Jump to content

New Rogue One trailer coming Thursday and the return of Bail Organa


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 372
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Oh thank god. If he wasn't in it, I was going to bail.

I can't wait until we get all of the dish on why she's up there.

That reply was coarse, rough, and got everywhere.

I think at the end of the day they aren't worried about it. Anyone who knows better gets when R1 takes place. If somebody is a casual fan and they don't get it, they're still buying a ticket cause it's STAR WARS.

 

I don't think there is a movie goer whose decision to buy a ticket hinge on where R1 is in the timeline.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like no crawl for the spin offs. Differentiates them from the core saga films.

Ugh, that sucks. I'm still adjusting to not having 20th Century Fox logo. If I'm in a theater watching Star Wars, I expect to do some background reading. I get differentiating yourself from the core films. But, yeah, this is pretty core to the franchise itself.

 

And, ah man... Does this mean that we're going to have to suffer through regular opening credits? They've always gotten a waiver thanks to the crawl. Will the first 10 minutes be marred by having to wait for a thousand names to pop up now like every other movie?

 

 

 

I think at the end of the day they aren't worried about it. Anyone who knows better gets when R1 takes place. If somebody is a casual fan and they don't get it, they're still buying a ticket cause it's STAR WARS.

 

Must be a nice luxury. It'd still probably be a good idea if, for no other reason, than to play up the "Vader's in this!" factor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Definitely.

 

And yeah-- Disney shelled out what they did because outside of the Beatles, Batman, and themselves, I can't think of a bigger IP brand than Star Wars.

 

As for credits, a lot of big budget tentpole franchise movie hold until the end. Most of the Marvel movies do I think.. don't they?

 

Trivia-- the unions all have to be paid a fee to have no credits at the top of the film.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't an argument over no credits at the start of the movie part of why Lucas left the DGA?

Guess they discovered that particular principle has a price since then.

 

 

 

Most of the Marvel movies do I think.. don't they?

 

Huh... I never noticed.

 

And yeah-- Disney shelled out what they did because outside of the Beatles, Batman, and themselves, I can't think of a bigger IP brand than Star Wars.

 

Be interesting to see if Harry Potter is still up in that range in a few months.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It's not the size in that shot that bugs me, it's that the superlaser is on the lower hemisphere. I mean, I know how space works (unlike JJ Abrams) but it looks odd.

I didn't notice it until you said that. I watched it at work with some of the others. An actual celestial body with magnetic poles would do that. That's the planet it orbits while under construction. My it exhibits planetary properties when not powered up? That's the extent of my geekdom for the day.

Magnetism has nothing to do with anything you're thinking about.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right. I should have said axial or rotational when refering to the poles.

I understand the concept of tidal locking (at least in the limited sense of being aware of the phenomenon's existence). I'm just not sure how that was demonstrated in a two second shot or why it would necessarily make the Death Star "upside down" instead of literally any other random orientation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest El Chalupacabra

I like no crawl for the spin offs. Differentiates them from the core saga films.

 

Definitely.

 

And yeah-- Disney shelled out what they did because outside of the Beatles, Batman, and themselves, I can't think of a bigger IP brand than Star Wars.

 

As for credits, a lot of big budget tentpole franchise movie hold until the end. Most of the Marvel movies do I think.. don't they?

 

Trivia-- the unions all have to be paid a fee to have no credits at the top of the film.

Well, it's definitely not something I care about that much one way or the other, but I don't understand the "it's a spin off movie, therefore it's not allowed to have a scroll" argument. If it's a star wars movie, it would seem to me it should have one, considering even star wars video games get them.

 

That all said, all I care about is if it's a good movie.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get the argument that just because it's Star Wars it has to follow the exact same formula, either. There are a lot of filmmaking and storytelling techniques out there. Let the saga continue with the precedent, so why not let the non-saga movies explore new things?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get the argument that just because it's Star Wars it has to follow the exact same formula, either. There are a lot of filmmaking and storytelling techniques out there. Let the saga continue with the precedent, so why not let the non-saga movies explore new things?

Near as I can tell, everyone on this thread has given the thumb's up for a bit of departure on style after TFA. It's just this one thing is pretty darned iconic. If they do this, I hope they have something really cool up their sleeves. If it opens just like any other movie, then "meh".

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like it. I was excited that TFA departed somewhat from the filmic technique of the OT, it looks like R1 follows no rules, and frankly, that's why it looks amazing. Crawl, I see merits either way, but the sheer fact that fandom always seems to fear change makes me cool with them ditching it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No opening crawl ? Urgh... some people easily forget what makes these films stand out from the rest as all time classics, the opening crawl is one of those things. Same with the music. If you're gonna do away with the crawl you might as well do away with the music. Both are synonymous with Star Wars. I won't throw a hissy fit if there is no opening crawl but I think it's a dumb choice to move away from it. That crawl with the music is just so simple and epic. It's needed now more than ever because people are going to be confused. The opening crawl serves two main purposes, to educate the audience (let's face it a lot of people need it now more than ever with all the films coming out) and other is to set up expectations. The crawl with the music is just such a good way to take you into this universe. Nothing else can do it better.

 

As for the trailer, it looks great, my only concern is the girl, but she appears to be a little more mature than Daisy Ridley and she has more acting experience behind her. She doesn't have that stupid fake wide eyed naive facial expression that Daisy does through most of TFA. Like Tank said, it's great to see the New Hope era tech shot with modern filming and VFX techniques. I just hope the camera isn't all over the place like it was in The Force Awakens, to me that just makes it look more like a TV episode . The Force Awakens, though it was shot nice, did look like a TV episode in comparison to the OT. You just can't soak in the sights and sounds with all that camera movement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My main concern is that she may be another Mary Sue. It's an annoying trend to make a female the protagonist these days, they are even doing this with the new Star Trek TV show. It just seems everything else seems secondary now. It's a cheap gimmick to pull in more female audiences. I've not seen her in anything to know if she can act or not, but she has a very similar annoying posh English accent that Daisy Ridley had in TFA, and she was terrible in that film.

 

The posh accent works for high up people in the Empire or Republic / Rebellion, but not for these ordinary people who come from humble backgrounds, however from what I've read (could be a false rumour), she doesn't.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My main concern is that she may be another Mary Sue. It's an annoying trend to make a female the protagonist these days, they are even doing this with the new Star Trek TV show. It just seems everything else seems secondary now. It's a cheap gimmick to pull in more female audiences. I've not seen her in anything to know if she can act or not, but she has a very similar annoying posh English accent that Daisy Ridley had in TFA, and she was terrible in that film.

 

The posh accent works for high up people in the Empire or Republic / Rebellion, but not for these ordinary people who come from humble backgrounds, however from what I've read (could be a false rumour), she doesn't.

We're pals, and I think your hate for TFA has clouded your vision a bit-- but I have to call out a few things, if only because in my own work there's some things said here that I am actively trying to change the conversation on.

 

First, in Star Wars, everyone is a Mary Sue. Luke goes from being a farm boy to dead-shoting trained soldiers without batting an eyelash. Rey is amazing at great at what she does-- but so is Han, Leia, Anakin, Obi-Wan and everyone else. It's mythic storytelling, it isn't small.

 

Second, it's really bad form to say that casting females is a "trend" and a bad thing. This is the "representation" argument that applies to any casting decision that isn't a white straight male. I know you well, and I don't think you're sexist or racist in any way, but your reaction to a female lead as a trend or gimmick is because you've been conditioned by decades of movies that have starred men.

 

People who want representation aren't pushing an agenda, they want to see people like them as the heroes and there's nothing wrong with that. Little girls deserve to see female heroes that aren't Disney Princesses and it it's really hard to see how they can get that when any time a woman is cast in a lead role in a genre film, everyone screams that it's pandering somehow.

 

How and why does everyone who makes that call justify it? Because it's happened more than once? Is it pandering to have a female lead in two SW films in a row? Why? Because the previous six starred men? You don't see the ironic myopia in that logic? Why is another movie starring a dude never called out a trend?

 

This is a vicious cycle of any minority casting being seen as pandering, a trend, or an SJW conceit just because it is different. It's really telling that the only people who ever make those statements seem to be white dudes.

 

As for Jyn-- I worried she was too stilted and cool for school as well after the first trailer-- but I think it is intentional. She was showing a lot more heart in the second trailer so I'm feeling like that's her character arc. She's bitchy and hard to protect herself and now she'll learn to feel!

 

It's a little pat and unoriginal-- but again, Star Wars is mythic and painted in broad strokes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...