Support NeoGAF

[C4Lukins]

I love the majority of what Red Letter Media does, but this was very mediocre.

It felt like they were making an actual semi documentary mainly about the ridiculous corners of Internet fandom and social media surrounding Star Wars, with sprinkles of how silly George Lucas has become, and then shoehorned the Plinkett character and a 30 minute commentary of the Force Awakens in there.

My guess is that this started as something else, and lost its way at some point, and turned into a mess of ideas. Not what I was expecting at all.

 

[BocoDragon]

The increasing diversity might be one of the few parts of the corporate mindset of the new Star Wars that I liked.

I'm much more upset at the general photocopying of classic Star Wars in general. It feels less like the series of films continued as usual, and felt more like a retro engineered copy of Star Wars applied to a formulaic 2010s cinematic universe.

And I don't know if "sexless" is the word I'd use, but there is a lack of passionate humanity in many of the characters. The word "sexless" implies a lack of sexuality or romance, but that's not exactly the root of what's missing. (I love a good romance, but it seems fine for a SW movie to occasionally omit that)

It's more because the characters of new Star Wars are these big safe action figures spouting big safe dialogue, in the style of the MCU. That tends to promote what might be called "sexless" characters. But they're lacking more than just sex. They're lacking any character traits that have any edges that might turn off anyone in the mainstream audience.

TFA plays it very safe. No other film in the series was this timid to be it's own thing.

 

[Tom Nook Sawyer]

Just finished the review. I love Plinkett's original reviews, but this one was pretty meh.

Good. I'm glad that this review doesn't give The Force Awakens haters the validation they want, because the fact is The Force Awakens was a good movie. End of story.

Someone doesn't like it when people have differing opinions.

 

[Salty Rice]

Such a great and on point review. It was worth the wait.

The diversity and sex part were great.

Diversity is good but they really put so much on it as someone would really care than people obsessed with it in a positive or negative way.

Also he is right about the movie missing some heart and sexual tension.
They werent bothered to copy New Hope but left out the love element what let it just feels the same but cold and something missing.

Also people complaining about the complaining about the prequels should think about that this is important to existence and the way Episode 7 is.

 

[DukeLongfellow]

That joke about black men not firing a gun being sci-fi broke me in two. The rest was... bland for Plinkett standards?

 

[Goon]

I think Mr. Plinkett should have released a review when the whole trilogy was released. Its hard to evaluate the new series when essentially its not complete yet. We don't know nothing about the character archs

 

[BocoDragon]

I think Mr. Plinkett should have released a review when the whole trilogy was released. Its hard to evaluate the new series when essentially its not complete yet. We don't know nothing about the character archs

Individual movies in trilogies used to stand on their own merits. Especially first entries. Star Wars 1977 would have worked even if there was never a sequel.

Individual entries in a trilogy often don't work on their own anymore, because now they really are like one planned out big story cut into pieces. They know they can be lazy and promise that things will be developed in the sequel they already know is coming. And all the better that they get you in the door for the sequel by leaving things unexplained. There's a corporate mandate to leave each entry feeling incomplete, always teasing the next morcel.

Look at the ending to Star Wars 1977. It is an ending. The ending to TFA, however, is a commercial for the next movie.

 

[Rentahamster]

I love the majority of what Red Letter Media does, but this was very mediocre.

It felt like they were making an actual semi documentary mainly about the ridiculous corners of Internet fandom and social media surrounding Star Wars, with sprinkles of how silly George Lucas has become, and then shoehorned the Plinkett character and a 30 minute commentary of the Force Awakens in there.

My guess is that this started as something else, and lost its way at some point, and turned into a mess of ideas. Not what I was expecting at all.

He did say at the very beginning that this was not only commentary about TFA, but also commentary regarding the corporotized Star Wars Cinematic Universe that TFA represents.

 

[Rentahamster]

Look at the ending to Star Wars 1977. It is an ending. The ending to TFA, however, is a commercial for the next movie.

Good point.

 

[Azoor]

I love the majority of what Red Letter Media does, but this was very mediocre.

It felt like they were making an actual semi documentary mainly about the ridiculous corners of Internet fandom and social media surrounding Star Wars, with sprinkles of how silly George Lucas has become, and then shoehorned the Plinkett character and a 30 minute commentary of the Force Awakens in there.

My guess is that this started as something else, and lost its way at some point, and turned into a mess of ideas. Not what I was expecting at all.

Like I said earlier, it seems like they didn't have much to say about TFA and decided to talk about Star Wars as a whole.

 

[Cheerilee]

Overly long, a retread of expected Plinkett jokes, not much interesting to say about TFA. The diversity argument was a big flailing mess, and the romance argument was weird, given Finn's clear interest in Rey. I guess you could shift the latter towards "passion" as some are saying, but then he framed his in-video argument in the wrong manner.

Was it clear? In my first impressions of TFA, I noted that Finn was posturing towards Rey, and that I wasn't sure if it was because he liked her, or if it was because of his previous standing as a nobody who cleaned toilets, and now here was somebody who looked up to him as a Rebel hero and had positive expectations of him, and I think he got a little drunk on that feeling of being looked up to and he wanted more of it. Or it could've been a combination of both.

And then there was Finn's "Do you have a boyfriend, a cute boyfriend?" line, and the apparent confirmation that Po is gay, leading people to wonder if maybe Finn is also gay. How can he be "obviously straight" if he might be gay?


I figure, in A New Hope they made it clear enough that Luke was into girls and that he thought Leia was beautiful. And then Han wants to bang Leia so he asks Luke what he thinks his odds are, and Luke immediately gets aggressive and hostile, and after a moment of being taken aback, Han realizes that the younger Luke is infatuated with Leia, and Han smiles because it's cute. It tells us two entirely different things about Luke/Han beyond checking the "hetero" checkbox. By the end of the movie, Luke and Han both "get the girl" by everyone ending up in friendly, positive relationships with each other. In the next two movies she flirts with Luke and Han and (whoops) let's just forget that incest part.

In the Prequel Trilogy, Plinkett complained that Lucas had created a strange, alien, sexless world. All of the Jedi are sworn to celibacy for some nonsensical unexplained reason that only exists to ruin Anakin Skywalker as it would ruin almost anyone. This made it harder to relate to the Jedi as human beings (they apparently procreate by kidnapping and brainwashing infants), and the only "romance" in the Trilogy was the laughably bad Anakin/Padme one.

For this New Trilogy, Disney was supposed to be trying to fix the mistakes of the Prequel Trilogy, but they went with the strange, alien, sexless world again, without even the "sworn to celibacy" thing. Is Finn gay? Straight? Bi? Whatever he is, he's the sex of the entire movie (not counting Han/Leia). If Rey had kissed Finn on the lips as he was unconscious after taking a lightsaber to the spine for her, that would've said a little bit more about Rey as a character, while her kissing him on the forehead told us that she's sexless (like everyone else in the movie whose name isn't Finn, or maybe Po, who shockingly made eyes at Finn).

For a movie that wears it's diversity on it's sleeve, it's should've gone for the interracial kiss, and it should've nudged Po's gayness up a couple more notches to the point where it becomes obvious once you realize it.

 

[Aiii]

Individual movies in trilogies used to stand on their own merits. Especially first entries. Star Wars 1977 would have worked even if there was never a sequel.

This is literally only because there wasn't even a remote chance there would be a second movie after The Star Wars. This has nothing to do with individual movies in trilogies, at all. Lest I need to remind you that Empire Strikes Back, when they knew there would be another movie, ended with several huge cliffhangers.

 

[BocoDragon]

Good point.

I'd go so far as to say that all of the previous Star Wars movies had more definitive "endings" that made them feel more like individual movies, rather than being small chunks of a cinematic universe as TFA is.

The arguable exceptions are ESB and AOTC... but even though they hinted at unresolved business, they capped off their era of the story and gave us a moment of finality. Despite Han being in carbonate and Luke having unfinished business with Vader, the ending of ESB with our heroes looking off into space felt very much like the end of that story, and not the beginning of the next.

AOTC probably moreso hinted at the next entry... but it didn't actually drag us to the next plot point like TFA did. The ending of TFA applied to ESB or AOTC would be like if ESB ended with the heroes knocking on Jabba's Palace, or AOTC ending by hearing that Palpatine had been kidnapped by the separatists.

This is literally only because there wasn't even a remote chance there would be a second movie after The Star Wars. This has nothing to do with individual movies in trilogies, at all. Lest I need to remind you that Empire Strikes Back, when they knew there would be another movie, ended with several huge cliffhangers.

What I just wrote acts as an unintentional rebuttal to what you said. I wrote it before I saw your post.

I don't believe the nature of the ending had to do with knowing a sequel was coming at all. It has to do with late 2000s/2010s corporate planning of long term release schedules, rather than just making a series of movies that build on one another.

Look at movies like Sam Raimi's Spiderman trilogy. Those films didn't annoyingly tease their sequels either. They knew sequels were coming. But Spiderman today (even by the time of the ASM series) will put all these unresolved hooks into the ending of the movie, as per the MCU method.

It's due to the corporatization of sequel planning, making long term franchises, and I think it's hurt the art. Instead of having individual masterworks that happen to tie into one another, we have little cut up pieces of an ongoing series that will never end. It's more like the old model of TV, and I'm personally less enthused by it.

 

[MrCunningham]

Look at the ending to Star Wars 1977. It is an ending. The ending to TFA, however, is a commercial for the next movie.

That's true, but 1977 was also a very different time for films. Star Wars actually went over budget when Lucas was trying to finish it up and it did go through delays as well, 20th Century Fox had no idea what they had on their hands and just kept their fingers cross that it would make any money at all. The idea of them leaving it open for a sequel was not an option as they thought it would lead to a big failure and a loss for them. Overall, the idea of leaving a movie open for a sequel was not something that was commonplace. The only series that ever really got away with it were the James Bond movies (at the end of the credits they would always leave a message that reads James Bond will return in...) .

A New Hope wasn't set up for a sequel, but after its huge success at the box office and being a merchandising machine , The Empire Strikes Back was left open with a cliff hanger for a third movie.

The Force Awakens was made under very different circumstances, as it was calculated to recreate the success and love for the original Star Wars films with lots of room for sequels and spin offs.

 

[liquidtmd]

Watched it, was entertained. Not up to crazy inspired flights of fancy the prequel reviews were but so few things are.

Reading through this thread you'd think RLM had molested their childhood...

 

[Rogan]

Cinema smegma lmao

 

[BocoDragon]

That's true, but 1977 was also a very different time for films. Star Wars actually went over budget when Lucas was trying to finish it up and it did go through delays as well, 20th Century Fox had no idea what they had on their hands and just kept their fingers cross that it would make any money at all. The idea of them leaving it open for a sequel was not an option as they thought it would lead to a big failure and a loss for them. Overall, the idea of leaving a movie open for a sequel was not something that was commonplace. The only series that ever really got away with it were the James Bond movies (at the end of the credits they would always leave a message that reads James Bond will return in...) .

A New Hope wasn't set up for a sequel, but after its huge success at the box office and being a merchandising machine , The Empire Strikes Back was left open with a cliff hanger for a third movie.

You can read my post above for more on this... but ESB merely planted seeds for a future movie. It didn't end in a glorified commercial for the next.

One feels like a complete work of art. The other feels incomplete.

The Force Awakens was made under very different circumstances, as it was calculated to recreate the success and love for the original Star Wars films with lots of room for sequels and spin offs.

There is a way to do this without shattering the illusion that these are individual stories. But I think that so much was riding on the Disney Star Wars situation that they weren't interested in showing restraint.

The "Look ITS LUKE, please GO SEE THE NEXT MOVIE" ending was very un-Star Wars... and it was probably their surrogate for the Marvel "teaser" which they perceive as part of the reason for the MCU's success.

 

[A Link to the Past]

I wish that RLM would make a video that explicitly shit on the alt-right viewers. I don't claim them to be alt-right or even sympathetic to the alt-right, I just claim that they don't try hard enough to clean up the scum in their comments and dissuade shitty people from watching them.

 

[broncobuster]

You can read my post above for more on this... but ESB merely planted seeds for a future movie. It didn't end in a glorified commercial for the next.

One feels like a complete work of art. The other feels incomplete.

There is a way to do this without shattering the illusion that these are individual stories. But I think that so much was riding on the Disney Star Wars situation that they weren't interested in showing restraint.

The "Look ITS LUKE, please GO SEE THE NEXT MOVIE" ending was very un-Star Wars... and it was probably their surrogate for the Marvel "teaser" which they perceive as part of the reason for the MCU's success.

As others have pointed it out in one of the several retrospective threads, partly why it feels that way is the entire Star killer subplot being disconnected from the main thrust of the film.

 

[Trigonometrize.]

The "Look ITS LUKE, please GO SEE THE NEXT MOVIE" ending was very un-Star Wars... and it was probably their surrogate for the Marvel "teaser" which they perceive as part of the reason for the MCU's success.

TFA's final scene is different from the Marvel teasers. Most of MCU's post-credit scenes really are just glorified teaser trailers that do not give a fuck whether or not they have any relevance to the story that just unfolded. Story about how Tony Stark becomes Iron Man and beats a bad guy? Here's Thor's hammer! Story about how the Avengers fight Loki and alien friends? Here's THANOS! etc.

In TFA though, the first scene is about Poe gathering information on Luke, the heroes and villains all throughout the movie reference Luke and basically his relevance to their motivations, and the last scene is the heroes getting their prize of finding Luke first.

 

[BocoDragon]

As others have pointed it out in one of the several retrospective threads, partly why it feels that way is the entire Star killer subplot being disconnected from the main thrust of the film.

That's interesting. So the destruction of the starkiller, being more tangential to the plot, didn't provide any sense of finality. The main focus was on Rey vs. Kylo, and that was left unresolved.

I don't know if it's the main reason for why it feels that way, but it didn't help. I'd chalk it up mainly to the fact that it ends with a scene that is a direct cliffhanger, which no other Star Wars had done. The state of the galaxy or of our heroes might have been on a kind of large-scale cliffhanger in ESB or AOTC, but there was never a SW movie that actually had two characters in mid-breath before a cut to black.

The fact that this cliffhanger was catalyzed by a deus ex machina R2 waking up for no reason makes it extra clumsy.

 

[Triggerhappytel]

I love the majority of what Red Letter Media does, but this was very mediocre.

It felt like they were making an actual semi documentary mainly about the ridiculous corners of Internet fandom and social media surrounding Star Wars, with sprinkles of how silly George Lucas has become, and then shoehorned the Plinkett character and a 30 minute commentary of the Force Awakens in there.

My guess is that this started as something else, and lost its way at some point, and turned into a mess of ideas. Not what I was expecting at all.

I'm about 40 minutes in, and this is basically where I'm at too. I'd rather have an actual analysis of TFA than a meta-commentary on fans' opinions and theories about the prequel trilogy.

 

[BocoDragon]

TFA's final scene is different from the Marvel teasers. Most of MCU's post-credit scenes really are just glorified teaser trailers that do not give a fuck whether or not they have any relevance to the story that just unfolded. Story about how Tony Stark becomes Iron Man and beats a bad guy? Here's Thor's hammer! Story about how the Avengers fight Loki and alien friends? Here's THANOS! etc.

In TFA though, the first scene is about Poe gathering information on Luke, the heroes and villains all throughout the movie reference Luke and basically his relevance to their motivations, and the last scene is the heroes getting their prize of finding Luke.

Good points. Though, I actually think that's an argument for why MCU teasers are better than how TFA ended. They aren't stepping on the main plot to tease a future movie. They really are mere easter eggs for fans looking for a little more.

It really does seem like they sacrificed the crowd pleasing finality of the typical Star Wars ending, in order to sell the next movie. That's one part of the Star Wars formula they didn't copy properly (whether they knew it or not). And that's something I actually did expect from SW, as much as things like the opening crawl or classic screen wipes. Plus, we all know the first episode of a SW trilogy is supposed to end on a celebration! Alas.

 

[Fat4all]

I wish that RLM would make a video that explicitly shit on the alt-right viewers. I don't claim them to be alt-right or even sympathetic to the alt-right, I just claim that they don't try hard enough to clean up the scum in their comments and dissuade shitty people from watching them.

RLM as a whole don't really care about their audience unless they get vitriolic feedback in a massive wave, ala the backlash to their review of Boyhood.

Otherwise, they purposely avoid their audience no matter who they are.

 

[Trigonometrize.]

Good points. Though, I actually think that's an argument for why MCU teasers are better than how TFA ended. They aren't stepping on the main plot to tease a future movie. They really are mere easter eggs for fans looking for a little more.

It really does seem like they sacrificed the crowd pleasing finality of the typical Star Wars ending, in order to sell the next movie. That's one part of the Star Wars formula they didn't copy properly (whether they knew it or not). And that's something I actually did expect from SW, as much as things like the opening crawl or classic screen wipes. Plus, we all know the first episode of a SW trilogy is supposed to end on a celebration! Alas.

Yeah, while I don't think TFA's ending was completely made for sequel baiting, it wasn't the perfect way to frame the story either. They had to stumble around with the map mumbo jumbo maamajomboo as the main catalyst for the story which was sucky. As Plinkett pointed out, lots and lots of "get that droid" when you put them next to each other.

 

[LiamR]

It's a shame that the importance of diversity seems to be lost on them. That section came across as very ignorant and will no doubt have the alt-right cheering in the comments section (sigh).

Other than that, I thought it was kinda fun... or maybe I just have a lot of respect and appreciation for the immense amount of work that must have went into creating this video as someone who makes YouTube videos myself.

 

[Trokil]

It's a shame that the importance of diversity seems to be lost on them. That section came across as very ignorant and will no doubt have the alt-right cheering in the comments section (sigh).

Well no. They said it for both sides diversity is only an issue for people who think about either the lack or too much and they don't care for both sides.

Even with the diversity issue TFA is still a pretty sterile and save movie, as the kiss scene proved. It's there, but they don't really commit to it.

 

[A Link to the Past]

RLM as a whole don't really care about their audience unless they get vitriolic feedback in a massive wave, ala the backlash to their review of Boyhood.

Otherwise, they purposely avoid their audience no matter who they are.

Fair enough, but the thing is that leaving it alone will inevitably lead to alt-righters getting very combative of them, because alt-righters become very upset and offended by perceived slights, no matter how slight. Heck, people are actively arguing that RLM fucked up because by promoting interracial relations, they're promoting white genocide. Leaving it alone is going to make these kinds of thought processes on their comments sections that much more prevalent.

 

[Cheerilee]

RLM as a whole don't really care about their audience unless they get vitriolic feedback in a massive wave, ala the backlash to their review of Boyhood.

Otherwise, they purposely avoid their audience no matter who they are.

Yeah, Rich Evans was asked in a recent stream if Mike toned down the "serial killer" content between his Episode II & III reviews because he saw the fan complaints on the internet, and Rich said that Mike deliberately refuses to listen to the fans, that he toned it down on his own whim. If Mike had heard complaints about it, he would've amped up the "serial killer" stuff, because fuck you. Mike likes to fuck with anyone who complains, and it makes him want to do the opposite of what you ask.

People got mad that he was in the minority that didn't like Boyhood, so he doubled down on his Boyhood hate.

 

[Aiii]

Fair enough, but the thing is that leaving it alone will inevitably lead to alt-righters getting very combative of them, because alt-righters become very upset and offended by perceived slights, no matter how slight. Heck, people are actively arguing that RLM fucked up because by promoting interracial relations, they're promoting white genocide. Leaving it alone is going to make these kinds of thought processes on their comments sections that much more prevalent.

And RLM should care about these people and what they say, why?

 

[Dr Funfrock]

I agree with what some other people have said, this review came too early and would probably be better if the new trilogy had concluded. I don't really care about the newer Star Wars and discuss it online, so I hadn't heard that awful Ring Theory. While it dragged on a bit because of it, it was still good overall. Hearing about the plans Disney Machine had and even somewhat redeeming Lucas later on. There isn't that much to say about ep 7, really.

Either way not getting Plinkett often is totally fine, since it should be something he wants to do and not feel obliged to. He hasn't touched Star Trek Beyond either. Half In The Bag and BOTW are so much fun so we don't really need Plinkett until Indiana Jones 5, which will probably be a proper review.

 

[Fat4all]

Fair enough, but the thing is that leaving it alone will inevitably lead to alt-righters getting very combative of them, because alt-righters become very upset and offended by perceived slights, no matter how slight. Heck, people are actively arguing that RLM fucked up because by promoting interracial relations, they're promoting white genocide. Leaving it alone is going to make these kinds of thought processes on their comments sections that much more prevalent.

You can't account at all times for who views what and how they personally decide to skew it, though. That will always tend to happen and is constantly escalated on places like youtube.

I've seen 30+ min videos on youtube where Trump is made fun of once through the whole thing and is never brought up again, and the first comment in the comment section was "Trump better than Hillary" with like 500 likes.

 

[greycolumbus]

Wasn't too hot on it the first time through, but I'm rewatching it now and I think I'm set to enjoy it more. It's a fine video essay.

Really I just want more Baby's Day Out style reviews. I kinda get the feeling they were a lot more fun to produce than the Star Wars reviews.

 

[A Link to the Past]

And RLM should care about these people and what they say, why?

Because they're their YouTube videos, their YouTube comments, and their videos are cultivating harmful communities.

 

[Rentahamster]

Fair enough, but the thing is that leaving it alone will inevitably lead to alt-righters getting very combative of them, because alt-righters become very upset and offended by perceived slights, no matter how slight. Heck, people are actively arguing that RLM fucked up because by promoting interracial relations, they're promoting white genocide. Leaving it alone is going to make these kinds of thought processes on their comments sections that much more prevalent.

The cynical, dry nature of their humor and commentary leads me to believe that they really couldn't give a fuck what other people think, and would even be encouraged to troll a specific group if that group were to get loud and annoying enough. A "punk rock" philosophy, similar in style to Trey Parker and Matt Stone.

 

[MrCunningham]

The "Look ITS LUKE, please GO SEE THE NEXT MOVIE" ending was very un-Star Wars... and it was probably their surrogate for the Marvel "teaser" which they perceive as part of the reason for the MCU's success.

I see your point there that Abrams left a story thread open at the end of TFA for obvious sequel bating and what to expect from the next movie. Which is something that none of the original trilogy or even the prequel trilogy did.

When I think about it, these kinds of endings used to be a thing that were reserved for lower budget horror movies (The killer/ monster is still alive... ) but has become more commonplace in big budget films now. Though as stated before, the MCU movies do generally reserve their sequel teasers for the end credit sequences.

But thinking about it, the most sequel bait movie that I ever saw in a cinema was probably Back to the Future II. I am hard pressed to think of another movie with a theatrical cut that ends with a big message that reads "To be Concluded..." followed directly by a trailer for a sequel that is planned for the next summer right before the end credits.

 

[BocoDragon]

I see your point there that Abrams left a story thread open at the end of TFA for obvious sequel bating and what to expect from the next movie. Which is something that none of the original trilogy or even the prequel trilogy did.

When I think about it, these kinds of endings used to be a thing that were reserved for lower budget horror movies (The killer/ monster is still alive... ) but has become more commonplace in big budget films now. Though as stated before, the MCU movies do generally reserve their sequel teasers for the end credit sequences.

But thinking about it, the most sequel bait movie that I ever saw in a cinema was probably Back to the Future II. I am hard pressed to think of another movie with a theatrical cut that ends with a big message that reads "To be Concluded..." followed directly by a trailer for a sequel that is planned for the next summer right before the end credits.

That's what I'm thinking too... BTTF sequels were the beginning to this. Because they actually filmed II and III as one big movie, so for the first time they were in the business of planning ahead and baiting sequels in previous movies.

I don't think it's always wrong to blatantly tease a sequel in a predecessor. Sometimes an ongoing series is blatantly an ongoing series. But there are certain movies that need to at least appear like standalone movies, and Star Wars already had the format of being that. They broke that illusion with this new movie, and I'm not a fan.

They could have teased that sequel without doing it so simplistically. I don't think they had the best people in the room on this decision, because they didn't even think to disguise it. That, or the corporate demand was too strong to let art get in the way of a successful franchise.

 

[jblank83]

Watched it last night. I thought the analysis of TFA was accurate, whether that analysis is "rehashed" or not. It's a very safe, very corporate, very obviously manufactured movie that lacks passion and takes zero risks. As the product of approximately one billion producers, CG artists, and test audience coordinators, it's an impressive work, but it's not an exciting work of art.

The biggest problem with the review is that the overarching Star Wars franchise analysis is bolted on. The two should have been separate videos.

And Kylo Ren is still a boring and ineffective villain (imo).

 

[Monocle]

The increasing diversity might be one of the few parts of the corporate mindset of the new Star Wars that I liked.

I'm much more upset at the general photocopying of classic Star Wars in general. It feels less like the series of films continued as usual, and felt more like a retro engineered copy of Star Wars applied to a formulaic 2010s cinematic universe.

And I don't know if "sexless" is the word I'd use, but there is a lack of passionate humanity in many of the characters. The word "sexless" implies a lack of sexuality or romance, but that's not exactly the root of what's missing. (I love a good romance, but it seems fine for a SW movie to occasionally omit that)

It's more because the characters of new Star Wars are these big safe action figures spouting big safe dialogue, in the style of the MCU. That tends to promote what might be called "sexless" characters. But they're lacking more than just sex. They're lacking any character traits that have any edges that might turn off anyone in the mainstream audience.

TFA plays it very safe. No other film in the series was this timid to be it's own thing.

I don't know how this could be said of any of TFA's main characters. Rey, Finn, Kylo, Han... they all have personal and deeply human drives. Rey to find the sense of belonging she lost when she was abandoned, Finn to reject the First Order's inhumanity and his past as a faceless soldier by first escaping and later defining himself as a rebel, Kylo to claim Vader's legacy for himself and overcome the lingering attachments that he believes hold him back, and Han to reconnect with his family. (I guess Poe might be the exception? But he's still more than his job description. Passionate, loyal, brave, reliable.) These aren't two dimensional people like most of the characters in the prequels. Their goals develop and mature throughout TFA as the characters interact and come to understand their purposes more clearly.

If the characters lack a certain edge, it's a matter of presentation. They're not exactly sanitized kid-safe plushy toys. At her core, Rey starts out lonely and living in the past. She experiences battle and an interrogation at the hands of the main villain. Finn comes from a group of genocidal radicals. Kylo's first major acts are to murder an old man, then have a group of innocent people executed, then torture someone. Han is still Han even though he doesn't shoot Greedo in this movie.

TFA is a Star Wars film. It's not going to linger on the horrors of war, pain, or death. These are all present, but seen through the lens of pulpy adventure series with a long history of pulling its punches to maintain a certain tone. Similarly, its characters don't all need to do ethically questionable things to be well rounded, or "human." The characters still contend with plenty of emotional ups and downs, and still deal with plenty of adversity. They're not perfect. You seem to be judging them based on their relatively sympathetic and relatable presentation, and the quintessential Star Wars tone I just mentioned.

I don't know if it's "timid" to feature onscreen torture and murder. If TFA proves anything, it's that a movie can have drama, dark dramatic elements, and emotional depth (i.e. human themes and character development) without being edgy and overwrought like Episode 3. There's absolutely nothing wrong with a movie being designed to give audiences of all ages a good time. Marvel does that well. Star Wars can do it very well too.

 

[Cheerilee]

That's what I'm thinking too... BTTF sequels were the beginning to this. Because they actually filmed II and III as one big movie, so for the first time they were in the business of planning ahead and baiting sequels in previous movies.

I don't think it's always wrong to blatantly tease a sequel in a predecessor. Sometimes an ongoing series is blatantly an ongoing series. But there are certain movies that need to at least appear like standalone movies, and Star Wars already had the format of being that. They broke that illusion with this new movie, and I'm not a fan.

They could have teased that sequel without doing it so simplistically. I don't think they had the best people in the room on this decision, because they didn't even think to disguise it. That, or the corporate demand was too strong to let art get in the way of a successful franchise.

Didn't Superman (1978) end with "Superman will return in Superman II" (or something to that effect) in the end credits? (Because they were filming 1&2 at the same time.) And the James Bond movies teased the specific titles of the upcoming movies. Back to the Future is just the most blatant.

 

[paperboywriter]

Because they're their YouTube videos, their YouTube comments, and their videos are cultivating harmful communities.

At best they should inform people that the YouTube comment section is a shitshow, but everyone knows that already.

 

[Salty Rice]

Yeah, Rich Evans was asked in a recent stream if Mike toned down the "serial killer" content between his Episode II & III reviews because he saw the fan complaints on the internet, and Rich said that Mike deliberately refuses to listen to the fans, that he toned it down on his own whim. If Mike had heard complaints about it, he would've amped up the "serial killer" stuff, because fuck you. Mike likes to fuck with anyone who complains, and it makes him want to do the opposite of what you ask.

People got mad that he was in the minority that didn't like Boyhood, so he doubled down on his Boyhood hate.

Good to hear they dont listen to complaints because on the internet someone is always offended.

Also there was a backlash because of their opinions to boyhood?
Cant understand that. To be fair its a overrated movie but its good i guess because IT TOOK 12 YEARS TO MAKE.

But on the other side some people got even mad because they shit on that trash that is the Ghostbusters reboot so i shouldnt be surprised.

 

[BocoDragon]

I don't know how this could be said of any of TFA's main characters. Rey, Finn, Kylo, Han... they all have personal and deeply human drives. Rey to find the sense of belonging she lost when she was abandoned, Finn to reject the First Order's inhumanity and his past as a faceless soldier by first escaping and later defining himself as a rebel, Kylo to claim Vader's legacy for himself and overcome the lingering attachments that he believes hold him back, and Han to reconnect with his family. (I guess Poe might be the exception? But he's still more than his job description. Passionate, loyal, brave, reliable.) These aren't two dimensional people like most of the characters in the prequels. Their goals develop and mature throughout TFA as the characters interact and come to understand their purposes more clearly.

If the characters lack a certain edge, it's a matter of presentation. They're not exactly sanitized kid-safe plushy toys. At her core, Rey starts out lonely and living in the past. She experiences battle and an interrogation at the hands of the main villain. Finn comes from a group of genocidal radicals. Kylo's first major acts are to murder an old man, then have a group of innocent people executed, then torture someone. Han is still Han even though he doesn't shoot Greedo in this movie.

TFA is a Star Wars film. It's not going to linger on the horrors of war, pain, or death. These are all present, but seen through the lens of pulpy adventure series with a long history of pulling its punches to maintain a certain tone. Similarly, its characters don't all need to do ethically questionable things to be well rounded, or "human." The characters still contend with plenty of emotional ups and downs, and still deal with plenty of adversity. They're not perfect. You seem to be judging them based on their relatively sympathetic and relatable presentation, and the quintessential Star Wars tone I just mentioned.

I don't know if it's "timid" to feature onscreen torture and murder. If TFA proves anything, it's that a movie can have drama, dark dramatic elements, and emotional depth (i.e. human themes and character development) without being edgy and overwrought like Episode 3. There's absolutely nothing wrong with a movie being designed to give audiences of all ages a good time.

I'm specifically saying that TFA is a betrayal of classic SW tone. There's no one here who that is like feisty, abrasive Leia, or carefree asshole Han. Everyone in TFA is safe and acceptable to audiences of all ages. They're all very nice and friendly cartoon characters.

My statement on timidity has zero to do with "torture and murder". It has to do with the film being chiefly concerned with reverse engineering the feel of Star Wars and doing it in the safest way possible, instead of using the universe as a tableau for original visions (as all the other moves were, for better and for worse).

It's almost exactly what you'd expect from Disney buying Star Wars.

Didn't Superman (1978) end with "Superman will return in Superman II" (or something to that effect) in the end credits? (Because they were filming 1&2 at the same time.) And the James Bond movies teased the specific titles of the upcoming movies. Back to the Future is just the most blatant.

I guess you're right, Superman I and II were filmed at the same time.

I don't mind if movies hint at sequels, by planting seeds, or by saying another one is coming in a statement at the end of the movie, or with a trailer or stinger.

It's purely when the movie itself feels incomplete without moving into the sequel that I feel the balance between art/product has shifted so much that it's not to my taste.

At least let me believe this is a total, complete work of art, even if you're subtly selling me on the next one.

 

[Catvoca]

The diversity and romance parts of this were pretty garbage, I had a really hard time figuring out if that was on purpose from the perspective of the Plinkett personality but I recall the other Star Wars reviews actually making solid points under all the over the top personality. Really felt like they were just swinging and missing during this entire review.

Yeah, i'm with you. The first hour felt like a re-thread of things he's said about the prequals and thing's that have been said in Half in the Bag and i thought the TFA anlaysis was really weak. I wasn't even hoping for some epic teardown (I think his Titanic review might be his best one) and i'm still a bit dissapointed. There was some funny stuff in it at least.

 

[Fudgepuppy]

Fair enough, but the thing is that leaving it alone will inevitably lead to alt-righters getting very combative of them, because alt-righters become very upset and offended by perceived slights, no matter how slight. Heck, people are actively arguing that RLM fucked up because by promoting interracial relations, they're promoting white genocide. Leaving it alone is going to make these kinds of thought processes on their comments sections that much more prevalent.

As long as their videos are fair, it's not really their fault for people using them for a fucked up cause.

Eventually, the alt-righters will steer a different route because the content in itself is not exactly pandering to them.

It's just because of Ghostbusters they have gotten an upswing of idiots, but those will secede once they realize that they're pragmatic and fair people in general.

 

[Ban Puncher]

What a delightful romp.

Pizza rolls for everyone.

 

[Ushojax]

I see your point there that Abrams left a story thread open at the end of TFA for obvious sequel bating and what to expect from the next movie. Which is something that none of the original trilogy or even the prequel trilogy did.

Uh, what? ESB literally ends with Lando and Chewie flying off to rescue Han Solo and Luke promising to meet them on Tatooine.

 

[Veelk]

I'm specifically saying that TFA is a betrayal of classic SW tone. There's no one here who that is like feisty, abrasive Leia, or carefree asshole Han. Everyone in TFA is safe and acceptable to audiences of all ages. They're all very nice and friendly cartoon characters.

My statement on timidity has zero to do with "torture and murder". It has to do with the film being chiefly concerned with reverse engineering the feel of Star Wars and doing it in the safest way possible, instead of using the universe as a tableau for original visions (as all the other moves were, for better and for worse).

It's almost exactly what you'd expect from Disney buying Star Wars.

I really disagree with this.

I can agree with the general characters that TFA is less sarcastic or snide in it's characters, but in terms of fiestiness, there's stuff like Rey losing her patience with Finn's antics and Han is his snarky self to Finn and Chewy more often than not. It's still less than what ANH had, I agree, but it's still there. TFA is not meely mouthed mish mash. Where Leia might have complained about her rescue not being done 'properly', Rey is just thankful that someone cared enough to rescue her in the first place. Honestly, you can basically boil this complaint down to them being different characters who will not react to things the same way the original cast did. And the abrasiveness you describe is really only present in ANH anyway. After that, the characters have grown together and any abrasiveness is either playful or else driven by different underlying tensions (Han thinking Leia doesn't love him).

What makes this really bizarre though when you follow it up with the complaint that TFA is a replication of the originals. When I think of what the tone of classic SW, it's not people bickering. I think the wonder and creativity of the galaxy, I think the mystical nature of the force, I think the internal struggle of good and evil, I think of the drama of the familial relationships. The first half hour of SW is spent with Luke being BFF's with Obiwan, for christ sake. That is the smallest part of it at best.

So your criticism is that TFA betrayed the tone of the original by not replicating this remarkably minor facet of the originals while still saying it's aping the originals too much? And this also seems predicated on the idea that characters acting abrasive or assholish is, inherently, a risk in storytelling, while a character being mostly nice is a safe play, which is hilariously untrue. I would happily argue that the 'abrasive, sarcastic asshole' archtype is something that probably occurs more often in any given fiction than otherwise.

 

[Monocle]

I'm specifically saying that TFA is a betrayal of classic SW tone. There's no one here who that is like feisty, abrasive Leia, or carefree asshole Han. Everyone in TFA is safe and acceptable to audiences of all ages. They're all very nice and friendly cartoon characters.

A "betrayal," wow. The movie that practically rewinds the Star Wars tape to a time before it was blighted by the Prequels. The movie that recaptures the look and sound and style and humor and themes and craft of Star Wars. And your big complaint is that the characters are too round around the edges? Fuck, dude. This movie had to court and reassure a massive segment of the Star Wars fan base. It had to encapsulate the spirit of Star Wars for a new generation of kids. Maybe wait until Rogue One and Episode 8 are out before complaining that the first good Star Wars movie since ROTJ is full of characters that are too "nice." As if the tone of Star Wars depends mainly on this.

Maybe focus instead on the exceptional character design and masterfully evolved art style (as an artist, I can confirm it follows sound design principles, making many subtle, carefully judged tweaks to modernize a familiar aesthetic), the vastly improved diversity (this stuff matters), the redemption of the lightsaber (it's heavy and kind of scary again, not a damn glowstick for people to spin around for no reason), or the exciting possibilities the movie sets up for classic and new characters alike. Context is really important here. The fact that the movie resembles classic Star Wars in almost all substantial aspects, and manages not to screw anything up like the Prequels, are major wins for Star Wars fans. Disney and the TFA crew deserve nothing but praise for an all around great first effort.

My statement on timidity has zero to do with "torture and murder". It has to do with the film being chiefly concerned with reverse engineering the feel of Star Wars and doing it in the safest way possible, instead of using the universe as a tableau for original visions (as all the other moves were, for better and for worse).

It's almost exactly what you'd expect from Disney buying Star Wars.

I see your point: based on a grand total of one pretty damn good Star Wars movie, Disney has surely failed this franchise.

 

[BocoDragon]

I really disagree with this.

I can agree with the general characters that TFA is less sarcastic or snide in it's characters, but in terms of fiestiness, there's stuff like Rey losing her patience with Finn's antics and Han is his snarky self to Finn and Chewy more often than not. It's still less than what ANH had, I agree, but it's still there. TFA is not meely mouthed mish mash. Where Leia might have complained about her rescue not being done 'properly', Rey is just thankful that someone cared enough to rescue her in the first place. Honestly, you can basically boil this complaint down to them being different characters who will not react to things the same way the original cast did. And the abrasiveness you describe is really only present in ANH anyway. After that, the characters have grown together and any abrasiveness is either playful or else driven by different underlying tensions (Han thinking Leia doesn't love him).

What makes this really bizarre though when you follow it up with the complaint that TFA is a replication of the originals. When I think of what the tone of classic SW, it's not Han and Leia bickering. That is the smallest part of it at best. I think the wonder and creativity of the galaxy, I think the mystical nature of the force, I think the internal struggle of good and evil, I think of the drama of the familial relationships.

That's interesting. I do. I do think of Han and Leia bickering and Luke screaming "I got him!!" when I think of the OT. I think specifically of the feisty brashness of the characters. That's what prevents this from being another sci-fi series for more left-brained geeks who are just interested in space settings and super-serious good vs evil drama. It has wild heroes with blood in their veins.

There's some of that in TFA. It's better than the prequels. But I do think the edges have been fundamentally shaved off this Disney version.

It's not my biggest flaw with the film, because it is so much better than the prequels. But because RLM has raised the spectre of "sexlessness".... I have to agree that there is something to that criticism.

So your criticism is that TFA betrayed the tone of the original by not replicating this remarkably minor facet of the originals while still saying it's aping the originals too much?

My central thesis is that I'm okay with new Star Wars sticking to tradition, but they copied Star Wars in the wrong way. A superficial way.

They copied specific plot points and settings from the OT. But this isn't a proper copy at all, in that the original Star Wars was always showing us something new. A proper copy would recreate the core of the OT (i.e. style of banter, style of conflict, tone, beginnings and endings to the story, etc), but this just copied the surface level of classic Star Wars plot points, while sometimes failing to nail the meaning that these elements had in the original.

Meanwhile it omitted much of what I personally would like to see stick to tradition. I think the sequel-baiting ending betrayed the feeling of Star Wars being standalone films, for one example that comes to mind easily as I've been talking about it tonight.