You can't have a meaningful dialogue when one person starts with incorrect facts.

I did notice a solution that helps the most amount of people in a reasonable way, educate them. Lack of education is the biggest factor in being able to radicalize anyone, from any religion. Arab Muslims have few educational opportunities, leaving them open to being duped by the unscrupulous.

Um....you're blaming Trumps flailing illegal orders, and the ignoring of judicial orders on the left? Fuck you. Trump is 100% the responsibility of the right, and the left accepts 0% of the responsibility for what he does. No one on the left cornered Trump into a Muslim ban, he advertised it, promised it, and delivered it for his racist base, and they love it because....fewer darkies.

Our borders are different from Europe. We may close the gates, but we won't be more secure because of it, anyone wanting in will still come in. 1/2 of illegals flew here, and the wall, if it's ever built, won't be done for decades and won't stop illegals, they'll tunnel.

This is the problem with the left in recent times, you're going out of your way to try to prove me wrong, instead of having a dialogue about a solution that helps the most amount of people in a responsible way. And that corners the right wingers into doing stuff like what Trump has done, in fact the far left can be partly blamed for why Trump is the president int he first place.

We've seen what open borders do in Europe. And now we're going to see what closed borders do in the US.

They're both bad solutions.

I expect a lot more from the left, since they are usually smarter and more educated than the right. But it seems that recently they've all opted for sensationalism just like the right.

And now I'm going to get down-voted by both the left and right lol, and no progress will be made.

Great....so now when producers edit audio to change what's actually been said, they can add video of the person saying the made up phrases. That was one way I determined if what I'm watching is real or edited....when they would splice audio together to create a monologue/dialogue, they had to cut away from the speakers face so you wouldn't notice the 1975 kungfu level dubbing....now they can convincingly fake both....in real time? We're totally fucked. Reality just became obsolete.

I'm going to Mars.

Interesting, I thought it sounded better the way he described. I love movies where I don't know what's going on and have to piece it together with bits of body language and dialogue. But it only works if you trust that it's not a mistake, like he says... Can someone cut the movie this way so we can check if he's right?

I'll bite. (needless to say, spoilers)

The characters certainly had motivation.

Jyn's motivation, much like Rae in FA, is simple, daddy issues. She isn't so much invested in the rebellion as she is in enacting vengeance for her father. She is stunted emotionally and is not idealistic, but I think she uses that as a vehicle to push other characters along with her. Her last moments with Cassian aren't driven by any great romance, just the solace of two people who don't know if what they did will make a difference, but they succeeded in what they set out to do. I suspect she understood before she left Yavin that she was not going to get out of it alive, which sort of fits with her fairly nihilistic view of the universe.

Cassian was entirely driven by the fight against the Empire. He was willing to do anything, and was completely ruthless at the start, but he does mellow towards the end as Jyn makes a point of saying that he was like a stormtrooper. He is a zealot, a true believer, and is willing to sacrifice everything, even his humanity, for the cause.

Orson, the imperial commander, is a mixture of patriotism and self interest. He's a fervant believer in the imperial ethos of bringing order to the galaxy, but he is also deeply interested in recognition and commensurate rise in rank. He is so motivated that he risks his life directly to try and stop the rebels (not something you typically see bad leader types do outside of superhero movies, that's what henchmen are for) at the end.

The droid is all programming, but his comedy relief is explained by the dialogue that slicing an imp droid can affect it's personality. He is the one of the few light hearted notes (and consequently gives us a pretty poignant note when he says goodbye and get's shut down) in what is a fairly depressing movie. His bluntly honest statements are perfectly ironic and as such really do deserve the laughs they get.

The monk and the warrior were guardians of a temple but are now displaced. While it's couched in the monks mysticism, I think honestly they were happy to stand up to the big bad guys who wrecked their temple and extract some form of revenge. I think it would please both of them to know that it was worth it in the end.

The imperial defector seems to have little motivation, but he has already taken the dangerous step of defecting and getting the ball rolling for the entire plot etc, he's obviously completely displeased about the empire and willing to risk his life to do something about it.

Saul has been driven mad by the fight. The rebel leadership all seem to fit well within their established roles in the canon, as do Tarkin and Vader. Random rebel and imp personal are placeholders and who really gives a fuck what their motivations are? X D

/shrug As far as character development goes, it's certainly not a work for the ages, but to say these characters are going to get a thing because they need to get a thing seems to be nitpicking for the sake of nitpicking.

Oh yeah, and in regards to AT AT's, it's a strategic imperial world and heavily garrisoned. Likely a staging point for excursions around the galaxy as well. It has major shielding, AA and fighter complements, Star Destroyers standing guard etc. Sure, fan service is a thing (although the homages in R1 are far less clunky than FA, including things like the Hammerhead, references to the cartoons etc), but as an imp commander, I would certainly release AT AT and AT ST vehicles against an attacking force of unknown size, particularly when you see a whole bunch of landing pads explode simultaneously. Are their 10 commandos or 1,000? 10,000? Yeah, go lowball and wait for them to walk out in the open right? \= |

It's not like the AT AT's were stomping all over the archive looking for a guy hiding behind valuable Imp data infrastructure, they are roaming the outer regions and are fairly proof against ground troops. Makes sense to me.

Dunno, I think the RLM reviews are generally entertaining and thoughtful, but in this case whoever writes Plinkett has let his acerbic dislike of "new" Star Wars cloud his objectiveness imo. It was an enjoyable flick and certainly one I intend to own. I don't think it's anywhere near the best sci fi (although I kinda like it on par with Empire) movie out there, but it's far better than RLM gives it credit for, imo.

I enjoyed past reviews from Red Letter Media a lot. They were insightful and detailed. They made me watch some movies in a new light and gave me a better understanding of them. However....

Go fuck yourselves, you whiny bitches!

You know what these people deserve? Everytime they turn on any screen of any kind to watch something even slightly related to sci-fi, it only plays Episode 1. They can't pause it, they can't stop it. And the Pod race as well as the 3-way lightsaber fight are edited out in their entirety. Just to make sure the relentless shittiness contains no form of relief.
We're finally getting decent Star Wars movies and all we get it 'But it ain't the original trilogy!!111!!'.
You people need more dialogue about the uncomfortableness of sand between your ass-cheeks. Or battle scenes characters only survive by entering slapstick-routines.
Sure, TFA and R1 certainly aren't perfect, maybe not even good, but they are surely much better than the awful shit Lucas shat down our throats the last 3 decades on the big screen.
The characters aren't likable enough? Have you met fucking teenage Anakin? I wanna slap the midichlorians out of that whiny bitch-face everytime he's on screen. He's so unlikable, the first time I didn't want to choke him until the Force left his body was when he murdered a classroom full of schoolchildren. That's what it took to make me go from 'I'm supposed to sympathise with this whiny-faced asshole?!' to 'Ok, he's the villian now. I'm supposed to feel this way about him'
There's not enough context? Go fuck yourself. Should we go and add extra flashbacks to Batman vs Superman on how Bruce Wayne's parents got shot? Just in case you don't get why he's Batman yet?
If you don't know what the Force is or who's Darth Vader, get the fuck out of my movie theater, mom! You're clearly here because somebody else dragged into this 'space war movie'.
I get it, the new movies aren't the perfect jewels of film-making your 5-year old self remembers the original trilogy to be ('Let's scrap the Wookies and invent the more Teddybear-like Ewoks, for the toy-sales!') but this is your response?
You're an teenage Anakin. A whiny, insufferable, bitch-faced asshole.
I welcome a healthy, critical discussion about movies any time. What I won't accept is this ridiculous display of ungratefulness after we suffered the prequel trilogy.
Star Wars is finally getting decent again. And you people shit all over it like the last 3 movies were even worth watching.
I'd rather watch Twilight than endure the creepy, awkward romance sub-plot of Episode 2 again. At least Twilight made laugh. And don't get me started on those tax disputes that started all that crap in the first place.
If you can't appreciate a Salami Pizza because there's no Pepperoni on it, you aren't worth any Pizza at all.

Your video, dialogue in film-how should characters talk?, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Imma guess that the last 10000 years have produced dialogues on stage, vellum, leather that contradict the premise here and yet somehow still work.

snotty me

That's a fan theory that explains why James Bond isn't the same guy all the time (Connery, Brosnan, Moore etc.) and kept spying around from the late 60's until now. The idea is that 'James Bond' is a cover identity used by various Agents of MI-6. This would allow for a black Bond but it isn't canon at all. That's why the Craig Bonds rebooted the franchise to allow the reuse of characters (Blofeld) and storylines (Vesper Lind vs. Tracy Bond).
007 is James Bond. The Producers are very protective in regards to this. However, the other 00-agents are pretty much non-existant in the franchise. They showed up in 'From Russia With Love' in a short meeting scene (sans dialogue), 009 died in the first 5 minutes of Octopussy (sans dialogue). The notable exception is Alec Trevelyan played by Sean Bean (I think he was 006), the villian from 'GoldenEye'. You could ague that Javier Bradem's Silva from 'Skyfall' must've been a 00-Agent but it is AFAIK not confirmed. Oh, and another 00-Agent was mentioned in 'Spectre'.
The reason Bond was made a scott was because Fleming like Connery's portrayal so much even though he was against casting him in the beginning. Bond's heritage is a minor plot point (more of a trivia item actually) in 'OHMSS' and a major plot point in 'Skyfall' (the name of Bond's family home).
As I said, gender-swapping Bond is much easier.

I'm all in. The dialogue is hilarious. *promote

Yep, and as a result each of the stories is progressing at a snail's pace. Also while the premise is interesting I feel the dialogue tries too hard to be deep and meaningful.

Also the nudity is absurdly gratuitous. I get they want to convey the dehumanised aspect of the hosts and that the park is basically a harem to satisfy the carnal pleasures of the wealthy, but they've made that point an umpteen times too many already.

Acting's solid though and production values are obviously insanely high.

I don't get it. Bad dialogue and acting. What about this appeals to people?

Although compared to other sci-fi tv series, i'm guessing, this is par for the course.

I hear people liked this show, but this just seems like inaccurate, pandering dialogue. Is the joke that he has no idea wtf he's talking about? Maybe that's the joke...

Maybe I don't know what I'm talking about?

<gasp!> Maybe I'm the joke??

Dialogue taken from an actual court transcript.

I highly doubt that this is any kind of official trailer. It is just so poorly done. Still frames? No dialogue? No bumpers?

This looks like it is coming from a spam bot.