Star Wars: The Last Jedi (CONTAINS SPOILERS)

[g3org3y]

parabolica said:

Why are the haters still moaning so hard about this film? We get it, you didn't like it; why waste your energy bhing and whining about it?

I hated the new Kingsman film after really enjoying the first one; I think I wrote a post about it in the main film thread after I saw it but since then it hasn't even crossed my mind. It genuinely baffles me why people have such a stick up their butt about this film.

Because to be frank, no one ultimately gives a fk about the Kingsman film.

This is one of the (if not THE most) iconic franchises in movie history. People actually give a st about this.

Jonesy23 said:

ExVantagemech.. said:

Hell I'm surprised there wasn't a Mickey Mouse window sticker somewhere...

They have to keep something back for the special edition.

Moonhawk said:

Whilst he's not that big of a character in the grand scheme of things in terms of screen time - he did spearhead the attack on DeathStar 2. Why even have him in the film if you are just going to kill him off so crudely then introduce yet another new non-character just to have them sacrifice themselves too?

Akbar could have easily fulfilled the role that Laura Dern's character did - giving him a decent send off and tying up his story arc in the process.

As it stands we got yet another new character that got no development and was dispatched rather quickly (probably just so we can tick the 'moar strong females in teh film' box) - and a character that did have some backstory and played a pivotal role in ROTJ and who had appeared in three films to date - but was wiped out with barely a mention.

The strong females agenda was pushed very hard in this film.

bhstewie said:

Maybe it was because the voice actor died in real life, maybe they just wanted to ps off a bunch of fans so Ackbar's new legacy is "they killed him off with barely a mention" who knows

I genuinely think there's an element of trolling fans on Rian Johnson's behalf.

After the Poe/phone on hold scene and Luke throwing the lightsaber over his shoulder, I knew this film was going to make me unhappy.

[chris watton]

Apparently, it's not doing very well in China, which I suspect they were banking on...

[frisbee]

chris watton said:

Apparently, it's not doing very well in China, which I suspect they were banking on...

Yep, you wouldn't have thought they would have fallen for the Monopoly money trick with the other 1.3 billion.

[Cold]

g3org3y said:

This is one of the (if not THE most) iconic franchises in movie history.

It's good, very good. I enjoy them a lot. But it's not James Bond good.

[ExVantagemech..]

Cold said:

g3org3y said:

This is one of the (if not THE most) iconic franchises in movie history.

It's good, very good. I enjoy them a lot. But it's not James Bond good.

The figures beg to differ....

https://www.the-numbers.com/movies/franchise/James...

https://www.the-numbers.com/movies/franchise/Star-...

[Cold]

ExVantagemech.. said:

The figures beg to differ....

https://www.the-numbers.com/movies/franchise/James...

https://www.the-numbers.com/movies/franchise/Star-...

That's just money and uses figures from when you could see Dr No for 2d and still have change for a bottle of Bollinger.

When/if the Star Wars franchise still has enough of a story left in it to make 24 movies it may or may not be considered as iconic as 007 - but of course Bond will have moved on by then too.
They're both popular and have infiltrated into eveyday life and even mainstream pop culture, but Star Wars still has a long way to go to be considered "THE" iconic movie franchise.
I'm not actually sure which franchise is, which could be an interesting discussion worthy of its own thread.

[generationx]

I finally went to see this yesterday afternoon after having managed to avoid every single review, opinion and spoiler (even ignoring this thread).

Me and the three casual Star Wars fans came away just, well, disappointed. There were a few things that really jarred, including:


So much death, with most characters (apart from Leia who genuinely seemed upset) not appearing to care

That flying scene

The killing off of so many characters

Why did Vice Admiral Dern wait so long for so many to be killed before finally deciding to do something about it?

ALL LEAD CHARACTERS MUST BE FEMALE

The phonecall with Maz - irritating

Anything to do with the hugely unrealistic "birds" on Luke Island

Will everybody please stop crying?

Maybe there could be a love story? You know, like the one in ESB that actually made you care about the characters?

At one point one of the characters said "God speed". Surely Star Wars cannon indicates there isn't a God, more a belief in the Force which is totally different.

And I can't take Ade Edmondson seriously as a baddy...


Please don't get me wrong - I am a MAJOR Star Wars fanboi and desperately wanted to love this film. But, as they say: Meh.

And although many here appear to like it I remain largely indifferent to Rogue One, again due to disliking almost all the characters and being jarred by so many clunky back-references.

[tankplanker]

chris watton said:

Apparently, it's not doing very well in China, which I suspect they were banking on...

It wouldn't surprise me if they actually lost money on China considering how much more money they spent on marketing TLJ over Rogue One, which was significantly more than TFA. I'm sure Donnie Yen's and a big part of his casting in Rogue One was to appeal to the Chinese market, without much success.

Not a good weekend for TLJ as it was beaten by Jumanji at the box office by nearly 50%.

[Halb]

The Bond films are just old and come from a time when a billion wasn't possible.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-gros...
When adjusted for inflation, THunderball tops the list for US take.
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/franchises/chart/?id=...
Shame they don't have a worldwide take for adjusted

Bond franchise was the first to cross 1 billion, it is the granddaddy franchise that has existed through luck at times, but Star Wars is probably the top iconic one, it's the oldest and biggest. I see Bond taking fourth spot though.

[gregs656]

They haven't worked out China at all but I am not sure that is a bad thing for Western movie goers, it is a problem for the bottom line of this movie however.

[Olivera]

I've not read this thread so far, but just let me add my opinion after seeing at the weekend:

It was ste

[Guvernator]

So general consensus on this thread seems to be about 20% who liked it. The other 80% seem to range from average to complete rubbish so again, how does it get 90%+ ratings almost universally from the critics?

I know it's easy to allude to Disney conspiracy theories but have we ever seen a film that has had such a blatant disparity between critic and audience reviews?

[chris watton]

Guvernator said:

So general consensus on this thread seems to be about 20% who liked it. The other 80% seem to range from average to complete rubbish so again, how does it get 90%+ ratings almost universally from the critics?

I know it's easy to allude to Disney conspiracy theories but have we ever seen a film that has had such a blatant disparity between critic and audience reviews?

The only reasons I can think of is the reviewers were too scared to give an honest review, for whatever reason/s.

[ukaskew]

Guvernator said:

So general consensus on this thread seems to be about 20% who liked it. The other 80% seem to range from average to complete rubbish so again, how does it get 90%+ ratings almost universally from the critics?

I know it's easy to allude to Disney conspiracy theories but have we ever seen a film that has had such a blatant disparity between critic and audience reviews?

Cinemascore: A (that's actual punters on opening night)

Comscore/Screenengine: 89% positive / 5 stars

IMDB Users: 7.5/10

Rotten Tomatoes: 50%

Metacritic: 4.6

So the two that take actual audience views after the movie are pretty much bang in line with critics, they're scores that can't really be gamed. IMDB which has a very broad user base gets 7.5, hardly bad. RT and Metacritic, systems which have famously been gamed/hammered many times in the past for varying reasons, have arguably artificially low scores.

Whatever your take on it it's hardly an 80/20 split and much closer to critical consensus than PH (which is massively out of touch with the general public which has been highlighted in many times in the past).

I thoroughly enjoyed my 3rd viewing last week but I'm not going to come on here and try and defend my opinion when it's the 'wrong one'. Pretty strong mob mentality around these parts.

Edited by ukaskew on Monday 8th January 18:22

[techguyone]

The take I've seen on it here, I've also seen echoed across many other varied non related sites, where the opinion seems to broadly be the same.

I'd estimate it to even out something like 5.5 -6/10, not too good, not terrible either, except for the fact Disney spent a stload of money on the franchise, in which case, those figures (we'll see how the takings look in due course) will not be to Disney's satisfaction, hopefully they'll do better moving forward.


Me personally, I give it a 'Must try harder' and I'm being charitable.

[chris watton]

ukaskew said:

Cinemascore: A (that's actual punters on opening night)

Comscore/Screenengine: 89% positive / 5 stars

IMDB Users: 7.5/10

Rotten Tomatoes: 50%

Metacritic: 4.6

So the two that take actual audience views after the movie are pretty much bang in line with critics, they're scores that can't really be gamed. IMDB which has a very broad user base gets 7.5, hardly bad. RT and Metacritic, systems which have famously been gamed/hammered many times in the past for varying reasons, have arguably artificially low scores.

Whatever your take on it it's hardly an 80/20 split and much closer to critical consensus than PH (which is massively out of touch with the general public which has been highlighted in many times in the past).

I thoroughly enjoyed my 3rd viewing last week but I'm not going to come on here and try and defend my opinion when it's the 'wrong one'. Pretty strong mob mentality around these parts.

Edited by ukaskew on Monday 8th January 18:22

Yes, you're right, it has surpassed all previous BO records, and people are tripping over themselves to re-watch it..

Oh, wait........

[g3org3y]

chris watton said:

Guvernator said:

So general consensus on this thread seems to be about 20% who liked it. The other 80% seem to range from average to complete rubbish so again, how does it get 90%+ ratings almost universally from the critics?

I know it's easy to allude to Disney conspiracy theories but have we ever seen a film that has had such a blatant disparity between critic and audience reviews?

The only reasons I can think of is the reviewers were too scared to give an honest review, for whatever reason/s.

I think that's certainly a contributing factor. Perhaps similar to the Ghostbusters debacle where it was felt criticism of the film was criticism of feminism/women.

ukaskew said:

Cinemascore: A (that's actual punters on opening night)

The same Cinemascore that gives Phantom Menace an A-?

techguyone said:

The take I've seen on it here, I've also seen echoed across many other varied non related sites, where the opinion seems to broadly be the same.

I'd estimate it to even out something like 5.5 -6/10, not too good, not terrible either, except for the fact Disney spent a stload of money on the franchise, in which case, those figures (we'll see how the takings look in due course) will not be to Disney's satisfaction, hopefully they'll do better moving forward.


Me personally, I give it a 'Must try harder' and I'm being charitable.

I rate Jeremy Jahns, I very much agree with his review of the film.

[zygalski]

The imdb score was 8.3 a day or two after release. 7.5 now.
Looks like it's set to go below 7/10 which is a distinctly average score. We're talking TPM & AOTC territory.

[Halb]

ukaskew said:

Cinemascore: A (that's actual punters on opening night)
Comscore/Screenengine: 89% positive / 5 stars
IMDB Users: 7.5/10
Rotten Tomatoes: 50%
Metacritic: 4.6
So the two that take actual audience views after the movie are pretty much bang in line with critics, they're scores that can't really be gamed. IMDB which has a very broad user base gets 7.5, hardly bad. RT and Metacritic, systems which have famously been gamed/hammered many times in the past for varying reasons, have arguably artificially low scores.
Whatever your take on it it's hardly an 80/20 split and much closer to critical consensus than PH (which is massively out of touch with the general public which has been highlighted in many times in the past).
I thoroughly enjoyed my 3rd viewing last week but I'm not going to come on here and try and defend my opinion when it's the 'wrong one'. Pretty strong mob mentality around these parts.

Edited by ukaskew on Monday 8th January 18:22

The further one travels from opening weekend hype the closer one gets to a truer score, that's cinema history, and word of mouth can help or hinder a film in the box office. It's clear that RT critics are out of touch with the public, but this isn't the first time, the GHostbusters thing being the best in recent memory, and RT has stated that the audience scores have no suspicious activity.
http://www.metacritic.com/movie/star-wars-episode-...
It looks far more that the suspiciously high critic score has to be defended. With the largest difference in the SW franchise.
PH doesn't seem to be out of touch here, except with the very high scores of critics.
When was RT gamed?

[techguyone]

g3org3y said:

I rate Jeremy Jahns, I very much agree with his review of the film.

Yes I've just watched it, he pretty well nails it.