The Rise of Skywalker Star Wars IX The Rise of Skywalker (JJ Abrams 2019)

[Arpy 4,145]

I think Abrams is the best and most logical person to close-out the trilogy, he already has a good working relationship with Disney and Co. and has already dealt in the universe with TFA. 

 

The people who always bring up the tired 'TFA is just ANH all over again' are the same people who use the same faulty reasoning for 'Why didn't the Eagles just fly the Ring to Mordor?' as if it was a good argument against watching the Lord of the Rings trilogy. 

 

People would still complain if TFA hadn't used ANH as a parallel jumping point. 

1 hour ago, Richard said:

The best thing that I can say about TFA, is that it's STAR WARS's greatest hits; it has nothing new offer, and absolutley nothing to say, but it has a fun time saying it.

The sad thing is that Star Wars has nothing new to offer and won't in running the risk it will alienate fans. Audiences want Rogue One pastiche and constant callbacks to the OT. 

Star Trek Discovery will be the latest testimony to this ravenous fanbase delusion of dripping everything in nostalgia.

 

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

27 minutes ago, Arpy said:

The people who always bring up the tired 'TFA is just ANH all over again' are the same people who use the same faulty reasoning for 'Why didn't the Eagles just fly the Ring to Mordor?' as if it was a good argument against watching the Lord of the Rings trilogy. 

 

Bullshit!

Apples and oranges. There no real reason TFA needed to be so similar to Star Wars. Not from a story mechanism POV. They could have easily come up with something different than yet another Death Star as a peril. 

[BloodBoal 7,538]

Indeed.

 

it is surprising to see a member like Arpy, who I considered a rather intelligent fellow, to use such dubious reasoning. "hey, i you fink TFA is just ANH remake, then it means your a ater who loves to ate for the sake of ating!"

 

I mean, come on... Can't people who liked TFA just accept the fact there are some who find little interest in watching a movie that is basically a retread of a much better movie, and would have preferred something that felt fresh?

 

39 minutes ago, Arpy said:

People would still complain if TFA hadn't used ANH as a parallel jumping point.

 

You don't know that nor does anybody, so that's a cheap argument to use.

[Arpy 4,145]

24 minutes ago, Stefancos said:

 

Bullshit!

Apples and oranges. There no real reason TFA needed to be so similar to Star Wars. Not from a story mechanism POV. They could have easily come up with something different than yet another Death Star as a peril. 

I completely agree concerning the bullshit "Death Star but biggerer" plot, there's quite a lot I find wrong with TFA which is why I'm hoping TLJ can put us on a new trajectory that isn't another retread.

 

I think, however, that using ANH as a starting point, in terms of Luke 2.0 and the general premise (Death Star excluded) was a great idea. TFA needed a strong base from which to build up from, and not discounting the general themes and arcs that Star Wars has been centred around from the beginning: the familial ties; father and son; light versus dark - it's all bound to repeat itself. 

 

Was TFA great? Not really, but it accomplished it's sole task at bringing Star Wars back. 

 

 

17 minutes ago, BloodBoal said:

Indeed.

 

it is surprising to see a member like Arpy, who I considered a rather intelligent fellow, to use such dubious reasoning. "hey, i you fink TFA is just ANH remake, then it means your a ater who loves to ate for the sake of ating!"

 

I mean, come on... Can't people who liked TFA just accept the fact there are some who find little interest in watching a movie that is basically a retread of a much better movie, and would have preferred something that felt fresh?

 

You don't know that and nobody does nor ever will know, so that's a cheap argument to use.

Bah!

 

In my mind, and be it an unpopular opinion, I don't find A New Hope to be much better than TFA. I understand its cultural and filmmaking significance and enjoy watching it occasionally, I just don't regard It as a great film. Empire beats it in every regard.

 

17 minutes ago, BloodBoal said:

it is surprising to see a member like Arpy, who I considered a rather intelligent fellow, to use such dubious reasoning. "hey, i you fink TFA is just ANH remake, then it means your a ater who loves to ate for the sake of ating!"

 

On the contrary, the same people who I know use the Eagles argument for Lord of the Rings love the films all the same, but use it as a criticism of its lengthy runtime. I find the criticism for TFA is often blurred by those who fawn for nostalgia, to those tired of the same-old, same-old. I'm simply in the middle of the two, I don't mind the ANH retread, and don't like it when it's too noticeable. 

 

[Chen G. 3,943]

To me, its very noticeable. It's not just that they copy off plot points. There are a couple of re-creates shots and even a lot about the narrative structure of the film is the same: action opening, long first act including a late-in-the-game introduction to the main character, and a tragic death launching the finale off. It doesn't ruin the film for me, but I don't feel that its a flaw to be taken lightly

 

As for Abrams closing the trilogy, do you really see him produce a GREAT film? A masterpiece for the ages? Its the last episode of a nine-piece series. It should be great. Not just a JJ-Abrams-good-time-at-the-movies film. We got a do-over from Return of the Jedi, why not make the most out of it?

 

Oh and as for the Eagles: Their appearances in Tolkiens writings are consistent in that they don't cover much ground (Gwaihir only took Gandalf from Orrhanc to Edoras) and if they do - it takes them a long time because they require frequent stops: they left the Misty Mountains after the Goblin army and took just as much time to get to the Lonely Mountain.

 

[Arpy 4,145]

44 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

To me, its very noticeable. It's not just that they copy off plot points. There are a couple of re-creates shots and even a lot about the narrative structure of the film is the same: action opening, long first act including a late-in-the-game introduction to the main character, and a tragic death launching the finale off. It doesn't ruin the film for me, but I don't feel that its a flaw to be taken lightly

 

As for Abrams closing the trilogy, do you really see him produce a GREAT film? A masterpiece for the ages? Its the last episode of a nine-piece series. It should be great. Not just a JJ-Abrams-good-time-at-the-movies film. We got a do-over from Return of the Jedi, why not make the most out of it?

 

Oh and as for the Eagles: Their appearances in Tolkiens writings are consistent in that they don't cover much ground (Gwaihir only took Gandalf from Orrhanc to Edoras) and if they do - it takes them a long time because they require frequent stops: they left the Misty Mountains after the Goblin army and took just as much time to get to the Lonely Mountain.

 

No, I don't see Abrams making a great film, but I do see the film bringing a competent sense of closure to the trilogy. As for the Eagles, they don't operate under the command of men or other folk - that was established in the books as an intervention on their way of life, not concerning themselves with the affairs of other races. I brought them up because it's what casual fans, and those who haven't read the books try to levy against the films.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

My point is that comparing the general criticism levelled against TFA with the eagles criticism from LOTR doesnt work at all. Completely different things.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Arpy 4,145]

44 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

To me, its very noticeable. It's not just that they copy off plot points. There are a couple of re-creates shots and even a lot about the narrative structure of the film is the same: action opening, long first act including a late-in-the-game introduction to the main character, and a tragic death launching the finale off. It doesn't ruin the film for me, but I don't feel that its a flaw to be taken lightly

 

As for Abrams closing the trilogy, do you really see him produce a GREAT film? A masterpiece for the ages? Its the last episode of a nine-piece series. It should be great. Not just a JJ-Abrams-good-time-at-the-movies film. We got a do-over from Return of the Jedi, why not make the most out of it?

 

Oh and as for the Eagles: Their appearances in Tolkiens writings are consistent in that they don't cover much ground (Gwaihir only took Gandalf from Orrhanc to Edoras) and if they do - it takes them a long time because they require frequent stops: they left the Misty Mountains after the Goblin army and took just as much time to get to the Lonely Mountain.

 

No, I don't see Abrams making a great film, but I do see the film bringing a competent sense of closure to the trilogy. As for the Eagles, they don't operate under the command of men or other folk - that was established in the books as an intervention on their way of life, not concerning themselves with the affairs of other races. I brought them up because it's what casual fans, and those who haven't read the books try to levy against the films.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

31 minutes ago, Arpy said:

No, I don't see Abrams making a great film, but I do see the film bringing a competent sense of closure to the trilogy. As for the Eagles, they don't operate under the command of men or other folk - that was established in the books as an intervention on their way of life, not concerning themselves with the affairs of other races. I brought them up because it's what casual fans, and those who haven't read the books try to levy against the films.

 

8 minutes ago, Arpy said:

No, I don't see Abrams making a great film, but I do see the film bringing a competent sense of closure to the trilogy. As for the Eagles, they don't operate under the command of men or other folk - that was established in the books as an intervention on their way of life, not concerning themselves with the affairs of other races. I brought them up because it's what casual fans, and those who haven't read the books try to levy against the films.

 

You can say that again!

[Arpy 4,145]

28 minutes ago, BloodBoal said:

 

Don't "bah!" me!

 

Anyway, regardless of whether ANH is a great film or not or whatever: do you believe that TFA really added something to the story told in ANH that represented an improvement? That it offered something that hadn't been already covered/shown/told in ANH? To simply say "Star Wars isn't much more than that anyway!" is a bit simplistic in my opinion and a rather narrow-minded view. If Star Wars is in fact only about "family ties, father/son relationship...", do we really need 9 movies of it? Didn't the original trilogy said everything there had to be said?

 

 

Really? I'd argue that's not true. Those who generally bring that up are people who didn't like them (you know, the Drax kind of people).

I don't think TFA added anything particularly new to the franchise, except for the rogue-Luke concept that will be explored in the next two films. I think BB you're taking my statements above far too literally! I've stated I like and respect A New Hope, all I said is in comparison to TFA I don't think either are particularly great, or that TFA did anything better. 

 

Was all that can be said, said in the OT? maybe? I don't like the Kylo Ren/Snoke/First Order crap of TFA and wasn't really rooting for more films after episode 3 closed the saga.

 

I said the familial ties theme etc. was a core theme to the saga, I'm not saying that's all Star Wars is or ever can be!

 

I can't say on the Eagles point if one side has more substance, as there's no way of gauging a consensus on the matter. 

[crocodile 7,984]

Well, I find most of this director discussion bit pointless. Star Wars films, just like Bond films, are not really director vehicles. Even the much-revered The Empire Strikes Back isn't really that unique in terms of style. I can't see much of a difference between Abrams and Edwards and I probably won't see much of a difference when I see Johnson's. It's just not an auteur series and it never will be. As long as I'm entertained for 2 hours, it's fine.

 

My point would be that I wouldn't necessarily waste a breath to defend artistic merits of Star Wars. It's just isn't worth it.

 

Karol

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

While I agree the SW films (when they aren't directed by Lucas) are more producers films, i can quite clearly see the difference between what JJ was doing and Edwards. Both in terms of storytelling and visualization.

 

JJ wins in the first, mainly though his sensitivities of casting and actors direction. Edward's film was more visually striking, but didn't mean much to me.

[crocodile 7,984]

Of course you can see the difference. I can see some differences. But these are mostly unremarkable. It's not like having Snyder or Nolan, or anybody else with a reasonably strong and identifiable voice, doing these. 

 

Karol

[Nick1Ø66 4,688]

Abrams is certainly not going to make a classic.  He's not a talented enough, or imaginative enough, director and screenwriter to do that. 

 

This new trilogy really could have been something new, but not after the course they set in TFA. And what's unfortunate about this whole affair is that most likely at the end of Episode IX, the Star Wars universe will basically be at the same place it was at the end of Episode VI.  Where else could it be, after they reset everything to where the galaxy was at the beginning of Episode IV.  There will be some new characters with some new names running around, but unless they go in a radical direction (and who thinks Abrams or Kennedy is going to do that), there won't have been any growth at all.  The First Order will be defeated, someone will be redeemed, and the Galaxy can go back to its shiny, pristine self.  

 

It's for this reason I'm frankly looking forward more to the Anthology films, and actually Rogue One is ageing a little better for me than TFA.

[Chen G. 3,943]

6 minutes ago, Nick1066 said:

someone will be redeemed, and the Galaxy can go back to its shiny, pristine self.  

 

Would I pissed if they stage it such that Kylo Ren gets redeemed. What could they possibly do that is enough to excuse patricide?

[Holko 9,499]

Sacrificing himself for the ultimate good, I guess.

[crocodile 7,984]

Darth Vader killed children. And Han Solo wasn't such a good person to begin with.

 

Karol

[Nick1Ø66 4,688]

7 hours ago, Chen G. said:

 

Would I pissed if they stage it such that Kylo Ren gets redeemed. What could they possibly do that is enough to excuse patricide?

 

Well Anakin Skywalker killed younglings, killed his wife, killed his surrogate father, killed his brother, killed his sister in law, cut off his son's hand, tortured Han Solo, altered bargains, destroyed the Republic, condemned thousands of star systems to decades of oppression, and was probably the biggest mass murderer in the galaxy (after his boss). So there's that.

 

"Even the worst of us can be redeemed"

-Kire Nerys

[Chen G. 3,943]

Yes, but I am talking about it from a narrative standpoint. Killing children that we as an audience know nothing about is a lesser crime, narrative-wise , than killing a character we have a strong connection with. Plus it was entirely off-screen.

 

And yes you could bring Anakin's Dark Deeds from the prequels, but I bet they weren't in George Lucas' mind when he conceived Anakin's Redemption for Return of the Jedi. Nothing in the original trilogy is that dark.

[Nick1Ø66 4,688]

3 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

Yes, but I am talking about it from a narrative standpoint. Killing children that we as an audience know nothing about is a lesser crime, narrative-wise , than killing a character we have a strong connection with. Plus it was entirely off-screen.

 

And yes you could bring Anakin's Dark Deeds from the prequels, but I bet they weren't in George Lucas' mind when he conceived Anakin's Redemption for Return of the Jedi. Nothing in the original trilogy is that dark.

 

You mean other than destroying millions of people on Alderaan?

 

Besides, Han Solo committed suicide by Sith Lord.

[Chen G. 3,943]

From a cinematic stand point, no, the destruction of Aldeeran is nothing like the killing of the Younglings, much less like Han Solo's death.

 

Its also another gripe that I have with the film: It staged Han Solo's death as a means of stressing Ren's ruthlessness, not the tragedy of Han's death. And his death doesn't inform the rest of the narrative. Rather, we're plunged back into the action.

[Nick1Ø66 4,688]

Well, I certainly hope they don't redeem Kylo Ren. Not for the plot reasons you mention...at this point he's certainly no more evil than Vader, and is probably responsible for a lot less suffering.  If Vader is redeemable, Kylo Ren certainly is.  But only if, like Vader, he pays the ultimate price for his redemption.  You can't be accepted back into polite society after what he's done.

 

Anyway, he's redeemable, but I hope they don't redeem him b/c that narrative arc would be so predictable. 

[Chen G. 3,943]

Also true.

[Will 2,215]

I too agree that TFA retreaded a lot of ANH's plot, but it doesn't really bother me that much (the recycled designs, however, do feel like a massive missed opportunity). 

 

But I wonder:

 

Would it have really been possible to make a TFA that didn't essentially copy the story of either ANH or TPM? First acts in a trilogy kind of have to do certain things, right?

[Chen G. 3,943]

As a business idea, probably no. It was the only sure way to get the fan-base on board, which would get the ball rolling in terms of critical acceptance.

 

As a creative endeavor, sure there were other ways. And while it is the first film in a trilogy, it is a film that stand on its own right. To return just for a moment to the Middle Earth films, it's not like this trilogy was all written and shot ahead of time.

[crumbs 14,301]

I reckon JJ is staring at a whiteboard right now working out how to subvert expectations AND avoid repeating ROTJ.

 

For that reason, I think they'll double down on Kylo Ren and make him irredeemable. He murdered Han Solo, he probably murdered all Luke's new Padawans at the New Jedi Order, they might even twist it that he murdered Leia.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

10 hours ago, Arpy said:

A Sith Lord? 

 

A Sith. Lawd?

[Brónach 1,301]

22 hours ago, Chen G. said:

If one isn't the kind of fan that deifys the "original trilogy", one should be able to enjoy Phantom Menace on the adventure and spectacle level, and Revenge of the Sith on the narrative level.

 

Among films of those times, I'm better off watching the Pirates of the Caribbean trilogy on all those levels lol

2 hours ago, crumbs said:

I reckon JJ is staring at a whiteboard right now working out how to subvert expectations AND avoid repeating ROTJ.

 

Everybody turns into orange juice!

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Disco Stu 15,495]

4 minutes ago, BloodBoal said:

Regarding the Kylo Ren discussion: I'm 100% convinced he'll be redeemed. This is Disney's Star Wars we're talking about. I don't expect them for one second to have the son of our heroes remain a douchebag till the very end.

 

I'm not sure why it would somehow be braver or better for Kylo Ren to just die a bad guy.  It's much better storytelling to have some sort of redemption.  Now there are certainly more interesting ways to accomplish this than the obvious Vader's redemption retread.  We shall see!

[Brónach 1,301]

That's probably what they wanna do and what they'll fall short of.

[A24 4,326]

A ROTJ remake? 

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

Roger roger.

[A24 4,326]

I wonder with what they are gonna replace the Ewoks ...

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

 

They were going to replace you. With these:

 

[Chen G. 3,943]

Ah yes, the Porgs. And we only see their top here. According to Rian Johnson, they have chicken feet. And don't forget Johnson's fish-nuns. 

 

Is it just me, or does all of this betray the worn and torn aesthetic of the original Star Wars or even the Force Awakens. Just look at how polished and plasticized Snoke's guards look.

 

1 hour ago, Brónach said:

Among films of those times, I'm better off watching the Pirates of the Caribbean trilogy on all those levels

 

Hey, I'm not going to sit here and claim that Episodes I and III are brilliant cinema (unlike The Hobbit ). All I'm saying is that I can watch them and be entertained enough such that the negative aspects don't dominate the experience.

[Disco Stu 15,495]

I like the porgs.  At least so far.

[Chen G. 3,943]

If they'd be fleeting and just add life to the planet, it'll be fine. Although there might be a tonal mess between the porgs and fish-nuns and what is clearly going to be a very brooding Luke Skywalker.

[Will 2,215]

2 hours ago, BloodBoal said:

 

What exactly did TFA do that is necessary to the first act of a trilogy, and as a result made it look like a copy of ANH? Was it necessary for Rey to be an orphan on a desert planet? Was it necessary to have a rebellious group fighting an oppressive regime that has created a huge WMD? Was it necessary to have a cantina-like scene?

 

As far as I can tell, the "certain things" the first act of a trilogy has to do is introduce us to the character, present the context, what the conflict is about, what are the various factions involved and what's at stake. Basically nothing that would necessarily turn a film into a retread of ANH.

 

I think there's a good argument to be made that the issue is less in the story per se and more in the aesthetics. The distinction is a bit flimsy but it is interesting to think about.

 

There are certain things that even the most daring filmmaker would surely have included in TFA (and many of these were from Lucas and Arndt and existed before Abrams was hired). First, a new main character who had some special attachment to the Force. The character could either be a loner (drawing comparisons to Luke Skywalker) or have a family (drawing comparisons to Anakin). Next, there had to be a new evil character. Also, the big three had to have had at least one kid among them, so why not make him the villain? The design of Kylo Ren is very similar to that of Vader. But I'm not sure if I'd say that's a story problem. If Kylo looked totally different and did all the exact same things, I doubt as many people would criticize the character. Now, the similarity of Snoke to the Emperor is a bit troubling, but I do think having the evil character reporting to someone and being trained by someone enriches their arc. The next thing was, "What would the evil organization be?" It could have been a band of pirates, or it could have been Neo-Imperials. Smartly, I think, the writers realized that anything other than a big galactic organization was not going to hold the appropriate amount of dramatic weight for this trilogy. Of course, it wasn't necessary for the First Order to look so much like the Imperials. But, again, I'd say that's an aesthetic choice, not a story choice. That said, Starkiller Base cannot really be excused on that basis. I don't find it too bothersome because it's just a one-film thing that serves as an appropriate vehicle for the bigger story, but it can't be denied that it is far from the most interesting SW location or story beat. The cantina scene, similarly, can't really be defended on this basis. But, ultimately, when a SW story needs a cool place for people to hang out (and doesn't want to use a city, because that would be too prequel), how many options does that leave you? 

 

In the case of Jakku, it all depends on how you frame it. When you say "orphan on a desert planet" it sounds like Luke. But you could just as easily say "orphan on a junk planet with crashed Star Destroyers" -- something new. The concept of a junk planet came up before it was decided to be a desert planet. Thus, again, that's really a little surface-level aesthetic thing, not a problem with the underlying story or designs. 

 

Lastly, two defenses about the general structure. First, the road trip element -- yes, it's similar to ANH. But characters have to go places. Second, there's the lack of politics -- similar to ANH. But imagine if they had added politics -- it would have been criticized for copying TPM! 

 

BB-8 is clearly an R2-D2 ripoff, but, c'mon, when you need a funny little character, how many options are there? (particularly given that they wanted to avoid anything like Jar-Jar)

 

I'm not entirely certain that I believe in what I'm writing here. I'd have to think about it more. But I definitely believe that it's worth thinking about. If you put ten great screenwriters in separate rooms and gave them each two years to write a SW story based on Lucas' treatment, somehow I doubt any of them would come up with an outline all too different from what we got. 

 

I'd hazard a guess that most people's problems with TFA would be largely fixed if:

 

- Jakku wasn't a desert planet, but rather an ice planet or a marshy planet

- The Resistance base was on a jungle planet

- There was no cantina, but rather an incredible multicultural city

- There was no Starkiller Base, and the First Order's designs were radically different from the Empire's 

- The Resistance used ships that were radically different from those of the OT

 

Many of these ideas were ones that were drawn up in concept art, but went unused in favor of a more retro look. But I think this illustrates that, ultimately, I can't really think of anything better than the general story of TFA. It's the retro look that's the problem, not the general story beats (junk planet with scavenger girl, deserting black Stormtrooper, Resistance fighting against First Order, meeting Maz in the second act, and scoring a victory against the First Order at the end). 

[KK 3,307]

9 hours ago, Chen G. said:

As for Abrams closing the trilogy, do you really see him produce a GREAT film? A masterpiece for the ages? Its the last episode of a nine-piece series. It should be great. Not just a JJ-Abrams-good-time-at-the-movies film. We got a do-over from Return of the Jedi, why not make the most out of it?

 

 

None of the Disney SW films are nor will be a "masterpiece for the ages". Neither should we expect them to be.

[Chen G. 3,943]

I know a lot of people who enjoy looking at film critically (perhaps not in quite the cerebral manner that I like, but still) who made Force Awakens to be their favorite/most appreciated film of 2015. So for a lot of people, even ones of a critical deposition, it is playing in the masterpiece playground.

 

Nostalgia can have a strong influence, and appearantly not just on the weak minded.

[Brónach 1,301]

36 minutes ago, KK said:

 

None of the Disney SW films are nor will be a "masterpiece for the ages". Neither should we expect them to be.

 

I wish we could hope for great movies...

[BloodBoal 7,538]

8 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

I know a lot of people who enjoy looking at film critically (perhaps not in quite the cerebral manner that I like, but still) who made Force Awakens to be their favorite/most appreciated film of 2015. So for a lot of people, even ones of a critical deposition, it is playing in the masterpiece playground.

 

Nostalgia can have a strong influence, and appearantly not just on the weak minded.

 

Does one considering TFA his/her favourite/most appreciated film of 2015 necessarily mean that this person considers it a masterpiece? To put it more simply: is the best film of a certain year necessarily a masterpiece? I don't think so.

 

Will: I'll get back to your post at some point, but not now. It's too damn long!

[Holko 9,499]

1 hour ago, Chen G. said:

Is it just me, or does all of this betray the worn and torn aesthetic of the original Star Wars or even the Force Awakens. Just look at how polished and plasticized Snoke's guards look.

 

Yeah, just compare them to the Emperor's guards (which the Praetorians pay direct homage to), they were really worn, grungy and dirty... Oh wait...

 

I get your point, and even agree to a degree, but you managed to pick a horrible example here.

[Disco Stu 15,495]

3 minutes ago, Brónach said:

 

I wish we could hope for great movies...

 

I hope for Star Wars movies that make me feel happy and that I have a great time talking about with my siblings and my children.  Star Wars is about the good vibes for me.

Now I'm not saying I leave all my critical faculties behind.  But at this point, Star Wars might as well just be a holiday.  Like Christmas.  It's all about making fond memories and spending time with friends/family.

[Chen G. 3,943]

5 minutes ago, Holko said:

 

Yeah, just compare them to the Emperor's guards (which the Praetorians pay direct homage to), they were really worn, grungy and dirty... Oh wait...

 

I get your point, and even agree to a degree, but you managed to pick a horrible example here.

 

Well, that's from Return of the Jedi so that doesn't count.

 

I said the original Star Wars.

 

Also, if Johnson is trying not to make a derivative film (in his own words) the design on the praetorians is just awful. They're just about the same as the Emperor's guards, minus the cape.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

Guards. Leave us.

[Holko 9,499]

12 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

Also, if Johnson is trying not to make a derivative film (in his own words) the design on the praetorians is just awful. They're just about the same as the Emperor's guards, minus the cape.

 

It's a logical next step for the First Order aesthetics - their whole deal is trying to imitate/bring back the Empire in everything they've done so far - Death Star, Star Destroyer Designs, Stormtrooper designs, their insignia, the officer uniforms, the TIE fighters, their second-in-command(?) Kylo... You don't just ignore all this in a sequel, it has to fit in. The Royal Guards therefore are samurai crossed with the original guard design.

 

 

I really have to wonder what they will do now that their ultimate plan of following in the Empire's footsteps and perfecting its work failed before its second use.

 

I'm telling you guys now, the Disney Sequel Trilogy and its use of the First Order will be a very smart commentary about those grumpy SW fans who want everything to be 100% like in the OT! </sarcasm>

[King Mark 3,625]

1 hour ago, KK said:

 

None of the Disney SW films are nor will be a "masterpiece for the ages". Neither should we expect them to be.

 

 

no but I don't think they have been as "safe" like everyone says . Well maybe TFA but in Rogue One  , Vader has his most violent scene of all the SW movies  and the entire cast of main characters dies so you don't see that often in movies