Oh well three movies I won't be seeing.
Yeah, I'll simply skip them.
Certain corners of Movie Twitter are going to be beside themselves with rage.
I mean Star Wars Twitter.I don't know if there's much crossover between Movie Twitter and Toxic Star Wars Fandom twitter though. Movie Twitter quite likes TLJ - they're not as prone to walking out of a movie in December 2015 and never, ever, ever reappraising if what they thought happened in it two seconds after the movie was over was maybe ... wrong, for example.
If it's any consolation, Johnson's star has risen a bit in the public eye since TLJ, because Knives Out was such a huge hit. Coupled with the fact that he probably won't be touching sacred cows from the OT with his trilogy, the general response will hopefully be a lot more positive. Maybe that'll be enough to drown out the diehard haters.I mean Star Wars Twitter.
I already wish Johnson would just uproot his trilogy and make it not Star Wars. I don't want to deal with the fanbase regarding this - it was genuinely startling to rewatch TLJ and feel the joy it brought me because I associate it with so much misery.
It's going to be interesting to see how that pans out, and to see if TLJ is treated differently to the Abrams films either side of it.If it's any consolation, Johnson's star has risen a bit in the public eye since TLJ, because Knives Out was such a huge hit. Coupled with the fact that he probably won't be touching sacred cows from the OT with his trilogy, the general response will hopefully be a lot more positive. Maybe that'll be enough to drown out the diehard haters.
And it's just idle speculation for now anyway, since we're probably still years away from it. And who knows, because of that delay, maybe the ST will finally begin to benefit from the nostalgia curve; I won't expect the Johnson trilogy to be complete for at least another five years, and the gap between TLJ and that will be comparable to the gap between the PT and TCW near its height, when prequel apologia was really starting to gather momentum.
Johnson trilogy is still on, he's just busy with other stuff ATM
I mean Star Wars Twitter.
I already wish Johnson would just uproot his trilogy and make it not Star Wars. I don't want to deal with the fanbase regarding this - it was genuinely startling to rewatch TLJ and feel the joy it brought me because I associate it with so much misery.
Totally missed this at the time, kinda like it. Actually, for that matter I need to figure out which if any of the Resistance heroes would be able to go undercover in an FO facility with their face on show. I think it might only be Kaydel.The only way I think the drug runner thing could work for Poe is if he was working undercover doing a point break type thing.
It's like a retroactive propaganda film for the New Republic, "look guys we always were the actually good ones at warfare and we were always fighting the imperials"..I mean, I feel the song is totally at odds with the nature of the Rebel Alliance.
Like as in most of the Rebel Leadership at some point or other has put their lives on the line for the Rebellion. Mothma was nearly killed in an Imperial mop up of the Senate, Dodanna was an Imperial Defector and lead his forces in battles where his own life was on the line, Princess Leia was literally tortured and her father and people paid the ultimate price for resistance.
I mean, the Rebels would be more likely to have songs like 'Mon Mothma is with us on our Campaigns' or 'Onwards to Coruscant!' considering who's supposed to be who in Vietname comparison.I mean, I feel the song is totally at odds with the nature of the Rebel Alliance.
Like as in most of the Rebel Leadership at some point or other has put their lives on the line for the Rebellion. Mothma was nearly killed in an Imperial mop up of the Senate, Dodanna was an Imperial Defector and lead his forces in battles where his own life was on the line, Princess Leia was literally tortured and her world, a prosperous one, paid the ultimate price for resistance.
I go back and forth on what I believe, tbh. Because Lucas has talked about the tone and direction of the films being very deliberate (which makes these the blockbuster equivalents of Tom Hooper musical adaptations, I suppose) and they are so dogged on refusing to do the obvious things in terms of shots.The thing is, I don't think these were actual choices Lucas made. I just think this was another manifestation of him not being on the top of his game/ becoming to obsessed with certain ideas for his own good. A big part of this is the direction of his actors. From what I've seen from interviews, the actors admit to having had a super hard time emoting or hitting proper emotional beats because of the green-screen environments they were in. Since they didn't have an actual physical environment to attach their existence to they couldn't put themselves into the situations without help. Now, this hurdle could have been overcome with good direction but, apparently, that didn't happen. And I really do think it was bad direction because all of his actors (Yes, even Christensen) were incredibly talented people when they were on game. But they weren't. The only performance I think is completely solid is McDiarmid followed by McGregor. Everyone else...
While I do think the complaint of too much CG might come down to taste, I do think the overabundance of green screen probably did drop a bomb into the acting (and possibly more intimate forms of cinematography). The more time goes on, the more and more I see the Prequels as the film equivalent of first drafts. Great ideas and vision hampered by a lack of cleaning up or at least of putting in supports to minimize style and direction problems (like say getting a co-director or some kind of equivalent specifically to help the actors with their performances and getting people to clean up dialogue which are the two big problems I have with the Prequels).
One thing to consider is all green screen filming has come a long way, at the time there was basically no experience with it in the industry at all, whereas now it is a completely different story.I go back and forth on what I believe, tbh. Because Lucas has talked about the tone and direction of the films being very deliberate (which makes these the blockbuster equivalents of Tom Hooper musical adaptations, I suppose) and they are so dogged on refusing to do the obvious things in terms of shots.
But on the other hand, filming in a subjective way, I imagine, takes plenty of time and thought, and blocking was probably tricky on green screens early on.
True, but looking at Lord of the Rings, filmed around the same time, the difference in the cinematography is stark. Those movies are shot to be subjective as hell, including their green screen sequences. Which is part of what leads me to believe that Lucas may well have been making very deliberate but misaimed choices.One thing to consider is all green screen filming has come a long way, at the time there was basically no experience with it in the industry at all, whereas now it is a completely different story.
"Undercut" is definitely the right word, I'd say. I spent so much of my rewatch (only coming a week after I watched the most divisive Star War and it gave me all the feels once again) going "but why this shot?" because there's so much that just doesn't serve the needs of the scene half as well as it could. Which is then accentuated by parts that feel like Lucas is just flexing in the effects-heavy sequences. And a baffling bit when Obi-Wan's about to fight Grievous where we get the only extreme close-ups for the film. That would be appropriate for a climactic face-off when the drama's built to a head.Which I definitely think too. A big part of this is people having to figure out the cutting edge tech and how to work around it's deficiencies.
This is part of what I mean when I say Lucas got too obsessed with certain ideas. He got so into that green screen tech as a way to bring his vision to life that he didn't (or wouldn't; YMMV) account and correct for the problems it spawned. It's really too bad that he didn't either pull back just enough to make it not so bad or didn't do the work needed to minimize the issues.
Edit: Responding to IfIhadAHammer. Bluntblade ninja'd me.
2nd edit so I can respond to bluntblade without double posting: I think those two things aren't necessarily exclusive. Part of why I could never join the full out Prequel apologists, despite having an appreciation for them, is how I think Lucas' deficiencies during the product outright undercut what he was trying to do and say.
In particular, how his writing completely distorted what he was trying to say about the Jedi; spawning all the the-Jedi-are-an-evil-child-stealing-cult bullshit that people refuse to abandon even with the new EU giving it a wide berth.
Part of why I could never join the full out Prequel apologists, despite having an appreciation for them, is how I think Lucas' deficiencies during the product outright undercut what he was trying to do and say.
In particular, how his writing completely distorted what he was trying to say about the Jedi; spawning all the the-Jedi-are-an-evil-child-stealing-cult bullshit that people refuse to abandon even with the new EU giving it a wide berth.
This might be me being extremely cynical, but I feel like half of this newfound appreciation is just the Prequels being used as a tool to bash the sequel trilogy. Like there's been a whole lot of "Lucas was robbed, lucas' vision was distorted by Disney" and other nonsense like that.