Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Monday December 28 2015, @03:19PM   Printer-friendly
from the can't-please-everyone dept.

[Editor's Note: By continuing to read this submission, you take full responsibility if the movie gets ruined for you. You were warned!]

Going against the tide of positive reviews for "The Force Awakens" the new Star Wars movie, L'Osservatore Romano, the Vatican's daily newspaper, found much to dislike. Most of the review seems to fault the movie for being more glitz than substance, "more reboot than sequel":

"Not a classy reboot however, like Nolan's Batman, but an update twisted to suit today's tastes and a public more accustomed to sitting in front of a computer than in a cinema."

The reviewer was not impressed with the depiction of the evil characters, particularly when compared to Vader and Palpatine:

"The counterpart of Darth Vader, Kylo Ren, wears a mask merely to emulate his predecessor, while the character who needs to substitute the emperor Palpatine as the incarnation of supreme evil represents the most serious defect of the film," it wrote. "Without revealing anything about the character, all we will say is that it is the clumsiest and tackiest result you can obtain from computer graphics."

In contrast, the newspaper was very impressed with such movies as the James Bond Skyfall, and described Mad Max, Fury Road as a "real, true masterpiece."


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by jbWolf on Monday December 28 2015, @08:32PM

    by jbWolf (2774) <reversethis-{moc.flow-bj} {ta} {bj}> on Monday December 28 2015, @08:32PM (#281821) Homepage

    I just came back from seeing it. I think everyone's being a bit harsh.

    If they take too much from the old movies, then people complain they're copying the old movies. If they don't take enough, then people will complain they aren't enough like the old movies. J.J. ran middle of the road and he's getting complaints from both sides.

    Frankly, Kylo Ren is an interesting character because of his heritage, what he did to his father, and he is obviously not as strong as Vader nor Luke. But he wants to be. Adding the whiny component shows the characters motivation. The mask (both his and Vader's) shows how warped he is. I'm pretty sure J.J. isn't done with him yet.

    As for Rey, she just wanted to be left alone and go back to Jakku, but the force is pushing her to do the things she didn't want to do. It's a twist. By the end, it's quite clear, she is ready to embrace her destiny. Because she was untrained and held her ground against a wounded, trained Jedi, it is quite clear she will become a very powerful Jedi. That got my interest. It also opens up the possibility of untrained force wielders. (a.k.a, witches)

    I read a review a week ago where someone said J.J. played this film safe. I agree and disagree. J.J. pulled a lot from the other movies, but he can move in any direction he wants for the second and third films. It is an excellent setup. The first film showed us he has the know how to make an action film with subtle story points and good character development. And I am SO thankful for character development after Episodes I, II, and III. There was definitely character development in Kylo Ren, Rey, and Finn. And although we didn't see character development in the movie for Luke, Leia, and Han, it is quite obvious they had some things happen to them which changed their personalities. And they played it damn well.

    (And for those who were complaining for months: no lens flares.)

    My personal take? It's better than Return of the Jedi. It's the movie Episode I should have been. And the story arc has the potential to make a fantastic Episode VIII that could be on par with Empire Strikes Back. (I'm not saying it will be. Just that it could. Only time will tell, of course.) Is it perfect? Of course not. Not even Empire was perfect. (Far from it.) But for a Star Wars movie, it was pretty good.

    If you want to enjoy a movie like this, you can't go in with expectations. I think that is the reason why so many people didn't like it.

    --
    www.jb-wolf.com [jb-wolf.com]
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by ikanreed on Monday December 28 2015, @08:47PM

    by ikanreed (3164) Subscriber Badge on Monday December 28 2015, @08:47PM (#281835) Journal

    But for a Star Wars movie, it was pretty good.

    Like I said, not a bad star wars movie. But I think my point on missing some first act fundamentals was still relevant. A thought many people didn't even realize they had: the super-weapon felt like an afterthought because it wasn't even introduced until the second act. Captain Phasma was never properly given a chance to be a villain, and we never cared why they'd throw her in a garbage masher. She was just a costuming choice, rather than an antagonist. It's small bits and pieces that a good story-boarding review ahead of time should have caught.

    • (Score: 2) by jbWolf on Tuesday December 29 2015, @02:21AM

      by jbWolf (2774) <reversethis-{moc.flow-bj} {ta} {bj}> on Tuesday December 29 2015, @02:21AM (#281945) Homepage

      I was just kind of frustrated that nearly all comments for this article were simply saying what was wrong with the movie instead of giving both the pros and cons. (That's the reason I went pro heavy.) It's definitely not a perfect movie and it sounds like you can pick it apart better than I can.

      I'm glad you're emphasizing with your last comment that it's not a bad Star Wars movie.

      It's too bad we can't sit down over a beer and debate the finer points. In this comment [soylentnews.org], you say that every movie had a new outside environment and you thought it would be good to continue the trend. I think that was one of the weaknesses of all six movies. "Desert planet" "City Planet" "Ice Planet" Why can't a planet have all kinds of environments like Earth? And with as many movies as they want to release, they are going to run out of novel environments pretty quickly. I think J.J. made the right call on this one.

      But you say that it's important to establish ecological niche. Totally agree. Although the outside environments may be limited, the character environments should be endless. Jakku and Tatooine had different feels despite both being a desert. Character plotting is important? Totally agree.

      I'm not sure what to say with the editing to make it feel less like Star Wars. I liked a lot of the feel of this movie. On the other hand, I get what you're saying. It's not like the other six. Is this good or bad? I don't know yet. I think I need to watch it a couple of more times. It's also where sitting down with you would be interesting to hear a more detailed take on your opinion on the matter.

      --
      www.jb-wolf.com [jb-wolf.com]