Jump to content

Rogue One Plot Revealed


Beniboybling

Recommended Posts

http://screenrant.com/star-wars-rogue-one-2016-trailer-script-images-casting/
Rogue One (as Tweeted by the official Star Wars account) has received the following synopsis: “A band of resistance fighters united for a daring mission to steal the Death Star plans”
I must admit, I had my reservations about the spin-offs but this sounds frikken awesome.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jedi will not feature in this movie. I think the words that the writer used were something along the lines of "God is not coming to save you.". They plan for this to be a war flick.

 

That said. It would not surprise me to see Vader though.

Edited by TheBBP
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jedi will not feature in this movie. I think the words that the writer used were something along the lines of "God is not coming to save you.". They plan for this to be a war flick.

 

That said. It would not surprise me to see Vader though.

 

Never mind the jedi's, question is - How many Bothans will be featured, allegedly many of them died to apprehend the Death star plans?!:rolleyes:

Edited by t-darko
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never mind the jedi's, question is - How many Bothans will be featured, allegedly many of them died to apprehend the Death star plans?!:rolleyes:

 

Wrong movie...this is about the 1st Death Star...not the 2nd, Bothans weren't apart of the 1st.

Edited by Wolfninjajedi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one has gotten to this topic yet, but . . .

 

I got a small fear or a kinda off vibe concerning the spinnoff movies; having seen 'concept' movies like 'Clash of the Titans' and 'Percy Jackson' and stuff, even JJ Star Trek remakes AND Marvels movies, they do follow a very, very ... very strict story buildup concept, hence the 'concept movie' expression. This concepts makes the above movies extreme predictable, and in some cases down right boring.

 

I hope not only for a good craftsmanship but for a story telling manner worthy of our Special Fan Objects . . .

Edited by t-darko
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is it named Rogue One, if Rogue Squadron was formed after BoY? It bothers me. Rogue Squadron was one of the best novel series in EU (imo). They cant just ruin it :(
Good question. Maybe it isn't about Rogue Squadron after all...

 

I mean, even by Canon, Rogue Squadron was formed post-ANH. In ANH Wedge and Luke are in Red Squadron not Rogue Squadron, which Wedge appears to be the leader of in ESB. There is no reason to assume that Wedge/Luke would suddenly leave Rogue Squadron to join Red Squadron for this mission, so they can't of existed.

 

I'm not sure how they are going to work that one out, seems strange to call it Rogue One if its not about Rogue Squadron. I also found this on Reddit, which speculates from what we've seen it might actually be about a ground unit.

Edited by Beniboybling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's just a callsign, why does it have to be about Rogue Squadron or having anything to do with it? Although maybe Rogue One gives inspiration to make Rogue Squadron later.

 

As Beni said, Rogue Squadron was formed post ANH, starting in ESB with Luke leading it. This is gonna take place during the time the Rebels acquired the 1st DS plans, so Rogue Squadron hasn't formed yet.

Edited by Wolfninjajedi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's just a callsign, why does it have to be about Rogue Squadron or having anything to do with it? Although maybe Rogue One gives inspiration to make Rogue Squadron later.

 

As Beni said, Rogue Squadron was formed post ANH, starting in ESB with Luke leading it. This is gonna take place during the time the Rebels acquired the 1st DS plans, so Rogue Squadron hasn't formed yet.

Because by evoking the callsign they are evoking the squadron to which it is associated. It seems bizarre to do so if they have no intention of using said squadron, and it begs the question of why they didn't title the movie differently.

 

If its not about Rogue Squadron a lot of people will be disappointed tbh, but that appears the way its heading.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because by evoking the callsign they are evoking the squadron to which it is associated. It seems bizarre to do so if they have no intention of using said squadron, and it begs the question of why they didn't title the movie differently.

 

If its not about Rogue Squadron a lot of people will be disappointed tbh, but that appears the way its heading.

 

 

Well considering the art for it and the fact, that it's taking place slight pre-ANH, people shouldn't be disappointed if they actually watched the movies and know Rogue Squadron hasn't formed yet. Luke not being around should be the biggest indicator as to why Rogue Squadron isn't gonna be in the movie.

 

This is what I take issues with, people say they watched the movies...when they really don't if they can't see the things right infront of them.

Edited by Wolfninjajedi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one has gotten to this topic yet, but . . .

 

I got a small fear or a kinda off vibe concerning the spinnoff movies; having seen 'concept' movies like 'Clash of the Titans' and 'Percy Jackson' and stuff, even JJ Star Trek remakes AND Marvels movies, they do follow a very, very ... very strict story buildup concept, hence the 'concept movie' expression. This concepts makes the above movies extreme predictable, and in some cases down right boring.

 

I hope not only for a good craftsmanship but for a story telling manner worthy of our Special Fan Objects . . .

 

Well I have good feelings about this one based on what they are doing film wise. Clearly they want this to be a "war movie" of sorts. The cinematographer they hired is Greig Fraser of Zero Dark 30 fame. Half of what makes a "concept" movie boring or not (even if predictable) is how the images on screen "grab you". I knew the entire plot of Zero Dark 30 before I saw the movie having read a lot about it all in advance. Fraser's cinematography though sucks you right in.

Edited by Ghisallo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because by evoking the callsign they are evoking the squadron to which it is associated. It seems bizarre to do so if they have no intention of using said squadron, and it begs the question of why they didn't title the movie differently.

 

If its not about Rogue Squadron a lot of people will be disappointed tbh, but that appears the way its heading.

 

Rogue Squadron was formed, as you said, after ANH. As this is before it would not make sense in the chronology. However would it not make sense that the Squadron born in the destruction of the Empire take it's name to honor the squad that made that operation successful?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

remember Rogue Squadron as we love and know it, is part of the EU. While I'd question their decision to change things up from the general idea of "fighter squadron" given it's very well known EU (it spawned three video games after all( it's possiable that the rogue call sign could end up meaning something else.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Rogue as a word, to just apply on Rogue Squadron, Squadron being an airborne unit and Rouge a noun. Would it be plausible and even credible that "Rogue One" is in reference to an special operation unit(deployable) and not that Squadron (Airborne) we all love . . .?! Edited by t-darko
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...