The Last Jedi: Official Review and Opinions Thread ** SPOILERS ** — Page 83

Collipso said:

I think it depends on why they were cut.

Apparently the scene was cut because the movie was too long or it didn’t fit with the flow of the film, not because it didn’t fit Rian’s vision, especially because the scene was in the trailer, so it was part of the final product for some time.

Not according to the Art Of book. That says that it was cut when Rian Johnson et al realized it was going too far and it threw off the tone. It’s not that it was deemed non essential and taken out to cut down on running time. RJ decided it was wrong for the movie and removed it for that reason.

nhoj3 said:

By the time I got to see the movie and find this thread, it was already 76 pages long. I slogged through the first 40 before I started seeing the same posters cycling through the arguments again and again.

I can’t contribute anything that hasn’t already been said over and over other than:

a) I’ve only seen the film once (lucky to at all with a newborn),
b) I came out of the theatre conflicted about whether I actually enjoyed it,
c) I’ve thought about the film everyday since I saw it, and finally
d) I like it less and less each and every day.

Perhaps subsequent viewings may soften my stance, but as for now:

a) I won’t pay to see it again theatrically, and
b) Barring a major course correction it will be the last Star Wars movie I see theatrically.

I don’t disagree the political arc chosen for TFA and TLJ is a “realistic” or even “probable” one, and that the Rebel Alliance couldn’t establish a utopian government post ROTJ. Despite feeling like a rehash, I was willing to buy into that “reality” with TFA.

The travesty here is the character arc chosen for Luke. Despite all pro-TLJ lobbying, I simply cannot believe that this hero would have responded the way he does in TLJ.

I don’t want my heroes to be “fallen”. Some may applaud a “James Bond” movie where the protagonist is portrayed as a recovering alcoholic and sexual predator as “realistic” or “honest”, but that’s not why I would choose to watch a Bond movie. And that’s why TLJ will be the last Star Wars film that I see in theatres, the same way I stopped going to see “dark and gritty” DCEU movies after “Man of Steel”.

To be honest, I would rather they never had made the ST and I wish that Mark Hamill would have had the option of reading a script before being contractually obligated to make this film.

This reminds me of when me and my dad went to see Skyfall. I remember him saying this after the movie was over: “it’s a very well put together movie, but that’s not my James Bond”. He also said James Bond wouldn’t have gotten his ass kicked, or wouldn’t be in such a bad shape. James Bond is that guy who kills everyone and completes the impossible mission and his suit is still clean and his hair still on point afterwards. So for him, it didn’t feel like James Bond, none of the Daniel Craig movies did.

I think this is what a lot of people feel towards TLJ, more specifically to Luke.

Some things I will say in defense of this movie I otherwise hate:

I don’t think cut scenes should necessarily be used to evaluate films. The creative process involves following all kinds of ideas. Bad ones or ones that don’t work get cut out. Should we downvote ESB because George Lucas had them shoot a pointless 5 minute Wampa subplot? That said, there is more than enough evidence in the final cut of the movie itself to betray the filmmakers’ intentions- and it’s not good.

I also applaud them for making Rey not related to anyone else. The egalitarian ideal that anyone anywhere can become a Jedi, and that you don’t have to be related to a Skywalker or a Kenobi or some other past Jedi bloodline, is a noble one. So I would disagree with people who say it’s a flaw of the movie that Rey’s parents are ‘nobodies’.

All of that said, the criticisms of this film far far outweigh any deserved praise, but I did want to be fair in these two cases.

Hardcore Legend said:

Please explain the ‘dark place’ scene to me. I’ve only seen the film once and forgot about it until now.

What was the point of it? When Luke went in there in ESB, he learned that the ‘thing’ he took with him in the Cave was fear and anger. So, what he got was Darth Vader and that fear and anger would turn him into what he tried to destroy. What lesson was Rey learning from seeing herself in infinity?

The point was to rehash interesting scenes of the OT but this time make them meaningless.

Edit: just kidding, I actually think Rey wanted to see her parents and saw herself because the cave was trying to tell her that she knew who her parents are, and she knew it “doesn’t matter”. That’s what I think at least. I quite like the scene.

Hoping they put many deleted scenes and commentary on TLJ’s Blu-Ray and don’t do what they did with TFA and have to do a 2nd release that people had to double dip on.

Got TFA 3D Blu-Ray thing in so I can get the JJ’s commentary and some extra deleted scenes. Really terrible packaging. It’s that thin plastic glued on cardboard thing. Those types of packaging always fails as the plastic ends up coming unglued from the cardboard.

No he didn’t. Go read the post again.

Lol… thanks to most for understanding what I meant. I’ve not even brought my 4-year old to a theatre yet and won’t until he’s proven he can sit still without talking at all throughout.

joefavs said:

So even though he ultimately decided the scene didn’t work and changed the film accordingly, you’re still upset at him for having the idea in the first place? I’m sorry, but that’s pretty weak.

I think your powers of comprehension and deduction are pretty weak. It’s pretty obvious in both the initial post you replied to and the below one that he is not just talking about that one deleted scene.

DrDre said:
Yes, but it betrays RJ’s feelings and intentions going into this. So, he’s taken off some of the sharper edges, but he still turned the Jedi’s 1000 generation legacy of peace and justice, and the OT’s theme of hope and redemption into a legacy of failure for both the Jedi and Luke personally. It’s more revisionist than Lucas has ever done.

Valheru_84 said:

joefavs said:

So even though he ultimately decided the scene didn’t work and changed the film accordingly, you’re still upset at him for having the idea in the first place? I’m sorry, but that’s pretty weak.

I think your powers of comprehension and deduction are pretty weak. It’s pretty obvious in both the initial post you replied to and the below one that he is not just talking about that one deleted scene.

DrDre said:
Yes, but it betrays RJ’s feelings and intentions going into this. So, he’s taken off some of the sharper edges, but he still turned the Jedi’s 1000 generation legacy of peace and justice, and the OT’s theme of hope and redemption into a legacy of failure for both the Jedi and Luke personally. It’s more revisionist than Lucas has ever done.

I think your powers of being able to engage in a civil discussion without acting rude and immature are pretty weak.

Collipso said:

This reminds me of when me and my dad went to see Skyfall. I remember he said “it’s a very well put together movie, but that’s not my James Bond”. He said James Bond wouldn’t have his ass kicked, or wouldn’t be in such a bad shape. James Bond is that guy who kills everyone and completes the impossible mission and his suit is still clean afterwards. So for him, it didn’t feel like James Bond, none of the Daniel Craig movies did.

I think this is what a lot of people feel towards TLJ, more specifically to Luke.

I appreciate the response and the anecdote with your dad. Take your dad’s reaction and multiply it by a few thousand for “Luke” in TLJ.

With James Bond I can wrap my head around the tonal changes because the part is recast, demarcating each series of movies from the next. Daniel Craig was essentially a reboot, and I was able to get on board with it. The same can be said for Chris Pine, whom despite never knowing his father in a rebooted Star Trek timeline STILL managed to resemble Captain Kirk.

With Mark Hamill continuing on in the original part, this depiction of “Jake Skywalker” is too much of a departure for my belief system, at least not without a trilogy of movies taking us through that emotional journey, and even then I’m not sure how “enjoyable” it would be to watch your hero lose their idealism and abandon their friends and family to die alone.

luckydube56 said:

But for some, TLJ was a step too far. Rian Johnson, with the full authority of canon, told fans that Luke Skywalker is transformed into someone else. Let us not forget that Star Wars is a very special thing to its fans. For many its a part of their childhood. To see that Luke went from being the idealist to being nihilist is too much for a huge swath of the fanbase.

That sums it up for me. Thank you for articulating it so well.

I understood his point just fine, I just think bringing in extra-textual material like this is a bad move in general. Deleted scenes are like biblical apocrypha. It’s interesting stuff from a process standpoint, but it’s disingenuous to assign it any kind of substantial weight when you’re evaluating the finished film, especially when it was cut for the very reason you find it problematic in the first place. Star Wars aside, I take issue with that as a general principle of criticism.

chyron8472 said:

DominicCobb said:

Valheru_84 said:

joefavs said:

So even though he ultimately decided the scene didn’t work and changed the film accordingly, you’re still upset at him for having the idea in the first place? I’m sorry, but that’s pretty weak.

I think your powers of comprehension and deduction are pretty weak. It’s pretty obvious in both the initial post you replied to and the below one that he is not just talking about that one deleted scene.

I think your powers of being able to engage in a civil discussion without acting rude and immature are pretty weak.

I think that calling each other (or each other’s arguments) “weak” is not actually helping to further the discussion, but tantamount to name calling.

And what does this post do, exactly, that helps further the discussion?

DominicCobb said:

Valheru_84 said:

joefavs said:

So even though he ultimately decided the scene didn’t work and changed the film accordingly, you’re still upset at him for having the idea in the first place? I’m sorry, but that’s pretty weak.

I think your powers of comprehension and deduction are pretty weak. It’s pretty obvious in both the initial post you replied to and the below one that he is not just talking about that one deleted scene.

DrDre said:
Yes, but it betrays RJ’s feelings and intentions going into this. So, he’s taken off some of the sharper edges, but he still turned the Jedi’s 1000 generation legacy of peace and justice, and the OT’s theme of hope and redemption into a legacy of failure for both the Jedi and Luke personally. It’s more revisionist than Lucas has ever done.

I think your powers of being able to engage in a civil discussion without acting rude and immature are pretty weak.

Says the one that admits to being snarky whenever they reply.

I’m happy to maintain a civil discussion while it remains civil. I’m also not afraid to give back what I receive though if I think they’ve overstepped one to many times.

In this case it was not directed at me but I felt Joefavs’s reply was pretty disingenuous in the face of what DrDre’s post was actually saying and wanted to point this out. He’s free to correct himself if he wants.

.Val

Valheru_84 said:

DominicCobb said:

Valheru_84 said:

joefavs said:

So even though he ultimately decided the scene didn’t work and changed the film accordingly, you’re still upset at him for having the idea in the first place? I’m sorry, but that’s pretty weak.

I think your powers of comprehension and deduction are pretty weak. It’s pretty obvious in both the initial post you replied to and the below one that he is not just talking about that one deleted scene.

DrDre said:
Yes, but it betrays RJ’s feelings and intentions going into this. So, he’s taken off some of the sharper edges, but he still turned the Jedi’s 1000 generation legacy of peace and justice, and the OT’s theme of hope and redemption into a legacy of failure for both the Jedi and Luke personally. It’s more revisionist than Lucas has ever done.

I think your powers of being able to engage in a civil discussion without acting rude and immature are pretty weak.

Says the one that admits to being snarky whenever they reply.

This:

“I think your powers of comprehension and deduction are pretty weak.”

is not “being snarky.”

It’s just straight up hostile and nasty.