rogue one is basically the film that force awakens would've been if J.J. Abrams really didn't care about the characters.
It's pro-war for both sides of the conflict (insurgent and empire), which I'd argue is bad.
It borrows the imagery of both real wars and war films to tell a pro-war story.
It's a "gritty" film where the main characters kill with impunity and where everyone dies in the end.
It prioritizes the casting of a dead actor over a live one, to the point where they spend million of dollars on a simulacrum to play a bit role
- This simulacrum can't act.
- This simulacrum, in comparison to a robot and who is easily the best character in the film-- evidences that c.g.i is cool when it's self-assuredly mechanical and not an attempt at resurrection
|Rest in peace, you magnificent bastard.|
It prioritizes the nostalgia of the audience to the point of self-parody, intentional (funny) and unintentional (bizarre and reptilian).
- To wit, there's a bit where Darth Vader shows up, force chokes someone, and makes a pun out of it ("don't choke on your ambitions"). Then he leaves.
The whole first half of the movie sets up a tragic backstory which is typically bland and sets up a one-and-a-half dimensional character, who looks and acts exactly like Rey
- Seems like an paranoid attempt to maintain series continuity? Probably why she/they all die?
The humanizing traits (humor) are relegated to the side characters, who are good but who get disposed of by the end (see above).
The whole movie suggests that sacrificing yourself for a noble cause is a good idea, while also suggesting that moral purity is unrealistic and pointless (a good point?)
- I'd suggest that suicide missions are cruel and sad.
- Sort of like "The Thin Red Line" where the humanity of the soldiers is being destroyed by war, not validated.
There's some brazenly stupid ship-crashing which I found enjoyable.
What's truly at stake isn't, I'd argue, some Trump-metaphor but the continuity of the Star Wars series:
- I say this b/cause the entire squadron of characters is disposed in the end, indicating that humanity isn't important, Star Wars is.
- This doubly indicated by the final surviving character being a simulacrum of 1970's era Carrie Fisher.
- I.e., the nostalgia of the boomer audience is given false life via the sacrifice of millennials
- the whole film seems vampiric for this reason.
Vampiric b/c it uses a tentacle monster that violates minds
- this monster has no purpose other than showing the morally dark side of a character who immediately sacrifices themselves for zero purpose
- Vampiric b.c it sees the force as a path to morbid greatness, but then has characters die for no reason other than franchise overpopulation.
- Vampiric b.c modern conflicts are referenced with impunity, children are saved from battle, war is seen as an arena for cool fights and glorious death (not new) but the character personalities are seen as a means to an end (different than Force Awakens or the original three, and at least the prequels were bumbling, this is just cold)
- Vampiric b.c it suggests in the face of apocalypse we should welcome the dying of the light.
2016, typical vampiric half-dead trash, burn with humanity, continuously divesting and re-investing in human lives like the stock they so transparently are, totally oblivious nostalgia trash which sparks out pretty flames :,(