Yeah I don't want to sound rude, but if you didn't realize Cassian shot him you weren't paying attention.
Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (spoilers and discussion)
240,194 Views |
1640 Replies |
Last: 4 yr ago by Fat Bib Fortuna
On the re-writes, and correct notice of how little of the first trailer made it in, have re-watched the available trailers carefully, I can now posit something that may shed some light.
By any standard, the scenes with Mon Mothma in the conference room indicate a complete change in how they decided to present the Death Star threat.
There is ample evidence that a conference that Jyn was called to already knew much about what was rumored, and that she was originally grilled and called into the mission by a more roundabout process. This is consistent with what we know they likely did know, but it seemed the re-shoot went for a more evocative approach for audience.
They are looking for way to destroy it --- Mothma's language is different from the theatrical release and sounds like she even knows what it can "destroy" means, but is using guarded language.
It almost looks like there may have been TWO scenes of that type --- Jyn brought in and questioned, then a later one building on what she found, and then actually still a third (the council argument)
The scenes with Krennic striding in water, and Jyn and Cassian also running on ground instead of the platform - and finally the great lost TIE fighter scene --- these are more easily explained by a full change to the `finale' part.
They are less baffling than the bald Saw and the very, very different Mothma meeting scenes with Jyn in my view?
If this is correct, the big changes constellate around how Jyn comes to be brought to Yavin and threat presented, and then at the end, to a way they do the finale, but not the sequence up to the transmission starting at a guess.
By any standard, the scenes with Mon Mothma in the conference room indicate a complete change in how they decided to present the Death Star threat.
There is ample evidence that a conference that Jyn was called to already knew much about what was rumored, and that she was originally grilled and called into the mission by a more roundabout process. This is consistent with what we know they likely did know, but it seemed the re-shoot went for a more evocative approach for audience.
They are looking for way to destroy it --- Mothma's language is different from the theatrical release and sounds like she even knows what it can "destroy" means, but is using guarded language.
It almost looks like there may have been TWO scenes of that type --- Jyn brought in and questioned, then a later one building on what she found, and then actually still a third (the council argument)
The scenes with Krennic striding in water, and Jyn and Cassian also running on ground instead of the platform - and finally the great lost TIE fighter scene --- these are more easily explained by a full change to the `finale' part.
They are less baffling than the bald Saw and the very, very different Mothma meeting scenes with Jyn in my view?
If this is correct, the big changes constellate around how Jyn comes to be brought to Yavin and threat presented, and then at the end, to a way they do the finale, but not the sequence up to the transmission starting at a guess.
Me missing something can easily be explained, indeed, a form of not `paying attention'. I am always looking at some of the background details in a SW movie ---- I only wondered about it when both people on either side of me nudged, and said "what happened? Who shot him?" I had realized I had kind of missed the moment--so just offered that explanation.Quote:
Really??? Not sure how anyone could miss that Cassian killed the informant. The informant was obviously worried, getting captured was a problem he was looking out for people coming and obviously there was no imminent threat....and then Cassian walks up behind him with a pretty grim but determined look on his face and boom. He goes down. Now troops hear the shot and he has to go quickly and he climbs.
Was just blatantly clear what happened....and I'm old. And my wife and daughter who are not sci fi or SW fans and they knew exactly what happened.
I just find that odd.
The last minute of this makes me laugh and is a good point
but of course the plans have to be stolen due to the OT script
but of course the plans have to be stolen due to the OT script
tk for tu juan said:
The last minute of this makes me laugh and is a good point
but of course the plans have to be stolen due to the OT script
Watched the entire thing. Girl lays it out perfectly why this was Just a really poorly done movie overall.
20+ mins, I'm not watching unless she gets naked
Interesting that she does while you apparently can'tFurlock Bones said:tk for tu juan said:
The last minute of this makes me laugh and is a good point
but of course the plans have to be stolen due to the OT script
Watched the entire thing. Girl lays it out perfectly why this was Just a really poorly done movie overall.
No wonder she didn't like it. She is one of the most depressing people I have ever listened to. I could only watch about 6 minutes before I started looking for alcohol to drown my sorrows. She is the real life female version of Marvin from Hitchhikers Guide.
I thought the movie was good, not great, but I could at least enjoy it for what it is: a spin-off.
I thought the movie was good, not great, but I could at least enjoy it for what it is: a spin-off.
tk for tu juan said:
The last minute of this makes me laugh and is a good point
but of course the plans have to be stolen due to the OT script
She is right. no one saw the good dinosaur
tk for tu juan said:
The last minute of this makes me laugh and is a good point
but of course the plans have to be stolen due to the OT script
Man she tore that **** up.
Furlock in th a house
She needs a star wars movie poster behind her and a collection of action figures to be more believable.
Average Joe said:
No wonder she didn't like it. She is one of the most depressing people I have ever listened to. I could only watch about 6 minutes before I started looking for alcohol to drown my sorrows. She is the real life female version of Marvin from Hitchhikers Guide.
I thought the movie was good, not great, but I could at least enjoy it for what it is: a spin-off.
Shout out to Marvin *****es!
drunk and ******ed is no way to go through life, son.
PatAg said:
drunk and ******ed is no way to go through life, son.
You don't actual know the line do you?
She just laid it out there. I didn't think it a great movie and she laid it to waste.
Ag Since 83 said
Why is there desire to move spoilers to the very long thread that doesn't warn people in its subject header as vs a thread that already spells out it does? There was no risk with my strategy---I didn't open any till I saw it, that's why posted yesterday. But some more careless ones might.
Aside: Presently watching tk for tu juan's link. She makes a few interesting points, will remark when finished.
I am not over here enough to presume to offer any vote. I would offer something to consider though toward his point. I just saw it yesterday; a friend just today. There will be more like that.Quote:
I vote no new thread. That other thread has served us well and will continue to do so.
Why is there desire to move spoilers to the very long thread that doesn't warn people in its subject header as vs a thread that already spells out it does? There was no risk with my strategy---I didn't open any till I saw it, that's why posted yesterday. But some more careless ones might.
Aside: Presently watching tk for tu juan's link. She makes a few interesting points, will remark when finished.
Oh I don't care if we continue this thread or allow spoilers back on the main Star Wars thread. Last year we did January 1 as the day spoilers were allowed on the main thread and it seemed to work well. I was just saying I vote no on a "2017" thread. That other thread has been going for a long time and in many ways it is its own sub-community. Some great discussions, petty arguments, and massive over reactionstitan said:
Ag Since 83 saidI am not over here enough to presume to offer any vote. I would offer something to consider though toward his point. I just saw it yesterday; a friend just today. There will be more like that.Quote:
I vote no new thread. That other thread has served us well and will continue to do so.
Why is there desire to move spoilers to the very long thread that doesn't warn people in its subject header as vs a thread that already spells out it does? There was no risk with my strategy---I didn't open any till I saw it, that's why posted yesterday. But some more careless ones might.
Aside: Presently watching tk for tu juan's link. She makes a few interesting points, will remark when finished.
Finished watching it, wow,
The word is pedantic. It really came across as pedantic review. Even though containing points of real truth and criticism.
Some of the points were valid, but oh-so nitpicky. Its easier to list the few things agree with:.
"A movie being dark doesn't make it good."
= DO Agree with her on that. Its why didn't really like Batman vs Superman, though a similar theme of hero vs hero in Civil War in Marvel worked great, so it wasn't that element. (I did like Man of Steel 1, and the aggressive WWoman in II, so its not the grittier part that put off either.)
I agree with her also about its silly to have an attitude (or appear to) of "don't bother to to develop characters if they are going to get killed." That would be crazy. I didn't see it as deliberate failure, just getting too many things at once to do better developed, and what was left on cutting room floors.
I agree with her about Krennic's arc--- he did show wry humor, and yes, just traces of what looked like sympathy at times. Later they show it as an absolute naked ambition (by the time of the debated Vader "choke on" scene) but at least in the first part, there seemed a bit of cutting slack; call it a suffering patience perhaps. But she refers to EU items are not aware of, but that only proves the point more that his character lost some of the dimension seen earlier in the movie.
She was absolutely brutal on the manner of their deaths and proposing other ways to complete their arcs. Don't really object to that, but it sure got wearing how rough on it. They were sympathetic enough, mostly.
Probably what will most tick off people was how completely anti-Vader scenes she was; the delight most felt at seeing him in action again. I know, he's the villain -- but she didn't seem to get -- and her age would give some of the reason -- the sheer mythos surrounding him for some from the early days. Its not really agreeing with what he is doing. She was absolutely savage about Vader's being in the movie at all.
A real counter gripe in turn where she was being sarcastic:
I didn't mind how they were having to get what she is calling the flash drive. The word reveals the problem. The whole point of Star Wars is it is NOT our future. Cultures develop things in different ways, and solve problems in different ways, even when similar problems. There is no guarantee at all that the way we developed stuff a culture of entirely different background would go about it the same way. Rome simply didn't seem to grasp actual commerce and banking in a way that would become more apparent; Byzantium actually did get the hang of it, and the gold Byzant became a stable currency. Another case---dynastic China's treatment of large ocean going capability. Despite real progress, it got sidelined. Another example of this is the Battlestar Galactica classic universe. It was confirmed to be separate from our 20th Century reality, its history to pre-date it. What they would come up with would be different.
Its why cut slack to how they fight space battles too. Critique is usually done within the observed capabilities of the vessels themselves. I think an Imperial academy review would say those two SDs at Scarif were handled poorly. (But their may have been issues as noted.)
So one area really cut the Star Was universe alot of slack is on how their imaginations show similar technical problems were solved. Its not Trek- -- our past is nowhere in theirs. It is a "long, long time ago..." after all.
You Nailed it.Quote:
No wonder she didn't like it. She is one of the most depressing people I have ever listened to. I could only watch about 6 minutes before I started looking for alcohol to drown my sorrows. She is the real life female version of Marvin from Hitchhikers Guide.
The word is pedantic. It really came across as pedantic review. Even though containing points of real truth and criticism.
Some of the points were valid, but oh-so nitpicky. Its easier to list the few things agree with:.
"A movie being dark doesn't make it good."
= DO Agree with her on that. Its why didn't really like Batman vs Superman, though a similar theme of hero vs hero in Civil War in Marvel worked great, so it wasn't that element. (I did like Man of Steel 1, and the aggressive WWoman in II, so its not the grittier part that put off either.)
I agree with her also about its silly to have an attitude (or appear to) of "don't bother to to develop characters if they are going to get killed." That would be crazy. I didn't see it as deliberate failure, just getting too many things at once to do better developed, and what was left on cutting room floors.
I agree with her about Krennic's arc--- he did show wry humor, and yes, just traces of what looked like sympathy at times. Later they show it as an absolute naked ambition (by the time of the debated Vader "choke on" scene) but at least in the first part, there seemed a bit of cutting slack; call it a suffering patience perhaps. But she refers to EU items are not aware of, but that only proves the point more that his character lost some of the dimension seen earlier in the movie.
She was absolutely brutal on the manner of their deaths and proposing other ways to complete their arcs. Don't really object to that, but it sure got wearing how rough on it. They were sympathetic enough, mostly.
Probably what will most tick off people was how completely anti-Vader scenes she was; the delight most felt at seeing him in action again. I know, he's the villain -- but she didn't seem to get -- and her age would give some of the reason -- the sheer mythos surrounding him for some from the early days. Its not really agreeing with what he is doing. She was absolutely savage about Vader's being in the movie at all.
A real counter gripe in turn where she was being sarcastic:
I didn't mind how they were having to get what she is calling the flash drive. The word reveals the problem. The whole point of Star Wars is it is NOT our future. Cultures develop things in different ways, and solve problems in different ways, even when similar problems. There is no guarantee at all that the way we developed stuff a culture of entirely different background would go about it the same way. Rome simply didn't seem to grasp actual commerce and banking in a way that would become more apparent; Byzantium actually did get the hang of it, and the gold Byzant became a stable currency. Another case---dynastic China's treatment of large ocean going capability. Despite real progress, it got sidelined. Another example of this is the Battlestar Galactica classic universe. It was confirmed to be separate from our 20th Century reality, its history to pre-date it. What they would come up with would be different.
Its why cut slack to how they fight space battles too. Critique is usually done within the observed capabilities of the vessels themselves. I think an Imperial academy review would say those two SDs at Scarif were handled poorly. (But their may have been issues as noted.)
So one area really cut the Star Was universe alot of slack is on how their imaginations show similar technical problems were solved. Its not Trek- -- our past is nowhere in theirs. It is a "long, long time ago..." after all.
One other thing -- her critique of how Jyn and Cassian die --- engulfed by the blast wave, and a placid manner to their faces. She was brutal about that. She might be even more so if she realized it strongly resembles a lift from a recent movie in 2014. It directly reminded me of it. So as not to give a spoiler to any who might have yet to watch the DVD or want to (it wasn't a major success) will simply say if you want to know, it about these coordinates on Google Earth.
Just avoid checking out the coordinates, and you won't learn the move. ;-)
You were cautioned:
40'45'0N 142'9'10E
titan said:
Finished watching it, wow,You Nailed it.Quote:
No wonder she didn't like it. She is one of the most depressing people I have ever listened to. I could only watch about 6 minutes before I started looking for alcohol to drown my sorrows. She is the real life female version of Marvin from Hitchhikers Guide.
The word is pedantic. It really came across as pedantic review. Even though containing points of real truth and criticism.
Some of the points were valid, but oh-so nitpicky. Its easier to list the few things agree with:.
"A movie being dark doesn't make it good."
= DO Agree with her on that. Its why didn't really like Batman vs Superman, though a similar theme of hero vs hero in Civil War in Marvel worked great, so it wasn't that element. (I did like Man of Steel 1, and the aggressive WWoman in II, so its not the grittier part that put off either.)
I agree with her also about its silly to have an attitude (or appear to) of "don't bother to to develop characters if they are going to get killed." That would be crazy. I didn't see it as deliberate failure, just getting too many things at once to do better developed, and what was left on cutting room floors.
I agree with her about Krennic's arc--- he did show wry humor, and yes, just traces of what looked like sympathy at times. Later they show it as an absolute naked ambition (by the time of the debated Vader "choke on" scene) but at least in the first part, there seemed a bit of cutting slack; call it a suffering patience perhaps. But she refers to EU items are not aware of, but that only proves the point more that his character lost some of the dimension seen earlier in the movie.
She was absolutely brutal on the manner of their deaths and proposing other ways to complete their arcs. Don't really object to that, but it sure got wearing how rough on it. They were sympathetic enough, mostly.
Probably what will most tick off people was how completely anti-Vader scenes she was; the delight most felt at seeing him in action again. I know, he's the villain -- but she didn't seem to get -- and her age would give some of the reason -- the sheer mythos surrounding him for some from the early days. Its not really agreeing with what he is doing. She was absolutely savage about Vader's being in the movie at all.
A real counter gripe in turn where she was being sarcastic:
I didn't mind how they were having to get what she is calling the flash drive. The word reveals the problem. The whole point of Star Wars is it is NOT our future. Cultures develop things in different ways, and solve problems in different ways, even when similar problems. There is no guarantee at all that the way we developed stuff a culture of entirely different background would go about it the same way. Rome simply didn't seem to grasp actual commerce and banking in a way that would become more apparent; Byzantium actually did get the hang of it, and the gold Byzant became a stable currency. Another case---dynastic China's treatment of large ocean going capability. Despite real progress, it got sidelined. Another example of this is the Battlestar Galactica classic universe. It was confirmed to be separate from our 20th Century reality, its history to pre-date it. What they would come up with would be different.
Its why cut slack to how they fight space battles too. Critique is usually done within the observed capabilities of the vessels themselves. I think an Imperial academy review would say those two SDs at Scarif were handled poorly. (But their may have been issues as noted.)
So one area really cut the Star Was universe alot of slack is on how their imaginations show similar technical problems were solved. Its not Trek- -- our past is nowhere in theirs. It is a "long, long time ago..." after all.
Agreed pedantic is a good word for it....nitpicking....and I would say just intentionally blase.....she is annoying.
But alas she also missed the point completely....it's like the observation that Raiders of the Lost Ark would have turned out exactly the same way had Indiana Jones done nothing (he was irrelevant)....yeah but then you would not have gotten to watch Indiana Jones!!!!!!
This is STAR WARS.......look the original Star Wars was no literary masterpiece and had huge plot holes, some weak characters, some poor acting and some cheesy graphics....but it was awesome!!!!
Yup, you can nitpick any movie to death if you want to. But if it worked to tell the story and engage the audience, no one cares about the little things.
If you've decided you don't like the film and want to justify yourself, nitpicking is the way to go.
If you've decided you don't like the film and want to justify yourself, nitpicking is the way to go.
My argument against the complaints about the character development is that we don't need it for this movie. This isn't a Star Wars movie with Jedi battles (even with Vader's 4 minutes of screen time), the light side vs the dark side, or anything else that makes Star Wars enjoyable. This is filling in the blank on how they stole the plans. You don't need to know all of their back stories and develop them. You just need to know enough to know how they got to the point of stealing the plans in the first place. This movie and these characters aren't the focus of the overarching story.
Average Joe said:
My argument against the complaints about the character development is that we don't need it for this movie. This isn't a Star Wars movie with Jedi battles (even with Vader's 4 minutes of screen time), the light side vs the dark side, or anything else that makes Star Wars enjoyable. This is filling in the blank on how they stole the plans. You don't need to know all of their back stories and develop them. You just need to know enough to know how they got to the point of stealing the plans in the first place. This movie and these characters aren't the focus of the overarching story.
She addressed that and shot it down.
This movie was made to answer the question "can a star wars movie ingore the under 10 year old market and still print money?"
Which it did.
Which it did.
wesag said:Average Joe said:
My argument against the complaints about the character development is that we don't need it for this movie. This isn't a Star Wars movie with Jedi battles (even with Vader's 4 minutes of screen time), the light side vs the dark side, or anything else that makes Star Wars enjoyable. This is filling in the blank on how they stole the plans. You don't need to know all of their back stories and develop them. You just need to know enough to know how they got to the point of stealing the plans in the first place. This movie and these characters aren't the focus of the overarching story.
She addressed that and shot it down.
She's a child seeking justification and fame for silly little video.
And it kills her that there are people like me that paid money to see it and enjoyed it.
I pasted that into Google Earth but it didn't work. What format do I use?
Hmm. Odd.
Try this as direct paste in ordinary Google search slot. Works even more dead-on in Bing.
40_45_0_N_14_29_10_E
Average Joe
Try this as direct paste in ordinary Google search slot. Works even more dead-on in Bing.
40_45_0_N_14_29_10_E
Average Joe
It sure does seem to. It was getting hard to sit through the video, but the points were interesting enough to hear out. I liked Zombie Jon Snow's comparison to Raiders of Lost Ark. I guess it depends on expectations--- I don't even expect the development I do from a Star Trek movie. All the flaws she mentioned are there, but some really are barbed, others more understandable.Quote:
And it kills her that there are people like me that paid money to see it and enjoyed it.
Or is that Pompeii
titan said:
One other thing -- her critique of how Jyn and Cassian die --- engulfed by the blast wave, and a placid manner to their faces. She was brutal about that. She might be even more so if she realized it strongly resembles a lift from a recent movie in 2014. It directly reminded me of it. So as not to give a spoiler to any who might have yet to watch the DVD or want to (it wasn't a major success) will simply say if you want to know, it about these coordinates on Google Earth.
Just avoid checking out the coordinates, and you won't learn the move. ;-)
You were cautioned:
40'45'0N 142'9'10E
Are those coordinates right? I can't get them to pull anything up
The movie was 2:15 long. If they spent more time developing characters then it would have been 4 hours long. This isn't a TV series. There is simply no way for any movie to develop characters Breaking Bad style.
Well forget it, aTmAg just removed my attempt to avoid spoilers. Yes, that' the subject.
Ooops.. I didn't realize I spoiled anything. I figured the fate of Pompeii was well known by now.
Yes. No big deal. But the Rogue One ending mirrored that movie's very closely - enough to wonder if someone in production saw it. It doesn't really matter, its more than two years ago now. Its actually a decent sword-and-sandals flick, and they do the types of eruptions Vesuvius engaged in accurately, including that final surge cloud.
Featured Stories
See All
19:50
3m ago
176
Donors can now earn priority points by giving to Texas Aggies United
by Texas Aggies United
A&M's approach remains the same with NMSU coming to Aggieland
by Olin Buchanan
13:00
3h ago
2.0k
61:40
1h ago
744
Keys to the Game: No. 23 Texas A&M vs. No. 21 Ohio State
by Luke Evangelist
ConfidentAg
Michigan to Offer 5 Star LSU QB Commit 8 Figure Deal
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
44
ElkoSZN
Instead of scheduling tough non-conference games like ND...
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
26