HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
 Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
He looks like a fricking gorilla
Boyega is one of the darkest, most coal black Black folk I've ever seen in cinema. There are some who are blacker in skin tone but not in features. Boyega looks like he only just ooga booge'd from some ancient forgotten by the world tribe which branched out from the rest of humanity before neanderthals went extict.
Seeing John Boyega for the first time in The Force Awakens was the shock of my life
I was so hyped for the sequel trilogy that I cagily avoided all marketing materials, all trailers, and all commercials. If I walked by a toy aisle at the store and caught a small glimpse of a vehicle or stormtrooper, I'd look away immediately. I wanted to go into the new era of Star Wars with an entirely open mind, as pure as an Amish virgin. On opening night I knew there was a brown-haired female protagonist (that much was hard to avoid, even though I shielded my eyes), but little else. I didn't even know which classic characters were returning
When Boyega first took off that helmet and revealed himself to the theater I let out an audible gasp. My entire row of filmgoers looked at me like I was nuts, but I couldn't help myself. There before me was the most Simian creature I'd ever seen in a galaxy far, far away. An intergalactic gorilla with huge flaring Black person nostrils and big Nigerian chieftain lips
Oftentimes film studios will soften the blow by casting Billy Dee Williams or Will Smith... but not this time. This time you were forced to feast your eyes on a pure-blooded coal black silverback Black person, blown up forty feet high on an IMAX screen
I looked around, uncomprehendingly, as the rest of the crowd seemed to accept this monstrosity as a regular matter of course. Then it occurred to me that I was the only person who hadn't already seen months' worth of marketing materials
Little by little, they had been led to accept this by drips and drabs of commercials, trailers, and TV interviews. Their minds had been so softened that they were willing to stare unflinchingly, even giggle and smile at the Black folkhines, as MegaBlack person (missing only a bone in his nose) besmirched the galaxy
Lots of people debate about the exact moment when Star Wars died. I contend it was when that minstrel-looking sweaty jigaboo removed his helmet and revealed his Lovecraftian face
Have you tried not being racist
yeah but Black folk made it too hard
top 5 pasta of all time
>lovecraftian face
Positively Lynchian
I managed to through the entire thing without laughing until "Lovecraftian face" and that set me off for a solid minute. This pasta is still gold.
Anyone ever notice this guy has six fingers on his left hand
AHHH Black personMAN SAVE ME
>Black person nostrils
I don't know why but this was the one that got me
Fresh pasta?
its 4 years old
Older than that
>reddit spacing
You have to go back.
Paragraphs were a thing long before reddit existed. Including on Cinemaphile. Because the increase readablity.
I like to imagine Boyega has read this, cried in fury, and then binge-purchased specialty sized Black personrich clothing.
>racism funny
The raw subject matter isn't what makes it funny, the delivery is. People who actually think like what you said think sex is mature just because, and ignore how it's handled and treat it like it's worthless and should be everywhere, freely given, and out in the open for all to behold instead of something special between a man and a woman who love each other.
What racism? Do you need glasses?
I read it everytime.
Dude, where do you live? You can literally see coal-black apes in any major city in the US. Nogs are the most unaesthetic creatures in nature. They all have that ugly bulbous nose, disgusting pube hair, literal fecal smell from their sweat, disgusting chimp lips and the monocolored race from head to toe. How the frick did the israelites ever manage to convert the US into an ape-worshipping shithole is commendable. The fact that a hairless gorilla like Boyega can get a job in Hollywood is a case of demon worship beyond compare in the US.
the most baffling part of all this is that in spite of all the pandering, black women still do not care about most of these legacy franchises. hell, women in general. women rarely care about something like star wars - very VERY rarely do they care strongly about it like a superfan. if anything women care less than they did when it was a franchise marketed towards men - when it also made more money
there's a good amount of female star wars fans out there but only on a casual level - the twatter spergs don't count, not even as diehards, they're just rabid feminazis
the death star wreckage wasn't a secret
and the lore of the knife's disappearance was only passed around campfires and the like
anyway it's generally accepted that the knife maker had a vision and crafted it as such, i think that's the actual explanation too but i'm not watching that piece of shit again to confirm it, i'm not even digging up the wiki page
>i think that's the actual explanation too
There is no actual explanation. At least not in the film.
And there wouldn't need to be one had that McGuffin not been so fricking stupid to the point where nothing about it made sense..
Women care less because what are they gonna do, see bland action movies with their female friends? they’ll either do something more social or see a chick flick.
women went to comic book movies with… surprise surprise, their bs or husbands. And if the guys aren’t into it, why would they bother?
the women who would shill the movies on twitter are probably shutins or grifters, they’re not gonna bother even if they make noise.
keep my beautiful zoe kravitz's name out ouf your mouth. the rest is accurate tho
>beautiful
>He looks like a fricking gorilla
Not really
Nah, Google AI would certainly tag that blue-gummed ‘groid as a gorilla
It's actually kind of amazing how much he looks like a gorilla. His existence is almost racist in a way.
He's staring at the yellow part of the dagger trying to figure out if it's a banana
fpbp
kek based E;R
Insult to gorillas.
i still find it funny how ass blasted someone must have been to make this
What? It is clealy comedy content
They must've been mad as frick.
I don't have a narrative about TFA vs TLJ, my point is that the diminishing returns of the ST and Solo bombing made Disney deviate from their stated plan to have a Star Wars movie every year from 2015 onwards. The percentage by which the ST fell from 1st to 3rd movie is the largest compared to the OT and PT.
>The percentage by which the ST fell from 1st to 3rd movie is the largest compared to the OT and PT.
No one is disputing that. But the post chain up to that point was about how films potentially influence their direct successors, not how much the numbers dropped overall. With the prequels, you had the lowest point with AOTC even, not with ROTS. According to the numbers in
(and I still find the OT numbers a bit suspect, I'm almost certain having read before that ROTJ performed better than TESB on their initial runs), AOTC is in fact the only Star Wars episode with a direct sequel that "caused" and uptick for said sequel.
What is disputable and easy to refute is the claim that TLJ caused some unprecedented drop in box office revenue for its sequel. Simply because that drop was comparatively miniscule to some other drops in the same franchise.
What is also disputable, but not 100% refutable on empirical evidence is the claim that a film's reception can cause a significant drop-off in audience numbers for its sequel. It's not very sensible to assume that, when those film releases all happen at different times in different contexts (and even different runtimes and such that would need to be considered).
Which brings us back to your point: Yes, from TFA to ROS, completely ignoring inbetween TLJ, there was a 52% drop-off in box office revenue. But what does that mean? That TFA overperformed? That ROS underperformed? Both (most likely, I'd say)? That the beginning was great (unlikely)? That the ending was bad (factually true, but not necessarily related to box office)? The the trilogy as a whole was bad, or incoherent, or something something?
And in contrast, what does it mean that the prequels had the smallest drop-off between first and third? That TPM wasn't overhyped enough? That ROTS was a flawless masterpiece (obviously not)? Or that the prequels were perfect, despite them taking a mssive dip with AOTC?
I see no coherent picture there.
I feel like you're carrying water for Disney when there's no need to. Whatever Disney saw or took away from the ST's performance made them table their plan for yearly releases of movies; that is indisputable. The MCU in the same time period proved that if a movie is good enough and fans are hyped enough, it's possible to have multiple $2 billion dollar movies in a short period of time (IW and Endgame), making Star Wars seem worse in comparison. Shit, look at how NWH performed even post-Covid.
>Whatever Disney saw or took away from the ST's performance made them table their plan for yearly releases of movies
Yes. But that is an entirely different point to the other discussion. The one about whether or not films are influencing their successor's success in a way that would allow you to (in reverse) gauge a film's reception by its successor's box office.
>The MCU in the same time period proved that if a movie is good enough and fans are hyped enough,
Hyped enough? Maybe. But you're again bringing supposed "quality" into the discussion, which I vehemently dispute. Not because I consider the Marvel stuff bad in general (and I do), but because franchise fans are not arbiters of universial taste, nor do they know much about filmmaking. So, no, it's irrelevant to the fan hype whether or not something is good. What matters is that you cater to them if you want them to hype something.
That being said: I'd argue that not even capeshit can thrive on fanboy hypes alone. You still need casual audience. And, well, what did Infinity War and Endgame do that other capshit didn't, that might have drawn general audiences? Simple. They had a much higher density of celebrity cast members. That's why those two were both successful. Not because of the first of them being good, or because the fanboys were on board. But because it secured celebrity fanbases. RDJ fans came to see their idol, Scarlet Johanson fans came to see her, and so on.
Those Marvel box office successes were successes of marketing and economy, not of filmmaking and art. Of course, you can say the same about Star Wars as a whole, or any big franchise. Art doesn't make money, catering to the lowest common denominator for mass appeal does.
gorillas are cool, as a tall cracker i guess i look like some pudgy ghost elf maybe, which is somewhat cool, but let us not pretend gorillas are uncool, friend
I see where you're coming from, but that's actually Daisy Ridley, she uses the pronouns she/her
Don't be mean to gorillas
Emperor was vaporized, then vaporized a second time. Death Star was vaporized. No gigantic chunks. They rewrite movie history like they rewrite real history.
>Cinemaphile never watched The Goonies
Didn't the coin in that line up as soon as they left the cave?
modifying a doubloon to fit a coast you've explored is different than someone designing a dagger attachment centuries before the event takes place despite the chunk of death star wreckage being literally vaporized
>wow, it's just like this other shitty movie!
That's your rebuttal?
Except it actually made sense in The Goonies
I can accept the gigantic chunks retcon. Like I can put aside the visual of the death star vaporizing and rationalize that how the explosion looked isn't really important and was just a result of the special effects of the time. But there's no justifying Palpatine coming back. It's stupid to think he could survive in any way and even on a conceptual level it's shit to even attempt to bring him back in the first place.
They did that in the comics though back in the 80s
I haven't read them myself but iirc when he returns in the comics, it's his soul that survives somehow and inhabits a new body.
I can't even remember rise of skywalker now. Wasn't it literally never even explained how he came back, he just did?
>somehow, palpatine returned
and it was stupid.
>akthually the bad guy.... THURVIVED!
is a really bad asspull that too many scifi authors fall into. Dune's was even worse.
Dune's makes sense though - the shield blocked the toxin, the antigrav suit got him up out of the way and the toxin was heavier than air. Pretty simple stuff
that there dagger is for one in the pink one in the stink
If she stood 100m further back or little bit to the side they wouldnt have found the place?
The force
>universe where a supernatural force exists that can shape destinies and connect things in impossible ways
>UHHHHH ACTUALLY THERE'S NO WAY THIS DAGGER WOULD WORK
Autists need a 10 hours essay explaining how the destiny trope works in Star Wars.
>Why are you so bigoted?
>BMW
Geee I wonder
Yes, it's written in language so OLD and mystical that it's forbidden. The Death Star was destroyed less than 40 years earlier.
It's insane that this shit made $1 billion.
>Just accept that Star Wars will always have shit writing anon!
>It's insane that this shit made $1 billion.
made a billion and it was a flop lmao
It wasn't a flop even with a budget of $416 million. How the frick did it cost $416 million?
>How the frick did it cost $416 million?
Studios don't care about wasting money on bloackbusters. And they mostly spend that money on overpaid "stars", like Oscar Isaac and Harrison Ford (who probably got a huge paycheck for his return for that one scene). But also Abrams himself.
Add to that how troubled the production was, that they had to rewrite the script, didn't know what they were doing during shooting and needed extensive reshoots, and that Abrams doesn't know how to manage resources, and you get an explosion of the budget way beyond any of the initial plans.
>needed extensive reshoots
I don't remember hearing about massive reshoots, how bad were they? "Captain America 4" level bad where they're basically reshooting the movie?
I think the steadily dropping revenue scared Disney into making Star Wars a TV-only franchise.
>I don't remember hearing about massive reshoots, how bad were they? "Captain America 4" level bad where they're basically reshooting the movie?
pretty much but imagine the film being rewritten on the day of shooting (often multiple times), then apply that to most of shooting and reshoots and then take an extra chunk of time for editing and post, that's how scrambled together the film was
>I think the steadily dropping revenue scared Disney into making Star Wars a TV-only franchise.
it did and that's also failed since disney+ has yet to be profitable
>I think the steadily dropping revenue scared Disney into making Star Wars a TV-only franchise
What was the overwhelming evidence that led you to that conclusion?
Disney originally stated that the plan was to have a Star Wars movie every year; TFA, RO, TLJ, Solo..., but after TROS there hasn't been a Star Wars move in five years. The movie revenue was as follows
TFA: $2.066 billion
RO: $1.058 billion
TLJ: $1.333 billion
Solo: $393 million
TROS: $1.077 billion
From TFA to TROS (which they were advertising as the end of an era) they lost nearly $1 billion, half the revenue. And Solo underperformed/bombed right before that, it's a worrying trend.
Worrying trend for whom? The israelites behind the ruination of Walt Disney's Christian legacy? Bob Eiger should be shot dead in front of Walt's statute in Anaheim. And Larry Fink and his co-horts should be flayed alive.
Why are you acting as if TFA, the at the time most successful film ever, should be the standard for what they expected their returns to be, rather than an absolute outlier carried by a hype that hadn't been seen since 1999 (when TPM came out)?
If anything, they expected the whole franchise to perform aroun TLJ's level, 1.5M at best, and probably expected TFA to only do slightly better than the other two. Which means TFA overperformed massively, and ROS underperformed, but not nearly by as much as you claim.
Anything that makes over 1B is a success. To claim otherwise is madness.
This was in the same year that proved through Infinity War and Endgame that a franchise with sufficient hype could hit over $2 billion consistently; it wasn't the gross amount, it was the trend.
And in any case, they stopped making movies and then kept announcing and canceling those same movies. Something is clearly not right.
>This was in the same year that proved through Infinity War and Endgame that a franchise with sufficient hype could hit over $2 billion consistently
Infinity War and Endgame came out 3 and 4 years after TFA, respectively. And capeshit has since completely collapsed and is doing worse than even Solo did (which admittedly was as bad as your average capeshit flick). That two-parter remains the peak of Marvel's popularity, and as you yourself said, it was also carried by a huge hype, not unlike TFA.
>they stopped making movies and then kept announcing and canceling those same movies.
They noticed that, yes, there was a downwards trend, and furthermore, that their non-mainline films performed much worse, in particular with general audiences. Rogue One performed worse than ROS, despite coming out just a year after TFA when there certainly was no such thing as a Star Wars fatique yet. Solo did even worse, although that was only two to three months after the last mainline film had left cinemas.
And then, in 2019, there was Covid and cinemas closed down anyway.
TLJ was the highest browsing film of its year(!).
Rise was seventh.
Shelves were full of unsold toys. Solo had bombed. They haven't released any more movies.
They know they fricked up.
>Shelves were full of unsold toys.
That's not an argument anyone takes seriously, and you shouldn't either. Toy sales are not what they used to be in the last century, children want electronics now.
Nonetheless, Star Wars toys, in particular toy lightsabers, topped the toy sales charts in the late 2010s.
You're correct about the rest. But, again, Rogue One had already set a baseline for what they could optimistically expect from Star Wars side projects, and since there was already a downwards trend, a possible oversaturation of the market, and since side projects were all they were planning to do (with the Skywalker saga coming to an end), they simply extrapolated and saw that having yearly high-budget stuff that would risk not breaking even wasn't worth it.
>That's not an argument anyone takes seriously, and you shouldn't either. Toy sales are not what they used to be in the last century, children want electronics now.
who said anything about kids lmao
anon is talking about collectors and autists which have accounted for toy sales since 05
>anon is talking about collectors and autists which have accounted for toy sales since 05
Collectors have never accounted for the majority of toy sales, and they still don't. They're a very small minority, outweighed even today by masses of children (or rather their parents).
>they simply extrapolated and saw that having yearly high-budget stuff that would risk not breaking even wasn't worth it.
Right, the trend was overall bad for both mainline and side project movies and Disney got scared off of their original plan of a Star Wars movie every year.
We'll see how the Rey and Mandalorian movies do.
marvel says otherwise to risk of annual content
it was the quality of the work that made them cancel the annual star wars release plan
>marvel says otherwise to risk of annual content
Take a good look at the latest Marvel releases and how they performed.
that's post-endgame, which anyone with a brain knew would be the case, because endgame was aptly labeled. that was the end of the storyline, no point in going further because it wouldn't ever be able to compete with the build-up. no way home was a fluke and made its money purely due to the nostalgia casting. with star wars all people wanted to see was the sequel trilogy and they made absolute dogshit films, that's why solo bombed. likewise after endgame the quality of the films dropped significantly. but at the time that star wars was going on you had one marvel film a fricking season almost and they were all breaking records consistently. phase 3 was by far the most profitable mcu and it ran congruently with star wars. after endgame was when marvel started going the woke route whereas star wars ran with it from the start.
>that's post-endgame, which anyone with a brain knew would be the case, because endgame was aptly labeled.
Well, in that case you know what Star Wars would have been post-Skywalker-saga. If Rogue One and Solo aren't indicative enough already.
>people wanted to see was the sequel trilogy and they made absolute dogshit films, that's why solo bombed.
Solo bombed because it itself was "dogshit", and no one wanted to see a Han Solo backstory to begin with. Reactions to even just the announcements ranged between lukewarm and extremely sceptical. No one liked the main cast as it was announced. And when the only news about it were how chaotic its production was, that's when even the last few people lost interest.
The massive amount of production troubles for all of their projects (TLJ being the only one of them that did not exceed budget, did not have a writer/director change midway and did not require excessive reshoots) was most definitely way more pivotal for them losing faith in the franchise than your perceived "quality" problems in the first place. Every cinematic Star Wars project (other than TLJ) had cost them more than planned and reduced their win margins. And with their projections of Rogue One's 1 billion being the best they could hope for in box office revenue for any side project, realistically less, not being able to rely on the production going smoothly, thus rendering any profit projections moot, basically tanked the whole idea of nonstop releases.
>likewise after endgame the quality of the films dropped significantly.
I find it astounding that anyone could see trash like Endgame and think it had much "quality" to being with. But you do you.
>Solo bombed because it itself was "dogshit", and no one wanted to see a Han Solo backstory to begin with
while that is true you can't deny the other two main factors, solo competing with the likes of deadpool 2 and avengers infinity war, and the disastrous reactions from last jedi. also most of the cast had positive reactions, it was just alden that people were skeptical of, which is why disney paid ford to appear to pass the torch and be done with the role
>I find it astounding that anyone could see trash like Endgame and think it had much "quality" to being with. But you do you.
people wanted to see the mcu lineup together on one screen and have a big all-out brawl and they got exactly that. people wanted to see luke, han and leia reunite one last time and instead they saw a bunch of old farts die depressing and pointless deaths. pretty obvious why things went the way they did.
>and the disastrous reactions from last jedi.
There were no disastrous reactions from TLJ. Critics loved it, general audiences gave it high grades in CinemaScroe and other such verified polls. There was a small group of people who made a ruckus about it on youtube and social media, and, yes, those people did claim they'd be boycotting Solo. But not only wouldn't they have made a difference, they're also the very people who actually ended up watching Solo, and reviewing it on their channels.
The people who ignored Solo were casual cinemagoers (who actually overwhelmingly liked TLJ from what we can tell).
>also most of the cast had positive reactions, it was just alden that people were skeptical of
That Glover guy had some positive reactions. Emilia Clarke didn't. Woody Harrelsen seemed as out of place in the cast as he felt in the final product. And that's about it.
>people wanted to see the mcu lineup together on one screen and have a big all-out brawl
Yes, but that's not "quality". That's fanservice.
Catering to fanboys doesn't make Endgame good. Having hordes of A-list actors also doesn't make it good.
holy shit you're fricking delusional lmao
that or just a disney shill/adult
not sure which is worse
We're talking hard numbers here. If you don't like that and would rather talk about how you feel, I don't think there's much left to dispute.
>We're talking hard numbers here
well look at those general audiences giving it high grades then
>cinemascore
lmao this is cope
>rotten tomatoes
>who have literally since admitted that those numbers are rigged
Kek. How about you try any verified polls instead?
>who have literally since admitted that those numbers are rigged
that was bob iger making claims, RT admitted they were genuine reviews and not mass spam
>How about you try any verified polls instead?
that's why i posted the israelitegle and imdb ratings as well
>RT admitted they were genuine reviews and not mass spam
That was their initial statement. They had to since admit that they had lied and that there had indeed been targeted rigging:
https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/7/18254548/film-review-sites-captain-marvel-bombing-changes-rotten-tomatoes-letterboxd
>a spokesperson said Rotten Tomatoes [...] has faced a new level of review-bombing over the past 18 months. She said only a few films have been seriously targeted — including Star Wars: The Last Jedi and Black Panther
Not a good look for them.
>the israelitegle and imdb ratings
Those are not verified polls. Do you know what that word means?
>Those are not verified polls. Do you know what that word means?
they're more verified than cinemascore, which only polls people on opening night and asks them to give a grade of A to F, then they average the ratings out and guess what, people tend to be in higher spirits on opening night especially for a tentpole franchise and will be in giddy moods and give films higher ratings than they really deserve
meanwhile RT doesn't count ratings that are either 0 stars or 1/2 stars, which is the overwhelming bulk of those negative reviews. so at 1 star or more it still only attained a 42% rating, which says far more about it
>they're more verified than cinemascore,
Holy fricking shit. So you do not know what the word "verified" means.
>only polls people on opening night and asks them to give a grade of A to F
Exactly. It only polls people who have definitely seen the film, and only counts each vote once. That's exactly what it means to verify a vote.
There's a reason general elections all over the world follow similar procedures rather than just relying on people making online spam accounts.
>then they average the ratings out
There's actually more to it than just taking an average. But I'm not an expert on their weightings and normalizations, and it really doesn't change the point here.
>people tend to be in higher spirits on opening night especially for a tentpole franchise
Do they? Wouldn't opening night not actually be skewed in favour of the hyper-critical hardcore fanboys? Those who made and uplaoded videos of themselves crying and complaining after the opening screening?
>RT doesn't count ratings that are either 0 stars or 1/2 stars
They actually do. But nice try.
Also, ignoring part of the votes does not mean the poll is verified. If anything, it screws even more with an already very messy input.
Disney course corrected so hard on Rise that it makes your entire point here moot.
>course corrected so hard on Rise
Disney didn't do anything. Abrams did.
And he also "course corrected" on Return of the Jedi, Revenge of the Sith, and even his own The Force Awakens, while he was at it. Or in other words: He just didn't care about any films that came before and wildly tried to recontextualize all of them.
If you ask me, he seems to have much more of a hateboner for RotJ than for TLJ, considering everything he did with and around Palpatine.
Of course, it's entirely possibly that he didn't even intent to go against any of the prior films. His work of ROS is so incoherent that all of it might just be incidental.
But everything he did around Palpatine included making Snoke and his death totally inconsequential. That was from TLJ.
>included making Snoke and his death totally inconsequential. That was from TLJ.
It was just as much from TFA. TLJ didn't invent Snoke. It just removed him from the story.
I think we can agree that Abrams really rendered a lot of things across the whole sage inconsequential.
TLJ made Snoke inconsequential. RoS did it to his death.
>TLJ made Snoke inconsequential.
Snoke was inconsequential to begin with, because Abrams didn't know what to do with him.
TLJ sealed his fate as a mere plot-device, but ROS proved that there really was never a point to him.
>Disney didn't do anything. Abrams did.
Who hired Abrams?
>Who hired Abrams?
lucasfilm did lol
>According to that logic, the original Star Wars was a massive flop since TESB performed worse than it. As were TPM and TFA. In fact, all of those had way worse declines to their direct sequels than TLJ had.
why do you keep lying on behalf of the last jedi? are you rian by chance?
the drop offs from first to second installments in the OT and PT were nowhere near as big as the drop off from TFA to TLJ
>only trilogy conclusion to regain audiences was Revenge of the Sith
Best of the prequels confirmed then, just as I've always said.
>the drop offs from first to second installments in the OT and PT were nowhere near as big as the drop off from TFA to TLJ
Pretty sure the OT couznts rereleases there as well, which pushed things closer. But nonetheless, with the numbers you provided
ANH to TESB is a dropoff of 30.6%.
TPM to AOTC is a dropoff of 36.4%.
TFA to TLJ is a dropoff of 35.6%
And TLJ to ROS? A dropoff of merely 19.3%
Now, I'm not sure what kind of arithmatics you apply, where 19% are more than 30%, but it sure is an interesting argument you're making here.
>Pretty sure the OT couznts rereleases there as well, which pushed things closer.
actually the only film accounting for a rerelease is phantom menace, its initial box office was somewhere around 920 million but with the 2012 rerelease that pushed it over to a billion
>its initial box office was somewhere around 920 million
Fair enough. In that case the dropoff to AOTC would only be around 29% (653/920 - 1). Still worse than TLJ to ROS.
>Still worse than TLJ to ROS.
you continue to compare 1st to 2nd with a 2nd to 3rd drop off
the copium supply you have is immense
>you continue to compare 1st to 2nd with a 2nd to 3rd drop off
It was you who claimed that it had a bad reception because its successor did "oh so much worse". I don't see why that same logic shouldn't apply to 1st to 2nd then. Can you give a good reason for why you think the first film gets a free pass for "dropping" a third of its audience when you give the second film shit for "dropping" a fifth?
Could it be that you're desperately moving goalposts now?
ironic that you accuse me of goalpost shifting when you've been doing it the whole fricking thread m8
i'm not the one comparing apples and oranges here you stupid eurogay
>when you've been doing it the whole fricking thread m8
Okay, so we've now have reached the "no u" phase of deflection. That went down faster than expected.
>1st to 2nd: Saw it, not bothered about sequels.
>2nd to 3rd: Wanted to see the continuing story...but not bothered about the ending.
Second is more indicative of a frick-up.
No, it really isn't. Whether you drop a story one third in or two thirds, you've already seen a good portion of it when you decide not to see the ending.
Doesn't change the fact that the ST had the biggest first movie to third movie drop-off of any Star Wars trilogy. End of the day the general audience wasn't feeling the ST story compared to the OT and PT.
>the ST had the biggest first movie to third movie drop-off of any Star Wars trilogy.
It changes everything about your narrative around TLJ. Because now, by your logic, it was TFA that already lost most of its audience, with TLJ doing pretty well in keeping those that remain.
>And TLJ to ROS? A dropoff of merely 19.3%
>Now, I'm not sure what kind of arithmatics you apply, where 19% are more than 30%, but it sure is an interesting argument you're making here.
still coping hard i see lmao
if you want to play that game then the 2nd to 3rd drop off for the OT is smaller than the 19% drop off in the ST
and there was an upward gain in the PT
>There's actually more to it than just taking an average
not really, you see picrel has lots of info that is irrelevant to the grading except the actual letter grading section, the rest of the information is just general stat gathering.
>you see picrel has lots of info that is irrelevant to the grading except the actual letter grading section
And again I can see that you have no idea how statistics work. Normalizaton is the process of taking a result you get and comparing it to all other results you got in the past (for other films), and then taking that difference into account to get to a ranking on a more evenly distributed scale.
For example, if you have historic precedent that most voters only give ratings between A and C, or Fs, but never the rating D, you might want to normalize your results in such a way that the distribution between A to C that you get maps instead into the interval A to D. That makes it easier to represent all results ever on the whole scale.
TLJ was so loved that fewer people went to see RoS because it couldn't possibly top it.
Alternatively, they didn't like TLJ and gave up on Disney Wars.
>that fewer people went to see RoS
Interesting argument. According to that logic, the original Star Wars was a massive flop since TESB performed worse than it. As were TPM and TFA. In fact, all of those had way worse declines to their direct sequels than TLJ had.
And if we count non-mainline films, ROTS must outright have been publicly hated, considering how abysmally The Clone Wars did in cinemas.
But, let me guess, you apply that logic of yours very selectively, right?
I don't claim to know why the earlier films had drop-offs. Makes no sense to me.
The reason in general is that there are lots of internal and external factors to why any film performs the way it does. For example, hype movements even pre-release like the ones for TFA or TPM contribute to them becoming larger successes than they realistically should have been. That's an internal cause.
Bad press or bad reviews can lead to a film underperforming, like with Solo (bad press) or ROS (bad reviews). Those are internal factors, because they are based on something to do with the film or franchise itself.
External factors are numerous and hard to account for, among them: The economical situation (a film won't do as well during a word-wide recession), pandemics (yes, covid), the competition (an action comedy won't do well if it has to compete against five other high profile action comedies at the same time), the time of the year (films do better duting holiday seasons when people have more leisure time), the fricking weather (people don't go to cinemas as much when it's sunny outside), alternatves to cinema being availabe (streaming nowadays).
All of that makes it impossible to pinpoint why exactly anything overperformed or underperformed, or why there were ups and downs for franchises.
There's also empirical data for trilogies that suggests that usually, middle-films have it the hardest, most likely because they get the least "hype" behind them, as opposed to beginnings and finales. But there are also many exceptions to that supposed rule, so take it with a giant grain of salt.
I did not, however, want an MCU clip show.
You mean when the marvel film's quality started tanking so hard that even normalgays are now shitting on them? That doesn't change the fact that it went a decade releasing multiple films a year with consistent and massive success. Meanwhile Star Wars stopped dead in its tracks after five movies.
>the marvel film's quality started tanking so hard
Not gonna argue about quality, since I don't think they were ever good, or even just decent.
But the one thing that really changed between Marvel ten years ago and Marvel now is the density of high profile cast members. Celebrities with a certain pull factor.
So what the hell happened with Guardians?
hype from the last guardians film kept it going
And the first succeeded because of...Pratt, before Jurassic World? Zoe Saldana?
pratt had a fanbase from parks & rec
zoe saldana was a growing sex symbol thanks to star trek
bradley cooper was that guy from the hangover
then you had randos like john c reilly, michael rooker (who had growing star power thanks to walking dead at the time) and fricking glenn close as well
the sequel then had sylvester stallone and kurt russell
Heh, did you notice that I acknowledged there WAS overwhelming evidence?
>It wasn't a flop even with a budget of $416 million. How the frick did it cost $416 million?
anon a movie has to make at least 2.5x its budget in order to have any sort of profit, 416 is just the film's production, that isn't including marketing which brings up costs to about $500 million. it's a flop, a bomb, a failure, whatever you want to call it, there was no profit.
>a movie has to make at least 2.5x its budget in order to have any sort of profit
Not that guy, but that claim is complete bullshit. Especially for big studios like Disney, which get 80% of the box office or more.
Tentpole films turn a profit much earlier, often below two times their budget.
>that claim is complete bullshit
i'm not the one who made it up, it's been the standard for a long time. also last i checked disney doesn't get 80% they should still only be at 70%, they pushed for 60% when the last jedi released. either way it's still a failure by all metrics, even disney considers it a disappointment which is code for failure. hell it could be worse, you could be moronic dc and consider batman v superman a bomb despite that making some profit
>it's been the standard for a long time
Not really. There exist multiple rules of thumb for blindly guessing the break-even point (without knowing any actual numbers but a budget estimate), and the 2.5x paradigm is one that's particularly popular on the largest box-office subreddit.
At least equally as common is the simpler 2x approach.
But, of course, both are exceptionally flawed and tend to completely neglect the relative differences in studio power (versus cinemas and distributors), public demand for a film (which forces cinemas to comply with non-beneficial contracts), the actual amount of marketing happening (which is very little for arthouse stuff, for example) or the reasons why a budget is as high as it is (as an expensive reshoot might double the budget, but will not increase the merketing or distribution costs in any way).
There simply is no heuristic formula that will convert a budget to a breakeven point, not even with an only somewhat decent accuracy.
wow that was a whole lot of nothing you wrote
stupid ass
>there's no formula for conversion
>meanwhile people simply take the cost and double it
there's your formula buddy, it's simple economics and many businesses do this as a common practice. for example if you go get your oil changed at an auto shop, they charge you parts plus labor multiplied by 2 so they not only get their money back for the oil they bought but also the money used to pay the mechanic for the hour. when calculating film profit usually the marketing budget is not added in and that's where the standard 2x measure comes in to determine the breaking even point. when adding marketing you bump up to 2.5x to figure out the magic number. besides that the box office split used to be down the middle, half would go to theaters and the other half would go to the production companies and distributors. but back in 2017 disney pushed to be given 60% of revenue and theaters agreed to it. they pushed again recently for 70% and got that too. now some anon is suggesting they pushed again for 80% but i highly doubt theaters would buckle like that. even still if you calculate at 80% the film is a box office failure/disappointment.
>it's simple economics and many businesses do this as a common practice.
No, it's not. And film studios know their exact numbers, so they don't have to use such inaccurate bullshit in the first place.
>when calculating film profit usually the marketing budget is not added in and that's where the standard 2x measure comes in
You're a fricking moron who doesn't undestand maths. No, if you ignore marketing costs in the initial budget estimate, that means that value is LOWER, therefore the factor needed to reach the same resulting value needs to be HIGHER, not lower itself.
But, again, it doesn't matter, because the whole method is bullshit that fails to account for actual numbers and the specific circumstances of each film. That you deny this just shows how little common sense you have.
>bleh bleh bleh maths
anon i'm just going by the numbers that get reported, you don't need to split hairs over it lmao
disney lied about the initial costs of the films, they claimed that all but solo cost roughly $200 million to make, the lawsuits disney has been going through revealed that each of the sequel trilogy films cost over 400 million to produce, rogue one cost about 250 and solo cost about 300. deadline hollywood had to readjust all their initial listings because of this enlightenment. and that's all before you apply marketing budgets to each film, which diminished with each succeeding entry. by the time solo and tros came out they had little merch out to promote the films and stuck mainly to advertising trailers and the like. but feel free to tell me the right way to estimate budgets and such because you're clearly a fricking phd graduate in mathematics or calculus.
Well, if you don't appreciate maths, I don't think you're in the best position to argue economy and statistics.
He owned you btw
No, you didn't.
Stop being proud of being shit at applied mathematics.
that anon wasn't me
Kek. Oldest trick in the books.
Only samegays ever post "proof" of not being samegays.
nah i'm too old and gay to waste my time editing (you)s out
Marketing is way higher than a mere 84 million, especially in a tentpole. The average for a non tentpole is half production, which would be 208 million, but on some blockbusters it has risen to 75-80% or higher. You could easily be looking at 300 million.
But it was retconned to not be supernatural anon
It's just midichlorians
You are fricking moronic. The problem isn't the destiny bullshit but the dagger itself being some of the worst writing I've seen in recent years.
I can write Palptine taking a shit that is shaped like the Death Star which gives him the idea to build it and say that it was his destiny. Just because you can write something doesn't mean you should.
moron, the dagger makes 0 sense
The dagger exists solely to progress the plot. They could have did something else that wasn't moronic but they had to be lazy israelites about it.
>there's a mystical space knife that's not really a knife but it will show you everything you need to know because someone took the time to make it that way for whatever reason.
I think the more obnoxious element is it points to the fricking throne room, the first place anyone with a fricking brain would go. I am willing to accept someone was given foreknowledge of the death star wreckage and made the dagger without really comprehending why, which is actually a pretty cool idea if it were executed properly, but why it points to the throne room and why a random dead guy who was a sith but not a sith had it is the problem. Why would Oshi have that dagger?
>Why would Oshi have that dagger?
A good story…for another time.
It's a homage to a 80's movie. I can't believe Cinemaphileirgins need this explanation.
>this important plot point being fricking shit is okay because it's a reference to a 40 year old movie
>characters get a mythical key that led them to the objective
>OMG MY CHILDHOOD IS RUINED
I guess it happens when a fandom becomes obssessed with lore
>please listen to my 10 hours essay about physics in Star Wars
>characters get a mythical key that led them to the villain's ruins
>OMG MY CHILDHOOD IS RUINED
I guess it happens when a fandom becomes obssessed with lore
>please listen to my 10 hours essay about physics in Star Wars
>just turn your brain off
That doesn't somehow make it not moronic
We all know it’s from the goonies, you don’t need to keep repeating it. Introducing an offensively dumb plot element to reference an 80s film does not make it okay
>Original Star Wars trilogy inspired by Kurosawa
>Star Wars Sequels trilogy inspired by The Goonies
This is so incredibly fitting. Hilarious.
oh my god! is that... is that a reference to an old movie?! LLLLOOOOOLLLLLL xD funny
>Cinemaphileirgins
it's fa/tv/irgins you stupid newbie, get it right
Because Marvel Comic books had Ochi being on Palpatine and Vader's payroll in the ESB-ROTJ gap period. He plays a part in the "Vader found Exegol and got blackpilled that he could never succeed at overthrowing Palpatine, which is why he's all sad and 'It's too late for me son' in ROTJ" storyline that ultimately ends up raising the "Why didn't Anakin's ghost tell Luke about all this shit sooner?" question.
>ESB-ROTJ gap period.
>shadows of the empire died for this
Yeah see this is the issue this is the ninth fricking act of thos overarching story, if Ochi were actually introduced 3 or 4 fricking movies again I'd have honestly been less bothered by it. Seriously who is this fricking guy? Who is he? What the frick is a sith assassin? Could he use the force? Who was he assassinating? If Palpatine had a sith assassin what the frick was he doing this whole time before he died in that fricking hole? Who was he killing?
remember the sequel trilogy? Yeah that happened
Yes and it will be forever canon. Cope and seethe.
Yeah it's called The Dark Side Timeline.
>Dark Side Timelime
This is the prequel trilogy, literally.
so are midichlorians
I've honestly never understood the hate for midichlorians
>it removes the mystery of the force
No it doesn't. All it does is explain why one guy can move shit with his freakin' mind and why another can't
Yeah we need more explanations in general. Everything needs to be explained. See that prop in the background, we need explanations about who made that prop, how it got there and what it's backstory it. Maybe it will be explained in the side material or maybe it will have a spinoff comic book tie-in. Or maybe a funk pop of the prop will have the description so we know what's REALLY going on.
Well you guys demand an explanation for the dagger of TROS
The Force is the backbone of the entire franchise and not some prop in the background of a scene. It needed to be fleshed out more in some way. The OT already established that Force sensitivity was genetic in some way. Why not have it be some special little bacteria that coexists in your cells? This is a sci-fi series after all
>Why not have it be some special little bacteria that coexists in your cells?
because that's fricking stupid. did you even read what you wrote?
>NNOOOOOOOO, YOU CAN'T EXPLAIN SOMETHING WITH SCIENCE IN A SCIENCE-FICTION SERIES
>This is a sci-fi
Star Wars never had any futuristic (pseudo) science, outside of the fricking EU and this one scene in TPM.
>laser swords, ftl travel, and moon-sized space stations aren't the product of futuristic science
There is no scientic explanation anywhere (outside the EU) for any of those things.
No, anon, the motorway near your city is not "scientific" just because cars and tarmac are the product of science.
What the actual frick are you even arguing here?
>Star Wars never had any futuristic (pseudo) science
2 of the main characters have actual cybernetics. Did you see the fancy gizmos in Lukes hand?
There’s armies of clones and robots for goodness sake. It may not be hard sci fi but it is actually more science than fantasy. In fact theres only ONE fantasy thing versus everything else being sciency.
>actual cybernetics
>armies of clones and robots
See
.
Having a futuristic setting doesn't mean it has science in it. If you want to know what science actually is, go visit your closest university and attend a lecture or seminar there.
Well, I find it quiet scientifically plausible to extrapolate that they would need to perform some science in order to have robot hands and cloning.
I don’t even know what your point is, calling Star Wars sci-fi isn’t exactly a novel concept.
>that they would need to perform some science
Which is not the same as actually having that science in the plotline of the film, moron.
Every single film ever has something in it that can be considered the product of science. A scene of some guy watching TV? A result of science existing in the setting. Some farmer in the middle ages plowing his field? A result of an ancient scientific discovery.
Do you consider literally everything you see "scientific"? Or does "scientific" actually concern the science itself rather than something that came to be because of it?
>The Force is just made up bullshit that can be explained with anything because it's made up bullshit
Exactly. So the explanation adds nothing of value and should have been left out.
The only sensible reason you would want to add a seemingly scientific explanation is to take away its mysticism and present it as something trivial and worldly. The not so sensible reason is that you want to give autistic fanboys lore to obsess over.
>moron
I’m not the moron trying to explain how a series widley accepted as sci-fi isn’t sci-fi.
>widley accepted
Ah, nice. Appeal to public opinion.
Always helpful when the facts don't go your way.
Lucas himself said Star Wara isn't scifi you fricking mongoloid
Where did he say that?
Because those are actually bound by scientific principles IRL, so you would need to devote a lot of time and effort into writing something even remotely plausible. The Force is just made up bullshit that can be explained with anything because it's made up bullshit
There's anti-gravity EVERYWHERE.
I don’t think it even works how people who b***h about it think it works.
Midichlorians are attracted to force users, they don’t make one a force user, or am I wrong?
You're wrong. Word of George is that Vader lost lots of his midis when he lost his limbs. They're what connects you to the force.
The force being an unknowable mystery was non-canon fanfiction in the first place.
Nah, that's been debunked, actually.
According to?
But what are the midi-chlorians’ tax policy?
did it though???
TLJ was so moronic I don't blame them for having no idea what to do with TRoS
They could've simply followed the original plan (Dual of the Fates) instead of retconnnig things to appeal the redditors who b***hed about TLJ.
>original plan
There never was a plan you fricking idiot
He's talking about Trevorrow's script. I.e. the "original" plan for episode 9 itself (written in 2016/2017), not for the whole trilogy.
based moron
Looks a bit too much like the TFA poster, but the Freudian in me appreciates the huge phallic object in the lower right.
>the redditors who b***hed about TLJ.
kek
redditors are the ones who loved TLJ and you know that because you clearly are one of them
TLJ was moronic because Disney handed all of the empty mystery boxes to Rian Johnson and said "Don't make it like Empire because that was the major criticism for TFA, but also make it exactly like Empire because we think that's the only way people will like it"
rian just made empire remixed with attack of the clones
you had dagobah training in the middle, the family twist and then you had the battle of hoth at the end
post the pasta
The dumbest thing is that they could easily have made up some sci-fi gadget that could show them the way. Maybe a small droid that pointed in that direction, a hologram that got more and more clear the closer they got, or some force-thingy that showed force sensitive people the route to take.
But who the frick stood at that exact place, designed a knife around the view, and thought that was a swell idea?
And all it did was point out the location of the throne room. Whoop de doo. Shouldn't the rebels already know that?
Not like it was on the top of a tower that stuck out more than anything else, though...
>mfw
People get paid million be to write this moronic shit
Lmao
But seriously what the frick are those 2 fat fricks doing there?
Are they actually in the movie?!?!
I think that pic's from the theme park.
So if you are too fat to fit into stormtrooper armor, you get promoted?
(You)r post best post
Dude in khaki pants looks like a stagehand that couldn't get away in time after they started recording
it's so fricking laughable
>300,000 burgers produced and a million more well on the way
>but sir, the calories count alone would exceed all levels of humanity!
>never tell me the calories!
What's the most plausible logic that could have led them to this dumbass decision?
>ROTJ Luke almost killed his father
>TLJ Luke didn't lay a finger on his nephew
As always internet chuds trying to rewrite story
>luke is tricked into fighting by vader
vs
>luke sees ben having a crazy dream
bit of a difference there, disney adults
Luke, only goes ham on Vader because Vader sussed out Leia. Luke wasn't afraid to die. He was afraid to let his sister have to stand in his place. And then still didn't go for the kill and refused the emperor, refuting anger for mercy as Vader was defeated and no longer a threat to Leia.
>>ROTJ Luke almost killed his father
After fighting him for roughly half an hour. And the Emperor goading him into joining the Dark Side for that entire time. And all the other Rebels in ships outside dying rapidly. And even then the only reason he snapped was because Vader threatened Leia.
But clearly, sensing a bad dream is just as intense and terrifying as being in the middle of a life-or-death battle with the ultimate evil in the universe.
>I never touched him
>I was simply standing next to his bed while he was sleeping
good luck in jail, skywalker
>internet chuds
What do israelites have to do with this?
>I still feel the good in you
The whole point of that scene is that Luke nearlu falls off the edge but doesn’t. He throws his saber away, remember?
>He throws his saber away, remember?
Throwing away a lightsaber? Sacrilegious!
A real jedi would never throw away a lightsaber!
Ghey pacifist bullshit.
Imagine throwing your only weapon away when your enemy (Palpatine) is still before you.
Uhh Vaderbros???
i mean adam driver is a israelite
>Luke, join with me and rule the galaxy or I will murder all of your friends and mindrape your sister into submission
>>A Few Moments Later
>NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO PALPATINE WHAT ARE YOU DOING!
I hate RotJ so much it's unreal. Ewoks were the least offensive part of the film.
Well, that part was a late addition.
Actually Vader ordered an entire planet destroyed, billions of people
>have Han get killed in ep 8
>have Luke witness Kylo kill Han
>Luke is enraged and wants to kill him to avenge his long time friend
>Kylo runs away
>now Luke has an internal conflict, to either kill Kylo or find it in himself to forgive him and try to bring Kylo away from the dark side
>have Luke's intense rage be similar to how Anakin's rage
>Luke starts having intensive force visions
>the dark side slowly seeping into his mind because of how angry he is
>starts seeing visions of Darth Vader from his manifestations of hatred
>suddenly he hears his father pleading with him to not fall into the dark side like he did
>Luke snaps out of it and listens to his father's pleads
>end of ep 8, and that's how you get people excited for ep 9
Good thing you're not in charge of writing any scripts.
Because the quality of his writing would stand out too much compared to the shit that is otherwise called the sequel trilogy?
Because his writing is worse than Abrams' and Terrio's incoherent bullshit in ROS. At least they TRIED to say something inbetween those pointless fanservice moments.
actually would have been kino
The most interesting part about this ANCIENT sith artifact is that it fricking ANCIENT, while the second Death Star is about 40 or 50 years old. And yet it had a built-in contraption made specifically to point at a specific location on a specific piece of wreckage of said Death Star, provided it landed in a specific angle on a specific location on a specific planet, and that you use it standing a specific distance away from said wreckage in a specific direction and hold it in a specific way.
That's some foresight.
again, you forgot that the Force exists
Yeah, sure, the Force "told" some guy millenia ago that he needed to engineer that exact thing because it would one day help someone (from the opposite team nonetheless) to find some map to a planet, which would be important because the guy from your team is hiding there (and apparently you would want him to fail).
Makes perfect sense that the Force would make such a detailled accuracy, when the best the Jedi ever got in terms of prophecies was some extremely vague "chosen one" bullshit.
>apparently you would want him to fail).
Noooo, Sheev WANTED Rey to find him. That one small part of it...kind of works. Almost.
>Sheev WANTED Rey to find him.
He did. But he didn't know that his plan for her to kill him would fail ... because she kills him.
But the Force would have known, right?
Then why he didn't sent her a message via the voice in her head he claim to be ?
The fact its ancient doesn't bother me because there really is no reason the force could not have given someone somewhere some form of precognition. It's the fact some moron who died in a hole in the middle of fricking nowhere right next to his ship whose job is "sith assassin" but we've never seen or heard of him before once ever had it.
>The most interesting part about this ANCIENT sith artifact is that it fricking ANCIENT, while the second Death Star is about 40 or 50 years old
The first movie acts like if the Force and the Jedi are an ancient religion despite the fact it only passed 20 years since the fall of the Jedi
NOOOOOOOOOOOO REAL LUKE WOULD NEVER DO THIS
They are ancient religions they just mostly died out within 20 years. Doesn't mean they're not ancient.
Collapse of the Jedi would have to have been recent if Luke's dad was a part of them. Besides what
said, that was just a guy being an obnoxious Reddit atheist mocking the ancient book of israeli fairy tales.
what is the igloo flag?
>kekistan flag
>most common pepe, frick's sake use at least a mid rare
>ellipses
what the hell is the purple pentagram?
frick off
sugma
it should then cross face to happy merchant
Too on the nose.
>star farts
I've never watched this movie and I never will. Somethings you can tell are shit before they even come out. Like jurassic park(og and new) gladiator and the northmen. You stupid fricking cucks need to learn to ignore and stfu and they pain will end.
WORST MOVE EVER
At this point I stopped giving a shit. So TLJ is still the worst of the bunch,
Nope, you're just a moronic homosexual who is gay for Luke. Rise of Skywalker is a thousand times shittier than TLJ.
It was really one of the dumbest most contrived things I've ever seen in movies, I had to lie down when I saw it. I don't mind a bit of impossible space magic but this wasn't even interesting. It was an asspull and goofy as hell
If the dagger just glowed when pointed the right way or levitated and pointed like a compass, it would have been fine right
What - you think YOU might have realised that the place to look for sith artefacts MIGHT be in the Emperor's throne room?
You literally can't explain to me why this is bad
Read the thread. It's TERRIBLE for a number of reasons.
>the death star was litteraly destroyed by the explosion
>the dagger was made thousand years ago but somehow work the remaining of the death, who need to fall on a precise planet, being looked at a precise angle, at a presice distance
>also it's been like 30-40 years since the star was destroyed so you need to think about rain, wind, animal, new republic who could destroy the remaining for security reason, people looking for scrap and all thing like that who could change the star little by little
>so palpatine could make rey come to him, despite claiming he was all the voice in her head, meaning he could just had sent a force message
ChatGPT wasn't as good back then. It could write a better script now.
it's not chatgpt, it's women studies graduate writers in a woke infested room
i know these were old memes but it was confirmed by leaks, yea it's just incompetence nothing else, no agenda to frick with the goy
israeli movies are as good as the quality of their writers after all
Its still surprises me how awful these films were, to the point where not even 10 years out from ep. 7 the entire trilogy has zero culturally cache. Meanwhile the OT and Prequels have significant cultural impact going on half a century since episode 4.
We're almost as far away from episode 7 as it was from episode 3. If zoomers who grew up with these movies haven't created memes of them it's because they didn't watch them many times.
>haven't created memes of them
There are countless memes of episode 9 and its stupid dialogue. Poe's "somehow" line gets posted almost daily on this very board.
The reason 7 and 8 get barely any memes like the prequels did is simply that there isn't much to make memes about like there was for the prequels. Not without focing them at least. Their dialogue isn't nearly as bad and they're way less campy.
What's the most suprising is how prequelgays unironically think that being "memable" is a good thing, when the memes they parade around on their subreddits actually make light of how bad certain aspects of the prequels were.
rose Tico is a sexy little vietcong slampiggy God I want to film her with white cum
The absurdity of the mechanism aside how the frick was the knife made if everything about the location is a super duper fricking secret?
There was a waypoint on Rey's minimap that showed her exactly where to stand.
The ancient dagger was a map that was gained when the map and the map that pointed to the map for the map and map coordinates for a map map map map map
.... I'm starting to sense a pattern in JJ's star wars scripts.
This quind of normie capeshit films are designed like vid*ogames quests
You ever heard the tale of Ochi Besomi?
Why did the First Order attack the Republic in TFA? Why weren't they told to hold off until the Sith fleet was ready? They could have just not attracted any attention and then conquered the entire galaxy from an unknown planet over the course of however long it takes to jump to the other end of the galaxy.
I don't see what they achieved by attacking so early, especially since they only blew up a few planets, something any member of that Sith fleet could do.
How was she supposed to know exactly where to stand to use the dagger like that?
I remember seeing Empire Strikes Back - it was awesome! Have they made any good Star Wars films since then?
this movie felt like a slapped together/as-is release they put out bc the director died and they didn't want to reshoot anything to change his vision
Reminder that the fricking room doesn't even exist or would fit.
Based female and black man. The saviours of slop wars.
Lmao. This is why happens when women get power Jesus fricking Christ
Reminder all nu wars is homosexual shit
They should have made the Endor genocide real. People would have forgiven all 3 films then.
here's your reminder that this actually happened because they needed a final scene with monke
wielding laser rifles on horseback is like throwing rocks from a F-16
they're also riding on back of a Star Destroyer
no it's not, you've got it reversed
>you've got it reversed
So ... throwing F-16s from a rock is like wielding horses on the back of a laser rifle?
I skipped it in theaters and then I fell asleep watching it with a couple of friends and never even figured out how this shit trilogy ended lol
Looks like she's measuring the jiggaboo
>the emperor will return again once they shit out a new trilogy
dear god please save us
Not necessarily. They just need to find someone who's a little bit more creative than JJ Abrams.