rose_griffes (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
rose_griffes) wrote2023-02-20 07:00 pm
rose_griffes) wrote2023-02-20 07:00 pm
Entry tags:
“I’ve been in this fight since I was six years old!”
One unpleasant side effect of enjoying how good Andor is: a revival of my burning rage at how badly Disney Star Wars botched the sequel trilogy--especially Finn and Rey. And while my DW is still an “I hate Rian Johnson's Star Wars film” safe space, the blame really lies with Bob Iger trying to rush things instead of giving the Star Wars team time to produce a solid foundation for a three-film series.
ANYWAY! Moving on.
One of the more common reactions I’ve seen from people who watched both Rogue One and season one of Andor is the wish that the show hadn’t retconned Cassian’s “grew up in the Rebellion” story from the film. And while I get it - and I’m not trying to convince people otherwise - that’s one thing that, ultimately, I decided was for the best.
1. We already have someone who grew up in the rebellion: Jyn! And look how that turned out! (Spoiler for Rogue One: not great.) It’s not exactly an idyllic childhood, right?
2. The show Andor added in SO MANY parallels between Cassian and Jyn’s stories. I’m okay with this one specific parallel being taken away.
3. I like the agency that this new backstory gives to Cassian. He’s going into the rebellion clear-eyed, by his own choice.
4. There are ways to smooth over the retcon. Been in the fight since he was six? Maybe that’s how old he was when the late Republic’s missteps and overreach led to the mining accident on Kenari. So he’s been pushing for both survival and revenge since then.
Again, not trying to persuade people who prefer the original version plus their various accompanying headcanons. It’s hard to give up Cassian speaking space Spanish! Plus, point number one about the horror story of growing up in the rebellion might be of great interest to many!
Before moving on: a big shout-out to all of you who prefer the original backstory for not whining about it in the pro-Andor-show spaces. I see you! Or rather, I don’t see you, and I definitely noticed and appreciate your tact.
So as I’ve rewatched Andor (I’m gonna run out of time soon! Not renewing Disney+ at the end of this month), I’ve really been struck by the almost-ending scene. Fan favorite Brasso is aboard the Breon Dayvan with B2EMO, Bix, Wilmon Paak, and Jezzi (a Daughter of Ferrix) piloting. They’re heading for Ganji moon. After that? Who knows! How will they survive?! THEY’RE AT GREAT RISK! The Empire will be after them soon--all of them!
And, uh... so. Fun fact, Pamela Nomvete, who plays Jezzi, was born in 1963, and Joplin Sibtain (Brasso) was born in 1969. That’s only six years difference! And now the two of them are on the run together, responsible for a minor human (Wilmon Paak is only 16), a sad dog-like droid, and a recently-tortured human (Bix) who literally can’t walk by herself at this point.
On the run! Together! Trying to take care of others! Together!
I’m shipping the two fiery, capable, caring older people, is what I’m saying.
Friends to lovers is a good trope - not my most favorite, but good. But “on the run together” is just fantastic. Especially when you add in things like cover identities and fake-dating or fake-marriage.
Unfortunately, there are some obstacles that make it unlikely that anyone (other than me? maybe? we’ll see?) writes these two as a romantic pairing.
1. Nomvete was only in three episodes. Jezzi was name-checked in episode one but we didn’t get a face for the name until episode ten. So THAT’S a big enough obstacle on its own.
2. Nomvete is older than Sibtain. And she’s a black woman who plays something of a caretaker role within the show. All traits that make fandom less likely to write her at all, much less pair her with someone younger.
Ah well. I make NO PROMISES for fic, but it’s fun to think about. But ugh, actually writing an on the run together story is hard! *whines* I’ve done it once, so I know! (Person of Interest fandom, Carter x Reese. My only novel-length fic. It’s good, you should read it and say nice things! Y’know... if you want.)
Gonna have to get rid of Jezzi's poncho, though. Ponchos: not sexy.
ANYWAY! Moving on.
One of the more common reactions I’ve seen from people who watched both Rogue One and season one of Andor is the wish that the show hadn’t retconned Cassian’s “grew up in the Rebellion” story from the film. And while I get it - and I’m not trying to convince people otherwise - that’s one thing that, ultimately, I decided was for the best.
1. We already have someone who grew up in the rebellion: Jyn! And look how that turned out! (Spoiler for Rogue One: not great.) It’s not exactly an idyllic childhood, right?
2. The show Andor added in SO MANY parallels between Cassian and Jyn’s stories. I’m okay with this one specific parallel being taken away.
3. I like the agency that this new backstory gives to Cassian. He’s going into the rebellion clear-eyed, by his own choice.
4. There are ways to smooth over the retcon. Been in the fight since he was six? Maybe that’s how old he was when the late Republic’s missteps and overreach led to the mining accident on Kenari. So he’s been pushing for both survival and revenge since then.
Again, not trying to persuade people who prefer the original version plus their various accompanying headcanons. It’s hard to give up Cassian speaking space Spanish! Plus, point number one about the horror story of growing up in the rebellion might be of great interest to many!
Before moving on: a big shout-out to all of you who prefer the original backstory for not whining about it in the pro-Andor-show spaces. I see you! Or rather, I don’t see you, and I definitely noticed and appreciate your tact.
So as I’ve rewatched Andor (I’m gonna run out of time soon! Not renewing Disney+ at the end of this month), I’ve really been struck by the almost-ending scene. Fan favorite Brasso is aboard the Breon Dayvan with B2EMO, Bix, Wilmon Paak, and Jezzi (a Daughter of Ferrix) piloting. They’re heading for Ganji moon. After that? Who knows! How will they survive?! THEY’RE AT GREAT RISK! The Empire will be after them soon--all of them!
And, uh... so. Fun fact, Pamela Nomvete, who plays Jezzi, was born in 1963, and Joplin Sibtain (Brasso) was born in 1969. That’s only six years difference! And now the two of them are on the run together, responsible for a minor human (Wilmon Paak is only 16), a sad dog-like droid, and a recently-tortured human (Bix) who literally can’t walk by herself at this point.
On the run! Together! Trying to take care of others! Together!
I’m shipping the two fiery, capable, caring older people, is what I’m saying.
Friends to lovers is a good trope - not my most favorite, but good. But “on the run together” is just fantastic. Especially when you add in things like cover identities and fake-dating or fake-marriage.
Unfortunately, there are some obstacles that make it unlikely that anyone (other than me? maybe? we’ll see?) writes these two as a romantic pairing.
1. Nomvete was only in three episodes. Jezzi was name-checked in episode one but we didn’t get a face for the name until episode ten. So THAT’S a big enough obstacle on its own.
2. Nomvete is older than Sibtain. And she’s a black woman who plays something of a caretaker role within the show. All traits that make fandom less likely to write her at all, much less pair her with someone younger.
Ah well. I make NO PROMISES for fic, but it’s fun to think about. But ugh, actually writing an on the run together story is hard! *whines* I’ve done it once, so I know! (Person of Interest fandom, Carter x Reese. My only novel-length fic. It’s good, you should read it and say nice things! Y’know... if you want.)
no subject
The joy of cherry-picking canon.
no subject
no subject
no subject
Oh, look. I'm STILL NOT OVER THE WAY FINN WAS TREATED IN THE LAST JEDI.
They all bear some of the blame, but it was Iger's choices that led to a sequel trilogy made so quickly that it wasn't actually planned through before releasing the first film. Which is the root of most of the problems.
I also think that both Abrams and Johnson were unwise choices to write solo for the sequel trilogy; blame that on Iger (again) and Kathleen Kennedy.
no subject
(they panicked SO MUCH when carrie fisher died, like, by the time TLJ came out any negative reviews at all were Just Too Much and then they moved solo and it didn't save them and then they had 18 months and NO ONE COULD SOLVE THE PROBLEM and now they're all scared and none of my Black friends with KICKASS book ideas want to endure writing a Finn book, because, well)
Plenty to go around, but none for JB or DR, because they gave us more than we deserved.
no subject
Disney has been so reactionary these past several years. A problem I don't foresee disappearing with Bob Iger's return to leadership. *shrug*
no subject
Force Awakens was okay. I was admittedly let down by it. And the two that followed, sigh. I didn't even bother seeing Rise of Skywalker in the cinemas, I'd given up by that point. By the time I did see it on television - I was kind of relieved that it wasn't as bad as I thought it would be. Last Jedi - was a mess. (Yes, yes, from a thematic standpoint - or political one - it was lovely, but from a plot, character, and logistical standpoint it was a mess.) I'm beginning to think that may just be Rian Johnson though? I saw the Knives Out films - and he does like to jump all over the place with his plotting, doesn't he? Although I do agree Bob Iger rushing things didn't help. But what also didn't help was having JJ Abrahams of all people show-running it - Abrahams got bored after Force Awakens, and had no plan in place and zip to say. You don't give this guy franchises. They also needed a good script writer in place throughout - someone like Lawrence Kasdan (who got tired and dropped out of it after Force Awakens). The problem with these films is they didn't have the same collaborative team throughout - while Andor has one show-runner and a cohesive vision. (The guy behind Andor did House of Cards, and is an excellent show-runner.)
I honestly think if you have a good writing/directing team - that's half the battle. But you do need both, and it should be the same throughout - or at the very least there should be someone who pulls it all together - kind of like Kevin Fiege did for the Marvel verse? Star Wars didn't have that. And without that - things get a little defused, I think.
no subject
Having gotten past the worst of my anger about The Last Jedi, I can finally see the themes and character arcs. They were interesting! And... really not a good fit for a film that's supposed to fit into that "Skywalker legacy".
Rian Johnson has some odd moves that he repeats a lot. And while I thought Knives Out was fun in the theater, it really didn't hold up on a rewatch. I couldn't even finish the rewatch!
Abrams' biggest strength that could have been used for the trilogy: character introductions. That's why The Force Awakens is okay, for all its flaws--we liked Rey and Finn when we met them. Abrams is also a decent director, but agreed that he should never have tackled any of the sequel trilogy by himself.
As for not having a plan in place, I view that as the fault of Bob Iger for rushing the whole project. If they'd waited even six more months to make sure there really was a plan in place--even a minimal plan--for all three films, it could have made such a difference. Abrams' story for episode VII deliberately left a lot of elements open because they didn't allow anyone the time necessary to create connective tissue. It misled me into believing that there was a plan, because what film studio would start a trilogy without knowing the answers to the biggest questions raised within their own movie?! Yeah... oops.
no subject
To be honest, I think - the same thing that happened with the sequels, to a degree happened with the prequels. The show-runner didn't have his head in the game and was too distracted with well, non-story specific elements.
I agree on Abrams - he's a decent director, and good at origin stories or introductions, but he needed someone else for the through arc, a macro visionary. They didn't have that. Somebody like Peter Jackson or Kevin Feige, or even the Russos, who can see all the pieces and how they need to fit together to make a cohesive and entertaining story. Instead what we got was three separate films, that don't quite fit together.
Rise is an amusement park ride - it was created to be an amusement park ride, nothing more or less than just that. They admitted that up front. Abrams was charged with creating a 4D film that had just the right spurts of action to fit the demands of a ride. It's why we had all those action sequences, and certain sequences that don't quite fit. For the amusement park ride. (Although why people find it fun to watch films while being beaten up by their chairs - is beyond me. But to each their own.)
Jedi - was ambitious. But it was also done by someone who either never bothered to watch Force Awakens, or did and decided to ignore 80% of it, and do his own thing. Shame Abrams did kind of the same thing with Rise - he also ignored the films that came before, although not quite to the same extent.
Weirdly, Rogue One paid more attention to everything that came before and after it, than Jedi and Rise appeared to. Rogue One and Andor didn't have to - but they do, as does Mandalorian, and OBi Wan. They are doing a better job in the continuity department with the television series than the films (it's usually the opposite with these things...)
I think if you don't care about continuity that much, Jedi probably worked better for you? Or if theme is more important than a solid character arc? Although I agree the character arcs are in Jedi, but Jedi is so insanely busy with inside filmmaker jokes that it's hard to see them. It's a film a film geek would adore, but anyone who is obsessed with the story or characters - will want to scream at. That's Rian Johnson though - he is a filmmaker's filmmaker. He really appeals to film geeks or critics. Because there's lots of little details in his films and it's where his focus tends to be.
I mean you either like Rian Johnson or you don't, I think. I can take him or leave him, myself. While Knives Out series was entertaining, I didn't fall in love with it.
That said? I agree that if Iger had been in less of a rush and more present, like say a Kevin Fiege or even a Peter Jackson, then the series would have been more cohesive. (Notice I didn't say Lucas - Lucas is not a good show-runner, all he cares about is Industrial Light and Magic and the FX. The story was never his main thing. It's kind of obvious in the prequels, also in the tweaks that Ford, Kasdan and Fisher made to his scripts in the original films. Fisher was kind of famous for stating that Lucas wasn't a good script writer, he's not. And he did not direct actor's well - Alec Guinness and Liam Neesom, almost killed him.)
That's Star Wars main problem as a franchise - it doesn't have a good show-runner with a vision. Star Trek has kind of the same problem. Both are all over the place in terms of quality and continuity. They are almost as bad as comic books and soap operas, and sigh, the Whedonverse.
no subject
Yeah, my middle brother thought that Last Jedi was great. He's the one who doesn't actually like Star Wars, so that tracks. LOL.
no subject
no subject
How can the original creator of his story “botch” parts of his own saga? Of course, people can disagree about narrative choices in the story. At the end of the day, it’s the creator’s vision of the story, at the time.
“beginning to agree with various critics (including John Scalzi) who've stated that the Stars Wars films that didn't feature Skywalker or Han Solo tended to be better than the ones that have”
I definitely disagree with those critics. If you remove the main characters from a Star Wars film in order to enjoy a Star Wars film, then have they considered that maybe they don’t like Star Wars? Why not watch a different space fantasy or sci fi movie? I find that train of logic odd but I’m curious to understand why some critics or fans think that way.
no subject
The critics didn't state that those characters aren't necessary or interesting, just that for some reason or other the films and series that didn't contain them were "tighter" and "objectively speaking - better written, directed and produced" with less emphasis on special effects. The dialogue is better, sharper. The plot tighter. Look I love Star Wars, and I loved Solo, Luke and Leia - but Andor is a tighter story. I think part of the difference is that the original film and the prequels were oddly aimed at a family audience or kids.
then have they considered that maybe they don’t like Star Wars? Why not watch a different space fantasy or sci fi movie? I find that train of logic odd but I’m curious to understand why some critics or fans think that way.
Some people, myself included, enjoy critiquing the things we love. We like to see what worked and what didn't for us. It's not that complicated.
no subject
Was the writing on Andor more sophisticated than the other D+ shows? Yes, but having characters talk more doesn’t necessarily make the show ‘better’. I watched the first few episodes, which was a slog to get thru due to slow pacing, no action, and way too much dialogue. I’ve also seen some themes on Andor on the Bad Batch, but handled in 30 minutes or less. I think the show would have been ‘better’ if it were six episodes instead of dragging it out to 12 episodes. I get the three episode story arc, but the execution was too slow and boring.
Critiquing what one likes is one thing, but if a showrunner who doesn’t care about the lore of the source material is hired to run a show set in the universe of a movie that they don’t like? Fans will notice the differences and inconsistencies.
no subject
I'd agree. That was the difficulty with Last Jedi and Rise. And in some respects why the Disney television serials work better - since the show-runners seem to care more about consistencies.
Andor is easier for a show-runner, because they don't have to mention or deal with the main characters of the previous series. Consider it another way? You are writing fanfic or playing a RPG for Star Wars, it's actually easier if you don't write about the main characters - because you don't have to deal with the fact that everyone perceives them differently than you do (people have strong opinions about main characters and are convinced their perception of them is the only one), but when you are creating a new character or focusing on a lesser-known character - then there's less chance of annoying people who view it differently. You also have more freedom to play. It's less restrictive.
It is not easy to play with someone else's characters, let alone iconic ones. Even original creators suck at it - in part because with film and television - it's not the same thing as a novel. George Lucas isn't really the "CREATOR", the work was a collaboration. Harrison Ford for example? Created a lot of his own dialogue and changed scenes. Carrie Fisher did the same thing. They adlibbed a lot. Industrial Light & Magic had a team of F/X guys who often went off book (not sure if you saw that documentary on Disney + yet?). George tried to control the narrative, but a lot of it was input from other people. The big difference between the first trilogy and the prequels - is the change in collaborators. You no longer had the same actors (obviously), or the same screen writer (George didn't write the script to Star Wars, Lawrence Kasdan did, with help from Fisher and Ford - Fisher and Ford let this slip in a lot of documentaries. George wasn't a good script-writer - this wasn't just dialogue but also action.)
(oops off to a meeting.)
no subject
The same argument can be applied to The Mandalorian. It is a show about an original character that didn’t even appear in the movies. It seems easier, with more creative freedom, to write an original character, but there’s more effort put into them to appeal to an audience that isn’t familiar to them. If the audience isn’t drawn to that original character, it’s on the creator to make it so. Meanwhile an established character has expectations but the writer just needs to be consistent and in character. Already there is a fan base for that character and established source material. For some writers, they may have an easier time staying true to the source material. So it really depends.
no subject
But, I will give them credit for making Rey, Finn, and the other new characters interesting - which has more to do with the rich world Lucas created. If you do a good job with the world-building, it is easier for other's to play around in your sand box, so to speak.
I preferred Andor to Mandalorian (which kind of bored me in places, and was rather clunky and uneven). Andor felt tighter, and had a much higher production value, also in some respects a better cast. Granted it too drug in places, but I also felt Andor did a better job of exploring the world, and depended less on the main characters to establish itself. But I get that mileage may vary here. Andor is a WWII style political spy thriller, featuring noirish characters. While the Mandalorian is basically a 1970s space western, complete with the man with no name (aka the Sergio Leone Westerns of old). I like both styles, but was more intrigued by Andor. (I've seen both and enjoyed both.)
[I've not seen the Bad Batch or Rebels, nor the computer animated Clone Wars - so can't comment. The animation style put me off, which is a personal thing - and not an apt criticism.]
Andor - did build off of a character that existed in Rogue One, and had a fanbase. Rogue One was risky - since it was a prequel to Star Wars, and dealt with the unseen subsidiary characters story. These characters do work within the continuity - since they are part of the world and the plot of Star Wars, and add to the film. Rogue One made Star Wars a better film, as does Andor. Because they both add a certain amount of seriousness and importance to the events of Star Wars. Or gravity. We now know how many lives were lost - and more importantly who they were, we have faces, and names - for what happened in Star Wars. We know that Darth Vadar really was horrible. (Not a fun villain, but a truly horrific one - in what he did. As was those around him.) And as a result, Luke's journey becomes more interesting, as does Han's and most importantly Leia's. Because of Andor and Rogue One - we understand why Leia was doing what she was doing, and why she was willing to risk everything for it.
The prequels, unfortunately, kind of ...did the opposite for many fans. They cheapened Darth, and made him laughable and not all that sympathetic. They also kind of lost people on Padme and the world. Instead of making the Star Wars films more interesting, they made them less so.
Part of the problem was the high expectations many fans had in regards to the prequels. I was
anticipating the prequels since 1985. And had written some of them in my head, did even fanfic regarding them. As I think did many others. That does create a level of expectation that I'm not sure anyone can begin to approach. But Lucas unfortunately was told by his buddies that he should direct it - and he was by far the worst of the directors of the films. (Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi weren't directed by Lucas. Empire the best of the bunch was directed by Lucas's film school instructor, an auteur who figured out how to make the film stand on its own. It was mainly Kasdan and that Director's project. Lucas laid out the story board and was primarily involved with the F/X.) Lucas isn't really much of a director for "people" nor is he a good script-writer - and if you've seen his other films, you kind of pick up on it. (American Graffiti, THX, Willow...the Raiders Saga was directed by Spielberg.)
The better films in the series - weren't directed by Lucas and weren't written by him.
The problem the prequels had - was he couldn't get someone else to direct and really write them, and he didn't have Fisher and Ford. Instead he had new characters - the only ones from the original were Darth and Obi Wan, and they weren't played by the original actors. So, outside of maybe Ewan McGregor, we had a lot of stiff performances by actors who didn't know how to act in a Lucas film.
There's a reason people dislike those films. For myself? I liked the middle one - which I thought was rather interesting. The first one - irritated me, Anakin was a little kid (which didn't work at all), and Jar JAr Binks was annoying. It was clearly geared towards kids. The third one - was a disjointed mess, that had a laughable ending. Not at all the gravitas that you find in say - Empire or Rogue One. And it should have had that level of gravitas. It should have been a tragedy. They actually did a better job in both Return of the Jedi and Rise of Skywalker.
And those films almost sank the franchise. It's why they are widely reviled by fans and causal viewers alike.
[I saw all three in movie theaters.]
no subject
I watched Rogue One in a movie theater. I had a pleasant time watching it, but I thought it was okay. Better than the main d sequels but not as good as the original saga. I initially saw the movie as a side story. I can still understand the main characters’ motivations for joining the rebellion without watching a spin off movie. (What are your thoughts on Liam Neeson saying that Star Wars is diluted with too many spin-offs?)
I disagree with the sentiment that making Darth Vader a tragic figure, a former hero who has fallen from grace, ‘cheap’. If anything, it makes his story more complex, not just a one note villain. Now, Padme is my favorite character from the prequels. I liked her compassion and courage, which makes it very tragic when she dies at the end of episode 3. (Tho I’d disagree with Lucas killing Padme off right at the end. I can imagine that she’d live on as a rebel spy, keeping tabs on Luke and Leia until she sacrifices herself to save others, which deeply impacted Leia to fully go into the rebellion. Would make an interesting au but I digress…)
I was a kid when the prequels came out in theaters. To say that those films were widely reviled is rather dismissive of a key demographic of Star Wars fans who grew up watching and enjoying the prequels in the early 2000s.
no subject
I had issues with the insane age difference between Padme and Anakin. And I remember having issues with Hayden Christian's bad performance. He made what should have been a complex and fascinating character - kind of silly. I didn't care about him at the time, and cringed during that performance in Sith. I can't watch it - too cringe-inducing. And I'd waited over fifteen years to see it.
I disagree with Liam Neeson - Star Wars had a rich world, and was set up as a serial, not stand-alone. There's a lot to be explored there. Also, I don't think we can take him too seriously on that - he hated the shoot, because he was reciting bad dialogue in front of a green screen. It drove him nuts. Lucas is a tough director for actors - he cares more about the look of it, and not about the character motivation or the dialogue. Ford is famous for stating - "People don't talk like that, George." That's the problem with the prequels. I did see the cartoon version of the Clone Wars - which was brilliant in comparison (not Lucas, the other one that came out with the prequels - it did have great character arcs, and Anakin has an episode in a cave that's well done. It's so much better than the prequels.)
I honestly think kids probably liked the prequels better than the adult fandom did.
no subject
Though I initially enjoyed the prequels as a kid, as I grew up, I did start to see some issues with the prequels. Absolutely agreed that Anakin and Padme’s ages should have been similar, like in line with the actors’ ages during Episode 2. Han and Leia also had a bigger age gap, and so did the one terrible pairing that shall not be mentioned in the disney sequels. Very odd indeed.
Hayden did his job, he was trying to emulate Darth Vader’s cadence before he ‘went in the suit’. Could the direction and execution have been different? Maybe, but I didn’t have any issue with his portrayal.
The Filoni Clone Wars animated series is ok imo but at least it did its job of expanding on the prequels. Filoni worked with Lucas but at least he continued the original vision in his own way. I remember the 2d micro series tho, which was different and focused more on visual storytelling.
I think it’s more like Star Wars under Disney is losing its mystery with every single detail having to be explained in a book or a tv show. It depends.
no subject
Expectations killed the prequels for me. I had twenty years worth. Also, if you'd seen the originals in the movie theaters in the 1970s and 80s, you'd have reacted to them very differently. (We didn't have the special effects people had in the 21st Century, let alone in the 1990s. Star Wars was insanely innovative - it was unlike anything we'd ever seen. Prior to that? Sci-fi was pretty much adult fare and horror. Monsters from outer-space, aliens. Star Wars was fun - it was a blend of fantasy, science fiction, World War II movie, and western. My father was excited about it - and we went out of our way to see it. Back then? We didn't have VHS. Movies didn't come to television until years after they'd been released. And there was no such thing as cable - it was just five channels, three network channels, PBS, UHF, that was it. I remember neighbors swearing King Kong would do better than Star Wars. I didn't agree, having see both. )
When Lucas re-released the originals he did more than merely edit them, he added stuff. He also changed scenes - such as had Greco fire on Han (unnecessary and didn't fit the prequels at all). But if you hadn't seen them in the 70s and 80s, it may not have mattered to you. You'd have reacted differently.
People do. A friend of mine didn't see Star Wars until she was an adult, about twenty years after it was released, so never got the appeal of the originals, and preferred Force Awakens. While my entire family, including my parents, with the exception of my niece, preferred the originals - nostalgia partly. We had the action figures of Leia, Luke, etc as little kids. They weren't expensive. And they were innovative back then.
I honestly think how, when, why, and who you view something with - has a huge effect on how you perceive it. Also, what baggage you bring to it. For me? Star Wars was the first time I saw a woman in a lead role in a science fiction movie, that wasn't horror. I couldn't watch horror. And she wasn't playing a damsel in distress or a romantic love interest - but down in the thick of things, and a fighter. Plus? She wasn't that much older than I was - bonus.
no subject
Star Wars to me is a good and engaging saga. When I watch any if the six films, they’re like great escapes from reality. I can still rewatch them and still have a great time.
Unfortunately with the disney sequels, I haven’t rewatched them since they were in theaters, and have no interest to rewatch them.
no subject
Regarding Cassian's backstory, I think we still don't know enough about Cassian's life before the beginning of Andor to assume that he wasn't involved in some rebellious activity (given what Maarva did which we actually saw). So it probably comes down to how the Rebellion is defined. I mean, just his age alone would mean he couldn't have grown up in it unless we count it as happening within years of the Empire's establishment.
Edit: Realized I posted this before I commented about Iger. I agree that the blame rests at least partially with him and the timeline for the film, but also with the decisions of who to hire to develop the new films. I get why they did it, given the amount of money they'd just sunk into Lucasfilm, only a new film series could start to recoup those costs -- and any new content was going to take a while to develop.
But I do regret that storytelling was not the primary thought for most of the films. While the TV shows may have been uneven, overall they've been better than the movies. Yet had it not been for the disappointment in film returns and issues they were having in who they were handing the movies over to (see the mess on Solo), we might not have gotten the TV development as soon as we did.
no subject
And yes, agreed that they chose the wrong people to be the main creative minds behind the sequel trilogy.
no subject
Imo, I find it strange that LF greenlit a show about a character from a side story movie and hired a showrunner who said that he wasn’t a fan of Star Wars to make a Star Wars show? That doesn’t make any sense.
Meanwhile, I watch The Last of Us, where the original creator and crew behind the original game is heavily involved, along with good writers and actors. The care and effort put into that show shined through in a good adaptation of a videogame.
Yeah there’s always going to be inconsistencies because creatives tend to change ideas over time. It happens. As long as it isn’t glaringly obvious.
no subject
As for why LF hired Gilroy for Andor? They thought he had solid ideas, I'm assuming. What little I do know: someone at LF apparently asked for Gilroy's opinion on one version of an outline for the Andor show; Gilroy wrote a whole manifesto in reply about what he thought they should do, and that ultimately lead to him getting a job that he hadn't been looking for.
I'd rather have someone who does good character arcs and plotlines, and fit that into the lore, than have someone who's so focused on the lore that the arcs and plotlines don't work as well. *shrug* obviously we feel differently about Andor as a whole, but looking at the lore within the show, they're using it well. Cassian is a minor character within the SW universe, which makes it easier. But they're keeping things flowing with Mon Mothma's known past/future, they've introduced the ISB into a live-action show for the first time (and made it compelling!), and the whole series serves to make Rogue One a richer film. So... thumbs up!
The thing to keep in mind about Gilroy allegedly not caring about Star Wars: he likes to run his mouth. A lot. He's done a Star Wars movie and will ultimately create 24 episodes of a Star Wars show. Him "not caring" looks an awful lot like someone who cares. Even if it's just to make a good story within the Star Wars universe. If he truly didn't care, he wouldn't do the work.
no subject
The Force Awakens seemed at the surface level popcorn film. It was like the Star Trek reboot film. There was definitely potential with Rey and Finn, but sadly they were wasted. Also the ot characters didn’t reunite on screen at all.
Meanwhile, Ghostbusters Afterlife introduced new characters, and had the legacy characters reunite and pass the torch to the new characters. It was done well enough. It’s what TFA should have been.
That’s good for him but I just find his directing style boring. That’s all.
Definitely agree with you on having good writing and characters arcs on a show, but if it doesn’t feel like it fits within the universe or established canon, then might as well change it into an original sci fi show instead?
no subject
Who's the judge of "does it fit?" Because Andor fits in great, in my opinion. And why would they make a stand-alone genre show when they can instead create something that adds value to the franchise as well as creativity?
An example more appropriate for your preferences: I could argue that instead of adapting a video game, HBO should create an original show about survival. Then I could say that zombie stories in visual media are gross and overdone. These are all true statements, in my opinion! But just because I'm not the target audience for The Last of Us doesn't mean that it's without value to you.
(There's a whole side discussion we could have about the franchising of media and the drawbacks of large media conglomerates, but this really isn't the time for that.)
no subject
The Last of Us has a different take on the zombie apocalypse, with fungi controlling people instead. Yeah, HBO could make their own original zombie series if they wanted to?
When Disney bought Star Wars, they thought it was going to be their next cash cow. So they just tried to churn out content, slap the Star Wars brand on said content, and call it a day, just to make money. Disney has the resources and the creative talent to create something original. Instead they just buy established ips yet to churn out remakes and sequels. At the moment, they’re creatively bankrupt.
no subject
no subject
It’s great that you can come up with headcanons and fic ideas for any media that you like. I’m currently doing that with Ghostbusters, just having a fun time playing in that sandbox.