hdnmickey

Careful... using the term "execution" has lead to the interrogation tactics people have been referring to lately.

Jay G.

Was it.... was it... me?

You get the examples wrong. The first is a very specific example on a specific argument, which is good, except you leave out that other audience scores, from polls less likely to have been gamed like RT or IMBD, also were favorable. So the issue isn't the RT audience score doesn't mesh with the BO or critics score, it's that it doesn't mesh with reality.

For the "counterexample," you cite something extremely vague where someone said.... something... citing the prequels in a positive light. Except I don't recall that ever happening, and I don't think I would've let that go without comment.

What I do recall, specifically, was the Snoke/Emperor comparison, where the lack of a backstory was compared favorably to the OT, and unfavorably to the prequels. People were complaining Snoke didn't get a backstory, and it was pointed out that neither did the Emperor in the OT. It was only in the prequels that we got his backstory, and the prequels aren't good.


Going back to the more general "argument about the argument," regardless of the actual ratio of haters to lovers left in this thread, it's pretty clear that for the last few months this thread has largely been sustained by haters returning to it. There's no new posters, and while I may not be able to speak for all the lovers, my recent posts have all been responses to new hate posts resurrecting the thread. Let's just use the most recent resurrection as an example: after about a month of no new posts, the thread is only brought back to life by someone posting they're looking forward to a fan edit that seeks to "fix" the movie.

Josh-da-man

Says the guy who kept Darth Vader’s helmet.

brayzie

I think you're looking for things to argue about.
I put audience in quotes for the very reasons you mentioned.


You're making a strawman argument.
I never said they cited the prequels in a positive light.
I was referring to the fact that posters here were defending particular criticisms of TLJ by saying it was consistent with the prequels.
And arguing something is consistent, doesn't necessarily mean it's a good thing, which is why I think that particular counter argument itself is weak.

A perfect example of whatabout-ism.
If I complain about Snoke not getting a backstory, or getting killed without knowing much about him, why would that automatically mean I liked the way the Emperor was portrayed in Return of the Jedi?
Return of the Jedi itself is criticized by OT fans.
In fact, in this very thread I called them both crap villains.

But even if you did think The Emperor was okay in the OT and/or prequels, you could still have a legitimate criticism for why TLJ shouldn't be rehashing the same elements.

Me being okay with the way Luke was portrayed in A New Hope, whininess and all, doesn't mean that my criticism of Anakin being a whiny brat is wrong.

But here's some examples of two posters citing the prequels as a way counter criticisms of TLJ and TFA:

Ex 1

Ex 2

You seem biased just by the terms you use for critics of the film, calling them "haters." To you it's lovers vs haters, instead of seeing it as nuanced.
I didn't hate the film, I thought it was a solid popcorn flick. It was enjoyable enough, but I didn't think it was that good either.

Michael Corvin said anyone who liked this film was "run off, long ago" and yet the most outspoken fans of this film continue posting here.
In fact, it seems like the same people, fans and critics alike, keep this thread alive.

Jay G.

Consistency purely for consistency's sake isn't great, but on ongoing series does need consistency, and a lot of pointing at the prequels was to show that, no, this film didn't make radical changes to how Jedi or other aspects of the universe were portrayed, as has been sometimes argued.

Well, it's not so much the criticisms of "I wish Snoke had a backstory" as "TLJ was crap because it didn't give Snoke a backstory." It was the people clamoring that TLJ shot this trilogy down the tubes because of this one particular point that the counterexample of The Emperor is brought up.

But honestly, going back to the original trilogy, can you bring up a criticism you made of the Emperor not getting a backstory in the OT from before TLJ was released? For all the faults of ROTJ, I don't recall "The Emperor's backstory isn't fully explained" being one of them.

Snoke was a product of TFA, and his basic "Emperor redux" character was established there. TLJ had to deal with him in some way. I actually thought it was a bold new move to dispatch him now, instead of the more obvious rehash of waiting for the final movie for a big, final showdown.

So the first one is a joke, but in as much of a point as it's making, it's a point as established in the OT as in the prequels. Also, the point isn't that it's necessarily a good thing, but that it's not a "betrayal" of how the Jedi have been portrayed.

The second example is in response to assertions that Rey "needs" to be trained by another Jedi in order to become a Jedi, with some speculating a Force Ghost Luke will fill that role in IX. I think TLJ on its own shows a counter, that you don't necessarily need a specific bloodline or specific Jedi training to access the powers of The Force, but the OT shows this as well, with Luke using The Force with minimal training before Yoda (i.e force grabbing his lightsaber despite Obi-Won never showing him that). The prequels add additional evidence to show how TLJ is consistent with the universe of Star Wars, but the prequel citations aren't critical to the point being made.

If you're resurrecting a film thread a month after the last post, nearly a year after the film was released, there's something more going on that you having some criticisms of the film.

I do actually agree with you that, in general, responses to this film can have a lot of nuance. I doubt many loved the film unconditionally, as well as those that disliked it hated it unconditionally. But the nuanced arguments were made a long time ago in this thread. Now it's down to a few who really hated it and can't let go, and a few who liked it who like an argument (hi!).

I hadn't posted in over a month. In fact, I held off on responding to some posts a month ago because I didn't feel it was worth the bother, and that maybe the thread would finally die. And it did.... until someone who doesn't like the film had to link to an upcoming fan edit that purports to "fix" it. That's just the latest example. There may be still TLJ supporters on this thread, but we're not the ones repeatedly reviving it.

brayzie

Jay G.,
I've enjoyed our discussion on the film and appreciate your thoughts on it.
I initially had typed out counter-counter arguments in response to the counter-arguments you made in your last post but I deleted them.
For a while now something about this discussion has just felt off to me.
At first I thought that everyone in this thread, including myself, were suffering some sort of psychological disorder or maybe dealing with personal issues that would cause us to repeat the same arguments, in the same way, about the same thing, over and over and over again, with no end in sight.

But that seemed highly unlikely, so I've come to the conclusion that we're trapped in a "time loop," sometimes referred to as a "temporal causality loop". Stuck in a specific fragment in time, repeating that same fragment over and over again.

I'm going to see if I can somehow break the cycle.
Wish me luck.

Josh-da-man

I actually find how polarizing TLJ was to be fascinating. It will be interesting to see how Lucasfilm and JJA handle IX and how both sides of the fanbase respond to it.

DaveyJoe

There's a generation of kids that grew up watching the prequels. There's a young 20-something I work with who thinks they are just as good as the OT.

I think the prequels have enjoyed a Renaissance thanks in part to the popular Prequel Memes subreddit and the long running Clone Wars series that revolves around the prequel characters. They also consider Rogue One and Solo to be part of the prequels.

I think we tend to forget that people on the internet, especially around 1999-2005 tend to form an echo chamber and are way harder on movies than the average viewer. I think it's misguided to assume all Star Wars fans hate the prequels as much as we do.

Gunde

I'm not quite that young but I can relate. I recently watched all 9 fllims (including Rogue One) having never watched any of them originally.

My take:
The originals are good, but not as amazing as "everyone" says.
The prequels are not as bad as "everyone" says.
The new ones are redundant but entertaining enough.
Rogue One was good.

They all felt like Star Wars movies pretty consistently.

Trevor

I think that’s how most of this thread’s visitors feel. “This crap is still being debated and repeated?!”

Jay G.

Sounds like someone is going through Rian Johnson's ouvre and just got to Looper.

Outside of the significant pop cultural impact the OT had to a generation, they're basically just good pulp stories. For me, the prequels are bad pulp stories, and the new trilogy a mix of ok to good so far.

Also, is Solo so forgettable that even someone new to the series forgot about it?

Jason

The original was a cultural touchstone. If you were a kid in 1977 like I was, seeing Star Wars was a life altering event.

The Empire Strikes Back was a surprisingly mature and complex sequel that established a much larger canon universe.

Jedi was a satisfying conclusion to the story.

The prequels are not bad stories, but suffer from poor casting, clunky dialogue, and an over-reliance on CGI that wasn't exactly 100% ready for that level of use.

The new movies just feel slightly off somehow. Rogue One and Solo feel like good extended universe novels adapted for the screen, but the Episodes feel like they had too much input from too many sources. Sort of the opposite of Lucas' final word on basically everything in the prequels. For me, the only one that legitimately felt like an extension of the Original Trilogy was Rogue One. The rest feel like they constantly need to drop references or sound effects to remind you what you're watching.

hdnmickey

For me, even more interesting will be if people praised the direction TLJ took will be essentially be posting the same criticisms of EP IX if JJ takes in back in the other direction. And if they will ever admit the others were correct in how much of TLJ was flawed given how much was course corrected after it.

Jay G.

I'm not sure I understand your point at all. Even if Ep IX retcons everything that happened in TLJ (highly unlikely), that doesn't mean the people that enjoyed TLJ were wrong.

To flip it around, if Ep IX reaffirms everything that happened in TLJ, does that mean you'll admit you were wrong and that TLJ is a very good movie?

Dan

I think this has to do with specifically how it ties into them, but I agree. Flawed as it is, it's still my favourite of the new SW flicks.

Mike86

Rogue One definitely feels most like the Original Trilogy to me. I also feel that Solo comes pretty close.

Neither are completely perfect but I think they both capture that classic feel a bit more, which they should given that they’re based around events and characters from the Original Trilogy.

hdnmickey

If in the end it does a better job of executing the story as TLJ failed to do, yes, I would view it differently given it could work better as the starting point for IX. The point obviously was if those arguing with people in favor of TLJ will do the same if it goes the other direction.

But TLJ still wouldn't be a "very good" movie. It just wouldn't fail as much if does end up working far better as a middle part of a long, cohesive, story. Currently I'm in wait and see mode on that.

clappj

Jay G.

I'm still not following the logic. I mean, it looks like English, but it doesn't make sense.

For fans of TLJ, if they're disappointed with how Ep9 resolves everything, the "fault" will be with Ep9, not TLJ. It's like when people were disappointed with ROTJ, nobody retroactively blamed ESB for the shortcomings of ROTJ.

You appear to be trying to jump through a series of logical hoops to try and rationalize that TLJ fans will have to "own up" to something at some point, which isn't how opinions work. There's no objective right or wrong opinion about TLJ, nor are there any objective "faults" in it, whether or not Ep9 ultimately goes in a different direction.

Mike86

Seems pretty straight forward to me. Basically if Episode IX is more satisfying than The Last Jedi it might make some of us view this film, and in turn the trilogy more positively than we currently do. If there’s a way to make some of the more unsatisfying aspects a little more acceptable it might change some of the negative feelings towards this film. That’s what I’m hoping happens and what I think hdnmickey meant.

Whether or not that will satisfy you and others who like The Last Jedi, who’s to say at this point. I would hope Abrams finds a way to make the conclusion somewhat satisfying for us all.

OldBoy

Everyone likes TLJ. 91% on rotten tomatoes. It’s a great movie. That’s it.

Josh-da-man

I think that IX can only partially salvage the “saga.”

TLJ will still be small in scope and have a lot of stupid scenes (titty milk, Leia flying) even if IX pulls off a miracle and manages to course-correct a lot of Johnson’s wrong-headed choices.

OldBoy

What the hell is titty milk and when did Leia fly?

TGM

have you not seen the movie? both were quite difficult to miss even the rosiest of rose colored glasses on.

Mike86

All in all things about this film will probably always bother me. I hope though that Episode IX is a good bookend to the trilogy and can make me feel better about some of the things that irritate me in this film, and give closure to the Skywalker saga since it’s being touted as the end.