There’s a huge time gap between Return of the Jedi and The Force Awakens, but everyone understands that you’re gonna be lost if you just jump into The Force Awakens blind.
They just reset the entire franchise to “Okay, but now the Empire is in charge again and the Rebels are on the run again and you have to beat the Death Star again”. It’s very easy to understand precisely because they abandoned the conclusion of the prior movie and just sent you back to the beginning of “A New Hope” again.
I just think it’s kinda funny that you pointed out that it feels like there should be companion material for these movies, even though there absolutely is companion material for these movies.
“We could have made six movies in between when Movie 1 ends and Movie 2 begins, but we’re hoping you’ll just pick it up off the backhanded remarks scattered around the 10’ mark” is weak writing.
The Matrix is great precisely because they spend so much time with the setup, but in a way that’s still engaging with the audience. Jurassic Park gives you some time to marvel at the dinosaurs and learn where they came from, even playing on the impatience to “Show them to me!” by expressing it with the characters themselves in the middle of the expository scene.
Yeah I already said I’m not trying to excuse bad writing. I explicitly called out that those movies have bad writing, and I explicitly called out that even if the writing was improved, they still probably wouldn’t be comparable to the Jurassic Park or Matrix franchises. We both acknowledge and agree that the Jurassic Park and Matrix franchises have better writing than Tron and Star Wars. That’s allowed. We’re allowed to agree on things on the Internet, I promise.
Literally all I’m pointing out is that if you watch the previous movies, you will be less lost than if you just watch the sequel by itself. I don’t understand how that’s a controversial point worthy of multiple paragraphs of response.
They just reset the entire franchise to “Okay, but now the Empire is in charge again and the Rebels are on the run again and you have to beat the Death Star again”. It’s very easy to understand precisely because they abandoned the conclusion of the prior movie and just sent you back to the beginning of “A New Hope” again.
“We could have made six movies in between when Movie 1 ends and Movie 2 begins, but we’re hoping you’ll just pick it up off the backhanded remarks scattered around the 10’ mark” is weak writing.
The Matrix is great precisely because they spend so much time with the setup, but in a way that’s still engaging with the audience. Jurassic Park gives you some time to marvel at the dinosaurs and learn where they came from, even playing on the impatience to “Show them to me!” by expressing it with the characters themselves in the middle of the expository scene.
Yeah I already said I’m not trying to excuse bad writing. I explicitly called out that those movies have bad writing, and I explicitly called out that even if the writing was improved, they still probably wouldn’t be comparable to the Jurassic Park or Matrix franchises. We both acknowledge and agree that the Jurassic Park and Matrix franchises have better writing than Tron and Star Wars. That’s allowed. We’re allowed to agree on things on the Internet, I promise.
Literally all I’m pointing out is that if you watch the previous movies, you will be less lost than if you just watch the sequel by itself. I don’t understand how that’s a controversial point worthy of multiple paragraphs of response.
I’m sorry did you pay for the full hour or just the thirty minutes