bored

It did impressively mount the franchise. 

It did impressively mount the franchise. 

They had Lawrence Kasdan for TFA which clearly shows in the scenes where there's no out of place Abrams quips. A lot of the Kylo story is pure Star Wars in the dialogue and execution. Han Solo's death comes to mind. For all the hate it gets because of the miserable fates of the original characters, that scene is straight out of the original trilogy.
 
The half red and blue symbolism, the emotional struggling, lines like "Your son was weak so I destroyed him", Leia feeling the death through the force, etc. More should have been done with his death and it definitely could have been more respectful and less miserable and nihilistic with his body just falling into an endless chasm like he's a villain, but that's one of the best executed scenes in the trilogy besides that IMO.
 
What it really seems like to me with Kylo, was Abrams and Johnson basically wanted their own Zuko from Avatar: The Last Airbender. Someone who's constantly struggling with his morals and what he really wants, and even achieves what he thinks he wants, but feels nothing but empty and guilty once he has it. This leading into an even more triumphant redemption. They almost had it, but they completely destroy it by having him redeemed just a bit too late, and immediately killing him off afterwards just to parallel Vader again.

As @Nick1Ø66 said, people were optimistic after The Force Awakens. However shockingly uncreative the movie is, the fact of the matter is that people were swept up in it greatly, and to this day it's not hard to see why: As Poe says "This thing really moves!"
 
It's also the one still somewhat imbued with the spirit of the previous films, to the extent that its basic plot outline still owes something to Lucas, that as you say Kasdan co-wrote it. It has Ben Burtt doing sound again. A lot of vintage ILM staff still worked on it, and it's the one that relies the most of vintage McQuarrie pieces for its visuals. So there's still some of that risidual DNA in there, at least.

They had Lawrence Kasdan for TFA which clearly shows in the scenes where there's no out of place Abrams quips. A lot of the Kylo story is pure Star Wars in the dialogue and execution. Han Solo's death comes to mind. For all the hate it gets because of the miserable fates of the original characters, that scene is straight out of the original trilogy.
 
The half red and blue symbolism, the emotional struggling, lines like "Your son was weak so I destroyed him", Leia feeling the death through the force, etc. More should have been done with his death and it definitely could have been more respectful and less miserable and nihilistic with his body just falling into an endless chasm like he's a villain, but that's one of the best executed scenes in the trilogy besides that IMO.
 
What it really seems like to me with Kylo, was Abrams and Johnson basically wanted their own Zuko from Avatar: The Last Airbender. Someone who's constantly struggling with his morals and what he really wants, and even achieves what he thinks he wants, but feels nothing but empty and guilty once he has it. This leading into an even more triumphant redemption. They almost had it, but they completely destroy it by having him redeemed just a bit too late, and immediately killing him off afterwards just to parallel Vader again.

Hehe, same wavelength

See, I don't even consider that "current politics". That's just an idiot (rich) filmmaker and, honestly, it doesn't seem to be completely out of Lucas' wavelength.
 
But the "NOBODY makes more money than WEAPONS MANUFACTURERS!" bit is the single dumbest moment in all of Star Wars. ALL. OF. IT.
 
And also, wasn't the Republic in charge like 24 hours ago? And how is the First Order PAYING these amoral scumbags who have GOD LIKE WEALTH? (This is a hangover from the idiocy of JJ, but Johnson also decided to wade into it and make it worse.)

And while we're on the topic...
 
 
The last person I'd turn to for apocryphal advice is Boyega. His comments about how he was marginalized - when he landed a role that 99.99999999999% of actors would kill for - are so hillariously clueless as to be the stuff of farce.
 
Reference: 
 
https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/culture/article/john-boyega-interview-2020
 
 
https://www.comicbasics.com/john-boyega-calls-out-racism-in-star-wars-fans-theyre-okay-with-us-playing-the-best-friend-but-not-the-hero/
 
 

Well, in that case, as Johnson's later films illustrate, he just fetishizes watching the bourgeoise bleed. It's inherent to both his Knives Out films, and to the whole Canto Bight stuff. It's...let's just say I don't get off of it like he clearly does.

I think the actor who played Finn outlines the issues quite well when he was asked what he would do differently.
 
Asked by an audience member at his spotlight panel what he would do if he were to remake the Star Wars sequels he appeared in (that is, The Force Awakens, The Last Jedi, and The Rise of Skywalker, respectively), Boyega was incredibly honest.
"It would be mad," said the Attack the Block star, "First of all, we’re not getting rid of Han Solo, Luke Skywalker, all these people. We're not doing that. The first thing we're going to do is fulfill their story, fulfill their legacy. We're going to make a good moment of handing on the baton."
In case you've somehow avoided this area of internet discourse (I'm so jealous), Boyega is talking about the fact that the Star Wars sequels killed off original characters Han Solo and Luke Skywalker in ways that fans were... upset about. To put it mildly. But it wasn't only the legacy characters whose arcs Boyega would've changed.
 
"Our new characters," said Boyega, "will not be OP'd [overpowered] in these movies. They won't just grab stuff and know what to do with it. No. You've got to struggle like every other character in this franchise. I'd do that."
 
Even beyond character specifics, though, Boyega's Star Wars would've drawn from different sources than the new movies did.
"I'd look to the Old Republic stories," the actor continued, "And see what we can add to the continuation of that. I would definitely want to see Force Unleashed stories in there. I would try to expand the Star Wars universe as much as possible while respecting the lore. If we're expanding the lore, we have to do it in within the respective boundaries that stay true."
"But Luke Skywalker wouldn't be disappearing on a rock," concluded Boyega, "Hell no. Standing there and he's, like, a projector? I would want to give those characters way more way more."
 
It’s clear that he grew up as a big fan and it’s quite sad that he had the experience that he did.

Not another lecture, Obi-Wan. At least not about the economics of politics.

It did impressively mount the franchise. 

It did impressively mount the franchise. 

It did impressively mount the franchise. 

I like Star Wars when it has good/interesting characters that I give half a shit about. 
 
So I like about half of it total.

The real reason Andor is the best Star Wars:
 
Space Latinas
 
 
And Wars sometimes.

Everyone just be grateful that Mattris hasn't joined the conversation 
 
 
 
Huh?
A/ 'true' is an absolute. Something cannot be more, or less, true.
2/ If Star Wars took place out of a war setting, it would be called 'Star Peace', wouldn't it? 

Oh yeah. The score in general, actually.
 
It's a significantly larger ensemble, it's orchestrated more fully almost throughout and there's more music running through the film.

Something spooky for Halloween...

If you compare the movie landscape from 2000 to 2025, you seem to have missed the memo.
Entire catalogues now are filled with movies that are wholly structured around what is regarded as acceptable.

I've watched Jackson's LotR before ever reading Tolkien, and having read Tolkien, I appreciated how seamless their additions were woven between Tolkien's bits.
And contrary to many, I believe The Hobbit in dialogue and spirit to be closer to Tolkien than credited.
 
Arguing whether they can carry Tolkien's feel and spirit is way behind the question that will define the legacy of this film to begin with: whether they exclude modern movie tropes and forced messages.

I have shown everyone I know the JRR Tolkien cut of The Hobbit films (I forgot exactly who did it), that I also added some minor edits to like adding back in the cut versions of "Dreaming of Bag End" as well as adding the Dwarves' introduction to Beorn since it's mostly book accurate, and all of them liked the one movie, 4 hour cut a decent bit. Not as much as LOTR of course, but the same is often true for the books in that case.
 
I think that cut works perfectly as a prequel to LOTR films while still being more book accurate. Plus the escape from the elves is cut down pretty well and seamlessly for my taste. I think that cut is the way to experience the films. I also didn't show them the original versions at all and when I told them some of the crap that was in the original cuts, they were baffled.
 
I have also forgotten a lot of what was in the original versions because I'm so happy with that fan edit at this point.

@Chen G. @VenomVeVenom @Monoverantus

In the commentaries, Peter Jackson mentions that the Evenstar flashback, was at one point going to be placed earlier in the film, before the scene with Gandalf and Aragorn discussing the Rohan, and Frodo's quest.

The LOTR symphony also has an clean opening of the Rivendell arpeggios from the sequence.

Also interestingly, one of the SFX shot boards seen in the EE Appendices seems to indicated that the scene of Frodo and Sam at the Black Gate was at one point at a later place in the film, approximately in the space it occupies on the OST.

and @Jim Ware has mentioned that the first three reels had a lot of recutting.

Here is a quick video that gives a quick idea of how that may have looked:
 

Not I.
 
Rings of Power - especially after season one - is a doppleganger. This movie, whatever else could be said about it, is not.
 
Yes, the subject matter at first blush is somewhat "provincial" compared to the epic sweep of what Rings of Power picked (or what, say, an Angmar movie would have done).
 
Yes, the film is Tolkienian in a kind of vestigial way: it's not an adaptation of a novel in any normal sense of the word.
 
Yes, people may be getting a little tired of interquels now that Star Wars has done them to death.
 
But goddamit, it's Lord of the Rings and it's the Lord of the Rings "team." I know that gets me excited.

I have shown everyone I know the JRR Tolkien cut of The Hobbit films (I forgot exactly who did it), that I also added some minor edits to like adding back in the cut versions of "Dreaming of Bag End" as well as adding the Dwarves' introduction to Beorn since it's mostly book accurate, and all of them liked the one movie, 4 hour cut a decent bit. Not as much as LOTR of course, but the same is often true for the books in that case.
 
I think that cut works perfectly as a prequel to LOTR films while still being more book accurate. Plus the escape from the elves is cut down pretty well and seamlessly for my taste. I think that cut is the way to experience the films. I also didn't show them the original versions at all and when I told them some of the crap that was in the original cuts, they were baffled.
 
I have also forgotten a lot of what was in the original versions because I'm so happy with that fan edit at this point.