Rogue One

[Chuck to Chuck]

It's very good. But, it has some small issues.

First two acts are too talky. Takes too long to assemble the team. They don't really generate the kind of byplay between the team to make the team feel like a team. The plot to capture the plans feels half assed. There's one too many Elder Statesmen types in this.

But that's a bit nitpicky. The third act is terrific.  They make some very smart and unusual choices with the characters. And Darth Vader is fucking bad ass.

It's a slightly lesser Dirty Dozen in space. Well worth seeing.

[Tonker]

It's very good. But, it has some small issues.

First two acts are too talky. Takes too long to assemble the team. They don't really generate the kind of byplay between the team to make the team feel like a team. The plot to capture the plans feels half assed. There's one too many Elder Statesmen types in this.

But that's a bit nitpicky. The third act is terrific.  They make some very smart and unusual choices with the characters. And Darth Vader is fucking bad ass.

It's a slightly lesser Dirty Dozen in space. Well worth seeing.

The Dirty Dozen was a Pixar movie?

[SKO]

Chuck is dead-on right, which is terrifying. You can see the seams a bit where the re-shoots changed the original plan, because Saw Guererra was poorly explained  (if you've watched Clone Wars though that helps) and there was definitely more back story for Galen and Krennic that felt like it had been left on the cutting room floor.

But everything comes together in an absolutely flawless third act that really makes you feel like we're right back where we started.

The Vader scene was utterly terrifying.

[SKO]

Also SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER the way they did Tarkin and Leia was amazing SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER

[Chuck to Chuck]

Chuck is dead-on right, which is terrifying. You can see the seams a bit where the re-shoots changed the original plan, because Saw Guererra was poorly explained  (if you've watched Clone Wars though that helps) and there was definitely more back story for Galen and Krennic that felt like it had been left on the cutting room floor.

But everything comes together in an absolutely flawless third act that really makes you feel like we're right back where we started.

The Vader scene was utterly terrifying.

The Saw Guererra stuff was the worst part. It was clearly only there because of the TV show. Since I haven't watched the TV show I was very confused why we needed him AND the dad. Guererra is to this movie as Spider-man was to Civil War.

I had read about the Vader scene. Without spoiling anything, I at first thought, "Man, the critics oversold it."  Then, it was "Ah ha!"

[Canadouche]

I, too, really enjoyed it, and am looking forward to watching it again.

The Vader scene at the end was outstanding. It's obvious that the abilities of the Jedi have changed from when Lucas made the first Star Wars movie, as that scene of ass-kickery should have occurred at the beginning of Star Wars as well.

[Tinker to Evers to Chance]

The Vader scene was everything I wanted from the prequels.

[Tonker]

I went to see two films this Christmas: the new J.K. Rowling, and this one.  I slept for a good three-quarters of an hour in the middle of both.

[Chuck to Chuck]

I went to see two films this Christmas: the new J.K. Rowling, and this one.  I slept for a good three-quarters of an hour in the middle of both.

Plinkett dropped an 7-8 minute piece on R1. Pretty much nailed it.

[SKO]

I went to see two films this Christmas: the new J.K. Rowling, and this one.  I slept for a good three-quarters of an hour in the middle of both.

Plinkett dropped an 7-8 minute piece on R1. Pretty much nailed it.

I agree with him and most reviewers who say the character development in the movie was fairly poor overall and that the first two acts were choppy story-wise. That said, I think his whole "the movie doesn't stand on its own without the star wars nostalgia" criticism is a little ridiculous.

"If you didn't know what Star Wars was you wouldn't know how Vader was choking that guy, why the Empire is bad, why the whole point of this movie is to steal the plans but not blow up the Death Star".

Well, no shit. No one should see this movie if they haven't seen fucking Star Wars. I don't think a valid criticism of franchise movies is "well, they rely too much on the franchise" and yet Plinkett goes to that well a lot. He acts like everyone should just accept that the fact that Disney now makes Star Wars and that it's going to be an endless franchise is inherently bad. If the franchise installments are actually good, and make sense, then make as many as you want. I'm not asking for Citizen Kane, I want competently made films set in the Star Wars universe. TFA and Rogue One are exactly that, the Prequels were not. "GRR FRANCHISING" is not sufficient criticism for me.

[CT III]

I went to see two films this Christmas: the new J.K. Rowling, and this one.  I slept for a good three-quarters of an hour in the middle of both.

Plinkett dropped an 7-8 minute piece on R1. Pretty much nailed it.

I agree with him and most reviewers who say the character development in the movie was fairly poor overall and that the first two acts were choppy story-wise. That said, I think his whole "the movie doesn't stand on its own without the star wars nostalgia" criticism is a little ridiculous.

"If you didn't know what Star Wars was you wouldn't know how Vader was choking that guy, why the Empire is bad, why the whole point of this movie is to steal the plans but not blow up the Death Star".

Well, no shit. No one should see this movie if they haven't seen fucking Star Wars. I don't think a valid criticism of franchise movies is "well, they rely too much on the franchise" and yet Plinkett goes to that well a lot. He acts like everyone should just accept that the fact that Disney now makes Star Wars and that it's going to be an endless franchise is inherently bad. If the franchise installments are actually good, and make sense, then make as many as you want. I'm not asking for Citizen Kane, I want competently made films set in the Star Wars universe. TFA and Rogue One are exactly that, the Prequels were not. "GRR FRANCHISING" is not sufficient criticism for me.

I find that to be an odd criticism since Empire, which is usually hailed as the best in the series relies almost entirely on character development from its predecessor.

[Chuck to Chuck]

I went to see two films this Christmas: the new J.K. Rowling, and this one.  I slept for a good three-quarters of an hour in the middle of both.

Plinkett dropped an 7-8 minute piece on R1. Pretty much nailed it.

I agree with him and most reviewers who say the character development in the movie was fairly poor overall and that the first two acts were choppy story-wise. That said, I think his whole "the movie doesn't stand on its own without the star wars nostalgia" criticism is a little ridiculous.

"If you didn't know what Star Wars was you wouldn't know how Vader was choking that guy, why the Empire is bad, why the whole point of this movie is to steal the plans but not blow up the Death Star".

Well, no shit. No one should see this movie if they haven't seen fucking Star Wars. I don't think a valid criticism of franchise movies is "well, they rely too much on the franchise" and yet Plinkett goes to that well a lot. He acts like everyone should just accept that the fact that Disney now makes Star Wars and that it's going to be an endless franchise is inherently bad. If the franchise installments are actually good, and make sense, then make as many as you want. I'm not asking for Citizen Kane, I want competently made films set in the Star Wars universe. TFA and Rogue One are exactly that, the Prequels were not. "GRR FRANCHISING" is not sufficient criticism for me.

I find that to be an odd criticism since Empire, which is usually hailed as the best in the series relies almost entirely on character development from its predecessor.

Yeah, I'm not completely with him on the "movie makes no sense without knowing Ep 4." But the character stuff was dead on.

This was a tough story to tell. You walk into the theater knowing that the heist is successful. That means that the plot is basically secondary to the characters. And the characters were poorly done.

That said, the third act was great and that a FRANCHISE would introduce new characters and kill all of them off was a bold choice.

Then again, I guess once Disney saw how shitty they were, killing them off was maybe not so bold.

[Bort]

I went to see two films this Christmas: the new J.K. Rowling, and this one.  I slept for a good three-quarters of an hour in the middle of both.

Plinkett dropped an 7-8 minute piece on R1. Pretty much nailed it.

I agree with him and most reviewers who say the character development in the movie was fairly poor overall and that the first two acts were choppy story-wise. That said, I think his whole "the movie doesn't stand on its own without the star wars nostalgia" criticism is a little ridiculous.

"If you didn't know what Star Wars was you wouldn't know how Vader was choking that guy, why the Empire is bad, why the whole point of this movie is to steal the plans but not blow up the Death Star".

Well, no shit. No one should see this movie if they haven't seen fucking Star Wars. I don't think a valid criticism of franchise movies is "well, they rely too much on the franchise" and yet Plinkett goes to that well a lot. He acts like everyone should just accept that the fact that Disney now makes Star Wars and that it's going to be an endless franchise is inherently bad. If the franchise installments are actually good, and make sense, then make as many as you want. I'm not asking for Citizen Kane, I want competently made films set in the Star Wars universe. TFA and Rogue One are exactly that, the Prequels were not. "GRR FRANCHISING" is not sufficient criticism for me.

I find that to be an odd criticism since Empire, which is usually hailed as the best in the series relies almost entirely on character development from its predecessor.

It's an asinine criticism, because if your movie in no way relies on tying in to the shared Star Wars universe, it should probably be a stand-alone, non-franchise movie in the first place.

I find all this bitching about "franchise movies," "comic book movies," or whatever to be fairly pointless. If a movie is good, it's good. If it's bad, it's bad. There are plenty of shitty movies not based on comics or ongoing franchises, and there are plenty of entertaining movies that are.

[Bort]

DPD - I do think the character work on Rogue One was pretty bad, for the record. But it was still an overall enjoyable movie.

[SKO]

DPD - I do think the character work on Rogue One was pretty bad, for the record. But it was still an overall enjoyable movie.

The second time through I actually thought they did a better job on Jyn than I thought the first time watching it. Her conversion from cynic to leader felt forced and way too sudden, but watching it again and realizing both her adopted father figure (Saw) and her real father died right after begging her to do the right thing/save the rebellion/destroy the Death Star, her development didn't feel as rushed.

Cassian was a cypher, and just having him vaguely allude to his tragic past as justification for his behavior is still weak, we really needed to know his story.

I'd have liked more on why the pilot decided to defect, why Galen meant so much to him, and there's a good story to be told about Chirrut and Baze being Jedi-worshipping monks who have to find their place in a world after basically watching God die. That movie did not tell it.

So yeah, I get the character criticism. About halfway through my first watch of the movie I wasn't sure I was even enjoying it, but the ending really packs such a punch I don't care.

Also the benefit of being an uber-Star Wars nerd who reads all of the books and comics and watches the shows is that I know I'm going to get plenty of tie-in media that eventually fills in all of the holes to my satisfaction anyway.