beef anyway though, it was more an overall design, production and technical failure to deliver a visceral set of films. Shit was completely bland and sterile to me interspersed with cringeworthy bad corny elements that didn't have the charm and wit of the originals to salvage the groan worthy stuff.
 

Hoss

Make America's Team Great Again
<Gold Donor>
25,677
12,151
Plinket's argument about the main character is retarded. A number of characters could qualify, but the main protagonist in ep1 is clearly obi-wan. I like how he has a list as long as an ithorian's neck of directors for whom this rule he just pulled out of his ass doesn't apply.
 

Palum

what Suineg set it to
23,582
34,047
Obi-Wan was basically a Mad Max style protagonist in that he exists within the movie and impacts certain scenes but he isn't calling the shots or the main focus of the storyline.
 

Oblio

Utah
<Gold Donor>
11,300
24,242
Okay, who's ALT is The Edge? His style of posting brings one fucktard member to mind, but then why would someone create an ALT and use the same style of contradictory & antagonistic shit posting?
 

chaos

Buzzfeed Editor
17,324
4,839
I personally don't even mind the midichlorian thing as much as most, I'm kinda with Edge on that, it was just a physical marker of a greater force. It rubbed a lot of people the wrong way though and I understand why. Those kinds of details weren't really my beef anyway though, it was more an overall design, production and technical failure to deliver a visceral set of films. Shit was completely bland and sterile to me interspersed with cringeworthy bad corny elements that didn't have the charm and wit of the originals to salvage the groan worthy stuff.
It isn't like it single-handedly ruins the movie for me or anything, the gungans do that. It just makes it dumb. Any time you try and explain heady mystical shit, it sounds dumb. The mystery behind the force was part of the allure. Like, if they tried to explain Harry Potter's magic with some kind of physics shit. It is just not necessary and makes it immediately less cool.
 

Sterling

El Presidente
12,987
7,893
It isn't like it single-handedly ruins the movie for me or anything, the gungans do that. It just makes it dumb. Any time you try and explain heady mystical shit, it sounds dumb. The mystery behind the force was part of the allure. Like, if they tried to explain Harry Potter's magic with some kind of physics shit. It is just not necessary and makes it immediately less cool.
This is pretty much my personal feelings on this particular topic as well.
 

Royal

Connoisseur of Exotic Pictures
15,077
10,641
Daisy looks like a (I didn't think it was possible) skinnier Kiera Knightley.
She has a boyish figure (which you can see naked in Silent Witness, though her character is dead at the time) but she's not that damn skinny. She'd have to lean down to match Keira Knightly.

5882889721_46a9e8d11f_b.jpg
 

Lithose

Buzzfeed Editor
25,946
113,035
Plinket's argument about the main character is retarded. A number of characters could qualify, but the main protagonist in ep1 is clearly obi-wan. I like how he has a list as long as an ithorian's neck of directors for whom this rule he just pulled out of his ass doesn't apply.
What's Obi-Wan's arc? Yeah, he doesn't have one--he's gone for half the film. Qui-Gon is the closest thing to a protagonist we see. But even that's weak, he is missing a lot of the elements that are typically part of the very basic protagonist.

And yes, certain directors can get away without a main character. Certain directors can also get away without using a 3 act structure, too. But that generally isn't a good idea if your film making mantra is spectacle (Which is what George's IS, it's literally what him and the producer for the original movies argued over, and what eventually lead to them parting ways in Return.)...Long and short though, if the focus of your films is spectacle, hoping to wow the audience with visuals and captivate them with the eye candy, then you want the simplest,most effectivekind of "structure" for your movie (RMI brought this up with Titanic--Cameron might just be a genius at using effective film making to tell stories that resonate with the broadest audiences..Mcdonalds of film). There is literally a formula for that that is taught in first year film school because it is extremelyeffective.That formula is known as the classic three act structure (A long build up of tension, then the failure or lowest point, and finally a big push at the end.) 90% of the moviesyou have ever watched, if you think about it,follow this.

Star Wars was such a good film because it was about spectacle and used the most basic, "best practices" of movie making and story telling. Basic Hero's Journey tale, in a tried and true three act structure...Absolutely no frills, nothing fancy, just what is absolutely known to work. The prequels were fucked because he actually tried something a lot more complex; and he just does not having the story telling chops to pull it off. He wants to be Stanley Kubrik but he's justnot. But yes,there are people whoCANpull it off(The list they gave was describing that), Lucas is not one of them...And you can almost see in the prequels its his attempt to enter that world. He's older now and fancies himself more an artist than a show man, and he wanted to do what his friends, like Coppola, could do. But that's not his wheelhouse, he sucks at it. (Dumb analogy? Removing a human heart and replacing it with another? Totally possible. But just because I can name X super star surgeon who can do it, Hoss, doesn't mean I'm bullshitting you when I tell you that your family doctor would kill you if he tried.)

I mean, I feel bad for the guy, his strength, the "spectacle" of movie making? Has become easier and easier and easier over the decades thanks to CGI...If you think about it, in the 70's, things were the opposite. "Real" looking special effects like in the originals? Werefar far rarer than even great stories, aside from 2001 and a very small handful of films, the kind of effects Lucas had wereunheardof...Meanwhile, really greatstories and characters, while not common, were common enough that hundreds of movies existed with them. However, now, realistic special effects are inhundredsof movies, and are so common they've grown boring, spectacle is literally a base line we expect now. But great characters and compelling stories arestilluncommon, in fact they seem even rare now thanks to the far greater amount of movies being made each year due to technology facilitating more production (The vast majority of them being shitty). So the "story" element of movies have become what defines them, where as before the spectacle might have arguably have been defining (And it is arguable that the spectacle of it is what made Star Wars the iconic movie it was).

It must be like us watching MMO's go casual, its heart breaking. Lucas is literally a movie neck beard who is trolling people because he hates the direction movies have gone, where his strengths are growing easier and more ubiquitous in films, so anyone can do it, meanwhile shit he was never good at is now whats rare and sought after.
 

iannis

Musty Nester
31,351
17,656
Ensemble can work and it can work well. I can think of other movies where I'm not sure who the main character was. Lots of them. Most recently, Eve comes to mind. It had three characters and they were all main characters. That wasn't a story about a person or a machine, that was a story about an idea. Star Wars is a story about a person. So the first order of business, really, is to decide which person.

Star Wars doesn't lend itself to it, if only because of Scope. You'd wind up with a 50 hour episode one if you wanted to develop his characters enough to make them all feel like proto-agon-ists. Maybe not 50, but reasonably at least 5. You have to explain why the Galactic Trade Federation is following the shadowy, obviously nefarious, hologram. Are they caught up in a financial scam and being blackmailed? Have they been promised the repeal of regulation in the galactic senate? What the hell is going ON? Are they mind controlled? There are ways to explain it in short and lazy exposition and there are ways to explain it more subtly in unspoken interactions. But you don't get either one. They're doing bad things because they're bad fish monsters and bad fish monsters do bad things.

And Jar Jar... it would take a very very long time to create any sense of relevance for that character.

Lucas might have even had some vague notion of these backstories. But if he did it wasn't anything concrete enough to put into words. The storytelling reminds me of teenage D&D Campaigns... you come across a town in the middle of the desert full of orcs... hey, wait a minute. First, why is there a town in the middle of the desert with no oasis and second why is it full of orcs? Fuck... good questions I guess. But how about you kill the orcs? And even that is fine for certain types of stories. You sort of expect more out of Star Wars.

1-3 were obviously supposed to be about Anakin and Palapatine's rise to power. I'm not sure how he managed to muddy such a simple premise so thoroughly, but he did. The real thing about those Plinkett reviews is that they work in "The Making of" features... which does to directly prove it wasn't fan pressure which was forcing him into these decisions. He seriously considered Jar Jar, his most ridiculous and extraneous character (we're including WHAT'S WRONG WITH YOUR FACE in the list) was absolutely essential to tying the whole thing together. Somehow. It really is just nonsense. Poorly acted high budget nonsense.

My theory is that it wasn't fan pressure at all, it was peer pressure. There was a frenzy. Once he begrudgingly decided that he'd actually do another Star Wars Trilogy (because money) it became a badge of status to be cast or considered for those movies. He had all the cool kids that wanted a piece of his pie. And even though it shouldn't, I think that -really- fucked with him.
 

khalid

Unelected Mod
14,071
6,775
I would love to have been a fly on the wall when George Lucas was going over the idea behind the gungas to the rest of his crew.
 

zzeris

King Turd of Shit Hill
<Gold Donor>
18,932
73,918
I disagree that movies are defined by the story. Sure, with critics, but spectacle is still what sells the movie. Avatar? Basic movie story with lots of cool spectacle. Titanic? All spectacle. That story is basic as hell. Hit the basic tried and true, add in spectacle and make money. As awesome as the stories of Inception and the Matrix were, it was the spectacle that brought in the money. I can keep going with Jurassic World, etc, etc, etc. The goal is to have a story that makes some sense, is adequately penned, and adds tons of spectacle. Movies are the visual spectacle and books are for stories that can be more easily fleshed out.

There was no need for lots of back story, multiple protagonists,etc. with the prequels. There wasn't even space to do it properly. All he needed was a story that gave some Vader, Emperor, and Yoda with some really epic scenes of bad-assery and he had a 3 film arc to pull it off. Instead he focused on a retarded love story, Jar-Jar, and a basic army of drones as his bad guys. I don't need to know what midi-chlorians are. I have no need to see Vader as a child. Shittier Ewoks do nothing for me. Seeing how people fell for the Emperor's wiles is as easy as watching modern politics or reading the history of Hitler, etc. Vader is a bigger bad-ass in a cartoon series. What a load of shit.

A very easy way to start the prequels off would be in an ambush where Stormtroopers are getting waxed and suddenly Obi-Wan and Skywalker come in and save the day. During the action, someone mentions the bad-asses by name and we are off. Later, have them go in and destroy a primary drone building facility guarded by Darth Maul. Easy! Thank God Lucas is gone.
 

Hoss

Make America's Team Great Again
<Gold Donor>
25,677
12,151
Okay, who's ALT is The Edge? His style of posting brings one fucktard member to mind, but then why would someone create an ALT and use the same style of contradictory & antagonistic shit posting?
Maybe whoever it is just sucks at changing their writing styles.

What's Obi-Wan's arc? Yeah, he doesn't have one--he's gone for half the film. Qui-Gon is the closest thing to a protagonist we see. But even that's weak, he is missing a lot of the elements that are typically part of the very basic protagonist.
Yeah I spent most of the movie thinking it was QGJ. But then he died without going through any kind of change. Do you mean what was OB1s arc OTHER than becoming a jedi and a jedi master to a kid he thought shouldn't have been trained, and avenging his master's death (albeit very quickly). You mean other than all of those perfectly acceptable character arc elements? Gee, I guess there wasn't one if we let you impose more arbitrary limits on what's allowed in artistic expression.

And yes, certain directors can get away without a main character. Certain directors can also get away without using a 3 act structure, too. But that generally isn't a good idea if your film making mantra is spectacle (Which is what George's IS, it's literally what him and the producer for the original movies argued over, and what eventually lead to them parting ways in Return.)...Long and short though, if the focus of your films is spectacle, hoping to wow the audience with visuals and captivate them with the eye candy, then you want the simplest,most effectivekind of "structure" for your movie (RMI brought this up with Titanic--Cameron might just be a genius at using effective film making to tell stories that resonate with the broadest audiences..Mcdonalds of film). There is literally a formula for that that is taught in first year film school because it is extremelyeffective.That formula is known as the classic three act structure (A long build up of tension, then the failure or lowest point, and finally a big push at the end.) 90% of the moviesyou have ever watched, if you think about it,follow this.
This is a good point but it's because before this, I didn't think you realized there were other story telling styles. Obviously with the prequels he wasn't going for the same linear story. He was going for something more like what the EU had been wildly successful at for 20 years. The main problem was there were only 2 hours to tell the story so everything was compressed and rushed.
 

iannis

Musty Nester
31,351
17,656
Red Letter guys have a conversation with Max Landis up (they TANKED his movie) where they kinda address some of Edge's perfectly valid complaints.

It's actually interesting. Jay: "You guys talk about movies being bad, but your movie SUCKS!"
 

Palum

what Suineg set it to
23,582
34,047
Eh I... I wish they didn't show some of that dialogue. "All teams give it everything you got!" just sounds retarded. The originals sort of made it like they were professional military fighter pilots instead of dudebros in spaceships.