Saga Mega thread: Sequels and spinoff films and the overall saga

^^^Well played.

 

Mark Hamill wishes Disney had listened to George Lucas’s guidance and advice

Oh look, just like I've been saying all along... To Mark Hamill you listen.

 

Spoiler: TLJ Metacritic Score

STAR WARS: EPISODE VIII - THE LAST JEDI
WALT DISNEY STUDIOS MOTION PICTURES | RELEASE DATE:DECEMBER 15, 2017

85​

METASCORE
Universal acclaim

Yeah, i'm not feeling too bad about that.

 

[Insert you should have listened meme here]

 

Ad populum?

You shouldn't feel bad. After all, you got what you ordered and that's precisely the difference between then and now.

 

More realistic user score incoming.

 

I guess there's an argument to say that the "Saga" is no more, or has evolved into something totally different now and unrecognizable from the original Lucas vision of the 70's or the revised Lucas vision of the 90's.

Whatever the ST will mean for Star Wars in years to come, IMHO, the Saga is now EPI-III, RO, EPIV-VI.

 

Too late for that, I'm afraid. They've completely ignored Han's character arc by turning him into a mere smuggler again (basically, back to square one) because that's what the fans™ want to see. And from what I've read and seen so far, Luke is on the same boat.

Thankfully there's always Return of the Jedi, where Luke renounces the dark side and declares himself as a Jedi, and Han is a (military) leader in an altruistic cause.

 

I don't understand you.

I don't understand a lot of people. This group that seems dedicated to not enjoying anything new. I understand just not liking something. No one can force you to enjoy something, and that's a good thing. But there is just so much negativity, and towards films that have been generally well received. Is it some kind of petty revenge for people that gave the prequels crap? Is it some search for vindication that someone else's Star Wars is inferior to "your" Star Wars?

I don't get it. And I want to get it.

 

My lack of enjoyment has nothing to do with something being new or old.

Again, why do you bring ad populum as an argument? Appealling to the majority is a fallacy. Anyone is free to criticize or praise a movie, if it's "generally well received" or not is irrelevant.

What?! Revenge and vindication?! Who's even talking about the prequels? Where are you getting all that stuff? I'm the one who doesn't get that reasoning.

Star Wars is not mine and never was. It's a fctional body of work from the mind and direction of George Lucas. And if that mind and direction is ignored in order to take the Star Wars name for personal and/or on-demand fan fiction, yes, I'll consider it automatically inferior (even that's giving it some credence) anytime. My criticism isn't in just ignoring the story that was yet to be brought to the screen. It's ignoring what was previously established.

 

What's wrong with that?

 

The new films have been amazing so far. Even Lucas & Hamill raved about R1. As for the ST, they had no obligation to stick to GL’s ideas precisely. In fact they told him up front before the sale that they might not. Yet he still chose to sell.
Put simply, Lucas retired & passed the torch. Others are continuing the Saga, & others will take over from them. Lucas has spoken about how happy he is that SW will continue on forever. Long after he’s gone. For now, bring on TLJ!!

 

I haven't liked the new films thus far because I haven't liked the new films thus far. Pretty simple concept. Has nothing to do with being against new material on principle. Alien 3 is my favorite of that series, for instance, but I loved Covenant.

 

Group of what, 5 people? I've superficially enjoyed everything that has been provided.

I just fundamentally disagree with every method being displayed.

 

Multiple timelines. It's all SW but will follow the story lines I want to.

 

On this, I completely agree with you.

 

On an individual level yes, of course. However that Latin quote you're so fond of applies to the fallacious premise that common opinion makes a proposition more true or more valid. It's a great point to make, in some circumstances. However it's an absurd thing to bring up regarding a piece of popular entertainment like a commercial movie. Which is designed to do exactly what ad populum cautions against. Its purpose is to entertain & be enjoyed by as many people as possible. When the goal of something is popularity, or mass entertainment, saying that a measure of that popularity is irreverent is itself a bogus premise. That goes for the movies that Lucas produced as much as the recent ones. He'd be the first to tell you that his primary goal was to provide enjoyment to as much of the audience as possible.

 

Well, I'll give you that one. It doesn't have to be any good in order to do that.

 

Yes it does. It has to be good at being entertaining & engaging. Without having flaws to the extent that they drag the movie down & spoil that entertainment. Plenty of movies try this & fail miserably.

 

Like The Force Awakens.

 

It's a fallacy. Something being popular doesn't make it objectively good or better. It's simply popular. I'm not fond of any fallacy and if you see me pointing it out frequently, then it's because said fallacy is being used equally frequently. I'd rather not have to point out anything.

No, it isn't. Movies are first and foremost about artistic expression, which is then promoted and sold to the public. They are a risk. Some movies are made on-demand, to pander the audience. Others (most of them) aren't. Star Wars was made because someone wanted to tell a story. And it was successful because enough people happened to like it. George didn't go around asking people what they wanted to see, that's a complete perversion of the whole thing. He had a vision of what he wanted and a story to tell, and made the movie accordingly. Fortunately, many people liked it which allowed him to continue the story.

Ad populum is about using the masses as an argument for something to be true or (more) valid. It doesn't caution against financial success or the popularity of something.

The purpose is (or was) to tell a story and hopefully to entertain as many people as possible. Not the other way around, at least in the case of Star Wars.

Something being popular or financially sucessful doesn't attest for its quality, authenticity, originality or any other attribute (subjective or otherwise). Only that it's popular and financially sucessful (which all of the SW movies have been).

As long as people continue to appeal to the masses as an attempt to shut down a discussion or refute an argument (impossible), I'll continue to point out that fallacy.

 

I've never ever seen anyone argue that a movie must be liked or disliked on the strength of reviews or popular opinion.

I've seen plenty of arguments, both here and elsewhere, that it's a "fact" that such and such film is not worthy of receiving of any praise/negative criticism or hasn't received such a response, in spite of there being overwhelming evidence of a predominantly positive, mixed or negative reception.


Alexrd will be ecstatic that, according to George Lucase there's a new, "beautifully made" Star Wars film.