Rogue One: A Star Wars Story |OT| They rebel - SPOILERS

Status
Not open for further replies.
I can't believe I'm going to say this but I think the battle at the end is way better than the one at the end of Return of the Jedi. Aside from the fantastic stuff between Luke/Vader/Palpatine, the steaks feel higher in Rogue One. When you look back on it, there was no way the Rebels were going to win the battle, they were in it to *just* squeak away with the Death Star plans.


Also, you know, The Empire not getting starched by teddie bears is good too.

Yeah lets just ignore arguably the best part of Star Wars, period. Then maybe the Rogue One end battle is better than the Jedi end battle :P


The fucking music that plays when Vader does his face turn is better than the entire Rogue One movie. Chills every time.
 
I was more thinking that it was nice that each character got to do one thing that mattered, that any individual failing would have ruined the entire mission, and each found a purpose and comfort in accomplishing that task and feeling like they mattered before their end (and more importantly justified or righted any terrible things they had to do to get to that point). The actual tasks themselves didn't matter as much as what it meant for the characters to do them. It could have been better obviously, but it still worked for me.
I agree with this. I just thought the execution could have been much more gripping in regard to caring about their individual struggles. Had nothing to do with "omg he just flipped a switch" and more to do with "I wish I could have spent more intimate time with this character" so I could care more about this sacrifice.
 
I can't believe someone would prefer a movie as generic, mediocre, and bland as TFA to Rogue One. I guess that's what the people want these days.

I feel like I'm living in another world when it comes to this film.

Rogue One was mediocre, bland, and generic IMO. Albeit, with some great sequences.
 
In my seat waiting for a 230 showing at true IMAX. Can't wait. Seat is a couple rows closer than I'd like but I'm dead center.
 
I expected him to like "bend" blaster fire around him like a force shield, the fact that he didn't even really do anything force-related rang kind of hollow for the time the film takes place in. Seeing the light side of the Force in a time that people didnt even belive in it and Baze witnessing it firsthand would have been thematically relevant and provided one hell of a moment. But... nothing. Flip a switch and get exploded. Shoot a couple of extraneous goons, get exploded.

Define "force related." Did Luke land the photon torpedoes because he used the force to move them? Or did he enter a state of meditation and become one with the force which allowed him to concentrate and land a miracle shot? Again, people are becoming way too bogged down in what the force allows you to do and the "correct" way to represent it.

Also as much as I argue that it's important to show that Chirrut was using his faith in the force to walk safely to the switch, it's also important not to make it blatant that it is the force protecting him. You should never represent divine protection as a literal invisible shield. It should be ambiguous. Faith isn't reliant on physical proof.
 
Does anyone know if there is chance of any of these characters making a return in another of these "side story" movies? I'm kind of bummed this is it as I really liked some of them.
 
Does anyone know if there is chance of any of these characters making a return in another of these "side story" movies

Jones was signed to a two-movie deal, but I think that was before creative decided everyone was going to die. So short of her maybe showing up in the Han & Lando movie in a brief role - nope. Nobody's showing up in anything else. This was their story.
 
Does anyone know if there is chance of any of these characters making a return in another of these "side story" movies? I'm kind of bummed this is it as I really liked some of them.

Doubt it.

According to Gareth Edwards, they dropped the opening crawl to stop the infinite loop of side stories based upon the films.
 
TFA has Rey, Fin, Poe, and Kylo--4 excellent new characters. It's not a surprise AT ALL why people would prefer that film.


Rogue One was awesome, but TFA was a much better film due to its characters imo. I can't even remember the names of most of the characters in Rogue One.
lol. There have been pages of discussion about this already.

In summary: It's a crap point.
 
I can't believe someone would prefer a movie as generic, mediocre, and bland as TFA to Rogue One. I guess that's what the people want these days.

something about the motivations of some of the characters in rogue one fell absolutely flat for me, the movie had some really great action sequences but for the most part i'll take generic mediocre bland movie to this, thanks. darth vader had one good scene but that's it. it's not surprising a lot of people think the best character was a goddamn robot, character development was extremely lacking. the score being forgettable makes this movie even worse. i enjoyed it for what it was, a side story of star wars, but a mainline movie it is not.
 
For me, Rogue One was great in concept, but fell short in execution (story and character wise). The action sequences were great, but without major investment in everything else, I didn't really care either way.

Of course, that's my opinion, but I just really didn't enjoy the film too much.

Also, the music annoyed the hell out of me... when it was new/original it was great, but when it teased an iconic theme only to go nowhere it kinda sounded like a cheap knockoff.
 

Yeah, these Takes take the cake. They make a lot of this thread look downright reasonable by comparison (that is a joke before I am internet filleted).

The New Yorker said:
There’s none of the Shakespearean space politics, enticingly florid dialogue, or experiential thrills of the best of George Lucas’s “Star Wars” entries (“Attack of the Clones” and “Revenge of the Sith”).
 
Yeah lets just ignore arguably the best part of Star Wars, period. Then maybe the Rogue One end battle is better than the Jedi end battle :P


The fucking music that plays when Vader does his face turn is better than the entire Rogue One movie. Chills every time.


That entire sequence is great but it's hurt by the rest of it. Everything happening on the Endor surface is dull and the space battle feels obligatory more than anything. There's too much stuff going on at the end of Jedi. The emotional climax of the OT is paralleled with the Empire getting starched by sticks and rocks, it feels like a parody at times, Most importantly the throne room stuff doesn't even feel like it's part of the actual battle, which is why I said "setting aside".

Rogue One's was tighter and everything built to it. It was an act of desperation and the Rebellion was never going to win that fight in particular.
 
I can't believe I'm going to say this but I think the battle at the end is way better than the one at the end of Return of the Jedi. Aside from the fantastic stuff between Luke/Vader/Palpatine, the steaks feel higher in Rogue One. When you look back on it, there was no way the Rebels were going to win the battle, they were in it to *just* squeak away with the Death Star plans.


Also, you know, The Empire not getting starched by teddie bears is good too.
That entire sequence is great but it's hurt by the rest of it. Everything happening on the Endor surface is dull and the space battle feels obligatory more than anything. There's too much stuff going on at the end of Jedi. The emotional climax of the OT is paralleled with the Empire getting starched by sticks and rocks, it feels like a parody at times, Most importantly the throne room stuff doesn't even feel like it's part of the actual battle, which is why I said "setting aside".

Rogue One's was tighter and everything built to it. It was an act of desperation and the Rebellion was never going to win that fight in particular.

Yeah, agreed.
 
The Pilot isn't really "the pilot" at any point in the movie though. His skills as a pilot are less important than his status as a defector. His familiarity with the Empire means more than his ability to fly anything. So him knowing what has to be flipped, and knowing how to set everything up so that he can get the message out fits just fine with what little there is of his character in the film, and Riz Ahmed manages to imbue that sketch with enough personality.

The goal is to get the plans out. They all have parts of that goal they have to attain. They fulfill their part in that plan, and they find their peace afterwards. That's part of the emotional punch of the film, really: These frantic, fucked-up nobodies finally get to rest after doing their part.

That doesn't really happen in Star Wars films at all.

and a hypothetical where Chirrut is actively manipulating the Force at the end completely breaks his character. It's a bad call, and for as overwritten, wordy, and desperately in need of an editor as Hulk is, usually his core ideas are good. That's a shit one.
That's fair, but I still think the entire sequence of getting the barrier down was badly realized, and their roles in its success felt hollow. He could have been a Rebel mechanic, not an defected Imperial pilot, with no impact on character or events in the third act. That's not to say I'm talking about a 1:1 character backstory to action mapping, jus that anchoring that character to doing what he did felt like a waste. I do agree he did a lot with what he had; all the actors did. Overall I liked the story here, but in the end I didn't give a shit about most of them, and that's weighing heavily on my opinion of the film. I saw TFA seven times in theaters because I loved the characters and enjoyed spending time with them. The only reason I'm seeing this a second time is because I'm at my in-laws and they haven't seen it, and always go to a movie before Christmas. This film did not resonate with me the way I hoped it would, and I'm still chewing on why.

Despite how well the action was staged - dat space battle - I'm actively dreading the third act because of how drawn out and dumb the plug/switch/plans plucking sequences are. Which is why I'm going on about them.
 
Jones was signed to a two-movie deal, but I think that was before creative decided everyone was going to die. So short of her maybe showing up in the Han & Lando movie in a brief role - nope. Nobody's showing up in anything else. This was their story.

I figured as much but I had.. a new hope. :D

okay that was bad haha

I think there's a possibility for Cassian and Jyn (her more perhaps) to be in the Han Solo movie. The ages would sort of match up.

This is what I was hoping for honestly. Would be cool to get a cameo or have them cross paths somewhere.
 
Yep, fully agreed. Chirrut's was close, but even then his actual death was separate from his character.

I've just read Film Crit Hulk's article - bit too long and unwieldy as usual, but some of it really echoes my own long and unwieldy post, weird enough - and he suggests Chirrut should have pulled the lever with the Force. That would have worked on a similar level to your Bodhi in a TIE, for instance.

Chirrut pulling the lever with the force would have been dumb. The characters are introduced as one believing in the force, the other not so much (which is kind of odd considering they seem to be protecting Jeddah for its force-related significance). Chirrut says the force saved him, and the other says HE saved him. When Chirrut walks to the lever, his buddy is shooting to save him, and we never know if the force really is helping him, he gets blasted plenty but his buddy is shooting back. So it never tilts the balance one way or the other, and if the force had really worked to accomplish Chirrut's goal it would have reduced the significance of his buddy's help.

Bodhi should have just been cut, was one character too many.

Anyway this movie had poor character writing, not as bad as TFA's Finn/Rey/Poe, but the script could have been significantly tightened. It also lacked a central "theme" which I think should have been mistrust.

Quick brainstorm of how it could have benefited from a rewrite:

1- Have Jyn's father go back to the empire, abandoning his wife and daughter, with no explanation to either of them. Straight up abandoning them to a harsh life on an isolated planet with no way out. Eventually the empire comes for them, kills the mom, Jyn hides like in the movie.

2- Jyn would have stayed with Saw all along. Cassian would have showed up to try to take her to the "real" Rebels (why is explained below), which she would reject because she has trust issues from having being abandoned by her father, be it with him or people in general other than Saw and his close associates.

3- Cut Bodhi from the movie. Have Cassian be the one who got Jyn's father's message, not intended for her but for the rebels, which he would have gotten from the guy at the start of the movie who would have been part of Saw's crew. Rebels don't believe the message is true, thinks it's a ruse from Saw or the empire (more focus again on the theme of mistrust), but Cassian is sure it's real and wants help, hence why he is looking for Jyn. Cassian gets captured by Saw like in the movie, shows the message which had been hidden from Jyn by Saw (mistrust again), hoping to convince her to help him. Jyn rejects him as said above but is shaken.

4- Cut out Chirrut's buddy, give a more central and guiding presence to Chirrut, make him a funnier and wiser character, and have a good scene dedicated to him be the one to convince Jyn to follow her feelings. Death Star blast, blah blah.

5- They go where they think Jyn's father is being held, they were followed by Rebels, Rebels try to assassinate her father, mistrust again between her and Cassian but Cassian himself didn't know he was followed (mistrust between him and the rebels), and from there you can pretty much go forward with how the movie was written. Maybe add that K2 betrays the team at some point, only slightly and by helping them at the same time, before he sacrifices himself; he was never actually successfully reprogrammed, he had played along in order to eventually betray them at a key moment but ended up never acting out on it, which again would fit with the mistrust theme.

I wouldn't have killed off Jyn and Cassian, I would have made their survival a "mystery"; they would have accomplished their goal of getting the rebels the plans, but not wanting to be part of this anymore would have left. It ties again with the theme of mistrust (they both were betrayed in their own ways by those they fought for, so they want out and be with one another instead), and makes the ending a bit less depressing considering the above.
 
Define "force related." Did Luke land the photon torpedoes because he used the force to move them? Or did he enter a state of meditation and become one with the force which allowed him to concentrate and land a miracle shot? Again, people are becoming way too bogged down in what the force allows you to do and the "correct" way to represent it.

Also as much as I argue that it's important to show that Chirrut was using his faith in the force to walk safely to the switch, it's also important not to make it blatant that it is the force protecting him. You should never represent divine protection as a literal invisible shield. It should be ambiguous. Faith isn't reliant on physical proof.

Didn't those photon torpedoes make like a sharp 90 degree turn before heading directly into that vent? Seemed pretty forcey to me, especially if there was no computer-assisted targeting involved

And the whole spiritual vs scientific thing in regards to the Force makes a lot of its current representation misguided. Yes it was cool and mysterious when it was just some spiritual thing, but the man who created the universe made the Force a literal, scientific trait that can be measured, whether people want to accept that or not. Not everyone can use the Force because not everyone had the mitochlorian count. Regardless of Jedi training or faith, you are either a force wielder or you arent. Chirrut was a victim of luck and faith, unless you believe an all-powerful God exists outside of mitochlorians. Making him a repressed force-wielder who was called by the Force to defend the temple would have been a better direction for his character.
 
So I almost hate to ask this but I feel like this is the only place I'll get an answer:


In Empire Strikes Back, when the AT-AT's show up, Luke says "that armor is too strong for blasters"---is there a reason why the X-wings can take down AT-AT's with blasters? it's it like a firepower thing where X-wings have like..more powerful lasers?



pls halp I wanna know
 
So I almost hate to ask this but I feel like this is the only place I'll get an answer:


In Empire Strikes Back, when the AT-AT's show up, Luke says "that armor is too strong for blasters"---is there a reason why the X-wings can take down AT-AT's with blasters? it's it like a firepower thing where X-wings have like..more powerful lasers?



pls halp I wanna know
cause they're AT-CATs, b
 
So I almost hate to ask this but I feel like this is the only place I'll get an answer:


In Empire Strikes Back, when the AT-AT's show up, Luke says "that armor is too strong for blasters"---is there a reason why the X-wings can take down AT-AT's with blasters? it's it like a firepower thing where X-wings have like..more powerful lasers?



pls halp I wanna know

An X-wing is armed with way more powerful weaponry than a regular ol' snowspeeder.

The X-Wings would have probably helped against the AT-ATs, but they were exlusively used as escorts for the transports.

They didn't wanna "blow up" the AT&ATs anyways, they didn't mean or never expected to ward off the Empire's attack, but mostly to buy time for the evacuation.
 
So I almost hate to ask this but I feel like this is the only place I'll get an answer:


In Empire Strikes Back, when the AT-AT's show up, Luke says "that armor is too strong for blasters"---is there a reason why the X-wings can take down AT-AT's with blasters? it's it like a firepower thing where X-wings have like..more powerful lasers?



pls halp I wanna know

For the same reason a planet that looked like it was almost entirely water and only had small volcanic islands would need giant slow-walking dinosaur bots
 
cause they're AT-CATs, b

I'm sorry but I don't know what this means


An X-wing is armed with way more powerful weaponry than a regular ol' snowspeeder.

The X-Wings would have probably helped against the AT-ATs, but they were exlusively used as escorts for the transports.

They didn't wanna "blow up" the AT&ATs anyways, they didn't mean or never expected to ward off the Empire's attack, but mostly to buy time for the evacuation.

Alright, kinda what I had guessed.
 
So I almost hate to ask this but I feel like this is the only place I'll get an answer:


In Empire Strikes Back, when the AT-AT's show up, Luke says "that armor is too strong for blasters"---is there a reason why the X-wings can take down AT-AT's with blasters? it's it like a firepower thing where X-wings have like..more powerful lasers?



pls halp I wanna know

Speeders are patrol vehicles, X-Wings are fighters. X-Wings are stronger/have torpedoes etc.
 
I thought this was a great movie. It like embraces the war in Star Wars. Something that I think TFA also did a lot better than the originals.

It sucks that they had to kill everyone due to the timeline.
 
. He could have been a Rebel mechanic, not an defected Imperial pilot, with no impact on character or events in the third act.

He basically was a Rebel mechanic, though. Like, his actual job title really doesn't matter, I don't think. Not in the larger scheme.

It's a story primarily about people dying to serve the greater good. While I agree the characterizations aren't great, and could have absolutely been bettered, their roles in enabling that greater good to actually occur work fine enough for me. They want to help however they can. They get there and "however they can" shifts and changes as the plan shifts and changes.

It's not perfect at all, but considering how tightly everything from Yavin 4 onto the finale is knitted together, it works really effectively for what it is.

edit: I also figure, if you wanna spackle the AT-ACTs going down easier, you can say it's because of the Battle of Scarif that the AT-ATs on Hoth have much improved armor.

You do realize that it's all fan-fic now, right

This is literally one of the bad takes that io9 article is mocking.
 
Didn't those photon torpedoes make like a sharp 90 degree turn before heading directly into that vent? Seemed pretty forcey to me, especially if there was no computer-assisted targeting involved

And the whole spiritual vs scientific thing in regards to the Force makes a lot of its current representation misguided. Yes it was cool and mysterious when it was just some spiritual thing, but the man who created the universe made the Force a literal, scientific trait that can be measured, whether people want to accept that or not. Not everyone can use the Force because not everyone had the mitochlorian count. Regardless of Jedi training or faith, you are either a force wielder or you arent. Chirrut was a victim of luck and faith, unless you believe an all-powerful God exists outside of mitochlorians. Making him a repressed force-wielder who was called by the Force to defend the temple would have been a better direction for his character.

I read about the photon torpedoes and they are supposed to curve on a trajectory. But the sequence of events makes it looks like it turns on a dime because before that we get a shot of them flying straight. So no, the force did not curve them.

What the creator said is irrelevant because he isn't making these new movies. Regardless of how your percieve the Force, as science or spiritual, whether Chirrut used the force or not should not be proven. IT should be ambiguous because faith is ambiguous. Did he survive because of the force or luck? We don't know for sure. Making it blatant that "yeah he totally used the force and deflected lasers and force pulled the level" defeats that.
 
This is what I was hoping for honestly. Would be cool to get a cameo or have them cross paths somewhere.

While I don't want to go full internet and say that it's the worst thing in the world if that happened, I am apprehensive about that idea. I've defended some of the cameos like the cantina jerks in here, but I think you can go overboard (I think TFA already did, but I could possibly forgive it depending on the other 2 parts of that trilogy, and if it ends up fitting nicely as a reintroduction).

I don't want them to go the Marvel route with these movies, where it's all about guessing which main characters show up in which movies. I'm never that interested in those kinds of team ups. Like the decision not to do after credits teasers (I'm hoping they stick with that), I'm hoping they keep treating these Star Wars movies a bit more like 'prestige' movies (relative to Marvel movies of course, I obviously know it's a bunch of silly space wizard movies in the end).

Of course, if Jyn ends up being in the Solo movie and it ends up working I won't complain, but I think the strength of her character is that her story begins and ends with this one movie. Same with the rest of that group. I don't really care what they do in the comics/books/cartoons etc - I'm sure they'll get plenty of stories there, but those don't really count as much as the movies for me personally.

Let them remain the tragic heroes who fell under the might of the Empire simply because they weren't named Skywalker or Solo. The fact that it's just this one intense movie makes that more powerful to me. The more you have them cameo in other movies, the more you lessen that effect. Having them all killed was an important point of the movie, and something which was vital in making it all work. Let's respect that.
 
I read about the photon torpedoes and they are supposed to curve on a trajectory. But the sequence of events makes it looks like it turns on a dime because before that we get a shot of them flying straight. So no, the force did not curve them.

What the creator said is irrelevant because he isn't making these new movies. Regardless of how your percieve the Force, as science or spiritual, whether Chirrut used the force or not should not be proven. IT should be ambiguous because faith is ambiguous. Did he survive because of the force or luck? We don't know for sure. Making it blatant that "yeah he totally used the force and deflected lasers and force pulled the level" defeats that.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qniy8aDSFLA

For reference on the torpedoes. There's no arc about it, they literally turn on a dime.

And as for Lucas not making these movies, no he doesnt. But he created the universe and laid very clear and specific guidelines about how things like the Force work. Changing fundamental tenets of an established universe is what creators of said universe do, not people who bought the IP.
 
You do realize that it's all fan-fic now, right

I don't distinguish between original creator and someone else who takes creative control. I only distinguish between bad writing and good writing. Original creators lose their way all the time. When canon starts sounding like fan-fic and fan-fic starts sounding more believable than canon, then the series is in need of fresh management. You have an MGS avatar, you would understand. You experienced MGS4/V where nanomachines and parasites are responsible for every magical thing in the series. Someone else needed to helm the writing in those games.
 
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qniy8aDSFLA

For reference on the torpedoes. There's no arc about it, they literally turn on a dime.

And as for Lucas not making these movies, no he doesnt. But he created the universe and laid very clear and specific guidelines about how things like the Force work. Changing fundamental tenets of an established universe is what creators of said universe do, not people who bought the IP.

http://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/8543/is-there-a-canon-explanation-for-how-proton-torpedoes-were-able-to-turn-90-degre

And nothing about Chirrut challenges those tenets. He never blatantly uses the force to do anything and the movie never makes it a clear case that he can channel the force. That's the point.
 
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qniy8aDSFLA

For reference on the torpedoes. There's no arc about it, they literally turn on a dime.

And as for Lucas not making these movies, no he doesnt. But he created the universe and laid very clear and specific guidelines about how things like the Force work. Changing fundamental tenets of an established universe is what creators of said universe do, not people who bought the IP.

Who created the Alien universe? Ridley Scott or James Cameron?
 
That's fair, but I still think the entire sequence of getting the barrier down was badly realized, and their roles in its success felt hollow. He could have been a Rebel mechanic, not an defected Imperial pilot, with no impact on character or events in the third act. That's not to say I'm talking about a 1:1 character backstory to action mapping, jus that anchoring that character to doing what he did felt like a waste. I do agree he did a lot with what he had; all the actors did. Overall I liked the story here, but in the end I didn't give a shit about most of them, and that's weighing heavily on my opinion of the film. I saw TFA seven times in theaters because I loved the characters and enjoyed spending time with them. The only reason I'm seeing this a second time is because I'm at my in-laws and they haven't seen it, and always go to a movie before Christmas. This film did not resonate with me the way I hoped it would, and I'm still chewing on why.

Despite how well the action was staged - dat space battle - I'm actively dreading the third act because of how drawn out and dumb the plug/switch/plans plucking sequences are. Which is why I'm going on about them.

Pretty amazing swing in opinion after reading your initial reaction. Seems you have been heavily swayed by the negative reaction in certain circles on the net
 
I don't distinguish between original creator and someone else who takes creative control. I only distinguish between bad writing and good writing. Original creators lose their way all the time. When canon starts sounding like fan-fic and fan-fic starts sounding more believable than canon, then the series is in need of fresh management. You have an MGS avatar, you would understand. You experienced MGS4/V where nanomachines and parasites are responsible for every magical thing in the series. Someone else needed to helm the writing in those games.

Lol so if the person who literally brainstormed this entire universe and it's lore lays the ground rules and other people come in and change stuff and ignore those tenets, it's OK as long as you like it? Say whatever you want about Lucas, mitochlorians are canon, good or bad. It's his universe to build however he wants.

And as for Kojima, good or bad, parasites and nanomachines ARE responsible for all of those events. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean Ken Levine could just show up and make a Metal Gear game where it's actually invisible monkeys pulling the strings
 
So I almost hate to ask this but I feel like this is the only place I'll get an answer:


In Empire Strikes Back, when the AT-AT's show up, Luke says "that armor is too strong for blasters"---is there a reason why the X-wings can take down AT-AT's with blasters? it's it like a firepower thing where X-wings have like..more powerful lasers?



pls halp I wanna know

cause they're AT-CATs, b

I'm sorry but I don't know what this means

The walkers on Hoth were AT-ATs, which are heavily armored and meant for battle. It stands for All Terrain Armored Transport.

The walkers on Scarif were AT-ACTs, which stands for All Terrain Armored Cargo Transport. They're larger and meant for...cargo transport. They're less well armed and probably not as fortified as their Hoth counterparts.

X-wing/U-wing weaponry is probably a lot better than speeders, too.

Not that it's directly related to your question but here is a rough size comparison:
c1FZiOK.jpg
 
Changing fundamental tenets of an established universe is what creators of said universe do, not people who bought the IP.

This is not a great storytelling standard. It sounds good. But I don't think it's the greatest rule in practice.

Of course, arguing for storytelling fidelity when simultaneously using executive-speak ("I.P.") belies the general sense of confusion wrapped up in discussing a lot of this shit anyway.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom