Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker (2019)

This is topic Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker (2019) in forum Film Handlers' Movie Reviews at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=002463

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 12-19-2019, 11:23 PM:

I went into this one with high hopes, given the "mixed emotions" that followed "The Last Jedi." And for the most part, I really really liked this new and final chapter.

The movie managed to press all the right buttons, the action scenes were appropriately spectacular, and there were some genuine surprising twists along the way. My friend Keith, during one of the battle scenes, turned to me and said "This is just so freaking GOOD!"

The sound mix was terrific, and John Williams knocked it out of the park again with his score. I love hearing the end title theme kick in - it is kind of sad thinking this will be probably be the last movie to feature that music.

And I was extremely glad that they gave away virtually no major plot twists or surprises in the trailers. There were several what I call "holy crap!" moments. I would recommend that people not read any reviews or articles on this movie until after seeing it, because there's gonna be spoilers, I can almost guarantee it. (Not in this review, though!)

The only thing that I found a little hard to take was the Carrie Fisher scenes, just knowing they were spliced in from old footage. I found myself distracted whenever she was on screen and trying to figure out where in the last couple of movies those scenes could have fit. I kind of wish they hadn't talked about those scenes so much in the months prior to this movie. But that is a small quibble.

While watching the movie I found myself wondering what the haters were gonna hate on. I'm sure haters'll be piling on, because this is a movie that's truly in a no-win position. If they make a movie that's just like one of the previous ones, they'll get criticized for not being innovative. And if they're innovative and move the characters in different directions (like they did the last time out), they'll get trashed for straying too far from the Star Wars "model."

Whatever. Haters gonna hate. I thought it was great fun, very satisfying, and a hell of a good ending to the saga. Four out of five stars from me. (I don't think I've ever given a movie five stars.... I'm always looking for the next movie to be better.)

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 12-19-2019, 11:46 PM:

There are certainly some plot points to nit pick, but overall I really enjoyed it. I felt a combination of joy, sadness, and satisfaction at the ending. The way the story wrapped up was very satisfying, and I loved some of the little nods within the story.

My feeling is much of the criticism of the Star Wars sequels and prequels stems from people having them on such a pedestal. Nothing is every going to live up to the memory of seeing the original movies as kids/young adults. Especially since we have seen so many other movies borrow on Star Wars story lines, and often do them better. Of the nine 'Skywalker Saga' movies, the only one I didn't like was Revenge of the Sith. The writing and dialog in that movie is horrible and painful.

Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 12-21-2019, 02:07 PM:

The reviews out there are somewhat of a mixed bag, but lately, it also has become somewhat of a trend to pick on Disney and what they did to Star Wars, just for the sake of it.

Let me start with saying that I, despite the nitpicking that will follow, really enjoyed the movie. There was lots of action, great special effects, a very strong soundtrack, a good soundmix and I ended up seeing it in 3D and it didn't even suck. No, it's most definitely not the best Star Wars movie ever, but I doubt we will ever see a NEW best Star Wars movie. What happened back there in 1977 is a lucky coincidence of a wacky story teller, a limited budget and therefore a studio that made sure this wacky story teller didn't run rampant with his wacky ideas. What came out of it was one of the most defining movies of that era, but if you look back at it, it was almost by accident and yes, even Lucas agrees on that. The chances of that ever happening again to the same franchise are close to zero.

I had some serious issues with The Last Jedi, not even so much the apparent blatant feminism on display, but rather the many plot holes and irrelevant side stories. I know it's a fantasy franchise, but when even basic logic fails, my brain starts to melt down in the process.

Given the relative mess that this previous movie left, they only had a limited amount of options to get it right in this movie and some of those "error corrections" pretty much feel just like that.

As a result of this, some of the reveals that ended up in this movie, really should've taken place in the previous movie. It worked great for "Empire" in the Original Trilogy and since photocopiers were running overtime anyways, they could've copied this piece of concept too. This also has the effect of this movie being overly dark.

Also, there is a lot of "fan service" in this movie, but I guess that's what everybody more-or-less expects from a Star Wars movie, especially one that's considered to be canon for the so-called "Skywalker Saga".

My biggest gripe with this latest trilogy is that Disney never seemed to have an overarching plan, it's like they just came up with the story while they went along with it. As a result, those movies feel a bit like they were made by a committee that made sure that they checked all the right boxes:

[x] The right balance of races
[x] The right balance of gender representations across all ranks
[x] The right amount of humor
[x] The right amount of new toys to sell
...

What I really missed in all of those three movies was some underlying idea. Some strong individual with a vision that goes further than the end of the current movie at hand.

quote: Mike Blakesley
The only thing that I found a little hard to take was the Carrie Fisher scenes, just knowing they were spliced in from old footage. I found myself distracted whenever she was on screen and trying to figure out where in the last couple of movies those scenes could have fit.

I personally thought it would've been more fitting if they would've said goodbye to her in the previous movie. She died in late 2016, bringing her back like this feels more than just a bit unethical and also unnecessary.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 12-21-2019, 03:13 PM:

quote: Marcel Birgelen
[x] The right balance of races
[x] The right balance of gender representations across all ranks

I had a conversation with a friend who was griping about exactly that. We must have equality and political correctness, no matter how silly it might seem in the story context. It's why we got female Ghostbusters, and why every woman in an action movie can fight and shoot just as well as the men can.

My friend says "Disney has ruined Star Wars with all this nonsense." I said, "It's not Disney's fault.... any other studio would have done the same thing."

What amazes me is the number of internet trolls who are starting out their horrible review comments by saying things like "I haven't seen the movie but from what I'm hearing..."

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 12-21-2019, 04:30 PM:

quote: Marcel Birgelen
[x] The right balance of races
[x] The right balance of gender representations across all ranks

This argument kind of bothers me, especially in Star Wars. Hollywood has made a mistake for too many years by prioritizing white dudes. As a result, it can be somewhat jarring when we see diversity in a movie. Even making it look like the film makers were intentionally "checking boxes".

In the context of Star Wars, it actually doesn't make sense to have homogeneous "humans" because they all come from different places in the galaxy. Even if you assume the 'humans' started on one planet and spread out to different planets over time, the reality is there would be a wide diversity in the way they look.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 12-21-2019, 06:29 PM:

This reviewer thinks they should have stopped after the first movie... I know quite a few people that worked on the first film and many of them feel the same way. This last installment had a 200 million dollar budget and has only grossed about 60 million so far.

Why Star Wars Should Have Stopped At Just One Film

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 12-21-2019, 10:02 PM:

I've never talked to anyone who felt they should have stopped after the FIRST movie. I've talked to a lot of people who wish they'd stopped after the third one.

I don't understand people who know they're going to hate everything new... why do they bother to watch the new ones?

Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 12-21-2019, 10:43 PM:

quote: Justin Hamaker
This argument kind of bothers me, especially in Star Wars. Hollywood has made a mistake for too many years by prioritizing white dudes. As a result, it can be somewhat jarring when we see diversity in a movie. Even making it look like the film makers were intentionally "checking boxes".

Let me be clear that I don't mind racial diversity in Hollywood productions and this list wasn't meant to point that out, it's a non-inclusive list, to which you could add like 10 or 20 other items. I also don't think that political correctness has killed Star Wars. Even Jar Jar didn't manage to kill Star Wars.

That being said, did you ever think, while watching the original trilogy... Hey, those movies are kind-of racist, because they're missing a whole bunch of black dudes and Asian girls?

I think they got very lucky with the main cast they got back then. There was a special kind of chemistry between them, one which we yet have to see in any new Star Wars movie.

I'm also not referring to this movie alone, but rather the whole sequel trilogy. If you start to analyze the movies more, especially the previous one, because of lack of compelling story, then you clearly see that most of it really isn't much more than an effort to "check all the right boxes", of which there are quite a few more, for example:

[x] Appeal to the existing Star Wars fans by bringing back old memories.
[x] Appeal to new Star Wars fans by bringing in some new stuff that connects more with the younger generations.

What I want to indicate is that it's clear to me that the Star Wars franchise misses somewhat of a visionary. It's like Apple without Steve Jobs. A Pixar without John Lasseter. To me it's clear that all the Star Wars sequels simply have been a product of its own. They simply hired a bunch of writers to figure it out from there. They may have had a guiding story for the trilogy, but what they had, they threw overboard and it was replaced with three separate installments, every installment struggling more and more to justify the choices made in the previous one.

quote: Justin Hamaker
In the context of Star Wars, it actually doesn't make sense to have homogeneous "humans" because they all come from different places in the galaxy. Even if you assume the 'humans' started on one planet and spread out to different planets over time, the reality is there would be a wide diversity in the way they look.

In case of Star Wars, I tend not to think about it too much, you know, because it's not hard Sci-Fi, it's a space opera gone wild. How likely would it be that there are all kinds of beings scattered around a whole bunch of planets, "a long time ago, in a galaxy far far away", that just look like humans? (And most of them happen to speak English too! [Smile]

quote: Mike Blakesley
My friend says "Disney has ruined Star Wars with all this nonsense." I said, "It's not Disney's fault.... any other studio would have done the same thing."

I don't think that is what "ruined" Star Wars, if Star Wars ever was ruined to begin with.

I personally only started to point out the rather blatant layer of feminism in the previous movie, once I simply couldn't concentrate on the story, because it was so damn illogical.

Once your suspension of disbelief starts to break down, it is when all those things start to become clear and you start to pick apart the movies on that kind of arguments. That being said, I think that a Star Wars movie is a particular bad vessel for any real political message, there are better suited movies for those.

And I'm not indicating that I'm opposing feminism, as long as it doesn't become its own version of racism against men. But please, why do you have to put it so blatantly into a much beloved Star Wars franchise?

quote: Mike Blakesley
I've never talked to anyone who felt they should have stopped after the FIRST movie.

Maybe they're confusing Star Wars with the Matrix? [Razz]

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 12-21-2019, 11:32 PM:

quote: Marcel Birgelen
Let me be clear that I don't mind racial diversity in Hollywood productions and this list wasn't meant to point that out, it's a non-inclusive list, to which you could add like 10 or 20 other items.

I wasn't trying to imply that in my post either. But what sorta bugs me is, they'll take a movie series like the original Star Wars, which happened to star a lot of white people, and then the 1-2-3 trilogy, which ALSO starred a bunch of white folks, if I remember correctly...and the men did most of the fighting, remember.... and now here comes 7-8-9, in which the galaxy has suddenly become so diverse and all the women are now badass fighters. It's not that any of this is bad, it just doesn't fit the previous chapters, and it plays into the whole "they're just trying to check all the boxes" thing. And makes people think they've betrayed the original stories, even if that was not the intention.

We are getting very positive reactions from people here, much better chatter after the movie than "The Last Jedi," so I think it'll have good legs. One lady told me she's probably going to be back "at least four more times."

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 12-22-2019, 02:19 PM:

Marcel, keep in mind that Lucas was responsible for the prequel trilogy, which was pretty bad compared to episodes 7-9.

Realistically, I don't think some fans are going to be satisfied by any Star Wars movie beyond the original trilogy - maybe even including Jedi. I think these fans have an idealized idea of what Star Wars should be, and just can't accept anything new because it doesn't live up to expectations.

When Phantom Menace was released, it was criticized by many people - and not just for Jar Jar - who felt it was not true to the idea of the force. Except that this was literally written by the person who created Star Wars. If Lucas's vision for what a Star Wars film should be is rejected, it shows that pretty much nothing will be accepted. When you look at the prequels and the SE tweaks to the original trilogy, it's pretty clear that Lucas's vision was much more campy than many fans take it.

Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 12-22-2019, 04:09 PM:

Justin, as you might have seen, I've kept George Lucas out of my very short list of "visionaries", because I never considered George Lucas himself to be it. The prequel trilogy is a perfect example of what happens when you give him almost free reign and he finds himself surrounded by a bunch of yes-sayers. The result is... interesting, but probably not what you'd expected.

You just need to look at THX 1138 or American Graffiti to see what a mostly unfiltered George Lucas movie looks like and although you'll find many elements of what later became Star Wars in there, it's clear that the original Star Wars trilogy simply isn't an unfiltered George Lucas production. He was primarily the source for the wacky universe, the characters in them and a general guidance for the stories that made it tick. But others essentially made it work for him, both during filming and in post-production. The dialog was extensively rewritten, even during filming. This apparently even angered some of the cast like Alec Guinness. Some of the more memorable moments with Harrison Ford were apparently even improvised on the spot. Maybe this "trying to make it work out together" among the cast is what caused the chemistry between them to even work better, as they apparently struggled with the almost "Ed Woodish" directing from Lucas. The movie was extensively changed in the edit too. His ex-wife essentially changed the entire tone of the movie by completely re-editing it from its original cut. Also, both "Empire" and "Jedi" weren't even directed by him anymore.

Another great example of Lucas being his own worst enemy is the "Special Editions" we got back in the late 90s. Many people (me included), hate most of those little additions he put in there so much, they would proudly give LucasFilm extra money, only to get a decent digital copy of the movies without all the junk added. Ah, and did you ever watch the infamous The Star Wars Holiday Special? Another "interesting" piece of unfiltered George Lucas.

So, like I mentioned before, what we got back in 1977 was more like a fluke. More or less against all odds, mostly due to sheer luck of how things played out and how George Lucas didn't have complete control of his own movie, this movie that would otherwise just been a side-note in movie history, happened to become that cultural beacon, even to a point that it's broadly being considered one of the most significant (but certainly not best) movies ever made...

quote: Mike Blakesley
I wasn't trying to imply that in my post either. But what sorta bugs me is, they'll take a movie series like the original Star Wars, which happened to star a lot of white people, and then the 1-2-3 trilogy, which ALSO starred a bunch of white folks, if I remember correctly...and the men did most of the fighting, remember.... and now here comes 7-8-9, in which the galaxy has suddenly become so diverse and all the women are now badass fighters.

Well, that's the point I'm trying to make, without really trying to judge it on its values. I know why Disney is doing it, as a big, international corporation. I'm wondering though, if it's really in their best interests, to try to be as political correct as possible all the time, since they will get a lot of heat for that too.

Regarding the "racial mix" of the human characters in previous trilogies; The only black actor as part of the major cast I can come up with for the original trilogy is Lando Calrissian, introduced in Empire.

For the prequels it's only Mace Windu (played by Samuel L. Jackson), which is present in all three of them.

There were off course, James Earl Jones as the voice of Darth Vader and, somewhat ironically*, Ahmed Best, as the "motion capture" actor for Jar Jar Binks, but since you don't see them on-screen for even a second, you can hardly count them.

* I remember there being some controversy regarding the Jar Jar character as in much of its antics were supposedly based on black Caribbean stereotypes.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 12-22-2019, 06:29 PM:

quote: Marcel Birgelen
That being said, did you ever think, while watching the original trilogy... Hey, those movies are kind-of racist, because they're missing a whole bunch of black dudes and Asian girls?

Non-white people were asking that question 40 years ago. Very few white people cared to listen.

Back then bigots were losing their shit when a Black actor such as Billy Dee Williams turned up in an important role in the Star Wars saga. Flash forward to The Force Awakens and a bunch of people were losing their shit over a Black Stormtrooper. I guess it wasn't such a bad thing in 2002 when Clone Warriors looked like Māori men from Polynesia.

White-washing has been a very long-lived, widespread tradition in Hollywood and other parts of the entertainment industry. Only in recent years we've seen deciders changing tactics a bit. But they're certainly not mixing in more brown and yellow faces among the white crowd just to be politically correct. Not all. It's all about MARKETING and making more money.

I've noticed this growing trend in TV commercials for various products that involve diverse families. The dad will be some white guy, the mom will be a black woman and they'll have one or more mixed race children. On a personal level I don't mind it since my girlfriend is Black. And I would find it a bit enjoyable if these commercials offended the living hell out of the racist crowd. Nevertheless, the trend is about expanding the customer base. Nothing more.

As to what "ruined" Star Wars, if anything it was the Ewoks and crass commercialism to sell out. Let's make a shit ton of money selling toys and other merchandise. A lot of people, film critics and historians in particular, hate on Star Wars because that movie paved the way for the very corporate, stale tide of sequels, remakes and other crap to reduce movies down to nothing more than a commodity to be sold. Star Wars itself was a very risky yet very ground-breaking, innovative project. So much of what has followed has been re-treading over the same idea. There's far too little of anyone taking big chances on new ideas these days.

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 12-23-2019, 11:18 AM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
There's far too little of anyone taking big chances on new ideas these days.

Unfortunately we've seen over and over that when audiences vote with their money, they mainly prefer the familiar.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 12-23-2019, 12:16 PM:

quote: Justin Hamaker
Unfortunately we've seen over and over that when audiences vote with their money, they mainly prefer the familiar.

I don't think that's an entirely fair point. The reality of what supposedly sells and why is more complicated.

One issue is the limited selection of movies that are booked in the average big box shopping center multiplex theater. Another is the wildly uneven marketing push from one movie to the next. Most people don't care enough about movies to actively go searching for content that isn't run of the mill. They end up choosing from a very limited selection of shows, if they even bother to go to the theater at all. Attendance levels are down this year, even with Avengers: Endgame setting dollar gross records and a new Star Wars installment hitting theaters this month.

Movie-goers do have a long tradition of screwing themselves out of watching great movies. There is stubborn mindset of anti-intellectualism among some movie-goers which makes them avoid movies that have drawn strong critical praise. If a TV commercial or trailer for a movie features a bunch of film festival logos bracketed by laurel wreath icons that's a dead give-away it must be some boring, artsy fartsy shit.

The movie marketing machine sometimes tries to take advantage of this phenomenon in an attempt to save a movie savaged by critics. Cats is a new example; some stars of the movie are suggesting the public is going to rush out to see the movie anyway because the "critics don't matter." Meanwhile theaters are receiving replacement DCPs of Cats with "improved visual effects."

Anyway, I roll my eyes with disdain when I hear a friend or acquaintance rave about some movie he "discovered" on TV at home and follow it with the complaint "too bad movies like that don't play here in Lawton," when in fact the movie did play here, briefly to a nearly empty auditorium. It was like that with movies such as The Usual Suspects.

I wonder if the very steep decline of movie advertising in newspapers has had an effect on booking trends in average multiplex theaters.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 12-23-2019, 02:12 PM:

quote: Bobby Henderson
So much of what has followed has been re-treading over the same idea. There's far too little of anyone taking big chances on new ideas these days.

This reminded me of George Lucas's famous comment after Episodes 1, 2 and 3 were done... he said "Why would I make any more [Star Wars movies], when everybody yells at you all the time and says what a terrible person you are?"

I expect Disney might feel the same way, considering some of the "fans" don't like ANYthing ANYbody does, including the guy who created the saga in the first place.

The thing they all fail to get is, there's no duplicating the thrill of experiencing something for the first time, especially if the thing was a major cultural phenomenon. It'd be the same if Universal bought Marvel from Disney and tried to make a new Iron Man movie. It could be the best movie ever made in the history of time, but fans of the original would say it sucked because it didn't feel the way the original did.

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 12-23-2019, 02:22 PM:

I'm going to start a thread in Film Yak so we don't complete hijack the Star Wars review page.

Continued discussion about the role of moviegoer choice in sequels vs original content.

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 12-30-2019, 10:04 AM:

OK, so, first of all, the cast diversity isn't a problem with the most recent trilogy. The problem is a complete lack of chemistry between the cast. The original cast in the original trilogy seemed like they were having an adventure together and it was fun to watch. The prequels (other than Anakin at times) had characters played by really good actors that made it seem like you were watching a serious drama, at least when Jar Jar Binks wasn't on screen.

Part of this is probably the fault of JJ Abrams but Oscar Isaac plays Poe like he stepped out of one of the new Star Trek movies and landed in Star Wars by accident. John Boyega playing Finn sort of robotic makes sense since he was a storm trooper but that doesn't mesh well with being part of a group of "buddies" on an adventure.

Rey isn't really fun and flirty or serious and determined. It's kind of like she is fighting against the enemy because she is forced (no pun intended) to. Contrast that with the immature/bratty Luke Skywalker in the original that was motivated by his back story fed to him by Obi Wan.

Also, contrast the Rey character to Carrie Fisher's Leia in the original trilogy. She was a determined leader but also fun and flirty. Speaking of Rey, it's nice that a scavenger orphan was able to afford a fashion designer to make her perfectly form fitting pants and a nice flowing blouse/jacket for this installment.

Spoiler Alert - Click to Toggle

It was nice that JJ Abrams managed to bring back all sorts of characters from the past even when they were dead. Should have let Chewbacca die and also shouldn't have restored C3POs memory.

At the end, I was thinking that I couldn't believe that he ripped off the plot of Return of the Jedi without the Ewoks but, then, they appeared as well.

I also agree that the Carrie fisher scenes were just weird. It was like back in the day on Full House when the Olson twins would have a line that was clearly shot separately from the person they were talking to. They should have just killed off Leia in the opening scroll.

--------------
A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away...

Princess Leia Organa was killed as she valiantly led a resistance battle and saved planet X
--------------

Or something like that. It was distracting and cringe inducing.

As a standalone space action movie it was entertaining. As the conclusion of the Skywalker saga it was a bit lacking.

As a standalone space action movie I'd say 3 1/2 out of 5 stars
As the conclusion to the Skywalker saga 2 1/2 out of 5 stars

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 12-30-2019, 03:34 PM:

quote: Lyle Romer
The problem is a complete lack of chemistry between the cast.

I think you're right.... I liked the scene near the beginning when Poe and Finn were accusing Chewie of cheating at the Nintendo Live Action Characters game they were playing and was hoping there'd be more of that kind of banter in the film, but then it just got serious. Even C3P0, normally a source of comic relief, gets a tearjerker scene.

Most of the reaction around here has been very positive. One guy told me he thought it was "corny" to which I replied, you could say that about any SW film and he said "That's true, I guess." But mostly people are loving it and I've had a few people say they think the critics are idiots.

Posted by Mark Ogden (Member # 43) on 12-30-2019, 07:48 PM:

quote: Lyle Romer
contrast the Rey character to Carrie Fisher's Leia in the original trilogy

That's not a legitimate comparison, they are not even close to being the same characters. If you want to contrast Rey with Luke Skywalker, then you might have something. Both were nobodies with unclear lineages when they had the fate of the galaxy thrust upon them, both rose to the occasion and harnessed the Force and fought like hell. I don't recall Luke being "fun and flirty" either.