Should these films be made? Are they just a cash grab for Disney?

Using Lucas' ideas is a very different thing, they could use them out of order and in in different contexts, which they clearly did.

 

The sequel trilogy is almost presented as Disney not even owning Star Wars and just renaming original series characters so they can use them without being sued.

 

I do believe they should have been made but I'm very unhappy with the finished product! Not a single one of the new movies has any rewatchability. I've seen them once. And that was enough.

The heartbreaking thing about the sequels are the missed opportunities! Disney had a blank slate, they could have done anything, taken star wars in any direction and told any story. They had the original actors and an open universe. Yet this is the best they could do, this was the best they could think up! Heartbreaking to think what could have been. This has been the biggest issue and the biggest problem with the sequels, they have failed to build on the world their inherited from Lucas. Instead of making the world bigger, they shrank it down to 2 ships having a car chase through space!

We expected and we deserved more than this. Disney thought they could fob us off with this poorly thought out, completely unplanned trilogy. Just not good enough, we deserve better.

 

“Unfortunately, even Leia’s life-essence can’t resurrect the franchise. See here:
https://bookandfilmglobe.com/film/star-wars-1977-2019-rip/“

 

I've seen, I've read, and I've disagreed with many of the conclusions there.

But hey, it's the Internet, and everyone who "hates Disney SW" absolutely MUST be heard. They MUST. It is a PRIORITY!!!! Their opinions must be heard. They absolutely MUST.

Anywhere on the internet right now that has anything to do with SW, ANYTHING to do, and has a comment section, will inevitably have comments by those who "hate Disney SW" and, they MUST be heard.

I am so done with that crap.

 

--- Double Post Merged, Feb 20, 2020, Original Post Date: Feb 20, 2020 ---

I hear you and the all pervading negativity is something I hate about modern 'film criticism'. If people don't like something, here is a novel idea, they should be mature and say "you know what, this didn't resonate with me" and look elsewhere for something that does. Otherwise why are they still here. Just to suffer.

--- Double Post Merged, Feb 20, 2020 ---

I wouldn't be too sure that many people would agree with you there. Nostalgia is one of the key things that draws people to Star Wars.

--- Double Post Merged, Feb 20, 2020 ---

I'm not to sure about this. I remember watching a Collative Learning (best film review on YT FYI) video on Psycho II which he favours above the original. Psycho II being directed by one of Hitchcock's friends and colleagues. It touches upon many themes that were only touched upon in the original and used clever visual cues and foreshadowing.

With the logic that future installations in a series are less impactful, there would be no Dune series or Shannarah Chronicles. However I do acknowledge that some are cynically motivated cash grabs.

 

I don't understand why would anyone have a problem with haters or any kind of opinion. People use an outlet to express their opinion, and this why the outlet is for; if 90% think something sucks they will tell so. It could be that 90% are positive or any kind of mixture. So what ?

If they use a certain approach to make money by drawing in and taking advantage of adolescents, then there is something to be said, but otherwise it's just how they feel.

 

Let me honest here: Star Wars has been stagnant for a long time.

Here's what I remember:
no one liked the PT trilogy.

And now:
No one likes TFA, TLJ, TROS.

I've been watching videos online, and TFA was fine after 2015 and 2016, aside from some critical outlying critiques videos. One of them was downvoted about half-way or at least a quarter around 2016.

Then TLJ came around, and KA-BOOM, people started thrashing Star Wars again.

I don't know what people get out of Star Wars. Do the visuals draw people in? The special effects?

(It's not the plot- I hope. The plot (in the PT, Return) stinks in a lot of areas, keeps relying on re-hash- an aspect (re-hash) that the ST also has).

I am also disturbed and will probably continue to be disturbed by the lack of focus on Return of the Jedi's script. People will focus on ANH and TESB's script, but there is a lack of focus on ROTJ's script, which really, really disturbs me. Fans don't have a clear idea of what the film is trying to convey. What is even more nuts is the lack of understanding the film's symbolism and what is said in production, which at least partially contradicts fans' perspective of the film.

The really disturbing thing that I've read about ROTJ is about how Lucas states that he just needed to finish it, or used a puzzle piece analogy, to see where pieces fit in, instead of being inspired. Also, it emphasizes that he felt obliged to finish it, which isn't the best sign of creating a compelling or meaningful plot. Despite this, ROTJ is treated as a masterpiece on account of its script, but I think its script is dangerous from being created in a more ad hoc or non sequitor process.

The sequel trilogy isn't that great because it's partially built on ROTJ. I think it'd actually be fine or even better if it was built on ANH or TESB- TLJ was very TESB. It was a ripoff, but a very good ripoff/homage.

I think that they were trimming down on the PT, which helped the ST avoid more random or destructive plot ideas. Even so, the ST had homage to the PT at points, especially during TLJ.

 

-----------
cash grab, the force awakens is basically a new hope with boobs, not original, then devolved into emasculating loved characters and getting ridiculously woke. why not have strong men and women, no rule saying you cant, you do not have to make all male characters weak/stupid to elevate strong women,

 

Ha ha

 

And nowhere as good, btw I'm stealing this, lol

 

cash grab, the force awakens is basically a new hope with ..., not original,

Some of the beats aren't original. Star Wars 1977 is more complex than one's effort to simply imitating its structure and making references to it in a film. J.J. mainly missed completely on the Flash Gordon/Buck Rogers aspects of it (serialized fun and adventure) and it think (if it weren't for Jakku) the idea of dust, wear-and-tear, and dirt in general.

then devolved into emasculating loved characters and getting ridiculously woke. why not have strong men and women, no rule saying you cant, you do not have to make all male characters weak/stupid to elevate strong women,

How I wish these were the actual problems of the ST and modern Star Wars. Re-hash of old plot points, themes, and characters were more of a problem than woke politics could EVER DREAM of being.

TFA Han is somewhat emasculated, but it's more of a focus on his ROTJ self (the comedic one), who's by default, more inept than his ANH/TESB counterparts. ANH Han isn't inept, but does find himself in trouble when he has to utilize improv with certain situations in order to survive (i.e. the intercom discussion, charging into stormtroopers). Kasdan was also heavily co-writing with George Lucas on ROTJ, so maybe this idea of Han's character was coming out in TFA. Also, some emasculation is dodged by focusing on the family drama- Han shows some responsibility by confronting Kylo Ren, even though Leia asks for it.

Leia is not emasculated at all, if anything, her character development is impressive- taking action for the death of The Resistance members is a next step from her ANH self (who was concerned about the rebellion but still overlooked deaths that occurred)- she really cares about the movement that she's involved with.

TLJ Luke is not emasculated. He admits that he was weak and failed, but that's ACTUALLY a sign of a strong character. In FFVII, Cloud Strife admits roughly the same thing to the group on the Highwind- that he was a liar to believe/prove that he was a strong member of SOLDIER and a hero. It's humility, sweet and short. The best heroes have it.

ROTJ Luke is the emasculated one, even though I think it's unintentional. The manner in which he's written, evokes villainous traits, even more strongly than Sephiroth, Thanatos, or even Ansem- since these are ambitious villains fulfilling their dreams, visions, and goals. I'd argue that the three that I just mentioned are more humble than ROTJ Luke- he's arrogant to a tee at some parts.

Luke doesn't have a vision in this film in the latter part (does he intend to rescue Han at the beginning which he does succeed, but out of extreme luck and at the cost of the villains' intelligence), other than hoping that Leia will survive if Luke doesn't make it. Saving Vader's soul from the dark side is his main priority, which, besides almost coming out of nowhere, also makes Luke take his focus off of caring for his friends/the rebellion. He defers directly caring for the rebellion to Leia. It's avoidance of responsibility out of the idea that he can save Vader, even though Vader evidently chose the dark path already. And when he presents his arguments to Vader on the bridge, I'd argue that they're pretty weak and don't address Vader's motivations (which is "end this destructive conflict [i.e. the rebels] and bring order to the galaxy"). It's Luke saying to Vader to remember the name of "his true self, that he's only forgotten", which is not only vague, but avoids acknowledging the consequences of Vader's decision to turn to evil. The most the film does for Vader to stop being evil is for him to "stop the horrors", which amounts to saving Luke's life, which Vader likely planned to do anything, and telling Luke that he "was right".

Let me tell you this- as boiled down and pandering to the audience that the ST gets- with characters, themes, old repurposed plot points, etc., characters- the heroes intend what they say, and if they change their minds, it's character development for them, for good or not, or driven by the characters and situations. I cannot say the same for Luke in Return. He is still one of the worst heroes in fiction that I've seen.

Not once does Luke imply that he'll commit to something, aside from meeting with Yoda again (a promise kept from the last film), who says that he doesn't require any more training, anyways. The throne room scenes are an egregious example of the very worst of Luke's characterization and (unintentional) villainous traits in the OT. I.e. (sacrifice himself to the Emperor by tensely breathing and tossing his lightsaber away), only to contradict himself moments later ("Father, please!"). Luke will say that he'll die with the Emperor, only to be convinced otherwise by the Emperor a few moments later. At which point, Luke has a conflict about the darkside with killing the Emperor, even though Luke just a moment ago expected to die with the Emperor (so killing the Emperor shouldn't be a problem if it meant letting the rebels have some leeway to blow up the Death Star II), and Luke was convinced the Emperor was going to be killed by the rebels anyways. So, if Luke kills the Emperor it is bad for him and will force him to turn to the dark side (which the Emperor says, unless he is lying to Luke, in which case, Luke has no reason to believe the Emperor, since he is clearly evil and also a liar), but not for the rebels who were going to kill the Emperor anyways, whom Luke nearly seemed to be gloating about??? (Your overconfidence is your weakness.).

Luke is a liar or doesn't hang on to his promises well in ROTJ. He is also both cowardly and arrogant, possibly from adhering to the idea of a stoic Jedi, a mature (non-whiny or less whiny) Luke, and the Obi-Wan parallels (and dialogue lifting from Obi-Wan from the first draft or the first draft revision). But the parallels here backfire HARD.

When TLJ Luke says that he'll burn down the tree, he does make an attempt to do so, but it's clear with body language that he's conflicted, so he stops. An action like this is FAR LESS wishy-washy than ROTJ Luke and understandable- step-by-step. Luke also admits his arrogance and cowardice in TLJ, something that HE NEVER EVEN CONSIDERS in Return. The most we see out of Luke is him being sincere (by trying to rescue Vader), and in the deleted scene of Luke, when talking to Han in the sandstorm about his rescue, says, "consider it nothing". Even Luke's sincerity and humility in the deleted scene has this flatness to it, since Luke barely interacts with Han in Return (he is stiff on the barge with Han, lightly jokes with him before Jabba). All we really have is the amount of unnecessary effort expended by Luke (which endangers other friends in the process) and the joke about things being bad in the rescue attempt. That's it in respect to Luke's "it was nothing" mentality.

In Empire, their relationship is more tense with the Han-Leia-Luke love triangle, and there is the idea of Luke needing to repay the debt of Han saving his life, also the idea of them being friends who look out for another. It's better and complicated. It makes Luke to be actual character than his stoic fulfillment of the hero's journey.

TLJ Rey is an imitation of TESB Luke, wanting to do the right thing, plus mystery about her character. She is neo-Luke. TLJ Luke seems to be a continuation of TESB Luke, plus combining compromise from Obi-Wan's character- ROTJ, ROTS, TESB Yoda, TESB Vader, and Luke in Return of the Jedi. He is no longer himself, but he hasn't been since TESB, so I'd rather take a continuation of TESB Luke, plus referencing other characters (who were picked up from Return, as a part of ROTJ Luke), as a part of the idea of legacy.

 

Disney needs that Disney plus money

 

-------------------------------------------------
I think they missed on character development, critical drinker covered this extensively, you never really felt rey was in any danger at any point, luke had to train with a master to become strong, rey just sort of appeared and wa already fully jedi and had zero training,

--- Double Post Merged, Mar 9, 2021, Original Post Date: Mar 9, 2021 ---

how do you like a post in this place?

 

I don’t know why I’m going to try and say something in this thread, but I really don’t like considering these movie’s as cash grabs, as if everyone involved was not already seriously invested into Star Wars and just wanted to make more content. It’s not like they hired Michael Bay to make 7,8,9 a big explosion-fest popcorn movie. They got JJ Abrams (the guy who was criticized for his Star Trek movies and said “Eh, I’m more of a Star Wars guy”) and Lawrence Kandahar (who wrote ESB and ROTJ). Kathleen Kennedy had already been working at Lucasfilm for the longest time, and was HAND CHOSEN by Lucas to take over.

Disney got an IP, and let those who loved Star Wars already make some films.

 

thanks for the information, am new here

--- Double Post Merged, Mar 15, 2021, Original Post Date: Mar 15, 2021 ---

-It is a €€ grab to me because they have not been respectful in last 3 films to the established characters

--- Double Post Merged, Mar 15, 2021 ---

they need to win business back, they have a penchant for being off putting with some of their casting decisions and not so subtle messaging.

 

-
will do, just odd to be back into the series, had long abandoned it after jar jar, they are making it difficult , sometimes very difficult. Appreciate you getting back to me