Sign In

The Last Jedi: Official Review and Opinions Thread ** SPOILERS ** — Page 42

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Just got back from seeing it for the second time.

The good stuff is still good. Actually better. All the Luke/Rey/Kylo stuff I’m on board with. In places it’s a deep film with complex themes and I like it. I really like the re-democratisation of the Force and the ‘let the past go’ message.

Then there’s the bad stuff that’s still bad on second viewing. The whole subplot, from the moment Finn wakes up in that stupid water/Bacta suit, to his meeting with Rose (she still sucks) to the lame phone call with Maz (how does Poe know her?) to the Monte Carlo planet, to Benicio Del Toro in his worst role ever, to the slave kids (Kids in Star Wars never works out well it seems), to the CGI donkeys, to the failed (and pointless) plan to sneak onto Snoke’s ship, to the unnecessary retread of old ground with Phasma… all that is still just bad bad bad.

And I still say there’s no excuse for poor plots, sub-par expositionary dialogue and jokes that feel like they’d be more suited to a Guardians of the Galaxy movie.

HOWEVER! Some of the dodgy bits that I didn’t like on first viewing I’m now ok with. For example, Yoda was much better now I didn’t have the surprise of seeing him distracting me from what he was actually saying. I like what he tells Luke and I can even forgive the page-turner gag because although it still feels a bit out of place, it’s not out of character for Yoda to drop a little gag here and there, and it fits into the lesson he’s giving Luke (i.e it has a point and isn’t just a cheesy millennial gag for the sake of it).

The Laura Dern/Poe Dameron mutiny plot could still do with a rewrite (IMO) but I can live with it. At least there’s a point to it and Poe has an arc (unlike Finn’s story).

I’ve booked to see it again after Christmas so maybe third time’s a charm? (I can’t see myself ever liking Rose or Canto Bight though to be honest).

War does not make one great.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

TV’s Frink said:

If for no other reason than the title of the article.

https://theconcourse.deadspin.com/a-list-of-some-of-the-times-the-last-jedi-told-the-olde-1821396631

A List Of Some Of The Times The Last Jedi Told The Older Star Wars Movies To Eat Shit

But also because it’s a good list…and it’s a good (partial) list of things I liked about TLJ.

I guess this is one of those unbalanced articles from the other side. 😃

Good title though, but it does beg the question, if TLJ went out of it’s way to tell the older Star Wars movie to eat shit, doesn’t this imply, it didn’t tell it’s own story, but in stead was guided by the older Star Wars movies, which dictated what it shouldn’t do at almost every turn?

If TLJ is to the other Star Wars films like a negative is to a photo, doesn’t it just invert the same information, and therefore add nothing new of it’s own? 😉

Author
Time

DominicCobb said:

pleasehello said:

DominicCobb said:

Mithrandir said:

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2017/12/star-wars-last-jedi-laura-dern-admiral-holdo-listen-to-women?intcid=inline_amp

Looks like there actually was an agenda in all this ST.

Sadly fairy tales all root in the old world.

Please fire Kennedy

Please fire yourself (from being a poster in this thread).

Someone’s getting a little defensive.

I reckon he’s allowed to be concerned about modern day politics infiltrating Star Wars.

Right, how dare they give women equal footing.

Look, I don’t know how you personally treat women, but as far as myself, and I can only speak for myself, women do have equal footing by default. Any attempt to proactively give it to them feels and seems an intrusion in a fairy tale to me.

I have no complaints whatsoever with Rey being a female protagonist. In fact in seven it just felt right, it felt…casual, which is the best way it is supposed to feel. Normal.

But when you have 3 films released, all with female protagonists and even a last one where you have Rey, Leia, and the admiral character, which all happen to be right where men are wrong, and the underlying tone of the movie is “get off the old world” it just ceases to be “good” femminism and starts to become a misandric manifesto. Male torso is “sexually agressive” to Rey, etc.

In anycase, reacting to a film I don’t like based on its contents and complaining about the creative direction they are heading, which actually I hope we pretty much agree is diametrically opposite in terms of values to what Lucas intended to do back then, is one thing. Reacting to a member on this very community by saying things you don’t like feels like another.

So, in best faith and being completely honest, don’t you fire yourself from this thread. Neither will I. Learn to live with those that challenge your in your own neighbourhood.

Author
Time

Mithrandir said:

DominicCobb said:

pleasehello said:

DominicCobb said:

Mithrandir said:

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2017/12/star-wars-last-jedi-laura-dern-admiral-holdo-listen-to-women?intcid=inline_amp

Looks like there actually was an agenda in all this ST.

Sadly fairy tales all root in the old world.

Please fire Kennedy

Please fire yourself (from being a poster in this thread).

Someone’s getting a little defensive.

I reckon he’s allowed to be concerned about modern day politics infiltrating Star Wars.

Right, how dare they give women equal footing.

Look, I don’t know how you personally treat women, but as far as myself, and I can only speak for myself, women do have equal footing by default. Any attempt to proactively give it to them feels and seems an intrusion in a fairy tale to me.

I have no complaints whatsoever with Rey being a female protagonist. In fact in seven it just felt right, it felt…casual, which is the best way it is supposed to feel. Normal.

But when you have 3 films released, all with female protagonists and even a last one where you have Rey, Leia, and the admiral character, which all happen to be right where men are wrong, and the underlying tone of the movie is “get off the old world” it just ceases to be “good” femminism and starts to become a misandric manifesto. Male torso is “sexually agressive” to Rey, etc.

In anycase, reacting to a film I don’t like based on its contents and complaining about the creative direction they are heading, which actually I hope we pretty much agree is diametrically opposite in terms of values to what Lucas intended to do back then, is one thing. Reacting to a member on this very community by saying things you don’t like feels like another.

So, in best faith and being completely honest, don’t you fire yourself from this thread. Neither will I. Learn to live with those that challenge your in your own neighbourhood.

+1
Well said. This isn’t the sort of thing that contributes in a meaningful way to my problems with the film, but I think it’s a fair point.

Well done. I will disengage self-destruct initiative.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Mithrandir said:

DominicCobb said:

pleasehello said:

DominicCobb said:

Mithrandir said:

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2017/12/star-wars-last-jedi-laura-dern-admiral-holdo-listen-to-women?intcid=inline_amp

Looks like there actually was an agenda in all this ST.

Sadly fairy tales all root in the old world.

Please fire Kennedy

Please fire yourself (from being a poster in this thread).

Someone’s getting a little defensive.

I reckon he’s allowed to be concerned about modern day politics infiltrating Star Wars.

Right, how dare they give women equal footing.

Look, I don’t know how you personally treat women, but as far as myself, and I can only speak for myself, women do have equal footing by default.

Your treatment of women is irrelevant to women’s equal footing in general, which is quite unequal in many places and ways. Including Hollywood, dramatically so.

Having two main female protagonists in Star Wars (Rey and Jynn) plus another as second-in-command (Laura Dern) is a ridiculous thing to complain about.

If it makes some of you feel better, Adam Driver got higher billing than Daisy Ridley, so at least that Hollywood power structure is still intact.

Mithrandir said:

Male torso is “sexually agressive” to Rey, etc.

[facepalm]

Author
Time

I personally feel unaffected by any supposed “intrusion” of “feminism” in these films so far. If there’s any intrusion of forced messages, it was that preachy “save the animals, and fuck the system!” in the most preachy way possible in TLJ.

It’s so damn redundant to have the second part to that message/theme being dropped in the movie too, given we already have the First Order and the Resistance dynamic going on.

The Rise of Failures

Author
Time

Hal 9000 said:

joefavs said:

Hal 9000 said:

If there were no shot of the books at the end of the film, is Yoda a book burner?

But there is a shot of the books at the end! “If that scene wasn’t there,” “if you stop watching before that scene,” “if you don’t catch the books,” . . . at a certain point you need to stop bringing up hypotheticals. It’s in the movie. “What if it wasn’t” isn’t a terribly useful question. You could say that about anything else in any movie and completely change whatever you want.

I’m just trying to understand the scene with Yoda. I need to understand what the scene is about and what I means to a hypothetical first time viewer who is really keyed in and picks up everything there is to pick up before advancing toward the end of the film. My suspicion is still that the shot at the end is supposed to be a retroactive fakeout that radically alters that part of the narrative in a way that I find very annoying.

It seems that the Yoda scene very clearly portrays Luke and Yoda as coming together to smile on the drestruction of the Jedi texts, with hope that Rey will be fine without them.

I feel like I already explained this.

You, like Luke, are ascribing too much importance to a bunch of old books. They’re still useful of course (that’s why Rey takes them), but it’s the putting too much stock in them that’s the issue.

Author
Time

TavorX said:

But perhaps one could think that…

I think it gets to the point where you’re defending bad writing once you start a sentence with “But perhaps one could think that…”

Author
Time

Collipso said:

TavorX said:

But perhaps one could think that…

I think it gets to the point where you’re defending bad writing once you start a sentence with “But perhaps one could think that…”

“YOU’RE TEARING ME APART LISA DISNEY!”

The Rise of Failures

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Mithrandir said:

DominicCobb said:

pleasehello said:

DominicCobb said:

Mithrandir said:

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2017/12/star-wars-last-jedi-laura-dern-admiral-holdo-listen-to-women?intcid=inline_amp

Looks like there actually was an agenda in all this ST.

Sadly fairy tales all root in the old world.

Please fire Kennedy

Please fire yourself (from being a poster in this thread).

Someone’s getting a little defensive.

I reckon he’s allowed to be concerned about modern day politics infiltrating Star Wars.

Right, how dare they give women equal footing.

Look, I don’t know how you personally treat women, but as far as myself, and I can only speak for myself, women do have equal footing by default. Any attempt to proactively give it to them feels and seems an intrusion in a fairy tale to me.

I regret to inform you that I live in the real world, and how I treat women does not necessarily go for the rest of my gender.

To take everything in Star Wars as a fairy tale is to ignore all the other (more modern) influences at play.

I have no complaints whatsoever with Rey being a female protagonist. In fact in seven it just felt right, it felt…casual, which is the best way it is supposed to feel. Normal.

But when you have 3 films released, all with female protagonists and even a last one where you have Rey, Leia, and the admiral character, which all happen to be right where men are wrong, and the underlying tone of the movie is “get off the old world” it just ceases to be “good” femminism and starts to become a misandric manifesto. Male torso is “sexually agressive” to Rey, etc.

In anycase, reacting to a film I don’t like based on its contents and complaining about the creative direction they are heading, which actually I hope we pretty much agree is diametrically opposite in terms of values to what Lucas intended to do back then, is one thing. Reacting to a member on this very community by saying things you don’t like feels like another.

So, in best faith and being completely honest, don’t you fire yourself from this thread. Neither will I. Learn to live with those that challenge your in your own neighbourhood.

I’m sorry I don’t take kindly to secret misogynists trying to promote an agenda (by claiming that Star Wars and LFL is when they’re really just reflecting the real world). Maybe I’ll try not to be so harsh but you can’t expect me to rationally agree with backwards bullshit. So I’ll guess I’ll just step back from it.

Author
Time

DrDre said:

I think it’s fair to ask the question, why the ST is following this trajectory? Is it really trying to tell it’s own story, or is it just trying to redo the OT in some form, but pretending that it isn’t by avoiding the same twists. A lot of the twists and turns, while different from the OT, seem to derive from taking an OT story thread, and doing the opposite. It follows the what if scenario:

What if Vader couldn’t be redeemed?

What if Vader overthrew the Emperor?

What if Yoda refused to train Luke?

Many of the beats of the story of TLJ are very similar to TESB with the ROTJ throne room sequence thrown into the mix. Bad guys attack good guy base. Bad guys chase good guys (albeit a lot slower). Young hero goes to backwater planet to be trained by Jedi Master. Young hero defies her teacher, by going after the bad guy. Rogue betrays good guys. Bad guy fails to turn the hero to the dark side. Heroes end up in a tight spot.

Of course by taking the what if scenario, the ST is abandoning several of the underlying themes of the OT that drive the OT’s twists. Which begs the question, is Star Wars more defined by it’s themes, or by it’s story beats? My view is, that it is the former, and a new Star Wars trilogy that is based on the same themes, but has different story beats is better than a Star Wars trilogy, that is based on different themes, but largely follows the same story beats.

Some good points. Both films feel like they’re struggling with what it means to be Star Wars. TLJ is angsty about it. Both are excessively self-referential. It is really hard to take someone else’s creative invention and be faithful to developing it. I think they have fallen into a trap, as the late Admiral Ackbar would observe. Maybe it is the pressures of fan and corporate expectations or simply the difficulty of adopting the work as their own. Where JJ tried too little, Rian tried too hard. If it were all in the service of story there would be no problem. But much was done in the service of struggling with being Star Wars.

The blue elephant in the room.

Author
Time

midichlorians out, estrogen is the new Force

Assimilate THIS!

Author
Time
 (Edited)

DrDre said:

Then there’s the fact that this entire arc aims to push Rey to the foreground as the next last Jedi, Luke 2.0, new and improved. However, does she deserve this mantle? Luke goes through hell and back before becoming a Jedi, making mistakes, suffering loss of life and limbs. Rey get’s her powers handed to her, and seemingly is never tempted. She’s almost a perfect heroine. The secret of her parents are supposed to be a representation of her personal demons, but it’s ultimately inconsequential. She cries about it, and the next scene she’s back being the hero. When Luke discovered the secret about his father, there was anguish and reflection, setting up the redemption arc of the next film.

Sorry to jump back a couple of pages, but if you remember Empire, Luke had this huge immediate reaction. The rest of his reaction had nothing to do with who his father is, but that Ben didn’t tell him. His litany is “Ben, why didn’t you tell me.” Before we ever see him really deal with it, he is back to his old self by the end of the movie and back to being a hero in the opening act of Jedi. Yes, he asks Yoda to confirm it, but Luke instantly accepted who his father was and carried on. So I’m failing to see how Rey crying about it and back to being a hero in the next scene is much different.

Not anyone specifically, but in general a lot of the issue people have with sequels and prequels (not just Star Wars) comes from preconceived ideas. That isn’t how fiction works. Someone has to create the stories and they are not always going to go the direction you would take it. Building up ideas and comparing what one character did to what another character did ignores the big picture that life sometimes repeats itself and sometimes does the unexpected. Good stories do the unexpected. Star Wars was unexpected in 77. The PT were not what many fans were expecting. Yet many younger fans love them. This ST is going its own direction (The Force help us with Abrams doing IX) and hopefully it ends well. Some people really hate this movie, but a lot of people really love it.

Author
Time

DrDre said:

I think it’s fair to ask the question, why the ST is following this trajectory? Is it really trying to tell it’s own story, or is it just trying to redo the OT in some form, but pretending that it isn’t by avoiding the same twists. A lot of the twists and turns, while different from the OT, seem to derive from taking an OT story thread, and doing the opposite. It follows the what if scenario:

What if Vader couldn’t be redeemed?

What if Vader overthrew the Emperor?

What if Yoda refused to train Luke?

Many of the beats of the story of TLJ are very similar to TESB with the ROTJ throne room sequence thrown into the mix. Bad guys attack good guy base. Bad guys chase good guys (albeit a lot slower). Young hero goes to backwater planet to be trained by Jedi Master. Young hero defies her teacher, by going after the bad guy. Rogue betrays good guys. Bad guy fails to turn the hero to the dark side. Heroes end up in a tight spot.

Of course by taking the what if scenario, the ST is abandoning several of the underlying themes of the OT that drive the OT’s twists. Which begs the question, is Star Wars more defined by it’s themes, or by it’s story beats? My view is, that it is the former, and a new Star Wars trilogy that is based on the same themes, but has different story beats is better than a Star Wars trilogy, that is based on different themes, but largely follows the same story beats.

I agree, but inevitably Disney would be aiming towards what’s going to sell more, and I don’t blame them. Original Star Wars Trilogy aesthetics and story beats with some new faces and stuff is going to sell like crazy! So they made a good and beautiful movie, that really looked and sounded a lot like Star Wars. If it was actually Star Wars is up to you.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

So we have to resolve Hollywood’s problems within the stories? Then there is a political agenda permeating into the film.

Are the stories of old no longer to be told because they just don’t represent anymore what we are told to believe in?

I don’t think it is fair that Driver got a higher billing. That’s a real world issue. But fairy tales just don’t belong in that repertory of ideas. It’s just not the same collection of notes.

Think of western traditional culture issues: learn to control yourself, to dominate yourself, on a bad note, learn to repress yourself. You can’t erase the past, as it settles your present and your future. Life’s a journey, a video and not a collection of separate frames: you have the responsibility to make it coherent. Carpe Diem. Seize the day, control it, and make it into something. Both individually and socially, learn to control yourself and the medium. Learn science to explain the world, because if it can be explained it can be understood and if it is understood, it can be handled, perfectioned and made into something better. There’s a reason for everything and in learning those reasons, you can fix things. Christianity, science, industrial revolution, both left-wing and right-wing politics all are contained within the same set of ideas.

There is an underlying truth in the universe, and in discovering it and learning from it, we can reach some sort of elevation. That’s why we have parliaments, dialogue, an Agora and philosophy; one way or another we’ve had it for 25 centuries. Because even if we can agree that noone has the truth, we all agree that it actually exists, somewhere. Philosophy and not sophisms. Wether everyone positions it in a different place, there is a sense of right and wrong to most of us. There is a moral compass. And there are plans, coherent trajectories in history. That’s why Campbell’s book, to pick a cheap example is called the hero’s “journey”.

To me, ironically, the most by that book country today is China, which modernised itself on a western values basis.

But anyway, that’s our book: be active

Up to some point that is the core of our civilisation. And fairy tales have a place in that core that’s rooted into the past times, and more particularly the medieval times, when everything wasn’t explicit but alegoric and symbolic. If we are to discuss gender roles, women have a role that’s very definite in those stories. It doesn’t matter if we don’t think the same way today, you can’t change the content and expect it to still be a fairy tale.

And the content being changed isn’t just gender roles.

Take this for instance:

The galaxy isn’t able to be saved. It is a living breathing entity, constantly changing. The Jedi attempt to “Domesticate” the Force, the Sith like to “let it run free” (when they’re not hiding it, thus why their force powers are so cabin fevery).

Rey is balance. Rey shapes the force to her will only when necessary - there is no need for her to try and control or trap the Force.

So there’s no point in fighting Evil because it will return. There’s no point in controlling your instincts because they are “natural”, there’s no point in controlling anything actually. Just flow with the Universe. Don’t resist Death, because it is also natural. There’s no point in resisting the will of power, because it is encapsuled within the very human being. It’s not an active stance anymore. It’s passive, as Luke’s passive now and therefore he’s just no longer the western hero anymore. The journey doesn’t matter, there are no heros, anyone can take your job and do it as well as you. There’s no meaning to the story anymore since your frame can be continued by someone else and it just will be the same. It’s a postmodern film, with asian cultural notes that flow very in tune with the actual phase of market.

So question yourself who is backwards and what are you building by thinking to be “progressive”. There are things that can progress, like justice and wealth distribution, within our cultural frame. And others that would take ceasing to be, in order to become something not necessarily better.

And the sole idea of “get rid of old books and live the life” is a false dichotomy. Life just is. You can live it by one book or another. That book, both literally and metaphorically is the culture. So Rey isn’t in balance, Rey is a sophist, he uses the moral compass of the Universe (the force) when necessary to her own gut. And that’s living by another book. One my personal moral compass doesn’t feel to be quite ethic:

Do or do not, there is no try - 1980: Do it convinced, challenge the error.
The best teacher failure is - 2017: It doesn’t matter to make wrong things because in the end you will learn.
Love he who errs, hate the error - 480 AD…

The thing is that is false as well. The only way to learn from errors is to actually not know they are mistakes. If you know you are heading into something wrong and do it the same only to say that one forges itself from errors then you are just acting plain wrong and being a perverse hypocrite shielding behind a speech.

So how does a man that learnt what’s right 30 years ago when he chose to sacrifice himself for a not-apparently-redeemable father now contemplate to kill his teenager nephew?

If life is a coherent journey, a video, or a movie, or a saga it doesn’t make sense.
If life is a sucession of different frames then it is explainable and understandable. Only that if life is so, then coherency is just an abstract possibility and hence the dissolution of the notion of heroes, or even what some users are calling “in-character” acting.

And life isn’t one way or another, because the explanation of what life is a cultural artifact itself, and therefore there isn’t a by the book or not by the book explanation here. You just choose which book you live by. And you choose by which book you make your movie.

At least to me that is what this movie means and hopefully JJ-wow-factor will make it right. Only that my two cents aren’t thrown into it this time, and especially not with his precedents.

Author
Time

TavorX said:

For some reason, I really dig showing a ‘badass’ Luke in such an unconventional manner. We WANT to see Luke flash his green lightsaber and go absolutely ham on the baddies with a swish and a shoosh. Instead they showed Luke handle the situation differently. Do you think Luke really wanted to duel Vader back in ROTJ? No, he wanted to live up to Yoda’s early teaching of “knowledge and defense, never attack” but Vader managed to push his emotional buttons to make him choose an agressive action.

Here, Luke found a way to help his friends that involved him tapping into the knowledge of the Force in a defensive tactic without laying a finger on Kylo. Would it be fucking badass to see Luke actually duel? Yeah, and it’s also fucking cool to see Star Destroyer, Imperial Walker, and Vader slashing Rebels but ultimately, those were easy cheap tricks to appease fans, to give them what they want without reason (yes, I’m looking at you Rogue One).

If got a duel where he faced Kylo in a traditional manner, well, it would mean Luke’s character was really thrown out the window. What we have is a sorrowful and broken Luke that couldn’t handle the burden of recreating the Jedi Order alone after failing basically the galaxy and his friends. Rey can now pick up where he left off, now becoming one with the Force, he has the chance to always be there when Rey needs his guidance. Perhaps this is what Luke needed after all this time, someone strong in the Force without the emotional baggage and weight and cynicism.

Bottom line though, what I’m saying is that I flinch a little at suggesting there’s disappointment in not having battle-badass Luke. It’s kinda like asking for the fan service treatment found in Rogue One and this is something we need to stay away from. Constraint leads to something more creative, like Force projection, which also helps keep passive Luke in-tact.

Yes to this post.

War does not make one great.

Author
Time

DominicCobb said:

pleasehello said:

DominicCobb said:

Mithrandir said:

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2017/12/star-wars-last-jedi-laura-dern-admiral-holdo-listen-to-women?intcid=inline_amp

Looks like there actually was an agenda in all this ST.

Sadly fairy tales all root in the old world.

Please fire Kennedy

Please fire yourself (from being a poster in this thread).

Someone’s getting a little defensive.

I reckon he’s allowed to be concerned about modern day politics infiltrating Star Wars.

Right, how dare they give women equal footing.

Not really the point. Women have always been the smart ones in command in Star Wars.

Point is, telling someone to go away because you disagree with them is not a valid argument.

Author
Time

pleasehello said:

DominicCobb said:

pleasehello said:

DominicCobb said:

Mithrandir said:

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2017/12/star-wars-last-jedi-laura-dern-admiral-holdo-listen-to-women?intcid=inline_amp

Looks like there actually was an agenda in all this ST.

Sadly fairy tales all root in the old world.

Please fire Kennedy

Please fire yourself (from being a poster in this thread).

Someone’s getting a little defensive.

I reckon he’s allowed to be concerned about modern day politics infiltrating Star Wars.

Right, how dare they give women equal footing.

Not really the point. Women have always been the smart ones in command in Star Wars.

Point is, telling someone to go away because you disagree with them is not a valid argument.

There are exactly 4 women with speaking roles in the OT. Three of them have less than a minute of screen time.

He said to fire Kennedy because she has an agenda. I don’t see why I should have to make a valid argument when he isn’t either. Calling for her to be fired is just as inflaming, if not more so.

Author
Time

Mithrandir said:

So we have to resolve Hollywood’s problems within the stories?

I stopped reading right there, and I will continue to not read the rest of your posts I think since you don’t get it.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

yotsuya said:

DrDre said:

Then there’s the fact that this entire arc aims to push Rey to the foreground as the next last Jedi, Luke 2.0, new and improved. However, does she deserve this mantle? Luke goes through hell and back before becoming a Jedi, making mistakes, suffering loss of life and limbs. Rey get’s her powers handed to her, and seemingly is never tempted. She’s almost a perfect heroine. The secret of her parents are supposed to be a representation of her personal demons, but it’s ultimately inconsequential. She cries about it, and the next scene she’s back being the hero. When Luke discovered the secret about his father, there was anguish and reflection, setting up the redemption arc of the next film.

Sorry to jump back a couple of pages, but if you remember Empire, Luke had this huge immediate reaction. The rest of his reaction had nothing to do with who his father is, but that Ben didn’t tell him. His litany is “Ben, why didn’t you tell me.” Before we ever see him really deal with it, he is back to his old self by the end of the movie and back to being a hero in the opening act of Jedi. Yes, he asks Yoda to confirm it, but Luke instantly accepted who his father was and carried on. So I’m failing to see how Rey crying about it and back to being a hero in the next scene is much different.

For one ROTJ takes place about a year after TESB, so it’s a difference between several minutes and a year. Secondly, the Luke we meet in ROTJ is not exactly the same character. He’s more mature, and serious, perhaps even a little darker (applying a Force choke early on). Either way, his discovery of his father’s identity leads directly into him questioning his masters, the shock of the confirmation, and the Vader redemption arc. Rey’s discovery as depicted really can’t go anywhere, and she’s already forgotten about it minutes later in the same film, and it is thus totally inconsequential. So, it’s definitely not the same situation.

Author
Time

DominicCobb said:

pleasehello said:

DominicCobb said:

pleasehello said:

DominicCobb said:

Mithrandir said:

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2017/12/star-wars-last-jedi-laura-dern-admiral-holdo-listen-to-women?intcid=inline_amp

Looks like there actually was an agenda in all this ST.

Sadly fairy tales all root in the old world.

Please fire Kennedy

Please fire yourself (from being a poster in this thread).

Someone’s getting a little defensive.

I reckon he’s allowed to be concerned about modern day politics infiltrating Star Wars.

Right, how dare they give women equal footing.

Not really the point. Women have always been the smart ones in command in Star Wars.

Point is, telling someone to go away because you disagree with them is not a valid argument.

There are exactly 4 women with speaking roles in the OT. Three of them have less than a minute of screen time.

He said to fire Kennedy because she has an agenda. I don’t see why I should have to make a valid argument when he isn’t either. Calling for her to be fired is just as inflaming, if not more so.

Correct.

Author
Time

DrDre said:

yotsuya said:

DrDre said:

Then there’s the fact that this entire arc aims to push Rey to the foreground as the next last Jedi, Luke 2.0, new and improved. However, does she deserve this mantle? Luke goes through hell and back before becoming a Jedi, making mistakes, suffering loss of life and limbs. Rey get’s her powers handed to her, and seemingly is never tempted. She’s almost a perfect heroine. The secret of her parents are supposed to be a representation of her personal demons, but it’s ultimately inconsequential. She cries about it, and the next scene she’s back being the hero. When Luke discovered the secret about his father, there was anguish and reflection, setting up the redemption arc of the next film.

Sorry to jump back a couple of pages, but if you remember Empire, Luke had this huge immediate reaction. The rest of his reaction had nothing to do with who his father is, but that Ben didn’t tell him. His litany is “Ben, why didn’t you tell me.” Before we ever see him really deal with it, he is back to his old self by the end of the movie and back to being a hero in the opening act of Jedi. Yes, he asks Yoda to confirm it, but Luke instantly accepted who his father was and carried on. So I’m failing to see how Rey crying about it and back to being a hero in the next scene is much different.

For one ROTJ takes place about a year after TESB, so it’s a difference between several minutes and a year. Secondly, the Luke we meet in ROTJ is not exactly the same character. He’s more mature, and serious, perhaps even a little darker (applying a Force choke early on). Either way, his discovery of his father’s identity leads directly into him questioning his masters and the Vader redemption arc. Rey’s discovery as depicted really can’t go anywhere, and she’s already forgotten about it minutes later in the same film, and thus totally inconsequential. So, it’s definitely not the same situation.

Yeah, she essentially overcame her greatest struggle (barely even a struggle because of the way it was portrayed) within minutes and that hardly even matters or affects her now.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Look, I didn’t mean to inflame you; nor do I think I didn’t make a valid argument considering I’ve tried and I’m still willing to develop my arguments. I don’t expect you to agree, obviously. But we have a discussion board for exactly that purpose.

That being said, don’t even take it too seriously. I wish no harm to Ms. Kennedy, I just don’t agree with what she is representing and heading the main saga. Not a Delenda Carthago sort of thing, but more of a find the right spot.

And if you got the Delenda Carthago line, you might understand why it was funny to close the posts with that phrase. Again, don’t take it too seriously and enjoy the polemic.

Author
Time

DominicCobb said:

pleasehello said:

DominicCobb said:

pleasehello said:

DominicCobb said:

Mithrandir said:

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2017/12/star-wars-last-jedi-laura-dern-admiral-holdo-listen-to-women?intcid=inline_amp

Looks like there actually was an agenda in all this ST.

Sadly fairy tales all root in the old world.

Please fire Kennedy

Please fire yourself (from being a poster in this thread).

Someone’s getting a little defensive.

I reckon he’s allowed to be concerned about modern day politics infiltrating Star Wars.

Right, how dare they give women equal footing.

Not really the point. Women have always been the smart ones in command in Star Wars.

Point is, telling someone to go away because you disagree with them is not a valid argument.

There are exactly 4 women with speaking roles in the OT. Three of them have less than a minute of screen time.

He said to fire Kennedy because she has an agenda. I don’t see why I should have to make a valid argument when he isn’t either. Calling for her to be fired is just as inflaming, if not more so.

That would be true, except that Kathleen Kennedy is not on this thread.

Also it seems to me that you just posited a valid argument, which you could have done the first time.