Movie Review: Rogue One: A Star Wars Story

Details: Over two hours long. Stars Felicity Jones and Diego Luna.

The first thought I had after watching this movie was… why did they make this movie? I know it’s obviously for money. Disney paid a billion dollars for the Star Wars franchise so they have to milk that cow, but I don’t think this movie needed to be made. It didn’t tell a story I needed to hear.

The premise is this: Jyn Urso is found by the rebel alliance and sent on a mission to find her father who has information on the empire’s new super weapon. In the overall Star Wars timeline, this takes place after Revenge of the Sith and before A New Hope.

I felt like this movie should have been a book or a comic book, not a full fledged movie. It’s just a side story that doesn’t push the overall Star Wars narrative in any direction. I feel like nothing was accomplished here.

I can see that they were trying to achieve a grittier, more realistic, more personal story. Unfortunately, there are so many characters we barely get to know anyone. I think in genres like science fiction of fantasy, character development is the crux of these types of stories. Character development was severely lacking here and I didn’t feel anything when bad things happened to the characters.

The actors give fine performances. The weakness of this film was just the story. The whole film felt like one big wink wink, nudge nudge towards existing Star Wars fans with constant references to the other movies. This movie is fan service. Unless you are a hardcore Star Wars fan, I probably wouldn’t recommend this movie.

Score: 5/10

Movie Review: The Theory of Everything (2014)

Details: About two hours long. Romantic drama starring Eddie Redmayne, Felicity Jones, and Tom Prior.

The Theory of Everything is a love story, but more about the duration/endurance of love, rather than just its beginning or end.

You know the story. Stephen Hawking, one of the great physicists of our time develops motor neuron disease, a disease where people lose control of their bodies and has no effect on the mind. They are trapped in their bodies in a way. The life expectancy of those with this disease is also short, with Hawking’s life expectancy no longer than two years after diagnosis. Despite this diagnosis, Hawking marries, has three children, writes a best selling novel on his theories, and survives his life expectancy by a few decades. He continues to do so today.

It’s a sad yet encouraging tale. Although, a friend I watched the film with may be better at expressing why the film is so good. After the film ended, one of my male friends cried… loudly. He said that the passage of time and how all these events from Hawking’s life, from the development of his disease to the birth of his children, was incredibly moving.

Personally, I thought the film was good. The problems I had which prevent it from being extraordinary are the same problems I had with Ray (starring Jamie Foxx). I had already learned so much about the reality that the fiction was uninteresting. For me, the reality was always far more interesting than the fiction. Further, reality is far more messy and Hollywood’s attempt to clean it up into three acts is disturbing to me and somewhat of an insult to the plight of the real Stephen Hawking.

Additionally, Eddie Redmayne was fine as Stephen Hawking, although I wonder about how much acting talent is required to speak less lines and show less emotion as a film progresses. Not sure he should have won the Oscar, though my crying friend disagrees. Felicity Jones on the other hand was great, showing far more emotion. She portrayed perfectly a woman in love, in pain, and doing her best to persevere.

Score: 7/10 A good film that is over two hours long. The ideal length for me is an hour and a half, but this film deserves the extra run time.