Star Wars: Rogue One Story Trailer
- Thread starter Biggest-Geek-Ever
- Start date
- Status
Scorpion Soldier
Member
Yeah, I got it in my stupidity as I edited, which made me re-read the entire exchange realizing I was an idiot xD No more tired late night posting for me
Edit: it gets worse every time I re-read it... So damn embarrassing...
Monocle
Member
I made the same mistake the first few times I read the title.Yeah, I got it in my stupidity as I edited, which made me re-read the entire exchange realizing I was an idiot xD No more tired late night posting for me
Edit: it gets worse every time I re-read it... So damn embarrassing...
This is literally a prequel to the original Star Wars about stealing the Death Star plans.
Approved.
professor_t
Member
I showed the trailer to my 4-year old son, who had no idea what to expect, and he audibly gasped when Vader appeared on screen.
The tease can be effective.
The tease can be effective.
This being an ANH prequel and therefore necessary to involve the Death Star aside, big fat lazers should definitely stop being on the darkside's agenda. Seriously, there are other world/galaxy destroying ideas out there you can pull out of your ass like:
- ancient evil magical force bullshit
- killer virus cloud/strain
- killer AI virus program a la Project Insight (Plot twist: Snoke is actually an MCP)
- Black holes. This is logically impossible but it's SW, they'll figure something out
- Some Sith Elder God
And if you wanna go full jump the shark
- ancient evil magical force bullshit
- killer virus cloud/strain
- killer AI virus program a la Project Insight (Plot twist: Snoke is actually an MCP)
- Black holes. This is logically impossible but it's SW, they'll figure something out
- Some Sith Elder God
And if you wanna go full jump the shark
time travel
Glory Fades
Banned
This brings a tear to my eye
Here's the thing: We've had three films centred around the threat of a Death Star. Four if you include Episode II where plans for it are discussed. The last one was less than a year ago. On top of that we have the other big reveal from this trailer: Darth Vader. Woo! Look out! Except there've been at least six films on the life and times of Darth Vader. Seven if you count the wannabe from the last film.
How much more of this crap do we need? Instead of giving us a new film, with an original cast and an original plot, we get yet another re-tread of the themes and characters from the old films. Are there really no other interesting people or interesting things happening in this universe?
Who cares?
Like. This all smacks of people desperate to find something, ANYTHING to complain about. And this went for TFA as well. Was Starkiller Base an amazingly original idea? No. Did I care? Not particularly.
Is Making A Movie Of How They Stole The Death Star's Plans completely obvious and an incredibly safe concept? Of course. Does this matter at all? Not in the slightest.
Edit: Also you realize that this entire movie series is about Darth Vader, right? Complaining that the single most important character in the entire franchise is going to appear in a movie where it makes perfect sense for him to be is very, very stupid.
You are basically arguing that this movie shouldn't even exist. Which, while a valid point of view, is not particularly conducive to discussion since it objectively does exist and its not going to not exist no matter how much people whine about it.
brandonh83
Banned
Starkiller wasn't even a focus of VII lol
It's a character driven story. Starkiller, Death Star, it all fits into the premise of Star Wars (it's called Star Wars think about it) but is all and nothing but a means to an end.
It's a character driven story. Starkiller, Death Star, it all fits into the premise of Star Wars (it's called Star Wars think about it) but is all and nothing but a means to an end.
I'm so sorry they didn't accept your screenplay, I'm sure it was awesome...
Anyhow- I don't like the time-frame of the movie being a prequel to ep iv, but it *looks* great for what it is. The dialog is rough as hell, but I'm more of a visual viewer. Cinematography looks on point.
Atraveller
Banned
I'm half expecting a rebrand like Edge of Tomorrow some time in the future.
orthodoxy1095
Banned
Will see purely for Donnie Yen tbh. He better not get shafted by the run time.
Oh ho, the infamous "I'm sure you couldn't do better" ploy, the defense of intellectual lightweights.
ChaosZeroX
Banned
Wow this looks fantastic
orthodoxy1095
Banned
Now I'm wishing Yen had top billing over Jones.
But that was never going to happen.
But that was never going to happen.
Well, you, obviously, since you're posting here. Me also, and I guess at least everyone else in this thread.
Are dissenting opinions suddenly not allowed on GAF? Like, I'm glad you both like the trailer and you're excited for this to release but I'm not. Can we talk about it please (the trailer, I mean) instead of talking past each other? Here, I'll start again:
I think this trailer is indicative of the fact that Star Wars is a tired franchise that has run out of ideas. The original movies, their cast and themes have reached such popularity that they are now a permanent part of the culture for two generations of people. I think the creatives who are working on these new modern Star Wars films grew up with the originals and are so enamoured with (or perhaps so intimidated by) them that they have no idea how to get out from underneath their long shadow.
I think Darth Vader was an interesting if slightly one-note villain and I think the hagiographic reverence with which he's treated in the prequels and in TFA is a mistake. OK he's cool but the Empire has lots of other cool space nazis we can love to hate. Grand Admiral Thrawn anyone? Grand Moff Tarkin perhaps? But no. We always come back to Vader and his bloody Death Stars. It's so boring!
Star Wars has become the Call of Duty of the film world: big and loud and showy and ultimately vapid.
Monocle
Member
Guess what, I want more of this crap. General audiences agree. And happily, Disney appears more than willing to accommodate us with content of substantially higher quality than the prequel trilogy.
Go find something you do like.
-ImaginaryInsider
Member
Reusing the Death Star for Force Awakens was somewhat annoying, it felt lazy. RO is approaching it from enough of a different angle I don't really mind them using it since they exploring more aspects of that period.
After this though, no more Death Stars again.
After this though, no more Death Stars again.
ryutaro's mama
Member
brandonh83
Banned
Again the Death Star is a means to an end. That's the plot, to steal the plans. Like IV, VI and VII this superweapon exists to propel the character journey. It's like saying Lord of the Rings is a boring plot because they have to throw a ring into a volcano. It's completely beside the point.
IV was about introducing the characters and having them come together for a goal, but it's actually about Luke finding out his place in the galaxy and his purpose. Rogue One is about stealing the Death Star plans but I guarantee it's not the focal point of the story. I can already see in the trailer how it's about characters coming together and working through differences to solve something.
I agree it was a little lazy to bring the DS back in VI. But then it makes sense later in VII that the First Order, being a new galactic power, having a superweapon to be able to say hey, don't mess with us. It's no different than countries having nuclear power. VII wasn't about another Death Star. It was about Rey, like Luke, getting away and learning of a bigger destiny for her and finding Luke. It's also about Han Solo and Kylo Ren.
There's plot, and then there's STORY. There's a difference. If you chalk Rogue One or Force Awakens down to it being ABOUT a Death Star like weapon, you're successfully ignoring what the story is actually about. The plot of Lord of the Rings is about people banding together to throw a ring in a volcano. The story itself is about so much more than that.
These things and comparisons are basic surface level things. There's a lot more going on beyond this shit and it confuses the fuck out of me when people say that it's lazy because the plot is a familiar trope rather than looking at what the actual story is about.
IV was about introducing the characters and having them come together for a goal, but it's actually about Luke finding out his place in the galaxy and his purpose. Rogue One is about stealing the Death Star plans but I guarantee it's not the focal point of the story. I can already see in the trailer how it's about characters coming together and working through differences to solve something.
I agree it was a little lazy to bring the DS back in VI. But then it makes sense later in VII that the First Order, being a new galactic power, having a superweapon to be able to say hey, don't mess with us. It's no different than countries having nuclear power. VII wasn't about another Death Star. It was about Rey, like Luke, getting away and learning of a bigger destiny for her and finding Luke. It's also about Han Solo and Kylo Ren.
There's plot, and then there's STORY. There's a difference. If you chalk Rogue One or Force Awakens down to it being ABOUT a Death Star like weapon, you're successfully ignoring what the story is actually about. The plot of Lord of the Rings is about people banding together to throw a ring in a volcano. The story itself is about so much more than that.
These things and comparisons are basic surface level things. There's a lot more going on beyond this shit and it confuses the fuck out of me when people say that it's lazy because the plot is a familiar trope rather than looking at what the actual story is about.
orthodoxy1095
Banned
So they can't come up with another means to their ends other than a Death Star?
I mean, come on.
brandonh83
Banned
It doesn't matter. It's called Star Wars. In order to have a star war you need a faction that has power and in a story about galactic power the opposing force needs a superweapon in order to be feared. The thing is that it makes sense.
If you have a problem with this it's very very likely that this thing is not for you.
I don't think people have actual issue with the concept of a giant planet killing superweapon so much as how it is presented and used in the story. The comparison with nukes only works insofar as the concept of the Death Star itself.
The actual narrative laziness is how the resolution of the samey superweapon is the same each time. Build a giant spherical planet killing device with a huge laser, install it with a single tiny weak spot which fighters can get into and blow up. That's lazy and boring.
A more accurate comparison would be if every story involving superpowers having nukes ends with the hero racing against time to destroy a suitcase with a timer on it. That's lame enough as it is in generic action movies. Now imagine if there was an action franchise where that happens in every installment. Always nukes. Always a suitcase. Always a timer. It's boring.
Presentation matters, and Star Wars can certainly exist without being lazy. There are tons of Star Wars stories which don't rely on that which are good. There is nothing inherently "Star Wars" about a stupid ball of metal in space with a tiny weak point.
The actual narrative laziness is how the resolution of the samey superweapon is the same each time. Build a giant spherical planet killing device with a huge laser, install it with a single tiny weak spot which fighters can get into and blow up. That's lazy and boring.
A more accurate comparison would be if every story involving superpowers having nukes ends with the hero racing against time to destroy a suitcase with a timer on it. That's lame enough as it is in generic action movies. Now imagine if there was an action franchise where that happens in every installment. Always nukes. Always a suitcase. Always a timer. It's boring.
Presentation matters, and Star Wars can certainly exist without being lazy. There are tons of Star Wars stories which don't rely on that which are good. There is nothing inherently "Star Wars" about a stupid ball of metal in space with a tiny weak point.
Krennic, a new character, is the main villain here.
For Rogue One it has to be the Death Star as that is literally the story they're telling, of how the rebels got the Death Star plans. Force Awakens is another story though.
brandonh83
Banned
I maintain in this case it makes sense.
VII is 30 years later and there's a new superweapon built to make the new empire be able to say hey, we have this, don't fuck with us. And the actual story isn't even about that.
Rogue One is a deliberate spin-off about stealing the plans for the original Death Star. But there will be more to the story and characters to just that.
Like with IV and V, the first one is about dealing with the power the opposing force possesses and VIII will probably explore different venues like V did. I doubt VIII will involve another Death Star type weapon. For VII it absolutely made sense.
Would I be annoyed if VIII and IX involved another Death Star type weapon? Maybe, depends what they do with it. But so far everything has made sense.
VII is 30 years later and there's a new superweapon built to make the new empire be able to say hey, we have this, don't fuck with us. And the actual story isn't even about that.
Rogue One is a deliberate spin-off about stealing the plans for the original Death Star. But there will be more to the story and characters to just that.
Like with IV and V, the first one is about dealing with the power the opposing force possesses and VIII will probably explore different venues like V did. I doubt VIII will involve another Death Star type weapon. For VII it absolutely made sense.
Would I be annoyed if VIII and IX involved another Death Star type weapon? Maybe, depends what they do with it. But so far everything has made sense.
Guys guys guys, Non- Death Star based Star Wars Movies are coming, just be patient, in fact we are going to have so many Star Wars movies in the future there will probably be a point where you say, "remember when there was a death star in Star Wars to rely on? Damn i miss that".
Episode 8, the Han Solo movie, they will probably be the first two that dont
Episod 9 though, i dont know, though ts still be written by Rian Johnson so we may get lucky.
Episode 8, the Han Solo movie, they will probably be the first two that dont
Episod 9 though, i dont know, though ts still be written by Rian Johnson so we may get lucky.
I think the existence of a Death Star was a detriment to VII. With Kylo Ren they showed that you can have a "Vader figure" and not trend the same ground. The character was initially presented to be one thing, but turned out to be something very different and owned the role. That subversion is interesting and makes the film's story stand out. The use of the same type of superweapon but "more" powerful was lazy, and made the climatic aerial battle much more boring as a result. If they had the confidence to try something different with the weapon like they did with Kylo Ren, it would have been a stronger movie.
Obviously I have no problem with there being a Death Star in Rogue One, because well, that... is the story. It's also not going to be about the Death Star being a threat to the characters or being destroyed by a a plane flying into a tunnel with a weak spot.
Obviously I have no problem with there being a Death Star in Rogue One, because well, that... is the story. It's also not going to be about the Death Star being a threat to the characters or being destroyed by a a plane flying into a tunnel with a weak spot.
Biggest-Geek-Ever
Member
Listen, Disney doesn't get to tell me what their movie should be called.
And even if I admitted that calling it a "story trailer" was a mistake (which I totally am not), I'd blame Disney and their backwards ass title.
The Death Star plot was completely tacked on. It didn't help that the main characters weren't involved in the actual assault on it, which made it hard to find that very interesting.I think the existence of a Death Star was a detriment to VII. With Kylo Ren they showed that you can have a "Vader figure" and not trend the same ground. The character was initially presented to be one thing, but turned out to be something very different and owned the role. That subversion is interesting and makes the film's story stand out. The use of the same type of superweapon but "more" powerful was lazy, and made the climatic aerial battle much more boring as a result. If they had the confidence to try something different with the weapon like they did with Kylo Ren, it would have been a stronger movie.
Obviously I have no problem with there being a Death Star in Rogue One, because well, that... is the story. It's also not going to be about the Death Star being a threat to the characters or being destroyed by a a plane flying into a tunnel with a weak spot.
I agree with you. Kylo Ren is a compelling character and an interesting threat, but the Starkiller plot was a dud.
brandonh83
Banned
There was barely a climactic aerial battle because it wasn't about that how the climax of IV was. VII's climax was about Rey, Finn, Han, and Kylo. That's what VII was about. The Starkiller was there to a) have a reason for the First Order to be a powerful galactic and feared force and to b) present a scenario that brings the central characters together for deeper things than the new superweapon.
That's why we had a brief attack on Starkiller led by Poe, and the actual focal scenes between again, Rey, Finn, Han and Kylo. That's what the actual climax, unlike A New Hope, was about.
That's why we had a brief attack on Starkiller led by Poe, and the actual focal scenes between again, Rey, Finn, Han and Kylo. That's what the actual climax, unlike A New Hope, was about.
I don't understand why you feel the need to stubbornly defend this by saying there was "barely" anything and that the movie was "not about that" and so on, as if that somehow excuses a lazy plot point which could be better. A story is about multiple things, these things are what different scenes present to audiences. It's never about one thing. The focus being one one or two things does not mean the other things do not matter or are excused from criticism.
Monocle
Member
I kind of agree with his point though. The climax was really character oriented. No, that doesn't excuse TFA's excessive repetition from criticism, but it does take some wind out of the sails of people who claim the movie's derivative aspects are fatal flaws that drastically diminish its quality and entertainment value.
QuantumZebra
Member
brandonh83
Banned
The focus of the actual story is pretty key but I digress. I'm not saying the Starkiller stuff lacked importance because it did. I'm saying that the core of the story was elsewhere.
Not trying to stubbornly defend anything, I'm just pointing out the clear differences between a plot and a story. I would even argue that IV wasn't strictly about destroying the Death Star but about using that conflict as a pedestal to develop Luke.
The tag, though, makes it hard.
Cabbagehead
Member
Man i can see this being a mess. I hope it's not really i do.
I don't agree at all that there was any "fatal flaw" in VII. I'm just saying that you know, using the same Death Star thing over and over... is really pretty boring! As I said, there's a lot of other interesting stuff going on in VII, which helped a lot, but the Starkiller thing was boring as shit. It's boring as shit, and they still devoted multiple scenes to it. Scenes which they could have devoted to something which wasn't as boring!
brandonh83
Banned
That's fair. Hell, Starkiller isn't my favorite thing about it. I don't have a problem with it though simply because as you said the story is about more than that. I don't say oh, VII is lazy because there's a new superweapon plot. I would accuse it of the same thing if the story were almost strictly about that.
I'm all for VIII heading into new territory. I just don't think it's a lazy sin that VII did this thing, especially as it was trying to tell a story far beyond the Starkiller stuff.
Discotheque
Banned
yeah none of that shit was interesting. i practically checked out during the flight scenes that were just a poor rip of a New Hope's attack run. even the briefing scene felt way too derivative.
but i was all in for that Kylo/Han Solo/Rey drama tho.
Monocle
Member
It's probably the worst thing about the movie. I could have done without it too.
At least most of the focus was correctly placed on character conflicts.
TDLink
Member
The Force Awakens wasn't a bad movie (and I can't take anyone seriously who actually thinks it was), but if it didn't have Starkiller Base it actually would have been much better.
I think having Starkiller is the biggest mistake Abrams made. If he really felt he had to have it to destroy those 5 planets (which I'm not sure I agree with) it still didn't have to be the climactic location and get destroyed in this movie.
The main crux of the film was finding Luke Skywalker, basically. This is what the entire film was building towards from the opening crawl, and it's what it ends on. Going up against the big Imperial Super-weapon doesn't feel earned at all for any characters. It's not a location we spend half the movie in like ANH either.
If that final act was near identical but it was some random Imperial Base that held the final piece of the puzzle to find Luke...it would have made a lot more sense. You could still have fighters serving as a distraction, still have the base on the planet blow up. But the reason for being there would resonate with the entire rest of the film much more and it wouldn't feel like a fast-forwarded and more soul-less version of the Death Star from the original movie.
I think having Starkiller is the biggest mistake Abrams made. If he really felt he had to have it to destroy those 5 planets (which I'm not sure I agree with) it still didn't have to be the climactic location and get destroyed in this movie.
The main crux of the film was finding Luke Skywalker, basically. This is what the entire film was building towards from the opening crawl, and it's what it ends on. Going up against the big Imperial Super-weapon doesn't feel earned at all for any characters. It's not a location we spend half the movie in like ANH either.
If that final act was near identical but it was some random Imperial Base that held the final piece of the puzzle to find Luke...it would have made a lot more sense. You could still have fighters serving as a distraction, still have the base on the planet blow up. But the reason for being there would resonate with the entire rest of the film much more and it wouldn't feel like a fast-forwarded and more soul-less version of the Death Star from the original movie.
In this movie the Death Star has a completely different narrative role though. The heroes aren't gonna destroy it at the end. They're trying to get the plans for it.
Yep. In general, Starkiller Base is the weakest element of The Force Awakens, and I absolutely would have excised it from the script if I had been writing the movie.
Count Dookkake
Member
Starkiller's similarities to the Death Star would have been mitigated with a minor adjustment.
Instead of draining suns to power a laser, it should have just drained suns.
Instead of draining suns to power a laser, it should have just drained suns.
TDLink
Member
I mean that would have done more to differentiate it but it still wouldn't feel earned for any of these characters to destroy it in this film. It just wasn't necessary for them to go up against a super weapon. The plot wasn't leading there at all, until suddenly it was.
Count Dookkake
Member
I'm not sure why you are telling me your opinion on things that have nothing to do with the specific point I made.
TDLink
Member
Changing the method of killing planets that the big superweapon employs doesn't change the fact that the story doesn't always have to be about heroes going up against a big superweapon.
It would still be similar to the death star enough even if it just ate suns but was otherwise as presented.
- Status