MovieChat Forums > Star Wars: Episode VII - The Force Awakens (2015) Discussion > Am I the only person to have found it OV...

Am I the only person to have found it OVERRATED???

posted 7 years ago by Cornelia123 (784)
11 replies | jump to latest

SPOILERS

Seriously, I didn't enjoy it one bit, and yes, I did see it in the big screen when it came out.

I think the main problem I have with this film is that I just don't like the new actors as I didn't think they suited their character:

Daisy Riley - too teenagey and dull looking. They should have got an older actress to play her, or one with a more interesting face, ie, one that has 'personality' and 'charisma'...like Carrie Fisher had as Leia. She was only 20 or so when they filmed the first Star wars, but she had a maturity about her that she made her role believable. I just can't see Riley as a heroine at all. Totally miscast imo.

John Boyega - For the entire film he seemed to have the same face expression throughout. Very boring to watch. Totally miscast imo.

Adam Driver - just always seemed off-key to me. I normally like him in other films, but he just didn't suit this role.

Apart from that, I found myself rolling my eyes a lot while watching the film and was pretty bored most of the time.

I had gone to see if because lots of reviewers had given it a 10/10 rating, when to me it deserves no better than a 5 or 6 (if being kind).

Anyone else found the film overrated and disappointed?

[–] saviodium (500) 7 years ago

I agree with your criticism of the actors. Though that was not the big fail for me it added to the bad taste that was this movie.

I do not know if they are bad actors because I have not seen them in much else but they are really bad here though. However I think Adam Driver and Even John Boyega did a fine performance with what they were given. Honestly look at the dialogue and the actions the characters had to say and make. Would any actor be able to deliver? I see it more as a combination of subpar acting with terrible directing and a truly god awful script.

[–] Cornelia123 (784) 7 years ago

Oh I don't blame the actors, I blame whoever cast them, so yes I do think other actors who suited the roles would have been able to deliver. Those 3 did not suit AT ALL, and it beggars belief how they could even get past their first auditions.

Yeah, I agree that the directing and the script were rubbish too, but with the right charismatic actors, I don't think it would have been as noticeable though. lol

[–] saviodium (500) 7 years ago

Yeah I guess I can agree with that, they were not well suited for their roles.

I do think Adam Driver could have been good for his role. because there are some scenes where he is good. but he like most others had a lot of ad material he was working with.

[–] Cornelia123 (784) 7 years ago

He's used to 'indies' and was way over his head, imo, though like you said in some scenes he did ok. I can't imagine him being comfortable performing to a green screen though, and maybe that was also the problem. lol But yeah, the material was pretty weak.

[–] saviodium (500) 7 years ago

I might be biased toward him though, he is my brother from another mother after all. Though I am somewhat suspicious that his back injury before his deployment might have been malingering. I knew some other marines that played that shit. I never met Adam personally so I could not say for sure, but if he can still perform stunts like he does I can't see his injury being bad enough to get a medical discharge unless he pushed for it; meaning he did not want to deploy. but there may be other factors at play. Because I have done it I have 'inside' information on how the system works and that makes me jaded and suspicious.

[–] Cornelia123 (784) 7 years ago

Oh yeah, I forgot he had been a Navy Seal for a few years. Weird, I just can't picture him, you know, his personality. Regarding his medical discharge.....well what can I say, nothing would surprise me.

At least he has experience of the 'real' world, and not like other actors who went straight from drama school to acting and never worked in other 'real' jobs.

[–] saviodium (500) 7 years ago

Marine Corps infantry actually, not Seal. easy to get us confused I know. In my opinion Infantry Marines are more effective in combat situations. Seals are good for intel gathering and pinpoint targets. Marines are good for assault, "close with and destroying the enemy". Not to say an individual seal is not better trained than an individual Marine (they obviously are), but the objectives are different. but again I am biased because I was an infantry marine and worked with both scout snipers teams and trained with some navy seals, in infantry squad leaders course. I was not as impressed with them as I thought I would be, they seemed too self important and cocky to work well as a team but maybe they operate different when training with other seals than they did with a bunch of grunts.

[–] Cornelia123 (784) 7 years ago

Thanks, I didn't know the difference between Marine Corps infantry and Seals so that was very informative.

[–] saviodium (500) 7 years ago

No problem. the military machine is an incredible complex order. Each occupation has distinct missions and objectives. around 90% of that is support roles, that support the infantry. The infantry is the main effort. Meaning we are designed to engage and destroy the enemy and/or secure primary objectives. Like for example say the commanding general wants to take out an enemy compound. He might first send in a recon or seal team to get intel on it, map routes, get grid coordinates, etc so the command can come up with an effective assault plan. They might even designate the seal or sniper team to take out a specific target in the compound (unlikely though because it would put the compound on alert, unless the main effort was coming right behind the seal team). The infantry would be tasked with actually assaulting and taking the compound and killing or capturing all the enemy inside. Maybe the seal time would stay for support and provide cover fire or sniper cover along with artillery or air support if it is called for. But the infantry unit would be the one to actually secure the compound or town, if it was a bigger objective. It would be unwise to use a small team of seals for such a large task. Typically you always want 1 element size larger than your enemy number. if they have a squad size element you bring a platoon, if they have a platoon you bring a company and so on. Can't always be that way but that is the goal.

[–] saviodium (500) 7 years ago

sorry if I rambled a bit there. I have been out for almost 3 years now after serving for 8, 5 active 2 reserve and 1 inactive. I guess part of me still misses it.

[–] Cornelia123 (784) 7 years ago

No that was very interesting. It all makes sense now.

Oh I can understand you missing it. It's only natural.