Jump to content
massey

Star Wars 8 complaint box

Recommended Posts

Well, let's see.

 

Luke vs. Tusken Raider: Raider.

Luke vs. Trash Compactor Beast: Beast.

Luke vs. Vader I: Saved by Han.

Luke vs. Death Star: Luke.

Luke vs. Wampa I: Wampa.

Luke vs. Wampa II: Luke.

Luke vs. Vader II: Vader (singlehandedly).

Luke vs. Rancor: Luke.

Luke vs. Vader III: Luke.

Luke vs. Emperor: Emperor.

 

I get a record of 4-5-1, which is thoroughly average.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm confused. I just re-watched the posted cartoon, which is using dialogue from the original movies, and doesn't deviate materially from the source material (other than a few expressions in the animation). What am I supposed to be upset about? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Ternaugh said:

I'm confused. I just re-watched the posted cartoon, which is using dialogue from the original movies, and doesn't deviate materially from the source material (other than a few expressions in the animation). What am I supposed to be upset about? 

 

That was my question.  Rewatched it a couple times and I guess it's because there are numerous (4 by my count) tweaks that, for some reason, make Luke look foolish and/or in need of rescuing which didn't occur in the movies.

 

Weirdly unnecessary IMO since Leia has many strong and heroic moments throughout the movies.

 

Perhaps it speaks to the feminization and diversification issues many fans seem to have with Disney's and Kathleen Kennedy's vision of SW.

 

Myself I just think they're subpar movies with mostly dull characters.

 

Force Awakens - ok, unoriginal and bland

Last Jedi - all around bad movie

Rogue One - good movie, strong story and characters, unfortunately it's a prequel where everybody dies so it can't go anywhere

Solo - decent movie, bad ending, plagued by the massive problem of:  sorry, that guy is NOT Han Solo and will never be Han Solo so this was a stupid idea

 

ymmv, of course. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ternaugh said:

I'm confused. I just re-watched the posted cartoon, which is using dialogue from the original movies, and doesn't deviate materially from the source material (other than a few expressions in the animation). What am I supposed to be upset about? 

Its about how they make Luke look like a loser. Chewie too but he only get a boot to the ass rather than being shown as an incompetent imbecile like Luke. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Starlord said:

 

That was my question.  Rewatched it a couple times and I guess it's because there are numerous (4 by my count) tweaks that, for some reason, make Luke look foolish and/or in need of rescuing which didn't occur in the movies.

 

Weirdly unnecessary IMO since Leia has many strong and heroic moments throughout the movies.

 

Perhaps it speaks to the feminization and diversification issues many fans seem to have with Disney's and Kathleen Kennedy's vision of SW.

 

Myself I just think they're subpar movies with mostly dull characters.

 

Force Awakens - ok, unoriginal and bland

Last Jedi - all around bad movie

Rogue One - good movie, strong story and characters, unfortunately it's a prequel where everybody dies so it can't go anywhere

Solo - decent movie, bad ending, plagued by the massive problem of:  sorry, that guy is NOT Han Solo and will never be Han Solo so this was a stupid idea

 

ymmv, of course. :)

It's kind of like how some writers have fallen into the habit of favoring Batman over superman, so they hand Superman a HUGE Idiot ball and sometimes make him a government toady or self righteous tool to boot.  It's not showing how great Batman is on his own merit, it's putting superman down so Batman looks more bad ass... if that makes sense.  

 

I agree with you on the latest Star Wars attempts. I maybe one of the few folks on the planet that actually LIKED Rose in Last Jedi, or at least liked her introduction and the outrage she felt at the 'haves' in the galaxy who were profiting on misery. They should totally have stuck with that. But the script gave her the idiot ball, and worse shoves her into love interest NOA niche in a move that felt incredibly abrupt. Don't get me wrong, I could see her and Finn fallilng in love, but it  would have been better if it had spread out over the course of a movie and a half ...smaller steps. Instead she went from this dedicated soldier with some understandable class resentment and  the loss of her sister to "Finn's so Dreamy I can't let him do a noble sacrifice to buy us time " . I don't blame the actress, that's all on the writers and director.  What a waste of a potentially good character.

 

All IMO

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if Rose thought Finn was the bees knees, she is still a trained soldier and would put those feelings aside and get the job done. All up, it is just poor writing and characterisation. Equally poor characterisation on the part of Finn wanting to make the 'noble' heroic sacrifice in the first place. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Trencher said:

Its about how they make Luke look like a loser. Chewie too but he only get a boot to the ass rather than being shown as an incompetent imbecile like Luke. 

 

Chewie does get a boot in the original, but it's from Han. As for Luke, he needs no help with looking like a loser in the scene. That's appropriate for someone new to all of the adventuring.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Trencher said:

We talking the new stuff and the rewrites here Old Man not the originals. 

 

That's why I focused on Luke's record from the originals, to show that he's not supposed to be a Mary Sue in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Starlord said:

 

That was my question.  Rewatched it a couple times and I guess it's because there are numerous (4 by my count) tweaks that, for some reason, make Luke look foolish and/or in need of rescuing which didn't occur in the movies.

 

Weirdly unnecessary IMO since Leia has many strong and heroic moments throughout the movies.

 

Perhaps it speaks to the feminization and diversification issues many fans seem to have with Disney's and Kathleen Kennedy's vision of SW.

 

Myself I just think they're subpar movies with mostly dull characters.

 

Force Awakens - ok, unoriginal and bland

Last Jedi - all around bad movie

Rogue One - good movie, strong story and characters, unfortunately it's a prequel where everybody dies so it can't go anywhere

Solo - decent movie, bad ending, plagued by the massive problem of:  sorry, that guy is NOT Han Solo and will never be Han Solo so this was a stupid idea

 

ymmv, of course. :)

 

Yeah, I liked Rogue One for the most part.  Probably wouldn't put it up with the originals, but  definitely better than the first 2 prequels if not all 3.  Unfortunately it only got my hopes up for Last Jedi (making that craterous letdown, even more dramatic).  Last Jedi is probably in the the Top 5 of Worst Movies I've ever saw (and I am including some MST3K movies without the MST3K'ing in that).  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Old Man said:

 

That's why I focused on Luke's record from the originals, to show that he's not supposed to be a Mary Sue in the first place.

 

Well, actually that is why people liked Luke, as he lost but had perseverance to come back and do better.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Hermit said:

It's kind of like how some writers have fallen into the habit of favoring Batman over superman, so they hand Superman a HUGE Idiot ball and sometimes make him a government toady or self righteous tool to boot.  It's not showing how great Batman is on his own merit, it's putting superman down so Batman looks more bad ass... if that makes sense.  

 

I agree with you on the latest Star Wars attempts. I maybe one of the few folks on the planet that actually LIKED Rose in Last Jedi, or at least liked her introduction and the outrage she felt at the 'haves' in the galaxy who were profiting on misery. They should totally have stuck with that. But the script gave her the idiot ball, and worse shoves her into love interest NOA niche in a move that felt incredibly abrupt. Don't get me wrong, I could see her and Finn fallilng in love, but it  would have been better if it had spread out over the course of a movie and a half ...smaller steps. Instead she went from this dedicated soldier with some understandable class resentment and  the loss of her sister to "Finn's so Dreamy I can't let him do a noble sacrifice to buy us time " . I don't blame the actress, that's all on the writers and director.  What a waste of a potentially good character.

 

All IMO

 

 

ANd while badly done, I never got the hatred focus on Rose, while I didn't particularly care for her, she was twice the character that Vice Admiral Purple Rain was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Badger said:

 

Well, actually that is why people liked Luke, as he lost but had perseverance to come back and do better.  

 

And he's still doing that in the Disney trilogy, so...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We'll have to agree to disagree on that.  (Original Luke got knocked down and got back up.  Disney Luke got knocked down, wallowed in the mud for 20 years, whined about his boo-boo, got humiliated by Mary Rey Sue, symbolically b!tchslapped by Yoda's ghost, then he got back to sort of go down fighting-by dying in battle without even being on the actual battlefield)

 

The Raiders got back up better from trading Mack than Disney Luke did.

 

 

Anyhow, I didn't have any ridiculous expectations like some fans had of Luke.  I didn't come in expecting him to fight.  I only expected a Yoda/Kenobi type role.  I didn't even really expect him not to have some mental crisis over the Jedi collapse, really.  Yoda had something of that in Ep 3.   Luke handled a similar failure infinitely worse than Yoda/Kenobi.   To a comic level of pathetic

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Hermit said:

Oh, yes, Holdo is the winner of the ''Dear god what were they thinking?' category .  I can't think of any redeeming features to her. Even her noble sacrifice ended up being problematic 

 

Whete-as I'm the opposite. She was the one of the few who showed class and dignity in getting the Rebellion safely out of its predicament. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...