Star Wars: The Force Awakens : Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

I see two camps on this board. People who think this is an awful remake with a Mary Sue character. And people who think it's the best sequel possible, or close to perfect basically.

When i first saw this in theaters i loved it. Not even a huge star wars fan but i genuinely can't remember having a better time at the movies in the last 5 years. On my second watch i liked it less, and started seeing the flaws people talk about.

On my third viewing after a year i now see things i never saw about the film before. It started to bother me that the movie shares way too many similarities with the original(i saw this flaw before but it did not bother me), i started to notice that Rey is actually a very poorly written character who is perfect and has no personality. The humor now seems completely forced and little things really stand out. Like Leia not hugging chewie or Rey doing better operating the Falcon than Han himself.

I still like the movie. Which is why i have it at a 7. Does anyone else feel the same?


Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

Yes I am right there with you. I have loved Star Wars since I was 6 or 7 and I have never been more exited for a movie than when this came out. Walking out of the theater I thought this was easily one of the top three SW films. Whenever I heard people complaining I thought "if you don't like this movie I can't consider you a SW fan". Then a couple weeks later I watched it again in the theater. This time walking out I was sure that it was my 3rd favorite. When it came out on blu ray I watched it again and liked it even less. The more I think about this movie the worse it gets. It is now my least favorite Star Wars movie and I have a hard time calling it Star Wars since the man who created it didn't have anything to do with it. I still can't believe how much my view of this movie has changed in a single year. This movie has made me like the prequels more than I thought I ever would. Now I consider the prequels masterpieces in their own terrible...and I mean terrible way. While I now see this movie as being so extremely shallow with way to much fan-service and sloppy writing. I'm happy I'm not the only one who's view has changed, even if mine has changed a little more than yours.

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

*excited

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?


This movie has made me like the prequels more than I thought I ever would. Now I consider the prequels masterpieces in their own terrible...and I mean terrible way.


Yeah. That is the most bizarre thing about it. I will never say i like the prequels(besides ROTS, and even that has a lot of terrible elements) but the prequels did feel like a part of SW. Even when they were terrible they felt original at the very least. Maybe it's just my nostalgia blinding me.

The acting and directing in TFA is good and much better than the prequels. The story is "good", but it isn't anything i haven't already seen before. And that is my problem with it.


Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

The visual storytelling of each of the prequels is amazing. Even with the AWFUL acting terrible love story, and jar jar binks, the PT had an amazing tragedy to tell and told it even if it didn't tell it in the best way. I think George Lucas had an amazing plan but just got caught up in the wrong places. For instance, I think everything that was supposed to lead to anakins turn to the dark side was really cool it's just they didn't emphasize the little things (like how hypocritical most Jedis were) enough. Either way the PT films are awful, and I mean awful movies on the surface but once you start digging into them and see what they were trying to do you can appreciate them for what they are.

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

I still consider TPM the worst of the SW movies, but through the years they really grow.

I think time will do this.

Granted i liked TFA more than i did any of the prequels at the time, and i still do love TFA, so i'm not in that camp. (None of the stuff people complain bothers me in the least, maybe because i'm convinced Rey is anakin reincarnated and has all the thecnical and fighting skills right from the start, and none of the arrogance so, for me she is the next step in anakin, becoming ever more powerful. I would have to watch the rest of the episodes and revisit TFA. For now, i love it.)

Have you ever watched the clone wars show? The cgi one, wich is canon, and its very very good. The first season was a bit sketchy and not the greatest, but that show just became better and better.

It really helped me enjoy even more the PT. It's on netflix so if you haven't give it a try.

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?


I see two camps on this board. People who think this is an awful remake with a Mary Sue character. And people who think it's the best sequel possible, or close to perfect basically.



I really like this film it a whole lot, but acknowledge that it has flaws. I'm pretty sure that there are several others here like that. I find little interesting new to me items each time I watch it, and continue to enjoy the film just a little bit more on each rewatch.

The retelling of the structure of the original combined with the unexplained power of Rey does turn off many. I agree that the story didn't need to take so much from the original, and I agree that Rey's abilities and the narrative we have interpreted for her background do not match up. I can see where many don't like the film as they rewatch it and these issues stand out.

Where many see flaws there with Rey, I see mystery until the story is complete. If in the end, the flaws turn out to be flaws and not mysteries that are solved, that would be a shame.




"But I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now"

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

Totally agree

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

No, I love it. And this is coming from someone who had no real interest in any sequels to the OT. It's my favourite SW movie after eps 4 and 5.

The 'Mary Sue' crap annoys the hell out of me to be honest. I had no problems with Rey whatsoever. If the previous movies showed us anything, it's that people with Force potential manifest their abilities relative to the environment they're in. No-one showed Anakin how to fly Pods or have prophetic dreams or magically divine the images on Windu's test paddles. No-one showed Luke how to hit a 2 metre target or levitate a lightsaber. Hell, no-one showed him how to use a lightsaber beyond the 10 minute session on the Falcon! Yet there he was duelling his little heart out!

So you put a Force sensitive kid in a hostile, barbaric environment and, ten or so years later, you get Rey. She has to learn to be self-sufficient, to fight, to be aware of predators and on guard against folks with malicious intent. Of course she is going to hone her awareness, her reflexes etc in a way that the Skywalkers never had to. I really loved that she wasn't just a lame repeat of the Luke/Anakin experience.

I also felt that the main characters were somewhat dulled in ROTJ, so I loved that TFA found a way to give them their old mojo back. The idea of a married Han Solo living in a villa on Coruscant with Jedi priestess Leia (who was only turned into a 'Skywalker' in 1983 to get Lucas out of a plot conundrum) bores the Force out of me. Having Han as the disillusioned old mentor and Leia as the stoic old war General was just wonderful - not to mention wizened old Luke as a Jedi Clint Eastwood in exile!

By the way I never saw Rey's piloting the Falcon as being 'better than Han'. She was clearly flying by the seat of her pants and in a blind panic, with her main advantage being sheer desperation and her knowledge of the terrain.

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?


The 'Mary Sue' crap annoys the hell out of me to be honest.


I don't really have a problem with her overpowered abilities and I try not to use the term 'Mary Sue' as it just seems lazy (though it can be a useful shorthand). However, a huge issue I have with the film - and it crosses over to Rey's character - is the constant audience pandering.

The part that really annoys me is when she learns the Jedi mind trick. Not because she learns it so easily. Not because she does it without training. But because JJ uses the scene to tell yet ANOTHER joke.

It could have been a very powerful scene. One where Rey is completely confused and conflicted by these amazing powers she has begun to wield. But instead JJ has her use it get the stormtrooper to release her and adds the joke of him dropping the weapon. He just can't stop with the nods and winks to the audience and it feels like he's sitting next to you in the theatre nudging you and laughing at his own jokes. (None of which are as funny or clever as he seems to think).

It's that constant playing to the audience that aggravates me throughout the film. I can deal with the 'hey, look at this for nostalgia', I've been primed for that from the prequels. But it goes way overboard in this film and it's there throughout.

I don't want to get pretentious but I know a lot of audience members who enjoy films aren't fully aware of the cinematic language that is going on at the same time. And in small details, for example, like the attack on Maz's castle, watch how the camera whips from explosion to explosion - BEFORE it happens. It's another signalling of an all-knowing director who is leading us through the film. Guiding us so heavy-handedly that we're merely along for the ride with no room for our participation in what's happening.

Rogue One also has its faults but Gareth Edwards knows how to frame a shot to guide your eye without shoving it down your throat. JJ does not. Both from a storytelling point of view and a director of shots.

I know some people here try to defend this film's weak and vague backstory by claiming they don't need to have everything spoon fed. The irony is that this film does nothing but spoon feed everything else to the audience. It just does it in different ways. How blatantly obvious in its purpose is the 'Rey decides not to sell BB-8' scene? How terrible is the exposition in the Leia and Han reunion? How stupid was the 'Starkiller base is almost at full charge' *beep* How on-the-nose was were the clouds covering the sun as Kylo decides to turn to the darkside? How unconvincing and unnecessary was Poe's quick explanation of what happened after the crash on Jakku? It was all so heavy handed in both direction and dialogue and it seeped into every part of the movie.

This is common in JJ's films where each story beat is tied to the previous one. It makes things predictable and one dimensional. You pretty much know that whatever is happening in the scene will be flipped by the end of the scene. Someone here likes to call that basic storytelling. And it is, but not in the way they think. It's basic storytelling. It's like that children's book 'What good news, what bad news". Where one thing happens, then the opposite happens. Which is great for children, but just once, there needs to be some variation to make the story a little less predictable, and a little more convincing.

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

Firstly, thanks for this post. I confess I'm not a 'technical' person when it comes to movies, so I'm ill-equipped to converse/debate at that level, but I think I know my Star Wars (subjectivity notwithstanding) and can certainly respond at that base level!


The part that really annoys me is when she learns the Jedi mind trick. Not because she learns it so easily. Not because she does it without training. But because JJ uses the scene to tell yet ANOTHER joke.



I thought this was 'classic' Star Wars and didn't feel awkward at all. Only the later revelation that Daniel Craig was in the suit took/takes me out of the scene on rewatching, but at the time I thought it was great. If it's 'pandering', then it's the right kind IMO. I remember an interview with Larry Kasdan (Empire of Dreams perhaps?) where he was describing his first viewing of ANH, and he said "...and it was so funny!". As a fan who'd watched ANH on a continuous loop over the years, I'd forgotten just how lightheartedly funny SW was - "we're all gonna be a lot thinner", "you overweight glob of grease", "listen to them Artoo, they're dying, "will somebody get this big walking carpet out of my way", "let the Wookiee win" etc etc. And the sight gags - the dianoga popping up, the cantina, the mouse robot and so forth.

All of these gags seem to pop up in moments of tension, something that hadn't actually occurred to me until I wrote the last paragraph, so 'time and place' isn't necessarily a factor. It's not like Han's quip in the trash compactor took away from the urgency of the situation. I thought Kylo's mind-reading thing was downright creepy - pretty heavy for Star Wars - but the Daniel Craig moment didn't detract from that in any way. It just felt...Star Warsy.

I suppose whether or not the 'pandering' is overboard is in the eye of the viewer. TFA is obviously built into the nice safe bedrock of the OT, particularly ANH. It's hard to explain why this works for me, given that the whole idea seems lame on paper (a third Death Star? Really?). But for me it works a) at a nostalgic level (obviously) and b) because while we're getting a nostalgia massage to lull us into a state of acceptance, the new film is ripping the old ones to shreds!

Han and Leia are divorced! Luke's new Jedi Order failed! The battle of Endor didn't stick! Han and Leia's son is the goddam villain! Those beloved characters who stole our hearts and danced to Yub Nub in 1983 are *beep* miserable!

How many fans are on these boards whining about JJ's sheer disrespect for ROTJ's conclusion, even as they accuse TFA of 'playing it safe'? Damn right he disrespected ROTJ! Nothing else would have sufficed IMO. I didn't need (or want) a sequel to ROTJ. Who does, apart from Disney's accountants? Who needs another TPM-style trilogy-opener where a peaceful republic is slowly twisted via a trade dispute while a young Jedi-hopeful slowly comes into their power as sagely Jedi Knights slowly come to grips with the emerging menace blah blah blah? No, TFA drops us in the middle of the destruction of all we hold dear, even as it massages our shoulders and whispers "look, a nice cozy desert planet..."

So the pandering worked for me here. It didn't work for me in Rogue One. In TFA it felt (to paraphrase Lucas) like 'rhyme'. TFA is sequel, reboot, and greatest hits all rolled into one, so it felt appropriate. In Rogue One it felt like pure fan service. I mean the cantina guys? Really? But obviously it's down to the viewer. The whole Rogue One experience has shown me just how subjective this whole thing really is.


I don't want to get pretentious but I know a lot of audience members who enjoy films aren't fully aware of the cinematic language that is going on at the same time. And in small details, for example, like the attack on Maz's castle, watch how the camera whips from explosion to explosion - BEFORE it happens. It's another signalling of an all-knowing director who is leading us through the film. Guiding us so heavy-handedly that we're merely along for the ride with no room for our participation in what's happening.
Rogue One also has its faults but Gareth Edwards knows how to frame a shot to guide your eye without shoving it down your throat. JJ does not. Both from a storytelling point of view and a director of sho


That's not pretentious at all, and I'm afraid I am that audience member. I don't know anything about movies in a technical sense.

I can say this though - TESB is my favourite SW film after ANH. To me they're perfect. While pretty much every other movie I saw around 1980 looks silly (still much loved, but silly) TESB and ANH have not diminished. I never cringe, or say "gee, that's lame" or "I wish they hadn't..." when I watch these two films. I have no idea if they're well-lit, or well-paced, or well-framed. I just know they feel right.

Not so with ROTJ, and that's from day one. Definitely not so with the prequels. And these movies get worse for me over time, not better.

TFA comes close to that 'right' feeling of ANH and TESB. Yes, it uses nostalgia and nods and winks and copied shots and all kinds of tricks to do so, but for me it works. I never cringed during TFA like I cringed when Obi Wan said "from a certain point of view" or when Hayden said "I don't like sand". There's no 'fat' on TFA, no overblown MCU-style speeches or boring scenes. But the emotion is there - the melancholy of the old cast, the thrill of Williams' score as Rey catches the lightsaber, the sheer weight of Luke's burden in that final dramatic moment.

So if I'm being led or spoon-fed by Abrams' technique, then I'm cool with it. With Rogue One I kept getting pulled out of the movie. The nods and winks were too much (I know it's ironic but see above!), the CGI Tarkins and Leias were distracting, the retcons of ANH's Death Star scenario and opening scenes were unforgivable (IMO) and, worst of all, I got bored! Yes, bored in a SW movie!


I know some people here try to defend this film's weak and vague backstory by claiming they don't need to have everything spoon fed. The irony is that this film does nothing but spoon feed everything else to the audience. It just does it in different ways. How blatantly obvious in its purpose is the 'Rey decides not to sell BB-8' scene? How terrible is the exposition in the Leia and Han reunion? How stupid was the 'Starkiller base is almost at full charge' *beep* How on-the-nose was were the clouds covering the sun as Kylo decides to turn to the darkside? How unconvincing and unnecessary was Poe's quick explanation of what happened after the crash on Jakku? It was all so heavy handed in both direction and dialogue and it seeped into every part of the movie.


Again, a matter of taste I suppose. Rey's refusal to sell BB-8 was a nice way of highlighting her intuition. I thought the Leia/Han reunion was absolutely wonderful - again just a really natural extension of their TESB personas but with the added weight of all that they'd been through. The imagery of the sun turning dim as Kylo made his move was very Star Wars in a 'Revenge of the Sith' kind of way. I liked it.

I'll admit I'm on the fence with Starkiller Base. A third Death Star is pushing it, no matter how cool it looks. I said TFA 'comes close' to that immersive and non-embarrassing ANH/TESB feeling but here's the exception from my certain point of view. The idea of building the weapon into an existing celestial body was great, because it allowed them to create a nostalgia Death Star without raising questions of financial backing or expediency. But then they do that stupid "this was the Death Star, this is Starkiller base" thing and it becomes patently obvious that the thing is just..bigger. That was daft.

And I agree on the Poe thing. That one really felt like an afterthought. He should have died or been given a proper story.

The great thing about TFA was that I didn't have to try to love it. I just loved it. I've been flexing my brain since ROTJ, writing my own desperate backstories and squaring all the round pegs to accomodate crappy writing and even crappier retcons. For once I didn't have to do that. That makes TFA really clever in my book. I never wanted a sequel. Now I can't wait for Ep 8.

Still don't want a 'young Han' movie though!

Thanks for your post. It gave me a lot to think about.












Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

to Jess;

"I confess I'm not a 'technical' person when it comes to movies, so I'm ill-equipped to converse/debate at that level"

Well I am and I can say what floppy is doing is mixing negative feelings / personal taste and presenting some supposed rule of film technique.
For instance floppy's criticism of the;

all-knowing director who is leading us through the film.

A lot of famous directors have done this.

- Take the ending of "Citizen Kane". The camera slowly moves over the crates in the mansion and then the image glides slowly to workmen throwing objects into a fire and then the camera slowly moves into a closeup of a sled in the fire until the viewer can make out the letters on the sled and music associated with those letters rises up.
Is the director, Orson Wells, leading the viewer in "Citizen Kane"? Of course!
Do film experts consider Wells to be a bad director and "Citizen Kane" to be a bad movie?
Absolutely not.
The Sight and Sound polls (the most prestigious movie polls in the world) rate Citizen Kane as one of the best films ever made.
And the style of this scene in "Citizen Kane" was copied by Spielberg in "Raiders of the Lost Ark".

- Another example; Alfred Hitchcock's "North By Northwest".
Hitchcock begins a famous action scene where a crop duster plane becomes a fighter plane trying to kill the hero.
The hero at first is on a road waiting for someone.
Hitchcock slowly calls the viewer's attention to the crop duster by having a person with the hero mention it.
Then when the action begins the camera is looking at where the action will be.
When the hero falls to ground the camera is already there.
When the plane flies into a truck and explodes, the camera was there before it happened.
With quick editing, the camera is leading the viewer to what is going to happen.
Is Hitchcock considered to be a bad director by film experts? No.
Sight and Sound polls rank his movies very highly.
- And Hitchcock's use of story boards and this style of leading editing has had a huge influence on many directors like Lucas, Spielberg, Cameron and Peter Jackson.

* Do not think that floppy is some infallible expert on film technique who is objectively just writing about some absolute rule of film making.
That is not what's happening.
Instead, floppy had a negative reaction to TFA. That's it. It's just floppy's personal taste about not liking something in a movie.

Imo at least, BB ;-)

it is just in my opinion - imo - 🌈

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

Thanks BB - again it's great to have a considered and articulate response to these things (as opposed to the "Rey is a Sue, you clearly vote Clinton lol" type stuff!

Actually, although I'm not an 'expert' on cinematic technique, I did feel that TFA was beautifully shot. And what I said to Floppy was true - the fact that I didn't have to try to enjoy the movie speaks volumes to me, especially given that I wasn't initially keen on a sequel at all.

I also think that the combination of rehash (for want of a better word) and rejection (again for want of a better word) of the OT was really clever. In terms of the original cast, I didn't get a sense of backtracking so much as revitalising. Getting Luke and the gang back to a post-TESB groove - with so much added depth - was infinitely more interesting to me than resuming a post-ROTJ 'business as usual and happily retired' model.

Thanks for the post and the insights into film-making!

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

by JessDrew;

"Thanks for the post and the insights into film-making!"

You're welcome.

"it's great to have a considered and articulate response to these things"

I appreciate your well thought out comments.

"I did feel that TFA was beautifully shot."

Agreed.

I also think that the combination of rehash (for want of a better word) and rejection (again for want of a better word) of the OT was really clever. In terms of the original cast, I didn't get a sense of backtracking so much as revitalising."

Well said.
TFA is not a repeat of ANH. Even though many on IMDb make that claim it is not true.

* You are correct that TFA is often an evolution of the characters and in seeing roles with different combinations from the SW franchise.

* Rey has several similarities to young Anakin in The Phantom Menace.
In the beginning Rey is more similar to young Anakin than young Luke.
A. Young Anakin is a slave.
Rey is under some kind of financial relationship with the junk boss Unkar Plutt. While not exactly slavery, it is a similar relationship where the workers are economic slaves to Plutt.
- Rey's situation is similar to Young Anakin who is under the control of Watto.
B. Both Rey and young Anakin gather and fix junk parts.
C. Rey and young Anakin have great natural piloting skills with little training.
Young Anakin has never flown a Naboo ship and he instantly becomes one of Naboo's best pilots.
Rey quickly flies the Millennium Falcon like an expert.

* Finn, the story of a storm trooper is a completely new addition to the SW franchise.
Finn alone imo blows away the argument that TFA was just a copy of ANH.

* Kylo is much closer to older prequel Anakin than anything else in Star Wars.
A. Older prequel Anakin praises Palpatine several times. He talks about how great Palpatine is.
B. Kylo has this kind of relationship with Snoke and the memory of Vader put together.

- But Kylo at the end of TFA has a character moment which is new to the live action SW movie franchise. Kylo is seriously wounded before his light saber fights in the woods which greatly hurts his fighting skills. Kylo is like a Sith. Still no Sith has previously had a serious physical wound when starting a fight in the live action movies.

* Solo goes beyond the OT. It is a growth of the character.
He is no longer the bad boy looking for love with Leia.
He is man with a failed marriage and a son who has become a criminal.
Solo's concerns are different from those of Jedi since he's a husband and a father.

* Leia as the female general is a role seen before in bits from ROTJ.
But the new thing is that Leia is a mother concerned about her son who has gone bad.
Shmi Skywalker wasn't connected with her son's fall to the dark side.
Leia's character in TFA is new territory for a Star Wars movie.

* Poe is a hotshot rebel pilot and there are those in the OT.
The new thing is that there is more depth with his story than any previous secondary character rebel pilot.

* In the second act of TFA once off the desert planet, this act has Finn and Rey meeting Solo and Chewie and dealing with the Rathtar monsters.
- There is no monster in ANH. But there are monsters in ESB and ROTJ.

* The final climax of TFA includes a light saber duel and finding a Jedi.
A. A light saber duel is not part of the climax of ANH. That is in the middle act of ANH.
- What happened between Rey and Kylo superficially resembles the fights between Vader and Luke in ESB and ROTJ which are at the climax of the films.
But that is only a surface similarity.
The Kylo / Rey fight at the end of TFA is a new variation of the climax fight idea in the SW franchise because wounded Kylo can barely beat Finn and Rey and then Kylo's poor judgment leads to his defeat.
B. As for finding a hidden Jedi. That is at the end of TFA, in the middle of ESB (Yoda) and the beginning of ANH. Not the same plot structure as ANH.

"Getting Luke and the gang back to a post-TESB groove - with so much added depth - was infinitely more interesting to me than resuming a post-ROTJ 'business as usual and happily retired' model."

The main writer of TFA, Kasdan, was the main script writer for ESB. He knows how to write a Star Wars script.
TFA allows many characters to grow and evolve into new adventures and tragic situations.
TFA is not business as usual. it shows new possibilities using established Star Wars ideas in different ways and expanding on what was done before.
At the same time TFA has the tone of classic Star Wars. There is horror and yet a lighter tone. There is as much laughter as there is pain.
This new SW movie fits well with the original trilogy.

Imo at least, BB ;-)

it is just in my opinion - imo - 🌈

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

I think what people either miss (or simply don't care for) is that for every point of similarity there's a big point of difference (which you've more or less shown in your post).

At risk of straw-manning, I see a lot of "this movie's a rehash, but Rey should've been more like Luke" or "this movie copies ANH but Kylo's not as cool as Vader".

I don't see Kylo Ren as a faux Vader. That's the first impression absolutely, but the movie flips it around and turns Kylo into Han and Leia's son rather than just 'the bad guy'. To me he isn't Vader so much as he is Anakin or Luke, but unlike Anakin his fate isn't predetermined and unlike Luke he's already crossed a very bold line. I think this is fascinating.

Likewise with Rey I don't see her as Luke II or Anakin III. You're right in what you say, she's the 'slave' that Anakin should've been. I see her as kind of like Conan in the '82 film - thrown into a fighting pit and forced (pun intended) to either grow or die. Of course she's way ahead of the Skywalker boys in terms of her Jedi skill-set. Life has made it a necessity for her. Now you have this feral kid who's basically a loaded gun. That showdown with Ren looked suspiciously 'dark side' to me.

I love where this is headed.

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

All I'm trying to do there is explain why I don't like it by pointing out that Abrams style of film-making annoys me and it is prevalent in every aspect of the film. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with his technique. I'm not saying I'm saying because his technique is basic it is therefore bad. I'm saying it annoys me and I'm explaining some examples of where it grates on me and why.

But let's look at your examples versus mine to show you the difference -


- Take the ending of "Citizen Kane". The camera slowly moves over the crates in the mansion and then the image glides slowly to workmen throwing objects into a fire and then the camera slowly moves into a closeup of a sled in the fire until the viewer can make out the letters on the sled and music associated with those letters rises up.
Is the director, Orson Wells, leading the viewer in "Citizen Kane"? Of course!
Do film experts consider Wells to be a bad director and "Citizen Kane" to be a bad movie?
Absolutely not.
The Sight and Sound polls (the most prestigious movie polls in the world) rate Citizen Kane as one of the best films ever made.
And the style of this scene in "Citizen Kane" was copied by Spielberg in "Raiders of the Lost Ark".



In Citizen Kane the camera movement is motivated to show us all the material possessions Kane has acquired over his life. His life's works and accomplishments are literally piled up in front of us. The camera travels across them to show us, to leave us in awe of what he achieved. It passes the workman throwing the objects into the fire. Reminding us that all of these treasures, all of this accumulated wealth, means nothing to Kane once dead. But it finally rests upon his childhood sled. Completely unexpectedly, it reveals the thing in his life that meant more to him than all that we have seen. It gives us the answer to the question that no one else could work out. The entire camera movement, what it takes in, and where it ends, has a point. It has a motivation. Orson Wells told a story with it.

Hitchcock puts his focus on his protagonist. The crop duster is off in the distance. At the time when he shot it, it was rather odd for a film to have an object framed off in the distance like that. (It's a common technique used now in horror films used to unsettle audiences who see something in the back of the frame that doesn't look 'quite right'). Hitchcock uses the scene to show us even in the seemingly remotest of spots, this man is not safe. And he keeps our focus on him and this realization. Again, he has a point and a reason for all of his shots and framing.

In scene in The Force Awakens that I am talking about JJ whips his camera around the create an energy to the battle. That's it. To create energy through camera movement. The motivation of the camera movement is to show us the next explosion. Whip left, bang. Whip right, bang. Great. He has created an energetic battle scene. But there's nothing else going on. It's a very basic technique. This is not a scene that will be examined by film scholars.

Compare it with Spielberg's Saving Private Ryan opening. Similar camera techniques are used but he includes shots like the Germans silhouetted, seemingly faceless, with perfect views of the men running toward them as they mow them down. He then uses close ups to show the unpredictable nature of who will die, who is saved, all by chance. He shows us the battle from both perspectives, so we can see the claustrophobic position of the Allies. The dominant and powerful position of the Axis forces. He helps us understand the battle and draws emotions from his framing and shot choice. Again, he tells a story.

There's no way we could analyze the attack on Maz's Castle in the same depth. It's just not there. There's the shot of the TIE fighter approaching out the sun ripped off from Apocalypse Now. And perhaps the tracking one shot that ties Finn and Poe together (though why is unclear apart from their bromance). And then there's a lot of tracking and whip pans. All without motivation except to let the viewer see the next thing that goes bang.

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?


I see two camps on this board. People who think this is an awful remake with a Mary Sue character. And people who think it's the best sequel possible, or close to perfect basically.
I don't know if the board is as polarized as you think. People can have their unique reasons for love and hate and even indifference.

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

Yep. I loved it the first time I viewed it, and I still like to it to some degree, but it really needs some work in the sequels. I feel like these sequels need a romance angle or something. I like Rey, Finn and Poe but I don't GET them. They need far more depth before I can begin to appreciate them the way I loved the original trio of Luke, Han and Leia. What are their stories? What does Rey want? What about Finn? POE? What the hell is the point of Poe? Compare these characters and their weak character angles to the complexities of Luke/Leia/Han and you begin to see that really there isn't anything behind the 'I'm a strong empowered female character' and 'I'm her black friend' and 'I'm the token Hispanic' facade.

Don't get me wrong, I want diversity of cast and a good range of character backgrounds. But DO something with it! It's fine putting these characters in there to get kids to relate to them but for those of us with a brain, it just doesn't go far enough. Ok, Rey is powerful. And? What now? What are we rooting for? What has she really to overcome?

Finn. He defected from the First Order and now he's the funny black guy. Great. What exactly does he do next?

Poe. Why is this character important? He can fly really well. Big whoop.

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

"I see two camps on this board. People who think this is an awful remake with a Mary Sue character. And people who think it's the best sequel possible"

I don't belong to either groups.

"Does anyone else feel the same?"

As you ? Yeah : me, I feel that way and I had the same experience as you (more or less).

So we can make a third group now : the one where normal people belong, who rate this movie between 5 and 7.

Actually you know what group we are ?

The group of people who actually HAVE A LIFE and don't care that much about a bunch of movies made for children.

Sad to see we are so few here on IMDB: in the normal world out there I've only met people like you and me.

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?


The group of people who actually HAVE A LIFE and don't care that much about a bunch of movies made for children.

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?


The group of people who actually HAVE A LIFE and don't care that much about a bunch of movies made for children.


Just so you are aware, The Force Awakens was rated PG-13, and had quite a few instances of bad language in that movie (like damn and hell), not to mention was actually pretty dark in tone (namely, the opening scene showed an explicit massacre at a village). That isn't exactly a kids movie. In fact, it's to the level of Revenge of the Sith, considered alongside The Empire Strikes Back THE darkest Star Wars film at the time (which was rated PG-13 as well, and Empire probably would have gotten the PG-13 rating had PG-13 even existed at the time the film was made).

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

Well said. Well said indeed. While I dislike this movie more than most, I couldn't care less what other people on here think of the movie. I have my own opinions that I formed myself about this movie and I don't really care what anyone anywhere thinks of it. Sure, I'll debate and defend my view of this movie but please...I beg all of you...don't let these idiotic boards actually upset you. Form your own opinion about a movie and don't let others tell you whether it is right or wrong. It's art. Art is based on taste. Everyone has different taste.

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

The Mary Sue thing has become a little cliche now.

A few people raised it. Now, just about every man and his dog that has a problem with the movie uses it.

Luke Skywalker is arguably the biggest Mary Sue (Gary Stu for male equivalent) in cinema history. A farmboy who flew an x-wing and fired torpedoes into the smallest of targets.

Hardcore fans won't want to hear that but Mark Hamill said this himself at the latest celebration when interviewed by a British podcast group.

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

Well, you do have a point there regarding Luke. Though Luke still does at least have some justification for how he was able to pull those stuff off, unlike Rey.

I won't necessarily go as far as to claim that Rey was a mary sue, though. It's pretty clear she has the Force, so that's still SOME justification for her capabilities, even if she is overall poorly written. If anything, I'd call Belle from BATB a mary sue due to some elements to her character that quite frankly simply CANNOT be justified at all.

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

While I really really don't want to talk about this again, and I'm also not trying to make it sound like I think TFA is an awful movie because it's not awful...I guess here I go.

Luke is not on the same level of Mary/Gary sue/stu as rey. Not even close. Everything Luke does good rey does better. And that's not mentioning that Luke has help or guidance in almost every situation he succeeds in. To give a few examples

Many people compare Luke supposedly "out-piloting" Vader and then destroying the Death Star to rey beating Kylo ren.
First off, Luke doesnt out-pilot Vader. Idk where some people got this idea but Luke just sits in the trench right in front of Vader while Vader gets ready to fire. So then that means that the only thing Luke did really at all in the end of ANH was use his feeling or instincts on when to fire the torpedos. That doesn't compare to using feelings or instincts and beating a trained force user in a light saber fight. Even if he was hurt. Also rey pilots the MF through a run down cruiser and then shuts off the engines at the exact moment she needs to in order to aim Finn directly at the TIE fighters. And that happens before she even knows what the force is.

Also, nothing Luke does can compare to the mind trick that rey uses. NOTHING. Even if rey had been trained before she was left on jakku, she was like 7 when she was abandoned. I doubt that a 6 year old can learn how to perform mind tricks.

There are many instances where Luke would die without help from friends (R2 saves them from the trash compactor, Han shoots Vader before Vader shoots Luke in the trench run) I can't think of one time with rey where I can say "if that person hadn't of shown up, she'd be dead"

The one time Rey is captured she escapes ALL BY HERSELF. No help whatsoever from anyone else.

There is no argument to be made that Luke is just as much of a Gary Stu as rey is a Mary Sue. No argument whatsoever. Now once again, I don't absolutely hate TFA. I just can't believe when people try to defend its many instances of obvious bad writing.

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?


Many people compare Luke supposedly "out-piloting" Vader and then destroying the Death Star to rey beating Kylo ren.
First off, Luke doesnt out-pilot Vader. Idk where some people got this idea but Luke just sits in the trench right in front of Vader while Vader gets ready to fire. So then that means that the only thing Luke did really at all in the end of ANH was use his feeling or instincts on when to fire the torpedos. That doesn't compare to using feelings or instincts and beating a trained force user in a light saber fight. Even if he was hurt. Also rey pilots the MF through a run down cruiser and then shuts off the engines at the exact moment she needs to in order to aim Finn directly at the TIE fighters. And that happens before she even knows what the force is.

Also, nothing Luke does can compare to the mind trick that rey uses. NOTHING. Even if rey had been trained before she was left on jakku, she was like 7 when she was abandoned. I doubt that a 6 year old can learn how to perform mind tricks.

There are many instances where Luke would die without help from friends (R2 saves them from the trash compactor, Han shoots Vader before Vader shoots Luke in the trench run) I can't think of one time with rey where I can say "if that person hadn't of shown up, she'd be dead"

The one time Rey is captured she escapes ALL BY HERSELF. No help whatsoever from anyone else.



You cannot escape the fact that a farmboy from Tatooine was the one pilot that outlasted an experienced fleet of X-wing pilots. Luke had basic flight experience and Rey had basic combat experience. Swinging a lightsabre is nothing comapared to firing your torpedos blindly into a target. We already know that Klyo has nobody to fight with so he isn't the warrior you proclaim him to be.

What age can someone perform a mind trick? Also, what if Luke Skywalker was your teacher? What if you're stronger with the force than Yoda and Vader? All mysteries at this point so you can't make a case.

Rey would have been killed on Jakku without Finn grabbing her and leading her away from the Troopers and Tie Fighters (It's Finn who recognises the sound).

Rey would have been captured by the two gangs but Han and Chewie helped them escape.

Rey would have died on Starkiller base had Chewie not flew by with the Falcon.



Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

You make it sound like because luke is a farmboy from tatooine he can't be a good pilot but Biggs describes him as "One of the best pilots in the outer rim". And he didn't even really outlast the others he was basically just flying towards the Death Star until he was close enough to the exhaust port to head into the trench. When I watched the movie I didn't see him performing crazy maneuvers to outlast the other pilots.

And then let's get to rey. An even bigger problem than her beating Kylo ren is her winning the force battle for the lightsaber. THIS is a HUGE problem. Kylo ren is depicted as one of the strongest force users we've ever seen. He can literally freeze people and read people's minds. He has trained basically his whole life to use the force. And then rey who shouldn't even know that you can move objects using the force OVERPOWERS the person who can freeze bullets and read people's minds. And then you know the story, after she gets the saber they fight and Kylo ren clearly is winning which makes sense and then she pauses to charge her superpowers and then whips Kylos behind. Also you make fighting with a lightsaber for the first time in your life sound so much easier than firing torpedos literally whenever you feel like you should. That's what luke does. He fires them when he feels like he should fire them. Rey who is completely untrained with a lightsaber beats Kylo ren who we know has at least used a lightsaber and probably used one in battles.

And then the mind trick. I got on a rabbit trail in my last reply where I talked to much about how even if she had training when she was abandoned she shouldn't know how to use a mind trick. But either way she DOESNT EVEN KNOW what a mind trick is. Terrible writing to have her escape like that.

Rey is such a Mary Sue and there's absolutely no way you can avoid that no matter how much you argue. And then to say luke is as much a Mary Sue as rey? Haha nope. Sorry pal

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?


The Mary Sue thing has become a little cliche now.

A few people raised it. Now, just about every man and his dog that has a problem with the movie uses it.

Luke Skywalker is arguably the biggest Mary Sue (Gary Stu for male equivalent) in cinema history. A farmboy who flew an x-wing and fired torpedoes into the smallest of targets.



I hear you but the comparison isn't even close man

https://jedijones77.wordpress.com/2015/12/30/if-luke-was-rey-a-k-a-the-star-wars-a-new-hope-mary-sue-rewrite/


Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?


Luke Skywalker is arguably the biggest Mary Sue (Gary Stu for male equivalent) in cinema history. A farmboy who flew an x-wing and fired torpedoes into the smallest of targets.

Really . You even get the premises wrong on what Mary Sue writing is.

Key question: was Luke the coolest guy around in ANH? Was he more awesome than Han, more powerful than Obi Wan, more advanced than his twin sister (senator and rebel leader)...? Obviously no (comare that to Rey now). Did Luke get VIP-hugs and attention from everybody, and was he constantly awarded with each ability he needed to look good? No, he was going from zero to hero: he was whiny and reckless, and beaten up several times and was saved countless times, including during the DS attack, during which his comerades, and R2 and Han sacrificed themselves for him. He had to learn the ways of the Force from the onset. That is called a hero's journey character.

Rey, despite her being a starving scavanger, had every absurd ability she required (even untrained ones, like shooting, fencing, hacking or the Force), was besting everybody at their game (droids, Kylo, Finn Han etc) and got all sweet attention she wanted. That is Mary Sue writing.

Learn writing theory before talking.
de gustibus non est disputandum

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?


Really . You even get the premises wrong on what Mary Sue writing is.

Key question: was Luke the coolest guy around in ANH? Was he more awesome than Han, more powerful than Obi Wan, more advanced than his twin sister (senator and rebel leader)...? Obviously no (comare that to Rey now). Did Luke get VIP-hugs and attention from everybody, and was he constantly awarded with each ability he needed to look good? No, he was going from zero to hero: he was whiny and reckless, and beaten up several times and was saved countless times, including during the DS attack, during which his comerades, and R2 and Han sacrificed themselves for him. He had to learn the ways of the Force from the onset. That is called a hero's journey character.

Rey, despite her being a starving scavanger, had every absurd ability she required (even untrained ones, like shooting, fencing, hacking or the Force), was besting everybody at their game (droids, Kylo, Finn Han etc) and got all sweet attention she wanted. That is Mary Sue writing.

Learn writing theory before talking.


The arrogance is pretty sickening here.

The idea of a 'Mary Sue' has been an ever changing label but it always comes down to a low-rank person/rookie who saves the day through unrealistic abilities. Mark Hammil agreed with me on this - chortle

It has nothing to do with being cool. Good grief! And you have the audacity to accuse others of not understanding the premise - chortle

You also make assumptions around her training. She clearly had combat training or do you think the staff was a walking aid? If Luke can fire a torpedo into a target without his scanner but Rey can't use a mind-trick then your resting on nothing but bias and hypocrisy. You also don't know Reys early years.

Facts have debunked you. Good luck with your rebuttal.. you'll need it.

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?


changing label but it always comes down to a low-rank person/rookie who saves the day through unrealistic abilities.
I find your lack of writing theory knowledge disturbing! Why do you keep humiliating yourself by sheer ignorance? This is the lame, oft derided Wiki definition (even Bart Simpson joked about ppl trusting in Wiki btw) that is so generic that it only describes action heroes, not Mary Sue writing: Do you think old characters cannot be Mary Sues...? Do you think when some character does not "save the day", he/she is not a MS? What if the character has NO unrealistic abilities LIKE THE ORIGINAL MARY SUE in A Trekker's Tale (was she not a Sue...?) or Sue types like Jerk-Sue or Anti-Sue (look it up).

Mary Sue writing is about highlighting/glorifying characters until he breaks the in universe rules (think Rey/Leia hug, think Rey getting each ability she requires to look awesome, her being better at everything etc).

Facts have debunked you. Good luck with your rebuttal.. you'll need it.
I do not know where you get your delusions, laser brain. As always you have presented nothing, and fittingly you do not know as little about the concept of facts as you do about Mary Sue. I quote the Supreme court: Some people are so dumb that they are unable to realize how dumb they are.

And more I will not teach today, ho home and rethink your life, Jobo El, stop being the board's idiot every day.
de gustibus non est disputandum

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?


The group of people who actually HAVE A LIFE and don't care that much about a bunch of movies made for children.


Oh really? Then why do you daily post on IMDb message boards and whine & bitch about obsessively about movies made over a decade ago? But you keep telling yourself you're different and better than most of the demographics on these message boards. Your self deception is quite entertaining!


Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

Me. I loved the first time I saw it but ever time I watch it now there's something else that bothers me about it. Mostly the dialog and the half @$$ed one line excuse as to how they found Luke's first lightsaber.

It kinda makes me laugh a bit how they said it belonged to Anakin before Luke, which is true, but Anakin broke or lost about a dozen of those things.

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

I wouldn't say I enjoyed it then changed my opinion, but I will say I came out disappointed, but didn't think it was terrible. However, as I began to think about it in the days/weeks after, my opinion dropped even more. It's the film that keeps on giving, unfortunately not in a good way.

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?


I still like the movie. Which is why i have it at a 7. Does anyone else feel the same?
I definitely felt more endeared to the movie while watching and soon after leaving the film. But on reflection (like most JJ Abrams stories) they just either don't hold up to multiple viewings once the viewer starts asking very simple questions concerning characters or plot.

I do think that Rey's abandonment of her only quality that kept her from being a boringly all-capable with no flaws was her obsession with keeping herself on Jakku for the sake of a family that abandoned her. But then it's just "Oh, forget about them." "Okay, I'll start learning about the force from someone who doesn't actually use it and is terrible at her job of being an information broker."

Of course TFA is a copy of ANH, but the problem is that it's far less interesting and dynamic as the original film. In ANH, that movie was all about spiritualism being triumphant over cold technology. This one is....uh....good guys stop bad guys. The First Order is not explained at all in any meaningful way, character dynamics and fighting abilities are picked up at random, and the focus of the spirituality of the force (y'know, the whole concept that made Star Wars a unique sci-fi property and what still helps it stand out among other Sci-fi contemporaries) is forgone for the sake of just making it a superpower with none of the theological insight it's supposed to provide for the characters. With the Empire, the Stormtroopers were faceless goons who were with the powers in control of the Galaxy, with a threatening leader, and the ranking officers were all British white men to emphasize the oppressively totalitarian homogeneity of the evil group. It's easy to understand in ANH where they stand, and they even give a small snippet of background information concerning the Republic, the fall of the Jedi and the rise of the Empire. The First Order gets none of that: an ineffective sith leader who is terrible at his job and throws childish tantrums, stormtroopers who the film can't seem to settle on sympathizing with or wanting to see as faceless baddies, making the First Order officers a multicultural group of men and women that contradicts the monolithic identity the Empire had, and making Finn one of the most useless protagonists I can even think of in recent memory just ruins HOW they implement the tropes and archetypes of the OG Star Wars films. Even BASIC information like why it's called "The Resistance" when they are the government in power, how the First Order did ANYTHING (resources, building the Death Star 2.0, the Sith's return, military, etc), or even expressing WHY Luke Skywalker is important to the plot besides "well, he's a fan favorite character and we need him back" is forgotten in the chaos and obsession with capturing the images of the original Star Wars trilogy without capturing the brains or the heart.

The prequels had some terrible dialog, and this movies occasionally shares that trait as well. The "I didn't know there was this much green in the whole galaxy" is on par, for me, with the "I hate sand" speech from Anakin in AOTC.

Also, for those that thought Han moving his head and shooting second in the special edition DVDs of ANH who don't complain about the totally idiotic character-worship moment of Han suddenly shooting behind him without looking on a battlefield just for a cool moment.

I honestly don't know if TFA is the worst Star Wars film I've ever seen. AOTC was pretty bad from pacing, direction, plot, writing, and acting, but at least it had a sensible narrative structure that established character motivations, important plot elements, and used iconography and archetypes effectively. The humor elements felt incredibly off at points to where a scene would stop everything to tell a joke.

I do like the new trio of characters (Poe, Rey, and Finn), and I hope that the next film will be a vast improvement on something that's initially entertaining, but ultimately a hallow and uninspired recreation of a much better film.


...

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

The first viewing, opening day, had the nostalgia machine running on all cylinders and I left the theater in a state of euphoria. After calming down, I still like it. I still defend it. But I can also acknowledge that it is flawed. But I see it as purely economic - Disney chose the right director to reboot the franchise in Abrams. They'd just paid billions to acquire Lucasfilm and needed a safe bet to catapult their new investment. So, we got TFA. We got a reboot. But that's not to say there aren't good aspects about the film. That's also not to say that subsequent episodes stand to only improve TFA. It didn't bode well as a stand alone film, but that is because it is incomplete...

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

I actually came to like TFA much more with further viewings. First time I watched it I could see nothing but the flaws, but with time its good points came to outweigh the bad.

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

I loved it the first time, and loved it just now on rewatch, however the whole Mary Sue thing did register with me this time. Her telling Solo how to operate his own flipping ship just didn't need to be in there and I found it highly annoying. It did seem she knew EVERYTHING and was a whizz at sh*t she'd never done before. It didn't take away from my overall enjoyment of the movie though.


If the truth hurts, you ain't living right...

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?


Her telling Solo how to operate his own flipping ship
Good thing that never happened.

Perpetual outrage is the most popular religion today.

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

Pretty much. I didn't love it the first time, I liked it enough, I think the first half still holds up really well but when you're not lulled in by the theater-going experience it's a lot easier to see all the flaws. Every movie has them, even ones I love but the cracks in the facade of the force awakens are ever appearing and very distracting to me. The movie has a heart, it doesn't feel as dead as the prequels in that regard, but it certainly lacks other organs, like balls and brain. Looking back it feels a lot like a first draft. Kudos to JJ and his team for still creating an ok film in such a short amount of time with I must assume some crazy restrictions imposed by Disney's executive evil AI or whatever runs that company, but they should have taken more time and more chances. imho the best fan service is just making a great movie with a vision, expanding the universe, taking chances. That kind of "fan service" gave us the empire strikes back. I know just giving people exactly what they already like is a safe paycheck (and a large one at that) but that practice is just not sustainable.

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

after watching rogue one my appreciation for the force awakens grew back a notch. still see all the flaws but boy oh boy do the characters shine in comparison.

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

Given the real lows of Star Wars all I was hoping for with Ep7 was that is just be better than Ep2.

I did enjoy the movie but the annoying elements probably well get more annoying with each viewing.

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

Not me. I did not like it the first time around. After watching it again I'd say it's serviceable.

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

These guys:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpYEJx7PkWE

"But I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now"

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

i loved it the first time. now i find the prequels more watchable, at least they try something different and have a lot more imagination

even equiped with a shovel and you couldn't dig this

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

Kinda the same here. Altough I still love it and enjoy it, I can see the flaws that everyone points out and -i didn't notice when I first saw the movie, like the recylcing of plot points from A New Hope (altought I have no problems with Rey)

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?


And people who think it's the best sequel possible, or close to perfect basically.


I haven't experienced anyone expressing anything close to that sentiment. Not even on the most favourable Star Wars fan site boards. How you can claim that there is a camp like that here is a mystery.



"Who can't use the Force now?! I can still use the Force!" - Yarael Poof

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

My apologies you are mostly correct. But when the movie first released there was 5-6 users on here who gave it 10/10 and literally think it's the best Star Wars sequel to date. They don't even use IMDb anymore because obviously the view points clash to such a strong degree here. So there isn't much point in discussing this movie on IMDB if you loved it, so that's why I think you don't see any from that "camp" anymore.

Even if you don't like the film people have to admit this has become a complete *beep* show of a board.



Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

It's my fourth favorite after the OT.

Re: Who else loved this the first time but changed their opinion later?

I hated it the first time and I hate it now
Top