Plinkett is death process

>Plinkett is death process.

The asian guy was annoying.

That's racist

No, it would be racist if he annoyed me and then I got annoyed by him an hour later.

>mfw this user isn't one with the force
>mfw the force isn't with him

I'm just saying the character felt forced.

DUDE I'M SOME SORT OF RELIGIOUS MONK BUT LITERALLY THE ONLY WORDS I HAVE ARE I AM ONE WITH THE FORCE, THE FORCE IS WITH ME LMAO

>mfw

another 2016 death

I wouldn't expect a scruffy looking Nerf-herder to understand.

>tfw you're op
>tfw you posted the wrong image
>tfw the thread starts growing anyway

>mfw anons have such shitty opinions on this board

And the twist is you're one of them.

Directed by M Night Shyamalan

>getting this mad

>implying

The Rogue One review was by far the most hamfisted hypocritical bullshit ever. The problems he has with Rogue One are in droves in The Force Awakens, which is loved.

Its fucking retarded, people need to stop parroting the opinions of retards.

>dosen't understand mantras

pleb

The people who love rogue own need to fucking grow up and accept a different opinion. It's a boring, poorly written movie and we can agree to disagree.

Again, more proof that Disney had been bribing critics

If you liked Rogue One you're a brain dead millennial or man child.

i thought the movie was shit

but the asian guy and the concept he introduced was a new and cool idea

the main problem with TFA was mary sue and rehash, beat for beat remake of star wars.

that wasn't the problem with rogue one, which was that it was dull, had one dimensional undeveloped characters, was completely nonsensical at times and relied entirely on you to care about star wars because the only good stuff was the last half hour.

I'll say I didn't care much about the characters. I thought the action was pretty good too. But the asian guy felt like he was there to appeal to the Chinese market. I think the Buddhist force user religion could work but I didn't think it was well executed.

the only time i noticed the chinese thing was when they had the fat chinese guy in the x-wing

wtf? was he some famous chinese guy doing a cameo?

You have shit taste in everything and you're a faggot who has no friends.

Ah, a brainless millennial manchild.

so weird how every brainless youtube reviwer is hating on this movie

He already admitted TFA wasn't very good. But let's be honest TFA is better than Rogue One, if you don't think this you are retarded.

>But let's be honest TFA is better than Rogue One, if you don't think this you are retarded.

You seriously liked Rogue One better than TFA? Rogue One was dogshit, did you really care about any of the characters? I know the characters are lackluster in TFA but they are technically more compelling than in Rogue One.

>ching chong harro prease
t. character made to appease chink market

I disagree about the whole "what if it didn't have any Star Wars shit in it" argument because it's a fucking Star Wars movie. Every Star Wars movie (except the original obviously) would fall apart under that criticism. It's part of a franchise.

However he is correct that Rogue One's cast is dildos. I mean the blind monk was cool I guess and it was sad when the robot died, but everyone else was irredeemably shit.

>technically more compelling

It's like you almost realise you're just making shit up but haven't quite become aware of it yet.

Would it make you feel better if I said TFA and Rogue One are both shit? I'm basically saying TFA was a slightly less smelly log of shit so it is slightly better than Rogue One. Seriously, you are probably a contrarian faggot if you can't recognize that Rogue One was clearly worse than TFA even though TFA was bad.

The Force Awakens was a good movie.
Rogue One was an okay movie.

Both movies have shit characters, at least in R1 they're not supercharged cartoons with terrible forced humor.

Why does everyone act like characters are the most important aspect of these movies anyway?

Why didn't they bribe them for rogue one then?

Because they did not. They do not care.
I hate RLM and despise DisneySW but thinking about bribes is ridiculous.

But TFA actually was a better movie. R1 felt like they filmed encyclopedia entry instead of the script.

Because Star Wars has always been about the characters. The cartoony setting and childish stories and politics have always been nothing more than a backdrop for those characters.

>let's just make shit up because I have not even the tools to destroy a mediocre movie

Rogue One had the cringiest scenes I've seen in star wars.

Number one cringe was when the blind guy was dying and his boyfriend kept repeating those same stupid lines dramatically.

>Because Star Wars has always been about the characters. The cartoony setting and childish stories and politics have always been nothing more than a backdrop for those characters.


Aah yes, that explains the massive success of the prequels and Rogue One.

>Because Star Wars has always been about the characters.

RLM drone. Plinkett exact words.

BUT.. in that context, plinkett criticised Lucas of creating a character based story and fail the characters. If you built a different movie, the focus will be elsewhere. You can build a movie in the same universe with different focus and priorities, regardless what Pleb Letter Media and Mike "give me my Marvel quips" Stoklasa think.

Now, this does not justify sloppy writing. They were not competent enought to make R1 compelling. But close the SW universe in small little boxes because Rich "please kill me" Evans said so is insanity.

user, are you dense? You understand that sequels will always make money so long as there is nostalgia to exploit and they're not outright terrible and/or insulting to the fans like Aliens 3. Right?

I'm not even the guy you're replying to. But don't confuse commercial success with the movie being good.
>reviewers
They'll say something is good if they could enjoy watching it. Most don't care beyond that. See: Miss Sloane.

oh boy, another movie with some rag-tag rebel minority team fighting against evil whitey, can't wait to see it

Back to your containment board

>user, are you dense?

Anyone who truly believes Star Wars is really about the characters is dense. Lucas wanted to make a shallow effects driven space adventure for children. His writing was complete shit and had he made the movie he intended it wouldn't have been half as memorable as what we got.

Thankfully almost everyone else involved saw through this and the actors and extra writers brought in helped flesh out the characters a bit to make them more interesting, relatable and so on.

Just because you look at the OT and find the characters to be the most enduring aspect doesn't mean that's what they were about at the core. It's all an excuse for action and adventure and amazing effects. The prequels merely cement this truth.

I wasn't even be surprised when poor insecure shitskins became star wars fans. That shit could have been seen from a mile away. Doesn't matter really, shitskins gonna shitskin, jews are gonna make shit movies for them, and the world'll keep spinning.

Just how triggered are you?

Just how much does your inferior non-white skin bother you?

Rogue One is literally a fan fiction story brought to life. Which is why I find it baffling that people are praising it so highly.

I have to agree here. A lot of the characters were good conceptually but we're never actually explored adequately, thus no emotional conception with any of them.

Talking of emotional connection, there was barely any connection between the character's except the two Asian dudes. Robot and Space Mexican should have had some connection but it never felt like they had any thoughts about each other at all.

Ginny wad just awful in every regard and didn't work well with any other character (except maybe Robot but that all felt a little forced).

There was also an Indian pilot who was there.

It just felt like a poorly made JRPG to me

> uh YEAH??
> well, I TOTALLY know what Lucas was planning to do with star wars, are you kidding me?
> pffffshhht, he OBVIOUSLY wanted a "shallow effects space adventure", okay?!
> trust me, user, I watched some movies that one time, I don't need facts, only opinions

>Rogue One is literally a fan fiction story brought to life.
>it's not about jedi or the skywalkers
>it's different
>fan fiction

Don't worry, you can always have the OT re-hash TFA. I'm sure Episode VIII will do a good job at remaking Empire.

Less cringe than that one speech?

"We have to have HOPE. If we don't have HOPE then we will lost to the Empire. Only with HOPE can we succeed."

Then Leia at the end:

"Now we have HOPE."

Do you know what interviews and documentaries are user? These aren't my opinions. Lucas has been pretty clear over the years about his original intentions and inspirations for star wars

>Lucas is Star Wars

This is where you went wrong.

All that action and adventure and amazing effects would have made for a forgettable movie without likeable characters to root for. The most memorable scene in the original trilogy was Vader confessing to be Luke's father and that was the core of the sequel as well. All the action, adventure, sets, setting, music, everything else is there to enhance the characters, not the other way around. This is where the prequels and Rogue One went wrong, but where TFA went right.

>i find characters the most important aspect of SW
>therefore that's what the movies are about

How fucking self-absorbed and idiotic can you be?

>The most memorable scene in the original trilogy was Vader confessing to be Luke's father

Yeah i didn't care about that

Quality rebuttal.

At least I responded. You don't see how backwards your logic is? If you watched Wizard of Oz and found the flying monkeys the most interesting part that doesn't mean they're about the flying monkeys.

Good for you for being a special snowflake.

Lucas is not Star Wars. Especially in the OT where he wasn't directing everything.
I tossed in the Sheev because of that one line he had where his hubris goes out of control. It's also where Lucas went wrong in the prequels but didn't notice (or care). The OT rereleases too.

Thinking Lucas is Star Wars is a mistake. The two are separate entities, and I don't just mean physically.

>Lucas is not Star Wars.

You seem to think you're proving a point in saying this, believe me, you're not. Take Lucas out of the equation and just look at the films for what they are. The characters are not the main focus of the movies.

What a quality comparison, Comparing characters as a whole, which is everyone in the movies, from Luke to Tarking to Vader to the Emperor, to a small subsection of animals in another movie. Oh yeah, not all the characters which would have made for a fair comparison. Forget about Dory, the Lion, the Scarecrow, all those iconic and likeable characters which make the wizard of oz so memorable. No, the fair comparison is with the flying monkeys.

Actually they are. Take the characterization out (let's imagine we put bland actors in) and most of the magic is gone.
Empire especially.

But hey, to each his own. I can't help you understand people. Just saying that the big reason the prequels get shit is because of the bland actors combined with bad characterization. The bad script is only half of it.

Alright then, tell me what Wizard of Oz IS about then

But we're talking about Star Wars. Why are you bringing a detailed dissection of Oz into this?

Can you just go kill yourself, you illiterate chimp?

Do you honestly think anyone could give even a single fuck about that drivel you've been writing?

Once again, just because you find the characters the most entertaining and think the "magic" would be lost without them doesn't mean that's what the movies are ABOUT.

The action and effects sell this shit. The huge success of the prequels and R1 prove this.

how much of a normie fuck are you to fall for his awful technique?

Didn't think so

I didn't but you prove me wrong sir

>LOL U MAD BRO!?
pathetic, desu

If you think I spend more than a couple hours on this shitpile of a virgin-convent board every month, conversing with trash such as you and the imbecile I was replying to, you're mistaken.

What's going on, is that you're getting a reality check about NOBODY giving a fuck about zit-ridden cheeto assassin opinions.

Just say "thank you m'lord", tip your 50 kilogram ass out of here, and preferably remove yourself from the gene pool.

>I only play with poop for two hours a day! Tops!
>I'm a real adult!

Maybe we'll bump into each other 20 years down the road and laugh about. See you then, I guess.

>no interracial kissing = movie is shit

Are you suggesting that the Wizard of Oz isn't about the characters?

It was a routine checkup on the LOWEST common denominator liking movies made for the LOWEST common denominator, so don't flatter yourself; playing with shit would actually be more interesting.

>implying movies are about characters and not camera tricks

Go watch plays you faggot.

>Are you suggesting that the Wizard of Oz isn't about the characters?

No, I'm saying Star Wars isn't about the characters.

So what you're saying is that you actually are a normie fuck, and you've become infuriated by realizing that you actually engaged in, and got tricked by, a piece of human refuse who you so desperately hate despite checking up on us once in a while?

Do you have a son who should have left home, but sits around posting here instead?

But it objectively is. The quest is only a vehicle for the characters to grow, just as it is in the Wizard of Oz. This is trivially true.

The burden of proof is on for The Wizard of Oz. Those anons have made their opinion clear on SW and have retorted to your opinions. If you want to bring up Oz and what it's about, you have to start with your opinion first, not leave it up to others and especially not retort to them condescendingly when they refuse to do your work first.

>The only thing holding the Star Wars: The Force Awakens back is that there's not slow motion scene of Finn's throbbing black cock penetrating Rey's quivering white pussy. As it stands now, it's still everything I hoped it would be.

What did he mean by this?

> get shat on
> oh yeah bud i tricked ya, im deffo not a dumbfuck, pshhh come on
> here's some stale cuck-projecting so you know I'm legit

You know he's getting off on this, right? You really are a normie fuck.

for a normie, you're pretty good on your memes.

how many pepes do you have downloaded?

I have zero gigs because he's a normie emblem now

...

>relied entirely on you to care about star wars

Saying this about Rogue One but not TFA is baffling. Particularly when the plot of TFA was a stripped-down version of the stripped-down "hero's journey" plot of ANH, the success of that film coming as much from the layering of "in-universe" detail as much as the basic plot itself (Cantina scene, anyone?).

Saying bad things about this one will get them controversy from "nerds", whereas with TFA if they were down on it, their normie friends and audience would think them "uncool".

Maybe, just maybe, what we're witnessing isn't "sell-out" double-standards, but the "geek girl"/numale millennial crowd meeting actual "geekery", and being repulsed by what they see.

Though none of what I just said has any bearing as to whether the two films were better than the other, or good in the first place, just my view of the cultural context.

>A movie that is a point by point illustration of the heroes journey is not about the characters
Look I get what you're saying, but just because the characters are broad stereotypes without much depth or nuance to them, doesn't mean that the movie isn't about them.

A sci-fi movie not about the characters would be something like 2001, where the protagonist and antagonist are only introduced at about the half-way point, characters are dropped without much resolution and only serve to move the plot and explore the setting and themes, such as the monkeys at the dawn of man and the scientists on the space station and the Moon. In 2001 we don't know that Dave even is the main character until Frank is killed, and HAL isn't the antagonist until that point either. Now that doesn't mean that 2001 is 100% not about the characters, but can you see how it differs to Star Wars and how in comparison Star Wars is about the characters? In Star Wars it's all about the character's experiences, their emotions, their choices and behavior, they fuel the plot and make things happen.

Would Star Wars have been as popular if the character drama had taken place in an office setting?

"Rebel Alliance PLC" versus "Galactic Empire Ltd"? The final scene could have been a courtroom drama where Luke remembers all of a sudden about the contract Darth Vader signed to become a member of the Jedi corporation, and gets him on a technicality that that company still exists because Obi-Wan transferred ownership of it to him.

'Twould surely be the massive success it was as a movie set in an original science fiction universe, if the character story was what made Star Wars what it was.

Rogue One was a step in the right direction.
They should abort episode 8 and 9 and just make spinoffs from now on.

>Would Star Wars have been as popular if the character drama had taken place in an office setting?
Irrelevant. If Star Wars took place in an office setting, with everything else being unchanged, it still would have been focused on and driven by the characters.

The popularity of office settings relative to science fiction settings has no bearing on this.

>it still would have been focused on and driven by the characters.

And people would have found it a trite 3-stars movie if they weren't appalled by the simplicity and "poetry" of it.

>The popularity of office settings relative to science fiction settings has no bearing on this.

"It doesn't matter what people actually like in films, so long as muh recycled hero's journey is slid down my gullet, its path smoothed by syrupy "romance" and the worst comic-book puns focus groups can come up with".

It doesn't matter what people like when we're talking about the focus of the movie. What are you having trouble understanding?

Plinketts TFA review was redeemable but the comments about rogue one were shit. It's like Mike recorded and uploaded that shit while drunk.

I see what you're saying, but by saying "this is a character story", you're rejecting outright the notion that the science-fiction universe is a part of the appeal of the movie, which it evidently is.
Saying "Star Wars is about the characters" is a false dichotomy, particularly when the science fiction elements could not be stripped away without making it not be "Star Wars" anymore.
The view RLM seem to have is that a "Star Wars" film is not a "Star Wars" film unless it has the EXACT same archetypes and plot progression of the original "hero's journey", which is more "fanboyish" and close-minded than nerds who want to see again the science-fiction imagery and aesthetic of the universe the old movies were set in.
It's almost like all Mike can say about Star Wars is "each stanza rhymes with the next one, it's like poetry, it rhymes".

Now this is banter