Sign In

The Last Jedi: Official Review and Opinions Thread ** SPOILERS ** — Page 136

Author
Time

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

There’s a difference between being a “legendary hero” in the context of our real life view of the OT as a story told on film and being a legendary hero in universe and all that comes with that meaning (though of course the two are metatextually related).

The ST doesn’t “retcon” the OT or make it wrong or whatever (ruin it, I guess?). The OT is still the OT and will always be the self contained story that it is and nothing that comes after can change that. But you admit Luke ended his hero’s journey there, so what is the ST supposed to do then? Just preserve Luke in a glass case of “perfect mythic hero”?

The ST does exactly what a sequel should do. In many ways this is very similar to the way Empire re-contextualizes the original Star Wars.

The original Star Wars is my all time favorite movie. But it’s not my favorite movie as the first film of a saga or as the fourth. It’s my favorite movie as a standalone, modern mythic adventure fairy tale. I can still watch it and love it in this way, even though Empire necessarily complicates the characters and the universe (and the myth) beyond what we see in the original. Empire can’t take anything away from Star Wars, it can only add to it. That’s what the ST does to the OT.

Yes, but as a critic I ask myself, did it have to completely break the myth of the OT in order to further the story? The ST is willing to deconstruct classic heroes, but it is inwilling to forgoe the underlying conflict of Empire versus rebels, and the OT aesthetic. Why were the classic heroes sacrificed in order to to be replaced by a new generation of heroes placed in an almost identical situation? That doesn’t feel like a natural story extension. It feels like a reboot. I think it’s fair to criticize those story choices.

It’s definitely fair to dislike the direction they’ve taken. I don’t agree with all aspects of it myself. But in general I definitely think this was not only the right way to go, but the necessary way to go.

I don’t know. I miss the days when there were just three movies, and 9 out of 10 people agreed, they were good. I would prefer Disney put their effort into creating original stories with original characters. Give me another Star Wars like experience, not another Star Wars experience. Been there, done that.

If nothing else, you have to admit that when all is said and done, this 9 episode Skywalker series, whatever it ends up looking like, has at least re-contextualized the saga in a way that’s easier to stomach than “The Tragedy of Darth Vader” that we got when the prequels were added to the mix.

I’m not sure he’ll admit that.

Author
Time

TV’s Frink said:

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

There’s a difference between being a “legendary hero” in the context of our real life view of the OT as a story told on film and being a legendary hero in universe and all that comes with that meaning (though of course the two are metatextually related).

The ST doesn’t “retcon” the OT or make it wrong or whatever (ruin it, I guess?). The OT is still the OT and will always be the self contained story that it is and nothing that comes after can change that. But you admit Luke ended his hero’s journey there, so what is the ST supposed to do then? Just preserve Luke in a glass case of “perfect mythic hero”?

The ST does exactly what a sequel should do. In many ways this is very similar to the way Empire re-contextualizes the original Star Wars.

The original Star Wars is my all time favorite movie. But it’s not my favorite movie as the first film of a saga or as the fourth. It’s my favorite movie as a standalone, modern mythic adventure fairy tale. I can still watch it and love it in this way, even though Empire necessarily complicates the characters and the universe (and the myth) beyond what we see in the original. Empire can’t take anything away from Star Wars, it can only add to it. That’s what the ST does to the OT.

Yes, but as a critic I ask myself, did it have to completely break the myth of the OT in order to further the story? The ST is willing to deconstruct classic heroes, but it is inwilling to forgoe the underlying conflict of Empire versus rebels, and the OT aesthetic. Why were the classic heroes sacrificed in order to to be replaced by a new generation of heroes placed in an almost identical situation? That doesn’t feel like a natural story extension. It feels like a reboot. I think it’s fair to criticize those story choices.

It’s definitely fair to dislike the direction they’ve taken. I don’t agree with all aspects of it myself. But in general I definitely think this was not only the right way to go, but the necessary way to go.

I don’t know. I miss the days when there were just three movies, and 9 out of 10 people agreed, they were good. I would prefer Disney put their effort into creating original stories with original characters. Give me another Star Wars like experience, not another Star Wars experience. Been there, done that.

If nothing else, you have to admit that when all is said and done, this 9 episode Skywalker series, whatever it ends up looking like, has at least re-contextualized the saga in a way that’s easier to stomach than “The Tragedy of Darth Vader” that we got when the prequels were added to the mix.

I’m not sure he’ll admit that.

I’m hoping my framing that post as a statement rather than a question will convince him to agree, regardless of his actual thoughts on the matter.

Author
Time

DominicCobb said:

TV’s Frink said:

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

There’s a difference between being a “legendary hero” in the context of our real life view of the OT as a story told on film and being a legendary hero in universe and all that comes with that meaning (though of course the two are metatextually related).

The ST doesn’t “retcon” the OT or make it wrong or whatever (ruin it, I guess?). The OT is still the OT and will always be the self contained story that it is and nothing that comes after can change that. But you admit Luke ended his hero’s journey there, so what is the ST supposed to do then? Just preserve Luke in a glass case of “perfect mythic hero”?

The ST does exactly what a sequel should do. In many ways this is very similar to the way Empire re-contextualizes the original Star Wars.

The original Star Wars is my all time favorite movie. But it’s not my favorite movie as the first film of a saga or as the fourth. It’s my favorite movie as a standalone, modern mythic adventure fairy tale. I can still watch it and love it in this way, even though Empire necessarily complicates the characters and the universe (and the myth) beyond what we see in the original. Empire can’t take anything away from Star Wars, it can only add to it. That’s what the ST does to the OT.

Yes, but as a critic I ask myself, did it have to completely break the myth of the OT in order to further the story? The ST is willing to deconstruct classic heroes, but it is inwilling to forgoe the underlying conflict of Empire versus rebels, and the OT aesthetic. Why were the classic heroes sacrificed in order to to be replaced by a new generation of heroes placed in an almost identical situation? That doesn’t feel like a natural story extension. It feels like a reboot. I think it’s fair to criticize those story choices.

It’s definitely fair to dislike the direction they’ve taken. I don’t agree with all aspects of it myself. But in general I definitely think this was not only the right way to go, but the necessary way to go.

I don’t know. I miss the days when there were just three movies, and 9 out of 10 people agreed, they were good. I would prefer Disney put their effort into creating original stories with original characters. Give me another Star Wars like experience, not another Star Wars experience. Been there, done that.

If nothing else, you have to admit that when all is said and done, this 9 episode Skywalker series, whatever it ends up looking like, has at least re-contextualized the saga in a way that’s easier to stomach than “The Tragedy of Darth Vader” that we got when the prequels were added to the mix.

I’m not sure he’ll admit that.

I’m hoping my framing that post as a statement rather than a question will convince him to agree, regardless of his actual thoughts on the matter.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

DrDre said:

Sorry, but this is just not true. The entire premise of TLJ is, that Luke has seen the suffering Kylo would cause in his vision. He knew exactly what might happen, but ultimately he did nothing to stop it.

Ah, but Luke never says what Kylo would do, only that he was already full of darkness and would do bad things. What he saw he does not elaborate on. For the purposes of what you are saying, we can assume he did not see the galaxy wide distress Kylo would cause.

So, realistic portrayal of toppling a despotic regime, realistic portrayal of a fallen hero, and a realistic portrayal of a character based on actual psychology and the given traits of the character (I checked up on that with some people who know these things), and you have a very realistic setting for the ST to take place in.

Again Star Wars is not realistic. The hero’s journey and myths are not realistic. They are not meant to be.

And yet GL used many things that lends realism to the stories. Not of course the technology or the force, but in the way the people act. He had just come off of American Graffiti and Star Wars has many of the same feelings to it that are grounded in reality. I think that is why even though the story and character archetypes are based on mythology, they feel relatable and grounded. You may have gone to class with Luke, Leia, or Han, had a teacher like Ben or Yoda, or a friend like Lando. While the story is based on mythology, the people come of as real in a fantastic setting.

No, it is not the story you wanted, but it is not flawed in the way you describe it. It is flawed from your view because you see Luke as a legendary hero and that the heroes of the OT should not have failed like they have in the years between the OT and ST.

Luke was a legendary hero, as follows from the hero’s journey. It’s not what I wanted, it is the way it was. That was allways the intent. His story was supposed to end in ROTJ. Of course then Lucas decided to sell his company, and there had to be a ST with the classic characters, and so they had to somehow extend the story. The ST has unrevalled the mythology of the OT in order to do this. Some will like this approach, and others won’t. I will allways prefer the myth, but I like the more realistic approach of the ST enough to want to see, how it plays out.

Luke went on a Hero’s journey, but that does not mean he has to stay a hero. When you think about it, TLJ repeats the offer of a Hero’s journey to Luke, and like the first time, he rejects it (“I can’t come with you to Alederaan. I have to get home.”). And like the first time, he gets a second chance and takes it. But his archetype in this film is not the hero, but the mentor. He rejects the role as mentor initially and then his mentor shows up and makes him see the error of his ways and then he accepts and sacrifices himself for the cause.

Luke is no longer the hero. He was not the hero when he took on students. Luke made a fantastic hero but thinks he failed being a mentor and is unwilling initially to do it again, especially when Rey turns out to be as powerful as Ben Solo was. We still don’t know if he actually changed his mind or decided to play the hero again one last time. Luke showing up as a force ghost in IX would mean he decided to become the mentor.

It all fits with the hero’s journey with our old hero becoming the new mentor. But rather than the type of wise sage we see in Kenobi, we get one beaten down and unwilling to teach and the few lessons he offers are basic and incomplete. So our Hero Luke has become Mentor Luke and in his first try at it he failed and now he fears creating another Kylo Ren more than what Kylo Ren might do. Typical rash Luke saw the darkness of Kylo but probably not all the ramifications of how he would help Snoke and the First Order.

Author
Time

Cobra Kai said:

DominicCobb said:

The ST doesn’t “retcon” the OT or make it wrong or whatever (ruin it, I guess?). The OT is still the OT and will always be the self contained story that it is and nothing that comes after can change that. But you admit Luke ended his hero’s journey there, so what is the ST supposed to do then? Just preserve Luke in a glass case of “perfect mythic hero”?

The ST does exactly what a sequel should do. In many ways this is very similar to the way Empire re-contextualizes the original Star Wars.

If the story must continue with all new characters, then Luke’s character should’ve just followed the natural progression that the OT set up and taken over the archetypal role as the wise mentor. That is exactly what they originally tried to do as Abrams and Michael Arndt have stated. According to Arndt though, they couldn’t figure out how to do this and not have Luke steal the show from the new “hero”:

“It just felt like every time Luke entered the movie, he just took it over. Suddenly you didn’t care about your main character anymore because, ‘Oh fuck, Luke Skywalker’s here. I want to see what he’s going to do’.” – Michael Arndt

I understand what he’s saying, but on a fundamental level I disagree with that. I don’t see any reason why Luke couldn’t have taken a “backseat” to Rey, during the course of the story. After all, they basically did the exact same thing with an equally popular character in Han Solo.

Because the back story is all about Luke’s failure.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Ryan said:

In ROTJ, I liked the Ewoks. Even remember playing with that Ewok village toy. But after the prequels came out, I learned that there were a sizable group of OT fans who hated the Ewoks. i.e. just there to sell toys, or were too cuddly or something. I can understand people not liking the Ewoks. I do hate the CGI with blinking eyes in the Blu-Rays though. Also wish the Ewoks battle scenes didn’t have that green screen look to them.

But at least the Ewoks weren’t nothing near like Jar Jar.

But I was wondering. Are there any here who hated the Ewoks, but love the Porgs?

I’m indifferent to Ewoks, neither love or hate them. They’re just there.
Well, except for Wicket. Wicket’s great.

I love the Porgs. (Up until recently I didn’t know what to call them. When I left the cinema I just called them those penguin/guinea-pig thingys). I thought they were cute and charming. That part where they’re burrowing inside the falcon’s wiring made me laugh a lot. I had a big smile whenever they were on screen.

On a different note, did that big Death Star battering ram thingy remind anybody about The Doomsday Machine from Star Trek??? Cos I got big Doomsday Machine vibes off of that thing.

<span style=“font-weight: bold;”>The Most Handsomest Guy on OT.com</span>

Author
Time

SilverWook said:

The original fairy tales are also a lot darker than the sanitized versions most people are familiar with today.

The change coincided with debates about what is the best way to educate and entertain children. It wasn’t always about sanitizing for its own sake, but rather not seeing the same need or value of dark moral lessons found in some old fairy tales. There was once a lively debate about the proper means of providing a moral education to children.

What the themes and choices of the ST tell us about our culture and our time is its own worthwhile topic.

The blue elephant in the room.

Author
Time

Disney also did a lot of sanitizing in adapting them. And now they are often better known than the source material. They did sometimes take some flak for changes to stories like Pinocchio. I saw a live action PBS production that was closer to the source material in the early 80’s(?) and was shocked at the differences. Jiminy cricket was not a nice helpful character at all. I think they stopped short of having him get squashed though. 😉

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

greenpenguino said:

Ryan said:

In ROTJ, I liked the Ewoks. Even remember playing with that Ewok village toy. But after the prequels came out, I learned that there were a sizable group of OT fans who hated the Ewoks. i.e. just there to sell toys, or were too cuddly or something. I can understand people not liking the Ewoks. I do hate the CGI with blinking eyes in the Blu-Rays though. Also wish the Ewoks battle scenes didn’t have that green screen look to them.

But at least the Ewoks weren’t nothing near like Jar Jar.

But I was wondering. Are there any here who hated the Ewoks, but love the Porgs?

I’m indifferent to Ewoks, neither love or hate them. They’re just there.
Well, except for Wicket. Wicket’s great.

I love the Porgs. (Up until recently I didn’t know what to call them. When I left the cinema I just called them those penguin/guinea-pig thingys). I thought they were cute and charming. That part where they’re burrowing inside the falcon’s wiring made me laugh a lot. I had a big smile whenever they were on screen.

On a different note, did that big Death Star battering ram thingy remind anybody about The Doomsday Machine from Star Trek??? Cos I got big Doomsday Machine vibes off of that thing.

In Frink’s version Commodore Decker tries to ram a shuttle craft right down that thing’s throat, only to be foiled by Rose. 😛

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

The original Star Wars felt relatable because Luke is a typical everyman and because it was filmed in a documentary type way, with very good world building. It has nothing to do with the fairy tale aspect of it, it’s purely product of the good movie that it is and the technical aspects cited above.

Author
Time

And to those comparing TLJ with TESB: I find it easier to relate to someone that has a lack of self trust and was lied to and has his world destroyed, than someone whose failure was almost murdering his family. I actually think it’s pretty hard to relate to the latter.

Author
Time

Saw it for the seventh time today. It gets better every time. Such a great movie with great characters and a great message. Love it!

Author
Time

Collipso said:

And to those comparing TLJ with TESB: I find it easier to relate to someone that has a lack of self trust and was lied to and has his world destroyed, than someone whose failure was almost murdering his family. I actually think it’s pretty hard to relate to the latter.

I don’t know, I almost murder my family every holiday.

Author
Time

TV’s Frink said:

Collipso said:

And to those comparing TLJ with TESB: I find it easier to relate to someone that has a lack of self trust and was lied to and has his world destroyed, than someone whose failure was almost murdering his family. I actually think it’s pretty hard to relate to the latter.

I don’t know, I almost murder my family every holiday.

I laughed out loud to this. So glad you’re back! 😄

Author
Time
 (Edited)

SilverWook said:

Chewie will discover the ones that stowed away on the Falcon reproduce at an alarming rate

That’s 'cause he fed them after midnight.

SilverWook said:

Well he did return in the OT, sort of. 😛

I don’t get it.

Ryan said:

In ROTJ, I liked the Ewoks. Even remember playing with that Ewok village toy. But after the prequels came out, I learned that there were a sizable group of OT fans who hated the Ewoks. i.e. just there to sell toys, or were too cuddly or something. I can understand people not liking the Ewoks. I do hate the CGI with blinking eyes in the Blu-Rays though. Also wish the Ewoks battle scenes didn’t have that green screen look to them.

But I was wondering. Are there any here who hated the Ewoks, but love the Porgs?

I thought most of those scenes were shot on location—I don’t recall a lot of green/blue-screen shots, but it’s been a while since I’ve seen it.

I loved ewoks and I liked the porgs. Ironically, the porgs were actually one of the few things I did like about TLJ, because when I saw photos of them, I thought I was going to hate them.

I call BS on most of the people who say they don’t like ewoks. I think they secretly love them. 😉 You can keep the blinking ones, though. I refuse to watch that crap. Ugh.

(All you young’uns know that Endor was originally supposed to be a Wookiee planet, and they just decided to cut the creatures down in size, right?)

Author
Time
 (Edited)

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

There’s a difference between being a “legendary hero” in the context of our real life view of the OT as a story told on film and being a legendary hero in universe and all that comes with that meaning (though of course the two are metatextually related).

The ST doesn’t “retcon” the OT or make it wrong or whatever (ruin it, I guess?). The OT is still the OT and will always be the self contained story that it is and nothing that comes after can change that. But you admit Luke ended his hero’s journey there, so what is the ST supposed to do then? Just preserve Luke in a glass case of “perfect mythic hero”?

The ST does exactly what a sequel should do. In many ways this is very similar to the way Empire re-contextualizes the original Star Wars.

The original Star Wars is my all time favorite movie. But it’s not my favorite movie as the first film of a saga or as the fourth. It’s my favorite movie as a standalone, modern mythic adventure fairy tale. I can still watch it and love it in this way, even though Empire necessarily complicates the characters and the universe (and the myth) beyond what we see in the original. Empire can’t take anything away from Star Wars, it can only add to it. That’s what the ST does to the OT.

Yes, but as a critic I ask myself, did it have to completely break the myth of the OT in order to further the story? The ST is willing to deconstruct classic heroes, but it is inwilling to forgoe the underlying conflict of Empire versus rebels, and the OT aesthetic. Why were the classic heroes sacrificed in order to to be replaced by a new generation of heroes placed in an almost identical situation? That doesn’t feel like a natural story extension. It feels like a reboot. I think it’s fair to criticize those story choices.

It’s definitely fair to dislike the direction they’ve taken. I don’t agree with all aspects of it myself. But in general I definitely think this was not only the right way to go, but the necessary way to go.

I don’t know. I miss the days when there were just three movies, and 9 out of 10 people agreed, they were good. I would prefer Disney put their effort into creating original stories with original characters. Give me another Star Wars like experience, not another Star Wars experience. Been there, done that.

If nothing else, you have to admit that when all is said and done, this 9 episode Skywalker series, whatever it ends up looking like, has at least re-contextualized the saga in a way that’s easier to stomach than “The Tragedy of Darth Vader” that we got when the prequels were added to the mix.

Yes, I can agree with that.

Edit: Gotcha, didn’t I, Frink!

Author
Time

TV’s Frink said:

Here come more “fire that Kennedy woman” posts on twitter and facebook…

Give Kennedy a promotion to oversee Disney Land.

Author
Time

Mielr said:

SilverWook said:

Chewie will discover the ones that stowed away on the Falcon reproduce at an alarming rate

That’s 'cause he fed them after midnight.

SilverWook said:

Well he did return in the OT, sort of. 😛

I don’t get it.

Those braided things hanging off Boba Fett’s shoulder? They’re Wookiee scalps! I thought everybody knew that.

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

[yotsuya said:]

Ah, but Luke never says what Kylo would do, only that he was already full of darkness and would do bad things. What he saw he does not elaborate on. For the purposes of what you are saying, we can assume he did not see the galaxy wide distress Kylo would cause.

Luke literally says, I saw the darkness and the suffering it would cause. He saw what Ben would become. He then lit his lightsaber in order to put a stop to it. Considering what he had seen in his youth, it must have been pretty terrible for him to freak out like that. So, yes we can assume he saw the galaxy wide distress Kylo would cause.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

SilverWook said:

Mielr said:

SilverWook said:

Chewie will discover the ones that stowed away on the Falcon reproduce at an alarming rate

SilverWook said:

Well he did return in the OT, sort of. 😛

I don’t get it.

Those braided things hanging off Boba Fett’s shoulder? They’re Wookiee scalps! I thought everybody knew that.

Yeah, I remember reading that someplace ages ago, but I didn’t notice them in the pic.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

TV’s Frink said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

There’s a difference between being a “legendary hero” in the context of our real life view of the OT as a story told on film and being a legendary hero in universe and all that comes with that meaning (though of course the two are metatextually related).

The ST doesn’t “retcon” the OT or make it wrong or whatever (ruin it, I guess?). The OT is still the OT and will always be the self contained story that it is and nothing that comes after can change that. But you admit Luke ended his hero’s journey there, so what is the ST supposed to do then? Just preserve Luke in a glass case of “perfect mythic hero”?

The ST does exactly what a sequel should do. In many ways this is very similar to the way Empire re-contextualizes the original Star Wars.

The original Star Wars is my all time favorite movie. But it’s not my favorite movie as the first film of a saga or as the fourth. It’s my favorite movie as a standalone, modern mythic adventure fairy tale. I can still watch it and love it in this way, even though Empire necessarily complicates the characters and the universe (and the myth) beyond what we see in the original. Empire can’t take anything away from Star Wars, it can only add to it. That’s what the ST does to the OT.

Yes, but as a critic I ask myself, did it have to completely break the myth of the OT in order to further the story? The ST is willing to deconstruct classic heroes, but it is inwilling to forgoe the underlying conflict of Empire versus rebels, and the OT aesthetic. Why were the classic heroes sacrificed in order to to be replaced by a new generation of heroes placed in an almost identical situation? That doesn’t feel like a natural story extension. It feels like a reboot. I think it’s fair to criticize those story choices.

It’s definitely fair to dislike the direction they’ve taken. I don’t agree with all aspects of it myself. But in general I definitely think this was not only the right way to go, but the necessary way to go.

I don’t know. I miss the days when there were just three movies, and 9 out of 10 people agreed, they were good.

I know I keep saying this, but that’s totally up to you. Just stop reading this thread!

I’m half-kidding, obviously you should continue to debate TLJ as long as you like, but the only one that can make the old days come back is you.

I’m not that powerful. I can’t make 9 out of 10 people think all the Star Wars films are good. I can’t even make myself think that. it’s just pathetic, really.

Author
Time

Mielr said:

SilverWook said:

Mielr said:

SilverWook said:

Chewie will discover the ones that stowed away on the Falcon reproduce at an alarming rate

SilverWook said:

Well he did return in the OT, sort of. 😛

I don’t get it.

Those braided things hanging off Boba Fett’s shoulder? They’re Wookiee scalps! I thought everybody knew that.

Yeah, I remember reading that someplace ages ago, but I didn’t notice them in the pic.

There was text pointing them out. 😛

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

DrDre said:

[yotsuya said:]

Ah, but Luke never says what Kylo would do, only that he was already full of darkness and would do bad things. What he saw he does not elaborate on. For the purposes of what you are saying, we can assume he did not see the galaxy wide distress Kylo would cause.

Luke literally says, I saw the darkness and the suffering it would cause. He saw what Ben would become. He then lit his lightsaber in order to put a stop to it. Considering what he had seen in his youth, it must have been pretty terrible for him to freak out like that. So, yes we can assume he saw the galaxy wide distress Kylo would cause.

Well, Yoda said the future is always in motion so I don’t think we can say with any certainty what Luke saw. His actions in that moment may have changed things and the intervening years would have had many events that may have changed things. His vision may have been worse or not as bad as what we see in the ST. His vision was almost certainly confined to Ben’s future, not the entire Galaxy’s as all the other visions seem to be.

Author
Time

Ryan said:

TV’s Frink said:

Here come more “fire that Kennedy woman” posts on twitter and facebook…

Give Kennedy a promotion to oversee Disney Land.

Either nonsensical statement or joke that fell completely flat.