How?
>Disney
How else do you think?
Summarises how under the red bar
>>67499582
It was everythning prequels shoud have been. Big productions like this are usually boggled down by studio execs, it's just refreshing to see good flick again.
>>67500187
I know this is bait but have a (you)
>female and minority lead characters
>Disney
hmm i wonder
>>67500222
>People wanted a star wars just like the originals or similar
>They got it
>People still complained or found new complaints
Please kindly hang yourself.
It played off of nostalgia. People love that shit.
>>67500222
fuck you, it's good.
>>67500294
This, it's nostalgia porn with fresh CGI. And after the prequels everyone really wanted to like it.
>>67499582
I can honestly say I enjoyed Batman v Superman WAYY more compared to the absolute shitfest of Force Awakens.
BvS was an almost R Rated film with great violent, action showing the darkness of Batman that we have never seen before on screen (Snyder is making an R Rated Extended Cut compared to fucking JJ who is such a fucking dumbass for not wanting to release a longer version of Force Awakens when it fails so bad at explaining so much plot detail. Rey is absolutely a broken character with no character arc whatsoever).
>>67499582
It delivered a fun adventure with likable characters.
That's literally all you need to score high on RT, as long as 90% of critics think your movie is at least better than a 6/10 then you can hit 90%+ easy.
>>67500187
People like you is what is making movies suck so bad recently.
The prequels are films inspired by Ancient human intelligence whilst Force Awakens is inspired by whatever makes Hollywood make more money
>>67500912
>designed to be a trilogy
>"her arch suks xDD"
Should I cancel my pre order of Force Awakens the steelbook edition? Is freakin $47 where I am. That is not a reasonable price at all.
>>67500951
and the prequels were garbage while TFA was a well made film.
what's your point?
After the prequels the only thing a star wars movie needed to be was a return to form, and this hit the mark spot on.
>>67500977
eh, just get the regular Blu-Rey
>>67501000
trips confirm
/thread
>>67500269
>>67500829
It's a soulless devoted of any character/creativity action movie...star wars is deaddisney is now beating the dead body of what once wasGOAT
>>67501184
maybe you're just dead inside.
>>67501198
You might want to look up the word "contrarianism."
>>67501583
It's a 3 syllable word for any idea too big for small minds
star wars is for literal manchilds who fucking cares?
6
>>67501669
underrated post
>>67499582
Posted this in another thread that died:
I watched the Blu-Ray leak the other night, and I am incredulous at the reviews TFA received. I forced myself to watch the whole thing and pay attention, but I was bored to tears after the first ten minutes. I found myself increasingly shocked by the way the film veered between high-quality sets and costumes, and incredibly cheap-looking CGI-augmented location shoots and digital backlots, terrible subpar alien and creature effects in live action AND CGI - Lucas took flak for his endless shot-reverse-shot dialogue structure in the prequels but at least his shot-reverse-shots were nicely framed and lit: anything in this film not shot on a set was a disaster to look at.
I was just as shocked at the meandering dull witless excuse for a script with none of the brevity, wit or earnestness of the original films about it this one seemed to be lumbered with, how Ridley veered from competent to outright awful in her acting throughout, how bored and tired Harrison Ford looked, how tonally-disonant Finn's dialogue was despite Boyega doing his absolute best to put in a good performance.
This film for me suffered the cinematic equivalent of uncanny valley - it almost looked like a Star Wars film, it almost felt like a Star Wars film - but there was something just off enough to leave me feeling repulsed at the very fact of its existence. By the end I felt less like I'd watched a film and more like I'd been defeated by some malevolent force. This isn't a film, it's a cold, soulless, joyless corporate product/marketing campaign masquerading as one.
Sorry for the personal blog, but like I said I am incredulous at the positive reception for this film, to the point where I'm starting to wonder if there's something actually wrong with me for not enjoying it. I honestly have not hated a film this much since being forced to sit through the entirety of Transformers 2 in the theatre. I'd actually say this was worse.
>>67501198
>metacritic
off yourself my friend
>>67501973
To add a couple of things to that:
I couldn't wrap my head around the pacing of the film at all - it never sat still for a moment, no slow panning shots to establish a sense of place or pauses for the audience to breathe like in the original movies - and yet it's a movie in which precious little happens.
The action scenes were a complete clusterfuck too. What really hammered this home for me was the staggeringly inept attempt to recreate the magic of the Death Star run from the end of A New Hope with the assault on Starkiller Base: whereas the former was tightly planned and expertly edited so there could be no mistaking what was happening and to who, the latter was a cacophony of digital noise and light I'd, again, have expected to see in a Michael Bay film - absolutely appallingly conceived, planned and edited.
I could talk endlessly about how bafflingly inept this movie was to my perception, but I think that'll do for now.
>>67502060
At least its a bit closer to reality than RT or IMDB.
>>67499582
Well, good story and good acting make a good movie.
>>67499582
This just shows that most of the critics are manchildren who grew up on original starwars movies and who by default rate everything that panders to those movies.
