I don't disagree with most of your criticisms, KungFuFerret. I can see the message being rambling because the guy is trying to justify himself to his daughter. His primary concern *isn't* to get the Death Star destroyed, it's to show his daughter that he's not a willing collaborator in the construction of the Genocideomatic 5000.

I disagree, that his primary concern isn't to get the Death Star destroyed. He became a double agent for YEARS, specifically to accomplish that very task. He even says as much in the message. That he knew they would build it without him, but if he was there, he could undermine their efforts.

That's what he wants the recipient of the message to believe. Doesn't mean it's a truthful assessment of the emotional reasons for his actions.

I'm not saying he's deliberately lying, but he's definitely trying to connect with the daughter he misses so terribly and trying to present an image of himself that explains his actions.

Also your argument that we have no idea who the people are is ridiculous as well. That's EVERY war movie. We get to know a select group of people but once the battle comes most of the participants are unknowns.

That's completely untrue. There *are* movies that take the time to establish various characters across the lines and in different roles and then show everyone's experience of a battle. The way Rogue One did it, it was a bunch of randoms we've barely seen before suddenly showing up in the last third of the movie, and with almost no effort to characterize them.

Like, describe the squid admiral's character. Not what he does in the movie, what his rank is, or his backstory, but what his personality is like. What do we learn about him as a person during his scenes?

If you read Catalyst, he's being entirely honest. However i'm not against different interpretations of scenes in films at all so it could be viewed that way in that would be a legitimate interpretation. I'm just saying based off of Catalyst the canon would suggest that in the scene he's being truthful.

I don't understand how anyone can say this movie was lifeless and bland. Everything felt so full of life. Jedha felt like a living, breathing city. Even that asteroid did. There were so many secondary and tertiary characters who stood out as unique characters even for having only ten seconds or so on screen. There was a magic going on in Rogue One that went beyond nostalgia. Its something a lot of movies try to do but it never feels right. It's that same wonder I remember feeling when I first saw the cantina scene in a New Hope that i've only felt in few other films such as the troll market in Hellboy 2 or the supernatural scenes in Pans Labyrinth.

Kung Fu Ferret, much of what you suggested should be cut were brief scenes most thirty seconds at most. Except for the Borgullet scene, that i'd be okay being cut as it was very long and did little to serve the plot of the film.

Also your argument that we have no idea who the people are is ridiculous as well. That's EVERY war movie. We get to know a select group of people but once the battle comes most of the participants are unknowns.

That's completely untrue. There *are* movies that take the time to establish various characters across the lines and in different roles and then show everyone's experience of a battle. The way Rogue One did it, it was a bunch of randoms we've barely seen before suddenly showing up in the last third of the movie, and with almost no effort to characterize them.

Like, describe the squid admiral's character. Not what he does in the movie, what his rank is, or his backstory, but what his personality is like. What do we learn about him as a person during his scenes?

Rewatch Saving Private Ryan. There are so many people throughout we don't get to know any more then most of the people in Rogue One, even at the end battle in the town. Sure we get to know a main ensemble very well but don't even try to say that most killed were ever developed. This is true of any war movie.

Admiral Raddus is a doer. A go getter. Unlike the other rebels he doesn't sit around on his keister and he wants to act now and he's not afraid of the Empire. He's obviously tough and creative considering the idea with the Hammerhead. He's a badass.

Have you watched The Thin Red Line? Or, you know, every war movie ever? Because you make some universal claims that only take a single counterexample to disprove.

I'm not talking about the characters on the ground who got killed, but about the space battle and the characters there. Really, character. Is there anyone of significance there? Tarkin's the only other at least marginally developed character in space, and he only shows up at the end of the battle, I think.

Your description of the Squidmiral is very vague. It applies as much to him as it does to Poe Dameron and Leia. That's not really specific enough to be a distinct character.

Jesus Christ, why is formatting quotes on this site such a nightmare?

I agree, it was a difficult movie to pull off right. I am of the opinion that they didn't pull it off. They tried, it wasn't a BAD movie, by any stretch of the imagination, but for me, it wasn't a GOOD movie either. It was just...there. I didn't find the humor all that funny, other than like 1 or 2 jokes that made me lightly chuckle. I didn't connect with any of the characters, and to this day, I still don't know most of their names. They were just archetypes in my head. "Blind Warrior Guy", "Heavy Weapons Guy", "The Pilot" (he even calls himself that more than his own freaking name), Jyn (only know her name due to repetition in adverts), and "That Other Guy".

For me, I know all the names, but that may be the result of diffent levels of investment. I've also seen it twice so there is that.

The Pilot, Bhoodie, did say "I'm the Pilot" over and over since he was still a wreck from the mindprobing (wich I agreed coul've been left out since it didn't amount to anything), but beyond that scene in the cell I don't recall him calling himself that.

I'll agree that aside from Jyn they didn't do a good job of establishing character backgrounds, but they had decent enough developement during their screentime, at least in regards to Jyn and Cassian.

I agree, but then I have said, many times on this forum, that I think Star Wars is crippled by it's own fandom. They are so afraid to not put in fanservice, that they end up just repeating the same old crap over and over. They have OT characters show up when there is NO reason they should, SWTOR has every bar band be that band from the Mos Eisley cantina...every crime lord is a Hutt. If you play a smuggler, you OF COURSE have a wookie friend, and you end up with a princess as a possible love interest. Of course you go to Tatooine and Hoth, even though the point of these planets in the OT was that they were out of the way, backwater, hole in the wall locations, but are now deeply important to the Star Wars mythos, etc etc. The list goes on and on. And for me Rogue One was a lot of fanservice, wrapped up in a story they felt needed to be told, that I really didn't think needed to be told. I mean come on, blue milk? Why the heck did they need to show us blue milk? They even held the frame on the bottle of it for like 5 seconds, just to make sure you saw the blue milk. And the guys from New Hope who assault Luke in the cantina, that was totally pointless, etc etc. Every time I saw one of those, it annoyed me.

I played little of the Star Wars MMO so I can't comment on that.
In regards to blue milk, I would see it more as homage than rampant fan-service.
Though Star Wars has been self-referencing since ancient times, I can see how it does it ab bit too much at times.

Pointless? Maybe. Annoying? Not for me at least.

On wether or not they pulled it off or if it was a story that needed telling:
We can go all day and night going "Yes" "No" "Yes" "No"

I disagree, but that's a matter of opinion, so that's fine. You can like R1 more than TFA, I feel the opposite. TFA emotionally engaged me, had me invested in the story and the characters, R1 didn't. You are apparently the opposite direction. Fine. No point arguing opinions, as neither is right/wrong.

Fair enough. Overall I liked TFA a lot as well, it's just a liiiittle bit too much of a mirror image of EP4 for my taste. I like it, but I know full well what I hate about it.
In fact, before TFA came out I was very distanced from Star Wars, but the film reinvigorated my love for the franchise.

And jamming in blue milk, and the guys from Mos Eisley, and all the other fanservices in R1 were ok, but when TFA does it, it's bad? I'll agree that Star Wars rests on it's laurels too much, in writing, catch phrases, etc. Both movies are guilty of it. But for me at least, TFA didn't seem to do it as much as R1, and I was able to forget it fairly quickly because I found the story engaging, so I didn't dwell on it like R1.

That wasn't a jab at TFA specifically. The prequel-trilogy is plenty guilty of overusing and misusing the bad feeling quote.

That wasn't really a big draw for me to be honest. I never had any personal illusions about the Rebellion doing bad things in a galaxy scale war. And I didn't really require to see it on the big screen to know it was there.

I agree that it wasn't necessary, but I thought it was a nice touch.

It was visually impressive, I just didn't really care. That's what I'm trying to convey. I had no real investment in the events of the story. Pretty colors and flashy lights isn't enough for me to love your movie. You have to give me something to care about. And the lackluster writing, barebones protagonists with little to no backstory or character development, made me detached from their struggle. I was already pretty certain it was going to be a Pyrrhic victory before even seeing it, so their sacrifices weren't all that engaging, and the ship fight was just pretty cgi.

Well, there is value in taking things for what they are. Impressive space battle is impressive.
That it didn't do anything for you is unfortunate. But that comes back to your opinion about investment, wich is fine.

I've stated in previous posts I liked that scene, but not for the fanservice of having Darth Vader in the movie. To be honest, I would've preferred he wasn't in it at all. Everything that went on in the movie seemed like a very simple Imperial bureaucratic thing, that didn't need the Dark Lord of the Sith's involvement. Tarkin and the other guy were perfectly adequate to deal with the issue. He was clearly shoehorned in because Star Wars fans, who are watching a movie during the OT timeframe, who don't get Darth Vader, get pissy, and whine on the internet if he isn't there.

I actually enjoyed this scene because it was the first time in the whole movie where I actually felt invested in the events. The nameless Rebel mooks, fighting off Vader in the hallway, got me more invested than the entire main cast in 2 hours of watching them stumble around. But that one Rebel, the one banging on the door, yelling for help, and then, in a moment's resolution, stops yelling for help, and just starts yelling for someone to take the plans, knowing he was dead, but refusing to give up on the Rebellion, even with the incarnation of Death behind him. THAT GUY, that nameless guy, who's actor is probably buried at the bottom of the cast list as something like "Yelling Rebel Guy" or "Dude Stabbed Through the Door", THAT GUY, got more emotional investment from me than anyone else.

It was pretty tense, and I feel the same way about the Rebel guy.
I'll freely admit to be a sucker for what you say is fanservice. The whole movie could have been a turd but just to have that scene visualized would have been worth it for me.
On the other hand, the movie would've still been good for me without the scene or Vader at all.

Overall: No hard feelings.

Your opinion was interesting to me since it so radically differs from mine.

I think it's important to disillusion oneself to avoid going full on fanboy, and discussion like this certainly helps. So thank you for indulging me, and sorry if I stepped on your foot.

Have you watched The Thin Red Line? Or, you know, every war movie ever? Because you make some universal claims that only take a single counterexample to disprove.

I'm not talking about the characters on the ground who got killed, but about the space battle and the characters there. Really, character. Is there anyone of significance there? Tarkin's the only other at least marginally developed character in space, and he only shows up at the end of the battle, I think.

Your description of the Squidmiral is very vague. It applies as much to him as it does to Poe Dameron and Leia. That's not really specific enough to be a distinct character.

Remember that scene where Jude Law picks off the German officers and soldiers using the cover of bombs exploding to fire? Can you give me the character traits of them? Or the Russian officer that yells at his soldiers that if they retreat they will be shot?

Let's be specific. How about Paul Giamatti's character in Saving Private Ryan? Bryan Cranston's character? Ted Danson's character?

What is Admiral Akbar's Motivation? Mon Mothma's? What is Dak's? Perkins? Wedge Antilles? The fighter that crashes into the SSD's bridge? Most of the fighter jockeys from the Original Trilogy we know nothing about from the movies alone. This isnt new in Star Wars at all.

EVERY Star Wars Space battle is full of secondary characters that blow up we know barely anything about. Rogue One is not any different in this regard.

Haven't watched those movies in years. Maybe over a decade.

But we've both watched Rogue One pretty recently, and you can't describe the characters in anything but the broadest terms. To me, that speaks to a flaw in the movie.

EVERY Star Wars Space battle is full of secondary characters that blow up we know barely anything about. Rogue One is not any different in this regard.

But the ones that get killed are not the ones given a big chunk of screentime. They're only shown quickly in A New Hope while we follow Luke and Vader - characters shown throughout the movie and given enough characterization that we can connect with them. In Jedi, you have Lando in space to anchor the viewers. And Ackbar, who gets to show some emotion beyond "determined dude who's determined". In Episode 1, we follow Anakin. In Episode 2, Obi-Wan and Boba Fett. In Episode 3, Anakin and Obi-Wan.

Again, I'm not talking about cannon fodder deaths, I'm talking about characters the viewers had time to get attached to being present in every part of a battle that cuts between different theaters, the most famous example being Jedi's three-tiered finale which had main characters in every section instead of a single secondary character.

Kung Fu Ferret, much of what you suggested should be cut were brief scenes most thirty seconds at most. Except for the Borgullet scene, that i'd be okay being cut as it was very long and did little to serve the plot of the film.

Right, but those 30 second, to 2-3 minute scenes, add up in runtime. They said they didn't want 10 more minutes of screentime to give us character development, and I was saying that it would be easy to shave off 10 minutes of useless runtime to then fit it in the same length.

**snip**

Overall: No hard feelings.

Your opinion was interesting to me since it so radically differs from mine.

I think it's important to disillusion oneself to avoid going full on fanboy, and discussion like this certainly helps. So thank you for indulging me, and sorry if I stepped on your foot.

Nah you didn't step on my feet or anything, just expressing what I didn't like about the movie. And understand, I didn't go into the movie wanting to dislike it. I never go see a movie, and spend 15+ bucks for ticket and possible snacks, to watch something I dislike. I have MANY other things I would rather spend that money on. I WANTED to like it....I just didn't. Too often I noticed myself frowning, and being annoyed with direction choices, like motivations for why someone did something, or a minor action someone took that didn't make any sense, and seemed contrary to the character they were presenting. Editing choices, scenes like that opening/closing iris that serves NO FREAKING PURPOSE, sorry, I just, can't let that bit go. I know it was supposed to be a dramatic scene, but I was openly laughing at that moment, because I just kept picturing Sigourney Weaver yelling at the Chompers. I even turned to my wife and muttered it under my breath, she got it too.

But yeah, it wasn't a terrible movie, I don't curse the movie gods for birthing it, I don't think it ruined my childhood, or anything like that. It was just, for me, a lackluster movie, that didn't really draw me in at all. And for Star Wars, if you can't suck me into a movie about a galactic war against a tyrannical empire, with spaceships and laser guns, and dudes with laser swords....then you did something really wrong. Because I'm a REALLY easy mark for that kind of story. Sweeping, epic storytelling, dramatic action, etc. That kind of stuff is my bread and butter. And they tried to capture that, it just didn't hit the mark for me.

Eeek! I shouldn't have come to this party!

Look- think I get what you're going at with the space battle and disposable supporting characters. Definitely get what you're going at with the movie being full of life. And I agree. HOWEVER. If the focus is on the Rogue One crew, why aren't they a part of the space battle? (Or maybe one or two of them?) Then we would've been emotionally invested in the fates of the people flying X-wings and crap around. If they're not part of it, the additional time spent on the space battle would've gone to better use earlier in the movie so we could learn more about these people. Keep in mind the very first Star Wars introduced nearly as many new characters as Rogue One, and we got to know them pretty well, so this can't be too hard to accomplish.

The movie was really enjoyable, and the spectacle of it all was fun. I feel some things could have been done better, and the sensation of "too many cooks in the kitchen" is a bit obvious, but that's the style of big budget movie-making in this day and age.

Eeek! I shouldn't have come to this party!

Look- think I get what you're going at with the space battle and disposable supporting characters. Definitely get what you're going at with the movie being full of life. And I agree. HOWEVER. If the focus is on the Rogue One crew, why aren't they a part of the space battle? (Or maybe one or two of them?) Then we would've been emotionally invested in the fates of the people flying X-wings and crap around. If they're not part of it, the additional time spent on the space battle would've gone to better use earlier in the movie so we could learn more about these people. Keep in mind the very first Star Wars introduced nearly as many new characters as Rogue One, and we got to know them pretty well, so this can't be too hard to accomplish.

The movie was really enjoyable, and the spectacle of it all was fun. I feel some things could have been done better, and the sensation of "too many cooks in the kitchen" is a bit obvious, but that's the style of big budget movie-making in this day and age.

To me, the space battle and some of the other battles were superfluous to what should have been more of an espionage story.

So, why was Leia at the Scarif battle? (starts at 19:00)

The TL;DNR version:

“The plan was always that Leia was going to go to Tatooine to pick up Obi-Wan and Raddus was going to escort her,” Hidalgo said. “Then the news of Scarif came in, and that was deemed more important ... [because] it’s the one warship that they have at this point.”

Hidalgo said Raddus was accompanying Leia because she was the “public face of the cause,” and they needed to keep her safe so she could continue getting them supplies. The ship’s inclusion itself was explained in the Rogue One novelization; Tantive IV remained on Raddus’ warship, as opposed to staying on Yavin or flying solo, because it was undergoing some repairs. That could be why it was unable to outrun the Star Destroyer—other than the fact that it’s, you know, a Star Destroyer.

Eeek! I shouldn't have come to this party!

Look- think I get what you're going at with the space battle and disposable supporting characters. Definitely get what you're going at with the movie being full of life. And I agree. HOWEVER. If the focus is on the Rogue One crew, why aren't they a part of the space battle? (Or maybe one or two of them?) Then we would've been emotionally invested in the fates of the people flying X-wings and crap around. If they're not part of it, the additional time spent on the space battle would've gone to better use earlier in the movie so we could learn more about these people. Keep in mind the very first Star Wars introduced nearly as many new characters as Rogue One, and we got to know them pretty well, so this can't be too hard to accomplish.

The movie was really enjoyable, and the spectacle of it all was fun. I feel some things could have been done better, and the sensation of "too many cooks in the kitchen" is a bit obvious, but that's the style of big budget movie-making in this day and age.

Because their job wasn't the space battle.....

I mean, that's fairly straightforward. They were going to get the plans, nothing else. They didn't even know they would need the fleet until they got there and saw what the situation was in detail.

That's in-universe reasoning. We're talking about the writing of the movie.

That's in-universe reasoning. We're talking about the writing of the movie.

Because only 1 member of the protagonists was a pilot, and he said he was only a transport pilot, not a fighter pilot, and he had to be on the planet to pilot them down, and thus got stuck. There was no "The best fighter in the Rebellion" type character ever introduced....why would any of them be in the fight? None of them were ever written to have mad combat piloting skills. And why do you have to have a main character in the fight for it to matter?

That's in-universe reasoning. We're talking about the writing of the movie.

Because only 1 member of the protagonists was a pilot, and he said he was only a transport pilot, not a fighter pilot, and he had to be on the planet to pilot them down, and thus got stuck. There was no "The best fighter in the Rebellion" type character ever introduced....why would any of them be in the fight? None of them were ever written to have mad combat piloting skills. And why do you have to have a main character in the fight for it to matter?

Why would one have to include a major space battle at all, other than some notion of "Star Wars, must have space battle."

That's in-universe reasoning. We're talking about the writing of the movie.

Because only 1 member of the protagonists was a pilot, and he said he was only a transport pilot, not a fighter pilot, and he had to be on the planet to pilot them down, and thus got stuck. There was no "The best fighter in the Rebellion" type character ever introduced....why would any of them be in the fight? None of them were ever written to have mad combat piloting skills. And why do you have to have a main character in the fight for it to matter?

Why would one have to include a major space battle at all, other than some notion of "Star Wars, must have space battle."

Why indeed?

It is a period of civil war. Rebel spaceships, striking from a hidden base, have won their first victory against the evil Galactic Empire.

That's in-universe reasoning. We're talking about the writing of the movie.

Because only 1 member of the protagonists was a pilot, and he said he was only a transport pilot, not a fighter pilot, and he had to be on the planet to pilot them down, and thus got stuck. There was no "The best fighter in the Rebellion" type character ever introduced....why would any of them be in the fight? None of them were ever written to have mad combat piloting skills. And why do you have to have a main character in the fight for it to matter?

Why would one have to include a major space battle at all, other than some notion of "Star Wars, must have space battle."

"Rebel spaceships, striking from a hidden base, have won their first victory against the evil Galactic Empire."

EDIT: Bah, ninja'd.

And? It's a crawl. The one at the start of Empire also states that the Rebels are lead by Luke Skywalker...

Plus, the space battle that they won doesn't have to have anything to do with the Death Star plans.

That's in-universe reasoning. We're talking about the writing of the movie.

Because only 1 member of the protagonists was a pilot, and he said he was only a transport pilot, not a fighter pilot, and he had to be on the planet to pilot them down, and thus got stuck. There was no "The best fighter in the Rebellion" type character ever introduced....why would any of them be in the fight? None of them were ever written to have mad combat piloting skills. And why do you have to have a main character in the fight for it to matter?

Why would one have to include a major space battle at all, other than some notion of "Star Wars, must have space battle."

I don't think Star Wars would have to have a space battle, to be Star Wars. But the question asked was why wasn't a main character in the space battle, under some idea that they have to have a main character in the fight or something. Even though Return didn't have a main character (Lando was not a main character, sorry, he was a supporting character) in the big battle in the sky.

My response was that I fail to see why that's at all relevant or important, for one of the main cast to be in the space fight. As if it lessens the importance of the fight or something, because none of them were involved. Which it doesn't, the fight was what it was, main cast involved or not.

And? It's a crawl. The one at the start of Empire also states that the Rebels are lead by Luke Skywalker...

Plus, the space battle that they won doesn't have to have anything to do with the Death Star plans.

It is a period of civil war. Rebel spaceships, striking from a hidden base, have won their first victory against the evil Galactic Empire. During the battle, Rebel spies managed to steal secret plans to the Empire’s ultimate weapon, the DEATH STAR, an armored space station with enough power to destroy an entire planet.

And? It's a crawl. The one at the start of Empire also states that the Rebels are lead by Luke Skywalker...

Plus, the space battle that they won doesn't have to have anything to do with the Death Star plans.

So one crawl gave an exaggeration so we should ignore what any other crawl says?

The prior lore stated a space battle was involved. It was fun to watch. It added to the fun of the movie. Nuff said.

There should have been main characters there so that people care about the battle. The way it's set up now, it's just empty spectacle lacking almost any emotional engagement.

In short, who are these people, and why should I care?

There should have been main characters there so that people care about the battle. The way it's set up now, it's just empty spectacle lacking almost any emotional engagement.

In short, who are these people, and why should I care?

The absence of main characters space-side did not lessen my engagement with that battle.

Clearly, our mileage varied.

Why would one have to include a major space battle at all, other than some notion of "Star Wars, must have space battle."

Because it was awesome?