Gatsby77

Wasn't a personal attack, but I lost a lot of respect for Roger Ebert when he revealed the twist of The Crying Game during their 1992 "If We Picked the Winners" Oscar special. Siskel was understandably pissed at him for that too. Of course, you could also tell whenever Siskel was _really_ angry at him -- he'd bring up "Beyond the Valley of the Dolls" -- Ebert's horrific screenplay for Roger Corman, and the reason he ended up becoming a critic rather than a (successful) screenwriter.

So...Luke should have struck down Kylo Ren while he slept?

WTF? Luke would _never_ do that. Did y'all not see the original trilogy? In Star Wars, Kenobi turned off his lightsaber when fighting Vader. In Empire, Luke let himself fall (i.e., suicide) rather than join Vader. And in Jedi, Luke threw his lightsaber away. The whole point of Star Wars is that good Jedi (those attuned to the Light) don't kill like that. Which is why it was a big deal that Luke came close to killing Kylo when he slept (to save literally thousands of lives), but even then he didn't succumb. Do y'all even Star Wars?

You want to see a good example and a bad example of same-era films? Last Jedi is the second-fastest film to $500 million domestic ever, on a short list of only nine films to hit that mark. The fact that it's already # 6 on the all-time chart in less than three weeks speaks volumes. It will easily best The Dark Knight and The Avengers domestically, and will likely surpass Jurassic World as well. As Scott Forbes put it, in (non-inflation-adjusted terms) it's on track to beat every other movie ever that was not called The Force Awakens or directed by James Cameron. Bad example? Justice League. What was billed as DC's Avengers instead made less in its entire domestic run than The Last Jedi made in four days.

The second week drop-off isn't nearly as bad as you characterize it because it rebounded in week 3. We see this _especially_ in comparing the second to third weekends The second weekend fall of 68% for TLJ (vs. just 40% for TFA) is mostly attributable to Christmas Eve falling on a Sunday this year. It rebounded on Christmas Monday (as expected), meaning it fell just 55% over the 4-day frame. More importantly, it rebounded in the third weekend, falling just 27% (vs. TFA's falling 40%). And again, it was hurt slightly by New Year's Eve being that Sunday, and made up more ground on Monday. This shows in its daily progress as well -- it lost ground to films like Jurassic World on a day-to-day comparative basis in Week 2, only to stomp Jurassic World and others day-to-day in Week 3. But the bigger picture is this -- and relates to the portion I bolded. With this film, Disney laid the necessary groundwork with this film to sever ties to the Skywalker family -- thus enabling them to build any number of other stories in other trilogies and one-off projects for decades to come. Far from "hurting future sales," I think they smartly sacrificed repeat sales for this film from a small portion of 40-something die-hard fans -- in aid of much stronger sales on a great number of future films over the long-term. By going the unexpected (but necessary) route -- Disney ripped off the band-aid, and set themselves up to evolve as Star Trek did -- enabling how many more series with entirely different casts over the years? Five (so far)? Who cares about (say) a $250 million hit on Episode 8 if it directly enables Episodes 10-18 to each be solid $800 million films, to say nothing of the various "Star Wars Story" one-offs in between?

Yojimbo's also a must-see. Like The Seven Samurai it's had two American remakes: Fistful of Dollars -- the 1964 Clint Eastwood spaghetti western; and Last Man Standing -- the 1996 Bruce Willis film that transplants the setting to 1920s gangters.

It's funny. My Japanese is decent. I've seen 10 of Kurosawa's films and even wrote an undergraduate term paper on Throne of Blood, but I've never seen The Hidden Fortress.

I read 1-40 or so when they came out. 1-25 are solid, after that not so much. I lost interest entirely around the Phalanx Covenant storyline. Uncanny of that era was probably better -- you've got 281-304 -- and (big crossovers that hit both titles like X-Cutioner's Song and Fatal Attractions aside), I remember the quieter issues of Uncanny 297 and 303 being the best mutant stories of that era. I also give the Uncanny run the nod for the introduction of Bishop and the not_in_tune_with_social_norms cool Portacio art.

Due respect, but this isn't true. As I posted a page or so back, The Last Jedi is performing exactly in line with Empire Strikes Back and Attack of the Clones at ~70% of the business of Star Wars and Episode 1, respectively. The first chapter of all three of these trilogies is literally a once-in-a-generation event. Even more so with The Force Awakens, which was not only the first new Star Wars movie in 12 years but also brought back the main original cast for the first time in more than 30 years. And again -- The Last Jedi's current rank of # 6 on the all-time domestic chart doesn't matter -- it's a false metric. What matters is its inflation-adjusted ranking of (currently) # 58 -- ahead of West Side Story, Superman, The Two Towers, Dark Knight Rises, Back to the Future, and Attack of the Clones. By week's end it will have passed Rogue One, Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith in real terms, as well as Batman, Blazing Saddles and even Bambi. And if you truly think that Disney is so dissatisfied with this film's performance that Rian Johnson will be fired from his next trilogy (you know, like Disney fired Josh Trank and Lord & Miller from Solo and then Gareth Edwards from Episode 9), I'll bet you $100 that he stays.

I suspect what she's referring to is the disappearance of mid-budget pictures -- those solid dramas budgeted at $25 million to $75 million that you used to see all the time. Now it seems like every movie is either a micro-budgeted $5-$20 million picture or a $90-$150 million would-be blockbuster. If I were a producer these days I'd take the micro-budgeted root -- such as what STX did for its first few films -- including "The Secret in Their Eyes" remake with Nicole Kidman, Chiwetel Ejiofor and Julia Roberts -- and Joel Edgerton's phenomenal "The Gift." Or follow in the footsteps of Jason Blum with Blumhouse Productions. Goal of $5 million budget per movie, with another $20 million spent on advertising and distribution. Following that model, "Get Out" is probably the most profitable film of the year ($254 million worldwide on a $4.5 million budget) -- as well as (literally) the best-reviewed. This new economic structure has killed actor salaries and largely moved the middle-market dramas to smaller screens like Netflix.

More importantly, this week TLJ will pass the inflation-adjusted totals (i.e., total number of tickets sold) of Rogue One, and Revenge of the Sith. It's already passed the inflation-adjusted total of Attack of the Clones. It's also performing as-expected for a second chapter (i.e., at ~70% of The Force Awakens). Both Empire and Attack of the Clones clocked in at about 70% of the business of the first chapter of their respective trilogies as well.

Saw this over on Quora -- that the tracking-through-lightspeed tech was previously referenced in Rogue One: The Last Jedi’s primary plot driver—hyperspace tracking—is an Easter egg. The technology was mentioned in Rogue One when Jyn Erso happened across its plans on Scarif while searching for the Death Star plans. This direct reference has been confirmed by Pablo Hidalgo, a Lucasfilm story development executive. Hyperspace tracking was one of the technologies being researched by Grand Moff Tarkin, but the technology was only perfected by the First Order.

Or...still possible that Rey's lineage was a feint. There's still an outside that she may, for example, still be a twin sister to Kylo Ren -- who was separated at birth / sent away exactly as Luke-Leia were. Why? 1) Again, Kylo Ren's the one who told her she's nobody. No reason for us to believe him; in fact, more reason exists for him to be lying in that moment than not. 2) It would also explain why in The Force Awakens Leia inexplicably hugs Rey when at that point they've never met. It bugged me to no end that she hugged Rey -- a stranger -- rather than Chewbacca -- who was her ex-husband's best friend and with whom she shared a 40-year history. If Leia secretly knew she was her daughter -- then it begins to make sense. I think it's a far stronger story choice for her to in fact be nobody and for the Force to be truly democratized again, but I don't believe we got a definitive answer either way in The Last Jedi.

Agreed. For instance, we know that: Lucas didn't decide that Luke & Leia were brother and sister until after Empire (hence their kiss in Empire, and that the first draft of Empire referenced a differently-named sister of Luke) Despite Lucas's varying claims throughout the years, Vader wasn't intended to be Luke's father in Star Wars -- he didn't become Luke's father until the second draft of Empire Lucas himself engaged in revisionist history -- both with the midichlorian BS in the prequels and in retroactively editing the Star Wars cantina scene so that Greedo shot first. The point? Contrary to the myth of some sort of "master narrative," the Star Wars films have *always* varied from one to the next.

When watching it the second time I watched the scene closely to test the rumor and found it implausible. It's not *just* that Luke fades away while looking off into the sunset. There's a lead-up to it where Luke falls off the rock from exhaustion and crawls back up. He's clearly been deeply affected -- emotionally and physically -- by his actions. Would have been really hard to do digitally, so Hammill was clearly in on that portion of the scene, which presages his (content, Zen-like) death a few moments later. The scene as a whole is cohesive and makes sense. So I believe Hammill was aware of it while filming.

This is actually dead-on. You're right - there were no true twists. Episode VII didn't actually contradict any of those three points -- it was only fan expectations (mine included) that led us to anticipate events that didn't ultimately occur.

You're looking at it wrong. The Force Awakens was a once-in-a-generation event. Far more anticipation than even Episode 1 because it featured the return of the primary original characters. The mere 5 seconds of the trailer of Harrison Ford stating "Chewie...we're home" guaranteed it would be one of the most-watched films ever. Fans had been waiting more than 30 years for the thrill of seeing Han, Luke and Leia again -- especially after the (vast) disappointment of the prequels. The second chapters of both other trilogies (Empire and Attack of the Clones) did 70% of the first chapters, a metric with which The Last Jedi is still tracking against. As of today, it's dead-on in-between The Last Jedi and Rogue One, right where it should be. Again - it's # 2 on the list of "fastest films to $450 million domestic" -- behind only The Force Awakens. And that's a very short list of only 11 films total. By tomorrow, it will have joined the list of 9 total films to make $500 million domestic, again ranking # 2. Yeah - it's a fake list, because what really matters is the inflation-adjusted ranking, but it's still going to end well over $600 million and -- most importantly -- set up Disney to go nearly anywhere they wish for the next chapter -- and subsequent additional trilogies well into the future. Inflation-adjusted, it was at # 87 yesterday, just behind the likes of Men in Black, Rocky, and Fellowship of the Ring -- and it will pass each of those film's total grosses this weekend. Seems absurd to have to defend a film that's such a critical and commercial success, but at the end-of-the-day, what matters is whether you personally liked it. I loved it. My friends and families did too. Sorry if it didn't fit y'all's personal head canon, but there was very little that *actually* contradicted Episode 7, just where you thought Episode 8 *might* go. I loved the various twists, just as I adored the Mandarin twist Iron Man 3.

Ahh...okay. But still goes to my statement that Empire (in the States, at least) did the worst of any of the original trilogy. International is nearly irrelevant because it has seen _such_ huge growth in the last 10 years, let alone the last 35. Trying to draw conclusions by comparing international box office in 2017 vs. 1983 is like comparing apples and hand grenades.

Luckily, with The Last Jedi, we got both!

I think the disparity is because Box Office Mojo counts all re-releases (including the 1997 ones). Here's the contemporary box office numbers courtesy of The Numbers: Star Wars: $460,998,007 Empire: $290,271,960 Jedi: $309,205,079 Even more impressive is the exponential growth among the respective opening weekends: Star Wars: $1.5 million Empire: $4.9 million Jedi: $23 million

Not quite true. Empire actually made the least amount of money of the original trilogy upon release, and got the worst reviews of the three. It was only generally considered the best of the three in retrospect. So..."if the pattern holds" Episode IX should do better than The Last Jedi.

Def. wasn't part of her original plan. I honestly don't think she thought of it right away. I didn't.

I'm with rjrjr on this one - that folks on these boards vastly overestimate their influence on this film. I posted earlier an explanation of why Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic user reviews are far more skewed (and outliers) vs. the positive audience reviews on IMDB and ComScore. And yeah - it passed $450 million domestic yesterday, the second fastest film to do so, after only The Force Awakens. Moreover, I saw it again last night -- along with a friend who'd already seen it once and my 70-something parents -- who were watching it for the first time. We all enjoyed it immensely, and I liked it even more on second viewing. And folks in the theater audibly gasped at Holdo's sacrifice. After simply remaking Star Wars with The Force Awakens, Disney has proven they can truly surprise, given Luke a worthy send-off, solidified Kylo as the true threat and vastly expanded the tapestry of stories they can tell moving forward.

I hear you, but a factual correction. Just like he didn't actually strike down Kylo at his bedside, he didn't destroy the learnings of the Jedi Order. In both cases he was tempted, but restrained himself before acting. Yoda destroyed the Jedi temple. And Yoda did so knowing Rey already had the original Jedi texts -- they're shown later aboard the Falcon.

Wait - what? Luke was a steady, steadfast character throughtout the overall franchise? Have you re-watched the OT lately? In Star Wars, he was a whiny, immature brat. In Empire he was still so immature that he disregarded Yoda and ran off to try (and fail) to rescue his friends, rather than complete his training -- and made himself that much more susceptible to manipulation by Vader and the Dark Side of the Force. The only time Luke was even close to "steady" was in Jedi. Again - this movie was just as much about failure as was Empire. But here, everyone failed individually. - Luke failed Kylo. - Rey failed to convert Kylo. - Finn and Rose's plan to save the fleet failed. - Poe's mutiny failed. - Admiral Holdo's original plan for the fleet to escape failed. - Even Finn's attempted suicidal sacrifice failed. The *only* overt successes were Luke's sacrifice to buy the remaining resistance time to escape (which was far more "epic" and useful than Obi-Wan Kenobi's sacrifice to allow Luke+Leia a bit more time to escape in Star Wars) and Rey's deus ex machina appearance to telepathically remove the rocks.