evilthecat said:
Hawki said:
Looks terrible. It looks like a fan-made film with a "dark and gritty" approach (which doesn't fit Star Wars IMO).
I think sometimes people think that because they watched the original Star Wars trilogy as kids it must have been super kid friendly. It's not really true.
I think some of the tropes have aged rather badly or become so lodged in the public consciousness that they've lost all the edge they once had, and I think the prequel trilogy seriously damaged people's ability to take Star Wars seriously. But ultimately Star Wars is pretty gritty. It has genuine peril, some moments of moderate (but still barely kid friendly) violence, and while there is whimsy and space magic and cute Ewoks it's set against the background of what is ultimately a pretty dark setting where the bad guys have, at the beginning, already won. Heck, even visually the Star Wars original trilogy basically created the "used future" aesthetic, which is the visual standard for "grittiness" in science fiction.
Sure, the prequels were light as fluffy as candy corn diarrhoea but hey, have we all forgotten that
the prequels were shit. They're the thing we've been wanting Star Wars to move away from for years. What does that mean, if not going back to a grittier approach?
I rewatched all six of the original films in 2015 prior to seeing TFA, so the tropes are fresh in my mind. And...no. I wouldn't call Star Wars "gritty." I also disagree with your assessment of the prequels, but the whole "used future" aesthetic is something I've never really agreed with. A New Hope? That applies to Tatooine, and little else. Certainly not the Death Star, and while you MIGHT be able to claim it applies to the rebels, that's dubious. I found it more in the keeping of 'classical sci-fi' in both tone and aesthetic, such as the use of robes. It reminded me a lot of Blake's 7 in regards to set and costume design.
So, then comes The Empire Strikes Back, which has always been my least favorite of the OT (gasp, blah blah blah, deal with it), and the aesthetic is part of that. A New Hope showed the rebels in a 'classical' look to me - it's hard to describe, but it looks like space fantasy with the types of helmets and robes, while the rebels in Empire on Hoth are far more militaristic (trenches, more regular uniforms, chain of command, etc.). That's a very minor gripe, but it does make Empire stick out like a sore thumb to me when we get to Return of the Jedi, which has returned to the more 'classical' style, and a far cleaner aesthetic outside of Tatooine. I keep hearing this "used future" aesthetic, but as far as the OT goes, I'd say that applies about 50% of the time, namely Tatooine, and elements of Cloud City (e.g. the smelter), while other elements go for the more sterile look.
Which also helps me appreciate the aesthetic of the prequels more, how there's a noticable shift across all three episodes to a darker mood/tone/colour scheme. The argument that "the prequels don't look like the OT" has always bothered me, because in my mind, it makes perfect sense why they shouldn't look similar. Different era, different characters, different everything. It's kind of what bothered me about TFA, how little technology has advanced in 30 years, whereas the prequels, even by Ep. III, were still using different types of craft and weapons.
Which, thus, brings us to Rogue One, where the aesthetic feels overpowering, and is being applied to the film as a whole. This is entirely down to personal preference of course, but I feel that in both the original trilogies, the aesthetic served the setting and story. This feels far more like a case of being gritty for the sake of it. And for a film that takes place right before Ep. IV begins, I can't help but notice how jarring the tone is when compared to it. At least there were two decades to separate the prequels from the OT.
