The Economist welcomes your views. Please stay on topic and be respectful of other readers. Review our comments policy.
You must be logged in to post a comment. Log in to your account.Don't have an account? Register
Absolutely, the worst Star Wars film I've ever seen - and I've been a fan since 1978. This film is far too long, has so many plot holes and frankly, completely unrealistic scenes (such as Leia's Mary Poppins moment, Finn/Rose being the only ones to use much-needed fuel to leave the fleeing Rebel fleet and come back - why didn't they all leave?, etc.). As for the main characters, I ended up not caring about any of them by the end of the movie - not even Luke, Leia or Chewie. Disney is destroying a once-great film franchise.
I think what's most disheartening about the new trilogy is that its facsimile story line & premise insults the intelligence of its fan base by essentially eradicating everything that occurred prior from Episodes 1 - 6 just for the sake of rebooting the series. What was so unique about Star Wars is its characters, the Jedi, and the political conflict that created the backstory. But, this new trilogy seems to be the exact opposite- ie going back and rehashing & re-packaging stories and conflicts already told- albeit in a slightly different manner. I think for a franchise to grow, the story and its characters have to evolve in a meaningful way- as new characters get introduced. It can't just be a re-hash or re-packaging. This is where the new saga fails to meet expectations.
I have yet to read a positive review of this film that comes close to touching the film's many plot holes.
George Lucas's original Star Wars had one huge redeeming quality: it was a space opera with the protagonists (and some antagonists) that their target audience could empathize with. The next two iterations didn't have that factor.
How is it possible that JJ Abrams understands star wars better than george lucas. This review demonstrates that the same parasites that have sucked the life out of star wars, have similarly infected entertainment journalism. It was only a matter of time, as that industry only survived at the behest of its engorged host. Its quite ironic that this review is published in the same ‘economist’ issue which picks apart the issue of chinese sharp power. It seems that disney mastered this dark art long ago. The chinese woukd be wise to follow disney’s model in order to corrupt agents of influence to achieve its own nefarious ends.
This film is horrible - a view shared by almost half of watchers according to the RT site. It is bloated, formulaic and frankly boring.
I have no idea what the solution is but these films have become a caricature of the original version.
Just one other observation - why did so many reviewers plainly not see and record how absolutely awful it was?
Don't forget Metacritic as well, which for some reason gets overlooked. As of today, the user reviews are at 4.8. Yesterday they were at 5.0. Out of 10.
This movie was unfortunately in my opinion the worst Star Wars film...Disney has definitely ruined the greatest saga ever created..if you are a real Star Wars fan you will be very disappointed!! Every other Stars Wars film that has came out was awesome..The last Jedi deserves to get pulled out the theatre how can George Lucas let Disney ruin his legacy like this unbelievable!!!
Thanks for the thriller. I had every intention not to to take the family to see this one, after the time-waste of the last one your thriller sat my intention in stone. Mocking, tearing down, rebuilding? Sounds like someone is desperately in need of some sort of identity, akin to my teenage girls seeking by means of mocking, tearing down and re-inventing the wheel. The project should have been handed to people comfortable with their identity. A mature project with distinguished identity, steeped in history, mysticism, and loaded with expectations should have not been given to directors and producers in search of identity. My teen age girl read The Economist back to front. She insist she can produce a much better and entertaining magazine with much broader scope. Layla thinks, without mocking, the Economist needs to be teardown and rebuild?
Seinfeld said his show was about NOTHING. Schopenhauer ended his Philosophical Tome with the adage: The World is Nothing. Cosmologists from Stephen Hawking to Lawrence Krauss convincingly argue the Universe is Nothing. And to top it off, the Greatest Box Office Grossing Movie Series of All Time is about: NOTHING! So to pose the venerable question, Why is there something rather than NOTHING, nothing is more profitable than something.
People are bored silly from seeing the same handful of things, people and tropes. At the same time they want to be nostalgic and see the exact same crap they saw before.
as for the teardown, I suspect they got that idea from youtube. The collective zeitgeist of YT allows for better executive content borrowing than ever before.
I might be the only one, but I did not like the film. I acknowledge the director's intention of making things different, but the result is deficient. The film is just a high- budget blockbuster and nothing more. It is long and predictable in every aspect. The plot is just a persecution and we can not understand at any moment in the story the reason why each side is fighting for (except for Kylo, the only original and interesting character in this new franchise and the one that gives the much needed twist). This episode lacks the political and philosophical drive that the other ones have. Also it is terrible what they did to the classic characters: Chewbacca becomes an adornment and Leia and Luke's purposes and behaviors are just nonsensical. It has some pathetic scenes (SPOILERS): Rey's training last two days and she becomes an expert fighter suddenly, Leia floating in space and her resurection is just ridiculous, Luke's vanishing for no reason after the fight, and most of all those "comedic" moments are awful and not funny.
The lack of training is like a trope of its own nowadays. I'm pretty sure Harry Potter had less training than Rey did when he first battled Voldemort. The new Capt. Kirk is basically some high school dropout who's original captain died in the first few days and, since he was just standing there, he become captain.
I completely agree. Still Harry Potter spent 7 years studying magic at Hogwarts.
In the hindsight, the "montage" sequences were better.
The pictured warrior looks like a mashup between Darth Vader and a Cylon centurion from the old (i.e., original) Battlestar Galactica tv series. Old wine, new bottles.
At least he didn't do as badly with Star Wars as he did with Star Trek.
I have to dig a little more into the data but so far, based on "Spiderman: Homecoming" (bad), "Wonder Woman" (good), "Blade Runner 2049" (bad), and this film (good), it seems that the presence (good) or the absence (bad) of a female hero determines the appreciation of a given film more than any other factor.
Justice League and Ghost in the Shell may be outliers to your little analysis.