I prefer option 1 to option 2, but at least with option 2 you could make the argument that at least then the trilogy would've consistently been one guy's vision and he wouldn't have wasted the 3rd movie pretty much just undoing the previous one that he disagreed with.
1 of 2 things should've happened:
or
Either probably would've resulted in something better than Rise of Skywalker.
I prefer option 1 to option 2, but at least with option 2 you could make the argument that at least then the trilogy would've consistently been one guy's vision and he wouldn't have wasted the 3rd movie pretty much just undoing the previous one that he disagreed with.
I just hate Abrams for what he did to Star Trek and hopes everything in his life turns to ashes in his hands.
At least Abrams left. Kurtzman still has his foul grasp on the franchise.
"What if the future was just capitalism but with Star Trek technology?" Fuck you CBS.
Just tack this on to any list, and the world will improve
deleted by creator
Focusing on the director is a mistake. The direction of Rise of Skywalker was mostly fine, but it was written by the guy who wrote Batman v Superman.
Lmao Terrio won an Oscar once for Argo and then he only wrote trash no one likes. Not sure when they're gonna get the message.
Lucas can't write dialogue or pace for shit, but he can write a coherent plot at least.
He doesn't have to write it. He didn't write Empire or Jedi
deleted by creator
better doesn't mean much there