John Hyperspace
UnKnown ReMember
Remember that Rogue One is only the second Star Wars movie that was not intended from the beginning to be part of a trilogy.
The only other movie shown as a one-off was A New Hope, and character development/backstory was pretty scanty in that.
For instance, the characterization of Han Solo was shown in a single scene--Han shoots Greedo first, so we see what kind of guy he is. We don't learn in A New Hope why he's pals with a hairy alien or anything else about him.
We don't learn much about Leia, either, except "rebel princesss." Okay. Anything about Vader? Nope. Anything about Tarkin? Nope. Very little about Luke, for that matter. IOW, characterization is not done any better in A New Hope than in Rogue One...that's the way it is for pretty much any action movie developed as a standalone.
Sure, I agree. I didn't mean to say there wasn't enough character-building in the movie, but only that I'm used to three movies of length, you know? I thought Rogue One had enough character as it was; I don't expect deep character development in an ensemble movie. Like you mentioned, it's much like The Magnificent Seven etc. in such a regard.
What I meant was that I'm just not used to a Star Wars movie that I don't have to wait 3 years between for a continuance of story. Two hours and it's over. But I liked it rather well, just not sure how much compared to the others; that's the part I'm having to feel out.
Upvote
0