Rogue One (Gareth Edwards, 2016)

Discussions of specific films and franchises.
Post Reply
Message
Author
calculus entrophy
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2014 11:32 am

Re: Star Wars

#101 Post by calculus entrophy » Wed Dec 14, 2016 11:13 am

Regardless of the name in the credits, all Star Wars activity is clearly done by committee at this point. And it reflects that.

User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Star Wars

#102 Post by mfunk9786 » Wed Dec 14, 2016 11:37 am

calculus entrophy wrote:Regardless of the name in the credits, all Star Wars activity is clearly done by committee at this point. And it reflects that.
You've seen this film?

calculus entrophy
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2014 11:32 am

Re: Star Wars

#103 Post by calculus entrophy » Wed Dec 14, 2016 11:53 am

mfunk9786 wrote:
calculus entrophy wrote:Regardless of the name in the credits, all Star Wars activity is clearly done by committee at this point. And it reflects that.
You've seen this film?
Amazing non sequitur, sir!

User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Star Wars

#104 Post by mfunk9786 » Wed Dec 14, 2016 11:55 am

You said that "it reflects that," I was just wondering if you had any particular insights into Rogue One reflecting being a work by committee or were just painting with a broad brush of speculation.

User avatar
Big Ben
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2016 12:54 pm
Location: Great Falls, Montana

Re: Star Wars

#105 Post by Big Ben » Wed Dec 14, 2016 12:25 pm

I think it's fairer to say this committee has expectations and some rules. People certainly have creative freedom.

User avatar
solaris72
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:03 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: Star Wars

#106 Post by solaris72 » Wed Dec 14, 2016 1:37 pm

I'm not trying to be a big advocate of corporate art here, but given the kind of story Star Wars is--mythology--it being "by committee" is more a description than a slur in my opinion. Mythology has long been something that works best when it passes through many hands. Malory brought us Le Morte d'Arthur from a lot of sources (eight I think? I'm at work and don't have my Norton edition with me), and then his text was revised by Caxton and later by Davison. And there are many other similar examples in the history of mythology.

User avatar
John Cope
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 5:40 pm
Location: where the simulacrum is true

Re: Star Wars

#107 Post by John Cope » Wed Dec 14, 2016 1:52 pm

solaris72 wrote:I'm not trying to be a big advocate of corporate art here, but given the kind of story Star Wars is--mythology--it being "by committee" is more a description than a slur in my opinion. Mythology has long been something that works best when it passes through many hands. Malory brought us Le Morte d'Arthur from a lot of sources (eight I think? I'm at work and don't have my Norton edition with me), and then his text was revised by Caxton and later by Davison. And there are many other similar examples in the history of mythology.
I understand what you mean and appreciate the point you're making but I definitely wouldn't compare those working for Disney to Malory, Caxton and Davison (but of course I suppose we wouldn't compare Star Wars to Arthurian legend either, at least not in a qualitative sense).

User avatar
captveg
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:28 pm

Re: Star Wars

#108 Post by captveg » Wed Dec 14, 2016 8:37 pm

Star Wars - like all franchise film properties these days - is a producer driven series. The main creative mind driving it all is Kathleen Kennedy. She may not come up with all (any of?) the concepts or ideas, but she certainly is the one deciding on which ones to move forward with, when to go back for rewrites and reshoots, etc.

These film franchise series are in the old Hollywood producer driven model, something that has been the TV model for decades. It is now the way to do things for these Steroid TV Shows that they happen to spend $125-250m an episode on and release in cineplexes every 6-12 months.

User avatar
R0lf
Joined: Tue May 19, 2009 7:25 am

Re: Star Wars

#109 Post by R0lf » Wed Dec 14, 2016 9:26 pm

I had an awful moment watching ROGUE ONE where my internal voice very clearly said "Hitler had Goebbels and the US have Disney."

This plays like a soft military recruitment propaganda video targeting children.

User avatar
captveg
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:28 pm

Re: Star Wars

#110 Post by captveg » Wed Dec 14, 2016 10:31 pm

And the original film is pro-radical terrorism.

Kids are smarter than people give them credit for. It's fantasy. I don't see how its any different than G.I. Joe and Transformers.

Star Tickles just doesn't have the same ring to it.

User avatar
Kirkinson
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 5:34 am
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Star Wars

#111 Post by Kirkinson » Thu Dec 15, 2016 12:03 am

captveg wrote:It's fantasy. I don't see how its any different than G.I. Joe and Transformers.
Well, that comparison kind of supports R0lf's point. Though it seems like Rogue One's involvement with the (in this case British) military was not very extensive, it's becoming pretty common for "fantasy" movies to bend to the military's wishes in exchange for personnel, assistance, or sponsorship. Independence day 2, Man of Steel, and X-Men: First Class even had concurrent military recruitment ad campaigns. Invoking Goebbels is over-the-top, and since I haven't seen Rogue One I can't say whether I agree with R0lf in this specific case, but in a general sense it's not outrageous to suggest a current or recent Hollywood film is aiding the US military's recruitment efforts.

User avatar
captveg
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:28 pm

Re: Star Wars

#112 Post by captveg » Thu Dec 15, 2016 12:06 am

Hollywood and the military have been chummy for 70 years. Rogue One is a mere drop in that ocean.

Toy soldiers have been the toys of children for hundreds of years. Some kids grow up to serve in the military; most don't. I highly doubt any of them make that decision based on the toys the played with or movies they enjoy.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Star Wars

#113 Post by domino harvey » Fri Dec 16, 2016 1:52 am

domino harvey wrote:Sounds like Disney pulled a studio-era Hollywood and actually made it better by meddling
Or not. I reckon we'll never know just where the puzzle pieces fit though a certain audience pleasing beatdown near the end almost surely benefited from being shoehorned in. I thought this was pretty bad, in stark contrast to my surprise affection for the Force Awakens. SO many corny lines and confusing exposition (the first act of this film is just seemingly naming random pages in the Star Wars Encyclopedia or whatever it's called). This will do okay at the box office but we are not going to see a lot of return engagements due to how much of a downer it is-- I have no idea how Disney let this one go through, as even with their lightening it's still remarkably dark and, frankly, not much fun. And not in a gritty, war movie way. Just in a not entertaining and everyone dying all the time way. The most audience pleasing highlights are actually the only parts that work: Donnie Yen's blind Force-believer gets a great fight scene capped off with a so stupid it shouldn't be as funny as it is punchline that brought the house down. And yes, Star Wars has once more gone back to the "funny robot" well, but, well, Alan Tudyk's robot is often the best thing on screen.

The film is pretty much a Sci-Fi version of
SpoilerShow
Wake Island
--but it didn't work for me. I couldn't read the audience too well during the picture, but they seemed to like it a lot based on the comments from people herding out. I suspect Star Wars fans who decried the Abrams sequel will love this, and the rest of us will not.

Not a lot of spoilers one needs to be aware of save one big one that will be inescapable due to its mind-blowing technological marvel
SpoilerShow
Audible "WHAT THE FUCK"s and loud, actual gasps when Peter Cushing showed up. I had no fucking idea CGI had advanced this far, and if this film doesn't win the Visual Effects Oscar, something has gone horribly wrong. Eerily accurate 95% of the time, and scary in its implications for a S1M0NE-style future of cinema
While the above doesn't really spoiler the narrative since it happens early on, one should go in with the shock of it actually occurring-- how long til articles about this aspect are plastered with spoiler headlines about this though? I doubt we even make it til the weekend.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Star Wars

#114 Post by domino harvey » Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:15 am

solaris72 wrote:Teaser for Rogue One.
To give you some idea of how much was reshot, literally everything in this trailer that isn't something exploding or Felicity Jones looking out the window isn't in the film. And Forest Whitaker looks completely different in the movie.

User avatar
Dr Amicus
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 10:20 am
Location: Guernsey

Re: Star Wars

#115 Post by Dr Amicus » Fri Dec 16, 2016 8:42 am

domino harvey wrote:
Not a lot of spoilers one needs to be aware of save one big one that will be inescapable due to its mind-blowing technological marvel
SpoilerShow
Audible "WHAT THE FUCK"s and loud, actual gasps when Peter Cushing showed up. I had no fucking idea CGI had advanced this far, and if this film doesn't win the Visual Effects Oscar, something has gone horribly wrong. Eerily accurate 95% of the time, and scary in its implications for a S1M0NE-style future of cinema
While the above doesn't really spoiler the narrative since it happens early on, one should go in with the shock of it actually occurring-- how long til articles about this aspect are plastered with spoiler headlines about this though? I doubt we even make it til the weekend.
It's a HEADLINE in today's Guardian - so the answer is not very long at all:
SpoilerShow

User avatar
Luke M
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 9:21 pm

Re: Star Wars

#116 Post by Luke M » Fri Dec 16, 2016 8:52 am

jbeall wrote:A.O. Scott was less than impressed.
[W]hether the fractures in the Rebel Alliance and the power struggles in the imperial ranks quicken our pulses and engage our emotions — is the big question, but it really isn’t a question at all. Millions of people will sit through this thoroughly mediocre movie (directed with basic competence by Gareth Edwards from a surprisingly hackish script by Chris Weitz and Tony Gilroy) and convince themselves that it’s perfectly delightful. It’s so much easier to obey than to resist.
I'll probably see it in a few weeks, and will probably find it (like TFA) something relatively enjoyable, but that I don't need to see a second time. (But who am I kidding? I'm trying to temper my expectations.)
I saw it last night and found myself agreeing with A.O. Scott's review. The film did feel like it came to a complete stop at times -- pacing on par with the prequels. Edwards didn't handle the nostalgia of seeing old characters, places, and things as well as Abrams did. Abrams cared for every detail, knowing anything he got wrong, he'd get crucified. Here Edwards isn't as careful and none of it works. It just feels lazy. It's worrisome for the future of these films though I have more faith in Rian Johnson than I did Edwards.

I'd rank Rogue One after TFA and closer to the prequels.

User avatar
Luke M
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 9:21 pm

Re: Star Wars

#117 Post by Luke M » Fri Dec 16, 2016 9:32 am

domino harvey wrote:
solaris72 wrote:Teaser for Rogue One.
To give you some idea of how much was reshot, literally everything in this trailer that isn't something exploding or Felicity Jones looking out the window isn't in the film. And Forest Whitaker looks completely different in the movie.
Wow. Even the dialogue of Felicity's scene with the Rebel Alliance is completely different.

User avatar
cdnchris
Site Admin
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:45 pm
Location: Washington
Contact:

Re: Star Wars

#118 Post by cdnchris » Fri Dec 16, 2016 10:34 am

Dr Amicus wrote:
domino harvey wrote:
Not a lot of spoilers one needs to be aware of save one big one that will be inescapable due to its mind-blowing technological marvel
SpoilerShow
Audible "WHAT THE FUCK"s and loud, actual gasps when Peter Cushing showed up. I had no fucking idea CGI had advanced this far, and if this film doesn't win the Visual Effects Oscar, something has gone horribly wrong. Eerily accurate 95% of the time, and scary in its implications for a S1M0NE-style future of cinema
While the above doesn't really spoiler the narrative since it happens early on, one should go in with the shock of it actually occurring-- how long til articles about this aspect are plastered with spoiler headlines about this though? I doubt we even make it til the weekend.
It's a HEADLINE in today's Guardian - so the answer is not very long at all:
SpoilerShow
Matt Zoller Seitz mentions it in his review as well as a sort of aside. I didn't read the comments though I'm sure people were freaking out, which is something he has little patience for now.

I don't think it's too big a deal. I recall them doing the same thing in Revenge of the Sith at the end, and the CGI for that brief moment was horrendous, so any shock from that is already gone.

User avatar
willoneill
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 10:10 am
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Re: Star Wars

#119 Post by willoneill » Fri Dec 16, 2016 11:11 am

SpoilerShow
I thought the Cushing CGI was fine, though I honestly think a lookalike with some digital voice manipulation would have looked better. But the Carrie Fisher/Princess Leia shot at the end was very off-putting.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Star Wars

#120 Post by domino harvey » Fri Dec 16, 2016 11:25 am

SpoilerShow
It's too bad these will be spoiled, as the movie does have fun initially framing them from behind so we think we're only going to get a voice or see their muddled CGI reflection in the window and then the camera starts to move closer and closer to the face to reveal the whole thing. In a film with little intelligence, it's a rare visually clever idea

User avatar
dx23
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 8:52 pm
Location: Puerto Rico

Re: Star Wars

#121 Post by dx23 » Fri Dec 16, 2016 12:03 pm

willoneill wrote:
SpoilerShow
I thought the Cushing CGI was fine, though I honestly think a lookalike with some digital voice manipulation would have looked better. But the Carrie Fisher/Princess Leia shot at the end was very off-putting.
Agreed.
SpoilerShow
Leia looked like one of those mediocre commercials where they used famous stars like Marilyn Monroe and Humphrey Bogart and the CGI looks cheap and creepy.
As for the movie, I enjoyed the third part of it greatly but the the pacing at the beginning and the middle was horrible, which made this a mediocre film in my book. Three things that really annoyed me:
1. how hard the film was trying to put easter eggs and references to the other 7 films and the Rebels series.
2. Alan Tudyk was playing a robot version of Sheldon Cooper from the Big Bang Theory
SpoilerShow
3. Darth Vader's costume look like a cheap ass knockoff that wouldn't even pass as decent for a cosplayer. Why was this? The mask looked extremely loose and rubberish.
But like this guy, I will end up probably doing the same
Image

User avatar
who is bobby dylan
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:50 am

Re: Star Wars

#122 Post by who is bobby dylan » Fri Dec 16, 2016 1:20 pm

Will echo disappointment. A lot to criticize, so will just pick three things.

The best Star Wars films depend on iconic, likable characters, so I'm not sure why they picked a director who's only previous blockbuster film (despite its merits) did not feature any remotely likable human being beyond Juliette Binoche for five minutes. Why couldn't they get her for five minutes in this?

And
SpoilerShow
Given the size of the Death Star how was its construction possibly kept a secret from the Senate and the Rebellion? Do ships in the SW universe cost money? Wouldn't the Senate have to approve and thus notice the massive increase in the budget needed to build and maintain the Death Star? Wouldn't the Rebellion notice the massive reallocation of Imperial forces needed to construct, defend and maintain the Death Star? It would be a more realistic starting point for the Senate and Rebellion to know about the Death Star, but instead the Empire is lying about its purpose. Maybe they claim it has the power to end resource disputes on planets by providing them with clean energy or maybe it can save worlds by re-energizing stars and preventing them from imploding. Maybe they're not lying and it can even do those things, but can also be used as a weapon. This way the Rebels would be active, trying to find out about the Death Star, instead of passive, a friend, told a friend, who told a friend, so now we suddenly know about it and even then don't do anything about it until forced.
And
SpoilerShow
If Disney is going to be making a lot more of these films, but updating things about them (like the gender and race of the protagonists) could we please update the idea that heroism can only be achieved through the death of a father figure. I'm tired of seeing films where both of the hero's parents are killed (Batman, Spiderman reboot, Superman) but, the only death that matters and informs the personality/motivation of the hero is the death of their father. This film is arguably worse in that regard than others because Jyn's mother makes the disgusting and completely stupid decision to abandon her daughter and face certain death with no possibility of saving her husband just to... wound the film's villain. She even gives up the element of surprise. Urgh. In fact, if the family knows this day is coming, why is the farmhouse at the least not rigged with explosives? They all go hide in the hole and when the troopers go to search the house, set off the explosives and wait for Saw Gerrera to pick them up.
Actually, one more
SpoilerShow
Why is there a telepathic slug in this movie? Why are we told by Saw that it leaves you crazy only to have it not leave the person it's used on crazy? Why does Saw say he's through running? When, from what we see in the film he has been based on Jedha for a while, engaged in an active battle. Why not say, I'm through fighting. Or with the help of Jyn come to the realization that his life support systems are making him deranged and say something like, there's nothing left of me to fight and turn off his various life support systems. Decisions like this would be rooted in his actual character. What he says, makes no sense. He clearly has not been running from the Empire. He is, in fact, the only one not running from the Empire. Why does Saw abandon an orphan? And withhold from her a crucial piece of information about his reason for doing so, that he easily could have communicated to her at the time? This movie is full of so many needlessly careless and stupid things. Urgh.
Last edited by who is bobby dylan on Fri Dec 16, 2016 2:31 pm, edited 5 times in total.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Star Wars

#123 Post by domino harvey » Fri Dec 16, 2016 1:29 pm

Regarding your second spoiler
SpoilerShow
I got the distinct impression that the whole father figure storyline was a product of the reshoots. Based on the teaser and initial plot summaries, Jones was a criminal who was offered a chance to clear her record by committing the heist, and then became dedicated to the cause despite being a mercenary. I thought the plot points we got in its place were halfhearted and left Felicity Jones hung out to dry. To be fair, her underwritten part would probably be impossible for any actress, but it doesn't seem suited to Jones' abilities at all.

User avatar
who is bobby dylan
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:50 am

Re: Star Wars

#124 Post by who is bobby dylan » Fri Dec 16, 2016 1:57 pm

SpoilerShow
I got the distinct impression that the whole father figure storyline was a product of the reshoots. Based on the teaser and initial plot summaries, Jones was a criminal who was offered a chance to clear her record by committing the heist, and then became dedicated to the cause despite being a mercenary. I thought the plot points we got in its place were halfhearted and left Felicity Jones hung out to dry. To be fair, her underwritten part would probably be impossible for any actress, but it doesn't seem suited to Jones' abilities at all.
SpoilerShow
That sounds plausible. I was encouraged because I read some reviews going in that you couldn't tell the movie had gone through re-shoots, but the first 1/3 - 2/3 of the movie is a boring mess. Flashback. Different planet. Different planet. Different planet. Different planet. Flashback. Pointless misunderstanding. Death Star. Secret mission where we know what will happen. Another scene in a movie about an ineffective government meeting, and finally the big war scene we've been building up to. Urgh. I just kept thinking for the first 45 minutes, this just seems like a bunch of random pointless scenes/when is this movie going to start? The actors are fine, but with this script and direction they have nothing to do, but stand around in their costumes. In the end Jyn's mother effectively committed suicide and her father was killed (accidentally) by the rebellion, so even her final revenge scene is mucked up. As it is, it might have worked better if we had seen the final fate of Jyn and Cassian first and then pulled back and seen Crennick last, to drive home the point that at least they're dying together, while he's alone.
That said, I had heard negative things about the special effects used for
SpoilerShow
Tarkin, but felt they looked fine. Leia, not so much.
Obviously, no movie is for everyone. So just want to say preemptively that I understand others may not have had the same problems with the film I did, but I second A.O. Scott's take. This movie is thoroughly mediocre and only escapes the fate of being the worst Star Wars movie because of the incredibly low bar set by the (intentionally bad?) prequels.

User avatar
captveg
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:28 pm

Re: Star Wars

#125 Post by captveg » Fri Dec 16, 2016 5:10 pm

cdnchris wrote:I don't think it's too big a deal. I recall them doing the same thing in Revenge of the Sith at the end, and the CGI for that brief moment was horrendous, so any shock from that is already gone.
That was actually actor
SpoilerShow
in prosthetics/makeup in Revenge of the Sith.
SpoilerShow
Image

Post Reply