The movie sucked because muh plot wasn't original!

>the movie sucked because muh plot wasn't original!

Let me tell you what else didn't have an original plot:
>Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet (based on an Italian epic poem)
>Shakespeare's Hamlet (based on the old Norse story of Amleth)
>Homer's Iliad (based on older attic Greek epics)
>most myth and folklore is just a retelling of older myth and folklore

The notion that everything has to be a 100% original idea sprung up from a creators mind in the middle of the night is a retarded myth invented by the special snowflake generation.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_IV,_Part_2
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_VI,_Part_2
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_VI,_Part_3
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hero's_journey#Popular_culture
twitter.com/AnonBabble

ok

The movie was actually great.

Force awakens is a rehash in the same universe that was worse then the original. It also taints the original trilogy as hey it turns out nothing they did mattered, because here is the new empire. Rogue one on the other hand added to the world building with insights into both the empire and rebellion.

So fuck off.

shakespeare didn't write a play called hamlet 2 and rehash 90% of the plot of hamlet

fuck off shill

It's only a sin to copy others if you can't do it well. Force Awakens is a poorly made film, and it doesn't cease to be poorly made just because some people are unable to criticise it for its actual flaws.

>nothing they did mattered.
30 years of peace means nothing? That's like saying that WWII American heroes don't matter because we ended up in another war 30 years later. As for Rogue One, nothing of consequence happens in that film, except for the fact that it ruined the ending of A New Hope by turning Luke's amazingly lucky shot he needed the Force to execute into something that happened to be planned all along.

jesus christ op you're stupid.

>cynical cashgrabs to trick idiots out of money are modern mythology

It's one of the better blockbuster films of this decade in terms of actual execution. It's better acted, shot, and written than anything put out by either Marvel or Sony. The only legitimate complaint is its similarity to the original.

>edgy Bible rip-off
Nice """""classic"""""

In 30 years the same damn Nazis didn't show up to do the exact same thing on a larger scale.

Watched this again the other night. It's actually pretty good.

TFA is extremely dated. Not in that it looks old, but in 10 years people will watch it and notice just how much of an influence the the year of its production had on it. It will reek of 2015 forever while the OT will remain entirely timeless.

It was a fucking fanfic
>muh scrappy main character who lives in squalor on a sandy rock but is magically good at literally everything
>she meets the main characters from the original movie and they're all impressed by how amazing she
>she's better at repairing the Millennium Falcon than Han Solo is
>then she joins the rebels who are still totally the rebels despite having defeated the empire and controlling the galaxy
>then it turns out she can totally use the Force and is instantly good at it
>then she fights a trained Sith in a lightsaber duel and wins despite never having used one before
>then she destroys the Death Star but it's cooler than when Luke did it because it's a bigger and badder Death Star
>then she goes to train with Luke Skywalker to become a Jedi
JJ Abrams is a fucking hack.

>It was a fucking fanfic
>being this upset
how does it feel knowing Lucas fucked up so badly with the prequels that he had to sell star wars to Pixar

Love's Labours Lost II: Love's Labours Won

The movie sucked for reasons beyond that.
>weak villain
>forgettable main characters
Han Solo being in it solo carried it to being a 5/10 and that is being generous.

If it was a remake that was BETTER than the original I wouldn't have a problem with it. But everything about it save the special effects was much worse.

Force awakens has the not empire kill the new new republic. So in what 45 years the republic has fallen twice to the same empire bullshit. Leia is a resistance fighter AGAIN. Han is a smuggler AGAIN. The Old yedi hides out in a isolated planet AGAIN. The rebels are on the backfoot AGAIN. The Not empire can build even bigger super weapons AGAIN.

Your anology would only make sense, if the Germans managed to take control of half of Germany 30 years after the end of WW2 and nuke New York.

One can make the argument that a lot of the same nationalistic underpinnings that lead to WWI also lead to WWII. Would you say that WWII happening makes the individual heroism of the soldiers involved in WWI irrelevant, or uninteresting?

Pixar was originally a branch of LucasFilm too.

>better acted
Q U A D J U M P A
>better written
Compared to as2, yes. Does that make a movie good?

This such an odd comment because it's literally the opposite of the truth. Rogue One is stylistically very much of its time, while TFA has many aesthetic and tonal elements from both the 70s and 2010s that don't make it feel like a film released in 2015. Even the way the film is edited makes it feel like something that could have been put out in the early 80s.

WW1 was a pointless futile war. It was a shame that it happened in the first place, let alone happened the second time.

Good job it's only fanfic and not canon in any way.

>end of ROTJ
>"what happened after that, daddy?"
>"they all lived happily ever after."
>"isn't there another film set after this one? with han and chewie and-"
>"THEY ALL LIVED HAPPILY EVER AFTER. THE END."

>individual heroism of the soldiers involved in WWI irrelevant, or uninteresting?
Yes.

Your examples would make sense if, say, a thing like the Odissey was the same story as the Iliad instead of a "spin-off" with one of the dudes from the Golden Fleece. But is a new story.

People copy each other, no surprise, but in a story set in the same universe you need originality.

In other words you are a shill, a retard, or both.

>Your anology would only make sense, if the Germans managed to take control of half of Germany 30 years after the end of WW2 and nuke New York.
Which would make for a dramatically interesting story.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_IV,_Part_2
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_VI,_Part_2
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_VI,_Part_3

Shakespeare pioneered shitting out sequels.

Kylo Ren is a far more interesting character than Vader was in ANH. Even people who dislike the film, like Max Landis, concede this.

Oh but if Max Landis said it then it must be true.


Fuck off, max

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_VI,_Part_2
Do they have the same plot?

You are a battered wife.

Yet there is no backup villain to carry the narrative. Snoke is a hologram. Hux is a gay red nazi, a mere shade of Tarkin. Captain Phasma was a bitch. That is it. Vader on the other hand could carry a entire movie on his shoulders from sheer awe and power.

There is a difference between inspired by and completely copying you fucking retard

And your analogy would make sense if The Force Awakens was the exact same story as A New Hope. And by the way, I wasn't referring to the Odyssey, I was referring to the fact that most historians believe that Homer was working off an old storytelling tradition and didn't actually write his works himself. That's how myth works; you take old stories and retell them by either changing the characters or adding in your own elements. This is what TFA does.

The idea of nationalism causing two consecutive wars is not the same as the same exact group of like minded people, following the system of beliefs of the same people from before, doing the exact same thing, by the way, in a new system completely under the control of the people who overthrew them in the first place. It makes the heroes seem incompetent for allowing this to happen under their noses, again, on a larger scale. And yes, World War 1 is regarded as a pretty shitty, pointless, cruel war. It was when the whole "War is hell" thing became really mainstream.

>completely copying
New characters, new settings, new conflicts. The only thing it copies is the basic structure of the plot, which most sequels do.

Most good sequels, and even a lot of bad ones, at least try to make a new fucking plot instead of just switching around names and locations from the first movie.

I'm not a Star Wars fan in denial, in fact I hate most of the movies. The only good films in the series are the first one and The Force Awakens.

how mad are you?

Better acted? Seriously?
Better written? What is the best written part, when they assrape their own universe's consistency, or when they do not explain anything J.J. Lost style?

Which shot did you like the most, the immersion killing lens flare?

How can you be so fucking delusional?

Are you retarded? Literally most sequels are the same plot as the original if you're abstract enough in your interpretation. People have been making jokes about this for decades.

he said good sequels. We know most sequels are shit. But thank you for your insight user. Kys.

I see, super hipster. You have the right to eist I suppose.

Are you serious? The new characters are copy replacements of the old like rey is for luke and poe is for han, the setting are all things we've seen before like jakku is for tatooine and the conflicts are the same like the star killer base is for the death star

It's much better acted. This isn't even a debate; the original films were derided for their mediocre acting and crummy dialogue. I think George himself conceded that he couldn't write dialogue to save his life.

>assrape their own universe's consistency
What consistency? The prequels and OT are at odds in terms of lore on multiple occasions.

I do concede that there are plenty of sequels that just blatantly copy/paste the events of the first movie with locations and characters switched around, those are the ones I left out when I said "a lot of bad sequels." Regardless, that shouldn't be a model for TFA to follow, and it shouldn't be immune to scrutiny because "Oh, a bunch of sequels suck, so let's give this one a pass." That's a terrible attitude and the mark of someone who isn't thinking for themselves.

There are dozens of cased throughout history of an enemy regrouping and coming back even stronger. It's not really anything new. And even if it doesn't occur in real life, that doesn't make it any less dramatically interesting. The notion that a film can be judged by how what occurs after it happens affects its legacy is retarded manchild lore-worshiping.

The force awakens is the same story as the new hope, just dumber if the universe and the characters that came before are taken into account. If you do not see this, you fail.

>That's how myth works; you take old stories and retell them by either changing the characters or adding in your own elements.
My point was: people research and get inspired by other people work, but in the same "continuity" good sequels can follow similar theme (like, greek gods interfering and being pricks) but they must follow new stories or be shit.

Homer (or whoever) took old myths, but in his own "continuity" Iliad and Odissey are different. Virgil with the Aeneid risked to go full J.J. but
1) he wanted an homage
2) did not interfere with Homer's "continuity" (barring minor stuff)
3) Mixed Iliad and Odissey, did not copy one of the two, and added new stuff like Dido.

Your example does not hold water.

New characters aren't copies of old ones at all. Poe isn't a smuggler who murders people. Finn isn't anyone from the OT. Rey is a bit like Luke, but that has more to do with following the monomyth than copying ANH.

>conflicts are the same
The main conflict of the film wasn't Starkiller base.

A number of great sequels, including Back to the Future 2 follow that formula. But my defense of TFA has little to do with defending its plot, my defense is that plot is the least interesting and important aspect of any story. Shakespeare's audience was already familiar with the plots of 90% of his plays because most of them were based on either older works, or historical events. Yet they were still engaging because he was a supremely competent writer. My defense of TFA has to do with the fact that it's a well-made film, and that our obsession with originality is hypocritical.

>The main conflict of the film wasn't Starkiller base.
Then what the fuck was it? The only characters who have any kind of arcs all have them resolved on Starkiller base. Kylo becomes fully evil or whatever, Rey becomes fully Jedi or whatever, Finn assumes his role as completely useless dingus, Harrison Ford finally escapes this franchise, everything is resolved when Starkiller base is destroyed. You could argue that the main conflict was finding Luke, which I guess, I mean that's what the plans inside BB-8 were leading to, but it's solved so easily and is really inconsequential to any character arc.

You are just stating than ANH is not well acted or written. This does not mean that saying for the nth time "I have a bad feeling about this" or dismiss conveniently plot elements with "this is a story for another day" or character making baffling decisions is any good.

>What consistency?
Just think about the Starkiller, the state of the Empire then and of the Order now.

TELL THAT TE' KANJIKLUB

>the same story as A New Hope
How many times do I have to demonstrate that this doesn't matter? If we judged the quality of a story based on the originality of its plot, 90% of the stories we tell would be accused of plagiarism.

>Homer (or whoever) took old myths, but in his own "continuity" Iliad and Odissey are different.
So your contention is that it sucks because it's a sequel? And a film that had that same exact story but in a different world with its own unique canon you'd be okay with it? That seems arbitrary.

You seem to be backtracking because the entirety of this conversation up until this point was around rehashing the plot and now you're basically saying the plot doesn't matter. All I'm saying is that if the people behind this film were that supremely competent, they'd be able to start this series of movies off in a different way than they already started off. It's lazy and off-putting, especially for people who may want to marathon the movies in the future.

i dont know what kind of brain damage you need to have to actually watch and enjoy the same rehashed garbage year after year and then actually care about it enough to shitpost here

>"this is a story for another day"
Did we really need a fucking digression just to know where they found a weapon? Is this what you want out of Star Wars; lore detail and internal consistency? It's a fantasy film with space wizards. The story is about the broad strokes, not the inconsequential details of how everything happened to occur. You seem to want a Tolkien-esque detailing of every aspect of the world, while most people want a fun space adventure film that's inspired by old cheesy serials like Flash Gordon.

>How many times do I have to demonstrate that this doesn't matter?
Is just one of the problems. There are purposeless characters like Phasma, Hyper competent like Rey, with underwritten conflict like Finn, schizophrenic between the RotJ and back to ANH like Han, uncharismatic and "your power level may vary" like Kill Loreen.
The setting and situation are unclear, you see a big base destroying the core of the Republic without any setup, there are useless scenes like the aliens inside the cargo.
Unexplained stuff like "this sword?" "lol tell you next time".
YOU think that the only problem people have with TFA is the plot, but is just one of the many reasons is shit.

>So your contention is that it sucks because it's a sequel?
How you came to this conclusion for what I wrote, I cannot even..
I have shown 3 stories of 2 authors, same universe, none made a soft reboot.
You say that people copied from the past, but within the same "continuity" they did not. Is to sate that the OP is invalid regardless the quality of TFA (which is shit).

Yes, the main conflict was finding Luke. It's the first sentence of the opening crawl. And by the way, there's a distinction between arcs being resolved on Starkiller base, and destroying Starkiller base itself being the main driving force of the plot.

You are just admitting that the movie is bad because of an informed, inherent bad quality. You add no point to the fend against the fact that TFA is shit.

If the main conflict was finding luke, do you realise that it happens outside the climax?
Do you think this is good writing?

They ripped off ANH without even knowing what actually worked. Jesus fucking christ you fanboys.

Backtracking? My first post was that people have been borrowing plot since time immemorial. Even in screenwriting classes they tell you that plot doesn't matter. What matters are characters and how they behave and interact within the story.

>in a different way
The entire point was to make A New Hope for a younger generation who have never experienced Star Wars, which is how myth works. They get passed on from one generation to another, often tweaked between cycles.

But if that's the case, then why bother blowing up Starkiller base at all? If anything wouldn't it be easier to do so if they found Luke first? Luke's got a lot of experience blowing shit up. It's not like either of these things have anything to do with each other in the first place, the resistance doesn't seem to know that the First Order has the rest of the map, so confronting the First Order has nothing to do with finding Luke, and if they did know they had the map, then blowing up Starkiller base is actively preventing them from finding him. The meat of the movie, blowing up Starkiller base, has nothing to do with finding Luke, aside from the fact that the First Order is also trying to find him in a giant, planet sized base that probably can't move at warp speed like a piece of junk like the Millennium Falcon can. The Resistance can take their time finding Luke, who cares if a couple more planets get blown up.

>make a shitty cashgrab reboot
>rehash 90% of the originals plot
>retards will still defend you online

good goy

You are overanalysing it.
The went for a zero-risk movie pandering on nostalgia because 90% of people are happy to see the Falcon again, fap a bit to it and then go home happy.

You are injecting a lot of well-thought bullshit to a safe-bet commercial operation.

I have difficulty writing now because I struggle to do not facepalm. You are worse of the retards with all the theories about the prequels and their symmetry Pleb Letter Media demolished in the last Plinkett Review.

Get a fucking life.

This is movie making not myths, ripping off another movie isn't interesting to watch

>fanboys
I already said that I dislike Star Wars, especially its fanbase.

>If the main conflict was finding luke, do you realise that it happens outside the climax?

Have you ever taken a creative writing course? A climax isn't a set, singular event of story, there are different types of climaxes that can occur at different points in the story and can either directly relate to the main conflict or only relate to it in a circuitous manner. Misusing the term 'climax' only exposed how little you know about storytelling.

>I already said that I dislike Star Wars, especially its fanbase.
If it walks like a duck etc.

>Have you ever taken a creative writing course?
Here we go. Explanation of why all the overthinked bullshit.
The film is unfocused. ANH is smooth, the DS is the focus of everything, directly or not. TFA is disjoined. Adding misused technical words will not change this.

if not done by Jar Jar Abrams

TFA is a parody of the original trilogy

>Phasma is purposeless
She served the exact function the plot required of her. What you're trying to say is that you wanted that character to have a bigger part of the story, and you think that that's somehow and inherent flaw.

>underwritten conflict like Finn
Conflict as in how? You mean character arc? He has the most complete arc in the film by far. He changes more than Rey does.

>uncharismatic Kylo Ren
This is subjective, but her obviously worked for some people given his popularity on tumblr-esque fan sites and in the cosplaying community.

> there are useless scenes like the aliens inside the cargo.
The only scene in the series where we see Han Solo smuggling. It's to show that he's back to his old ways, it wasn't useless.

>Unexplained stuff like "this sword?" "lol tell you next time".
Dumbest shit people complain about when it comes to this movie. You wanted a fucking story digression just to explain where they got a blue sword?

>You say that people copied from the past, but within the same "continuity" they did not.
You're mad that they copied the past within the same continuity, i.e. because it's a sequel. That's retarded.

Do you understand that it was a race to find Luke? Finding Luke wasn't irrelevant to the state of the First Order because they were also trying to find him. Ignoring them will A, allow them to kill billions of more people, and B, let search for Luke unperturbed.

You are unsalvageable.

>She served the exact function the plot required of her
In a work of fiction, you put detail when is needed. Any generic stormie could have done what she did.

>Conflict as in how?
Have doubt, kill fellow stormies, what he does next.. is all A-OK for you?

>The only scene in the series where we see Han Solo smuggling. It's to show that he's back to his old ways, it wasn't useless.
Ignoring the idiocy of Han back to smuggling, they already shown that. Do not try to justify padding.

>Dumbest shit people complain
No, that's classic JJ putting things in without explanation hoping that enough lens flare will confuse the viewer.

>That's retarded.
Having standards is not retarded. This, ignoring the incoherence, problems of focus and scale, and shitting on the OT, its characters and their accomplishments.

You are the perfect customers. New Capeshit and SW is made for you.
You are the reason we have a shitty cinema now.

I'm basically quoting Kathleen Kennedy about them wanting to make Star Wars for a new generation and you call that over-analyzing? I'm not standing out on a limb. Hell, Star Wars has always been about retelling old mythical tropes. Read:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hero's_journey#Popular_culture

Do you hate The Magnificent Seven because it's a copy of Seven Samurai?

Of course they will try to justify their bullshit.

You are naive. Nothing bad about that, if you are 16-18.

If you are older... wew lad.

What I'm really saying is that the crux of finding Luke should have been more related to the meat of the plot than "Oh hey, R2-D2 woke up for some reason?" If what I had said, that the Resistance knew the First Order had the rest of the map, as Kylo Ren implies they do, then the entire climax would honestly be a lot better. Instead of Han and Finn going into Starkiller base just to save Rey, they'd all have something else important to do, maybe even extend the scene with Phasma since she might know about the map. It connects the two central conflicts seamlessly and doesn't add any bullshit about R2-D2 waking up out of nowhere.

Is The Magnificent Seven set in the same universe?

Remakes are now the same thing as uninspired sequels?

How deep in your mouth is Disney's cock?

Everything you said is subjective, though. I think both ANH and TFA are 'smooth.' They're the two Star Wars films that adhere closest to the monomyth, and they're very well-paced with an opening action scene that goes straight to a languorous sequence that introduces the main character. That's why those are the only two films in the series that I happen to enjoy. Much better than Rogue One, which is action scene after action scene with almost no character development.

"New" and "original" is just a shiny coat of paint on the same old clunker.

I'd rather have a classic well-oiled machine that works well than a shiny piece of shit.

new and fresh=/=good
tropes and cliché=/=bad

This is my point. You only give a shit because it exists within the same canon. You don't care that it's a remake, you're just angry that it's both a remake and a sequel, and you brain can't process something being both.

For specific answer, this user
I am done. I really cannot anymore.

Generally speaking, you can buy this myth bullshit they sell to dignify their flicks.
If you want to swallow it, I am nobody to stop you.

I am angry because is the same story. Yes.
Super pratical: see above who said a bout an hypothetic marathon.

This is not secondary. I see you or others try to justify this shit with "hero journey" or "myth inspiring myth" bullshit because muh writing lessons.

You are putting effort into justifying a cash grab and one of the most conceptually dishonest movies ever made.

You are part of the problem.

Not him, but I think the problem is that TFA was marketed as groundbreking and it turned out to be the same ground getting broke than in the OT (female badass, black main character, etc.)

Sadly, movies aren't in a vacuum and marketing and expectations are a big part of the whole thing (at least for a few years after the movies come out).

Having the same action beats, character developement and plot points (but BIGGER) isn't a new thing in sequels and it's not a real deal breaker. Saying "this isn't your daddy's Star Wars" and giving us exactly our daddy's Star Wars is.

>Any generic stormie could have done what she did.
The costume and voice were to differentiate her status within the First Order, which is why she had access to the shields towards the end of the film. She served her function.

>Have doubt, kill fellow stormies, what he does next.. is all A-OK for you?
He has doubt. His character opens with doubt, and he tries to run away throughout. Are you upset that he's not more torn about the fact that he has to kill the people that are literally hunting him down? This is a space adventure film, not a meditative war drama.

>Ignoring the idiocy of Han back to smuggling, they already shown that. Do not try to justify padding.
No, they haven't shown Han Solo smuggling in any Star Wars film before.

>padding
lol what. Stop letting the memes influence your opinion of the film. It was a sequence like any other.

>No, that's classic JJ putting things in without explanation
If they explained how they found it would be an objectively worse film. I hope they never explain it.

>hoping that enough lens flare will confuse the viewer.
Nice meme. I remember it back from March of 2009. Glad you're bringing back this retro internet gag.

>You are the reason we have a shitty cinema now.
I don't watch movies or tv. I watch like 3 new movies a year. I don't support modern cinema.

This is a non-post. Why would you waste your time if you're not going to actually participate in the discussion?

This is what Red Letter Media and Cinema Sins does to peoples' brains. They care more about plot details and how the various events converge and connect with one another in a logically consistent way than they care about shit that actually matters when it comes to storytelling, like characters, aesthetics, and form.

Please don't get me started on the characters then because I will never fucking stop talking about them. Not just Rey, everyone else in this movie is just the fucking worst.

It could be a non-post, but believing in any artistic research in these overrated flicks is insanity.

>I don't watch movies or tv. I watch like 3 new movies a year. I don't support modern cinema.

OK NEVERMIND THEN
SORRY FOR TAKING YOU SERIOUSLY LAD

Jesus fucking christ.

The personal insults are petty. They make you look bad and don't serve your arguments well.

My point is that you don't seem to care that it's the same story because your criticism is that it's the same story within the same continuity. So it's the fact that it's both remake and sequel that bothers you, not the fact that it's a remake. I've given many examples of great remakes that probably don't bother you.

>Saying "this isn't your daddy's Star Wars" and giving us exactly our daddy's Star Wars is.
Where the fuck were you last year? The entire marketing premise was "THIS IS YOUR DAD'S STAR WARS, NOT YOUR OLDER BROTHER'S SHITTY STAR WARS." They wen't through great pains to show how similar it was to the OT, even going so far as to talk about its use of practical effects and the fact that the old cast was all back.

No, it's you that are analysing it adding a shallow and undeserved "myth" aura while the story one follows and is emotionally attached to goes to shit.

Mary Sue is a valid complaint, but I don't see how Finn, Poe, and Kylo can be subject to ire. All of the tertiary characters are really engaging.

Both of you are right.

TFA characters were aweful. Finn felt like two character merged into one. Rey was just showing off how great she was at everything without any real hardship to conterbalance. Kylo's motivations were glossed over and should have been explored a little more. Some characters (Han, Phasma) just let shit happen because it was needed for the plot to go in a particular direction (not a bad thing per se, but it is bad when the characters and their dialoge doesn't feel natural in these scenes).
The only characters who were well written were Poe and Hux.

I don't get how this is weird. If you're over 50 (i'm not) you're only watching like 3 or 4 new movies a year. When I watch a movie I tend watch one of the thousands that were made prior to the last 5 years, not one of the dozens of forgetting films put out ever year.

Kylo's motivations are actually really interesting once you understand that he knows that Luke seduced Vader to the light and that he's trying to avoid that same weakness by killing his family. The fact that the movie doesn't make that clear is disappointing, but i'm sure the sequels will. And he's still much more of a character in this film than Vader was in ANH.

As for Finn, I don't get the hate he elicits on this board . Him along with Poe seem to be the two characters that everyone, even people who disliked the film, seem to enjoy.

Muh female action hero NEVER DONE BEFORE IN SW LADS
Muh black minority in SW NOW FOR THE FIRST TIME
Muh female Empire villain THERE NEVER WAS A FEMALE EMPIRE VILLAIN BEFORE LADS

I sound like some Sup Forums shit, but I'm not the one who based a big chunck of the marketing campaign on that kind of "LOOK HOW WE'RE MAKING SW MODERN LADS" shit.

All these grounds were broken before by the OT (and some by the PT).

Different guy but

>The costume and voice were to differentiate her status within the First Order,
Let's not kid ourselves, it was to sell toys.
>Are you upset that he's not more torn about the fact that he has to kill the people that are literally hunting him down?
Yes, actually. I would have thought he would have been a little more hesitant
>lol what. Stop letting the memes influence your opinion of the film. It was a sequence like any other.
The scene served little to no purpose. If Han would have survived the movie, maybe it would have led to something. However, because you can take that scene out and it doesn't affect the movie whatsoever, it's padding.
>I hope they never explain it.
>