Which was the best Star Wars movie outside of the original trilogy?

[RealityChuck]

@gdave

Again, I’m not trying to say that your reaction to a piece of entertainment is wrong, and I’m not going to try to retroactively convince you to have bought into the movie and enjoyed it more, but…

There is a fundamental issue with setting a new story in the Star Wars universe, which I’ve personally run into in a very different context. Hardcore fans may clamor for more stories in the Old Republic era or other times and places, but casual fans know the Rebellion era - to them, that is Star Wars. Setting your story elsewhen requires a lot of heavy lifting to get audience buy-in, and casual fans may not bother, or like the result. So, Rebellion era it is.

But then you run into the problem of, what do your protagonists do? You can have your protagonists do small stuff on the margins, but for a lot of fans, and creators, the whole point of Star Wars is telling big, epic stories. But the Heroes of the Original Trilogy have already done all of the big, epic stuff. What can your protagonists do that feels big and epic and Star Wars-y, in the Rebellion era, that fits into the established canon? For me, in another context, the obvious answer was the Death Star plans. They’re a key plot point in Star Wars, but we have no idea how Leia got them. Having your protagonists be the ones who got them just seems like the most obvious way to get another big, epic Star Wars story into the continuity.

Now, having the flaw being deliberately inserted isn’t strictly speaking necessary (I didn’t even think of it), but I think it is actually necessary for this movie. The plans for the Death Star are obviously important, but without knowing there’s a flaw, the characters would be disobeying orders, sacrificing their lives, and, for the fleet officers who join them, sacrificing half of the Rebel fleet on the off-chance that the plans might reveal an exploitable weakness. Knowing (or at least believing Jan Erso) that there’s a flaw buried somewhere in the design makes everyone’s motivations to sacrifice everything make sense.

And the way it’s set up, so that they know there’s a flaw somewhere in the plans, but don’t know what exactly it is or where in the plans it is makes getting the complete plans vital. Otherwise, there’s really not a very good reason not to cut and run with partial plans, if the alternative is certain death.

As to everyone dying, I do think that’s a dramatic necessity. If some of the heroes survive and escape with the plans, then it’s just another movie about Big Damn Heroes with Plot Armor. Which is Star Wars, sure, but its a Star Wars story we’ve already seen told a number of times. If everyone dies, then, as MEBuckner so eloquently puts it, it becomes a movie about sacrifice, and for me, personally, a lot more powerful.

But, of course, YMMV.

What you’re saying is that the writers have to bow to fan reactions when making a movie. Write the damn movie, make it good, and ignore the reaction.

So because they wanted to have big flashy battle scenes, writers had to invent a flaw. But that only makes it worse: the Empire has access to the plans, right? Wouldn’t they suspect that there was a reason the Rebellion wanted them? Wouldn’t they have done the same analysis as the Rebellion and fixed the problem? Everything falls apart once you start playing that game.

What is should have been was an example of spycraft, where the Rebellion has to infiltrate and secretly steal the plans so the Empire didn’t realize what was going on. But Star Wars has no room for subtlety.

I don’t mind characters dying attempting a task. I do object to them being killed gratuitously. Killing them after they get the information out is not sacrifice. It’s killing them for killing’s sake. That’s not tragedy. That’s not triumph. It’s clearly there to keep fans from wondering why they were never shown in the original movie.

[gdave]

@RealityChuck

Write the damn movie, make it good, and ignore the reaction.

I think that’s actually what they did.

[Deeg]

This post should be pinned.

[Miller]

@RealityChuck

Well, I can’t agree. The point of the movie was to fix what people mistakenly thought was a flaw in the original film. The entire movie is set up with the rather silly conceit that the weakness in the death star was programmed into it. No explanation for the flaw was necessary at all.

Opinions about art are usually subjective, but this seems like an objective claim. Do you have a cite for anyone connected with the film claiming that they were making it to close up plot holes in the original film? Can you find a substantial number of viewers whose reaction to the film included being glad that this plot hole was closed? You’re literally the only person I’ve ever heard make this claim, and I spend a lot (too much, by any objective standard) of time talking about Star Wars.

You didn’t have to kill off the entire cast to show there were casualties, and it was handled in such a way that it looked like someone was trying to be tragic without having any understanding of what tragedy is. When you end up killing everybody in the movie, it devolves into farce.

Sure, just like in Shakespeare’s most famous farce, Hamlet.

[ExTank]

Yes. Dear Og, this. The child-like, black-and-white cookie-cutter morality of the Star Wars Universe needed this tarnish badly. It was The Dirty Dozen, the Eiger Sanction, Platoon, Pearl Harbor, Midway, etc. rolled up and injected into Star Wars.

It was Star Wars for grownups.

[ExTank]

Well, I can’t speak for Chuck, but the plot hole I perceived is that the Rebels obtained the plans to the Death Star, and found an exploitable weakness. But the Empire should have the exact same plans, right there in the Engineering Computer of said Death Star. So why couldn’t they spot the same flaw, and take steps to mitigate it?

Rogue One answered that question. Thanks to Galen Erso, The Empire had fake plans, and only one set of “archive plans” showed the real flaw Erso covertly had built into the Death Star.

[ChockFullOfHeadyGoodness]

@ExTank

but the plot hole I perceived is that the Rebels obtained the plans to the Death Star, and found an exploitable weakness. But the Empire should have the exact same plans, right there in the Engineering Computer of said Death Star. So why couldn’t they spot the same flaw, and take steps to mitigate it?

The Empire did spot the flaw, but they were too arrogant (or at least Tarkin was) to do anything about it in time.
[quote = Trench run battle scene]

Commander #1: We’ve analyzed their attack, sir, and there is a danger. Should I have your ship standing by?

Grand Moff Tarkin: Evacuate? In our moment of triumph? I think you overestimate their chances.
[/quote]
And the arrogance was on display earlier in the force choking scene, which occurs shortly after the rebels are known to have obtained the plans:

General Tagge: And what of the Rebellion? If the Rebels have obtained a complete technical reading of this station, it is possible, however unlikely, they might find a weakness and exploit it.

Darth Vader: The plans you refer to will soon be back in our hands.

Admiral Motti: Any attack made by the Rebels against this station would be a useless gesture, no matter what technical data they have obtained. This station is now the ultimate power in the universe! I suggest we use it!

Darth Vader: Don’t be too proud of this technological terror you’ve constructed.

So, Imperial arrogance caused them to downplay the danger of the plans falling into Rebel hands, and when the Empire finally did look, they saw the flaw as well, but it was too late. No plot hole filling required.

[bump]

I’d order them like this in terms of good movies:

Empire Strikes Back
Rogue One
A New Hope
Revenge of the Sith
Solo
Return of the Jedi
Attack of the Clones
The Force Awakens
The Phantom Menace
The Rise of Skywalker
The Last Jedi

[zimaane]

Is there an actual poll to respond to, or is this just a general discussion ?

Anyway, the fact that the thread is now an argument about Rogue One is evidence that it was a worthwhile film. But I’d vote for Solo as my favorite outside the first trilogy, I realize that is not a commonly held opinion, despite its obvious correctness.

[Tilt-A-Whirl]

Another vote for Rogue One. Out of all of them, it was the ONLY one I thoroughly enjoyed, the only one that didn’t end up feeling like some sort of homework.

[Lantern2]

@bump

I chose Rogue One, because it was by far the best movie of the bunch. But I’d say that Revenge of the Sith and Solo weren’t too far behind.

I can’t say that I was ever that enthusiastic about the third trilogy- something about the whole rehashing of the original trilogy didn’t sit right with me. Not sure if it’s because it’s repetitive, or because it’s just lame, but the similarities between TFA and ANH were just too much to really enjoy.

Those are the three that I like as well especially Rogue One which is second only to ESB IMO. In general I think I like the films that are as closer in time to the original trilogy. I hope Disney continues to explore the time period between the OT and the prequels. In particular I would love to a series of films on the rise of Darth Vader.

[JohnT]

A series of films on the rise of Darth Vader? Yippee!

[bump]

I imagine there’s a LOT of fertile ground out there- Republic-era Jedi clearly did a lot of stuff, and there’s probably a lot of ANH-TFA ground that is un-addressed as well. (TFA-TLJ seems to have taken place in like a year or so, so not much else going on). Or what Han Solo was up to between Solo and ANH for that matter.

I mean, I could see an “Adventures of Qui-Gon Jinn” type series, or something like the Clone Wars series, but set after ROTJ and before TFA.

I think what makes the period between Revenge of the Sith and A New Hope so problematic from a storytelling perspective is that in large strokes, not much seems to have happened. I mean, the Emperor/Vader essentially took over the existing Republic infrastructure and consolidated their power- and were apparently still doing so when ANH came around. There’s a lot of room for Han Solo type small-scale stories and for the origins of the Rebellion I’d say.

[Snarky_Kong]

Haven’t seen Solo.

Good Movies:

• Rogue One
• Last Jedi

Ok Movies:

• Force Awakens
• Revenge of the Sith

Trash Movies:

• Rise of Skywalker
• Attack of the Clones
• Phantom Menace

[Miller]

I think TFA gets a bit of an unfair pass for the horribleness of the sequel trilogy, because a lot of the ideas people hated in the second two movies were established in the first one, just not resolved. Rian Johnson gets blamed for turning Luke into a bitter hermit, ignoring that the first movie is the one that established Luke failed in training Kylo and abandoned the galaxy. Or that it was TFA that set up the question of Rey’s parentage, which was a mystery that had no good answers - it’s obviously got to be someone from the original trilogy, otherwise who cares, but that requires that one of the characters from the original trilogy was such a piece of shit that they sold their daughter into slavery, which really limits who it could be, or fundamentally breaks the characterization of one of the heroic characters from the OT.

[iiandyiiii]

Totally agree, and TLJ did about the best possible with both of these established plot points from TFA, IMO.

[Snarky_Kong]

Rey not having famous parents, Snoke’s backstory not being important, Luke being disenchanted, etc were all phenomenal decisions. The only continuity issue that I had from TFA to TLJ was the relative power of the First Order vs the Republic. Yes, there are explanations, but they didn’t really sit right with me. The Poe and Rose lines are what kept it from being a slam dunk for me.

Then there a billion continuity issues from TLJ to ROS.

Should have let Rian Johnson do the whole trilogy.

[MaxTheVool]

I agree with the general consensus that Rogue One is, by a good margin, the best non-OT SW movie.

What I think is interesting (and tragic) is that the other films all fail in different ways.

The Prequel Trilogy is an interesting story, with a clear arc over the trilogy, told poorly. It fails on a number of levels (dialog, special effects, Jar Jar) but at least it ends up where it was clearly aimed from the beginning. (And in general, I agree with the consensus that they get better as they go, with RoTS achieving general decency.)

The Sequel Trilogy as a whole is kind of a mirror of the prequel trilogy. It’s a horrible mess of a story, told fairly well (at least, for the first two movies). Read on:

The Force Awakens is probably the most damn fun of all the non-OT movies. It has interesting characters who bounce off each other in a fun way and who are not, themselves, just retreads of previously existing characters. It opens up at least some interesting avenues to explore (a stormtrooper not wanting to be a stormtrooper any more). But… its story is just a rehash of ANH to a fairly ludicrous decree. And it uses up and spits out the OT characters and the potential for seeing where they end up at a furious pace.

The Last Jedi is probably the most interesting and though-provoking movie for movie’s sake. It offers a lot of commentary and stuff on SW. But… you don’t go to see a SW movie, at least one in the main series, to see lampshading and deconstruction and commentary. It does a lot of things well. But it has some massive flaws of its own. And it does an AWFUL job of following up TFA and setting up episode 9. (And yet despite the awful job of setting up it does, Ep 9 manages to still fumble the handoff). TLJ is interesting in that it’s both over and under rated. It’s much better than the ludicrous scorching hate that internet edgelord fanboys direct at it. But fuck-the-edgelord types then react by overlooking its flaws and making it out to be better than it is. Imho.

The Rise of Skywalker is the worst of all worlds. It’s a hot steaming mess. It’s awful. I have very little good to say about it, other than that the actors, who are all good, really try.

Rogue One has been covered at great length in this thread, and I generally agree.

Solo tries to be Rogue One, and is… pretty good. Any SW fan who hasn’t watched it would probably enjoy it.

[RickJay]

Rogue One is a goo movie. It’s not great, but it’s good. That, right there, makes it near the top of all Star Wars movies besides the first two.

I would classify them in three groups:

GREAT: Star Wars, The Empire Strikes Back

GOOD: Return of the Jedi, Rogue One, The Force Awakens, Solo

BAD: All the prequels, Last Jedi, and Rise of Skywalker

I’d not saying all movies in each category are equal; Last Jedi has some good points, while Phantom Menace is total garbage.

[GuanoLad]

@MaxTheVool

Solo tries to be Rogue One, and is… pretty good.

Solo would’ve been better as a TV series like The Mandalorian. It does the same thing: telling a story largely unconnected with the epic saga; peppered with call backs and cameos; answers questions that mostly don’t matter; ends on a cliffhanger that implies a big story to explore. Even the action sequences are not all that cinematic, there are similar scenes in The Mandalorian that match those in VFX scope.

If it had been on TV instead, it would have been loved by more fans, I think.

(Some fans love to blame Kathleen Kennedy for Solo, but it was actually George Lucas’s plan. He had the first drafts ready before he sold it to Disney. All Kennedy did, if anything was at all controversial, was fix things when they went off the rails, which is exactly what good Producers should do IMHO)