Star Wars: The Last Jedi (CONTAINS SPOILERS)

[motorizer]

The fact that people walk about on these star destroyer type ships suggect that they have their own gravity of sorts, which does seem to extend outside of the hull, so I didn't mind the bomb drop, it's consistent with the made up science of the series.

Technically there is gravity in space anyway...

I don't really get why no one has invented a hyperspace missile though, given the mess they make.

I actualy enjoyed the film, I was expecting stupid stuff and daft "cute" aliens, it's what you get in star wars.
Leia's superwoman space flight was the daftest bit for me, should have gone out in a blaze of glory.

I actually like that there are more female characters in the new ones, but Rey would be more interesting if she was a bit more vulnerable.... the male heroes weren't superheroes on that scale.

Edited by motorizer on Friday 20th April 19:00

[chris watton]

I think that if the story, characters and sub-plots were good, none of that would have really mattered to most

Edited by chris watton on Friday 20th April 19:47

[Moonhawk]

motorizer said:

Leia's superwoman space flight was the daftest bit for me, should have gone out in a blaze of glory.

This - it was a prime opportunity to kill her off in a heroic manner - and could have given Kylo even more motivation to kill snoke.

They could have easily made it so that when Kylo eased off the trigger and the other fighter came in and took the kill - that order could have come from Snoke, which means Snoke killed Kylo's mother.....and thus embedded resentment and anger against Snoke.

[p1stonhead]

Moonhawk said:

motorizer said:

Leia's superwoman space flight was the daftest bit for me, should have gone out in a blaze of glory.

This - it was a prime opportunity to kill her off in a heroic manner - and could have given Kylo even more motivation to kill snoke.

They could have easily made it so that when Kylo eased off the trigger and the other fighter came in and took the kill - that order could have come from Snoke, which means Snoke killed Kylo's mother.....and thus embedded resentment and anger against Snoke.

Why they didn’t have Leia do the suicide light speed thing is beyond me.

[r11co]

p1stonhead said:

But there is gravity inside the ships so why wouldn’t she and they fall until they reached the ‘outside’ whereby they’d keep moving in the same direction?

Indeed, so why the kneejerk reaction to come up with another explanation? It wasn't necessary of course but the fact that they did for this (and other scenes, including coming up with some crap about the inexplicable Ren/Rey link being established as a result of Luke's training both of them) shows that Johnson wasn't in full control of the movie, there was no overall view of what was going on, and the 'committee' kicked in once again.

p1stonhead said:

Why they didn’t have Leia do the suicide light speed thing is beyond me.

Indeed. It would have been a fitting end and praised to the heavens if they had. Might even have won Carrie Fisher a posthumous Oscar.

I can only surmise that Rian had written it that way (because he started writing the script before TFA was released, allegedly, and therefore before Fisher's death) and he was determined to retain control of that part of the story regardless of the obvious change making massive amounts of sense. This decision alone is reason enough to condemn the movie - to go out of their way to avoid a creative decision and leave themselves a massive headache for the next movie for the sake of it.

Edited by r11co on Friday 20th April 19:10

[p1stonhead]

r11co said:

p1stonhead said:

But there is gravity inside the ships so why wouldn’t she and they fall until they reached the ‘outside’ whereby they’d keep moving in the same direction?

Indeed, so why the kneejerk reaction to come up with another explanation? It wasn't necessary of course but the fact that they did for this (and other scenes, including coming up with some crap about the inexplicable Ren/Rey link being established as a result of Luke's training both of them) shows that Johnson wasn't in full control of the movie, there was no overall view of what was going on, and the 'committee' kicked in once again.

I agree although to be fair having the girl lying on the platform above the open bomber doors does not really correlate to why Leia got sucked out when the window broke....

[Murph7355]

chris watton said:

I think that if the story, characters and sub-plots were good, non of that would have really mattered to most

This.

I'm struggling to contain myself on public transport that presumably grown adults are debating the crapness or otherwise of Star Wars based on whether it was scientifically correct or not

(And picking one of only a few things that is actually plausible with a little imagination!).

[frisbee]

Moonhawk said:

All of the ships (the large ones at least) in the Star Wars universe have artificial gravity.....that is established canon.

Since she was inside the ship - surely she was just subject to the ships artificial gravity field.

There was nothing in that scene that was inconsistent with established canon as far as I can tell.

Even small asteroids which then turn out to be giant space slugs have gravity in the Empire Strikes Back!

[r11co]

Murph7355 said:

I'm struggling to contain myself on public transport that presumably grown adults are debating the crapness or otherwise of Star Wars based on whether it was scientifically correct or not

They're not. I have summarised in my last two posts what the problem is and it is that the studio has been issuing 'patches' to the storyline pretty much ever since the film was released, first via the actual director/scriptwriter, then via merchandising books and then via the novelisation. The writer/producers are publicly stating they are standing by their decisions in the movie while at the same time demonstrating they aren't.

They've pretty much acknowledged though that the movie was flawed, and the process going on now is they think that if they can tweak the perception of some of the flaws and ridicule and shame the critics into accepting others then that will be enough.

A quick question - how many people who went to see this were aware of Rian Johnson and his previous work? If you were, on the basis of what he did before would you have considered him a good choice to helm a Star Wars film? If you weren't then it might be a good idea to avail yourself of some of his previous work as the criticism of it in terms of jarring editing screwing up tension and storyline, and him throwing all sorts of inexplicable crap into a movie seems to have carried through into TLJ.

Edited by r11co on Friday 20th April 20:02

[warch]

So basically we have two camps of people who dislike the film.

People who don't agree with the story and think it should have had a different outcome.

And people nitpicking about details.

I think this is why I like Star Wars but I'm not a Star Wars fan.

[Moonhawk]

p1stonhead said:

I agree although to be fair having the girl lying on the platform above the open bomber doors does not really correlate to why Leia got sucked out when the window broke....

Again it does fit with Star Wars canon. Intentional openings to space like hangar bays (and presumably bomb bays) tend to be sealed by energy shields to keep the air in. Remember the scene in ANH where the falcon is tractored into the hangar bay of the death star - there were no hangar bay doors.

When the bridge of Leia's ship got breached - there was no such energy field in place as it was never intended to be an opening - hence they got sucked out.

[Nik da Greek]

warch said:

People who don't agree with the story and think it should have had a different outcome.

I'm neither. It was just a really poorly written story. Confused, badly paced, muddled and self-contradictory. Its irrelevant whether it was Star Wars or whether you're a fan, it was just bad scripting.

EDIT for sense

Edited by Nik da Greek on Friday 20th April 20:24

[Moonhawk]

warch said:

So basically we have two camps of people who dislike the film.

People who don't agree with the story and think it should have had a different outcome.

And people nitpicking about details.

I think this is why I like Star Wars but I'm not a Star Wars fan.

I guess I sit in both camps to a degree. Although visually stunning, I hate the light speed ramming scene as it essentially breaks space combat and the whole premise of massive super weapons in the SW universe.

I also think the story was crap and basically shat all over everything set up in TFA

[r11co]

warch said:

People who don't agree with the story and think it should have had a different outcome.

It didn't really have an outcome though, did it? It was just one big reset button..

What we have is a cast of inexplicable characters (one of whom was made central but can take no further part in the story so now either has to be written out plausibly or just, inexplicably, disappear), a story built in one movie and then disassembled in another, and not much else.

Edited by r11co on Friday 20th April 20:48

[warch]

As I said I enjoyed the film but don't mind that other people didn't, there are at least quite a few intelligent criticisms of the film that hadn't even occurred to me on this thread.

For me the positives massively outweighed the negatives, but I am wondering where they're going with all this. They can't really replace Carrie Fisher with another actress and it's still a big ask for CGI to digitally replace her.

[Halb]

Moonhawk said:

Did they?

No but what you will get is one of the secretariat coming along telling you you've posted enough, now back to the gulag you go comrade!

warch said:

TBH most of the Star Wars films feature massive plot holes. Like Luke crash landing on Yoda's planet and landing twenty feet from his doorstep. Or the droids in the first film ending up in the hands of the only bloke in the universe who has the wherewithal to off Darth Vader.

Neither are plot holes, an overused and misunderstood phrase. Yoda guided in Luke's ship. The second might be viewed as poor writing, or as said, the force.

[Halb]

Nik da Greek said:

I'm neither. It was just a really poorly written story. Confused, badly paced, muddled and self-contradictory. Its irrelevant whether it was Star Wars or whether you're a fan, it was just bad scripting.

EDIT for sense

Edited by Nik da Greek on Friday 20th April 20:24

Exactly, above all it was poorly written/scripted. It just was a mess from start to finish, not even mentioning the editing, or details. As Chris said, if it was decent, a lot of people would forgive the SW details.

What I find interesting is the constant need to snidely diminish criticism of this film. Does this happen with other poorly received films?

[warch]

Halb said:

What I find interesting is the constant need to snidely diminish criticism of this film. Does this happen with other poorly received films?

Two reasons, firstly I enjoyed it, secondly it was hardly poorly received, it got five star reviews across the board. I didn't think it was a five star film but it was really good.

[Halb]

warch said:

Halb said:

What I find interesting is the constant need to snidely diminish criticism of this film. Does this happen with other poorly received films?

Two reasons, firstly I enjoyed it, secondly it was hardly poorly received, it got five star reviews across the board. I didn't think it was a five star film but it was really good.

I was referring to the poor receival of the everyday viewer, 47% as opposed to 90odd. One of the most poorly received SW films there is.

[southendpier]

warch said:

Halb said:

What I find interesting is the constant need to snidely diminish criticism of this film. Does this happen with other poorly received films?

Two reasons, firstly I enjoyed it, secondly it was hardly poorly received, it got five star reviews across the board. I didn't think it was a five star film but it was really good.

I think that you need to look at the special treatment reviewers get when invited to review the film. It is a business. Public reviews are likely to be more honest.