 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
97.34.192.78
In Reply to: RE: How about Star Wars ? (spoilers) posted by Ross on December 22, 2015 at 19:01:01
LA Times movie review,Admit it: 'Star Wars: The Force Awakens' stinks -- and here's why
"On Christmas Day, I fulfilled my duty as an American consumer and took the family to see the new "Star Wars" movie. The excursion solved a mystery: Why do so many of the reviews, even the enthusiastic ones, carry an undertone of disappointment?
The simple answer is that "Star Wars: The Force Awakens," is not very good. It's professionally made in the sense that it displays an industrial level of Quality Control. But it's depressingly unimaginative and dull in long stretches, and -- crucially -- reproduces George Lucas' original 1977 movie slavishly almost to the point of plagiarism.
This isn't to say that it's not an enjoyable way to spend a couple of hours. If you're among the millions who plainly have done so, bless your heart. The issue, however, is whether "The Force Awakens" even deserves to be considered as a movie, because it's not. It's the anchoring element of a vast commercial program, painstakingly factory-made for maximal audience appeal, which means maximal inoffensiveness. The result tells us a lot about the state of entertainment today, and about the future of Hollywood."
Edits: 12/29/15Follow Ups:
IMHO, it's an accurate review. I'm a Star Wars fan and this latest movie was a huge disappointment. The amount of plagiarizing from the original is laughable. It was dull and boring at times and some of the new characters were just not that interesting and/or irritating. They did very little in the way of filling you in on what happened after Return of the Jedi. $200 million was spent making the movie and they couldn't come up with an original ending?! One that had already been done much better. The praise hoisted on this movie is just bewildering.
I would say the audiences have grown up but the film did not. I can barely watch the original because we have all become perhaps more cynical with age. I am pretty sure the people who made this film at Star Wars fans. They were paying homage at every turn to Star Wars lore. They brought back the original cast....The problem for any movie franchise like this is that it has to stay within the trope of the prior films. They can't turn it into a Blade Runner bleak film....it's a science fantasy not a science fiction film.
Like Empire...we can all hope the second film will be better...it has a chance because there won't need to be a lot of character introduction. They will likely follow the same arc as Empire with Rey being trained by a certain Jedi Master to harness her raw talent.
Daisy Ridley was the best thing about Force Awakens...The second movie may be able to now move away from this first entry in a set of three.
The Force Awakens is vastly better than all three prequels combined. I'd argue it's better than Return and has better pacing than the original....which is difficult to sit through.
I would have preferred some originality...but never forget that all Star Wars ever was was white hat VS black hat...set in space. There's only so much that can be done within the confines of this genre. And strictly looking at it as a Star Wars film within the world of Star Wars I enjoyed it enough. Ridley has a highly watchable quality...and I don't mean just looks. She carried the film for me enough to give it a thumbs up.
Movies are a lot like high-end audio. Now matter how mediocre something is, there are going to be those people who think it's great.
George Lucas was recently interviewed and referred to Disney's acquisition of the Star Wars franchise as "white slavers". He went on to say that "American filmmakers don't have much freedom because Hollywood has to adhere to a very narrow line of commercialism. The other thing that got abused -naturally, in a capitalistic society - especially in the American point of view- the studios said Wow, we can make a lot of money. This is a license to kill. And they did it. And of course the only way you can do that is to not take chances. Only do something that's proven. They went on to do a retro movie."
RGA states: "The Force Awakens is vastly better than all three prequels combined. I'd argue it's better than Return and has better pacing than the original....which is difficult to sit through."
RGA, you got to lay off that crack pipe : )
I think most reviewers agree that this is a better film than the three prequels that Lucas put out - see rottentomatoes as evidence to this effect. Return of the Jedi was the weakest of the three original movies - I just rewatched the three originals this past weekend - and actually I would reverse my stance on the original - it was rewatchable surprisingly.
Lucas' indictment on Hollywood where he made his billions is a bit laughable. He's a terrible director and the prequels episode 1-2-3 were unwatchable. I actually walked out of the Phantom Menace - one of the only times I've walked out on a film it was so obnoxiously bad. And I sat through "I Spit on Your Grave."
This is the typical summer blockbuster released over Christmas to make a killing at the box office where there are no other big blockbusters. This is a blockbuster spectacle based movie - it's no deeper or shallower than any of the previous entries. Star Wars never was - for that Star Trek the TV series was vastly more thought provoking.
Not sure what you were expecting from a Star Wars movie - high expectations is a mistake from such kinds of movies. For what it is it's well done - and like the original 3 films doesn't get bogged down by long tedious senate discussions and lack of character development.
The review that summed up the Phantom menace and the prequels to a tee.
I guess Disney/Lucas designed episode VII for the already existing fans craving yet another Star Wars.Yes. Incorporated are many of the plot elements from episode IV. As reboots go, this is probably a good starting point to build upon.
The original characters have mostly aged out. New characters must be developed to replace the old. This would account for the 'slow' portions of the film. Getting to know the newbies. Gaining awareness of the landscape and politics of the worlds surrounding this episode.
Perhaps screenplay writer Kirchner gave his perceived audience enough credit to have an attention span greater than 3 minutes. Beyond that of your pet cocker spaniel. Some dogs having an attention span of ~27 seconds. Some Chimpanzee's have been tested to have better memory recall than many humans. So I presume Kirchner settled on pacing his film so that a chimp could follow it.
I'm not sure where that puts me but I was able to stay with the film during the 'slow' portions that exist between the action sequences.
All in all I thought the dialog was written quite a bit better than in episodes IV through VI. I perceive it was not so much written for 12 yr. olds as were the originals.
-Steve
Edits: 12/29/15 12/29/15
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
