Movies: Star Wars: Rogue One or The Force Awakens

[chicagoskycam]

I liked both of them.

And btw, A New Hope rehashed all sorts of things including lifting the whole trench run from a WWII movie.

That's not even close to the same thing.

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

I am more a fan of Rogue One, because it showed us something new. It showed us the other side of the war. If the regular movies show us the kings and leaders (Jedi/Sith) this movie was more about the individual soldiers. The ground forces, so to speak. It gives us a different view on the story as a whole, even though it only focused on 1 chapter in the 30-year story.

The Force Awakens was a great experience, because it was the first Star Wars movie in cinemas in 10 years. Having watched the prequels as a kid (Born in 84, so I was 15 when The Phantom Menace came out) this was a great way to re-ignite the flame inside me that craved Star Wars. But, watching it again, I do feel it did not teach me anything new. It did not show me something I didn't already know. The cinematography is great at times. How the blue light on Kylo Ren's face changes to red right before killing Han is wonderful. There are great moments in that movie and I like it a lot.

Rogue One showed us a great, great space battle, with a nice throwback to the original 1977 Star Wars movie. It had a bit of a problem introducing characters, which could have been resolved by adding the opening scroll, but in the end, we knew what we needed to know. Both movies are better than the prequels and RotJ. I just like Rogue One more, because it is something new on top of it having all the aspects I look for in a Star Wars movie

 

[Roboturner913]

Rogue One makes The Force Awakens look corny and superficial. And I really, really liked TFA. I fear Rogue One may spoil me on all future SW movies. It was that good.

 

[NyQuil]

I enjoyed both but I liked TFA better.

The action sequence at the end of Rogue One was better than anything TFA had, but I thought that the pacing and overall feel of TFA was superior.

It was a better film overall - probably because it was ANH all over again.

 

[Takeo]

There needs to be a poll option for "evenly-matched, mediocre commercial films that adequately pass the time, bank on nostalgia, but ultimately forgettable."

 

[RockLobster]

Is there an option where Takeo doesn't do his usual drive-by?

As for the question at hand. I'd vote for "enjoyed both", but if this is meant as some sort of comparison of the two films, it's not going to be an apt one (despite "Star Wars" being in both titles). TFA was an introduction of several new characters and a new long-term story arc; Rogue One was the introduction of new characters and storyline that we already kind of new about (through the opening scrawl of ANH), and we knew how it'd end (we just didn't know the actual story). I think it's logical for people to like it better than TFA right now, because they got an introduction and conclusion to this story, whereas we're still awaiting the conclusion of the bigger things introduced in TFA.

 

[johnjm22]

"evenly-matched, mediocre commercial films that adequately pass the time, bank on nostalgia, but ultimately forgettable."

That's an apt description of these films.

 

[SirPaste]

Loved both, loved Rogue One more

 

[RandV]

That's not even close to the same thing.

You know I could buy this, but not after a few years ago seeing much of the same criticisms lobbed at Avatar for being a copy of Dances with Wolves/Pocahontas/Fern Gully. Feels like a deep philosophical difference to me, some people it seems to drive crazy but it didn't bother my enjoyment in the least.

And yes A New Hope was basically a rehash of other movies, most specifically it was Akira Kurosawa's "The Hidden Fortress" set in space. I'd bet if it came out today a lot of people would be nitpicking it too.

Anyways, for the poll I liked both, but liked TFA better so voted for that.

 

[Classic Devil]

You know I could buy this, but not after a few years ago seeing much of the same criticisms lobbed at Avatar for being a copy of Dances with Wolves/Pocahontas/Fern Gully. Feels like a deep philosophical difference to me, some people it seems to drive crazy but it didn't bother my enjoyment in the least.

Avatar was awful, IMO. If it was on this list it'd be at the bottom, somewhere under Dante's seventh circle of hell.

And yes A New Hope was basically a rehash of other movies, most specifically it was Akira Kurosawa's "The Hidden Fortress" set in space. I'd bet if it came out today a lot of people would be nitpicking it too.

True, and not true. It borrowed heavily, but inspiration from different stories isn't exactly verboten. It's another thing entirely when a movie cribs its own prequel.

Anyways, for the poll I liked both, but liked TFA better so voted for that.

Rogue One was a far better movie, but I'm biased as I'm still bitter over the loss of the Zahn Trilogy from canon.

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

.

And yes A New Hope was basically a rehash of other movies, most specifically it was Akira Kurosawa's "The Hidden Fortress" set in space. I'd bet if it came out today a lot of people would be nitpicking it too.

Filmmakers borrow plot points, character quirks, music and shots they like from other filmmakers all the flipping time.

This isn't bad in and of itself, but at the same time I think there exists an important difference between Lucas importing Hidden Fortress into a space film because he liked Hidden Fortress (same reason Solo = Flash Gordon and the WWII trench run out of that genre film), and JJ Abrams importing A New Hope for really no other reason than it is A New Hope. A self-referential reference that is nevertheless integral to the story of the film. It's like TFA is one gigantic Easter Egg meant to placate the Star Wars fan base.

 

[kihei]

Rogue One by a couple of parsecs.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

There needs to be a poll option for "evenly-matched, mediocre commercial films that adequately pass the time, bank on nostalgia, but ultimately forgettable."

Agreed. I feel gypped every time I try to give Star Wars a chance because of friends.

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

Idk... R1 is better written (though it avoids dramatic conflict like the plague outside one scene, which is annoying). TAG is better directed, so even if you're too busy thinking, "This is so ****ing stupid", you can't deny Abrams instilled a frantic energy and excitement into the film. Which R1 lacks.

Let's go with Takeos option.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

Idk... R1 is better written (though it avoids dramatic conflict like the plague outside one scene, which is annoying). TAG is better directed, so even if you're too busy thinking, "This is so ****ing stupid", you can't deny Abrams instilled a frantic energy and excitement into the film. Which R1 lacks.

Let's go with Takeos option.

The best thing for from Star Wars films are certain shots of space and the spaceships. Besides that, I see and feel nothing. It's campy as hell and the acting in TFA was god-awful. I wanted to spit at the screen during Rogue 1 in one of the final scenes when Felicity Jones should be getting smoked by Ben Mendelsohn but of course he has to speak to her long enough for Diego Luna to come and save her. There were so many moments in these two movies where I just felt like I was being taken to the cleaners/manipulated (Han Solo's death being another example, Jesus Christ!). If those movies were called anything but Star Wars they wouldn't get half the acclaim they do and I'm very resentful of this. They're run of the mill as they come and extremely manipulative (is there anything more manipulative then using nostalgia over and over again to sell you a story?). It's disgraceful to anyone who ever tries to come up with an original story/movie/writing.

 

[Blender]

JJ Abrams, for the most part, makes run of the mill and easily accessible movies that entertain you the first time you watch them but rarely have any lasting appeal. TFA fits that mold as perfectly as anything he's done, but the fact that the story was such a cookie cutter copy of ANH really hurt the movie imo.

 

[wedge]

Star Wars is all about the Force, the Skywalkers, the Jedi and the Sith.
You have almost none of them in R1. Sure it's a pretty good movie but it's mostly a war movie. I'll take TFA even if R1 has surprised me. I think TFA will be even better after we see episode VIII.

That damn starkiller, though... destroyed a lot of the movie's greatness.

 

[JackSlater]

Easily Rogue One for me. Good story, tone felt like a Star Wars movie. I hate The Force Awakens. Even forgetting how it shamelessly just rehashes A New Hope (really... the victors from the last was are supposed to be underdogs just ~30 decades later?) I found the three main characters straight up bad and didn't find the tone right.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

Rogue One was a better movie but The Force Awakens had more emotional highs.

 

[HanSolo]

Liked both but I liked TFA a fair bit more. Rogue one works really well as an action movie and the last third is up there with some of the best of Star Wars. Shame the whole movie couldn't be the same quality

 

[Tawnos]

It's a meaningless comparison, even though I voted for TFA.

It's like comparing a great X-Files episode heavily involved in the conspiracies and main storyline to one of the better "Monster of the Week" episodes. Or like comparing Star Trek TNG's Best of Both Worlds to Yesterday's Enterprise.

 

[Shareefruck]

I'll never understand the apples vs. oranges thing. They're movies. There's likely going to be some sliver of difference between how rewarding you think they are, therefore, it's meaningful to compare them regardless of their differences.

 

[Tawnos]

I'll never understand the apples vs. oranges thing. They're movies. There's likely going to be some sliver of difference between how rewarding you think they are, therefore, it's meaningful to compare them regardless of their differences.

At the end of the conversation though, the comparison means nothing. Did you like TFA? Did you like R1? What do the answers to those questions really have to do with each other?

It's because we set up ourselves in camps of meaningless comparisons and waste a ton of time on the arguments. Star Trek vs Star Wars. Marvel vs DC. Megadeth vs Metallica. Gibson vs Fender. Airbus vs Boeing. And those are examples of equivalent things which get argued into absurdity. In this case, we have one story that's wholly complete in R1 and has no further implication on the future of the story's fabric and we are comparing it to something that is incomplete and has a lot of further implication.

Personally, I like apples better than oranges, but that doesn't make my preference meaningful in any way.

 

[NewtJorden]

I like both of them equally, wich seems impossible for a lot of people...

 

[HanSolo]

I like both of them equally, wich seems impossible for a lot of people...

I can understand that. I think if you weigh the strengths and weaknesses of both films I can see how you can come to like both equally.

EDIT: The most important thing to me, though, is that these movies are undoubtedly better than the prequels. Not good enough to wipe away the stain of those three films but at least we haven't had to suffer with true garbage just yet.