This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/13/movies/reviews-star-wars-rogue-one.html
The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| ‘Rogue One’ Reviews: Here’s What the Critics Say | ‘Rogue One’ Reviews: Here’s What the Critics Say |
| (about 20 hours later) | |
| Movie critics got their first look at “Rogue One: A Star Wars Story” on Monday night. As their reviews spread across the internet on Tuesday, it became clear there was little consensus about the film. The reviews were mostly positive, but there were several notable exceptions. | Movie critics got their first look at “Rogue One: A Star Wars Story” on Monday night. As their reviews spread across the internet on Tuesday, it became clear there was little consensus about the film. The reviews were mostly positive, but there were several notable exceptions. |
| Let’s start with, oh, to pick one at random, The New York Times. A.O. Scott called it a “thoroughly mediocre movie” with “a surprisingly hackish script.” | Let’s start with, oh, to pick one at random, The New York Times. A.O. Scott called it a “thoroughly mediocre movie” with “a surprisingly hackish script.” |
| The Miami Herald was also underwhelmed. Rene Rodriguez said the end was rousing, but the journey there was “about as exciting as a long drive down the Florida Turnpike.” | The Miami Herald was also underwhelmed. Rene Rodriguez said the end was rousing, but the journey there was “about as exciting as a long drive down the Florida Turnpike.” |
| In USA Today, Brian Truitt said the movie was undermined by its ties to the original trilogy, and it “misses a real chance to turn the familiar into something remarkable.” | In USA Today, Brian Truitt said the movie was undermined by its ties to the original trilogy, and it “misses a real chance to turn the familiar into something remarkable.” |
| Stephanie Zacharek wrote in Time that it was “almost pedantic in its inoffensiveness.” | |
| The New Yorker was perhaps the most harsh. Calling the film “lobotomized and depersonalized,” Richard Brody wondered: Is it time to abandon the “Star Wars” franchise? | |
| Several other critics were far more complimentary, and some even considered it among the best of the eight films in the “Star Wars” canon. | Several other critics were far more complimentary, and some even considered it among the best of the eight films in the “Star Wars” canon. |
| Entertainment Weekly’s Chris Nashawaty said the film “gets the obsessive need-to-know curiosity that the most rabid ‘Star Wars’ fans have always had.” | |
| Richard Lawson wrote in Vanity Fair that it is “a bracing and dizzying marvel, propulsively pitched and even, I dare say, moving.” | Richard Lawson wrote in Vanity Fair that it is “a bracing and dizzying marvel, propulsively pitched and even, I dare say, moving.” |
| Jen Yamato in The Daily Beast declared it the best “Star Wars” movie since “The Empire Strikes Back.” | |
| In Variety, Peter Debruge said it is “not the crass cash-grab skeptics may have feared.” | In Variety, Peter Debruge said it is “not the crass cash-grab skeptics may have feared.” |
| In Rolling Stone, Peter Travers said the spinoff “has the same primitive, lived-in, emotional, loopy, let’s-put-on-a-show spirit that made us fall in love with the original trilogy. | In Rolling Stone, Peter Travers said the spinoff “has the same primitive, lived-in, emotional, loopy, let’s-put-on-a-show spirit that made us fall in love with the original trilogy. |
| Bryan Bishop wrote in The Verge that several of the characters “feel thin and undefined” and struggled with the workload of building itself from the ground up. | Bryan Bishop wrote in The Verge that several of the characters “feel thin and undefined” and struggled with the workload of building itself from the ground up. |
| Peter Bradshaw wrote in The Guardian that it was an “exhilarating, good-natured and enjoyable adventure.” | Peter Bradshaw wrote in The Guardian that it was an “exhilarating, good-natured and enjoyable adventure.” |
| In The Chicago Tribune, Michael Phillips said it is “rough around the edges, hectic in its crosscutting but increasingly effective as kinetic cinema.” | In The Chicago Tribune, Michael Phillips said it is “rough around the edges, hectic in its crosscutting but increasingly effective as kinetic cinema.” |
| In Deadline, Pete Hammond called it “a rousing and wholly entertaining take that proves you don’t have to go along with the recipe in order to serve up a satisfying meal for fans and non-fans alike.” | In Deadline, Pete Hammond called it “a rousing and wholly entertaining take that proves you don’t have to go along with the recipe in order to serve up a satisfying meal for fans and non-fans alike.” |