Also I was real lucky getting a good seat. I got there 30 minutes early and there already was a huge line inside.
Wait - you didn’t have assigned seats on the ticket?
Novus_Opiate said:
He says the temptation came over him but for a brief moment. He wasn’t going to actually do it.Yeah I get that; what I don’t get is why it even came to that point to begin with? I mean we have to consider, it wasn’t simply a tempting thought, but those thoughts actually compelled Luke to pull out his lightsaber and ignite it! That’s so irrational of Luke. Sure, I bet killing Kylo is a thought would had crossed anyone’s mind if they learned Kylo’s taint of the darkside, but this is Luke here. I’d buy Luke was outside of Kylo’s hut, stewing back and forth of what to do and how to confront him; however again, it’s beyond me to think this temptation compelled Luke to pull out his lightsaber and stop himself from committing the murder at the last second.
dahmage said:
Luke’s final version and what is generally accepted as the true version has Luke go in to read kylo Ren’s mind. After seeing kylo rens darkness he has what he describes as a very brief moment of thinking that it would be better to kill him. And without thinking ignited his lightsaber and immediately, immediately regretted that decision.
No, again, it makes no sense. Luke in ROTJ was struggling between whether to kill Vader or redeem him, and yes, it came to that point where he was tempted to really finish Vader off, but he came to senses to not fall for the bait. So all these years later, that lesson he learned was for nothing…?I don’t get all these complaints that boil down to “Luke would never do that” (including disappearing in the first place) when we basically saw nothing that happened between the end of ROTJ and TFA/TLJ. People change, especially those that have suffered trauma. It’s the same complaint about Han that makes no sense either.
Sorry, but in movies you don’t change people’s characters off-screen unless it’s logical. Luke growing wiser and more confident between TESB and ROTJ is logical. Luke going from believing in his Nazi father to contemplating his nephews murder is not. Such a change of character needs to be explained more thoroughly. Given that so many don’t buy the way Luke behaves, I think it’s clear this part of the plot is underdeveloped.
I think his rash behavior in the OT and the fact that what he saw in Ben’s mind was traumatic would cause him to make the mistake of briefly “acting on instinct”. Doesn’t seem out of the realm of possibility.
I’m not saying it’s out of the realm of possibility. I’m saying it could have been developed better. Luke doesn’t just have the idea float around in his mind, he activates his lightsaber and contemplates killing a sleeping boy who hasn’t yet committed any crimes.
sorry, but “contemplates killing” is your own wording, and it is clear that you are over-inflating the problems in your descriptions of parts of the film because you didn’t like it. it wasn’t contemplation, it was an instinctual reaction that lasted a split second.
You’re talking semantics. He instinctively thought about killing a sleeping boy, his nephew, who hasn’t yet committed any crimes for a split second. The Luke we knew didn’t show those instincts.
I think this is the same Luke that has always looked forward or “looked to the horizons” instead of concentrating on what’s in front of him. Yoda called him out on it again. This is the same Luke that has not learned from his mistakes or teachings. If he was any different, I would have been upset.
I think the point of ROTJ was, that Luke was different, and had learned from his mistakes and teachings. He had also grown beyond his teachers, by seeing the good in Vader when his teachers could not.
Now part of that growth is reversed to make him more human and flawed. That brings new things to the table, but also alters the perspective on the character. Not everyone has to be on board for this. The Luke we meet in TLJ is very different from the one we left in ROTJ. It’s up to each of us to decide if TLJ sufficiently fills the gap, and if they like the moody and fearful Luke, who abandoned his friends and the universe.
When it came to Ben, Luke was scared sh*tless about what he would become. Because of this he made a fleeting decision that he literally backed away from a second later. Luke is not perfect and he’s not the savior of the universe. I felt this made his character more believable in the end. We all make mistakes and make rash decisions that affect our lives. Why should Luke be so different? And again, if hew was concentrating on where he was and what he was doing, he wouldn’t have looked forward, freaked out, and made such a costly mistake.
This is Luke and I loved it.
Like I said it is a different version of Luke as envisioned by RJ. It’s a more complex version, which is interesting, but I can’t blame anyone for missing the optimistic hero of the OT.
Well said. I love the civil conversations we can have about this. In the end, it’s a movie franchise and these are first world problems. I enjoy this fandom even when I may disagree with someone about certain aspects of the film. MTFBWY!
I don’t like TLJ at all, and it all has to do with the treatment of Luke. I think it was a complete betrayal of the character in two major ways: 1) They took a massive steamy dump on the last moments of Jedi when Luke throws down his lightsaber and refuses to kill his father. This Luke acknowledging giving into fear, hate, and anger will not allow him to defeat the darkside. What we see in the “Murderous Uncle” plot point is the complete opposite of this lesson. Not to mention in Jedi, his father is essentially the head of the SS, yet Luke refuses to give up on him and literally risks his life to do it. But his nephew he’s just gonna kill? 2) Luke the quitter. A core component in every movie is “I’m Luke Skywalker. I’m here to rescue you!” Leia from the deathstar, his friends from Vader, Vader from himself. I get that Abrams set Johnson up for this character betrayal first, but at the end of ever Luke scene I sat there thinking, “OK this is were we get Luke back for one last ride, like Han.” Instead we bitter bastard Luke who has given up on everything. Instead of “I’m here to rescue you!” we got “GET OFF MY LAWN!!”. I’ve read things like, “this makes the character more believable” or “it plays off earlier flaws”, but 1)NOTHING ABOUT STAR WARS IS BELIEVABLE. There’s no sound in space, light can’t make a saber, and yoda is a muppet (in TLJ a crappy looking one). The reason why star wars is for 12 year olds is its about imparting ideals and lessons in a mythic setting. Luke Skywalker is supposed to be larger than life, not a frail being. He is the idealization of the good guy, the boy scout archetype. Johnson seemed more interested in making yet another deconstructionist pile of junk than a true Star Wars movie.
That said I get why the critics liked it, the dialog is good, the main plot of Kylo and Rea was great, the Fin, Rose, Poe plot was middling, but the character development from FRP plot was good. I don’t get the hate for the jokes, to be honest they kept me watching after every crappy Luke scene. It’s a dark movie that needed gags, just like Empire did. But none of that good can overcome the bad of the betrayal of characterization of Luke Skywalker, the essence of what a Star Wars movie should be: a mythic morality tale wrapped in escapist fantasy.
It used to be Star Wars was the only franchise I would pay regular prices for, now it’s just like everything else. $5 Tuesday if that, more likely free from the library.
Honestly I think Hamill puts it in a much better way than any of us could.
Oh, i made the mistake and read the comments. Reading comments on youtube is never a good idea.
Also I was real lucky getting a good seat. I got there 30 minutes early and there already was a huge line inside.
Wait - you didn’t have assigned seats on the ticket?
No, my theater doesn’t do assigned seats. Which I like and don’t like. As I think I’m probably glad they don’t as many times I’ve had to move seats for various reasons. One time there was a really stinky person come in and sit by me. He stunk real bad. And so I moved to another seat. Sometimes I move because loud people are sitting close by, and so I’ll move to the other side of the theater. Sometimes I move because a family with a bunch of kids sit by me, and the kids won’t shut up.
On something else on topic. There have been times where I’ve left a show and got a refund because there was a person in the theater with a loud screaming baby. WTF? That’s happened many times. I just don’t get it. But there’s been many times in the past where I just couldn’t sit through an entire movie with a screaming baby and got a refund for a later showing. Though sometimes I’ve sit through a movie in the theater with a loud screaming baby. I just don’t get why people bring babies to the theater. I’ve complained a lot and told them to ban babies or something. I remember watching that 2008 Indiana Jones movie, and had to leave because of a screaming baby and come back for a later showing. It really sucks too because when I come back for the next showing. I have to re-buy my popcorn and drink. So a loud screaming baby can cost me $10 in food/drink.
I think another poster said it before, that TLJ is both good and bad. It gives us some bold choices both in story and character, that defy expectations. At the same time franchises thrive on expectations by giving us more of the same with some new stuff sprinkled in. In a lot of ways the sameness defines a franchise. Do we really want something new? Do we want to see Indiana Jones grow old? Do we want to see Superman no longer able to fly? Do we want to see Spider-Man deny that with great power comes great responsibility? These are traits, that define these characters. Should a new writer change Spider-Man’s character, or reveal previously unknown flaws, or should he create a new character, or write a new story? These questions don’t have a right or wrong answer. One thing is for sure Star Wars is evolving at a faster rate than ever before.
The best Spider-man movie to date features Peter losing his powers and giving up on being Spidey entirely. The (debatably) best Superman movie also features him losing his powers. I don’t see your point.
I think another poster said it before, that TLJ is both good and bad. It gives us some bold choices both in story and character, that defy expectations. At the same time franchises thrive on expectations by giving us more of the same with some new stuff sprinkled in. In a lot of ways the sameness defines a franchise. Do we really want something new? Do we want to see Indiana Jones grow old? Do we want to see Superman no longer able to fly? Do we want to see Spider-Man deny that with great power comes great responsibility? These are traits, that define these characters. Should a writer change Spider-Man’s character, or reveal previously unknown flaws, or should he create a new character, or a new story. These questions don’t have a right or wrong answer. One thing is for sure Star Wars is evolving at a faster rate than ever before.
I’m really wondering what’s going on with the Solo movie. As the word was the original director was making it too much like a comedy or something. And so they brought in Howard to re-shot a lot of the movie. I really hope they see the complaints of the comedy in TLJ and remove any of that in the Solo movie when they edit it and/or do pickup shots.
The best Spider-man movie to date features Peter losing his powers and giving up on being Spidey entirely. The (debatably) best Superman movie also features him losing his powers. I don’t see your point.
Yes, and he discovers he makes a mistake and get’s his powers back. That’s not the same as permanently altering a character.
In the comics Marvel altered Spider-Man history, by having him make a deal with the Devil, and exchange his marriage for his aunt’s life. This story was the biggest retcon in the comic’s history, and is widely considered one of the worst retcons in comic book history, because it made 20 years of comic history irrelevant to future content.
Change can be both good and bad depending on your point of view. It can even be both, which is probably a good description my perspective on TLJ.
I wonder what are y’all smoking seeing bold and expectation-defying choices in the story. I can only think of the Force projection thing (which I quite liked). Other than that it seems incredibly safe to me.
And why didn’t the one chick that Leia was having a lesbian relationship with tell Poe about their plan to evacuate everyone off of the ship? If they did that then Poe wouldn’t have sent Finn and fat asian chick to get captured and have their plan discovered.
‘and fat Asian chick’ has a name - if you can’t be bothered to learn what it is - then it could likely give the impression you didn’t think too much about your post there. Think twice about using that as a description for another person on this site too.
Same for the ‘one chick that Leia was having a lesbian relationship with’.
Okay? I was unaware that describing someone by their race, gender and body size is bad?
Post edited.
“couldn’t be bothered to learn what her name is”
I wish the movie bothered to make me care.
Rose’s defining characteristics - has a dead sister, doesn’t like animal abuse. Real memorable.
Luke astro-projects himself to Salt Lake Planet, gets shot at by gorilla walkers, has a non-lightsaber duel with Darth Millennial, then dies of a broken heart, inspiring broom boys throughout the galaxy to get creative with their sweeping. - DuracellEnergizer
The best Spider-man movie to date features Peter losing his powers and giving up on being Spidey entirely. The (debatably) best Superman movie also features him losing his powers. I don’t see your point.
Yes, and he discovers he makes a mistake and get’s his powers back. That’s not the same as permanently altering a character.
Isn’t that what Luke does though? Even though he failed, he decides to become the legend one last time (and that may be my favorite scene in movie history). So he, in a way, got his power back, meaning the change wasn’t permanent.
And why didn’t the one chick that Leia was having a lesbian relationship with tell Poe about their plan to evacuate everyone off of the ship? If they did that then Poe wouldn’t have sent Finn and fat asian chick to get captured and have their plan discovered.
‘and fat Asian chick’ has a name - if you can’t be bothered to learn what it is - then it could likely give the impression you didn’t think too much about your post there. Think twice about using that as a description for another person on this site too.
Same for the ‘one chick that Leia was having a lesbian relationship with’.
Okay? I was unaware that describing someone by their race, gender and body size is bad?
Ok cool. So you are terrible on purpose.
I wonder what are y’all smoking seeing bold and expectation-defying choices in the story. I can only think of the Force projection thing (which I quite liked). Other than that it seems incredibly safe to me.
Um, killing Snoke halfway through the trilogy is safe?
Ok.
I still think that if Rey’s character wasn’t as unrealistic as it is both TFA and TLJ would have been amazing.
My biggest gripe with the Sequel Trilogy is that each film (so far) has ended with a variation of the Force Theme. For The Force Awakens, it was fitting, and seemed to work with The Last Jedi as well, but I’d prefer not to hear the same theme over and over again at the end of every film. Even Rogue One used it!
Episodes I-VI all had different ending pieces, why can’t this be the same for the Sequel Trilogy?
“That said, there is nothing wrong with mocking prequel lovers and belittling their bad taste.” - Alderaan, 2017
MGGA (Make GOUT Great Again):
http://originaltrilogy.com/topic/Return-of-the-GOUT-Preservation-and-Restoration/id/55707
I wonder what are y’all smoking seeing bold and expectation-defying choices in the story. I can only think of the Force projection thing (which I quite liked). Other than that it seems incredibly safe to me.
Um, killing Snoke halfway through the trilogy is safe?
Ok.
Lifting a scene from the end of ROTJ and putting it in the middle of TESB sure is strange, just not my idea of brave. And not my idea of clever either, since Snoke was obviously set up to actually matter in the overall story.
Also I was real lucky getting a good seat. I got there 30 minutes early and there already was a huge line inside.
Wait - you didn’t have assigned seats on the ticket?
Where do you live that movie theaters have assigned seating? The Navy Pier IMAX in Chicago is the only one I’ve ever been to with assigned seating…
Also I was real lucky getting a good seat. I got there 30 minutes early and there already was a huge line inside.
Wait - you didn’t have assigned seats on the ticket?
Where do you live that movie theaters have assigned seating? The Navy Pier IMAX in Chicago is the only one I’ve ever been to with assigned seating…
Every movie theater I’ve ever been to had assigned seats, except for one in Evanston that I don’t remember the name. It was really shocking to me that it didn’t, but apparently it’s more common for theaters not to have assigned seats than to have here in the US, from what I’ve heard so far. Is that true?
From what I’ve seen assigned seating never used to exist, but has become much more common recently.
The best Spider-man movie to date features Peter losing his powers and giving up on being Spidey entirely. The (debatably) best Superman movie also features him losing his powers. I don’t see your point.
Yes, and he discovers he makes a mistake and get’s his powers back. That’s not the same as permanently altering a character.
Isn’t that what Luke does though? Even though he failed, he decides to become the legend one last time (and that may be my favorite scene in movie history). So he, in a way, got his power back, meaning the change wasn’t permanent.
Yes, but the Spider-Man film took much more time to develop the story and explain how Peter Parker came to his decision to give up on his life as a superhero. It wasn’t just a short flashback scene with a few lines of dialogue. I can sort of fill in the gaps, but would have liked to see more of Luke and Kylo before his turn and what motivations Snoke provided for Kylo to allow the darkness into his heart.
The best Spider-man movie to date features Peter losing his powers and giving up on being Spidey entirely. The (debatably) best Superman movie also features him losing his powers. I don’t see your point.
Yes, and he discovers he makes a mistake and get’s his powers back. That’s not the same as permanently altering a character.
Isn’t that what Luke does though? Even though he failed, he decides to become the legend one last time (and that may be my favorite scene in movie history). So he, in a way, got his power back, meaning the change wasn’t permanent.
Yes, but the Spider-Man film took much more time to develop the story and explain how Peter Parker came to his decision to give up on his life as a superhero. It wasn’t just a short flashback scene with a few lines of dialogue.
Yeah I agree.
And why didn’t the one chick that Leia was having a lesbian relationship with tell Poe about their plan to evacuate everyone off of the ship? If they did that then Poe wouldn’t have sent Finn and fat asian chick to get captured and have their plan discovered.
‘and fat Asian chick’ has a name - if you can’t be bothered to learn what it is - then it could likely give the impression you didn’t think too much about your post there. Think twice about using that as a description for another person on this site too.
Same for the ‘one chick that Leia was having a lesbian relationship with’.
Okay? I was unaware that describing someone by their race, gender and body size is bad?
Ok cool. So you are terrible on purpose.
I’m not discriminating on that basis nor was I using the description in a derogatory manor, It was a general description.
Edit: When the police ask for a description of a person, is it racist/sexist to say their race, gender, how tall they were, what they were wearing? I’m sorry the character had little impact on me and I couldn’t remember her name.
Luke astro-projects himself to Salt Lake Planet, gets shot at by gorilla walkers, has a non-lightsaber duel with Darth Millennial, then dies of a broken heart, inspiring broom boys throughout the galaxy to get creative with their sweeping. - DuracellEnergizer
Watched it again last night
I now fucking love this film!!
Quite the change of heart. Can you explain why?
Novus_Opiate said:
He says the temptation came over him but for a brief moment. He wasn’t going to actually do it.Yeah I get that; what I don’t get is why it even came to that point to begin with? I mean we have to consider, it wasn’t simply a tempting thought, but those thoughts actually compelled Luke to pull out his lightsaber and ignite it! That’s so irrational of Luke. Sure, I bet killing Kylo is a thought would had crossed anyone’s mind if they learned Kylo’s taint of the darkside, but this is Luke here. I’d buy Luke was outside of Kylo’s hut, stewing back and forth of what to do and how to confront him; however again, it’s beyond me to think this temptation compelled Luke to pull out his lightsaber and stop himself from committing the murder at the last second.
dahmage said:
Luke’s final version and what is generally accepted as the true version has Luke go in to read kylo Ren’s mind. After seeing kylo rens darkness he has what he describes as a very brief moment of thinking that it would be better to kill him. And without thinking ignited his lightsaber and immediately, immediately regretted that decision.
No, again, it makes no sense. Luke in ROTJ was struggling between whether to kill Vader or redeem him, and yes, it came to that point where he was tempted to really finish Vader off, but he came to senses to not fall for the bait. So all these years later, that lesson he learned was for nothing…?I don’t get all these complaints that boil down to “Luke would never do that” (including disappearing in the first place) when we basically saw nothing that happened between the end of ROTJ and TFA/TLJ. People change, especially those that have suffered trauma. It’s the same complaint about Han that makes no sense either.
Sorry, but in movies you don’t change people’s characters off-screen unless it’s logical. Luke growing wiser and more confident between TESB and ROTJ is logical. Luke going from believing in his Nazi father to contemplating his nephews murder is not. Such a change of character needs to be explained more thoroughly. Given that so many don’t buy the way Luke behaves, I think it’s clear this part of the plot is underdeveloped.
I think his rash behavior in the OT and the fact that what he saw in Ben’s mind was traumatic would cause him to make the mistake of briefly “acting on instinct”. Doesn’t seem out of the realm of possibility.
I’m not saying it’s out of the realm of possibility. I’m saying it could have been developed better. Luke doesn’t just have the idea float around in his mind, he activates his lightsaber and contemplates killing a sleeping boy who hasn’t yet committed any crimes.
sorry, but “contemplates killing” is your own wording, and it is clear that you are over-inflating the problems in your descriptions of parts of the film because you didn’t like it. it wasn’t contemplation, it was an instinctual reaction that lasted a split second.
You’re talking semantics. He instinctively thought about killing a sleeping boy, his nephew, who hasn’t yet committed any crimes for a split second. The Luke we knew didn’t show those instincts.
I think this is the same Luke that has always looked forward or “looked to the horizons” instead of concentrating on what’s in front of him. Yoda called him out on it again. This is the same Luke that has not learned from his mistakes or teachings. If he was any different, I would have been upset.
I think the point of ROTJ was, that Luke was different, and had learned from his mistakes and teachings. He had also grown beyond his teachers, by seeing the good in Vader when his teachers could not.
Now part of that growth is reversed to make him more human and flawed. That brings new things to the table, but also alters the perspective on the character. Not everyone has to be on board for this. The Luke we meet in TLJ is very different from the one we left in ROTJ. It’s up to each of us to decide if TLJ sufficiently fills the gap, and if they like the moody and fearful Luke, who abandoned his friends and the universe.
When it came to Ben, Luke was scared sh*tless about what he would become. Because of this he made a fleeting decision that he literally backed away from a second later. Luke is not perfect and he’s not the savior of the universe. I felt this made his character more believable in the end. We all make mistakes and make rash decisions that affect our lives. Why should Luke be so different? And again, if hew was concentrating on where he was and what he was doing, he wouldn’t have looked forward, freaked out, and made such a costly mistake.
This is Luke and I loved it.
Like I said it is a different version of Luke as envisioned by RJ. It’s a more complex version, which is interesting, but I can’t blame anyone for missing the optimistic hero of the OT.
Well said. I love the civil conversations we can have about this. In the end, it’s a movie franchise and these are first world problems. I enjoy this fandom even when I may disagree with someone about certain aspects of the film. MTFBWY!
I love this as well! MTFBWYT!