Topic: Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens - December 16th 2015

[*<JO>*Scalarik]

Hi Master Ekul

Next movie out December 2016, though that will be the death star plans spinoff, Rogue One. Episode VIII will be out spring 2017. I believe young Han Solo spinoff comes in 2018 and Episode IX in 2019. Gonna be a ride like never before 

[ChrisGrim]

I went dark for four days avoiding the Internet as much as was humanly possible worried about spoilers.

Totally worth it.

Fantastic. 8.9/10 from me. New characters worked. Old characters felt true to themselves. Only one or two moments took me out of it. And the writer in me can ignore or rationalize any plot hole that popped up (as well as the understanding that the saga has two more movies to clear it up).

[*<JO>*Shin-Tetsu]

It was...AMAZING!

It brought me way back to the old days. We really need a decent Jedi game. Come on!

[*<JO>*Veniku Dar Adias]

was good but after reading a few books when i was younger and then now getting a movie... i liked the books more. That said; was a good movie. Kids loved it and now want half the house decorated in star wars... makes me proud. Hope everyone enjoyed the movie or gets the time to watch it. happy holiday's to everyone in the order.

[*<JO>*RaegnaMari]

was good but after reading a few books when i was younger and then now getting a movie... i liked the books more.

I refuse to pay to watch it, but I've read all about it... And it might be a good film, yes, but like you said. The books were so much better. The story sounds pretty weak overall, and if you ask me, it REALLY wasn't worth gutting the expanded universe to get that film.

That said, I do like Rey and Finn. Or the actors, at least. I just would have preferred to see Daisy Ridley as Jaina Solo, or something. Anything... The Thrawn Trilogy will forever be the sequel trilogy to me. You can't make me think otherwise!

[ChrisGrim]

was good but after reading a few books when i was younger and then now getting a movie... i liked the books more.

I refuse to pay to watch it, but I've read all about it... And it might be a good film, yes, but like you said. The books were so much better. The story sounds pretty weak overall, and if you ask me, it REALLY wasn't worth gutting the expanded universe to get that film.

That said, I do like Rey and Finn. Or the actors, at least. I just would have preferred to see Daisy Ridley as Jaina Solo, or something. Anything... The Thrawn Trilogy will forever be the sequel trilogy to me. You can't make me think otherwise!

Much of the EU was bloated and awful. It was worth getting rid of them even without the movie getting made. Getting a movie and an open ended story is just a cherry on top of getting rid of that bloated mess.

Seems a lot of your opinions, both here and previously, are that you don't want to like the movie, ergo, you don't and refuse to give it a shot. Without even seeing it. You read some things online, ignoring ALL of the good, and decided that the few gripes there are means it is bad. Your suspicions confirmed! This is especially strange considering the synopsis for the Thrawn Trilogy sounds remarkably like what The Force Awakens is, but with different characters and names...

"As the first book opens, the Rebellion, now known as the New Republic, is still fighting to mop up final Imperial resistance and set up a functional government. Out in the fringes of the galaxy, the most brilliant of all the hand-picked Grand Admirals is gaining strength and preparing to attack the New Republic. After convincing a Dark Jedi to join his side, Grand Admiral Thrawn is confident in his victory."

That is EXACTLY what happens... Replace Thrawn with Snoke and BOOM... You have the Force Awakens. But, no... You won't like it. Because he isn't named Thrawn... C'mon bro...

[*<JO>*Tabaet]

The reason that works in the Thrawn trilogy is that it takes place almost immediately after RotJ. By the time period covered in TFA, the Empire's been pretty much defeated and they've moved on to a new enemy. TFA gives the impression that almost nothing has happened over the last 30-odd years and, if anything, the Empire/First Order is actually more powerful than it ever was while the Emperor was alive.

Like Ving, I haven't seen the film, but I will eventually and I'm trying to keep an open mind, but a lot of the core concepts seem to be fundamentally flawed.

Sure, a lot of the EU was messy, but most of it was pretty good and built up an insane amount of lore for the universe, while Lucas was pretty happy to say, 'This is like this just because,' and leave it at that

Finally, if anything should have been made non-canon, they should have started with the prequels

[ChrisGrim]

The reason that works in the Thrawn trilogy is that it takes place almost immediately after RotJ. By the time period covered in TFA, the Empire's been pretty much defeated and they've moved on to a new enemy. TFA gives the impression that almost nothing has happened over the last 30-odd years and, if anything, the Empire/First Order is actually more powerful than it ever was while the Emperor was alive.

Like Ving, I haven't seen the film, but I will eventually and I'm trying to keep an open mind, but a lot of the core concepts seem to be fundamentally flawed.

Sure, a lot of the EU was messy, but most of it was pretty good and built up an insane amount of lore for the universe, while Lucas was pretty happy to say, 'This is like this just because,' and leave it at that

Finally, if anything should have been made non-canon, they should have started with the prequels

Then the complaints that they didn't to the Thrawn Trilogy make even less sense. They couldn't do the Thrawn Trilogy exactly as it was written. The characters have aged too much... So, instead, they did a similar story with new, arguably more interesting characters... And never does it leave the impression "nothing" has happened over the last 30 years... It clearly demonstrates that a ton has happened. The fight didn't end with Vader and the Emperor. As is always true in Star Wars, a power struggle began almost immediately. But, I can't get into what HAS happened because I don't want to be rude to the people who haven't seen it (spoilers).

I'd like to know what core concepts you're speaking of, though. Again, spoilers, so maybe PM? Because the core concepts seem to be Thrawn and ANH adjacent... Similar themes with a twist. So... I mean...

Some of it was pretty good. But, it was too expansive and too much of it was bad. Disney clearly didn't want to be tied down to the bad, convoluted ideas presented in them. The small parts of good were sacrificed to free the hands of creators. And that makes the future exciting. Also, they didn't technically destroy them. They made the "Legends" which sort of means they may have happened, may not of, no one really knows, but it isn't part of the canon story (the stuff people know happened 100%). Which means they'll probably still borrow ideas from it. The best ones, anyway.

And finally, I agree. Prequels need to be redone and done correctly. But, it wouldn't surprise me if GL might have put something in the sale agreement that forces Disney to keep the prequels in the lore. Really just GL's last laugh at the fans. "Hate my prequels?! Now they'll NEVER go away!"... GL is the Sidious of the Star Wars Franchise... lol

[*<JO>*Tabaet]

They could have done the Thrawn trilogy in full CGI, like the TOR cinematics, then the age of the actors would be irrelevant. But it would have been far better if they'd set the film a couple of hundred years in the future, when the Jedi and Sith have both been fully reborn and they could have made a completely new story without bringing in the original actors or being constrained by massive amounts of story content that isn't really relevant to the current film.

Two words: Starkiller base. There is absolutely no way the First Order had the time or resources to build that thing. Its only reason for existing is to make the First Order seem like a bigger threat than the Empire, but the Empire struggled to build the Death Stars with all the resources of the galaxy at its disposal. Personally, I also feel that Kylo Ren's lightsaber is enough reason to hate the film no matter how good the rest of it is, but that's already been covered in great detail earlier in this thread

[*<JO>*Shin-Tetsu]

To be honest. When I walked out of the theater, I immediately began searching for clues about Snoke...

[ChrisGrim]

They could have done the Thrawn trilogy in full CGI, like the TOR cinematics, then the age of the actors would be irrelevant. But it would have been far better if they'd set the film a couple of hundred years in the future, when the Jedi and Sith have both been fully reborn and they could have made a completely new story without bringing in the original actors or being constrained by massive amounts of story content that isn't really relevant to the current film.

Two words: Starkiller base. There is absolutely no way the First Order had the time or resources to build that thing. Its only reason for existing is to make the First Order seem like a bigger threat than the Empire, but the Empire struggled to build the Death Stars with all the resources of the galaxy at its disposal. Personally, I also feel that Kylo Ren's lightsaber is enough reason to hate the film no matter how good the rest of it is, but that's already been covered in great detail earlier in this thread

A CGI Star Wars over a live-action sequel to the OT? Really? That's what we waited 30 years for? We're going to end up on completely different sides of this because to me that sounds terrible. I watch Rebels for that stuff. The easiest and best way to give the new story and bring in new characters is to bring them off the backs of the previous main characters. To connect the worlds. And no one wants a story 100+ years ahead. We want to know the aftermath of Jedi. We want to know what happened to Luke, Han, etc.

The EU was terrible and ridiculous and thank God it isn't canon because that was entirely unsatisfying. This still has a chance of not sucking as hard as the EU did. And this movie is a solid first step in that direction.

Struggled? They built it TWICE! The second time in far less time that the First Order had to build Starkiller base. I do agree we don't ever have a real understanding of what kind of financial situations we're talking about for the Resistance and the First Order but... perhaps they left it slightly ambiguous for a reason.

Kylo Ren's saber is fully explained now and all of the complaints of it earlier don't actually hold up. Because, surprisingly, none of us knew what we were talking about. Shocking what happens when you try to debate something with no information but gut reaction. Like reading a plot summary online and deciding you know the movie inside and out... It isn't a crossguard like we'd originally thought. They are vents of the excess power and energy of the crystal he is using. A crystal that is broken and leaks power. And in action, the vents are incredibly useful. The saber is chaotic and volatile, it practically crackles with energy. It's surprisingly effective.

[ChrisGrim]

To be honest. When I walked out of the theater, I immediately began searching for clues about Snoke...

Me too. I have a good idea as to who he is but there is enough ambiguity that I could easily be wrong. We could all be wrong. It'll make for an interesting reveal in 8 or 9.

[*<JO>*Scalarik]

To be honest. When I walked out of the theater, I immediately began searching for clues about Snoke...

Me too. I have a good idea as to who he is but there is enough ambiguity that I could easily be wrong. We could all be wrong. It'll make for an interesting reveal in 8 or 9.

It's Jar Jar Binks after all

[ChrisGrim]

To be honest. When I walked out of the theater, I immediately began searching for clues about Snoke...

Me too. I have a good idea as to who he is but there is enough ambiguity that I could easily be wrong. We could all be wrong. It'll make for an interesting reveal in 8 or 9.

It's Jar Jar Binks after all

I would, no joke, rage quit the Star Wars fandom. All of it. Burn the collectables, movies, games, and delete every character I've ever made or created from every game and clan I've ever been apart of. Retroactively destroy my entire SW fandom.

[*<JO>*Tabaet]

A CGI Star Wars over a live-action sequel to the OT? Really? That's what we waited 30 years for? We're going to end up on completely different sides of this because to me that sounds terrible. I watch Rebels for that stuff. The easiest and best way to give the new story and bring in new characters is to bring them off the backs of the previous main characters. To connect the worlds. And no one wants a story 100+ years ahead. We want to know the aftermath of Jedi. We want to know what happened to Luke, Han, etc.

I was just making suggestions for ways they could have made new films without wiping out 30 years of built-up lore. And I clearly said the CGI could be done like the TOR cinematics, not like the cartoon series. At that sort of quality, you're hardly even aware that it's CGI. For people who liked the EU, we already know what happened to Luke, Han etc, and I personally am much more interested in the revival of the Jedi as a whole rather than a couple of random, barely trained Force-sensitives. We had the OT for a story about someone discovering the Force for the first time. What's wrong with wanting someone who actually knows how to use it?

The EU was terrible and ridiculous and thank God it isn't canon because that was entirely unsatisfying. This still has a chance of not sucking as hard as the EU did. And this movie is a solid first step in that direction.

Clearly, you hate the EU and everything to do with it, so there's no way we'll ever reach an agreement on this point.

Struggled? They built it TWICE! The second time in far less time that the First Order had to build Starkiller base. I do agree we don't ever have a real understanding of what kind of financial situations we're talking about for the Resistance and the First Order but... perhaps they left it slightly ambiguous for a reason.

The second Death Star was never completed. They rushed to make the super laser operational, but a huge amount of the infrastructure was incomplete. And yeah, they left it ambiguous because they knew that if they did anything to draw attention to how much effort was actually involved in weaponising a planet, everyone would realise that even with Star Wars level technolgy it simply isn't possible.

Kylo Ren's saber is fully explained now and all of the complaints of it earlier don't actually hold up. Because, surprisingly, none of us knew what we were talking about. Shocking what happens when you try to debate something with no information but gut reaction. Like reading a plot summary online and deciding you know the movie inside and out... It isn't a crossguard like we'd originally thought. They are vents of the excess power and energy of the crystal he is using. A crystal that is broken and leaks power. And in action, the vents are incredibly useful. The saber is chaotic and volatile, it practically crackles with energy. It's surprisingly effective.

That... actually makes it worse. The fact that the side openings were vents was a prevailing theory, but I was actually hoping it was meant to be a guard instead, because if one of those vents was cut or damaged in any way, the saber would just explode in his hand.