Ask HN: What did you think of the Force Awakens? (Spoilers) | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: What did you think of the Force Awakens? (Spoilers)

8 pointsdanso24 comments

I always like hearing opinions from people here about politics, code, honeybees, etc. why not the sci-fi cultural event of the year?

I hope to see it again in the theater. It was very good, given the expectations. I thought J.J. Abrams attempt to remake the moments and themes of The Wrath of Khan was a disaster...the desire to retread the themes of the original trilogy got a little tiresome but still a pleasure to watch, and it seems that the second film has been well set-up to forge its own path.

View on HN

The callbacks to Episodes IV-VI were a bit excessive. And it reminded me of the Poochie episode of The Simpsons, where Homer suggests that whenever Poochie isn't on the screen, all the other characters should be asking "where's Luke...I mean Poochie?"

I wish Kylo Ren got more of a character arc, but the Sith rarely do. They're basically just cardboard foils for the heroes except for Anakin/Vader. JJ, are you listening? My money is waiting for an opening day ticket to the Kylo Ren prequel.

Overall, it looked and felt like a Star Wars movie, more than the prequels ever did. But it was a 2015 Star Wars movie by JJ Abrams instead of a 1977 Star Wars movie by the director of THX-1138. The First Order was more organic, more believable than the sterile, efficient sci-fi bad guys of the Empire. Kylo Ren's temper tantrums wouldn't have fit into George Lucas's Star Wars universe, but it added depth to his character. It gave him a weakness. It humanized him.

Another case in point: motion control cameras and Steadicam were cutting edge filmmaking when A New Hope was filmed (I think Steadicam was only used for the speederbike sequence in RTJ). Shaky hand-held cameras are a JJ Abrams trademark.

I love the new diversity to the Stormtroopers. Hopefully it'll draw more die-hard fans from all walks of life into the family. It also contrasts them sharply with the Clone Troopers. The Jedi built an army of disposable cannon fodder. Who's the bad guys here?

It wasn't a perfect movie, but neither were Episode IV-VI. It was still fun for all ages and I just may duck out for another showing today since I have the day off.

I really enjoyed it, but thought it was too derivative of the earlier installments, particularly the original trilogy.

Which I suppose is unsurprising given they are trying to bring the story back to its roots and not the infamous prequel trilogy, but I hope they are more original with the future installments and rely less on callbacks.

It honestly felt more like a New Hope reboot, than a new installment in the franchise. I sound pessimistic, but I really did enjoy it :)

I also enjoyed it immensely, but I couldn't help but feel exasperated that they recreated Darth Vader and the Death Star.

Overall I was not disappointed. Which was the main thing for me. But I did have a few minor issues with it.

The whole movie looked very distinctly like Star Wars, but only the second half actually felt like Star Wars. (I haven't figured out why yet)

It's way to mild in terms of violence. It was like Narnia, in that all the violence was only alluded to but you never actually see anything violent. Especially the scene where Han Solo dies. You don't see the lightsaber go through him, you only see it behind him. This ruined the effectiveness of the scene for me. This contributed to another thing I didn't like about the film. It didn't have the same darkness and grit of Episodes 1-4 (and to a lesser degree 5 and 6) that I really liked.

There were a few too many scenes that were made just for the nostalgia, and they seemed a bit forced.

Other than that, I enjoyed the film very much.

Have the films ever been violent?

I don't recall ever thinking they were, characters frequently get limbs cut off with no blood, Obi-Wan 'dies' by disappearing and not even getting cut down, even Qui-Gon in the first one isn't even a violent death.

I just don't think it's a part of the franchise in general.

Well I wouldn't say they are violent films. Compared to an action movie for example. But as you mentioned limbs get cut off (and you see it happen). And when Qui-Gon was killed you see the light saber go through him.

So it's not that I wish there was more blood/gore or anything. It's just that for a relatively un-violent movie series, it seems like they went out of their way to shield people from the violence in this movie, as if it is a children's movie like Narnia. And that pissed me off.

Actually Star Wars is incredibly popular among pre-teen boys, at least here in Germany. For their sakes I'm quite glad they didn't put in too much gore.

> as if it is a children's movie

It is a children's movie.

EDIT: That's not a bad thing, but it's really freaking obvious that Disney aren't going to suddenly change this massively lucrative franchise to be 12+.

Star Wars is not "the sci-fi cultural event of the year". It's more fantasy than sci-fi, it just happens to use space ships and lasers and stuff.

If it involves "space ships, lasers and stuff" then it is, by definition, SciFi. SciFi is very rarely a genre all on its own.

To give some examples:

- Alien: Horror/SciFi

- 2001: A Space Odyssey: Mystery/SciFi

- Interstellar: Adventure/SciFi

- The Martian: Drama/SciFi

- The Force Awakens: Fantasy/SciFi

Words are funny things. But the crowd's against you on this. Space and lasers don't make something sci-fi, and Star Wars is a conversation example of Science Fantasy - magic in space.

Science fiction builds a universe on the innovation and consequence. Star Wars doesn't work when you think like this. "why doesn't all the air leak out of the hanger into space?", "why can people see energy beams in the sky that are millions of miles away?", "why don't robots shoot straight?", "why can't they write an algorithm to match BB-8's segment of the map in the map database?", "in all the vastness of space, how did Han+Chewey chance upon the Millennium Falcon?". And, the force just doesn't fit.

2001 and The Martian are fine examples of scifi.

> But the crowd's against you on this.

[Citation Needed]

Also give an example of something which you consider SciFi, because as I've shown most of what people consider the staples in the SciFi genre aren't pure SciFi.

I agree w/ you on this, I used to argue the other way w/ my aunt when I was 5 lol, but I grew up and realized the difference. Star wars is a Space Fantasy, science fiction while not ALWAYS accurate hinges on at least trying it's best to be 'real' or use as much real science as possible. Star wars on the other hand tends to put the technology and science on a back-burner, and focus more on the story and character arcs. Here's a good stackexchange article asking the same question:

http://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/46481/did-george-lu...

And here's a quote from that: "No. Lucas often used the term Science Fantasy. He never referred to it as only science fiction. Star Wars doesn't hold itself to use science: space craft bank in a vacuum like airplanes do in air, there's the Force (a type of magic or at least metaphysics), .... Star Wars is about epic story telling and not one to get caught up in details such as physics and using the scientific process to solve a problem. This is also why it's felt that JJ Abrams is a great choice for directing Star Wars movies, much more so than Star Trek which spent much effort on not violating laws of physics or at least having a really good technical explanation why something works. Star Wars doesn't attempt to use science to solve problems where as science fiction series such as Star Trek expose science to the audience in an attempt to engage them as to the difficulty of the problem, some possible solutions, and how to conduct experiments to decide upon a solution."

From what I've seen, traditionally Star Trek is considered science fiction and Star Wars is considered science fantasy (or more precisely a space opera, that is, a soap opera that happens to be in space -- Lucas himself refers to it in this way).

I enjoyed the film. I saw the original Star Wars in the theaters as a kid, and the nostalgia at the opening sequence was surprising and overwhelming. It put me in an odd mental space for watching the movie.

I agree with most other commenters that there were a few too many overtly nostalgic references. I didn't mind them too much in this initial viewing, but it makes me wonder how well this film will age. I watched IV a month ago and it's aged well; there isn't really anything in there I'd consider corny or outdated. I think some of the scenes in this new movie will age poorly.

That said, I really enjoyed it overall. I liked that Ren took off his mask early, that certainly added depth to his character. I'd love to see a movie between VI and VII. I also liked Rey's character a lot.

The storyline was incredibly shallow, basically just an amalgamation of scenes from the last six episodes.

On the plus side, the characters are a lot more convincing and very well acted. (Even though I still don't understand why JJ Abrams chose to add a female storm trooper captain, that somehow doesn't feel right. Glad to see some more diversity than in the previous the movies though.) Also, I like the sense of history that pervades the everything. I can understand if some people consider it too nostalgic, but IMO it adds a lot of depth to the movie world.

On the whole it was a film I very much enjoyed watching, even though I wish Abrams had been a bit more creative with his plot.

I enjoyed it quite a lot.

It obviously mirrored the original quite strongly. Had I been alive when that movie was released, I might have been upset about this. However, A New Hope is just one of the most solid coming of age stories there is, and I can't fault Disney for wanting to do a soft reboot for a new generation.

The film added little new lore since it is mostly a recreation of the original, but I at least do not watch Star Wars movies as a lore hunter. I watch them to be entertained, and TFA delivered in spades. I don't feel like Star Wars has ever been particularly strong on lore, so not much is lost in my opinion. In fact, my main disappointment with the prequel films is that they focused more on providing new lore and less on being solidly fun to watch. They provided a lot of great material for Star Wars wikis, but not much else.

I feel like it improved on the original in a lot of ways that matter to me personally, but may not matter to others. It might have regressed in ways that matter to others, but not to me.

The acting in general was very good, and I liked Rey more than I liked Luke. This is a big deal for me. The actors carried this movie extremely well.

I enjoyed the older Harrison Ford more than the younger -- he's grandfatherly now on top of all the traits he already had when he was younger.

Kylo Ren was a more interesting villain to me than Darth Vader. Not necessarily better, but more interesting. Vader only became interesting retrospectively with the information gained from The Empire Strikes Back and ROTJ. Given only what was known in A New Hope, he was incredibly one-dimensional.

Starkiller Base was obviously highly derivative of the Death Star, but it was so visually stunning that I don't mind. The film excelled at showing its sheer scale. It was a sight to behold on the big screen in 3D. Any Star Wars movie needs an incredible spectacle, and I think Starkiller Base delivered.

This film is probably the first Star Wars installment where none of the humor annoyed me. That's a big deal for me as well. I'm glad that C3PO was featured very minimally here.

I could go on, but I'll leave it at this. Bottom line: I was very satisfied with it, but I don't regard it as a perfect film. It worked for me, and I suspect it will work for most viewers, but certainly not all viewers.

I enjoyed it, but afterwards came across some opinions talking about how it basically knocked down the triumph of the original trilogy and rendered the entire struggle from episodes I through VI completely futile and pointless. The "Empire" is still going strong (as strong as before, certainly, if they have the physical and economic security to build a super-weapon capable of destroying multiple planets at once), and the Rebellion er... Resistance is right back where it started.

Unfortunately, that's a lot like real life.

Very sad to say but this old Star Wars fan was very disappointed with the movie. To me it looked cheap, with a poor rehashed plot. Very much the Hunger-games (permanently unhappy teenage girl) meets any film staring Danny Glover (out of place but racially correct actor who looks permanently shocked & breathless). And just how bad does Jedi training need be, so that you get beaten by a little girl who has never picked up a lightsaber before?

I thought it was great. I enjoyed the humour that they put into it. It seemed like they really cared about what the fans thought of the movie and that made me happy.

Music is critical to star wars. This film is scored to the standard of the originals.

// Music in star wars

Sound is critical to Star Wars. There's lots written about this, http://houstonsymphonyblog.org/09/15/before-luke-skywalker-t...

Examples,

* IV. Luke Skywalker watches the binary sunset, and feels the pull of the force. The force theme has been hinted at previously, but is played more richly here.

* VI. Interplay between themes in the space battle/endor/emperor chamber. Use of the imperial theme, the rebel alliance theme, troubled variations of rebel alliance theme. Tension, victory.

* Leia's theme. In the original trilogy, Leia is constantly successful and ends each episode on a joyful foot. Yet - her motif is distinctly melancholy. Why? What is the darkness in her future that earns the troubled motif?

Williams is a master. His tunes from the original films worked well then, and have stood the test of time.

// The prequels

The prequel scoring was awful.

The 'trick' in Anakin's motif was unsubtle and uninteresting. There were no interesting new motifs, and they watered down some of the existing motifs by applying them to purposes that they weren't suited to.

Either Williams was left out of the creative process, or he treated it as a time+materials job. There's nothing interesting there, and it's over-egged in the films.

// Episode VII

As I was waiting for the film to arrive, I was wondering how it would compare for music against the original and prequels.

Several segments were scored as richly as the best bits of the original. Example: the scene where they launch the Millennium Falcon.

There are strong new motifs. Kylo Ren's motif is good, and gets used well. For example - the battle after the first light-sabre scene.

The plot has been taken in a direction that satisfies Leia's melancholy motif.

Disney has brought in a team who know what they're doing. Nice work guys!

// Other

Away from music - I was disappointed at the Poe situation. If you're going to stamp out a new series by sticking closely to the old formula, at least stick to the formula!

The original films were edgy. Esbalished characters were killed off (Luke's relatives, pilots), and Han shot first. We should have seen blood at the crash site, and no more of Poe. Killing off an established character is part of strong writing.

Not enough female characters. Rei is good. But only one? All the nazis - why are they all men? Poe - could have been a woman (and then she could have been killed off). Even the author of Buffy makes a Star Wars film dominated by male characters.

Back to the Nazi thing - this has been pretty heavily played out. Davros and the daleks were fun. Starship Troopers. But it has been thoroughly picked over. Old is boring. Find something new. Why not do something with the samurai themes, feudalism?

There were too many strong American accents. Cushing made sense with a strong English accent in episode IV because it helped establish the idea of /empire/. But strong American accents are a distraction in the star wars universe.

I loved the monsters in the freighter. The Tai Fighter hijacking was cool.

Fin worked. Hope he evolves into a badass and not a comic relief character.

Kylo Ren is a strong addition. He is a powerful /angry young man/ character. Another nail in the coffin of the originals - fabulous. His accent is fine.

As another writer comments, the tributes to the original films were excessive. Everyone has seen the originals. Get on with it. Hopefully this is a one-off cost.

The droid is excellent.

I agree with with almost everything you said, but before someone else points this out in a meaner way than I do:

JJ Abrams isn't the writer of Buffy, Joss Whedon is, and he hasn't done a Star Wars movie.

Thanks!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com