[D13Fd]

> This is interesting to me because it's so at odds with how I took in the new trilogy. I thought only Johnson showed any vision at all, and I also thought his sense of small scale combat choreography was way better, e.g. the scene where Adam Driver and Rey fight those guys in the red suits.

> JJ's movies were so derivative of the original trilogy I sometimes wondered if he was messing with us, e.g. the scenewhere a character says, if I recall, "it's just like the death star!" once they've unveiled...another death star.

I liked Abrams' first one best. It had some issues but it at least nailed the epic Star Wars tone and feel, and it's a solid movie and fun to watch.

Johnson's felt ridiculous and contrived, with the fake low-intensity chase, the weird dialog, the space casino, and on and on.

The third one was just an absurd mess, and involved total plot whiplash after the second one went in a different direction.

[pwdisswordfishc]

> I liked Abrams' first one best. It had some issues but it at least nailed the epic Star Wars tone and feel,

No wonder, given that it was a glorified remake of A New Hope. The sort of film for which the term "remaquel" was created.

[MattPalmer1086]

Yes. Some of my friends loved it, but I couldn't get past the fact it was literally the same story.

I mean, an orphan who becomes a Jedi, a droid who brings important information and then battles against the Empire who has a deathstar.

Where did I see that before? It wasn't even trying to be original in any way whatsoever. That said, it did a good job of capturing the star wars feel... Which is possibly not surprising.

[D13Fd]

That’s fair, but I also don’t mind much. It was a solid attempt to return the franchise to its roots, even if the other movies mostly squandered that.

I agree though, I could have done without Deathstar III.