Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually love the prequels by Lucas. They were entertaining and I loved Natalie Portman and Hayden. They had amazing chemistry. It reminded me of Rey and Kylo.

Yuck. IMO Hayden and Natalie had the most awkward interactions. He was a terrible choice for Anakin Skywalker. I don't love Rey and Kylo as a couple, but they have actual chemistry. AOTC attempt at romance was cringey - floating food flirting? Seriously?

+1

Hayden and Natalie are so painful to watch I close my eyes at a few points when I watch the prequels.

+1

I would much rather have seen Qui Gon and Obi Wan going on adventures, Mace an Yoda doing bad ass force stuff. Instead we get a whiney little pod racing twat, and the most painful relationship to watch since Whitney Houston and Bobby Brown.

Well gotta take into consideration the 5 year age gap between them that may have contributed to the "awkwardness" of Anakin and Padme's romance.

10 years.

Honestly as for the new characters, I love them — especially Rey. She’s so cool. And I love that they have a ex-Stormtrooper. That’s definitely new.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually love the prequels by Lucas. They were entertaining and I loved Natalie Portman and Hayden. They had amazing chemistry. It reminded me of Rey and Kylo.

Yuck. IMO Hayden and Natalie had the most awkward interactions. He was a terrible choice for Anakin Skywalker. I don't love Rey and Kylo as a couple, but they have actual chemistry. AOTC attempt at romance was cringey - floating food flirting? Seriously?

+1

Hayden and Natalie are so painful to watch I close my eyes at a few points when I watch the prequels.

+1

I would much rather have seen Qui Gon and Obi Wan going on adventures, Mace an Yoda doing bad ass force stuff. Instead we get a whiney little pod racing twat, and the most painful relationship to watch since Whitney Houston and Bobby Brown.

Well gotta take into consideration the 5 year age gap between them that may have contributed to the "awkwardness" of Anakin and Padme's romance.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually love the prequels by Lucas. They were entertaining and I loved Natalie Portman and Hayden. They had amazing chemistry. It reminded me of Rey and Kylo.

Yuck. IMO Hayden and Natalie had the most awkward interactions. He was a terrible choice for Anakin Skywalker. I don't love Rey and Kylo as a couple, but they have actual chemistry. AOTC attempt at romance was cringey - floating food flirting? Seriously?

+1

Hayden and Natalie are so painful to watch I close my eyes at a few points when I watch the prequels.

+1

I would much rather have seen Qui Gon and Obi Wan going on adventures, Mace an Yoda doing bad ass force stuff. Instead we get a whiney little pod racing twat, and the most painful relationship to watch since Whitney Houston and Bobby Brown.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually love the prequels by Lucas. They were entertaining and I loved Natalie Portman and Hayden. They had amazing chemistry. It reminded me of Rey and Kylo.

Yuck. IMO Hayden and Natalie had the most awkward interactions. He was a terrible choice for Anakin Skywalker. I don't love Rey and Kylo as a couple, but they have actual chemistry. AOTC attempt at romance was cringey - floating food flirting? Seriously?

+1

Hayden and Natalie are so painful to watch I close my eyes at a few points when I watch the prequels.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually love the prequels by Lucas. They were entertaining and I loved Natalie Portman and Hayden. They had amazing chemistry. It reminded me of Rey and Kylo.

Yuck. IMO Hayden and Natalie had the most awkward interactions. He was a terrible choice for Anakin Skywalker. I don't love Rey and Kylo as a couple, but they have actual chemistry. AOTC attempt at romance was cringey - floating food flirting? Seriously?

+1

Hayden and Natalie are so painful to watch I close my eyes at a few points when I watch the prequels.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually love the prequels by Lucas. They were entertaining and I loved Natalie Portman and Hayden. They had amazing chemistry. It reminded me of Rey and Kylo.

Yuck. IMO Hayden and Natalie had the most awkward interactions. He was a terrible choice for Anakin Skywalker. I don't love Rey and Kylo as a couple, but they have actual chemistry. AOTC attempt at romance was cringey - floating food flirting? Seriously?

+1

Hayden and Natalie are so painful to watch I close my eyes at a few points when I watch the prequels.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually love the prequels by Lucas. They were entertaining and I loved Natalie Portman and Hayden. They had amazing chemistry. It reminded me of Rey and Kylo.

Yuck. IMO Hayden and Natalie had the most awkward interactions. He was a terrible choice for Anakin Skywalker. I don't love Rey and Kylo as a couple, but they have actual chemistry. AOTC attempt at romance was cringey - floating food flirting? Seriously?

Anonymous wrote:According to this article, many of the “people” criticizing the new movies on social media are Russian trolls.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2019/12/24/opinion/star-wars-rise-of-skywalker.amp.html

I think PP might be one, considering he/she didn’t even know they‘ve been making money.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:George Lucas said several times that Palpy was dead in RoJ. Dead, dead, dead. 100% dead. He was resurrected without an explanation to save Disney's arse. All the voice ghosts were done to save SW Disney reputation. The ONLY reason people are liking this RoS better is because true and tried villain that Lucas wrote came back.

George Lucas degraded the series with the prequels, and would have completely ruined it with all the midi-clorian and Whills nonsense. He should be grateful Disney saved him from himself.

What’s the hatred towards midiclorians? It’s a minor plot point that just explains how you can measure force sensitivity. I don’t get the vitriol. The prequels sucked because of crappy dialogue and crappy acting. They had cool lightsaber duels though — especially by Yoda.

Go read what Lucas had planned for 7-9. They weren’t going to be a minor plot point, they were going to basically render episodes 1-6 pointless.

I am guessing you did not watch the Clone Wars?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm laughing at the desperate prequel fanboys and girls. Sorry, the prequels sucked. Most rational fans recognize that.

Thankfully George Lucas sold to Disney or we would have had those monstrosities duplicated in 7-9. Did you see the interview where Lucas was going to go full on Midiclorian in 7-9, and add another kind of magic force virus? What a mess that would have been.

And the Disney ones suck even worse. Hence why every movie since 2015 has been losing money.

Say what you want, the prequels are canon and come from Lucas. They aren’t lazy rehashes like the Disney movies that just lazily repeat the original trilogy with awful badly written characters no one will care about in 3 years.

Losing money??! Are you delusional?

First of all, Lucas said the Disney ones are canon. So you need to get over that. Second, they’ve all made a TON of money.

Force Awakens: budget $260-300M; box office $2B
Last Jedi: budget $200-300M; box office $1.3B
Rise of Skywalker: budget $275M; box office $453 (and it’s been out for a week)

I disagree that the movies are lazy. I love the new characters. The Skywalker story wasn’t finished because Palpatine wasn’t dead yet, which is why the themes had to be revisited.

There are 3 more Star Wars movies coming out that Lucasfilms has said will be very different, so you’ll get your different themes then.

Umm the delusional one is you. In your own post, you’ll see the movies have been losing money yearly, not growing. Do you know how basic math and economics work? You clearly do not.

https://slate.com/culture/2019/12/star-wars-rise-of-skywalker-box-office-opening-weekend.html

Huh?

The movies....since 2015....have been losing....money.

2015: 2B
2016: 1.05B
2017: 1.3B
2018: 392 Million

Why is this so hard for you to understand?

1. Over time they make more money. Unless you’re citing year-long figures, your post makes no sense.

2. Losing money usually means costing more than they bring in. Your post is exceptionally unclear at best.

They HAVENT been making more over time. That’s what articles like this is pointing out.

https://www.looper.com/128174/what-solos-failure-means-for-the-future-of-star-wars/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:George Lucas said several times that Palpy was dead in RoJ. Dead, dead, dead. 100% dead. He was resurrected without an explanation to save Disney's arse. All the voice ghosts were done to save SW Disney reputation. The ONLY reason people are liking this RoS better is because true and tried villain that Lucas wrote came back.

Kathleen Kennedy said it had always been the plan to bring him back.

You don’t think it’s plausible that a powerful Sith Lord could figure out how to bring himself back in some form? It’s not unprecedented. See: Voldemort.

Fail.

Colin Trevarrow was the original screenwriter for Episode 9. Palpatine was NOT in the script.

https://collider.com/rise-of-skywalker-palpatine-was-jj-abrams-idea-not-colin-trevorrow/

JJ only contacted Ian in 2018 about reprising Palpatine...
This is out of the actors own mouth.

https://youtu.be/dLP6BKZfx6Q

Palpatine was NEVER planned. It was a last minute decision.

So you’re saying Kathleen Kennedy is lying?

Umm yes.

Ok so it’s all a conspiracy to ruin Star Wars for you

Your posts make zero sense. Studio executives will lie to save face. Have you worked for any company before?

Nothing is a conspiracy. There were no plans to bring Palpatine back, from the actor and people inside the studio itself.

Kennedy or any studio exec will never come out and say “we never had a real plan going into these films”. That’s terrible press.

Anonymous wrote:I actually love the prequels by Lucas. They were entertaining and I loved Natalie Portman and Hayden. They had amazing chemistry. It reminded me of Rey and Kylo.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm laughing at the desperate prequel fanboys and girls. Sorry, the prequels sucked. Most rational fans recognize that.

Thankfully George Lucas sold to Disney or we would have had those monstrosities duplicated in 7-9. Did you see the interview where Lucas was going to go full on Midiclorian in 7-9, and add another kind of magic force virus? What a mess that would have been.

And the Disney ones suck even worse. Hence why every movie since 2015 has been losing money.

Say what you want, the prequels are canon and come from Lucas. They aren’t lazy rehashes like the Disney movies that just lazily repeat the original trilogy with awful badly written characters no one will care about in 3 years.

Losing money??! Are you delusional?

First of all, Lucas said the Disney ones are canon. So you need to get over that. Second, they’ve all made a TON of money.

Force Awakens: budget $260-300M; box office $2B
Last Jedi: budget $200-300M; box office $1.3B
Rise of Skywalker: budget $275M; box office $453 (and it’s been out for a week)

I disagree that the movies are lazy. I love the new characters. The Skywalker story wasn’t finished because Palpatine wasn’t dead yet, which is why the themes had to be revisited.

There are 3 more Star Wars movies coming out that Lucasfilms has said will be very different, so you’ll get your different themes then.

Umm the delusional one is you. In your own post, you’ll see the movies have been losing money yearly, not growing. Do you know how basic math and economics work? You clearly do not.

https://slate.com/culture/2019/12/star-wars-rise-of-skywalker-box-office-opening-weekend.html

Huh?

The movies....since 2015....have been losing....money.

2015: 2B
2016: 1.05B
2017: 1.3B
2018: 392 Million

Why is this so hard for you to understand?

1. Over time they make more money. Unless you’re citing year-long figures, your post makes no sense.

2. Losing money usually means costing more than they bring in. Your post is exceptionally unclear at best.