1. nulligravida FTW says:

    But does Rise of Skywalker have anything other to recommend it than nostalgia? Last Jedi at least had some interesting new ideas to mull over, but it seems like the committee that made Rise couldn’t commit to any ideas to introduce for more than 2.34 seconds.
    Somebody called Forrest Gump “Boomer catnip” and that helped solidify why I don’t like that movie as much as the public at large seems to like that movie. That, I think, is the pitfall for nostalgia movies.
    But I also like me some trendy trash isekai stories. I guess it depends on how we rate the value of stories. Is longevity the only “true” factor? Probs not. Does the value it generate warrant the costs of a multi-billion-budget movie production? It does make me feel better about my digital light novels and internet fanfic. Much less waste involved.

  2. princesselwen says:

    I think the negative associations with nostalgia comes because of the trend in films these days to rely on it as a marketing tool. (Hence, all those remakes/reboots.) So when reviewers end up seeing the film and being disappointed by its lack of quality (whether they think it had a poor script, or bad acting, or any number of other flaws), they end up being cynical about the nostalgia that was used to promote it. Because to the reviewer, it can appear that they are being asked to overlook genuine flaws in storytelling for the sake of nostalgia, which can make the nostalgia itself seem cheap.

  3. Travis Perry says:

    Hey I really enjoyed your take on these terms. “Gritty reality” in particular has so often struck me as totally unrealistic. But I liked your thoughts on the others terms, too.

  4. The biggest problem with TROS is that it was “nostalgic” for the Original Trilogy in a way that made no sense for the Sequel Trilogy characters or in the context of the Star Wars saga as a whole. When Rey went to Tatooine (a planet she has no personal connection with, Luke himself couldn’t wait to get away from and where Leia’s only experience was being enslaved and treated as the plaything of a monstrous slug), to bury Luke and Leia’s sabers (at the ruined homestead where Luke’s adopted parents were brutally murdered by the Empire, no less), it made absolutely zero sense as something Rey would naturally think to do, let alone anything Luke or Leia would want. But the scene was meant to fill middle-aged OT fans with warm fuzzies anyway, simply because it hearkened back to the original STAR WARS. That’s the kind of “nostalgia” that comes at the expense of characterization, continuity, and good storytelling, and that’s why critics were using the term in a negative sense. But I’ve seen it used positively in reviews of other movies, so it really depends on the context.

What do you think?