| [Article] Four Reasons Why 'The Last Jedi' Isn't One for the Ages [message #358851] |
Sun, 17 December 2017 20:57  |
Your Name
Messages: 910
Registered: September 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
From a long article (including explanations of the author's four
reason) at Variety.com ...
Four Reasons Why 'Star Wars: The Last Jedi' Isn't One for the Ages
------------------------------------------------------------ ------
...
A stupendous "Star Wars" movie is something you'll know if you see
it; it's not something you have to convince yourself of. Yet in the
new, born-again, rebooted-by-angel-craftsmen era of the "Star Wars"
franchise, there is so much sheer collective pop fundamentalist
desire for these films to be great that it's almost as if we can't
allow ourselves to confront the ways that they fall short. Even
when those shortcomings are staring us in the face.
Here are four ways that "The Last Jedi" doesn't measure up - even as
the film seems, on the surface, to have delivered exactly what it
promised. You can call me a curmudgeon if you want, but the issue at
the heart of my quibbles is simple, and not really so negative.
Forty years later, we're still talking about "Star Wars" and "The
Empire Strikes Back." Decades from now, are we going to be talking
about "The Last Jedi"? If the answer is "no," then I say: Someone is
doing something wrong. Because even as a non-"Star Wars" fanatic,
I want these movies to be great. Don't you? The enemy of greatness,
at this point, may be nothing less than the overly facile and
calculated imitation of greatness.
1. Rian Johnson doesn't know how to structure a movie.
...
2. You can feel the force of repetition.
...
3. Watching a "Star Wars" film has become a postmodern experience.
...
4. Critics and fans have traded places.
...
The movie has received a 93% Fresh rating from the reviews compiled
by Rotten Tomatoes, but - tellingly - only 56% of viewers on the
same site have given it a "Like" rating. My own admittedly
unscientific anecdotal survey is that the average person I've talked
to feels underwhelmed by the movie, though in ways they're not always
sure how to define. (The most consistent idea I've heard is: It's no
"Empire Strikes Back.") I've seen countless movies I've loved more
than audiences, but when critics start to sound like fans and fans
starts to sound like critics, we may finally have reached a moment
when the "Star Wars" galaxy, even in the hyperspace of its success,
needs a realignment.
< http://variety.com/2017/film/columns/star-wars-the-last-jedi -four-reasons-why-its-not-one-for-the-ages-1202643241/>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [OT] Spoiler alert?? [message #358930 is a reply to message #358922] |
Mon, 18 December 2017 15:20  |
Your Name
Messages: 910
Registered: September 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2017-12-18 17:13:09 +0000, Mr. Man-wai Chang said:
> On 18/12/2017 9:57 AM, Your Name wrote:
>>
>> From a long article (including explanations of the author's four reason)
>> at Variety.com ...
>> ....
>
> Any spoilers? :)
Depends what you term a spoiler. It does of course mention parts of the
movie's storyline, but there's no huge amount of detail that I could
see in a quick skim-read.
|
|
|
|
| Re: [OT] Spoiler alert?? [message #359077 is a reply to message #358930] |
Wed, 20 December 2017 10:03 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Mr. Man-wai Chang
On 19/12/2017 4:20 AM, Your Name wrote:
>
> Depends what you term a spoiler. It does of course mention parts of the
> movie's storyline, but there's no huge amount of detail that I could see
> in a quick skim-read.
I think I should have closed my eyes and ears... maybe my nose as well. :)
--
@~@ Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch! Live long and prosper!!
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty!
/( _ )\ May the Force and farces be with you!
^ ^ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10) Linux 2.6.39.3
不借貸! 不詐騙! 不援交! 不打交! 不打劫! 不自殺! 請考慮綜援 (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_pubsvc/page_socsecu/sub_ addressesa
|
|
|
|
| Re: [OT] Spoiler alert?? [message #359106 is a reply to message #359077] |
Wed, 20 December 2017 15:24 |
Your Name
Messages: 910
Registered: September 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2017-12-20 15:03:59 +0000, Mr. Man-wai Chang said:
> On 19/12/2017 4:20 AM, Your Name wrote:
>>
>> Depends what you term a spoiler. It does of course mention parts of the
>> movie's storyline, but there's no huge amount of detail that I could see
>> in a quick skim-read.
>
> I think I should have closed my eyes and ears... maybe my nose as well. :)
Well, the JarJar Abrams' new movies do somewhat stink, ;-)
thanks to be largely being just lazy-ass knock-offs of what George
Lucas had already done. :-(
|
|
|
|
| Re: [OT] Spoiler alert?? [message #359329 is a reply to message #359106] |
Fri, 22 December 2017 12:13 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Mr. Man-wai Chang
On 21/12/2017 4:24 AM, Your Name wrote:
>
> Well, the JarJar Abrams' new movies do somewhat stink, ;-)
> thanks to be largely being just lazy-ass knock-offs of what George Lucas
> had already done. :-(
If all these 3 new Star Wars sequels were just about attracting new
audience with new characters, I think not even George Lucas could do the
job right. It's still interesting to see how Leia, Luke and Han Solo
vanished from the series. :)
--
@~@ Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch! Live long and prosper!!
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty!
/( _ )\ May the Force and farces be with you!
^ ^ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10) Linux 2.6.39.3
不借貸! 不詐騙! 不援交! 不打交! 不打劫! 不自殺! 請考慮綜援 (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_pubsvc/page_socsecu/sub_ addressesa
|
|
|
|
| Re: [OT] Spoiler alert?? [message #359356 is a reply to message #359329] |
Fri, 22 December 2017 16:09 |
Your Name
Messages: 910
Registered: September 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2017-12-22 17:13:09 +0000, Mr. Man-wai Chang said:
> On 21/12/2017 4:24 AM, Your Name wrote:
>>
>> Well, the JarJar Abrams' new movies do somewhat stink, ;-)
>> thanks to be largely being just lazy-ass knock-offs of what George Lucas
>> had already done. :-(
>
> If all these 3 new Star Wars sequels were just about attracting new
> audience with new characters, I think not even George Lucas could do
> the job right. It's still interesting to see how Leia, Luke and Han
> Solo vanished from the series. :)
The franchise doesn't need silly knock-off reboot movies to attract new
audience. It's been doing that for decades all by itself simply as fans
grow up and watch the movies with their children (and grandchildren).
What the fans wanted were new stories which fit within the established
universe. Not lazy-ass, "Politically Correct" recreations of the
originals.
|
|
|
|
| Re: [OT] Spoiler alert?? [message #359418 is a reply to message #359356] |
Sat, 23 December 2017 01:30 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Mr. Man-wai Chang
On 23/12/2017 5:09 AM, Your Name wrote:
> The franchise doesn't need silly knock-off reboot movies to attract new
> audience. It's been doing that for decades all by itself simply as fans
> grow up and watch the movies with their children (and grandchildren).
I don't know how far this could go. New-born might not find Star Wars
philosophy interesting. BTW, TV stations in Hong Kong periodically
rebroadcast old movies including Star Wars.
> What the fans wanted were new stories which fit within the established
> universe. Not lazy-ass, "Politically Correct" recreations of the originals.
Hollywood is always about selling peoples called stars, right? And toy
manufacturers want to cash from Star Wars by selling items.
--
@~@ Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch! Live long and prosper!!
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty!
/( _ )\ May the Force and farces be with you!
^ ^ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10) Linux 2.6.39.3
不借貸! 不詐騙! 不援交! 不打交! 不打劫! 不自殺! 請考慮綜援 (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_pubsvc/page_socsecu/sub_ addressesa
|
|
|
|
| Re: [OT] Spoiler alert?? [message #359467 is a reply to message #359418] |
Sat, 23 December 2017 15:13 |
Your Name
Messages: 910
Registered: September 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2017-12-23 06:30:28 +0000, Mr. Man-wai Chang said:
> On 23/12/2017 5:09 AM, Your Name wrote:
>> The franchise doesn't need silly knock-off reboot movies to attract new
>> audience. It's been doing that for decades all by itself simply as fans
>> grow up and watch the movies with their children (and grandchildren).
>
> I don't know how far this could go. New-born might not find Star Wars
> philosophy interesting.
Obviously it's when the kids are old enough to watch them.
> BTW, TV stations in Hong Kong periodically rebroadcast old movies
> including Star Wars.
It's Christmas time, which means broadcast TV here in New Zealand plays
a pile of movies (partly due to regular shows having a break) ... so
that means the entire Harry Potter series played one-per-week, yet
again.
Occasionally they play the Star Wars movies, normally around teh time a
new one was released, but they haven't done that in a while. Probably
something to do with Disney's buyout changing the rights.
>> What the fans wanted were new stories which fit within the established
>> universe. Not lazy-ass, "Politically Correct" recreations of the originals.
>
> Hollywood is always about selling peoples called stars, right? And toy
> manufacturers want to cash from Star Wars by selling items.
Star Wars tends to use mostly unknowns, so "stars" doesn't really come
into it. As for toys, they'll sell those no matter what the sotry is,
so rehashing the originals isn't relevant there either.
|
|
|
|
| Re: [OT] Spoiler alert?? [message #359572 is a reply to message #359467] |
Sun, 24 December 2017 07:35 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Mr. Man-wai Chang
On 24/12/2017 4:13 AM, Your Name wrote:
>
> It's Christmas time, which means broadcast TV here in New Zealand plays
> a pile of movies (partly due to regular shows having a break) ... so
> that means the entire Harry Potter series played one-per-week, yet again.
>
> Occasionally they play the Star Wars movies, normally around teh time a
> new one was released, but they haven't done that in a while. Probably
> something to do with Disney's buyout changing the rights.
And Transformers ...
And Avengers ...
And Ironman ....
And Die Hard... but less frequently!
And Lethal Weapons... again less frequently!
>
> Star Wars tends to use mostly unknowns, so "stars" doesn't really come
> into it. As for toys, they'll sell those no matter what the sotry is, so
> rehashing the originals isn't relevant there either.
I always prefer story-lines and action scenes over movie characters,
whether they are sexy or not. :)
--
@~@ Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch! Live long and prosper!!
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty!
/( _ )\ May the Force and farces be with you!
^ ^ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10) Linux 2.6.39.3
不借貸! 不詐騙! 不援交! 不打交! 不打劫! 不自殺! 請考慮綜援 (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_pubsvc/page_socsecu/sub_ addressesa
|
|
|
|
| Re: [OT] Spoiler alert?? [message #359573 is a reply to message #359572] |
Sun, 24 December 2017 07:35 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Mr. Man-wai Chang
On 24/12/2017 8:35 PM, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:
> On 24/12/2017 4:13 AM, Your Name wrote:
>>
>> It's Christmas time, which means broadcast TV here in New Zealand plays
>> a pile of movies (partly due to regular shows having a break) ... so
>> that means the entire Harry Potter series played one-per-week, yet again.
>>
>> Occasionally they play the Star Wars movies, normally around teh time a
>> new one was released, but they haven't done that in a while. Probably
>> something to do with Disney's buyout changing the rights.
>
> And Transformers ...
> And Avengers ...
> And Ironman ....
> And Die Hard... but less frequently!
> And Lethal Weapons... again less frequently!
>
Oh how could I forget to list Indianna Jones! My bad, Master! :)
--
@~@ Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch! Live long and prosper!!
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty!
/( _ )\ May the Force and farces be with you!
^ ^ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10) Linux 2.6.39.3
不借貸! 不詐騙! 不援交! 不打交! 不打劫! 不自殺! 請考慮綜援 (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_pubsvc/page_socsecu/sub_ addressesa
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
