Star Wars: The Rise Of Skywalker

Wrap photo of Finn, Rey, & Po.

Looks like the trilogy might end where it began...back on Jakku.

After we find out the truth about Rey's parents. (I don't believe for one second that Kylo Ren knows what happened to Rey's parents in that scene in The Last Jedi; he's sensed her deepest fear about them and is simply giving voice to it.)

Looks like she kept all her appendages

Hard to tell. She may be missing her nose.

Hamill unhappy that there wasn't an onscreen reunion with Han, Luke, Leia. Seems upset that nobody cares that the reunion didn't happen and really unhappy with some of the things Johnson did.

https://comicbook.com/starwars/2019...ywalker-han-solo-reunion-stirs-fans-emotions/

I have to say that I think he's right on both accounts and Johnson seems to have treated the film as just another paycheck.

Everything I've heard about Johnson makes him seem like the biggest jackass. I'll never watch anything else with his name attached to it. He killed my interest in Disney Star Wars.

I totally agree, but it was Ford that killed Han. That’s not to say that JJ couldn’t have made a reunion happen before Han died. I blame both JJ and Ryan Johnson, mostly Johnson though.

There's your problem.
Stop listening to scrunchy-faced vloggers, and watch the TLJ behind the scenes documentary.
I saw him as a nice guy, and a well researched fan.

It would have been sweet, but as has been mentioned, Han was already killed by JJ.
And....what Star Wars has everyone else been watching?
Doesn't seem to be the one I saw the last 40 years.
The Star Wars galaxy is a grim unfair fucking place.
Vader never gives Threepio an "I missed you", hug.
Obi-Wan never sees Bail Organa again.
Yoda never sees Chewie again.
Jyn Erso doesn't make it to the medal ceremony in ANH.
Qira probably doesn't send Han & Leia an RSVP for their wedding invitation.

The holy trinity being split up when we need them most is actually honest to the past pattern of this story.

I mean, Star Wars isn't Thrones, but it ain't Carebears either.

Again, not at all the impression I got from the documentary.
He went through ESB with a lice comb.

Point of order: Those docs are designed to make everyone look good and don't reflect reality at all. In one of the behind the scenes documentaries for the OT they have one of the execs say that there was never any plans to call the third movie "Revenge of the Jedi" and that it was just something made up by someone. Later on, you see him sitting in front of an official Lucasfilm "Revenge of the Jedi" poster. Those docs also maintain the fiction that Lucas had everything planned out from the beginning in great detail. No way, no how, is Disney going to allow an official Star Wars related production to say anything bad about the creatives involved with the project. They're going to put the best possible image forward.

Now, maybe Johnson was a dedicated fan, maybe he took making the film as serious as he would any other project. I don't know, but I do know that no matter what, anything Disney puts out about him is going to be carefully shaped and crafted so that he appears in the best possible light. They're not going to show him being, understandably, frustrated with an actor who continually fucks up a scene. They might give hints that he's passionate about directing the movie by showing him being a bit sharp with someone, but if he went off on a profanity-laden tirade on someone ala Christian Bale, that'll never make the cut.

Maybe.
But Kathleen Kennedy fired Miller and Lord for coughing wrong with the wrong shaped cloud in the sky, if Johnson were a profane hot-head, I don't think he would have been offered his own trilogy, much less been allowed to complete TLJ.

Nothing says that there couldn't have been a reunion in TFA.

Why should he? In the OT, the implication is that Threepio is a standard protocol droid, not something Anakin slapped together in his garage one day.

Assuming, of course, he doesn't show up in the oft-rumored Obi-Wan film.

Unless, of course, that happens in something like the Obi-Wan film, and even if it doesn't, we don't have 3 decades of memories of them interacting on the screen like we do with Luke, Leia, and Han. All we get is a short-clip in RotS with Yoda saying, "I shall miss you, Chewie" or some shit. Hell, we didn't even get Yoda in the Holiday Special, but we got Han, Luke, Leia, and Chewie all hanging out together.

Who?

Again, who?

Is it? Obi-Wan gets killed in the first film, and yet manages to show up in the next two. Hell, Harrison Ford wanted out after the first film but showed up in three more.

Yeah, I don't think the Carebears would be totally cool with forgiving a genocidal maniac just because he said: "I'm sorry." I might be wrong, not having seen an episode of Carebears.

And the docs from the OT claim that Lucas had everything written in advance, which we know not to be true.

Just

Without seeing the film that Miller and Lord wanted, we have no idea if Kennedy made the right call or not. Remember, Solo made a considerable chunk of change but was considered a "flop" because it didn't make as much as expected. (I'm not making any judgment on the quality of the film Ron Howard delivered.) As for why Johnson would have been offered his own trilogy, that has more to do with what they expected his actual box office to make, more than anything else. We're talking about an industry which was more than happy to turn a blind eye to guys like Harvey Weinstein and many, many others because they made piles of cash.

Dude, seriously, grow up. We're talking about art, which means that there's a lot of aesthetics involved. I don't have a problem with someone liking a film I don't, but I do have a problem with them denying the obvious flaws in the film. To shift to a different film for an example, in Peter Jackson's King Kong, there's a scene where one character is denied being given a gun because he's never handled one before in his life. No big deal, right? A few scenes later, that same character is using a tommy gun to shoot giant grasshoppers off of people and he somehow manages to not hit any of the people! Now, the first scene works, if you don't have the later scene, and the later scene works, if you don't have the first scene. But if you have both in the same movie, there's a problem. Maybe that's not enough to wreck the film for you, and that's fine, but don't deny that it is a problem. (Not saying that you would, but I have known people to make such a claim.)

As I've pointed out in the past, you have the tendency to be almost Daytonesque in your loyalty to the kinds of things that you like. I haven't seen TLJ, so I can't comment on the film, TFA was, IMHO, so bad that I didn't have any desire to watch the rest of the films. You disagree, fine, whatever, but don't deny that there are flaws in all the Star Wars movies.

Hell, man, I take my user name from a failed automobile company. While Preston's car had a lot of innovative features (some of which weren't mentioned in the film), I will readily admit that there were flaws in both the design of the car and the way Tucker ran the company. That doesn't change Tucker's vision, nor does it mean that because I found the other things in the SW universe to be unwatchable once you got outside the OT (well, actually, anything past ESB isn't all that great, IMHO), that they don't have merit. There are shots in TFA that I found to be breathtakingly beautiful, even though I thought that the film was shit. I just refuse to slavishly follow anyone or anything. I don't always succeed in that, but I try. You? I'm not seeing it. According to you, everyone who disliked the all-female cast version of Ghostbusters was a misogynist. I have no doubt that many people who objected to the film were, in fact, misogynistic, but at the same time, there are legitimate reasons to not like the film without being misogynistic.

I mean, Ghostbusters II wasn't exactly a stellar film, and maybe we'd all be better off if the only things that existed were the original film and the cartoon. I don't know. I do know that everything of Dan Aykroyd's that I've seen since 1987 (when he did Dragnet), hasn't been exactly great. It's entirely possible that the original Ghostbusters was one of those things which was perfected in its original form and anything done after that is a lesser vehicle, no matter how talented the people involved are, or how much money the studio threw at the project. I mean, look at how Follywood has tried to rework the formula behind Casablanca and failed. David Soul starred in a prequel to the movie which lasted only 5 episodes. I mean, holy shit, Casablanca is considered one of the greatest films ever made, and Rick certainly seems to have a very interesting backstory that could be fleshed out, yet the show flopped. When Follywood rebooted it with a female lead who should have been a box office draw, nobody gave a fuck about it.

*Presses "stop", ejects the post, puts it in its case, puts it on a shelf, walks away*

Sort of like those who folks who'd say, "I haven't listened to Obama's speech, but because he's a Democrat, I know he's wrong, and let me tell you why."

Yeah I can’t think of any part of Star Wars where there was closure for the characters and a nice reunion that was emotionally satisfying, not a one.

Something, something, retcon.

He’s the biggest apologist for crappy movies that happen to share a franchise/universe with really good ones that I’ve ever seen. As for ESB, it’s nearly flawless. As for Ghostbusters 2, I still, to this day, maintain it’s not that bad. I understand the criticisms and I share them, but I still like it and I still chuckle at the Titanic scene. To defend Ghostbusters 2016 this vehemently, still, it staggers the imagination.

Of dead guys.

I was unaware that science had discovered an objective standard for art.
Why were you given the memo, and not me?

No, @Diacanu is entirely correct on this point. If you haven't actually seen TLJ, just shut up.

People who gripe about, and opine on, films/books/TV shows they haven't even bothered to watch are exactly what's wrong with social media and contemporary geekdom in general.

Because nobody likes you. That's why you're never invited to the office Christmas parties.

(Sad Artoo Detoo)
Woooo.

You mean like how people who aren't Christians shouldn't quote the Bible? If you'll notice, I haven't said that TLJ is a "bad movie," I've said that I think that if Hamill's telling the truth, he's probably accurate about the problems with the film. I mean, I do know what the movie's about, having read all the details of it (including the spoilers) from people who loved it and from people who hated it. None of those things that I've read have convinced me that it's worth spending the time to watch the film.

You'll also note, that despite my dislike for the NT, I continue to share news stories about the films without making comments like, "Well, this proves that XYZ movie sucks" or "Yeah, it looks like the next movie is going to be hot garbage." I don't do that because I recognize that there's plenty of reason for people to like these movies, even if I find them flawed. After all, I didn't have a problem with Jar Jar in TPM. He fit right in, IMHO, with the kinds of characters that Lucas had created in the previous movies. My biggest complaint when I walked out of the theater after seeing TPM on opening day? The damned pod race scene went on for way too long. I wasn't entirely thrilled with Anakin being a little kid, but I was willing to "go with it" to see what Lucas delivered in the later films (mostly garbage, as it turned out), and there were some problematic things about Qui Gon's behavior that I noticed later, once someone pointed them out, but I didn't hate the movie.

I don't hate TFA. I just think that it was largely a film that placed (as JJ Abrams films tend to do) style about as far over substance as is humanly possible. It wasn't bad enough to make me not want to follow the developments with Star Wars Universe, because I think that it's entirely possible for some excellent stories to be told there.

Nope.
Bad example.
I'm atheist, but at least I've READ the Bible, and know how to get at the crazy passages.

Don't know if you notice this, but there's all kinds of clips of TLJ on YouTube. So, if I read a piece which claims that Ben Solo told Rey that her parents were "ordinary" there's literally no way for me to verify that an article claiming this is true without watching the entire film? Because that's what you're saying here. How is what you're claiming different than saying, "Well, claiming that God was wrong to cause the Flood if you haven't read the story of Adam and Eve in Genesis is stupid and misguided."? I mean, under what pretext is genocide a good thing? Regardless of what might have come before this.

@We Are Borg wont accept any criticism of JJ, in the same vein @Diacanu wont accept any criticism of any franchise he adores. They treat these films the way Dayton treats religion. It’s really quite childish.

Go to my blog, look up my reviews for the Freddys, the Jasons, The Michael Myers-es, the Pinheads, there's entries to all of those I get pretty fucking brutal on.
You're just wrong.