Page 1 of 8 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 118
  1. #1
    Mighty Member Slowpokeking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,135

    Default SW ST aren't just bad movies, it also created a very dull era

    No interesting characters.
    First Order-Awful copy of the Empire.
    New Republic-simply gone.
    The resistance is extremely bland as well

    It made the entire era awful and nearly impossible to extend.

    PT might have problems with the movies, but its era was great and there are so much to develop/explore.

    THIS is why most of the series were based upon dark time or close to OT era, but still you can't change the big picture, maybe that's why they moved to High Republic era.

  2. #2
    Extraordinary Member ChrisIII's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,605

    Default

    Mandalorian and Book of Boba Fett are in the NR era. Although the "Rangers" series might be dead, it seems Disney still has some plans for that period. Not quite the old EU ones, but maybe some conflicts parrarell to that that don't have a big impact on what happens later on. The Ashoka/Thrawn/Ezra thread for instance. Plus some hints in Bad Batch/Mandalorian as well.
    Last edited by ChrisIII; 01-17-2022 at 09:33 PM.
    chrism227.wordpress.com Info and opinions on a variety of interests.

    https://twitter.com/chrisprtsmouth

  3. #3
    Mighty Member Slowpokeking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,135

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisIII View Post
    Mandalorian and Book of Boba Fett are in the NR era. Although the "Rangers" series might be dead, it seems Disney still has some plans for that period. Not quite the old EU ones, but maybe some conflicts parrarell to that that don't have a big impact on what happens later on. The Ashoka/Thrawn/Ezra thread for instance. Plus some hints in Bad Batch/Mandalorian as well.
    ST are in the post-NR era actually. Mandalorian is set in 5 years after RotJ, much closer to the OT era.

  4. #4
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    The ST era was already a bit shakey after TFA, though it *could* have been carefully finessed into a different and fun era. After TLJ made sure to bury the new heroes, deny and advertise an even-more rigid copy-paste of the OT complete with inept idiots for the villains such that hadn’t appeared in the Kasdan-written Star Wars films (ESB, ROTJ, and TFA, actually), and make it so Luke really was just sitting around with his thumb up his ass while Ben Solo was still a loathsome prick, but now a boring one we were supposed to be fascinated with… yeah, it kind of had its neutered nature confirmed.

    Nowadays, there *are* elements or retcons that can change things: actually exploiting Finn instead of trying to bury him, giving Luke successful and surviving students, etc.

    But yeah, it had what already few interesting elements it could have stripped away.
    Like action, adventure, rogues, and outlaws? Like anti-heroes, femme fatales, mysteries and thrillers?

    I wrote a book with them. Outlaw’s Shadow: A Sherwood Noir. Robin Hood’s evil counterpart, Guy of Gisbourne, is the main character. Feel free to give it a look: https://read.amazon.com/kp/embed?asi...E2PKBNJFH76GQP

  5. #5
    Mighty Member Slowpokeking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,135

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by godisawesome View Post
    The ST era was already a bit shakey after TFA, though it *could* have been carefully finessed into a different and fun era. After TLJ made sure to bury the new heroes, deny and advertise an even-more rigid copy-paste of the OT complete with inept idiots for the villains such that hadn’t appeared in the Kasdan-written Star Wars films (ESB, ROTJ, and TFA, actually), and make it so Luke really was just sitting around with his thumb up his ass while Ben Solo was still a loathsome prick, but now a boring one we were supposed to be fascinated with… yeah, it kind of had its neutered nature confirmed.

    Nowadays, there *are* elements or retcons that can change things: actually exploiting Finn instead of trying to bury him, giving Luke successful and surviving students, etc.

    But yeah, it had what already few interesting elements it could have stripped away.
    I think it's a matter of time for the ST to be removed from canon if they want to make more movies after OT era.

  6. #6
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Posts
    11,461

    Default

    If people can pretend the prequels were good and revive that era, then they can do the same for the sequels. I wouldn't even say the sequels are as bad as the prequels

  7. #7
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CosmiComic View Post
    If people can pretend the prequels were good and revive that era, then they can do the same for the sequels. I wouldn't even say the sequels are as bad as the prequels
    I think that’s fundamentally, even an idealized and consistently executed ST would still have one weakness against the PT - the era as its own separate asset, which is more what this thread is about than general quality of the film series.

    The PT can be crap movies, and regardless still introduce a radically different, exciting, expansive, and well crafted world around it. The PT managed to never actually lose the fanbase in part because as much as Lucas the writer and director had flaws in executing his films, Lucas the producer user built a massive sandbox and unleashed his company onto it. The PT era was utterly dominating all mediums and markets beside the films in the day and age of Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, and the X-Men movies - because Lucas created a mag of ante canvas for everyone else to work on. The PT films had a backlash and re-evaluation period… but the PT era was mostly an uninterrupted success across multiple platforms for over a decade, even at the worst time to be a fan of the actual films. Hell, some fo the company’s Lucas got were that people in his sandbox were doing things better than him (Grievous) because of the sandbox’s quilaty.

    In contrast… whether it’s Abrams, Johnson, or LFL in general, there was little more than a desire to rigidly recreate the OT’s status quo, and outside of Abrams, frighteningly little interest in the actual characters or conflict of the era. Even LFL themselves seem apathetic towards the era, and their proudest forays are just stuff focused on how cool they think Ben Solo is or a failed TV show.

    …Film-wise, the PT may have poor chemistry between its romantic leads, so-so execution all over, and cringey-dialogue…

    …but nowhere does it ever go “Hey! You’re heroes’ a small minded, self-centered coward! But he should still get more credit for ignoring the Galaxy for doing a magic show for five minutes than the people who avenged billions of deaths and prevented billions more on days before, and they need to get beaten down and hollowed out until the black guy’s far away from the white girl, so she can properly worship the boring Neo-Nazi School Shooter who violated her mind under torture just days ago, while the only character trait given to the cool officer and pilot played by a Latino was ‘too hot blooded’!”

    Any series with respect towards TLJ in it will always be shittier than the PT.
    Like action, adventure, rogues, and outlaws? Like anti-heroes, femme fatales, mysteries and thrillers?

    I wrote a book with them. Outlaw’s Shadow: A Sherwood Noir. Robin Hood’s evil counterpart, Guy of Gisbourne, is the main character. Feel free to give it a look: https://read.amazon.com/kp/embed?asi...E2PKBNJFH76GQP

  8. #8
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Posts
    11,461

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by godisawesome View Post
    I think that’s fundamentally, even an idealized and consistently executed ST would still have one weakness against the PT - the era as its own separate asset, which is more what this thread is about than general quality of the film series.

    The PT can be crap movies, and regardless still introduce a radically different, exciting, expansive, and well crafted world around it. The PT managed to never actually lose the fanbase in part because as much as Lucas the writer and director had flaws in executing his films, Lucas the producer user built a massive sandbox and unleashed his company onto it. The PT era was utterly dominating all mediums and markets beside the films in the day and age of Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, and the X-Men movies - because Lucas created a mag of ante canvas for everyone else to work on. The PT films had a backlash and re-evaluation period… but the PT era was mostly an uninterrupted success across multiple platforms for over a decade, even at the worst time to be a fan of the actual films. Hell, some fo the company’s Lucas got were that people in his sandbox were doing things better than him (Grievous) because of the sandbox’s quilaty.

    In contrast… whether it’s Abrams, Johnson, or LFL in general, there was little more than a desire to rigidly recreate the OT’s status quo, and outside of Abrams, frighteningly little interest in the actual characters or conflict of the era. Even LFL themselves seem apathetic towards the era, and their proudest forays are just stuff focused on how cool they think Ben Solo is or a failed TV show.

    …Film-wise, the PT may have poor chemistry between its romantic leads, so-so execution all over, and cringey-dialogue…

    …but nowhere does it ever go “Hey! You’re heroes’ a small minded, self-centered coward! But he should still get more credit for ignoring the Galaxy for doing a magic show for five minutes than the people who avenged billions of deaths and prevented billions more on days before, and they need to get beaten down and hollowed out until the black guy’s far away from the white girl, so she can properly worship the boring Neo-Nazi School Shooter who violated her mind under torture just days ago, while the only character trait given to the cool officer and pilot played by a Latino was ‘too hot blooded’!”

    Any series with respect towards TLJ in it will always be shittier than the PT.
    I think that's slightly off base. PT had a monopoly because it was Star Wars, and hadn't yet soured the brand name with underwhelming movies, aka, the prequels, which had worse acting and dialogue overall, and more questionable effects. And if you're going to go that far into the politics of it, then you can't ignore the numerous racial steroetypes in the prequels and the fact that the supposedly strong female character of Padme falls in love with a creepy stalker-ish psycho like Anakin. Rey didn't fall in love with Ren, cringe as that final kiss was. And there wasn't even a lead Black character in those movies. The most we got was Mace Windu as a side character.

  9. #9
    Astonishing Member thwhtGuardian's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,623

    Default

    The prequels were better than the sequels in every conceivable way...it's not even close to being a contest.
    Looking for a friendly place to discuss comic books? Try The Classic Comics Forum!

  10. #10
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Posts
    11,461

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thwhtGuardian View Post
    The prequels were better than the sequels in every conceivable way...it's not even close to being a contest.
    How is that even close to being true?

  11. #11
    Astonishing Member thwhtGuardian's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,623

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CosmiComic View Post
    How is that even close to being true?
    For starters they had a coherent story.


    I mean, I'm being serious here, there is no legitimate argument that could be made that the sequel trilogy is better than the prequels.
    Looking for a friendly place to discuss comic books? Try The Classic Comics Forum!

  12. #12
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,179

    Default

    I'm not sure what damage the O.P. thinks the sequels have done to the franchise.

    Star Wars unlike Star Trek keeps looking backwards. It did so after Return of the Jedi and it does so now. At one point most of the novels, comics and games were set during the Old Republic Era and after the prequels we got materials set during the Clone Wars.

    The biggest difference to me is that after Empire, the comics did a whole series of stories to fill in what happened between Empire and return (I think that's where we got Dash Render from). All that stuff got thrown out the instant Return came out. The same thing happened with the post Return novels.

    Is there that big of a difference between 90% of the stuff made being set in the past and 100% of it being set there?

    PS @ WhiteG: The prequels made God awful use of it's actors. Only Ewan McGregor came out of it looking good. It made Hayden Christensen look far worse than he was.

    Whatever the sequels faults, it doesn't subject any of it's actors to anything like the infamous "I hate sand" scene.
    Last edited by Vic Vega; 01-19-2022 at 10:25 AM.

  13. #13
    Astonishing Member thwhtGuardian's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,623

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vic Vega View Post
    I'm not sure what damage the O.P. thinks the sequels have done to the franchise.

    Star Wars unlike Star Trek keeps looking backwards. It did so after Return of the Jedi and it does so now. At one point most of the novels, comics and games were set during the Old Republic Era and after the prequels we got materials set during the Clone Wars.

    The biggest difference to me is that after Empire, the comics did a whole series of stories to fill in what happened between Empire and return (I think that's where we got Dash Render from). All that stuff got thrown out the instant Return came out. The same thing happened with the post Return novels.

    Is there that big of a difference between 90% of the stuff made being set in the past and 100% of it being set there?

    PS @ WhiteG: The prequels made God awful use of it's actors. Only Ewan McGregor came out of it looking good. It made Hayden Christensen look far worse than he was.

    Whatever the sequels faults, it doesn't subject any of it's actors to anything like the infamous "I hate sand" scene.
    I'll take "I hate sand" over " Who talks first? Do you talk first or do I talk first ?" any day of the week. Don't get me wrong the line, and Hayden's delivery were far from good...but it wasn't a movie ender, the plot went on just fine...where as the Kylo interaction with Poe at the very start of Force Awakens just killed Kylo as a villain and instantly made me check out of the movie.
    Last edited by thwhtGuardian; 01-19-2022 at 11:23 AM.
    Looking for a friendly place to discuss comic books? Try The Classic Comics Forum!

  14. #14
    Extraordinary Member Jackalope89's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    8,780

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CosmiComic View Post
    I think that's slightly off base. PT had a monopoly because it was Star Wars, and hadn't yet soured the brand name with underwhelming movies, aka, the prequels, which had worse acting and dialogue overall, and more questionable effects. And if you're going to go that far into the politics of it, then you can't ignore the numerous racial steroetypes in the prequels and the fact that the supposedly strong female character of Padme falls in love with a creepy stalker-ish psycho like Anakin. Rey didn't fall in love with Ren, cringe as that final kiss was. And there wasn't even a lead Black character in those movies. The most we got was Mace Windu as a side character.
    For one movie. Finn got side charactered hard after that (and Disney got cold feet in having an interracial relationship on the big screen). At least Mace Windu was consistently portrayed as an important side-character during the prequel run.

  15. #15
    Extraordinary Member ChrisIII's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,605

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vic Vega View Post
    I'm not sure what damage the O.P. thinks the sequels have done to the franchise.

    Star Wars unlike Star Trek keeps looking backwards. It did so after Return of the Jedi and it does so now. At one point most of the novels, comics and games were set during the Old Republic Era and after the prequels we got materials set during the Clone Wars.

    The biggest difference to me is that after Empire, the comics did a whole series of stories to fill in what happened between Empire and return (I think that's where we got Dash Render from). All that stuff got thrown out the instant Return came out. The same thing happened with the post Return novels.

    Is there that big of a difference between 90% of the stuff made being set in the past and 100% of it being set there?

    PS @ WhiteG: The prequels made God awful use of it's actors. Only Ewan McGregor came out of it looking good. It made Hayden Christensen look far worse than he was.

    Whatever the sequels faults, it doesn't subject any of it's actors to anything like the infamous "I hate sand" scene.

    I wouldn't say Star Trek doesn't look backwards. Enterprise was a prequel series, Discovery started as one (and Strange New Worlds will continue that), the movie Reboot was based on the TOS characters. Part of the hook of PICARD (Picard himself, Data, 7 of 9, Q in the new season etc) and to a lesser extent PRODIGY (Holo Janeway) are using characters from shows that ended decades ago.
    chrism227.wordpress.com Info and opinions on a variety of interests.

    https://twitter.com/chrisprtsmouth

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •