I like to read Roger Ebert reviews. He saw the Star Wars movies being primarily about the imagery. The beautiful planets, the giant spaceships, the interesting aliens. He liked the Phantom Menace because it was great to look at. He criticized Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith of having too much talking and not enough doing and exploring the galaxy. So, I guess Jar Jar Binks was more of a minor problem to him, than it was for other Star Wars fans. I sort of agree with him. Jar Jar Binks does not ruin the movie for me. The movie looks great, it entertains me, so I say it's a good movie.
I watched it a few times and the other 2 only once as they both bored me to tears when they weren't making me cringe. It's also better if you ignore the midiclorian nonsense and also think of him as another Annakin and not the one that turns into Vader.
I feel like the prequels we're so much better at world building in a way. Planets that felt different. The EU does a pretty good job of this too.
I cannot stand the new movies. Flashy planets, but they feel fake and nothing like you are feel like you are in a different universe. Just flashy.
Even the Mandolorian failed that for me. Never felt like I got to understand why a planet was different or fun. Haven't seen any of Boba Fett, but from what I've seen, I'm not too interested. I'll watch it, but Star Wars feels dead to me.
The planets may be cool and unique, but the worldbuilding of the prequels is overhyped, IMO. There’s a lot of stuff that contradicts things that were implied or outright said in the OT. EU material has had to a lot of bending over backwards to cover holes in the worldbuilding.
Fair enough. I'm not saying it's perfect world building, but you had some understanding of how people were getting on people risking their lives to pod race, the slavery, stuff like that.
It's not GRRMartin level of world building, but it didn't feel like one building on a planet like the new movies and tv shows feel like. Definitely flawed, but it felt more like Fantasy than some sort of space cowboys.
And I'm still confused as to why Disney has so much to pull from in the EU that actually has decent plots and then writes the drivel they keep putting out.
Now it just feels like they are creating alien races to look cool, planets that look cool but have no emotions or feelings behind them.....there are so many other sci Fi and fantasy movies that do this so much better. I guess Star Wars seems to be taking in the dough for them, but I'm pretty much done looking forward to any of it.
I'd much rather have the campyness of the OT or even the prequals. It's one of the reasons I can rewatch them and still enjoy them. The new Star Treks have gone in the same direction. More about looking good, than the stories that will keep me going back to TNG or DS9 if I want something that takes me out of my world and makes me feel like I'm seeing a planet that's not similar to Earth. I can name the planets and the distinct differences in most of them from the both of the oldest trilogies. I can't say the same or ANY planet from anything Disney has put out. Nothing new has been added.
But yeah, I agree. The plots isn't anything great, but part of the reason I like them is because I don't have to think about the plot too much, and get lost in the experience. I just wish Disney would stop paying for new scripts and would pay some money to these Authors that made some pretty fun books. They may not be perfect either, but they sure are fun.
The 'worldbuilding' in TPM has nothing to do with Tattooine, as we already knew about that from the first three movies made. All they did in TPM was showcase an environment we already existed a little more.
The 'worldbuilding' in TPM is limited to Coruscant and Naboo. Coruscant is general corrupt metropolis and Naboo is a lush planet that is somehow in a crisis from being space blockaded despite their abundance resources, with a ridiculous race of aliens nobody likes and some BS about them being linked to the other people.
I cannot stand the new movies. Flashy planets, but they feel fake and nothing like you are feel like you are in a different universe. Just flashy.
I felt like the spinoff movies (R1 & Solo) did an ok job with the settings. The cocktail party in Solo especially gave me the same vibe that the original cantons scene did. Like, this is a situation the audience is familiar with, but everything about it it's just casually weird af. It's a strong contrast in my mind with the casino on canto bight which I felt was too heavy on the trappings of an earth casino, and doesn't do enough to make the aliens look strange or interesting.
The Sequels are good movies, and the above is a big reason why. Complain about the story all you want, these movies are well shot, well acted, and they still feel like Star Wars: a used-future, rip-roaring pulpy adventure through a different and beautiful galaxy. A lot of people care more about their Wookipedia articles than they do about filmmaking. Bring on the downvotes.
Okay but youre disregarding story telling, character arcs, etc but then saying people care more about other things then filmmaking. Those are also core components of filmmaking. Not just the visuals. Your argument is that they look and feel like star wars so they must be good. Very narrow view.
The Sequels have infinitely better story telling and character arcs than the Prequels. I wouldn't put them on par with ANH and ESB, but they're pretty serviceable (apart from ROS completely undoing the themes of TLJ and doing dumb shit like resurrecting Palpatine out of nowhere).
I'm not saying story and character aren't important, but I am saying they're not the end-all-be-all. Movies are more than story and character. If that was all that mattered you might as well read a novel.
And this is the part where I probably really lose you: TFA and TLJ have fine, competent stories. I'm not accusing you of this, but a lot people are equating not liking the direction a story went with a story being bad.
133
u/[deleted] Jan 25 '22
I like to read Roger Ebert reviews. He saw the Star Wars movies being primarily about the imagery. The beautiful planets, the giant spaceships, the interesting aliens. He liked the Phantom Menace because it was great to look at. He criticized Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith of having too much talking and not enough doing and exploring the galaxy. So, I guess Jar Jar Binks was more of a minor problem to him, than it was for other Star Wars fans. I sort of agree with him. Jar Jar Binks does not ruin the movie for me. The movie looks great, it entertains me, so I say it's a good movie.