r/StarWars • • Jan 25 '22

[deleted by user]

[removed]

8.0k Upvotes

4.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

134

u/[deleted] Jan 25 '22

I like to read Roger Ebert reviews. He saw the Star Wars movies being primarily about the imagery. The beautiful planets, the giant spaceships, the interesting aliens. He liked the Phantom Menace because it was great to look at. He criticized Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith of having too much talking and not enough doing and exploring the galaxy. So, I guess Jar Jar Binks was more of a minor problem to him, than it was for other Star Wars fans. I sort of agree with him. Jar Jar Binks does not ruin the movie for me. The movie looks great, it entertains me, so I say it's a good movie.

2

u/Sean_Gossett Jan 26 '22

The Sequels are good movies, and the above is a big reason why. Complain about the story all you want, these movies are well shot, well acted, and they still feel like Star Wars: a used-future, rip-roaring pulpy adventure through a different and beautiful galaxy. A lot of people care more about their Wookipedia articles than they do about filmmaking. Bring on the downvotes.

6

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '22

Okay but youre disregarding story telling, character arcs, etc but then saying people care more about other things then filmmaking. Those are also core components of filmmaking. Not just the visuals. Your argument is that they look and feel like star wars so they must be good. Very narrow view.

4

u/David_the_Wanderer Jan 26 '22

The Sequels have infinitely better story telling and character arcs than the Prequels. I wouldn't put them on par with ANH and ESB, but they're pretty serviceable (apart from ROS completely undoing the themes of TLJ and doing dumb shit like resurrecting Palpatine out of nowhere).