NationStates

Fedel wrote:

Vassenor wrote:
>didn't respect the backgrounds of pre-established characters

wait what

Elaborate on your confusion.

Vassenor wrote:

Fedel wrote:
Elaborate on your confusion.

I'm wondering in what way TLJ "didn't respect the backgrounds of pre-established characters".

Fedel wrote:

Vassenor wrote:
I'm wondering in what way TLJ "didn't respect the backgrounds of pre-established characters".

In regards to how they handled Luke's character. I thought that would be obvious.

Vassenor wrote:

Fedel wrote:
In regards to how they handled Luke's character. I thought that would be obvious.

I dunno, Mark seemed pretty on board with it, and I'd say he knows the character better than anyone.

Vassenor wrote:

Fedel wrote:
In regards to how they handled Luke's character. I thought that would be obvious.

I dunno, Mark seemed pretty on board with it, and I'd say he knows the character better than anyone.

Andsed wrote:

Vassenor wrote:
I dunno, Mark seemed pretty on board with it, and I'd say he knows the character better than anyone.

Just because Mark may have been on board with it is not a good argument for addressing Fedel's claim.

Personally I feel like the way the handled Luke major change from his OG trilogy version was very poorly handled. That Luke would not even hesitate to rush to save his friend while this Luke needed encouragement to do so. And while that change would be fine it needs to be shown or explained which TLJ kinda failed to do.

Vassenor wrote:

Fedel wrote:
In regards to how they handled Luke's character. I thought that would be obvious.

I dunno, Mark seemed pretty on board with it, and I'd say he knows the character better than anyone.

Ism wrote:

Vassenor wrote:
I dunno, Mark seemed pretty on board with it, and I'd say he knows the character better than anyone.

Everything I've seen points toward's Mark's attitude being more "I disagree with this, but I'll do my job." He wouldn't have joked that he was actually playing "Jake" Skywalker if he had thought it perfectly fit Luke's character.

Andsed wrote:Just because Mark may have been on board with it is not a good argument for addressing Fedel's claim.

Personally I feel like the way the handled Luke major change from his OG trilogy version was very poorly handled. That Luke would not even hesitate to rush to save his friend while this Luke needed encouragement to do so. And while that change would be fine it needs to be shown or explained which TLJ kinda failed to do.

I wouldn't say fine, at least not for me, but it would be tolerable at least.

Impaled Nazarene wrote:

New haven america wrote:Their so screwed right now that JJ's been forced to revisit the treatment for Episode 7 that Lucas made in order to get a movie out. No one wanted to listen to Lucas about how the ST should be done, but now it seems like he's their last hope to save the trilogy.

Gotta love the Post Disney Revisionism.
Old EU: Here's Mara Jade, the Thrawn Trilogy, a massive series of events that most fans have accepted as canon.
The Prequels: Hated, contained many bad ideas and riddled with poor execution.
George Lucas: I don't consider any of that EU canon. My ideas for a sequel trilogy will have none of that.
Fans: Fuk u george you're holding the franchise back

Disney: SCREAMING IN CAPITALISM AND MASHING THE TAMPER BUTTON
Some fans: Huh, that was good I guess but it didn't live up to its potential.
Some fans: HEIL LUCAS DEATH TO DISNEY! THE PREQUELS WERE SECRETLY GENIUS!
Other fans: This whole thing was insane

Star Wars fans will never be happy. If Lucas made the sequel trilogy it would have had all the flaws of the prequels all over again.

Vassenor wrote:

Fedel wrote:
In regards to how they handled Luke's character. I thought that would be obvious.

I dunno, Mark seemed pretty on board with it, and I'd say he knows the character better than anyone.

Andsed wrote:

Ism wrote:
Everything I've seen points toward's Mark's attitude being more "I disagree with this, but I'll do my job." He wouldn't have joked that he was actually playing "Jake" Skywalker if he had thought it perfectly fit Luke's character.



I wouldn't say fine, at least not for me, but it would be tolerable at least.

I mean if they had thrown in a line or something about how like Snoke had been manipulating Luke over the years or how he had just gotten paranoid over the years than I would have been fine with it. But because we really got no explanation it honestly felt pretty jarring for Luke to refuse to help his friends and attempt to kill a kid for showing some dark side thoughts.

Vassenor wrote:

Andsed wrote:I mean if they had thrown in a line or something about how like Snoke had been manipulating Luke over the years or how he had just gotten paranoid over the years than I would have been fine with it. But because we really got no explanation it honestly felt pretty jarring for Luke to refuse to help his friends and attempt to kill a kid for showing some dark side thoughts.

Literally cut himself off from the galaxy out of shame for being prepared to do exactly that.

Fedel wrote:Let's be clear here:

Disney is a passionless corporation only out to make money. They bought Star Wars in order to make it the next MCU ( an attempt which failed for multiple reasons ).

TFA was a bad remake of ANH.

TLJ was not formulaic but it was bad as it; had some jarring tonal issues, didn't respect the backgrounds of pre-established characters, seemed to often contradict itself in the message it tried to get across, was inconsistent with elements of its own universe and story, neutered its villains for the sake of comedy and shock value and generally just favored style over substance.

HOWEVER

Bringing Lucas in to implement his own ideas would not necessarily have been an improvement. While I believe Lucas to be creatively gifted, I do not think he's all that great at executing his ideas.

I will say that I think if Lucas had done the sequels they would have been better then what we got ( if still not we would have wanted ).

Alvecia wrote:

Fedel wrote:Let's be clear here:

Disney is a passionless corporation only out to make money. They bought Star Wars in order to make it the next MCU ( an attempt which failed for multiple reasons ).

TFA was a bad remake of ANH.

TLJ was not formulaic but it was bad as it; had some jarring tonal issues, didn't respect the backgrounds of pre-established characters, seemed to often contradict itself in the message it tried to get across, was inconsistent with elements of its own universe and story, neutered its villains for the sake of comedy and shock value and generally just favored style over substance.

HOWEVER

Bringing Lucas in to implement his own ideas would not necessarily have been an improvement. While I believe Lucas to be creatively gifted, I do not think he's all that great at executing his ideas.

I will say that I think if Lucas had done the sequels they would have been better then what we got ( if still not we would have wanted ).

I think if helmed by a good leader (for lack of a better word) then Disney's "influence" doesn't really matter that much.

If we take the MCU for example, led by Feige. They've managed to do a spectacular job, taking some huge risks along the way.

The Biggles Syndicate wrote:We all know that it'll be a Thanksgiving feast for RedLetterMedia when Episode 9 comes out. Maybe we'll get more Nerd Crew episodes.

My boi Filoni and his crew will probably just go to some beach for a week or two and just wait the whole shitstorm out.

Collider will have an Ace Attorney breakdown.

That's my two cents on what'll happen with Ep.9.

Forsher wrote:

Idzequitch wrote:Not sure where that idea came from, except for the sake of being overly dramatic. If you liked VIII, say something positive about it. Let's talk about it. I'll most likely disagree with that viewpoint and say so, and that's okay. But let's not devolve into moaning about the popularity (or lack thereof) of our viewpoints. If you liked it that's great. If you have a point, you're welcome to make it. And then I'll argue with you till Mustafar freezes over because I'll very likely disagree

You literally just said you agreed that Star Wars is an inevitable plane crash:

Idzequitch wrote:This is very much my attitude towards IX as well.

This isn't Vass' being overly dramatic but instead a perfectly reasonable interpretation of "Star Wars is crashing and burning". Note that there are 0 posts between your agreement post and Vass' "no positive opinions allowed".

Be more careful in your use of language and perhaps this problem wouldn't exist?

Impaled Nazarene wrote:I like how virtually every planet having a single biome has become an occasionally referenced joke. Canderous mentions Mandalore having tropical forests on the equator for instance.

Alvecia wrote:

Fedel wrote:Let's be clear here:

Disney is a passionless corporation only out to make money. They bought Star Wars in order to make it the next MCU ( an attempt which failed for multiple reasons ).

TFA was a bad remake of ANH.

TLJ was not formulaic but it was bad as it; had some jarring tonal issues, didn't respect the backgrounds of pre-established characters, seemed to often contradict itself in the message it tried to get across, was inconsistent with elements of its own universe and story, neutered its villains for the sake of comedy and shock value and generally just favored style over substance.

HOWEVER

Bringing Lucas in to implement his own ideas would not necessarily have been an improvement. While I believe Lucas to be creatively gifted, I do not think he's all that great at executing his ideas.

I will say that I think if Lucas had done the sequels they would have been better then what we got ( if still not we would have wanted ).

I think if helmed by a good leader (for lack of a better word) then Disney's "influence" doesn't really matter that much.

If we take the MCU for example, led by Feige. They've managed to do a spectacular job, taking some huge risks along the way.

Ism wrote:

Impaled Nazarene wrote:I like how virtually every planet having a single biome has become an occasionally referenced joke. Canderous mentions Mandalore having tropical forests on the equator for instance.

1. That world was Ordo, Canderous's homeworld, not Mandalore.
2. *screams in Naboo*

Dylar wrote:

Ism wrote:
1. That world was Ordo, Canderous's homeworld, not Mandalore.
2. *screams in Naboo*

Are you sure? I thought that Ordo was Canderous' clan name and that he was from Mandalore

Impaled Nazarene wrote:

The Biggles Syndicate wrote:We all know that it'll be a Thanksgiving feast for RedLetterMedia when Episode 9 comes out. Maybe we'll get more Nerd Crew episodes.

My boi Filoni and his crew will probably just go to some beach for a week or two and just wait the whole shitstorm out.

Collider will have an Ace Attorney breakdown.

That's my two cents on what'll happen with Ep.9.

They implied that they wouldn't do one for 9. It seems RLM is kinda done with the whole Plinkett thing. Which is sad because that character is the only reason they have so many subscribers.

Impaled Nazarene wrote:Just learned that Grand Admirals outrank Grand Moffs (at least in the old canon).
So this means that had Thrawn been a Grand Admiral earlier he would have outranked Tarkin. I would have loved to see Tarkin's face had he learned of an alien holding a higher rank than him.

Fedel wrote:

Impaled Nazarene wrote:Just learned that Grand Admirals outrank Grand Moffs (at least in the old canon).
So this means that had Thrawn been a Grand Admiral earlier he would have outranked Tarkin. I would have loved to see Tarkin's face had he learned of an alien holding a higher rank than him.

Out of curiosity, where'd you learn that little tidbit? Even I was unaware of that.