Red Mosquito

CopperTom wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

CopperTom wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

CopperTom wrote:I always viewed Leia as not quite knowing the power of the DS while in orbit over Alderon. If she knew, she would have never risked lying.

I don't follow?

If she knew it could destroy the planet, I don't think she would have lied. She would have told Tarkin where the Rebellion actually was located.

I understand your sentence. Just not the logic. Why do you think she would have told the truth? After all of that. Knowing it's full power, you think she would have caved and turned traitor? Just doesn't seem right to me.

Also, she doesn't know it's full power. She saw a test and from afar. Maybe she didn't believe it was fully functioning and/or that it would literally be able to destroy a whole planet.

She was the second most powerful leader on Alderon. She wouldn't betray her people on Alderon either. She was "traitor" either way.

durdencommatyler wrote:

CopperTom wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

CopperTom wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

CopperTom wrote:I always viewed Leia as not quite knowing the power of the DS while in orbit over Alderon. If she knew, she would have never risked lying.

I don't follow?

If she knew it could destroy the planet, I don't think she would have lied. She would have told Tarkin where the Rebellion actually was located.

I understand your sentence. Just not the logic. Why do you think she would have told the truth? After all of that. Knowing it's full power, you think she would have caved and turned traitor? Just doesn't seem right to me.

Also, she doesn't know it's full power. She saw a test and from afar. Maybe she didn't believe it was fully functioning and/or that it would literally be able to destroy a whole planet.

She was the second most powerful leader on Alderon. She wouldn't betray her people on Alderon either. She was "traitor" either way.

I guess I need to revisit what actually happens in ANH because I'm just not following what you're saying at all. It's my bad. I haven't seen that movie in a long time.

Simple Torture wrote:Holy fucking shit, Joey and CopperTom, are you misspelling "Alderaan" just to give me a fucking ulcer or what?

Simple Torture wrote:Holy fucking shit, Joey and CopperTom, are you misspelling "Alderaan" just to give me a fucking ulcer or what?

Simple Torture wrote:Holy fucking shit, Joey and CopperTom, are you misspelling "Alderaan" just to give me a fucking ulcer or what?

dimejinky99 wrote:Joey you need to see R1 again and then immediately watch a new hope after it.

durdencommatyler wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:Or trying to make a case that rogue one is great and feeling the only way to do that is to dismantle and pick apart force awakens to make that case is just lazy.

Picking apart either film by using flaws that are contained in both is what I'm getting at, dime. I don't see any reason to pick apart The Force Awakens on Rogue One's terms or vice versa. It's entirely possible and valid to like/love one of these films and dislike/hate the other. That's not my issue. No one has to like either of them. But what we've seen a lot of (in this thread and across the internet) is some need to bring down one to elevate the other and I think that's weird. Because this has always been such a beloved (though flawed) franchise.

durdencommatyler wrote:

stip wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

stip wrote:And if I recall correctly, Joey, you were pretty taken with Ren's performance. Do you also not think that character undergoes meaningful development in TFA (you didn't mention him) or was that an oversight on your part? Before I drop another thousand words on this and further ruin McP and Platy's day

I didn't include him because it feels like we're getting further from the mark and carried away by this word "arc." I was probably using it in a different way than you. I do think Kylo Ren had "meaningful development" yes. I think Han has "meaningful development" as well, though.

how are you using the word arc, since you almost certainly have a more narrow (and accurate) definition?

I don't know that I do have a more accurate definition, actually.

But I guess, I just mean that we all started using it as a blanket term to cover everything during this conversation. I don't think Han has an arc in the strictest sense of the word, but that doesn't mean he's stagnant or that he experiences nothing meaningful throughout the course of the plot. Clearly, that's not true.

But if we use the word arc to mean the character transforms over the course of the story, and like the story, has a beginning, middle and end, then I don't think most characters qualify in the Star Wars films. And that's okay. As I said before, these stories aren't supposed to be about all of them equally. Again, not every character has to transform to be meaningful or to impact the story or even for us to fall in love with them. R2 goes on a great adventure and affects the outcome at many turns but doesn't have what I would call a character arc. But we all fucking love the shit out of him, nonetheless. In taking about Rogue One, I just don't think it's accurate to say there is no character development. Or to criticize characters for not being fully developed. Because the story doesn't necessarily require all of them to go much further than they do. That was my initial point.

Han's changes all come off screen. He is a different man than we knew in RotJ. But we only know this because he tells us. Very little in his actions show any kind of transformation or growth or "arc" from who Han is when we find in in TFA and when we leave him in TFA. Han gets four films over which to explore and make an impression and transform. Cassian, for example, gets 120 minutes. And I would argue has a far more profound transformation over the course of his one single film than Han does in his one single film (if that film is TFA).

stip wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

stip wrote:

durdencommatyler wrote:

stip wrote:And if I recall correctly, Joey, you were pretty taken with Ren's performance. Do you also not think that character undergoes meaningful development in TFA (you didn't mention him) or was that an oversight on your part? Before I drop another thousand words on this and further ruin McP and Platy's day

I didn't include him because it feels like we're getting further from the mark and carried away by this word "arc." I was probably using it in a different way than you. I do think Kylo Ren had "meaningful development" yes. I think Han has "meaningful development" as well, though.

how are you using the word arc, since you almost certainly have a more narrow (and accurate) definition?

I don't know that I do have a more accurate definition, actually.

But I guess, I just mean that we all started using it as a blanket term to cover everything during this conversation. I don't think Han has an arc in the strictest sense of the word, but that doesn't mean he's stagnant or that he experiences nothing meaningful throughout the course of the plot. Clearly, that's not true.

But if we use the word arc to mean the character transforms over the course of the story, and like the story, has a beginning, middle and end, then I don't think most characters qualify in the Star Wars films. And that's okay. As I said before, these stories aren't supposed to be about all of them equally. Again, not every character has to transform to be meaningful or to impact the story or even for us to fall in love with them. R2 goes on a great adventure and affects the outcome at many turns but doesn't have what I would call a character arc. But we all fucking love the shit out of him, nonetheless. In taking about Rogue One, I just don't think it's accurate to say there is no character development. Or to criticize characters for not being fully developed. Because the story doesn't necessarily require all of them to go much further than they do. That was my initial point.

Han's changes all come off screen. He is a different man than we knew in RotJ. But we only know this because he tells us. Very little in his actions show any kind of transformation or growth or "arc" from who Han is when we find in in TFA and when we leave him in TFA. Han gets four films over which to explore and make an impression and transform. Cassian, for example, gets 120 minutes. And I would argue has a far more profound transformation over the course of his one single film than Han does in his one single film (if that film is TFA).

Cassian does have a larger transformation than Han for sure (as does Jyn, but probably none of the other characters). But I do disagree that Han doesn't end up covering a fair amount of distance in TFA. It may not feel that way since some of it is similar ground to what he did in the OT, but the reset in terms of why he needed to get back there was totally legit, and to be honest I think better done in TFA than it is in Jedi, where it's like a light gets switched on.

LoathedVermin72 wrote:I can't believe stip referred to Ben Mendelsohn as "the actor who played Krennic"

tragabigzanda wrote:I liked this movie a lot but this thread is starting to make me hate it.

LoathedVermin72 wrote:I can't believe stip referred to Ben Mendelsohn as "the actor who played Krennic"

tragabigzanda wrote:I liked this movie a lot but this thread is starting to make me hate it.