LogFAQs > #921125993

ParanoidObsessive posted...

Every time I see her in a major film, I basically go "Oh, I know exactly why they hired her for this role - Game of Thrones is popular."

Ironically enough, I tend to think the same whenever I see Peter Dinklage in a major role. Though the difference there is that Peter Dinklage is actually a good actor who rises to the level of whatever character he's playing (no pun intended), while she... doesn't.

tbh, 90% of the time I see her, I don't recognize her from GoT. Haven't seen Solo, but didn't recognize her from the posters, etc.

Peter Dinklage is hard to miss, though.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

Lucifer would probably classify as an "Alien" (in the same way Thor technically does).

"Otherworldly Being" would therefore be a more fitting umbrella term.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

But a lot of people loved TFA, no matter what flaws it had, because it finally FELT like a Star Wars movie again, after years of the prequels being terrible. Ironically enough for a movie blatantly copying "A New Hope", it felt like a new hope. Which was the entire point. TFA was exactly what it NEEDED to be.

Here's the thing -- despite obviously cribbing so much of ANH, it *never* actually felt like a SW film (probably because there was no spirit to it). TLJ at least had a SW feel for the jedi portion. TLJ reminded me of some reasons why I loved the franchise, whereas TFA was a joyless abomination that made me miss the prequel trilogy.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

If TFA had been an "unearned" Rogue One, or too much like the prequels, or even a (God help us) TLJ, it would have tanked the franchise hard, right after Disney paid a ton of money for it. They needed to breathe new life into it, and went the emotional exploitation route rather than the intellectual route (which was the right choice).

TLJ was literally the only thing that convinced me to watch RO. I would have just given the rest of the supporting franchise a hard pass if TLJ had been more like TFA. TLJ did the impossible, though: It made me care again.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

Hollywood loves a happy ending, and assumes audiences are too stupid to enjoy nuanced or sad endings. Movies like "I Am Legend" were completely undermined and ruined because test audiences thought the ending was too sad, and execs don't give a shit about artistic integrity or thematic meaning if they think it will cost them revenue.

Most downer endings are lousy anyway. They're often used as a shortcut to presumed artistic merit. The Mist certainly wasn't improved by tacking on a shitty bit of survirony.... and, by the way, Hollywood sure hates ambivalent endings a metric fuckload more than downer endings. They seem to operate under the impression that audiences always want resolution and answers.
---

(\/)(\/)|-|
There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist.