3 ms·

Got to say, I haven't seen it, mostly because I know I would hate it. But one of my friends told me that they are destroying a death star. Again. For the 3rd t

by dudul 11y ago

Got to say, I haven't seen it, mostly because I know I would hate it. But one of my friends told me that they are destroying a death star. Again. For the 3rd time. Seriously? How many times are they gonna try? "One can envision Hollywood eventually turning out only two products: "Star Wars" movies and James Bond movies, each periodically "rebooted" for a new generation of customers." Absolutely love the conclusion. This is exactly what is happening right now. It's like every single new movie is a reboot. Mad Max, Ghostbusters, Robocop, Point Break, The neverending story...

krapp 11y ago
Yes. It is, in broad strokes, essentially a retelling of A New Hope. The only reason the Death Star was destroyed in the first movie was that George Lucas was forced to essentially cram his ideas for the entire trilogy into A New Hope (which is why, absurdly, a second Death Star shows up later.) It wasn't supposed to be destroyed until the third act. There really is no excuse for the new "Death Star" to wind up destroyed in the The Force Awakens other than fanservice. I honestly would have been more impressed if they'd shown the utter failure of the attempt to destroy it - given how much more massive the new thing was compared to the old, it just stretches even the dubious credibility of the problems with the original Death Star past the breaking point. But... nope... they set some handheld explosives and blow up the whole planet what good. Just like they did two other times. And honestly, i'm kind of ok with that. The movie's not terrible, it's just not that original. But after the prequels, I can't really blame anyone for wanting to play it safe - and I understand most modern Star Wars fans have never even seen the original trilogy, so for the target audience, it's possibly not old hat. George Lucas likes to say the Star Wars movies "rhyme," which basically seems to mean using the same themes, basic characters and plot points is intentional.
- chrisdbaldwin 11y ago
  If only Lucas had stuck with Jar Jar being the hidden wizard like he did with Yoda.
twic 11y ago
I read an interesting take on that: that in the Star Wars universe, immense superweapons aren't once-in-a-trilogy special cases, they're standard practice. > One Death Star is a horror; two Death Stars and one Starkiller Base and whatever horrific murder innovation the First Order will come up with for Episode 9 is something more like the inexorable logic of history, grinding us all to dust. https://gerrycanavan.wordpress.com/2015/12/23/tolkien-the-force-awakens-and-the-expanded-universe/ https://gerrycanavan.wordpress.com/2015/12/23/tolkien-the-fo...
randycupertino 11y ago
I love how they always make the Death Star with 1 fatal flaw! There's always some small way to instantly blow it up. It wouldn't be the Death Star without this key component. The reboot phenomena you describe was covered excellently in the article How Disney is Re-selling us our Childhoods: http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21684138-disney-making-fortune-and-safeguarding-its-future-buying-childhood-piece-piece http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21684138-disney-makin...

by dudul 11y ago

krapp 11y ago

Yes. It is, in broad strokes, essentially a retelling of A New Hope. The only reason the Death Star was destroyed in the first movie was that George Lucas was forced to essentially cram his ideas for the entire trilogy into A New Hope (which is why, absurdly, a second Death Star shows up later.) It wasn't supposed to be destroyed until the third act. There really is no excuse for the new "Death Star" to wind up destroyed in the The Force Awakens other than fanservice. I honestly would have been more impressed if they'd shown the utter failure of the attempt to destroy it - given how much more massive the new thing was compared to the old, it just stretches even the dubious credibility of the problems with the original Death Star past the breaking point. But... nope... they set some handheld explosives and blow up the whole planet what good. Just like they did two other times. And honestly, i'm kind of ok with that. The movie's not terrible, it's just not that original. But after the prequels, I can't really blame anyone for wanting to play it safe - and I understand most modern Star Wars fans have never even seen the original trilogy, so for the target audience, it's possibly not old hat. George Lucas likes to say the Star Wars movies "rhyme," which basically seems to mean using the same themes, basic characters and plot points is intentional.

chrisdbaldwin 11y ago
If only Lucas had stuck with Jar Jar being the hidden wizard like he did with Yoda.

twic 11y ago

I read an interesting take on that: that in the Star Wars universe, immense superweapons aren't once-in-a-trilogy special cases, they're standard practice. > One Death Star is a horror; two Death Stars and one Starkiller Base and whatever horrific murder innovation the First Order will come up with for Episode 9 is something more like the inexorable logic of history, grinding us all to dust. https://gerrycanavan.wordpress.com/2015/12/23/tolkien-the-force-awakens-and-the-expanded-universe/ https://gerrycanavan.wordpress.com/2015/12/23/tolkien-the-fo...

randycupertino 11y ago

I love how they always make the Death Star with 1 fatal flaw! There's always some small way to instantly blow it up. It wouldn't be the Death Star without this key component. The reboot phenomena you describe was covered excellently in the article How Disney is Re-selling us our Childhoods: http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21684138-disney-making-fortune-and-safeguarding-its-future-buying-childhood-piece-piece http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21684138-disney-makin...