Topic: The Movie Thread

@RogerRoger I was more referring to the actual fan reaction to what a mess the film is rather than the boycott - but that too wouldn't have helped it much either.

It is a massive shame Solo took such a beating. I'd love to see more of the cast in their roles.

If you've ever read the excellent Scoundrels by Timothy Zahn (recommended if you haven't), that would make a great sequel!

@RogerRoger If you keep up with the animated stuff, then the cameo makes total sense. I should imagine it would actually throw a lot of people off if they don't. As far as incorporating that in to a sequel, I think it would be a better thing to keep at arms length given Han's later disparagement of all things Jedi related. And there's nothing Jedi related in Scoundrels.

@RogerRoger Solo does leave the characters in a good place to move through to ANH certainly - I'd just like to see more of them. While I've no particular issue with the cameo or the positioning of Maul as a crime boss - it does seem a bit moot to try and build much more of a story around it. Anyone he encounters is immediately going to have to have some way of overcoming his powers, which is unlikely unless they all get Ysalamir!

@Ralizah Very Interesting reviews. I also enjoy reading your takes.
Of note, your ‘bottom three’ there of Ragnarok, Infinity War, and Dark World we’re all movies I actually enjoyed significantly more on the second viewing. Although I doubt you would entertain the idea of seeing any of them for a second time, for some reason it made a difference to me. Especially for Dark World, which although it wasn’t a 1/10 for me it was a large disappointment initially. Going back a second time a year or two later I was able to enjoy it. I’m not really sure why that is, but I have some theories. Some movies are much less enjoyable on subsequent viewings and some are more fun. Maybe it has to do with anticipation and expectations which are held in check on the next go around, or maybe it’s the fact that it’s easier to pick up on plot nuances. I think this applies especially for action heavy movies and movies with a lot of rapid fire jokes or one-liners that are sometimes easy to miss (Ragnarok would fit here). Without the pressure of trying to interpret the plot in the midst of sensory overload and a constant barrage of attempted wit, one can relax and just appreciate each set piece or run of dialog on its own. I don’t know, it’s just a theory. I’m not sure how other people feel about that and maybe it’s just me that has a different experience when I see a film 2, 3, or 4 times. But either way, I can completely appreciate some of the criticisms you mention regarding those films.

But I would be interested to see if other people had examples of films that they either A) enjoyed much more when they saw it a second or third time, or B) had the opposite experience where they went back a second time to a film they loved but found that they actually disliked it.

@Th3solution I'm sure Dark World isn't ACTUALLY a 1/10 film. It's still mostly competent filmmaking, at least on a technical level. I've seen many much worse movies. The only "real" 1/10 movies are direct-to-video dreck like Krampus: The Reckoning.

I didn't like it at all, though. Usually I can find SOMETHING I like in a movie, but nothing really seized me here.

I'll probably eventually see some of these movies again, and I'll keep your suggestion in mind when I do.

@RogerRoger Most of it yeah, certainly the highlights. The issues it usually throws up are the ones common to the prequels; those of fluctuating jedi/sith power levels and plot contrivance to 'balance' a fight. This wasn't really an issue before the prequels, for the films or the expanded universe. But once the prequels came along with the acrobatic stick bashing rather than classic sword fighting and instances of ridiculous displays of power it really did make any opposition to significant force users seem like nonsense.
Case in point, Jango Fett vs Obi Wan Kenobi in AOTC - utter, total nonsense.
Cad Bane vs Obi Wan and Quinlon Vos is also a nonsense.
Even in the sense of bringing Jedi to a manageable level for non force users to serve a story, it just leaves me in mind of the excellent creative use of team members in the JLU cartoon: they built great stories with great lower tier heroes, eschewing the likes of Superman as the story would be over in seconds.
Maul works as a crime boss, but really only a remote one.

@KALofKRYPTON Your spoiler tags have not worked!

@JohnnyShoulder they really havent!

OK. Could be me... I'm very tired, my eyes are killing me following a 3 hour contact lens fitting today, but I can't see why they haven't worked...

Thinking about it. There's nothing spoilery in there really...

@RogerRoger they are absolute stick bashing, I can't think of a single lightsaber encounter in the prequels that works at all as a sword fight. Some are far better choreographed than others, the biggies (Duel of the Fates, Battle of Heroes) are just repetitious (literally) stick bashing.

@KALofKRYPTON @RogerRoger Well, you have to consider the lightsabers only have worth in their hilts, the blade is weightless so you’re going to swing it around more than a regular sword. They also were never supposed to look like normal swordfights. The only reason Lucas didn’t have them that way in the original trilogy is because he couldn’t. If he could’ve, he would’ve had a hay day with them.

@Ralizah I agree with your comments regarding Infinity War although it wouldn't get such a low score from me. I too found Thanos a bore to watch a thought casting Brolin for the role a mistake when i first heard about it. He wasn't helped by a poor script even by Marvel's standards. For me it is proof that making everything bigger doesn't always equate to the film being better.

@Jaz007 Lightsabers are meant to be incredibly difficult to weild. There are intense gravitational effects of the blade's containment system. Thats why they are usually wielded by force users.

And yes. They were meant to look like sword fights.

@KALofKRYPTON Is that in the originals (I can't remember)? Because the prequels and new trilogy and everything else Star Wars makes them easy to wield, and by look I mean they are easy to wueld. I've never seen anyone have trouble. I mean, look at Finn. Him hitting Kylo was ridiculous though. And I think they were only meant to look like swordfights originally due to technological limitations.

@Jaz007 From the (admittedly now defunct) EU. They were meant to be almost impossible to construct due to the danger of acquiring and harnessing the kyber crystals, and the gravitational forces used to contain the blade made them unwieldy to most non force users as the expectation that the only weight is the hilt would usually end up with someone maiming themselves.

That's why most similar weapons not in force user hands are/were rarely a hilt and blade - rather a blade/beam between two points.

The Finn thing is pretty explainable, he is a trained Stormtrooper - and I don't think he (or Rey for that matter) uses the lightsaber particularly easily or one handed throughout TFA.

I don't think any non-force user character uses a lightsaber throughout the prequels.

It wasn't technical limitations that decided the format of lightsaber fights for the OT; "An elegant weapon, for a more civilised age" and all that. It was meant to be sword fighting in space; Errol Flynn high adventure with a bit of flare.

@KALofKRYPTON Han was still able to use one pretty easily in Empire Strikes Back though OH and Sabine in Rebels uses one pretty well too ans neither of them are force users

@FullbringIchigo Very briefly, also - isn't a weapons noob - isn't she a Mandalorian?

Just saw The Predator. When it first started, I thought it'd be one of those poorly-reviewed films that I'd end up liking, but it turned into a right mess by the end! It's tonally schizophrenic, the script is poorly written, there are too many characters (almost all of which suck), and the plot was terrible. And the constant flippant attitude toward murder rubbed me the wrong way. Things just kind of happen in the movie without rhyme or reason, with betrayals and reconciliations occurring because otherwise the plot would simply spin its wheels. The Predators (there are apparently a lot of these things) aren't intimidating at all. It feels like it's trying to be two or three different movies, and none of them are very good.

Good news, though: if you felt like hideous alien dogs that act like domesticated puppies were the missing element from previous Predator films, then you're in for a good time!

I mean, I had fun laughing at it. At least it's not boring like Prometheus was. I imagine I'd have been irritated if I was a Predator fan, though.

WB: The DC stuff isn't making us instant Avengers money...

Also WB: We'd better scrap the whole thing, or some of it, or most of it...

WB: And let Superman and Batman walk?

Also WB:... Yeah, yeah why not?

WB: What can we do to make instant Avengers money though?

Also WB: Deadshot spin off movie?

WB: YES!!!

FML. 😒

To be fair, the DCEU does have some fun projects on the horizon. The new Joker movie looks promising, and I'm very interested in the Birds of Prey movie they're putting together. I've only watched Wonder Woman of the DCEU movies, which was pretty bad, so I hope they're better than that at least.

@Tjuz WW was great I thought, apart from the ending.
I think it's fair to say at this point that Man of Steel is an underrated gem. BvS is unnecessarily messy, but mostly sorted with the blu ray version. Suicide Squad is very OK but suffers from being primarily a Will Smith film (as opposed to casting a lesser known actor and not anchoring the whole thing around them), and not using the reams of Joker material they shot... and recutting and reshooting to alter the tone.
Justice League is a sad shambles.

New Joker movie could be good. WW2 will probably be good, Shazam and Aquaman will both probably be good. Should all have happened before the big team up movie.