I was speaking more towards the people who think the human body blows up like a water balloon in space.
In a movie universe where spaceships and explosions can be heard in a vacuum, and often defy physics, giant slugs live inside an apparently airless asteroid, people with magical powers formally fight with improbable laser swords when a blaster would end things quicker, (see Obi-Wan vs. Grevious) and overgrown teddy bears kicked Imperial ass, Leia in space was the one bridge too far? I give up.
It wasn’t the improbability of Leia flying—we all know that films rely on suspending disbelief, and it was required many times in the OT, but it was more the TONE that struck me as so odd. The tone of the flying Leia scene was totally off, totally un-Star Wars-like, and I think that’s why so many people were like “WTF”?!
I’ve heard a lot of complaints about this scene, but never this. I’m honestly curious why you think so, in my mind tonally it’s one of the scenes that feels the most like classic Star Wars.
There was nothing in the OT that was tonally like that scene at all. It made me wonder if RJ had ever seen any of the OT films.
The “use the Force, Luke” scene in ANH, Ben’s Firce ghost & Luke calling out to Leia with the Force in ESB, Luke making Threepio hover, there were plenty of unexpected Force-scenes that did things we hadn’t seen before. Why would TLJ be any different?
The only thing that I personally find to be “tonally different” is the fact that it’s a CG moment that would have been hard to pull off in the 80’s. That scene overall (Kylo/Leia moment included) actually really reminds me of the end of ESB.
That was a voice in Luke’s head, not someone floating in space, and it was done multiple times in the OT.
I was thinking more the tone of those scenes; the music, the sense of mystery, the unexpectednes of it all (first time watching at least), etc. Pluss, like I mentioned, Luke made Threepio hover in ROTJ. It’s simpler than flying Leia, but hardly a subtle moment.
And why does TLJ have to conform to what the OT films did. They never limited themselves to what the previous film(s) did, and neither did TLJ.
The OT were the establishing films that set all of the rules in a new, unfamiliar world. The world is no longer new and unfamiliar, hence the rules. If the rules aren’t followed, then they might as well just make them as Marvel films, which is the direction they’re headed anyway.
“Rules”? Why does the OT have to be the rules? The OT showed very little of the galaxy, and is set in a time with only a handful of Force-users. There was always the implication that the Force could do so much more, so why limit it to what little we saw in the OT?
And who makes the “rules” anyway? George Lucas? Seeing how many people dismiss the PT, there really isn’t much of an official baseline for what can or can’t happen in these movies.
Everything you mentioned was was done multiple times in the OT. It was established from the first film that Luke could hear Ben’s voice. It was established from the 2nd film that Jedis could use the force lift objects off the ground and see force ghosts. If they’d wanted to make someone fly in outer space “in the 80s” they could have. They were able to show Christopher Reeve fly as Superman, I don’t see why they couldn’t have done something similar.
Just because something like that never happened within the plot of three movies doesn’t mean it can’t happen within the world.
Plus, what about Palpatine’s Force-lightning. That was a pretty jarring addition to the lore that didn’t resemble anything seem before. At least “flying” Leia is consistent with levitation, telekinesis, etc.
I’m not saying anyone has to like this scene, or the film, or any of the new SW stuff, I just don’t get the point of the argument that these movies aren’t conforming to what we saw in the OT. We saw so little in the OT, it only makes sense for the new films to introduce weird new things, just like the OT did when they were new.