• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Star War: The Force Awakens Review Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Syriel

Member
WorthPlaying Review:
http://worthplaying.com/article/2015/12/16/reviews/97989/

If you overlook the blatant parallels and focus on the new characters, "The Force Awakens" is at its best. Daisy Ridley is an absolute treat as Rey, the mysterious protagonist. Ridley's portrayal of Rey is one of a self-sufficient young woman who doesn't need anyone's help but is willing to offer it when needed. She has her vulnerable side, particularly around her mysterious past and unknown family, but that doesn't define her. Rey is strong and confident, and it's obvious from the start that she is the star of the show. Come Halloween, don't be surprised if there are thousands of girls wearing Rey costumes, just as there were thousands of boys wearing Luke Skywalker costumes when the original trilogy was in theaters.
Click to expand...

The one character I wasn't quite sure what to think of was Kylo Ren (Adam Driver). A Dark Side user following in Darth Vader's footsteps (he even has a Dark Side master, portrayed by Andy Serkis), Ren's driving goal is to eliminate all traces of the Jedi. While his first appearance is imposing, Ren's unstable nature means the character has none of Darth Vader's gravitas. Perhaps things will change in the next film, but for now, Ren can't even compete with Darth Maul as a villain, let alone Darth Vader.

When it comes to the soundtrack, "The Force Awakens" sees a return appearance of John Williams, though like Abrams, Williams seems to be playing it safe and relying on nostalgia rather than something new. Much of the soundtrack is atmospheric, with major cues reusing themes from past films. There are no stand-out tracks like "The Imperial March" or "Duel of the Fates" here.

Ultimately, "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" isn't a bad film, but it's also not an amazing film. Instead, it's a solid first entry in a new trilogy that relies on nostalgia and plays it safe in order to set the stage for what's to come. Star Wars fans are likely to appreciate "The Force Awakens" more for the foundation it lays than the immediate experience it provides. The payoff isn't at the end of the film but in Episode VIII and Episode IX. If you've never seen a Star Wars movie before, you'll probably think better of the film because it won't feel quite so familiar.
Click to expand...
 
J

Jonm1010

Banned
Cross-Section said:
How does TFA stack up to Age of Ultron, if we're talking big franchised blockbusters of 2015?
Click to expand...
Hopefully it blows it out the water from a quality standpoint....given the reviews that seems to be the case.

Frankly if TFA is as forgettable as most Marvel movies I will ultimately feel the film is a dissapointment.
 
A

Already Torn

Banned
Jonm1010 said:
Creed is pretty cliche reliant, a bit campy and barely hides that it is basically retreading the original. Not to mention not having seen the previous films reduces a lot of the films potency. The direction is really good and the acting is solid, which elevates an otherwise fairly by the numbers boxing story and script.

Creed is a solid boxing film with excllent direction while Mad Max is an action and technical masterpiece. One that is seemingly poised to go down as one of the all time greats in its genre. That's not a knock on Creed, it just speaks to the achievement of Mad Max and how impressive it is what they accomplished in all facets of film making.
Click to expand...
You're saying camp is bad? Mad Max is super campy, but it's great. And yes, it is cliche reliant. I still don't see how that's a bad thing lol

It seems like you just like action movies more than sports ones
 
D

drspeedy

Member
As someone who's trying to stay spoiler free I don't want to read too many of the reviews, but can anyone explain to me why the movie is PG-13? All I've seen was "sci-fi action violence", that pretty much describes all the other SW films are as well... Is this just The ratings board being overly cautious?
 
E

esmith08734

Member
drspeedy said:
As someone who's trying to stay spoiler free I don't want to read too many of the reviews, but can anyone explain to me why the movie is PG-13? All I've seen was "sci-fi action violence", that pretty much describes all the other SW films are as well... Is this just The ratings board being overly cautious?
Click to expand...

IGN said there's some blood and serious violence. And a good amount of death.

not much of a spoiler but have to be safe.
 
I

Inferno313

Banned
drspeedy said:
As someone who's trying to stay spoiler free I don't want to read too many of the reviews, but can anyone explain to me why the movie is PG-13? All I've seen was "sci-fi action violence", that pretty much describes all the other SW films are as well... Is this just The ratings board being overly cautious?
Click to expand...

The ratings board has become more and more cautious over the years. To the point where adding PG-13 has basically become irrelevant. Where we used to have G, PG, and R. We now have PG, PG-13, and R. (In most recent years there have been less than 5 movies that get G ratings by the MPAA.)

By today's standards, all six Star Wars films would probably be PG-13.
 
N

Ninjimbo

Member
I spoiled myself a few months ago. The reviews seem to line up with my impressions of what I read. TFA is nothing more than a crowd pleaser which is the least anyone could have asked for.

I can't wait for tomorrow. It will be great.
 
F

firehawk12

Subete no aware
Fixed2BeBroken said:
why do people hate into darkness so much?

i enjoyed it
Click to expand...
It's hard for me to explain it since I've seen Wrath of Khan maybe two dozen times. As a Star Trek fan, it's a poor remake of the most well known (but not the best performing) film of the franchise.

But absent all that baggage, it has a plot that doesn't stand up to any scrutiny, space magic that makes George Lucas blush, and just boring action sequences.

Jonm1010 said:
Creed is pretty cliche reliant, a bit campy and barely hides that it is basically retreading the original. Not to mention not having seen the previous films reduces a lot of the films potency. The direction is really good and the acting is solid, which elevates an otherwise fairly by the numbers boxing story and script.

Creed is a solid boxing film with excllent direction while Mad Max is an action and technical masterpiece. One that is seemingly poised to go down as one of the all time greats in its genre. That's not a knock on Creed, it just speaks to the achievement of Mad Max and how impressive it is what they accomplished in all facets of film making.
Click to expand...
Mad Max's strength lies in the fact that it used practical effects. It's amazing because in a sea of CG, it just stands out.
 
P

ProudCanuck

Banned
Timu said:
It dropped to 95%, can't wait to see how it holds up on the 18th!
Click to expand...

The more reviews that come in, the more hard it will be for numbers to go up or down. I think this will settle between 94-97% which is better

Remember the HIGHEST RT score for any SW movies is 94.
 
F

Fine Ham Abounds

Member
Reading the blurb portion of most reviews in an attempt to avoid spoilers, yeah, this definitely sounds like being extremely derivative is a consistent takeaway. My enjoyment is going to be dependent on whether it comes across as more full of callbacks or a straight rehash. The latter is going to be a major turnoff for me. I can understand people not caring, I can understand the argument that it needed to be safe, that doesn't change that it's something that's going to bug me.
 
G

guek

Banned
Fine Ham Abounds said:
Reading the blurb portion of most reviews in an attempt to avoid spoilers, yeah, this definitely sounds like being extremely derivative is a consistent takeaway. My enjoyment is going to be dependent on whether it comes across as more full of callbacks or a straight rehash. The latter is going to be a major turnoff for me.
Click to expand...

It's depressing how much it sounds like the concerns I've had since Abrams landed the job were spot on. I expected a good but not great film that feels incredibly derivative. Maybe I'll like it a ton despite that though. The only way to know is to see it for myself. And if it's just a good movie that doesn't live up to the hype, that'll be OK. We all know it could have ended up so much worse.
 
JetBlackPanda

JetBlackPanda

Member
guek said:
It's depressing how much it sounds like the concerns I've had since Abrams landed the job were spot on. I expected a good but not great film that feels incredibly derivative. Maybe I'll like it a ton despite that though. The only way to know is to see it for myself. And if it's just a good movie that doesn't live up to the hype, that'll be OK. We all know it could have ended up so much worse.
Click to expand...

Blaming Abrams is LOL!! Lucas film, the freaking writer of ESB and few others all worked on this film.
 
J

Jonm1010

Banned
Titanoboa said:
You're saying camp is bad? Mad Max is super campy, but it's great. And yes, it is cliche reliant. I still don't see how that's a bad thing lol

It seems like you just like action movies more than sports ones
Click to expand...

Creed is good. Deserves a spot in the discussion of better boxing movies. Might get a mention in the category of great sports movies. But it isn't going down on any critics top 10 list for action movies of all time.

The film is in the same league I would put Warrior. A solid sports movie that is good for what it is but doesn't transcend the genre or do anything ground breaking. It takes a oft recycled formula, cliches and all, and puts a coat of paint on it and executes it better then many in recent times but ultimately falls short of those it is emulating.
 
Vire

Vire

Member
Hearing it's overly safe and derivative is really disappointing to me. That was my biggest concern going into this thing based on the trailers that I've seen.

Oh well, I'm sure it'll still be fun.
 
F

firehawk12

Subete no aware
thecouncil said:
I'll still blame Lucas. He created this universe and there's only so much you can do with it.
Click to expand...
I think KoTOR2 is probably the most interesting Star Wars story to come out of decades of Expanded Universe bullshit. But that's way too grey for a mass market.
 
J

Jonm1010

Banned
Inferno313 said:
The ratings board has become more and more cautious over the years. To the point where adding PG-13 has basically become irrelevant. Where we used to have G, PG, and R. We now have PG, PG-13, and R. (In most recent years there have been less than 5 movies that get G ratings by the MPAA.)

By today's standards, all six Star Wars films would probably be PG-13.
Click to expand...
Absolutely.

I got into this argument multiple times when I made the case this film was guaranteed to be rated PG-13.

I heard excuse after excuse after excuse for why I was wrong. But what you say is true. The MPAA has gotten more strict, not less so, to the point that subjective adult themes gets you a PG today. Pretty much any blood or a decent bit of violence gets you a PG-13.

A bloody decapitated limb and a burnt body in full view would never pass PG standards today. I honestly don't expect to see anything in TFA that is that graphic and clear to the viewer on screen.

The MPAA is such a clusterfuck though that it takes essays to properly explain all the weird logic they operate with.
 
T

Tertullian

Member
Jonm1010 said:
Absolutely.

I got into this argument multiple times when I made the case this film was guaranteed to be rated PG-13.

I heard excuse after excuse after excuse for why I was wrong. But what you say is true. The MPAA has gotten more strict, not less so, to the point that subjective adult themes gets you a PG today. Pretty much any blood or a decent bit of violence gets you a PG-13.

A bloody decapitated limb and a burnt body in full view would never pass PG standards today.

The MPAA is such a clusterfuck though that it takes essays to properly explain all the weird logic they operate with.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it pretty much feels like adding PG-13 way back when was pointless. We used to have G - PG - R. Now G and PG are pretty much interchangeable and arbitrarily assigned, and we have G/PG - PG13 - R.

Shit, Disney's The Hunchback of Notre-Dame was rated G. How the hell is Star Wars: the Force Awakens two whole ratings more adult that a movie where a guy threatens to burn a family alive if a woman won't let him rape her?
 
D

Drahcir

Member
I'm really liking that small divide regarding Kylo as well. Some not being impressed with his lack of Vader gravitas and others like that he's a loose cannon of sorts. Can't wait to judge for myself!
 
I

Inferno313

Banned
Tertullian said:
Yeah, it pretty much feels like adding PG-13 way back when was pointless. We used to have G - PG - R. Now G and PG are pretty much interchangeable and arbitrarily assigned, and we have G/PG - PG13 - R.

Shit, Disney's The Hunchback of Notre-Dame was rated G. How the hell is Star Wars: the Force Awakens two whole ratings more adult that a movie where a guy threatens to burn a family alive if a woman won't let him rape her?
Click to expand...

It's less even that G and PG are arbitrary, but that G movies are basically non-existent.

These are all 3 G rated movies released in 2015. An animated film, and two documentaries.

At this point, might as well get retire the G rating and move back to a 3 rating system, because that's what we effectively have.
 
W

weshes195

Member
Mad Max is a great action film and deserves the praise, but Creed is a better overall film IMO. You actually feel bad for the characters, you root for them to win and you feel the story.

You get 2 maybe 3 lines from Max so you don't know his character, let alone care about him (never seen the original film) and the lead female gets good characterization and the weird guy seems interesting but since the whole movies is basically 1 chase scene (except around 2/3 part until it continues again) I can't really care about the characters.

Not hating on the film, but I cared more for Bruce Willis and the black cop in die hard than anyone (with the exception for the main female lead) in the whole movie.

Just my opinion about the film in a Star Wars Review thread lol
 
J

Jonm1010

Banned
Tertullian said:
Yeah, it pretty much feels like adding PG-13 way back when was pointless. We used to have G - PG - R. Now G and PG are pretty much interchangeable and arbitrarily assigned, and we have G/PG - PG13 - R.

Shit, Disney's The Hunchback of Notre-Dame was rated G. How the hell is Star Wars: the Force Awakens two whole ratings more adult that a movie where a guy threatens to burn a family alive if a woman won't let him rape her?
Click to expand...

Not only that but PG-13 itself has been neutered over the years. To the point that many PG movies of yesteryear would actually be R today.

A film like Poltergeist and maybe even Jaws would probably get R ratings today and a pg-13 film like the original Red Dawn would certainly be R rated now.

It really is:

Modern PG = encompasses most of the boundaries of classic G ratings.

Modern PG13 = a much more restrictive version of the old PG rating

Modern R= hard classic PG, early PG-13 and up.
 
S

samn

Member
Tertullian said:
Yeah, it pretty much feels like adding PG-13 way back when was pointless. We used to have G - PG - R. Now G and PG are pretty much interchangeable and arbitrarily assigned, and we have G/PG - PG13 - R.

Shit, Disney's The Hunchback of Notre-Dame was rated G. How the hell is Star Wars: the Force Awakens two whole ratings more adult that a movie where a guy threatens to burn a family alive if a woman won't let him rape her?
Click to expand...

When I was three years old our pre-school took us to see Hunchback.

From that day onwards I was terrified of the curtains opening and closing at the cinema. At the time they used to play this ad right as the curtains were opening and it created this terrifying fiery ripple effect on the cloth:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjEchu4Qnxk

which brought back memories of the hellfire scene

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3NoDEu7kpg

They don't do that any more thank goodness.
 
N

Nipo

Member
Jonm1010 said:
Not only that but PG-13 itself has been neutered over the years. To the point that many PG movies of yesteryear would actually be R today.

A film like Poltergeist and maybe even Jaws would probably get R ratings today and a pg-13 film like the original Red Dawn would certainly be R rated now.

It really is:

Modern PG = encompasses most of the boundaries of classic G ratings.

Modern PG13 = a much more restrictive version of the old PG rating

Modern R= hard classic PG, early PG-13 and up.
Click to expand...

I thought jaws and temple of doom are the reason we have pg13. Both were originally classified as r but lowered to pg on appeal.
 
S

sheepishlord

Member
Some twat handle posted a spoiler in a youtube comment section the other day but i obviously didn't know if it was genuine or not. Then today my brother got spoiled, we were just talking about it and both comments said the same thing.

So, thats the ending ruined. People are such bad dickheads.
 
S

samn

Member
sheepishlord said:
Some twat handle posted a spoiler in a youtube comment section the other day but i obviously didn't know if it was genuine or not. Then today my brother got spoiled, we were just talking about it and both comments said the same thing.

So, thats the ending ruined. People are such bad dickheads.
Click to expand...

why were you discussing potential spoilers with your brother!! recipe for disaster.
 
O

Oddduck

Member
guek said:
It's depressing how much it sounds like the concerns I've had since Abrams landed the job were spot on. I expected a good but not great film that feels incredibly derivative. Maybe I'll like it a ton despite that though. The only way to know is to see it for myself. And if it's just a good movie that doesn't live up to the hype, that'll be OK. We all know it could have ended up so much worse.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I don't know what other direction Abrams could have went.

The issue is Disney wanted the biggest audience possible. They want to introduce a new generation of kids and teens to Star Wars. Disney also wants more women to be interested in Star Wars.

And there was only one way for Abrams to give Disney exactly what they wanted.

By creating a film that feels like a sequel, a reboot, and a semi-remake, all wrapped in one package.
 
E

ElephantShell

Banned
Jonm1010 said:
Not only that but PG-13 itself has been neutered over the years. To the point that many PG movies of yesteryear would actually be R today.

A film like Poltergeist and maybe even Jaws would probably get R ratings today and a pg-13 film like the original Red Dawn would certainly be R rated now.

It really is:

Modern PG = encompasses most of the boundaries of classic G ratings.

Modern PG13 = a much more restrictive version of the old PG rating

Modern R= hard classic PG, early PG-13 and up.
Click to expand...

Captain Ron was PG in 1992, Kurt Russell says "fuck" AND you see Mary Kay Place's boobs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Star Trek "Origin Story" movie in the works
44
2K
Panajev2001a replied
Star Wars: Dark Forces Remaster | Review Thread
Analysis Review 2
58
5K
sloppyjoe_gamer replied
DualShockers: Creative Assembly is developing Total War: Star Wars game
29
1K
NeonDelta replied
Rottenwatch: The Marsh King's Daughter (starring Daisy Skywalker's American Accent)
28
2K
Laieon replied
‘Starfield’ Gets Infinitely Better With 100 ‘Star Wars’ Mandalorian Mods Installed
2
57
4K
twilo99 replied
Top Bottom