TROS Star Wars: Episode IX - The Rise of Skywalker

Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
32,589
Reaction score
1,182
Location
Oregon
I wouldn't mind that version of the Emperor, though not necessarily the machine. Although it would be a good use to give him light up eyes. lol
 
Joined
Sep 28, 2013
Messages
527
Reaction score
210
Location
UK - Leeds
Yeah that was great, I do feel I'd have liked this version a lot more than what we got but who knows how it would have ended up.
 
Joined
Jan 22, 2017
Messages
2,426
Reaction score
1,022
Special features on the home release mostly suck. the John Williams one saved the disc....
 
Joined
Jan 23, 2007
Messages
1,639
Reaction score
52
Just for the record, my official feelings on Episode IX after the Palpatine clone confirmations, and after rewatching it again:

The Rise of Skywalker is one of the best of the Star Wars films, in the top 4 or so in my opinion. I really don't see how anyone else could have tied it altogether in any other way. In fact, it's quite "George Lucas-like" so to speak.
 
Joined
Sep 5, 2015
Messages
3,790
Reaction score
922
Location
Viborg, Denmark
Just for the record, my official feelings on Episode IX after the Palpatine clone confirmations, and after rewatching it again:

The Rise of Skywalker is one of the best of the Star Wars films, in the top 4 or so in my opinion. I really don't see how anyone else could have tied it altogether in any other way. In fact, it's quite "George Lucas-like" so to speak.
April fools' was yesterday :) (sorry, couldn't resist)
 
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Messages
1,218
Reaction score
66
Location
Edinburg Texas
So I got the best buy box set which hopefully it will be my last purchase of any star wars / Skywalker saga films. unless there is new movies in the future i will not be spending more money 💰. Had to have them in 4k format.. I had seen them already on 4k as I have Disney plus. I own every version imaginable include beta max , vhs , and the original trilogy unaltered versions .. so hopefully this it..
 
Joined
Jul 15, 2000
Messages
1,648
Reaction score
72
I'm holding out for the 8K format coming out next year.
That will be expensive!
You'll have to buy an 8K TV, Bluray player, A/V receiver and HDMI cables.
That's like $10,000+ for what most experts say isn't much better than 4K.
 
Joined
Jan 22, 2017
Messages
2,426
Reaction score
1,022
That will be expensive!
You'll have to buy an 8K TV, Bluray player, A/V receiver and HDMI cables.
That's like $10,000+ for what most experts say isn't much better than 4K.
I work in the display industry, and most people can't see a difference between 4k and 8k. though I had a medical monitor in here at 32k! used in very very expensive cancer screening equipment. those raw screens are over $20k. Right now there isn't even enough 4k content.... trying to sell 8k later in the year will be a hard sell.
 
Joined
Jun 13, 2013
Messages
1,509
Reaction score
287
Are you suggesting the guy at Best Buy doesn't know the proper terms?🤣


I am a AV person & have people regularly talking about 16K to which I reply the original films/highest computer signal/giant billboards don't need that much detail. Nor could you afford it to make it look good at that resolution.

😃
 
Joined
Jan 22, 2017
Messages
2,426
Reaction score
1,022
Are you suggesting the guy at Best Buy doesn't know the proper terms?🤣


I am a AV person & have people regularly talking about 16K to which I reply the original films/highest computer signal/giant billboards don't need that much detail. Nor could you afford it to make it look good at that resolution.

😃
we have pretty much hit the cap of what people will buy, but that does not mean the good folks at Best Buy aren't willing to go that extra mile to sell you something you don't need... Their Geek squad is top notch!
 
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
32,589
Reaction score
1,182
Location
Oregon
Well, new cellphones come out about every 6 months...
So evidently there are people who need a new phone quite frequently.

Perosnally, it takes me good 6 months by the time I learn to use all the cool features. lol
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2006
Messages
5,893
Reaction score
262
makes sense. if they are indeed planning an extended cut, then there's no telling which of these "deleted scenes" will actually make the cut, and which will actually BE deleted scenes, after the smoke clears. it sounds like they shot a LOT of stuff that didn't make it into the theatrical release -- this stuff would be better utilized in the extended cut -- it would be premature to present them as "deleted scenes" until AFTER the extended cut is finalized.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Messages
7,211
Reaction score
1,213
Location
NJ
My postmortem on the entire ST (not that anyone cares) now that I've had a few months to digest Episode 9:

It's the new Expanded Universe. I really had hope after TFA. I got really nauseous after TLJ. I really like TROS but for all the wrong reasons (not because it was a good Star Wars; but because it did the best job it could to erase a worse Star Wars movie).

Fun stories set in the Star Wars stratosphere but not in any conceivable way a continuation of the proper Saga canonically ended in ROTJ.
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2006
Messages
5,893
Reaction score
262
I've been saying that same thing for years: "it's all EU now".

^^ perhaps if audiences had accepted this fact in 2015 then the entire ST would be a LOT more enjoyable... after all, I enjoyed the hell out of 'splinter of the mind's eye' and the old Marvel Comics run... why? because these were "fun stories set in the SW stratosphere", as you say; NOBODY ever sold them to me as the "official continuation of GL's life work" (when GL was no longer working) LOL. that very premise is absurd. that would be like JJ Abrams painting an oil-on-canvas and calling it the "official continuation of Picasso's life work" -- (or Leonardo Davinci's) -- that's ridiculous.

the EU has always been defined as "stories NOT written by George" -- and lets face it, the ST are "stories NOT written by George" LOL -- they never fooled me for an instant -- it was "splinter of the mind's eye", all over again.

(ironically, if we had accepted the ST as "EU" from the start, then this would have allowed audiences to actually ENJOY it, like splinter of the mind's eye -- but instead, by selling it as "the official continuation of GL's life work" (when GL was no longer working), Disney had dug their own grave -- this gave the ST an impossible standard, to live up to -- and by THAT standard, it was doomed to fail)
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 10, 2018
Messages
1,756
Reaction score
572
It doesn't matter whether it's all EU now or not. What matters is whether the story and characters are good and in the sequels trilogy, they're not.
Labelling something as "EU" doesn't let it off the hook.
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2006
Messages
5,893
Reaction score
262
it would remove a level of scrutiny, and allow people to relax their sphincters, and who knows? they might actually enjoy it.
 
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
32,589
Reaction score
1,182
Location
Oregon
Even if it's all EU now, there were some good EU stories. So it doesn't mean that the ST should be excused for being what it based on that.
Labeling this EU seems like an insult to EU, even if it is just as bad as a lot of EU was/still is.

For all those that hated EU in the past simply because it wasn't the Movies, don't really seem to have a leg to stand on now though, when it comes to their criticisms. Bad is bad regardless of the media source. And while that is merely a person POV, anyone who really likes the ST probably didn't mind the trashy elements of EU.
 
Joined
May 10, 2018
Messages
1,756
Reaction score
572
it would remove a level of scrutiny, and allow people to relax their sphincters, and who knows? they might actually enjoy it.
It still has to be good, though, Cobalt.

As someone who's never really delved that deep into the EU, old or new, that moniker doesn't really mean that much to me and it has no weight, if you know what I mean. So, my own anal muscle remains quite relaxed. But, I still judge a piece of Star Wars entertainment as I do any other. The main judgement being "Does this entertain me?", which leads to how and what's entertaining about it. If it doesn't, I ask why am I not being entertained by this?

Whether something is EU or not (and by your yardstick, it's all EU now) means nothing to me as a benchmark of quality.
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2006
Messages
5,893
Reaction score
262
I didn't mean you personally, I meant Disney's Audience, in general. Disney inherited the most dedicated fanbase in the history of modern cinema, and they've somehow managed to squander it.

IF they had told us the truth: that GL is now retired; GL's "personal body of work" is at an end; their plan moving forward was to retire the (so-called) 'G-canon' and expand the EU to include movies now, for the first time ever; the movies would now share the same historic status as the comic books and novels, from now on... (aka: "everything is EU now")... I think everything would have been fine... after a while, the fanbase would accept this.

BUT instead they told us a load of orwellian double-speak: the EU is now at an end; their plan moving forward was to retire the (so-called) EU-canon, and expand GL's "Personal Body of Work" to include comic books and novels now, for the first time ever; the comic books and novels would share the same Historic Status as the GL Movies from now on.. ("aka: everything is canon now")... I think this is where everything went south... after a while, the fanbase did NOT accept this.

fans of the old EU had a FIT, when they realised their beloved storylines were all being "cancelled" like Woody's Roundup; and fans of the GL movies were doomed to disappointment.. because these are NOT "GL Movies" LOL :p the very IDEA of "continuing GL's personal body of work" is patently absurd... and yet... this is how they sold it.

^^ this is the biggest mistake that Disney made with their (so-called) ST.

It still has to be good, though, Cobalt....

Whether something is EU or not (and by your yardstick, it's all EU now) means nothing to me as a benchmark of quality.
not so much a benchmark, so much as, a lowering of the bar.

yes, it still has to be good. (agreed).

just saying, if they had sold it AS "EU", then The Audience, as a whole, would have been a LOT more forgiving -- most of the EU was crap after all, which makes this an EASY standard to live up to -- but by selling their ST as "the Official Continuation of GL's Body of Work" they really sort of dug their own grave -- they created a standard for themselves, which proved IMPOSSIBLE to live up to.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 16, 2011
Messages
2,927
Reaction score
725
Location
Pennsylvania
Pssh. Lucas himself lowered the bare a decade and a half ago. Lucas was as much if not more a sell out. Looking to Lucas for light is like looking to OJ in an NFL players court trial. In a manner of speaking it entirely continued what Lucas did: destroying SW.
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 1, 2011
Messages
747
Reaction score
240
just saying, if they had sold it AS "EU", then The Audience, as a whole, would have been a LOT more forgiving

I'd say no. First of all, these are The Movies - The Big Thing. Very few members of the audience, and I assume very few fans either, will go and ask "what level of canonity is this?". Structurally these movies are sequels (even if they come as soft reboot) - they have the old actors, they are set in the future of the originals, they have a common continuity with the OT and PT. Disney set it up this way; it's hard to ignore. Why should some "EU" label (that you need to explain to three quarters of the moviegoers) change anything about this?

Furthermore, I have always thought that the "level of canon" labelling is artificial and lazy. When I consumed a Star Wars item (book, or comic, or series, or movie...) I always took the content for a true and valid part of the universe - at least at the time of reading/watching, with the notable exception of explicit "elseworlds" stories that intentionally looked at changed events.

Why? Because it makes no sense to have "true" stories and "almost true" stories and "perhaps not so true" stories and "BS stories" and put them all under the same label. Part of the attraction of a franchise is that it tells tales about one universe, with specific rules and expectations, with consistent characters and a sensible history. A spot to live in, for a fan, that feels like a real place, an ersatz home (yes, escapism is a big part of it). If that is not a given in a franchise - well, then I don't see the reason why we should call it a franchise at all; I might as well read separate stories set in separate universes. If you don't have the ***** (or the patience, or the fortitude, or the talent) to create a true franchise, then make a reboot, like Battlestar Galactica - you get to change all rules from the original and tell your own story, which is not bound to or limited by its predecessor.

I do not mind reboots (although, uh, those Spiderman reimaginations were reeeeally close together) or using similar storylines (Dances with Wolves vs. Avatar?). But if it's going to be a franchise, the puzzle pieces must fit.

As first-of-a-kind, Star Wars ran into franchise troubles early on. The later "Saga" was not prepared for a sprawl of add-ons, which led to "it's so popular, we need something for TV for Christmas - make a Holiday Special", "maybe it's not going to work, let's write Splinter of the Mind's Eye as cheap sequel", and "we want to show Jabba in the comics, what does he look like? Dunno? Okay, we just use some almost invisible character from the Cantina scene then".

Later, it didn't help that Lucas himself was not very interested in the franchise idea, and did not provide the necessary background for EU material. The authors did their best to keep their works contradiction-free, but Lucasfilm (despite having a department for EU-related stuff) didn't set up the framework, and reserved the right to revise EU ideas whenever it fit them. Which later led to the infamous Mandalorian revisionism and the death of the Traviss book series.

Therefore, the old EU wasn't as consistent and coherent as it could have been, and often used ideas which were... of dubious value.

I can understand that Disney didn't want to burden themselves with the old EU. I can also understand that they wanted to whip all media in line, so there wouldn't be any contradictions (well, as few as possible). Calling the whole thing, including the films, "EU", would not have made a difference, it's still all Star Wars.

What I do not understand is the way Disney went about it.
  • They never declared everything "non-canon", instead, they pretend to keep stuff, and not keep stuff, at the same time. It's all wishy-washy without a definitive timeline.
  • Old material, theoretically non-canon, is still printed as "Legends".
  • Ideas from old material is infused into the new canon, making the distinction between both ever more difficult.
  • Stuff was apparently kept which was most deserving of eradication, like Chewie's family from the Holiday Special.
  • New canon material was subject to inappropriate agendas.
  • Let's not get into the Palpatine Saga again...
It was supposed to be an improvement, but it's already, after so few years, a mess, and to add insult to injury, it's not even good.

I never wanted this kind of chaos, no matter how you label it; I never even would have demolished the old EU, as flawed as it is. The easiest way out would have been to set the new movies a thousand years into the future, when the Skywalkers are legend and all storylines are remote history. But Disney insisted on reusing the old heroes (and then diminish and kill them all) to cash in on nostalgic feelings.

Ultimately, it's up to each fan what they accept as their headcanon. My personal canon ends with Anya Solo and the final destruction of the Sith (with all the flaws and failures). And all of Disney is indeed EU, whether they declare it as such or not. It is sad, in the end, that the continuation of Star Wars means so little to me. I'll probably even give up the books. Disney just botched it.
 
Joined
May 10, 2018
Messages
1,756
Reaction score
572
I didn't mean you personally, I meant Disney's Audience, in general.
No worries, I didn't take your post personally. But, I can only reply in personal terms on this matter I spose.

Disney inherited the most dedicated fanbase in the history of modern cinema, and they've somehow managed to squander it.
Plain and simple, Disney were just the wrong people to handle Star Wars, because they just hadn't a bull's notion what to do with it. It'll be a shame forever what they did with the Skywalker saga.

just saying, if they had sold it AS "EU", then The Audience, as a whole, would have been a LOT more forgiving -- most of the EU was crap after all, which makes this an EASY standard to live up to -- but by selling their ST as "the Official Continuation of GL's Body of Work" they really sort of dug their own grave -- they created a standard for themselves, which proved IMPOSSIBLE to live up to.
The problem here, though, is that 99% of the general audience has no idea what the "EU" is. They never read about Skippy the Droid and wouldn't know who Timothy Zahn was if he bit them all on the ****. Into the bargain, there's also a huge, huge, percentage of fans who couldn't care less about the EU, because at best it was always just (pretty poor in most cases) secondary material. So, Disney simply can't say "it's all EU now", even though that appellation is apt in many ways.
 
Joined
May 10, 2018
Messages
1,756
Reaction score
572
Pssh. Lucas himself lowered the bare a decade and a half ago. Lucas was as much if not more a sell out. Looking to Lucas for light is like looking to OJ in an NFL players court trial. In a manner of speaking it entirely continued what Lucas did: destroying SW.
Yeh, Lucas blew it long before Disney got their mitts on Star Wars. But a lot of that has to do with the sycophants he surrounded himself with. When I think about George I am often reminded of Sick Boy's theory about great people having it and then losing it forever.

 
Top