The Death Star and Darth Vader in the commercials were the first sign familiar marketing was powering fan wank. What we learn about the former are superficial details that explain how exactly its role in this film doesn't lighten the weight it is supposed to have on the one following it in continuity, and a justification for its apparently infamous weak point, even though there was already a justification in the so called "Star Wars Legends". The latter saw parts of scripts left off the final product for being too cheesy put in this one instead.
Vader and the Death Star are scary, the rebels barely won? Didn't need to be reminded, but when the film did lift things directly from "Legends" I oddly found myself appreciating it. Fighting the empire again was not all that engaging thematically, perhaps more time could have been spent explaining or showing why the rebellion shouldn't have just folded. "Hope" is nice, but when you're likely to die your motivations generally have to be more layered than "they can be beaten". I did end up finding the characters amusing, as little new lore they gave the series, and the fight scenes were great. Rogue One pulled off the multilayered Star Wars battles as well as they ever have been.
I know what it's like to be a fan. If an experimental company approached me with an opportunity to write an entry into a somewhat damaged series I was passionate about I could easily see the results looking just like Rogue One, it's also why I didn't see anything that really justified a full length interquel besides one or two interesting characters. Everything else could have been accomplished in a sequel's flashback or line of dialog. But that same passion went into the cinematography; the movie was too competently made for me to hate it. If you're a really passionate Star Wars fan, you might just appreciate Rogue One more than I did. If you're not that fan, be warned, you'll just be treading on familiar ground.
Franchise Zombie meets Running The Asylum: A decent movie escapes
The Death Star and Darth Vader in the commercials were the first sign familiar marketing was powering fan wank. What we learn about the former are superficial details that explain how exactly its role in this film doesn't lighten the weight it is supposed to have on the one following it in continuity, and a justification for its apparently infamous weak point, even though there was already a justification in the so called "Star Wars Legends". The latter saw parts of scripts left off the final product for being too cheesy put in this one instead.
Vader and the Death Star are scary, the rebels barely won? Didn't need to be reminded, but when the film did lift things directly from "Legends" I oddly found myself appreciating it. Fighting the empire again was not all that engaging thematically, perhaps more time could have been spent explaining or showing why the rebellion shouldn't have just folded. "Hope" is nice, but when you're likely to die your motivations generally have to be more layered than "they can be beaten". I did end up finding the characters amusing, as little new lore they gave the series, and the fight scenes were great. Rogue One pulled off the multilayered Star Wars battles as well as they ever have been.
I know what it's like to be a fan. If an experimental company approached me with an opportunity to write an entry into a somewhat damaged series I was passionate about I could easily see the results looking just like Rogue One, it's also why I didn't see anything that really justified a full length interquel besides one or two interesting characters. Everything else could have been accomplished in a sequel's flashback or line of dialog. But that same passion went into the cinematography; the movie was too competently made for me to hate it. If you're a really passionate Star Wars fan, you might just appreciate Rogue One more than I did. If you're not that fan, be warned, you'll just be treading on familiar ground.