Having said that, I will admit that this latest has rather more substance than most of its predecessors, though it could have been mightily improved by being shorn of at least 30 mins. Two hours and a half is bloating it beyond what it will take, at least to hold my interest for all that period.
I shan't attempt to precis the story for the very good reason that I couldn't follow it beyond 'goodies' v 'baddies' with, inevitably, characters masquerading as the former turning out to be on the other side and v.v.
The cast here is more interesting than, perhaps, it's ever been. Aside from the poignant and quite substantial role for the late Carrie Fisher (going out on something of a deserved 'high'!), there are major parts for Oscar Isaac, and (I didn't know he was in it) Benicio Del Toro, as well as Laura Dern (mercifully here not screwing up her face at any point into a 'gurn'!) Then there's now-regular John Boyega (why did he have to speak with an American accent when others in cast spoke with clipped 'received' English pronounciation?) - as well as British stalwarts Andy Serkis and Warwick Davis.
Major female role is taken by Daisy Ridley, reprising her part in the previous film, as also is Adam Driver.
Presiding over all, however, is the irreplaceable and statesman-like presence of good ol' Mark Hamill.
This is director Rian Johnson's first feature film that I have seen, and there's no denying that he handles it all with the assurance of someone more experienced - but, Jeez, what a racket for a goodly proportion of the film!
I said last time that I was giving up on the series as they don't bring me anything special enough to justify the investment of time and money. This film doesn't change my attitude, though I do rather wish the series would now lie down and go to sleep - permanently............4.
Interesting take! I won't see the movie until it comes on the satellite movie channels. But I will see it! I was a big fan of the first three movies (I was seventeen when the first one came out). The middle three are "meh" for me; never really got into them, but there are interesting and good parts of each. Lucas' original plan was for 9 films, I believe, a trilogy of trilogies, as it were. So you likely have one more to go!
ReplyDeleteUh, by "the first three," I meant the first ones that came out starting in '77, even though they're numbered 4, 5, and 6 in the grand scheme. Clear as mud? ;)
DeleteI do remember my confusion at seeing the first released film being 'Episode 4', Walt - and my mentioning it at work the following day when everyone apart from myself seemed to know why it was so entitled. Actually it wouldn't have made any difference to me to have known, as my interest from one to the next one didn't carry. They could play them all in random order and I'd still be no wiser.
DeleteThere's a BIG hint at the end of this one, Walt, that there's more to come. Heigh-ho! Hardly a surprise. If more money can be squeezed out of it, then of course it follows that they're not going to let it go. For some reason the public's appetite for more, more, more, is insatiable. Whether I follow like sheep is uncertain. Depends if the mood takes me and there's a cheapo screening.
ReplyDeleteI've seen this get lots of 4 ratings. And $500 million at the box office! I loved the first one. Was very disappointed in the last. Will wait for this one to come to my TV.
ReplyDeleteDespite my score I found it slightly better than most, if not all, of its predecessors, Mitch. But that's not saying much. If it had had a lesser known cast I'm sure my rating would have been lower.
DeleteAs the combats are spectacular (as they ought to be) I think it must work better on a big cinema screen than TV - though on the latter one doesn't have to endure the headachey high sound level.
Ray,
ReplyDeleteLike you, I always thought the "Star Wars" franchise was overhyped. I saw one of the movies (the second one I think) and many clips. Not impressed. I like the John Williams score though. Didn't like all the cutie characters like Jar Bar Ling (or whatever) and the latest cutie characters. I like Carrie Fisher though, in ANYTHING. She is missed. Thanks for this review, I'll take a pass and go back to Season Seven of "Game of Thrones." Now THERE is a series.
Ron
Overhyped, over-praised and overlong, Ron. But as so many DO like them - well, it's money that does the talking.
DeleteI think Carrie Fisher has the most substantial part in this than in any other of the films, especially in the first half hour or so. So there you have one reason for seeing it.
I've never been a great fan of John Williams' scores but must admit he does have a knack of encapsulating the right mood for his films. I think his 'Superman' scores were the best of his.
I'll have remain in blissful ignorance of GoT and to leave you to your own enjoyments of it.
Yes, there is another segment. It's not a hint. The original plan was to have it revolve around Leia, but clearly that can no longer happen.
ReplyDeleteMy friend pondered, about Dern: 'how come she wore a slinky cocktail dress to a Rebellion?'. I could not stop laughing.
Now you mention it, B, I do now recall some mention somewhere of an extended dissertation on the Princess Leia character in a future film. Now, whichever way the next film goes, without her it'll be one less compelling reason to see it.
DeleteI had to chortle at your mention of Laura Dern's inappropriate garb - but it's so true. I was so transfixed at looking at her face to spot any signs of her facial muscles getting twitchy that I hadn't paid so much attention to what she'd been wearing. But I can see it now - and, oh dear!