Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker (J.J. Abrams, December 20, 2019) Movie • Page 72

I don't recall any of that being the intention expressed before that movie came out, and I was in high-school and obsessed with Star Wars.

 

Just watching Episode I and seeing how aimed it was towards kids is enough to understand this.

 

like weve discussed; how many people do we think write these movies credited or uncredited? I dont think JJ is going to pull all of the weight. I like him fine as a director, his stuff is pretty.

 

I think most have picked up on this by now but theyre pretty great as a ‘so bad its good what was the creator thinking’ sort of thing. sort of like Room with production value and in SW universe.

 

Having the intention to make something for kids, or having the intention to make a movie for a general audience and instead adding far too many stupid elements to it that it feels extremely juvenile, and therefore saying "it's a kids movie" to deflect that criticism, I think are different things. It was aimed to be a merchandising juggernaut for kids, like the first trilogy was, but it very much was positioned as a general audience, PG rated, movie. The first teaser trailer was shown over Meet Joe Black. All Star Wars movies are built to be hits with kids, but not just for kids, which I think is the differing factor between a movie "made for kids specifically" and a movie that kids also like. Star Wars has always been the latter, obviously, while a movie like Big Hero 6 are the former.

 

I’m a little confused. Trade blockades are intended for children, but Ewoks aren’t? Phantom Menace stars a child, so one of the narratives in the overall story belongs to a kid, so I can see the argument that it gives other children a point of view in the story. But the overall arc? I don’t see it. I wouldn’t argue that bad execution goes hand in hand with movies made for children.

 

It's the difference between Minions and Toy Story. One is made for kids, the other is for all ages.

 

First they're not kid movies, then they're the least of all the kids movies out of the whole saga (which is ridiculous), and now Toy Story isn't for kids? Okay, I'm not going to convince you and you're not going to convince me of anything. But it's whatever, these movies aren't even worth this dumb conversation in the first place.

 

this is the biggest point we all must realize.

back to Episode 9.....

 

100% true, sorry for derailing the thread! Haha

 

The prequels aren't kids movies. I said an argument could be made that Episode I is the least-for-kids of the whole prequel trilogy, don't misrepresent what I said. Toy Story is not a kids movie, it's for all ages.

Carry on.

 

k

 

Man the prequels are really the Monopoly board game of movies. Always leads to an argument lol

 

‘Ive been wondering... what are midichlorians?’

 

QUI-GON : In your cells. We are symbionts with the midi-chlorians.
ANAKIN : Symbionts?

lol

 

Not to make this a thing again but the concept of midichlorians is 100% not something put in the movie for kids lol

 

I'll start with the positive. JJ has the ability to craft large, sweeping, narratives that tap into specific things people like about adventures. He combines mystery with intrigue while walking right up to (and sometimes past) the "too clever by half" moments. He's a really great idea man, as seen by his work from film to TV to books -- his creativity in those realms shines through in building out the story itself to be something interesting. Now, he has problems here as well -- I think in quite a few of his projects he's failed with the story turn because he focuses too much on trying to set up the mystery and just letting that mystery box be too much of the story, with the answer not really mattering. So, while I think he's a good person to have in the room when creating a story, I think he ends up making movies that are ... for the lack of a better term ... overly plotty. I'd want him to be the one in the brainstorming sessions with a great writer. Which, is why I refer to him more as a great storyteller, or idea man, and not a great screenwriter/writer.

However, in the details, I find his actual directing to be just ok. He relies on camera movements, and specifically dutching the camera, way too much for my liking. I can always tell I'm in a JJ movie (but not in the specifically stylized for that movie way someone like Edgar Wright will shoot a scene), and I much prefer a director who can take a few steps back and let the film breathe. He does texture well, right up until you want him to pull back and let the story actually play out, and then that texture feels extremely overwrought. I've also thought every single one of his films has at least one relatively long scene that should have seen the cutting room floor, but didn't. (And I kinda like the lens flare.)

As for with actors, I can't think of any JJ movie where I think he got a better performance out of an actor than I've seen in another movie. I think the performances in TLJ, to stay in this world, are better performances, and I think how Rian let the film sit a little more allows those performances to be seen.

 

Lens flare always and forever til the day I die

 

And to bring this back to a different thread, it's one of many reasons I really hated Thor.

Try not to get sick watching this.

 

And Kenneth Branagh should know better

 

Thank goodness we got rid of the juvenile stuff so we could watch Luke Skywalker drink alien cow milk.

 

I feel like Dutch angles are the visual equivalent of the jump scare: They can be done well, but more often than not they are used as a fallback when the filmmaker doesn’t have any other interesting and more creative ideas. A lot of the times I groan inside my head when something I am watching leans hard into the whole Dutch angle thing, and whatever it is then has to then work really hard to win me over to even keep watching.

 

I agree, thank goodness.

 

I'm starting to feel a similar way about tracking shots, to be honest. It seems like they show up more and more in films and they don't really seem to have a purpose other than, "this is a technically impressive type of shot and it looks cool".

 

I haven't seen it in forever, but I seem to remember there being a ton of Dutch angles in Drag Me To Hell. I need to watch that again, that movie was kick ass. Especially the very last scene.