Rogue one was better than the force awakens. Agree? or bad taste in cinema?

This forum is for anything not Reason related, if you just want to talk about other stuff. Please keep it friendly!

Isn't rogue one better than the force awakens?

Yes
17
68%
No, because I have poor taste in cinema, init ;)
0
No votes
No.
8
32%
 
Total votes: 25
avasopht
Competition Winner
Posts: 3932
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

26 May 2017

Rogue one was brilliant in its direction and flow. The Force Awakens felt forced, was riddled with cliches and as much as I feel Abrams did a great job with the insurmountable task of making good of the plot elements demanded by his funders, lacked originality and mastery.

Rogue One on the other hand brought with it a compelling plot that added a subtle dimension to the Star Wars universe without feeling tacked on, even though it did seem like a crafty way to retrofit a legitimate justification for <<spoilers removed>>.

Your thoughts?

HepCat

26 May 2017

They're both a sack of monkey caca so it's hard to say. You'd have to weigh them l guess. Formulaic computer-game graphics posing as films created by sophisticated talespinning wizard software.

User avatar
gak
Posts: 2840
Joined: 05 Feb 2015

31 May 2017

I haven't seen it yet.

But, since I hated the "force awakens" with a passion that is not acceptable to 98% of people, it's got to be better.

User avatar
adfielding
Posts: 959
Joined: 19 May 2015
Contact:

31 May 2017

I was thoroughly entertained by both, though I thought Rogue One was the better film by a decent margin. TFA was way too reliant on source material, and Rogue One had a bit too much fan-service for my likng... but TFA was a soft reboot so, go figure, I still enjoyed it. I'm not a huge Star Wars nut by any stretch, but I like the films (and Knights Of The Old Republic was awesome).

Totally unrelated, but I'm mostly sick of superhero flicks and I can see myself getting serious Star Wars fatigue if they release one film every year. That said, I thoroughly enjoyed Guardians 2 because it was a lot of fun and felt very un-Marvel-y in its execution. Not everything has to be Citizen Kane to be a good film, but as far as modern mainstream flicks go Guardians 2 had a surprising amount of heart.

Would like to see more original ideas (particularly sci-fi) making it to the big screen though, feels like mainstream movies have become waaaaaay too reliant on remakes/reboots/sequels/superhero flicks. I'd bloody LOVE to see a decent cyberpunk film that isn't a rehash or sequel.

User avatar
plaamook
Posts: 2593
Joined: 22 Jan 2015
Location: Bajo del mar...

01 Jun 2017

Yeah I'm in the other camp. I think Rogue1 lacked interesting characters and was kind of a mash up of stuff. That said, this thread has inspired me to DL the thing and give it another spin. So I may have to update.

People took pot shots at TFA beause of all the references to past mastery etc. but I think it kind of had to happen. Like something we all needed to get over so we can move on into a future that's more free.
Perpetual Reason 12 Beta Tester :reason:

You can check out my music here.
https://m.soundcloud.com/ericholmofficial
Or here.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC73uZZ ... 8jqUubzsQg

User avatar
Oquasec
Posts: 2849
Joined: 05 Mar 2017

01 Jun 2017

mgs5> the entire avengers franchise. With that being said, I might watch rogue one.
Producer/Programmer.
Reason, FLS and Cubase NFR user.

User avatar
gak
Posts: 2840
Joined: 05 Feb 2015

02 Jun 2017

plaamook wrote:Y
People took pot shots at TFA beause of all the references to past mastery etc. but I think it kind of had to happen. Like something we all needed to get over so we can move on into a future that's more free.
Good chronic, eh? :lol:

No. It was awful and I can point to any and all reasons. Placid characters, a lame "droid", a piss-poor story, boring, boring, and boring, and was simply a cash crop for that idiot producer.

It's not that I'm trying to be harsh, the movie is so bad, that stands on it's own.

Like I said, I haven't seen R1, and likely never will because there isn't much reason.

Star wars:

"A New Hope" : Beyond brilliant, even though it's not what what's his name wanted.

"Empire Strikes back" well, close to the first, but a little darker.

"Revenge of the Jedi" : Not as good at first glance because it seemed thrown together, but ended up being terrific.

(those 3 had a similar look/feel and characters, they were excellent)

One and Two, utter garbage. Lame to the extreme. I actually like Jar Jar Binks, get over it.

The third? Entertaining but not great.

Frankly, Star Wars Rebels is a MUCH MUCH better substitute for SW fans, and isn't simply for the kids. Best computer graphics EVER, and captures that "first 3" charm.

User avatar
tronam
Posts: 486
Joined: 04 Mar 2015

02 Jun 2017

I found TFA fairly entertaining and it did recapture at least some of the original trilogy vibe, but it doesn't take much thought to realize just how much of a disposable, fan-service retread it really was. I still haven't seen it a second time. R1, on the other hand, wasn't shackled by the Skywalker saga and it was refreshing to focus on completely new characters without any expectation baggage. The stakes seemed a lot higher, sacrifices felt more real and it didn't act like an amusement park ride on rails. I was genuinely surprised by some of the directions it went. It also quite cleverly provided a plausible explanation for one of the classic "plot holes" of A New Hope, which actually made me appreciate the original more. Good stuff, I say. :)
Music is nothing else but wild sounds civilized into time and tune.

avasopht
Competition Winner
Posts: 3932
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

04 Jun 2017

@tronam, exactly.

I'm no Star Wars fan, but I appreciate its cultural significance, impact on cinema as a whole and the brilliance of the original plot.

The use of Leia, Solo and Skywalker in TFA felt forced (like much of the plot).

The sacrifices were stellar. I had the feeling watching the film that certain people would (and should) never make it out alive, better yet if they failed completely :)

siln
Posts: 349
Joined: 11 May 2015
Location: france

04 Jun 2017

FYI Lucas admitted a lot of his work in star wars was inspired by joseph campbell 's books such as "the hero with thousand face" and "the inner reaches of outer space" which was inspired by jung's work about what is a myth.
I then used to make fun of people who criticized this trilogy without knowing that fact and without knowing about joseph campbell, anyway , I havent seen the last one , but TFA was to me quite a nice job

User avatar
plaamook
Posts: 2593
Joined: 22 Jan 2015
Location: Bajo del mar...

04 Jun 2017

gak wrote: I actually like Jar Jar Binks, get over it...
Well, that sums up a lot.

I think a lot of what people see in it, not surprisingly, depends on their relationship to it fro mthe beginning. Personally I'm not so interested in whether it's objectively a good flick or not. I'm only really interested in whether it works as an extension of 'Star Wars'... if you see what I mean. For many of us it just has this mythological status that compells us to measure it in different terms.
Perpetual Reason 12 Beta Tester :reason:

You can check out my music here.
https://m.soundcloud.com/ericholmofficial
Or here.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC73uZZ ... 8jqUubzsQg

User avatar
Skullture
Posts: 575
Joined: 17 Nov 2015
Contact:

04 Jun 2017

Rogue One is better because of the final third act. That was a great war space epic a lot of people needed to see that only Star Wars could bring.
Force Awakens = A New Hope, I couldn't watch that movie a second time. Not sure if I'll go see the 8th episode but curiosity kills the cat (and my wallet).

User avatar
gak
Posts: 2840
Joined: 05 Feb 2015

04 Jun 2017

Here it is in a nice neat sum: I don't care about the extension if it smells like rotting fish.

After the first one, they have systematically pushed me further and further away with poor story lines, placid acting, PISS-POOR special effects and and the stench of "rake in at the box office because the rich get richer" ;)

User avatar
plaamook
Posts: 2593
Joined: 22 Jan 2015
Location: Bajo del mar...

05 Jun 2017

gak wrote:Here it is in a nice neat sum: I don't care about the extension if it smells like rotting fish.

After the first one, they have systematically pushed me further and further away with poor story lines, placid acting, PISS-POOR special effects and and the stench of "rake in at the box office because the rich get richer" ;)
Fair enough.
For me almost anything that can wash the taste of the Mucus Prequals out of my mind is a winner and at least worthy of torrenting.
Perpetual Reason 12 Beta Tester :reason:

You can check out my music here.
https://m.soundcloud.com/ericholmofficial
Or here.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC73uZZ ... 8jqUubzsQg

User avatar
Bloma
Posts: 724
Joined: 06 Sep 2015
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

08 Jun 2017

I loved Rogue One, and Force Awakens was pretty good but I preferred Rogue One. Also, Rogue One has the guy from Mr Lonely, my least favourite Harmony Korine movie, which was funny (to me).

User avatar
plaamook
Posts: 2593
Joined: 22 Jan 2015
Location: Bajo del mar...

08 Jun 2017

WEll, I just watched Rogue 1 again, first since the cinema, and really I liked it more the second time. Now I'm torn...
Perpetual Reason 12 Beta Tester :reason:

You can check out my music here.
https://m.soundcloud.com/ericholmofficial
Or here.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC73uZZ ... 8jqUubzsQg

User avatar
gak
Posts: 2840
Joined: 05 Feb 2015

09 Jun 2017

It's ok to like what you want. It's ok to not like what you don't.

Anyways, when it comes out on DTV, I'll check it. Not expecting much.

User avatar
gak
Posts: 2840
Joined: 05 Feb 2015

22 Jul 2017

OK, so, it came out on some channel (netflix????????????)

and.....

It was 1000 times better than the force awakens. It is to FA as Rick Reuben is to dj parrot. Anyways, I was surprised. Kinda started slow though, it was like "hun?????" and then I stuck with it. But SPOILER ALERT, everyone dies in the end. That was weird (though there is some tv show coming out with her.........)

User avatar
FlowerSoldier
Posts: 470
Joined: 03 Jun 2016

22 Jul 2017

Rogue One FTW. Forrest Whitaker is a savage.

avasopht
Competition Winner
Posts: 3932
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

22 Jul 2017

gak wrote:
22 Jul 2017
It was 1000 times better than the force awakens. It is to FA as Rick Reuben is to dj parrot. Anyways, I was surprised. Kinda started slow though, it was like "hun?????" and then I stuck with it. But SPOILER ALERT, everyone dies in the end. That was weird (though there is some tv show coming out with her.........)

Yeah, I think the ending made it much better. During the film I was hoping it would end in that way as it creates far more depth - I just never thought they would actually do it.

My inspiration I suppose was the Foundation series by Isaac Asimov where he built up a huge storyline for a character, only to see their efforts made obsolete (on two occasions in fact).

User avatar
gak
Posts: 2840
Joined: 05 Feb 2015

23 Jul 2017

FlowerSoldier wrote:
22 Jul 2017
Rogue One FTW. Forrest Whitaker is a savage.
Out of all the things in that movie, a bit part was what turned you on? :lol:

Honestly, you must be a dj parrot fan.

avasopht
Competition Winner
Posts: 3932
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

23 Jul 2017

gak wrote:
23 Jul 2017
FlowerSoldier wrote:
22 Jul 2017
Rogue One FTW. Forrest Whitaker is a savage.
Out of all the things in that movie, a bit part was what turned you on? :lol:

Honestly, you must be a dj parrot fan.
Why would thinking Forrest Whitaker is a good actor suggest someone must be a "dj parrot fan?" (or moreso, be a fan of certain hip-hop artists who sample)?

User avatar
platzangst
Posts: 728
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

23 Jul 2017

Whenever I hear debate on the merits of various Star Wars films I always think of John Scalzi's analysis of the series, and here's an excerpt:
Star Wars is not entertainment. Star Wars is George Lucas masturbating to a picture of Joseph Campbell and conning billions of people into watching the money shot.

There is nothing in the least bit “popular” about the Star Wars films. This is true of all of them, but especially of Episodes I, II and III: They are the selfish, ungenerous, onanistic output of a man who has no desire to include others in the internal grammar of his fictional world. They are the ultimate in auteur theory, but this creator has contempt for the people who view his work — or if not contempt, at the very least a supreme lack of concern as to whether anyone else “gets” his vision. The word “entertainer” has as an assumption that the creator/actor is reaching out to his or audience to engage them. George Lucas doesn’t bother with this. He won’t keep you out of his universe; he just doesn’t care that you’re in it. To call the Star Wars films “entertainment” is to fundamentally misapprehend the meaning of the word.

Which is not to say that the films can’t be entertaining: They can be. George Lucas is an appalling storyteller in himself, but at the very least he has common tastes, or had when he first banged together the original Star Wars film. The original Star Wars is a hydra-headed pastiche of (as I wrote in my Rough Guide to Sci-Fi Movies) 30s adventure serials, 40s war films, 50s Kurosawa films and 60s Eastern mysticism, all jammed into the cinematic crock-pot and simmered in a watery broth made from the marrow of Campbell’s thousand-headed hero. With the exception of Kurosawa, all of this was stuff was in the common culture, and Lucas did a decent enough job spooning out the stew. Star Wars also benefitted from the fact that it emerged at the end of a nearly decade-long string of heavy, dystopic SF-themed films, beginning with Planet of the Apes and gliding down toward Logan’s Run. After a decade of this (and combined with the film’s brain-jammingly brilliant special effects), Star Wars felt like a breath of fresh air.

But even at the outset, Lucas was about something else other than entertaining people. As he noted in a biography of Joseph Campbell:

“I came to the conclusion after American Graffiti that what’s valuable for me is to set standards, not to show people the world the way it is…around the period of this realization…it came to me that there really was no modern use of mythology…”

What’s interesting about mythology is that it’s the residue of a teleological system that’s dead; it’s what you get after everyone who believed in something has croaked and nothing is left but stories. Building a mythology is necrophilic storytelling; one that implicitly kills off an entire culture and plays with its corpse (or corpus, as the case may be). It’s one better than being a God, really. Gods have to deal with the universes they create; mythmakers merely have to say what happened. When Lucas started Star Wars with the words “A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away…” he was implicitly serving notice to the audience that they weren’t participants, they were at best witnesses to events that had already happened, through participants who were long dead.

Why does this matter? It matters because Lucas’ intent was to build an overarching mythological structure, not necessarily to make a bunch of movies. If you listen to Lucas blather on in his laconic fashion on the Star Wars DVD commentaries, you’ll hear him say about how he wanted everything to make sense in the long view — that all his films served the mythology. This is fine, but it reinforces the point that the films themselves — not to mention the scripts and the acting — are secondary to Lucas’ true goal of myth building. Myths can be entertaining — indeed, they survive because they can entertain, even if they don’t brook participation. These films could work as entertainment. But fundamentally they don’t, because Lucas doesn’t seem to care if the films work as entertainment, as long as they sufficiently conform to his created mythology.

User avatar
gak
Posts: 2840
Joined: 05 Feb 2015

24 Jul 2017

That's absurd. Talk about masturbation ! (oh im so important oh im so important SPEWWWWWWWWWWWWW)

User avatar
CaliforniaBurrito
Posts: 574
Joined: 11 Nov 2015
Location: San Diego, CA
Contact:

11 Aug 2017

I finally watched this (Rogue One) a couple days ago and I just loved how connected it was to the original trilogy. That is pretty obvious as it is a prequel but it's better than any of the other modern stuff they've done. I'd watch it again for all of the exciting references. I actually bought Force Awakens a while ago before watching it but I wouldn't watch it again. Force Awakens just ventures off into no man's land through a state of bleh even with some of the original cast.

Post Reply
  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: Neo and 12 guests