> Yeah, kind of reminds me of the Star Wars sequels (well, I actively disliked the last one also, but the first two sequels anyway) I can definitely relate to

> Yeah, kind of reminds me of the Star Wars sequels (well, I actively disliked the last one also, but the first two sequels anyway) I can definitely relate to this. I didn't mind the first two at all, but the last one was not enjoyable at all for me. I'm the type of person who usually has absolutely no interest in cinematography as an art form (tending to roll my eyes a bit internally when someone actively makes sure to use the term "films" instead of "movies"), but watching The Rise of Skywalker was the first time I ever felt strong negative feelings towards a movie purely based on, well, film-making reasons. I was almost overwhelmed by how quickly the camera shots were changing; at one point I started counting how many seconds each shot lasted, and it took several minutes before I counted one over four seconds. The dialogue also felt extremely stilted; I remember reading beforehand that they had used existing footage of Carrie Fischer due to her dying beforehand, and it seemed like their solution to shoe-horning in the lines of hers they had without making them stick out was just to edit it so that all dialogue in the entire movie felt spliced together rather than the actors actually being on set together.' The Rise of Skywalker may have done a better job of catering to people's nostalgia in terms of where they expected the plot to go after the original movies, but I don't think that doing what people expected is what made the original movies good in the first place.