Film Star Wars: Episode VIII

I really liked it. More i think about it more i like it actually.
Loved the jokes and dialogue, liked the characters, thought they all got a good arc.
Thought Mark Hamilll was brilliant
 
It's funny watching this vid now, he warned us 8 months ago, he's clearly pissed off with the films.

My tinfoil hat reckons they fired him and cgi'd his 'force-death/suicide' in last minute, now he's in full suck-up mode.


Just like the fans it's the same boohoo they did this with this character and so forth. I would like to hear some actual criticism, if you have no sentimentality for these characters it means nothing. Hamill's just probably disappointed that he can't hog all the spotlight and that his character isn't infallible.
 
Why did people hate the casino subplot so much? I thought it was good.

I think a lot of people found it to be a bit of a detour, especially given that whole side mission ultimately had no impact on the main plotline.

Though given the whining about the level of diversity in these new films, I'd imagine there's also a small minority who were predisposed to taking against the Finn/Rose subplot anyway.
 
It was boring for me, and I wanted more Luke and Rey teaching-time when it was casino-time.
Having this elaborate subplot that ultimately didn't result in anything was one of the many subversions that made film so good and appreciated by people who merely look at the craftsmanship of the film, not how the film relates to the other ones in the universe. I'm glad that they didn't play out the Rey and Luke story in a conventional master and pupil way, they didn't really need more time together.

I liked Rose too, but I guess it was always gonna be hard for a pudgy Asian girl to make an impression on some people.
 
Having this elaborate subplot that ultimately didn't result in anything was one of the many subversions that made film so good and appreciated by people who merely look at the craftsmanship of the film, not how the film relates to the other ones in the universe. I'm glad that they didn't play out the Rey and Luke story in a conventional master and pupil way, they didn't really need more time together.

I liked Rose too, but I guess it was always gonna be hard for a pudgy Asian girl to make an impression on some people.
Not sure what the last parts about? I'm happy with the actor playing Rose, but think slight adjustments in the writing would make her a better/more relatable character. I simply wanted more stuff between Luke & Rey and going from what I wanted there to the casino part is as much of a negative for me as any other scene not involving something grander would. If it was a switch between Snoke training Ren and Luke training Rey with the casino stuff moves to a different time I'd probably be fine with the casino planet. Subjective reasoning to not like it, but that's what I commented on. :)
 
Having this elaborate subplot that ultimately didn't result in anything was one of the many subversions that made film so good and appreciated by people who merely look at the craftsmanship of the film, not how the film relates to the other ones in the universe. I'm glad that they didn't play out the Rey and Luke story in a conventional master and pupil way, they didn't really need more time together.

I liked Rose too, but I guess it was always gonna be hard for a pudgy Asian girl to make an impression on some people.

Elaborate subplot ?

It was fecking shit..Land - In jail after 5 mins - out of jail - off the planet
 
Just like the fans it's the same boohoo they did this with this character and so forth. I would like to hear some actual criticism, if you have no sentimentality for these characters it means nothing. Hamill's just probably disappointed that he can't hog all the spotlight and that his character isn't infallible.
Oh, probably? Where did you get that from? I mean, if you're going to complain about a lack of actual criticism, surely you're able to back up this sort of accusation.
 
Can you explain what was good about it?
Nice design of the casino town, didn't just barge in but got caught for parking on a private beach, found a code breaker not the code breaker, the animals running riot in town was nicely done. It also helped to set the political tone of the film.

All in all a very nice, enthralling digression.
 
Can you explain what was good about it?

Its the first time a star wars movie has actually shown the downtrodden victims of the empire / first order rather than suggesting it.
Its actually pretty central to the theme of the movie imo where 'heroes' are treated with scorn (Poe losing all the bombers) and its more about making use of the wider dissatisfaction with the Empire and working together etc.
Same with Lukes scene. He's inspires the wider rebellion and brings the invasion to a halt by his presence but its essentially meaningless, hes not in a position to actually intervene and he does it without actually involving himself in the conflict.

Oh and its pretty important to Finns arc and bringing him from wanting to escape the first order and hide, to wanting to fight the first order and protect the republic with Del Toro acting as the devil on his shoulder saying 'dont get yourself involved'.
 
Last edited:
Why did people hate the casino subplot so much? I thought it was good.

I didn't expect much subtlety from a Star Wars flick but the political aspect in this segment was delivered as a ham handed lecture rather than just demonstrated. Thought Del Toro was pretty bad in his role. Wasn't a massive fan of the theme of respecting veiled authority or mother knows best. Thought the film needed one of the new blokes to actually succeed at something (particularly Finn) rather than just receive a character building lesson. All in all it felt a bit bolted on (and behind door 3 we find some themes) and made the second act drag more than it should have.

Agree with you about the design of the place and the characters they invented to live there. It was a cool place.
 
Nice design of the casino town, didn't just barge in but got caught for parking on a private beach, found a code breaker not the code breaker, the animals running riot in town was nicely done. It also helped to set the political tone of the film.

All in all a very nice, enthralling digression.


Hated the casino town design, the fecking awful writing that all the profiteers of the Star Wars(jesus christ) are living in Space Monte Carlo. The stupid fecking BB8 machine-gunning coins, the cringy 'humour', the fecking "code-breaker" sitting in a cell he could leave at any time, the barf-enducing save the animals(but not the child-slaves) & Rose with her 'now it's worth it' line when taking off the saddle. The fresher-year attempt at setting a political tone as you call it but worst of all the fecking blandness of the whole thing bore me to death.

If this was not a film written by committee then Johnson is a complete and utter hack. If he got no interference in making this he is an awful script writer and story teller, not to mention the plot holes the size of your outer rim.

It's just terrible film making, in every sense. The only positive thing i could say about the film is that some scenes are technically shot well.
 
Can you explain what was good about it?

At the time I didn't particular care for it as it felt like a detour.

Thinking about it afterwards though, it was pretty key to Finn's character arc, built his relationship with Rose, introduced us to Del Toro's character, enforced a couple of the film's key themes and also introduced us to the kids we eventually end the film on.

I'm still not sure I liked it all that much but in hindsight removing that subplot would have taken quite a bit from the film.
 
The only thing I really hate is that leprechaun.
 
any one else notice that force projecting yourself gives you a haircut

from island hobo to nicely couffuired in one Jedi trick
 
The Finn and Rose subplot might've worked if Rose killed herself to save the others at the end. Then you give her an actual role in the story, you make the parallel with the sister that died for the common cause at the beginning of the film, you instantly give another layer (a second one) to Finn's character and some actual development, as well as a basis for further growth - she taught him about slavery and socialism and animal rights etc., so you build on that. The audience also actually connects and identifies with the Resistance on an emotional level, not just because the exposition made them the "good guys" and the writing makes their opposition the obvious (comically) "bad guys".

Instead they decided to go for the romance without any previous hint that there's any romantic element to their relationship. Or any chemistry between the characters, really.
 
Last edited:
The Finn and Rose subplot might've worked if Rose killed herself to save the others at the end. Then you give her an actual role in the story, you make the parallel with the sister that died for the common cause at the beginning of the film, you instantly give another layer (a second one) to Finn's character and some actual development, as well as a basis for further growth - she taught him about slavery and socialism and animal rights etc., so you build on that. The audience also actually connects and identifies with the Resistance on an emotional level, not just because the exposition made them the "good guys" and the writing makes their opposition the obvious (comically) "bad guys".

Instead they decided to go for the romance without any previous hint that there's any romantic element to their relationship. Or any chemistry between the characters, really.
You mean like Holdo did, which people started moaning about because "it should've been Ackbar!"?
 
You mean like Holdo did, which people started moaning about because "it should've been Ackbar!"?
Sort of. But she had no real connection to the other characters, so nobody cares about her death. She was also being a smug bitch for no reason at all for half the movie, so I wasn't sorry seeing her go.

On a side note - I had no idea who Ackbar was and only remember that I've seen him before when I googled his image. "I've seen him before" is about the extent to which I care about him though.
 
Last edited:
Sort of. But she had no real connection to the other characters, so nobody cares about her death. She was also being a smug bitch for no reason at all for half the movie, so I wasn't sorry seeing her go.

She wasn't smug, there was obviously an inner circle that knew the plan. She also knew the plan needed to be kept away from Poh because of his impulsive record. The audience were watching the plan unravel from his eyes.
 
She wasn't smug, there was obviously an inner circle that knew the plan. She also knew the plan needed to be kept away from Poh because of his impulsive record. The audience were watching the plan unravel from his eyes.
She was definitely smug though. The "I know your type" conversation with the pilot was overflowing with smugness.

Edit:
dTnXplKxk178-VEouXFfIX8Ql0nipNoDCivMtDqVsJQ.png
 
Just like the fans it's the same boohoo they did this with this character and so forth. I would like to hear some actual criticism, if you have no sentimentality for these characters it means nothing. Hamill's just probably disappointed that he can't hog all the spotlight and that his character isn't infallible.
Hamill isn't disappointed though and he's been constantly saying that since release because his words have been taken out of context.
a1a4x7p0jc601.jpg
 
She was definitely smug though. The "I know your type" conversation with the pilot was overflowing with smugness.

Edit:
dTnXplKxk178-VEouXFfIX8Ql0nipNoDCivMtDqVsJQ.png

Yeah because his type is impulsive.

Besides, it was just setting the audience up for a twist. I feel like people over analyse star wars too much.
 
1) Luke's character has been butchered.
2) Rey Sue. Everyone in Star Wars, be movies or books need training. Everyone bar her, of course.
3) The fact that it makes the old Trilogy irrelevant. The weak rebels fight against all odds against the big evil Empire and somehow win. 40 years later, the weak rebels are fighting against the big evil Empire.

1.
luke-defeats-vader.png

NUwnS.jpg


2 Debatable

3. Agreed
 
Just like the fans it's the same boohoo they did this with this character and so forth. I would like to hear some actual criticism, if you have no sentimentality for these characters it means nothing. Hamill's just probably disappointed that he can't hog all the spotlight and that his character isn't infallible.

Actual criticism? Luke Skywalker´s characterisation was poorly written. The film shoved him into a role it wanted him in without much care for his core character traits and little to no explanation for that change. I don´t even have that much of a gripe with his personality on that island (although his insistensy to be left alone to die after leaving a freaking map behind to find him had me scratching my head). It is how he appearantly got to his state as hermit that felt incredibly clunky and thus was really hard to believe.

If I would have to summarize Skywalker´s character in one word it would be "hope". Hope for a better future but also the belief that pretty much everyone can be saved, even from themself. This belief led him to basically go on a suicide mission in EP VI in an attempt to redeem his father, a man who has done unspeakable things. Skywalker was shown to be a very reluctant killer even when presented with grave danger. This point was made in the clearest way in his lsat fight vs. Vader and the lengths the latter had to go to make Luke unleash true killing intent. It took Vader to enter Luke´s mind and then threathen to turn his beloved twin sister towards the dark side.

Now enter the "birth" of Kylo Ren and the best explanation for Luke having the urge to kill a defenseless child (his own nephew on top of that) in his sleep the writers came up with was instinct, because he saw Ben´s potential for the dark side. That is an incredible stretch and simply something I can ever picture Luke Skywalker doing, not without prior development towards that point. It was a cheap plot device to force Luke outside the picture.

For the record, this whole point did not ruin the film for me (it did lower my personal rating for the film, though) as it had several strong points (beautiful shot, great soundtrack, two very well made and entertaining large scale battles) and if you don´t dive into the plot deep enough, it was a good blockbuster. However, I´m also not what you would call a real fan of the series. I´m too young to have been grown up with the original films, having seen them only three times in my life. If I put myself in the shoes of the people who love the first three episodes and it´s characters, having grown attached to them through dozens viewings, I can easily picture the ire they developed towards that film. I can even understand why they would rate it below the prequels as in the difference to them this film actually utilized their beloved characters (and advertised greatly with them) only to turn them into characters they simply don´t recognize anymore.

The dominant reactions of the Star Wars fans I know was simple: pretend this film never happened and ignore Ep IX.
 
I really liked the movie but it does have some major flaws. It was a movie I enjoyed seeing but I do feel the story could have been beter written, they clearly wanted to create a more emotional movie but they did so by sacrifycing important elements of the story. The what and how and why is not so important anymore as the how does it look and how does it make you feel. The things that bug me the most is that the major questions that the first movie brought up were actually simply ignored (so good bye to any major fan theories) and that the character of Luke feels overall weird and could have been done much better.

Things I liked:
  • Snoke's mastery of the force and his evilness
  • Snoke's death scene was epic
  • Kylo and Rey fighting Snoke's elite guard gave us some pretty epic light sabre action
  • The scene in the first space battle were the asian pilot has to drop the bombs was pretty dramatic and well done
  • Luke's use of the force to make an astral projection tricking Kylo and the first order and providing the ultimate escape for the rebels
  • The fact that on so many points were you tought this is going to be predictable the movie actually did something unpredictable and in that way managed to surprise me several times
  • Crashing a star cruiser at light speed into another star cruiser (i don't care if it makes any sense, that was epic)
  • The visuals of the battle on the salt planet with the red on white effects was beautiful
Things I did not like:
  • Slapstick character of general Hux
  • Porgs were not funny
  • Rose was annoying
  • Snoke dying (it was epic but too soon) and the fact they just ignored having any sort of background for this character (who is he ?, where did he come from ?, how is he this powerfull)
  • Anti climax to know that Rey's parents are actually nobody at all and the entire mystery of her parent issues is simply here weakness and insecurity that Kylo wanted to exploit to turn her to the dark side
  • Luke dying for no apparent reason
  • Luke's agenda and motivation for going into hiding (ending the jedi, shutting himself off from everything, makes little sense to me)
  • Still don't know exactly how Kylo was turned to the dark side and how he managed to overpower Luke (why did he not kill him ?)
  • Where are the knights of Ren ? (were they the red guys guarding Snoke ?)
  • Some elements of the space battles really made very little sense
  • The plot to find the codebreaker and the character of the codebreaker played by Benitio Del Toro was unecessary and also made little sense
  • The casino scene and the chase with the fathiers wasn't overall very good (altough some parts were ok)
  • Overall it felt like the movie had alot of plotholes and scene's that did not serve the story in any other way than to simply bring some charcaters together (Snoke being the biggest of them all)
 
The thing about the new ones rendering the OT irrelevant plot-wise is kind of true, but the problem is that was a natural consequence of making a new series of films when there didn't need to be any more. ROTJ obviously ended happily and with all the heroes in a good place...but the problem is that any new film was always going to require conflict, and that inherently meant making the lives of the main heroes post-ROTJ a little bit shit and miserable.

Obviously they could've approached it differently. Not making the First Order a clone copy of the Empire would've probably helped, but even then in a by-the-numbers action movie series you're inevitably going to veer into the same territory as you did before when following the whole trilogy format. Which (again) means following certain dramatic conventions which will result in plot movements that render old ones obsolete. Irrespective of whether it was handled better or not it's just something which would've probably always happened when following on from a trilogy that had a nice enough ending.
 
The thing about the new ones rendering the OT irrelevant plot-wise is kind of true, but the problem is that was a natural consequence of making a new series of films when there didn't need to be any more. ROTJ obviously ended happily and with all the heroes in a good place...but the problem is that any new film was always going to require conflict, and that inherently meant making the lives of the main heroes post-ROTJ a little bit shit and miserable.

Obviously they could've approached it differently. Not making the First Order a clone copy of the Empire would've probably helped, but even then in a by-the-numbers action movie series you're inevitably going to veer into the same territory as you did before when following the whole trilogy format. Which (again) means following certain dramatic conventions which will result in plot movements that render old ones obsolete. Irrespective of whether it was handled better or not it's just something which would've probably always happened when following on from a trilogy that had a nice enough ending.
I also think it's not exactly unrealistic, given global events in the 20th century, that a defeated party in a massive war comes back decades later with even more firepower. I don't agree that it becomes irrelevant either - the time of this trilogy would just have an Empire with probably dozens of death stars, Vader being a dick as Emperor and no rebellion or jedi left against it.

Also worth remembering that the end of RotJ, as Kasdan originally wrote it, was supposed to be far more bittersweet before it was changed to be that carnival thing. I know Star Wars is really a fairy tale in space but still, "happily ever after" doesn't really fit it.
 
Watched it last week. Was really underwhelmed by how nonchalant Luke seemed to be. Think Kylo Ren is poorly portrayed. Film lacked substance.
 
I also think it's not exactly unrealistic, given global events in the 20th century, that a defeated party in a massive war comes back decades later with even more firepower. I don't agree that it becomes irrelevant either - the time of this trilogy would just have an Empire with probably dozens of death stars, Vader being a dick as Emperor and no rebellion or jedi left against it.

Also worth remembering that the end of RotJ, as Kasdan originally wrote it, was supposed to be far more bittersweet before it was changed to be that carnival thing. I know Star Wars is really a fairy tale in space but still, "happily ever after" doesn't really fit it.

True, and I'd have probably preferred that as the ending considering Luke in ROTJ does come across as someone damaged to an extent...but at the same time I do think people saying that it renders the original happy ending irrelevant are kind of missing the point that any film in which the story continued on from those events was always going to do that to an extent.
 
True, and I'd have probably preferred that as the ending considering Luke in ROTJ does come across as someone damaged to an extent...but at the same time I do think people saying that it renders the original happy ending irrelevant are kind of missing the point that any film in which the story continued on from those events was always going to do that to an extent.
I'm not sure. I think there's a lot of ways they could've taken the power balance besides literally copying the first trilogy. I think a lot of people wanted/were expecting the new republic to be in power and more at the forefront, maybe challenged by smaller bands of the old empire, and Luke to be training lots of new Jedi. Instead we got what we've seen before. Powerful Empire vs poor rebels and the almost extinct Jedi forced into exile and sought out by the last hope. It's no wonder that people aren't pleased, we've seen that story. That's why I think a lot of people make the point of the OT being rendered pointless, because we're literally back at the New Hope starting position. But if you're not happy with that then you're apparently just "overthinking Star Wars".
 
True, and I'd have probably preferred that as the ending considering Luke in ROTJ does come across as someone damaged to an extent...but at the same time I do think people saying that it renders the original happy ending irrelevant are kind of missing the point that any film in which the story continued on from those events was always going to do that to an extent.
Disagree. If you read the Thrawn Trilogy, you see that it was possible to make a villain who had much less resources than the Republic and still was able to cause them problems.

Obviously, they decided to not make those books as movies but still it was totally possible to have a much weakened Empire. What they did was somehow make the New Order even stronger than the Empire, and have an Emperor copy and a Vader copy as main antagonists with the Republic /Resistance having somehow just a dozen ships, which is less than at the height of the Galactic Empire.

I agree that living happily after would have been a shit story for a movie, but they could have definitely turn the table, and make The Empire as the weaker one and still have good movies. What they did was a soft reboot which was totally unneeded IMO.
 
Yeah because his type is impulsive.

Besides, it was just setting the audience up for a twist. I feel like people over analyse star wars too much.
Of course it was for the twist. That's what the complaint is.
 
Why complain about the plot invalidating previous trilogy now? It was TFA which did that when First order magically popped up to take the place of empire and have upper hand over the rebels..who should not have been rebels at that point anyway! No one complained then because they were too busy jerking off to nostalgia porn. Rey already defeated Kylo without any training in TFA or not and showed that he could match or outmatch him when it come to using the force. Luke turning into a recluse instead of helping out his sister against First order (even when they destroyed a whole planet) was a choice already made clear in TFA too. There were already countless plot holes and poor story decisions in TFA.
 
I'm not sure. I think there's a lot of ways they could've taken the power balance besides literally copying the first trilogy. I think a lot of people wanted/were expecting the new republic to be in power and more at the forefront, maybe challenged by smaller bands of the old empire, and Luke to be training lots of new Jedi. Instead we got what we've seen before. Powerful Empire vs poor rebels and the almost extinct Jedi forced into exile and sought out by the last hope. It's no wonder that people aren't pleased, we've seen that story. That's why I think a lot of people make the point of the OT being rendered pointless, because we're literally back at the New Hope starting position. But if you're not happy with that then you're apparently just "overthinking Star Wars".

If we’re choosing completely random hypothetical scenarios which didn’t happen as reasons for this to be a bad movie can I start hating on it because Luke didn’t have a pet unicorn?
 
Why complain about the plot invalidating previous trilogy now? It was TFA which did that when First order magically popped up to take the place of empire and have upper hand over the rebels..who should not have been rebels at that point anyway! No one complained then because they were too busy jerking off to nostalgia porn. Rey already defeated Kylo without any training in TFA or not and showed that he could match or outmatch him when it come to using the force. Luke turning into a recluse instead of helping out his sister against First order (even when they destroyed a whole planet) was a choice already made clear in TFA too. There were already countless plot holes and poor story decisions in TFA.
Complained about all those points back then, and disliked that movie almost as much as this one.

This one just took the piss instead, butchering totally Luke's character and making the plot of that movie irrelevant (search for Luke, Rey's parents and so on). But yeah, JJ by playing super-safe kind of destroyed this saga for me, and Rian just ignored everything about Star Wars when he made this movie.