STAR WARS: THE LAST JEDI

[Deleted member 110072]

How to save the Star Wars franchise in three easy steps:

1)Fire Kennedy.

2)Do whatever it takes to get the Russo's to direct the next movie.

3)Rehire Kennedy so she can make sandwiches and get coffee for the Russo's. That is the only way this dumb cunt will make a positive contribution to Star Wars.

Most obviously...

1.Phone Gareth Edwards

2.Apologise profusely

3.Rehire Gareth Edwards

The simple thing that's missing from Disney Starwars is a skilled director of blockbusters who actually cares about Starwars. The success of TFA really was a disaster for Starwars I'd say because it made them think they could just draft in anyone who do what they wanted with a few references and it would sell. The reality is IMHO that film simply traded on massive built up demand for a sequel that even the prequels didn't really tap.

 

[One MMA Fan]

Gareth Edwards

Lol he was removed by the end of the movie.

All the best scenes aren't by him. He has paper characters.

He ain't that good of a director he will never do another SW film.

 

[Deleted member 110072]

Lol he was removed by the end of the movie.

All the best scenes aren't by him. He has paper characters.

He ain't that good of a director he will never do another SW film.

Gilroy definitely helped and I would say the two together as on Godzilla would be an ideal team but the majority of the film is Edwards and indeed I think he was still involved late on if not always in fully control.

As a visual director he absolutely shits on Abrams and Johnson and brings back the same kind of atmosphere we saw in the originals. Abrams especially directs films like a 10 year old playing with Starwars toys shoving things in your face constantly, the same dullvideogame 3rd person view behind some spaceship done again and again and again....

 

[One MMA Fan]

Gilroy definitely helped and I would say the two together as on Godzilla would be an ideal team but the majority of the film is Edwards and indeed I think he was still involved late on if not always in fully control.

As a visual director he absolutely shits on Abrams and Johnson and brings back the same kind of atmosphere we saw in the originals. Abrams especially directs films like a 10 year old playing with Starwars toys shoving things in your face constantly, the same dullvideogame 3rd person view behind some spaceship done again and again and again....

JJ and RJ run circles around GE their not in the same league.

GE is lucky for other contributions like the ending Vader scene he wasn't even there.

 

[Deleted member 110072]

JJ and RJ run circles around GE their not in the same league.

GE is lucky for other contributions like the ending Vader scene he wasn't even there.

Again I think the key thing is both Abrams and Johnson totally fail to create the atmosphere of Starwars, there compositions are overly simplistic(bar Abrams stealing Micheal Bay's tele lens action shots) and in your face as is the design work and lighting, I mean I would say in Johnsons defence he seemed to feel the need to follow Abrams lead.

Edwards actually understood a lot of the visual language of the originals, the lived in depth of his designs, the more sublte and complex compositions, the heavy use of shadow, etc I mean he did add to it as well(most obvious more hand held camera work and shallower focus) but from a starting point close to what came previously where as TFA and TLJ were bog standard modern blockbusters, the odd decent moment but generally something to be digested once and forgotten. They included a lot of designs from Starwars but they really didn't look much like Starwars, well not unless you include parts of the prequels.

 

[One MMA Fan]

Again I think the key thing is both Abrams and Johnson totally fail to create the atmosphere of Starwars, there compositions are overly simplistic and in your face as is the design work and lighting, I mean I would say in Johnsons defence he seemed to feel the need to follow Abrams lead.

Edwards actually understood a lot of the visual language of the originals, the lived in depth of his designs, the more sublte and complex compositions, the heavy use of shadow, etc I mean he did add to it as well(most obvious more hand held camera work and shallower focus) but from a starting point close to what came previously where as TFA and TLJ were bog standard modern blockbusters, the odd decent moment but generally far something to be digested once and forgotten. They included a lot of designs from Starwars but they really didn't look much like Starwars, well not unless you include parts of the prequels.

Yea EG needed to go for an outdated, older look to differentiate them instantly just by visuals and to show this events are happening way back in time. I liked the look don't get me wrong he nailed it but to say he is better then JJ and RJ is a little over the top in my eyes.

JJ knows how to shoot action and knows pace and tone.. indeed his SW was a tad to clean looking for my taste I would prefer the pace and tone of JJ but the visuals of RJ.

Also no idea what happened to Solo but they screwed up the filters and the lighting they tried to be unique but they made it fugly, again to my eyes I'm talking for my own tastes here.

 

[Deleted member 110072]

Yea EG needed to go for an outdated, older look to differentiate them instantly just by visuals and to show this events are happening way back in time. I liked the look don't get me wrong he nailed it but to say he is better then JJ and RJ is a little over the top in my eyes.

JJ knows how to shoot action and knows pace and tone.. indeed his SW was a tad to clean looking for my taste I would prefer the pace and tone of JJ but the visuals of RJ.

Also no idea what happened to Solo but they screwed up the filters and the lighting they tried to be unique but they made it fugly, again to my eyes I'm talking for my own tastes here.

As I pointed out theres actually a lot to Edwards style that is quite modern, the use of handheld cameras and very shallow focus most obviously. What he does though is bring these modern touches to a visual style that understands the strength of the originals to create a similar kind of atmosphere.

Abrams has the odd decent shot to his films but for the most part I think he's a very unambtious director, he falls back to really simple in your face compositions far too much and just goes with bright simple lighting far too often. As I said just look at his space battles, every time its the same with the camera locked right behind a ship like a videogame, in Rogue One as in the originals you have much better thought out shots with ships moving across the frame.

Johnson I think does have more talent and you do have some interesting ideas like the lightspeed ram but for me something like the Deathstar destroying Jedha One is cinema at a much higher level visually and the standard is just much more consistent across the entire film.

 

[One MMA Fan]

As I pointed out theres actually a lot to Edwards style that is quite modern, the use of handheld cameras and very shallow focus most obviously. What he does though is bring these modern touches to a visual style that understands the strength of the originals to create a similar kind of atmosphere.

Abrams has the odd decent shot to his films but for the most part I think he's a very unambtious director, he falls back to really simple in your face compositions far too much and just goes with bright simple lighting far too often. As I said just look at his space battles, every time its the same with the camera locked right behind a ship like a videogame, in Rogue One as in the originals you have much better thought out shots with ships moving across the frame.

Johnson I think does have more talent and you do have some interesting ideas like the lightspeed ram but for me something like the Deathstar destroying Jedha One is cinema at a much higher level visually and the standard is just much more consistent across the entire film.

Okay fair enough.

I just feel you been kinda underrating JJ for many posts now. When ever there is a talk about overall directors you punch JJ .

 

[Deleted member 110072]

Honestly I think Abrams is the biggest fraud in modern film making, I don't think he will be remembered alongside the likes of Spielberg, Cameron or Jackson at all but rather Michael Bay.

He's just very good at picking films that don't need much quality to be a success, franchises coming off of low points where the fans will just accept rather unambitious fun and nostalgia, at least on initial viewing. He's been behind relaucnhing arguably the twop biggest sci fri franchises ever in recent years and in both cases they've gotten into serious trouble with fans by the second film, this isn't a coincidence IMHO.

Honestly I find it depressing just how many people glory in this kind of hack like cinema, Chris Stuckman for example is the grand high priest of bland formulaic cinema he can explain in simple terms to the lowest common denominator.

 

[Clippy]

Honestly I think Abrams is the biggest fraud in modern film making, I don't think he will be remembered alongside the likes of Spielberg, Cameron or Jackson at all but rather Michael Bay.

He's just very good at picking films that don't need much quality to be a success, franchises coming off of low points where the fans will just accept rather unambitious fun and nostalgia, at least on initial viewing. He's been behind relaucnhing arguably the twop biggest sci fri franchises ever in recent years and in both cases they've gotten into serious trouble with fans by the second film, this isn't a coincidence IMHO.

Fan of both SW and ST

And both very similar

First Star Trec back is a safe and simple reboot - rehashing basic story concepts of the franchise

Second Star Trec goes in a new and awful direction and tries to recapture some of the best movie - Wrath of Khan ....

Did he do the third one cause that one was actually good.

 

[Deleted member 110072]

Fan of both SW and ST

And both very similar

First Star Trec back is a safe and simple reboot - rehashing basic story concepts of the franchise

Second Star Trec goes in a new and awful direction and tries to recapture some of the best movie - Wrath of Khan ....

Did he do the third one cause that one was actually good.

The biggest problem is neither film was really Star Trek the same as TFA wasn't really Starwars, it was bland modern blockbuster formula 101 and as the franchise went on the weakness it was all built on became more obvious.

I would say a big issue in recent years is that rewatching blockbusters happens much less, even as recently as Lord of the Rings you had ticket prices at a level people could afford to go several times and even moreso back in the 70's and 80's were films stuck around for months. Its given rise to a "one and done" culture were I think people over rate something that vaguely amuses them for 2 hours whilst reviewers mostly just do what the studios tell them to, its only years latter the real reputation of films is known.

 

[BisexualMMA]

The biggest problem is neither film was really Star Trek the same as TFA wasn't really Starwars, it was bland modern blockbuster formula 101 and as the franchise went on the weakness it was all built on became more obvious.

I agree with you that JJ is more...Emmerich than Spielberg. But I would say that Star Trek 2 and Star Wars 8 failed on their own. The reason Star Trek: Into Darkness wasn't great is that it wasn't great. There was no reason a good second film couldn't have been made on the heels of the Star Trek reboot, and no reason at all Rian had to torpedo everything right after Star Wars 7.

Star Trek 1 and Star Wars 7 were by the numbers, no doubt. But the problems with Into Darkness and Last Jedi were in how they were written, and the preceding films didn't in any way require them to be written poorly, or leave them without better possibilties.

 

[Bob Gray]

Abrams has the odd decent shot to his films but for the most part I think he's a very unambtious director, he falls back to really simple in your face compositions far too much and just goes with bright simple lighting far too often. As I said just look at his space battles, every time its the same with the camera locked right behind a ship like a videogame, in Rogue One as in the originals you have much better thought out shots with ships moving across the frame.

What are you talking about?



Theres like less than 10 seconds total of what you're referring to, and the camera shots and angles frequently change between static, tracking, ships moving in and out of frame, etc.

 

[Deleted member 110072]

I agree with you that JJ is more...Emmerich than Spielberg. But I would say that Star Trek 2 and Star Wars 8 failed on their own. The reason Star Trek: Into Darkness wasn't great is that it wasn't great. There was no reason a good second film couldn't have been made on the heels of the Star Trek reboot, and no reason at all Rian had to torpedo everything right after Star Wars 7.

Star Trek 1 and Star Wars 7 were by the numbers, no doubt. But the problems with Into Darkness and Last Jedi were in how they were written, and the preceding films didn't in any way require them to be written poorly, or leave them without better possibilties.

More that kind of level I'd agree but Emmerich was at least original and had a bit more visual flair to him building up to his big CGI moments like the aliens arriving in ID4 that people remember.

I think part of the issue is that the Abrams formula is basically good for one film per franchise, the second film needs to be more ambitious which reveals a lot of the weaknesses of the first.

 

[Deleted member 110072]

What are you talking about?



Theres like less than 10 seconds total of what you're referring to, and the camera shots and angles frequently change between static, tracking, ships moving in and out of frame, etc.

This is of course a bit different to the sequels like the Tie and Falcon escapes earlier in the film as its a sideshow without as much direct focus(so fewer following shots as I mentioned) but really if I wanted to highlight Abrams inability to handle large scale action I think its a perfect example. I mean literally half the footage their is closeups of pilots in cocpits and what isn't is made up of really simple shots of a small number of ships flying directly at something or just random stuff flying around with no composition to it at all.

This is how you deliver a complex more visually impressive space battle in Starwars...





Its the same in Trek, I mean just compare Wrath of Khan's confronations with Into Darkness, a complex and tacial submarine battle in space version a load of quick cuts and explosions.

 

[Bob Gray]

This is of course a bit different to the sequels like the Tie and Falcon escapes earlier in the film as its a sideshow without as much direct focus(so fewer following shots as I mentioned) but really if I wanted to highlight Abrams inability to handle large scale action I think its a perfect example. I mean literally half the footage their is closeups of pilots in cocpits and what isn't is made up of really simple shots of a small number of ships flying directly at something or just random stuff flying around with no composition to it at all.

This is how you deliver a complex more visually impressive space battle in Starwars...





Its the same in Trek, I mean just compare Wrath of Khan's confronations with Into Darkness, a complex and tacial submarine battle in space version a load of quick cuts and explosions.

Like I said before, your disdain of Abrams seems to skew you a bit. I mean, basically all of the space battles have had a bunch of close up of fighters talking in their cockpit. And even watching your clips, it almost feels like theres MORE of the shots you were complaining about, mainly tagging along behind them like a video game.

If your point is that the Rogue One space battle was better, you'll get no disagreement from me. It's not even close. But honestly it seems like Abrams fucked your girlfriend or something.

 

[Deleted member 110072]

Like I said before, your disdain of Abrams seems to skew you a bit. I mean, basically all of the space battles have had a bunch of close up of fighters talking in their cockpit. And even watching your clips, it almost feels like theres MORE of the shots you were complaining about, mainly tagging along behind them like a video game.

If your point is that the Rogue One space battle was better, you'll get no disagreement from me. It's not even close. But honestly it seems like Abrams fucked your girlfriend or something.

You get some of that in all Starwars of course but I think its clear the Abrams clip you posted has much of it, I mean that whole battle really very little happens. I was responding to the idea that Abrams knows how to direct large scale action on the level of Lucas(well early Lucas anyway), Cameron, Jackson when I really don't think he does.

I mean Abrams isn't responsible for everything wrong with TLS but again I think TFA was a really bad reintroduction to Starwars that put any followup at a big disadvantage the same way his Trek did.

 

[minute bull]

Did he do the third one cause that one was actually good.

Goddamn you. It was Justin Lin the FAT FURIOUS guy.

 

[EvilDDS]

Nice little Darth Vader vid

 

[Bob Gray]

You get some of that in all Starwars of course but I think its clear the Abrams clip you posted has much of it, I mean that whole battle really very little happens. I was responding to the idea that Abrams knows how to direct large scale action on the level of Lucas(well early Lucas anyway), Cameron, Jackson when I really don't think he does.

I mean Abrams isn't responsible for everything wrong with TLS but again I think TFA was a really bad reintroduction to Starwars that put any followup at a big disadvantage the same way his Trek did.

I dont think hes on the level of Cameron and the like either. Then again, I dont really feel like thats a criticism or that people prop him that high. I dont see a lot of people calling Super 8 a classic, or that Force Awakens had the best space battles. But lots of people would disagree with the claim that hes some sort of hack that cant shoot a scene. Theres a wide gulf between your opinion and the other end of the spectrum (Cameron, Spielberg), and I think thats where the majority of people disagreeing with you would reside.