Star Wars (1977 - present)

16364666869254

Comments

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    edited April 2016 Posts: 41,011
    Perhaps you frequent some rather strict places, as I've never found myself having to viciously love or hate something with no in between. I'm in between with a good bit of movies I end up seeing. That mindset you mention, though, seems to branch off from people who want to be nothing but negative when it comes to any and all things remotely popular in the world today. Some people simply can't be pleased, no matter what type of movie you make. Then, there are some of us who genuinely don't like something from the start, like me and SF: haven't cared for it in the slightest from the start, and that wasn't me trying to get out of the norm of those who loved it, I just didn't care for it. It's not that I wanted to hate it after anticipating it all those years, either. Sometimes it just happens.

    Same goes with TFA: some loved it, some hated it, some were so-so about it, and some have radically changed their minds since it was released. For me, the first viewing or two of a new movie is very essential to me, and after this point, it's a rare occurrence for me to change my opinion of the film so drastically.
  • @Creasy47 You can see it with Batman v Superman right now. Having seen the film, the backlash it's getting is absolutely incredible. It's not a great film, granted, but the abuse it's taking from some people right now is absolutely hyperbolic. Eventually though, that'll settle down, the film will be re-examined and over time probably be recognised for the good things in the film that were ignored through all the bile. I just feel like the same is happening, only in reverse, for The Force Awakens. However, I do know, as you said regarding you and Skyfall, that people just don't care for things, just dislike them and that's always going to happen. But then you do get the people who try to 'get out of the norm of those who loved it'. So it becomes a battle between the overhyped and underhyped. It just gets boring for me as someone who is in between and enjoys discussing both the good and the bad points and hearing genuine opinions.
  • Posts: 4,325
    Re Batman v Superman - it's being built up over the last few years ever since people knew they were making it - that's a number of years for people to get their hopes up. Which is why if there is going to be a long gap to Bond 25, I'll probably switch off from Bond so I'm not disappointed when it comes out.
  • @tanaka123 I'm not trying to even really insult anyone who does do it, hell, I've done it a load of times. When I first saw Iron Man 3, I hated it, strongly. I couldn't see anything in it for me at all. However, then it came out on DVD, I watched it once or twice more and re-evaluated, finding a few things in it I really liked. I think what I'm trying to say is, nothing is ever as good, or ever really as bad as they're first made out. It's never going to be as good as those who only see the positives say and it's never going to be as bad as the haters say. Both are way, way over the top when it comes to incredibly popular films. Especially when it's part of the Star Wars franchise.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    Agreed, that happens with everything. I thought BvS was awful, but definitely nowhere even close to being "the worst film ever made." I'm actually surprised sometimes when I see people reference particular films in such a way, mainly this one. As much as I didn't like it, I'd watch it hundreds of times before I checked out other Hollywood trash.
  • Posts: 4,325
    @tanaka123 I'm not trying to even really insult anyone who does do it, hell, I've done it a load of times. When I first saw Iron Man 3, I hated it, strongly. I couldn't see anything in it for me at all. However, then it came out on DVD, I watched it once or twice more and re-evaluated, finding a few things in it I really liked. I think what I'm trying to say is, nothing is ever as good, or ever really as bad as they're first made out. It's never going to be as good as those who only see the positives say and it's never going to be as bad as the haters say. Both are way, way over the top when it comes to incredibly popular films. Especially when it's part of the Star Wars franchise.

    Yeah, I'm in agreement with you @BlofeldsScar
  • @Creasy47 Exactly, I'd say out of every film made, I don't think any is absolutely flawless and I don't think any is so garbage that it's irredeemable. Of course, you then have to remember film is all about opinions. One man's trash is another man's treasure and all that. If someone really thinks something is the best/worst film ever with no bad points or plus points, fair enough that's their opinion. But for me, I wouldn't be interested in talking about the film with them as their view would be coming from a point of blind criticism or blind praise.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    Everything is a matter of taste.
    But if a mediocre movie like SF or TFA gets ridiculously high praise from everywhere it's overhyped. In TFA's case it's only the nostalgia (old crew) that propels it into that level of overpraise.
    The next Episode better have a decent script and especially well written characters, the nostalgia factor will not work again.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    @BondJasonBond006, which, in itself, is yet another opinion: those movies aren't overhyped/overpraised to some, you just see it that way because you don't care for either. Like you said, everything is a matter of taste.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited April 2016 Posts: 23,883
    It's possible to be blinded by emotional enthusiasm for something. That's for sure.

    I'll admit that TFA did that for me. I can understand what the critics say, but the film touched a positive emotional nerve for me so I can forgive the flaws for the most part, and I'm not even a big SW fan really. I just think they played it right. Not too much nostalgia, but enough to take you back to that original universe and recreate that impression from an earlier time. Same goes for SF. I had a connection to the film - not an emotional one in that case, but more of a visual one. It just felt like classic Bond to me, visually, if in no other way. Silva in particular, was a welcome return for me to old school larger than life camp villainy. Bond seemed less wrapped up in himself and was just doing his job. Even today when I watch SF, I'm amazed by the visual splendour of the whole thing and the rich characterizations.

    With SP in contrast, I had no emotional connection to the film whatsoever, which is surprising perhaps, given Bond is my #1 franchise by far. So I just viewed it somewhat coldly and in a detached fashion from the very start, and saw all its flaws in the cold light of day.
  • edited April 2016 Posts: 4,617
    We are going off topic but....the sign of a movie you truly love is that you know it like the back of your hand , with all of its faults but you still enjoy it again and again. Its really hard to define but they have a warmth about them. I cant see SP or TFA becoming one of those movies.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    That's a good and fair statement @bondjames

    I think if Solo had't been disposed of that stupidly I would have liked the movie much better.
    But after that scene it was over for me and I realised how flawed the movie is and I became quite unforgiving about TFA therefore.
  • edited April 2016 Posts: 90
    @BondJasonBond006 Of course everything is a matter of taste. I can definitely see the nostalgic thing being a problem for some, especially on rewatchings as the nostalgia factor inevitably wears off. J.J. Abrams loves to use nostalgia as a manipulative device, but the next episode is being directed and written by the wonderfully talented Rian Johnson, so I think it'll feel like a completely different film to The Force Awakens. However, the long post laying into it as a 'bastard clone', accusing people of 'lapping it up' and calling J.J. Abrams 'Jar Jar Abrams' probably lends about as much sense and perspective as if someone came on and started going on about Lord Abrams and how The Force Awakens is one of the greatest films of all time. Both are/would be hyperbolic, silly and quite frankly boring in my opinion.
  • Posts: 4,617
    bondjames wrote: »
    It's possible to be blinded by emotional enthusiasm for something. That's for sure.

    I'll admit that TFA did that for me. I can understand what the critics say, but the film touched a positive emotional nerve for me so I can forgive the flaws for the most part, and I'm not even a big SW fan really. I just think they played it right. Not too much nostalgia, but enough to take you back to that original universe and recreate that impression from an earlier time. Same goes for SF. I had a connection to the film - not an emotional one in that case, but more of a visual one. It just felt like classic Bond to me, visually, if in no other way. Silva in particular, was a welcome return for me to old school larger than life camp villainy. Bond seemed less wrapped up in himself and was just doing his job. Even today when I watch SF, I'm amazed by the visual splendour of the whole thing and the rich characterizations.

    With SP in contrast, I had no emotional connection to the film whatsoever, which is surprising perhaps, given Bond is my #1 franchise by far. So I just viewed it somewhat coldly and in a detached fashion from the very start, and saw all its flaws in the cold light of day.

    We posted at the same time but coming from the same perspective. You mention emotional connection and I mention warmth and they are really the same thing. If I am channel surfing tonight and SF comes on, I know I am watching it again. The same for Empire Strikes back or Wrath of Khan. You just welcome the opportunity to enjoy them for the umpteenth time
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    That's a good and fair statement @bondjames

    I think if Solo had't been disposed of that stupidly I would have liked the movie much better.
    But after that scene it was over for me and I realised how flawed the movie is and I became quite unforgiving about TFA therefore.
    That could very well be @BondJasonBond006. I wasn't all that upset by the Solo death and actually liked the fact that they didn't dwell on it. So that probably helped me to enjoy the film more. I'll admit though that the ending is what really got me. Love that moment with the revelation of Luke, finally. If the film hadn't ended that way, my view might be slightly less enthusiastic. Once again, the power of emotion to cloud judgement.
    However, the long post laying into it as a 'bastard clone', accusing people of 'lapping it up' and calling J.J. Abrams 'Jar Jar Abrams' probably lends about as much sense and perspective as if someone came on and started going on about Lord Abrams and how The Force Awakens is one of the greatest films of all time.
    I get the distinct impression that bondsum doesn't have a favourable impression of TFA, don't you? Not sure where I get that from.
  • RC7RC7
    edited April 2016 Posts: 10,512
    However, the long post laying into it as a 'bastard clone', accusing people of 'lapping it up' and calling J.J. Abrams 'Jar Jar Abrams' probably lends about as much sense and perspective as if someone came on and started going on about Lord Abrams and how The Force Awakens is one of the greatest films of all time. Both are/would be hyperbolic, silly and quite frankly boring in my opinion.

    Actually @Bondsum makes a lot of good points, but people in 2016 need 'safe spaces' where their opinions can't be challenged so it wouldn't surprise me if a lot of people closed their eyes and ears to it. His points about elements of the prequels being more progressive and original than TFA are absolutely spot on. I've mentioned similar things myself, but it's not something that people want to discuss. That's absolutely fine, but to dismiss it as hyperbole is shortsighted.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    edited April 2016 Posts: 9,020
    Personally I'm a big if not huge fan of Abrams. EVERYTHING he has done so far I love.
    Alias, Lost, Person Of Interest, Fringe, Almost Human...
    Super 8, what a fabulous movie.
    Star Trek, as a Trekkie I'm eternally grateful to JJ for bringing Trek back to the big screen in such a spectacular way and with such a brilliant cast.

    TFA is technically almost flawless. Typically JJ Abrams quality.

    If anything it's the characters that are as deep as rain puddle that hurt TFA and the Disney Channel casting. Yes I said it again, because I feel that way.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Didn't Abrams do MI3? I found that a bit soap operatic.

    I'm not too enthused with the recreated Trek world either, to be honest. I find all of the characters pale in comparison to the originals - all of them. Then again, I'm not really a Trekkie.

    I had my concerns as a result prior to TFA. Thankfully it was greater than the sum of its parts to me, even though the individual parts had their flaws, and yes, it does have a distinct 'Disney' vibe to it.
  • @RC7 No, I'm not one of those 'safe space' people in the slightest! You say that the prequels were more progressive and original, but they still followed the same template, young kid on a desert planet wanting to escape for adventure, mentor being killed by a baddie in front of the student's eyes (Qui Jon Gin and Obi Wan), etc. The main Star Wars franchise follows Joseph Campbell's The Hero With a Thousand Faces, which means there are a lot of clearly defined roles (The Hero, The Mentor, The Sidekick) which is why the trilogies mainly follow the same path and why people may enjoy the spin off TV shows/Rogue One more as they offer something different within the same universe. For me, 'bastard clone' and 'Jar Jar Abrams' are hyperbolic and indicative of someone not open to other's ideas. I'd love to hear and discuss your thoughts on The Force Awakens, good, bad, or whatever. :)
  • Posts: 4,617
    Abrams is a safe pair of hands and knows what NOT to do. He does not drop the ball. However, he does not really bring much of his own soul to a movie. With great directors, there are themes and styles that run through a career. JJ is a quality popcorn director but he aint no Spielberg IMHO. Lucas has had a slagging but for bringing Star Wars to the screen, he was a visionary who created a whole new World. The same for Roddenberry. JJ inherits worlds rather than creates them
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    patb wrote: »
    Abrams is a safe pair of hands and knows what NOT to do. He does not drop the ball. However, he does not really bring much of his own soul to a movie. With great directors, there are themes and styles that run through a career. JJ is a quality popcorn director but he aint no Spielberg IMHO. Lucas has had a slagging but for bringing Star Wars to the screen, he was a visionary who created a whole new World. The same for Roddenberry. JJ inherits worlds rather than creates them

    Not entirely true. He did create Alias and Lost for example. And both made TV history worldwide.
    He also created the movie Super 8.

    But of course I see your point as he has inherited Star Trek and Star Wars.
  • Posts: 4,617
    Fair points but having the vision and imagination to create a World beyond our own is something very special. Who is going to be the next Lucas? that's the question. I love both franchises but it would be nice to have some originality.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    patb wrote: »
    Fair points but having the vision and imagination to create a World beyond our own is something very special. Who is going to be the next Lucas? that's the question. I love both franchises but it would be nice to have some originality.

    There are such visionaries. Sadly mostly or only in the TV sector.

    Rockne S. O'Bannon for instance, he created the Farscape universe and the Defiance universe. For me that's visionary enough. I just wish such stuff would get made for the big screen.
  • I don't see why I'd want a 'safe space', it's bloody Star Wars. People have their opinions. But whether it's Star Wars or favourite type of bread, if someone is talking in a smug, or arrogant way, I have every right to say that I think it's silly. I absolutely love a lot of the debate and opinions that have gone on and been expressed here, good or bad, but if someone is talking in an overly critical way, with no room for positives, or even vice versa, I find it boring. That's just my opinion.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    I don't see why I'd want a 'safe space', it's bloody Star Wars. People have their opinions. But whether it's Star Wars or favourite type of bread, if someone is talking in a smug, or arrogant way, I have every right to say that I think it's silly. I absolutely love a lot of the debate and opinions that have gone on and been expressed here, good or bad, but if someone is talking in an overly critical way, with no room for positives, or even vice versa, I find it boring. That's just my opinion.

    Sure, terms like JarJarAbrams or Skyfail (to talk Bond) are idiotic and insulting. It also diminished the credibility of an otherwise good argument or criticism.
  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    Posts: 7,314
    The lack of originality in TFA is indeed a huge problem but it has enough positive things going for it to make up for those shortcomings. To me, it's what prevents it from being a great movie and takes it down a notch to just being good. On first viewing, I actually left the theater disappointed. The rave reviews had me believing that this was the second coming. Now that I know what to expect, I enjoy it for what it is. Hopefully, it ends up being the weakest episode of the new trilogy.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Imagine if Forster or Mendes did a SW movie.

    The initial text would probably scroll downwards.
  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    Posts: 7,314
    The Dead Are Alive (Han Solo Force Ghost?)
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512

    Sure, terms like JarJarAbrams or Skyfail (to talk Bond) are idiotic and insulting. It also diminished the credibility of an otherwise good argument or criticism.

    It's tongue in cheek, to be taken with a pinch of salt. Apparently no one can do that these days, though. Is anyone genuinely insulted by the comment 'Jar Jar Abrams'? If you are you should probably take a cold shower and join the real world.
  • @RC7 I don't think anyone's insulted. But we're allowed to point out that he sounds like an idiot. His whole attitude stinks of 'I'm better than everyone else because I don't like the film', accusing people of lapping it up, accusing people of being stupid. And you know what? Yours does too. I've given you the chance to have a discussion about what you didn't like about the film and you've not taken it, choosing to instead have more snide digs. You go on about safe spaces and being insulted so much that I think it's YOU that needs a safe space. You're not worth anyone's time.
Sign In or Register to comment.