ST Star Wars: The Force Awakens...reviews

That shot wasn't what ruined the film for me. It was a lot of other things.

 

Ok, I can see your point. Yes, TFA is a new beginning for sure.

I just wanted to watch it together with a few other episodes to see how well it fits in the saga.

I think it fits pretty well.

 

I FINALLY saw TFA for the second time last night!!

And you know, putting my nostalgia for the OT aside, I think this may just be the most well-made SW film. The acting is by far the best. The pacing is great. The chemistry between the characters is almost tangible. The dialogue is succinct and witty, and manages to provide the necessary exposition without ever feeling clunky. The visuals are fantastic. And, most importantly, I simply find all of the protagonists very appealing, and all the villains intriguing, and I can't wait to see where their stories go.

I do understand the complaints about the lack of original designs, and yeah, it could have done without some of the recycled plot points. But even with those faults, this is just such a genuinely entertaining film to watch.

Last night, I watched it with a friend who hadn't seen ANY of the SW movies until recently. A couple of weeks ago, I lent her all six previous movies, and she watched them in order from TPM to ROTJ. After we saw TFA last night, she ranked TFA as her favorite. I'm still not sure which is my absolute favorite. It's hard to judge since I've only seen TFA twice, so there's still a freshness to it that the others don't have. But TFA is easily near the top.

 

I'm sorry, but that article was terrible. TLDR. He needs to take a writing class and learn how to edit. He needs to have someone else look at his writing and give feedback. He doesn't know how to write and needs to learn how to use lower case letters. Referring to himself in the third person as HULK all the time was ridiculous and monotonous. He misused 'literally'.

As far as his views go, they're his views. I don't share them, but that isn't the issue as we don't have to agree. But if he had written more concisely and without his idiosyncratic style, I might have taken him more seriously.

 

That's his persona for writing, so it takes a second to get past that. He's not actually shouting with all of those caps. I don't completely agree with him either, but I do think he brings up fair points about the plotting of the film and the characterization of the leads.

 

I know he's not shouting. And he is idiosyncratic. It isn't worth getting used to in my opinion.

 

TFA story and ending represent our path coming to TFA. We wanted to find the heroes of our past. TFA mirrors our story as fans as well. When we find Luke, our search for our past heroes is completed, as much as it means the same for the characters as well.

 

I was waiting for this

 

Don't bother. In the 1:45 min runtime, it's about an hour of PT bashing, followed by a quasi-review of TFA, where he bashes it but still likes it...or something. I can't stand TFA, but this guy and his comedy is just...not my bag.

 

Because I guess Stoklasa decided that sixteen hours of rambling about the PT wasn't enough to get his opinions across, then?

 

The take-down of "ring theory" is right on the money.

 

It's about ****ing time. I'm so pumped to watch this and send him pizza rolls.

 

The trailer to this review also announced to be some kind of response to the "recent reconsiderations", so this was part of the concept I guess.

Hey lol, I haven't seen TFA yet and don't wanna get spoiled (too much) - but I'd kinda prefer not to be out of the loop as far as the discussion of the previous movies goes.

Could you or anyone else post some kind of time stamps or guide where to avoid TFA spoilers, or where 1-3 or 4-6 are discussed (in isolation or conjunction)?



I'd just rather not rush to watch TFA just to see this review, kind of wanted to approach it with the more idealistic pre-2016 mindset when I do ; - )

So something like that would be cool.

 

God forbid people present alternate opinions then.

The very early Plinkett stuff about the TNG movies I found tolerable enough, even if I didn't always agree (even if it was on what precisely was bad). I'm not one of those people who defends TPM as a misunderstood masterpiece or anything, but with the prequel reviews, I felt they disappeared increasingly up their own asses.

 

Nah I agree with this general view, I think I-III generally deserve their IMDB/Meta ratings etc., give or take - RLM were among the "zealots" trying to argue for something much lesser than that, and there's lots of nonsense in the reviews. So much nonsense, they actually end up missing most of the things actually wrong with the movies - which is quite an accomplishment in itself, for a slating



Unless they somehow revised or enhanced their views in the TFA review - that's why I'm kinda curious what they said in it.

 

I watched the whole thing immediately after it came out.

It's definitely the weakest of the four thus far, as I personally fell asleep for about twenty minutes of it, and I don't think I could possibly do that during the first three. Stoklasa gets at the money-grubbing of Hollywood and how George Lucas is a hack but it doesn't really mean much in my opinion. I actually enjoyed the first three with all of their faults and I think this one is lacking something. There weren't as many quips. I think this is mostly due to the fact that there's less to work with in terms of awfulness (in the film being reviewed), but I feel like there were lots of missed opportunities.

This is a channel on YouTube that I do really enjoy as their style of humor is somewhat appealing to me, but this is the weakest thing they've created in a while if I'm honest.

 

Star Trek 09, Indiana 4, Titanic - three reviews that were really crisp and also insightful/reasonable, of movies that weren't awful, and weren't reviewed as awful.

So if this new one isn't that good, it's nothing to do with that.

 

To be fair, I wasn't expecting much from this one, as the Red Letter Media guys already said they liked it on their "Half in the Bag" show.
I've been watching it for about 15 minutes now and he seems to me more into bashing George Lucas and the horde of "the prequels were secretly genius" conspiracy theorists.

 

None of those reviews were 105 minutes long, either. It just feels a little long in the tooth.

 

Where in the review are the sections where that happens?

 

So apparently he spouts some weird conspiracy theory that the reason people posted articles trying to re-evaluate the prequels was to make more merch sales somehow?