"Rogue One" (no spoilers)

[Russell Watson]

You probably already know if it's for you or not. You either love or
hate the genre and/or the franchise, or only the originals but think the
new ones are shit. I have stated here that starting with the 2nd trilogy
I'm good for one viewing per (having seen the original trilogy at least
twice each, in the theater when new and again on VHS a few years later).
This one may prove the exception, as I can easily see myself buying it
when it comes out on Blu-Ray (I don't own any of the others). It is
basically everything I would ever want one of these movies to be. Given
that prior to this, "The Empire Strikes Back" was my favorite of the
series, that kind of tells you what this one is like. Hint: despite
being the "darkest" of the original trilogy, TESB is kind of
lighthearted fun compared to this one. Visually it's gorgeous, with top
notch fx of mechs and creatures. The story and characters aren't that
deep: it's a Star Wars movie after all, but they suffice. It's a worthy
prequel to the original.

[BTR1701]

I agree with all of your review but there were a few negatives for me:

No John Williams score. Understandable considering he's currently scoring
and recording the score to Episode VIII. There's suddenly a lot of Star
Wars out there and one 80+-year-old man can only do so much, but his
absence was noticeable and his contributions were missed.

I really didn't like that it didn't start like a SW movie is supposed to.
No word crawl and main theme. Seems like a minor thing, but it really set
the film off on an odd note to me.

Also they didn't get Vader's suit right. His helmet is supposed to fit into
his armor, but here they had the neckpiece flapping around on top of the
chest shield, and the cape is supposed to hang off his shoulders connected
across the chest shield with a chain, not pulled up under the neck of his
helmet.

On the other hand, the technology they used to make Tarkin and Leia a part
of the story was impressive.

[TT]

17.12.2016, 0:36, BTR1701 kirjoitti:
> On the other hand, the technology they used to make Tarkin and Leia a part
> of the story was impressive.

I think the headline reads NO FUCKING SPOILERS...

[BTR1701]

(1) No, it actually doesn't say that.

(2) People whose definition of spoiler is so ridiculously expansive, they
just have to take their chances. Even viewers with only a passing
familiarity with the Star Wars oeuvre know that this is a story that
necessarily involves those two characters. It's like saying Rey and Finn
and Kylo Ren are in Episode VIII is a spoiler. Only to the terminally
retarded.

(3) For someone who's so butthurt over this supposed spoiler, you really
did a great job reposting it for all to see. Well done, genius.

[tomcervo]

The darkness was the thing. It was a decent gritty war story, so much so that the banal callouts to the Force jarred.
And of course, the cynical feeling that the dead will return for a sequel.

[TT]

17.12.2016, 1:22, BTR1701 kirjoitti:
> Even viewers with only a passing
> familiarity with the Star Wars oeuvre know that this is a story that
> necessarily involves those two characters

No, for one Carrie Fisher is around 120 years old and Peter Cushing
approx 220 but looks older.

Now if you told us that they managed to steal the plans while many
Bothans died that wouldn't come as a surprise...

[TT]

Should one watch it in 2d or 3d?

In general I like 2d much more, but don't regret seeing EP7 on both formats.

--
"He did touch my vagina through my underwear. Absolutely"

[Russell Watson]

I saw it in 2D Dolby and it was fine to me.

[BTR1701]

TT <as...@dprk.kp> wrote:

> 17.12.2016, 1:22, BTR1701 kirjoitti:

>> Even viewers with only a passing
>> familiarity with the Star Wars oeuvre know that this is a story that
>> necessarily involves those two characters
>
> No, for one Carrie Fisher is around 120 years old and Peter Cushing
> approx 220 but looks older.

I didn't say anything about Fisher or Cushing. *You* just spoiled that,
genius.

> Now if you told us that they managed to steal the plans while many
> Bothans died that wouldn't come as a surprise...

The Bothans died stealing the Intel on the second Death Star, so that
*would* be surprising, genius.

[TT]

So first you spoil it and then act like an asshole for good measure.

[BTR1701]

For all definitions of "asshole" equal to "calling you on your bullshit,
sure.

[Lewis]

In message <92339260.503620281.595424....@news.giganews.com>

BTR1701 <addre...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> Russell Watson <russell...@comcast.net> wrote:

>> You probably already know if it's for you or not. You either love or
>> hate the genre and/or the franchise, or only the originals but think the
>> new ones are shit. I have stated here that starting with the 2nd trilogy
>> I'm good for one viewing per (having seen the original trilogy at least
>> twice each, in the theater when new and again on VHS a few years later).
>> This one may prove the exception, as I can easily see myself buying it
>> when it comes out on Blu-Ray (I don't own any of the others). It is
>> basically everything I would ever want one of these movies to be. Given
>> that prior to this, "The Empire Strikes Back" was my favorite of the
>> series, that kind of tells you what this one is like. Hint: despite
>> being the "darkest" of the original trilogy, TESB is kind of
>> lighthearted fun compared to this one. Visually it's gorgeous, with top
>> notch fx of mechs and creatures. The story and characters aren't that
>> deep: it's a Star Wars movie after all, but they suffice. It's a worthy
>> prequel to the original.

> I agree with all of your review but there were a few negatives for me:

> No John Williams score. Understandable considering he's currently scoring
> and recording the score to Episode VIII. There's suddenly a lot of Star
> Wars out there and one 80+-year-old man can only do so much, but his
> absence was noticeable and his contributions were missed.

iThere's plenty of John Williams music and a lot of variations and
motifs based on his score.

> I really didn't like that it didn't start like a SW movie is supposed to.
> No word crawl and main theme. Seems like a minor thing, but it really set
> the film off on an odd note to me.

It is not a Star Wars Movie in the 9 part story, it is a separate story.
A one off.

> Also they didn't get Vader's suit right. His helmet is supposed to fit into
> his armor, but here they had the neckpiece flapping around on top of the
> chest shield, and the cape is supposed to hang off his shoulders connected
> across the chest shield with a chain, not pulled up under the neck of his
> helmet.

You need to see the original movie again. Preferably the de-specialized
version.

[ horribles spoilers removed ]

--
Well, I've wrestled with reality for 35 years, Doctor, and I'm happy to
state I finally won out over it.

[Lewis]

In message <1462749686.503622971.468620...@news.giganews.com>

BTR1701 <addre...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> TT <as...@dprk.kp> wrote:

>> 17.12.2016, 0:36, BTR1701 kirjoitti:

[ DELETED ]

>>
>> I think the headline reads NO FUCKING SPOILERS...

> (1) No, it actually doesn't say that.

Yes it does. Learn to read.

> (2) People whose definition of spoiler is so ridiculously expansive, they
> just have to take their chances.

What you posted was not just a spoiler, it was an unforgivable spoiler,
especially in a thread labeled (no spoilers).

> It's like saying Rey and Finn and Kylo Ren are in Episode VIII is a
> spoiler.

No. It is nothing at all like that.

> (3) For someone who's so butthurt over this supposed spoiler, you really
> did a great job reposting it for all to see. Well done, genius.

Anyone seeing his post would already have seen you being a fucking
asshole.


--
Mickey and Mallory know the difference between right and wrong; the just
don't give a damn.

[Lewis]

In message <iW25A.27763$mN1....@uutiset.elisa.fi>

He's always been an asshole, this is just the latest example of his
assholery and complete lack of consideration for anyone else.

--
A bartender is just a pharmacist with a limited inventory.

[Lewis]

In message <VH15A.27761$mN1....@uutiset.elisa.fi>

TT <as...@dprk.kp> wrote:
> Should one watch it in 2d or 3d?

The 3D is good and enjoyable, but I don't think it was necessary like,
say, in Doctor Strange.


--
and I swear it happened just like this: / a sigh, a cry, a hungry kiss,
the Gates of Love they budged an inch / I can't say much has happened
since / but CLOSING TIME

[alvey]

On Fri, 16 Dec 2016 17:22:35 -0600, BTR1701 wrote:

> TT <as...@dprk.kp> wrote:
>
>> 17.12.2016, 0:36, BTR1701 kirjoitti:
>
>>> On the other hand, the technology they used to make Tarkin and Leia a part
>>> of the story was impressive.
>>
>> I think the headline reads NO FUCKING SPOILERS...
>
> (1) No, it actually doesn't say that.
>
> (2) People whose definition of spoiler is so ridiculously expansive, they
> just have to take their chances. Even viewers with only a passing
> familiarity with the Star Wars oeuvre know that this is a story that
> necessarily involves those two characters. It's like saying Rey and Finn
> and Kylo Ren are in Episode VIII is a spoiler. Only to the terminally
> retarded.

About a hundred years ago my paternal grandfather, as a young married
country boy, decided to move to the city. He bought a house in a nearby
township and moved it to a vacant block he'd bought in the city, a distance
of 160km. The countryside was basically virginal in those days and the only
way to transport it was by a ten beast bullock-train that he drove himself.
Many, many years later I, as a nipper, asked him what he remembered most
about the journey. "The smell of bullshit." he answered. I can't think what
prompted that memory to surface...



alvey

[BTR1701]

No, there's not "plenty" of it by any normal definition of that word.

The Imperial March is quoted twice. The Force theme three times and the
Rebel fanfare once. That's approximately 25 seconds of Williams's music out
of the entire 2-hour film.

>> I really didn't like that it didn't start like a SW movie is supposed to.
>> No word crawl and main theme. Seems like a minor thing, but it really set
>> the film off on an odd note to me.
>
> It is not a Star Wars Movie in the 9 part story, it is a separate story.
> A one off.

No shit, Captain Obvious. It's still a Star Wars film.

>> Also they didn't get Vader's suit right. His helmet is supposed to fit into
>> his armor, but here they had the neckpiece flapping around on top of the
>> chest shield, and the cape is supposed to hang off his shoulders connected
>> across the chest shield with a chain, not pulled up under the neck of his
>> helmet.
>
> You need to see the original movie again.

No, I don't, at least not in reference to this.

[BTR1701]

Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> In message <1462749686.503622971.468620...@news.giganews.com>
> BTR1701 <addre...@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>> TT <as...@dprk.kp> wrote:
>
>>> 17.12.2016, 0:36, BTR1701 kirjoitti:
>
> [ DELETED ]
>>>
>>> I think the headline reads NO FUCKING SPOILERS...
>
>> (1) No, it actually doesn't say that.
>
> Yes it does. Learn to read.

Nope. The subject line does not say "No fucking spoilers".

Learn to read.

>> (2) People whose definition of spoiler is so ridiculously expansive, they
>> just have to take their chances.
>
> What you posted was not just a spoiler, it was an unforgivable spoiler,
> especially in a thread labeled (no spoilers).

There's levels of spoilers now? Venal spoilers and mortal spoilers?

You're hilarious.

>
>> It's like saying Rey and Finn and Kylo Ren are in Episode VIII is a
>> spoiler.
>
> No. It is nothing at all like that.

Yes, it's like that.

>> (3) For someone who's so butthurt over this supposed spoiler, you really
>> did a great job reposting it for all to see. Well done, genius.
>
> Anyone seeing his post would already have seen you being a fucking
> asshole.

Not necessarily. If they had me killfiled, they wouldn't have seen my post,
but they'd have seen his, so he was just as guilty of spoiling as I was.

[BTR1701]

You forgot to wipe again?

[tomcervo]

On Friday, December 16, 2016 at 9:48:22 PM UTC-5, TT wrote:

> Should one watch it in 2d or 3d?
>
> In general I like 2d much more, but don't regret seeing EP7 on both formats.

It's not native 3D, and it shows. The 3D promo before the movie was much better.

[Ronald O. Christian]

If ESB was your favorite, then I suspect our tastes are similar. Good
to know we finally get a decent prequel to Star Wars.


Ron
-
2014 FLHTK "The Grey"

[moviePig]

When it comes to how good "ordinary" scenes (90% of a movie) can look,
native 3D has a lower limit, while post-conversion has an upper one --
with the latter depending largely on the cash invested. Unfortunately,
the 3D ticket-hike remains the same regardless, so look for 3D's
immediate future to comprise mostly crap post-conversion.

--

- - - - - - - -
YOUR taste at work...
http://www.moviepig.com

[Lewis]

In message <xoydnfMfVrn21sjF...@giganews.com>

BTR1701 <no_e...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

>> In message <1462749686.503622971.468620...@news.giganews.com>
>> BTR1701 <addre...@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>>> TT <as...@dprk.kp> wrote:
>>
>>>> 17.12.2016, 0:36, BTR1701 kirjoitti:
>>
>> [ DELETED ]
>>>>
>>>> I think the headline reads NO FUCKING SPOILERS...
>>
>>> (1) No, it actually doesn't say that.
>>
>> Yes it does. Learn to read.

> Nope. The subject line does not say "No fucking spoilers".

It says "(no spoilers)" you gibbering moron.


--
I HAVE NEITHER BEEN THERE NOR DONE THAT Bart chalkboard Ep. AABF17

[BTR1701]

Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> In message <xoydnfMfVrn21sjF...@giganews.com>
> BTR1701 <no_e...@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>> Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>
>>> In message <1462749686.503622971.468620...@news.giganews.com>
>>> BTR1701 <addre...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>> TT <as...@dprk.kp> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> 17.12.2016, 0:36, BTR1701 kirjoitti:
>>>
>>> [ DELETED ]
>>>>>
>>>>> I think the headline reads NO FUCKING SPOILERS...
>>>
>>>> (1) No, it actually doesn't say that.
>>>
>>> Yes it does. Learn to read.
>
>> Nope. The subject line does not say "No fucking spoilers".
>
> It says "(no spoilers)" you gibbering moron.

That wasn't what was asserted, you pustulent taint.

[Lewis]

In message <QOSdnWE6HtnXLsjF...@giganews.com>

BTR1701 <no_e...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

>> In message <xoydnfMfVrn21sjF...@giganews.com>
>> BTR1701 <no_e...@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>>> Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>>
>>>> In message <1462749686.503622971.468620...@news.giganews.com>
>>>> BTR1701 <addre...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>>> TT <as...@dprk.kp> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> 17.12.2016, 0:36, BTR1701 kirjoitti:
>>>>
>>>> [ DELETED ]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think the headline reads NO FUCKING SPOILERS...
>>>>
>>>>> (1) No, it actually doesn't say that.
>>>>
>>>> Yes it does. Learn to read.
>>
>>> Nope. The subject line does not say "No fucking spoilers".
>>
>> It says "(no spoilers)" you gibbering moron.

> That wasn't what was asserted, you pustulent taint.

You are a fucking asshole AND an illiterate fool. Congratulations.
Your parents must be so proud.

--
Keep Virginia clean...throw your trash into Maryland.

[BTR1701]

Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> In message <QOSdnWE6HtnXLsjF...@giganews.com>
> BTR1701 <no_e...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>
>>> In message <xoydnfMfVrn21sjF...@giganews.com>
>>> BTR1701 <no_e...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>> Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> In message <1462749686.503622971.468620...@news.giganews.com>
>>>>> BTR1701 <addre...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> TT <as...@dprk.kp> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> 17.12.2016, 0:36, BTR1701 kirjoitti:
>>>>>
>>>>> [ DELETED ]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think the headline reads NO FUCKING SPOILERS...
>>>>>
>>>>>> (1) No, it actually doesn't say that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes it does. Learn to read.
>>>
>>>> Nope. The subject line does not say "No fucking spoilers".
>>>
>>> It says "(no spoilers)" you gibbering moron.
>
>> That wasn't what was asserted, you pustulent taint.
>
> You are a fucking asshole AND an illiterate fool.

I'm not the one denying reality here.

[Ronald O. Christian]

Saw it tonight. Loved it.

It was really dark. More so than I expected, even after "many died to
get these plans".

My opinion, Empire Strikes Back is still the best Star Wars movie. But
this one is right up there. Mostly, I'm thankful that it helped wash
the taste of those other prequels out of my mind.

[TT]

18.12.2016, 9:25, Ronald O. Christian kirjoitti:
> It was really dark

That doesn't sound good... Star Wars is supposed to be magical, not dark...

http://www.cheatsheet.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Empire-Strikes-Back.jpg

Even Ep5 had the humour and some really nice soft and magical looking
scenes, such as the Dagobah swamp with Yoda. Of course it was shot on
actual film and with miniatures/puppetry - not digital camera and CGI.

However I don't mind these extra stories being different. Gotta see it
next week... I don't expect it to feel as starwarsy. We'll see...

I think EP7 managed to catch much of the magic of original trilogy,
especially visually. It was of course shot with film camera and special
lenses which gave it that Star Wars look.

[BTR1701]

Ronald O. Christian <ro...@europa.com> wrote:
>
> Saw it tonight. Loved it.
>
> It was really dark. More so than I expected, even after "many died to
> get these plans".

Which didn't even refer to the events in this movie. Mon Mothma said that
in RETURN OF THE JEDI about the spies who got the intel on the *second*
Death Star.

[BTR1701]

TT <as...@dprk.kp> wrote:

> 18.12.2016, 9:25, Ronald O. Christian kirjoitti:

>> It was really dark
>
> That doesn't sound good... Star Wars is supposed to be magical, not dark...

Says who?

[Russell Watson]

Yea, verily...

[Ronald O. Christian]

It's really really Starwarsy. But a Star Wars as envisioned by Martin
Scorsese. Which in my opinion is not at all a bad thing.

[Obveeus]

On 12/15/2016 11:57 PM, Russell Watson wrote:
> You probably already know if it's for you or not.

Yep. I watched it today thinking that it was for me and it was.

> You either love or
> hate the genre and/or the franchise,

This movie brings back the STAR WARS sound so well, both in terms of the
instrumental accompaniments and the sound effect of various ships and
such flying by. The sound along immerses the viewer back into this
imaginary world that has now entertained us for about 40 years.

> or only the originals but think the
> new ones are shit. I have stated here that starting with the 2nd trilogy
> I'm good for one viewing per (having seen the original trilogy at least
> twice each, in the theater when new and again on VHS a few years later).
> This one may prove the exception, as I can easily see myself buying it
> when it comes out on Blu-Ray (I don't own any of the others). It is
> basically everything I would ever want one of these movies to be.

The best aspects:
1. In the past 7 films the robots have largely been comic relief. That
is still true in this film, but the comedy is aimed at adults instead of
12 year olds. That was a much appreciated improvement, for me.
2. This film, as with REVENGE OF THE SITH, does an excellent job of
meshing together questions/problems people had about the earlier works.

> Given
> that prior to this, "The Empire Strikes Back" was my favorite of the
> series, that kind of tells you what this one is like. Hint: despite
> being the "darkest" of the original trilogy, TESB is kind of
> lighthearted fun compared to this one. Visually it's gorgeous, with top
> notch fx of mechs and creatures.

I saw it in 2D and didn't notice any reason to see it in 3D. As you
said, visually gorgeous; a fully realized set of visual worlds.

> The story and characters aren't that
> deep: it's a Star Wars movie after all, but they suffice. It's a worthy
> prequel to the original.

The characters are overshadowed by the story, but maybe that is as it
should be both in terms of building the larger universe and in terms of
preserving the idea of the underdog's struggle.

[Lewis]

In message <7bec5c1hngpgdq40n...@4ax.com>

Ronald O Christian <ro...@europa.com> wrote:

> Saw it tonight. Loved it.

> It was really dark. More so than I expected, even after "many died to
> get these plans".

That was in reference to the Death Star II plans in Jedi.

> My opinion, Empire Strikes Back is still the best Star Wars movie. But
> this one is right up there. Mostly, I'm thankful that it helped wash
> the taste of those other prequels out of my mind.

I consider it the only prequel movie.

--
Updated to be PRCE compatible after 400 years: /(bb|[^b]{2})/

[RichA]

Surprised wussy Star Wars fans aren't turned-off by all the killing.

[Ronald O. Christian]

On Sun, 18 Dec 2016 20:50:10 -0800 (PST), RichA <rande...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>Surprised wussy Star Wars fans aren't turned-off by all the killing.

Like we were turned off by the destruction of an entire planet in the
first film?

[BTR1701]

RichA <rande...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Surprised wussy Star Wars fans aren't turned-off by all the killing.

Why does liking STAR WARS make me "wuss", Rich?

[trotsky]

Hell, I think you're a complete dick and even I wouldn't say that.

[Lewis]

In message <1187646383.503823002.121375...@news.giganews.com>

Rich's micropenis makes him very angry, so he attacks everyone. His
favorite target is people's masculinity since his is so tiny.

--
"He has all the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire."
Winston Churchill

[TT]

I saw Rogue one today...

I'd say it's more of a action film located in Star Wars universe rather
than a Star Wars film, despite lots of fan service and references to OT.

It is pretty bleak and lacks the characteristic Star Wars humour and
banter... it's ok though, being different... after all they didn't even
include Star Wars theme in this one. However the main problem with the
film is that the story is paper thin and there are too many characters -
it simply is not a good film when it comes to characterisation and
storytelling.

The CGI and visuals are pretty good overall, although I found the couple
essential CGI characters being sort of distracting since them being CGI
was rather obvious. The CGI robot was pretty nice. As for other
characters, Donnie Yen's Chirrut Îmwe was probably the best.

I think the final 15 minutes or so saved a lot. Still worth a see at the
movie theatre but don't expect too much from the story itself, it's more
about the cool looking Star Wars CGI and homages.

6,5 / 10 (rated it a 6 at IMDB, and will watch it again when it comes to
home media)

P.S. It's not a good holiday movie for kids.

[TT]

PPS... watched it in 2D. Also, I was referring to YOUNG kids, too grim
overall.

[Lewis]

In message <ABS6A.28453$mN1....@uutiset.elisa.fi>

TT <as...@dprk.kp> wrote:
> I'd say it's more of a action film located in Star Wars universe rather
> than a Star Wars film, despite lots of fan service and references to OT.

It is much more of a war movie than the previous films.

> It is pretty bleak and lacks the characteristic Star Wars humour and
> banter...

Did you see the same movie I did?

---
"Do you want to know the odds she'll use that on you?"

"No."

"They're high!"
---

Did you know that wasn't me?
---

The Captain Says you're a friend. I will not kill you.
---

There were a lot of explosions for two people blending in.
---

Are you kidding me? I'm blind!
---

"You almost shot me!"

"You're welcome."
---

> it's ok though, being different... after all they didn't even
> include Star Wars theme in this one. However the main problem with the
> film is that the story is paper thin and there are too many characters -
> it simply is not a good film when it comes to characterisation and
> storytelling.

Couln't disagree more. We get to know the main 5 characters pretty well,
and the story is waht it needs to be, no more.

> The CGI and visuals are pretty good overall, although I found the couple
> essential CGI characters being sort of distracting since them being CGI
> was rather obvious.

No it wasn't. This is waht is known as "confirmation bias". Ypou knew
they were CGI, so you decided that was obvious. I've asked many people
who've seen the movie about the CGI characters and no one who didn't
know ahead of time had any idea they were CGI.

> The CGI robot was pretty nice. As for other
> characters, Donnie Yen's Chirrut Îmwe was probably the best.

Chirrut wasn't CGI.

> I think the final 15 minutes or so saved a lot. Still worth a see at the
> movie theatre but don't expect too much from the story itself, it's more
> about the cool looking Star Wars CGI and homages.

And again, I disagree. This movie stands on its own perfectly. No one
need have ever heard of Star Wars to enjoy this film.

> P.S. It's not a good holiday movie for kids.

My six year old niece loved it and has seen it twice so far.


--
'Who's that playing now, Mr. Dibbler?' "'And you".' 'Sorry, Mr.
Dibbler?' 'Only they write it &U,' said Dibbler. --Soul Music

[TT]

22.12.2016, 20:11, Lewis kirjoitti:
> In message <ABS6A.28453$mN1....@uutiset.elisa.fi>
> TT <as...@dprk.kp> wrote:
>> I'd say it's more of a action film located in Star Wars universe rather
>> than a Star Wars film, despite lots of fan service and references to OT.
>
> It is much more of a war movie than the previous films.
>

That it is. Close combat scenes.

>> It is pretty bleak and lacks the characteristic Star Wars humour and
>> banter...
>
> Did you see the same movie I did?
>

Ok, I see from your excerpts that indeed it had some, although some of
it felt forced. I even laughed a bit on one of them. It just didn't feel
like a light hearted adventure at all.

>> The CGI robot was pretty nice. As for other
>> characters, Donnie Yen's Chirrut Îmwe was probably the best.
>
> Chirrut wasn't CGI.
>

I didn't claim he was...

>> I think the final 15 minutes or so saved a lot. Still worth a see at the
>> movie theatre but don't expect too much from the story itself, it's more
>> about the cool looking Star Wars CGI and homages.
>
> And again, I disagree. This movie stands on its own perfectly. No one
> need have ever heard of Star Wars to enjoy this film.
>

And it's probably better if they haven't...

>> P.S. It's not a good holiday movie for kids.
>
> My six year old niece loved it and has seen it twice so far.
>

*MASSIVE SPOILER* SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER

She either didn't understand what happened or didn't care for the
characters. Pretty much everybody dies, even the funny robot. The Erso
death scene also reminds a lot of nuclear holocaust which could actually
be extremely distressing for a kid, if they make the connection. She'd
probably be too young to understand the film.

SPOILER END

[Lewis]

In message <yl37A.28500$mN1....@uutiset.elisa.fi>

TT <as...@dprk.kp> wrote:
> *MASSIVE SPOILER* SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER


> She either didn't understand what happened or didn't care for the
> characters. Pretty much everybody dies, even the funny robot.

Yes. And she knew that. She also knows it's a movie and that when she
watches it again they'll all be there again.

--
When this kiss is over it will start again
But not be any different could be exactly the same
It's hard to imagine that nothing at all
Could be so exciting, could be this much fun

[Ronald O. Christian]

On Thu, 22 Dec 2016 18:11:35 -0000 (UTC), Lewis
<g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

>In message <ABS6A.28453$mN1....@uutiset.elisa.fi>
> TT <as...@dprk.kp> wrote:

>> It is pretty bleak and lacks the characteristic Star Wars humour and
>> banter...
>
>Did you see the same movie I did?
>
>---
>"Do you want to know the odds she'll use that on you?"
>
> "No."
>
>"They're high!"
>---
>
>Did you know that wasn't me?
>---
>
>The Captain Says you're a friend. I will not kill you.
>---
>
>There were a lot of explosions for two people blending in.
>---
>
>Are you kidding me? I'm blind!
>---
>
>"You almost shot me!"
>
>"You're welcome."
>---

I've read that Alan Tudyk improvised many of those lines. But yeah,
there was a surprising amount of humor. I felt it was bordering on
too much, considering the seriousness of the story.

Daughter and I met Tudyk once. She was in line for an autograph, and
the guy ahead of her had just gifted him with a hand made model of him
as Wash, complete with toy dinosaurs. Alan was taken aback, and
genuinely moved by the gift. Then he turned to my daughter and said
in a loud carrying voice "Well? What did YOU get me??"

[Lewis]

In message <1l106c9dtj2nq5v3d...@4ax.com>

Ronald O Christian <ro...@europa.com> wrote:

Heh! I hope she found it amusing.


--
'I like the sound of that,' said Mrs Palm. 'I like the echoes,' said Dr
Downey.