Sign In

Unusual Sequel Trilogy Radical Redux Ideas Thread — Page 74

Author
Time

RogueLeader said:

I feel like I’m in college, attending a debate on morality with Nev and Jake on stage. I’m taking notes for my extra credit assignment.

College was fun, haha.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Even if the stormtroopers all die at the end of the movie anyway, I’d still prefer to get the impression that our heroes aren’t quite as ‘shoot first, act questions later’ as they come across in TROS.

It didn’t bother me to see troopers getting shot on Takodana in TFA because it was an active firefight - similar to how we all know that Luke Skywalker probably killed a few innocent people when he blew up the Death Star, but it was that or watch Yavin IV explode, so we don’t come away with the impression that he’s a cold, desensitised killer. But when our heroes in TROS run out of the Bestoon Legacy onto the Steadfast, guns blazing, blasting two FO troopers who have up to that point done nothing except ask for their credentials, and proceed to wipe the rest of the room out without flinching, it’s shoved right in the audience’s face. In TFA, a lot of edits trim Finn’s willingness to shoot his former colleagues, but there they were at least already shooting at him.

I mean, regarding the OT, Lucas has mentioned that “we very consciously didn’t kill very many humans in those movies” - this is obviously an absurd statement, but I think what he’s getting at is that you don’t necessarily get the feeling that the heroes are killing people. I suppose that’s why he chose to go with battle droids in the prequels, so that moments like Anakin killing Dooku (or Tal Merrik, Trench etc. in TCW) could stand out more.

Author
Time

Yeah, I mean… they only committed genocide 5 times in TFA without defecting, and are preparing to staff ships that each are designed to commit genocide with a single shot, including Kijimi.

Recruited as a child or not, if you don’t defect after five planets are obliterated, I think you’ve had just as much opportunity to be complicit.

Or do we not mind multiple genocides if it’s done by adults that joined as children?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I don’t mean to excuse the stormtroopers - they’re soldiers for a genocidal fascist regime. But for some reason the movies go out of their way to mention multiple times that they’re recruited as children, and to demonstrate that, given the opportunity, many do defect, which I read as them being intentionally cast as at least slightly human or sympathetic (I assume the actual purpose of this writing decision was to justify Finn not requiring any redemption and that the wider implications weren’t really considered). It’s not like the First Order suddenly revealed themselves to be evil with the Hosnian Cataclysm but we’re still supposed to read Jannah and Finn as goodies because they eventually left.

Ultimately, I don’t actually have a problem with all the baddies exploding at the end of the movie - it’s a fun, melodramatic space opera, after all, not a hard-hitting gritty piece on the horrors of war - I just think it’d be less jarring for our heroes to be somewhat less utterly unphased by all the killing. It’s less about the stormtroopers and more about the way the heroes come across.

Edit:
Star Wars is very forthcoming with redemption for actions that would be less redeemable, or even irredeemable, in reality. Han Solo and Migs Mayfeld are both supposed to be sympathetic, despite being ex-Imperials, back in the era when you had to actually go and intentionally sign up to fight for fascism. Anakin/Vader has absurd amounts of innocent blood on his hands, but you’re still supposed to feel a little warm inside when his son smiles at his ghost. In TCW he’s supposed to be sympathetic and a goodie, despite having at that point already slaughtered a village full of humanoids out of rage. Bo-Katan is mostly treated as a good character these days, despite that time she helped burn down a village. We’re supposed to root for Ben Solo’s redemption even though he far more complicit in the Hosnian Cataclysm than any of the stormtroopers - he literally takes control of the First Order later in the same week anyway. Etc.

Author
Time

I guess to me, they’re still fighting faceless people who, recruited as children or not, take part in multiple genocides, and those who were less directly involved cheered it on.

I don’t feel like our heroes become heartless because they prioritise the needs of those who can’t defend themselves rather than feeling bad for genocidal armies.

I feel like Finn having been one of them, and with how we see his defection and actions against his former comrades, he seems to show that he knows they are who they are. He thought himself to be the only one to question what they were doing, which is why he’s so shocked to see more (in Jannah and her crew).

These troops are all adults, joining as children or not they have chosen to commit such atrocities that I don’t feel their deaths harm the way we see the heroes or their actions.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Again, I’m not arguing that the heroes are “heartless” for fighting the First Order - obviously the Resistance is morally correct in fighting against fascists, and seeing them all die at the end of the movie is no more troubling than watching Luke blow up the Death Star. My concern is mostly with the specific scenes of them gleefully blasting through stormtroopers like they’re videogame enemies, in a trilogy of movies which - rightfully or wrongly - seems to be trying to make some sort of point about stormtroopers not always being faceless videogame enemies. Divorced from any personal moral judgements (which I try to suspend when I’m watching Star Wars, because otherwise ROTJ is about Space Hitler being given eternal life because he was nice for five minutes, and I find it much more satisfying to instead interpret the movies on a mythic/symbolic level), it still strikes me as out of place, especially given how choked up Rey gets about nearly killing Space Hitler 2 later in the movie, and how she’s supposed to be grappling with her dark side.

I’m imagining Poe just blasting Finn directly in the face as he disembarks from the FO troop carrier on Jakku at the start of TFA.

Edit: anyway, this is hardly a hill I want to die on. This is barely even an issue, let alone a major one in TROS, I just feel like our heroes using stunners instead would fit just as well without giving me any “huh, they sure have gotten used to all the killing” vibes.

Author
Time

I’m definitely down with Stunners, and the way the films are originally doesn’t really bother me either. But the cutting out how they were conscripted makes Finn seem much more evil and complicit… and as far as Rey having an emotional connection to Ben’s death, well… she knows him, and cares about him. It isn’t exactly shocking that Luke went from needing to kill Vader to being unable to once he found out Vader is his father…

And Finn nearly was shot by Poe at the beginning of TFA. Luck is what saved Finn on Jakku, not Poe’s morality.

Author
Time

On a completely different note, this absolutely bizarre fanfilm has a sequence about Ben’s childhood. The impressions aren’t good enough to actually use for anything and it’s all clearly fanfilm-tier footage, but maybe there’s something in there that’s useable somewhere.

Author
Time

I think that ultimately, because the movies did Finn such a disservice, the better move might be to minimise him, or at least this particular plot point, from earlier in the sequel trilogy. And I say that really, really liking Finn’s character and what he represents.

He gets an arc set up for him, then entirely ignored in the final movie. There’s no third act to his story. So I think that (for the theoretical first time viewer), he shouldn’t come off as a main character.

Author
Time

He drives the plot in the first two films. While him becoming co-general and whatever happens with the tower is lacklustre, I think it’s far worse to minimise him further.

If you want to get rid of him in TRoS, kill him off on Crait or even before you could cut around to make it seem as though he’s been executed. Then cut him out of TRoS entirely.

Author
Time

Destroying his mask was a symbol of autonomy, relying on himself, free from bondage or trying to free himself. The mask was a symbol of him being trapped in his desires to have control. He takes control when he destroys the mask, and he realises he does not have control when he remakes it. When he takes the mask of throughout IX, it’s to take control of a situation.

Destroying his mask represents deconstructing tropes and reforging it represents reconstructing them. It’s the story of a thesis, antithesis, and synthesis.

Author
Time

I’m sorry to interrupt the discussion, but I have one more edit!
Luke trains Rey: https://vimeo.com/496540201 password: Rey
well this is my second edit of the sequel trilogy, i hope you like it. I know it’s not perfect and it may be poorly edited, it’s because i edit it on my cell phone.

Author
Time

It’s pretty clean, except for an awkward cut at the beginning when Luke says “Impressive”.

I’m not 100% sold on the fan-made footage, though it’s cut in well (if I pretend it’s the actors in the right setting).

I miss Luke being snarky and mischievous like Yoda though… But I know a lot of people hated that. 😅

Author
Time

Skybatman said:

Movies Remastered said:

Skybatman said:

I’m sorry to interrupt the discussion, but I have one more edit!
Luke trains Rey: https://vimeo.com/496540201 password: Rey
well this is my second edit of the sequel trilogy, i hope you like it. I know it’s not perfect and it may be poorly edited, it’s because i edit it on my cell phone.

I like the sarcastic Luke at the start. What fan-film is that?

https://youtu.be/VfO2S-EDvsY

Thanks, That’s a nice little film. I missed that one.

Check out - http://www.youtube.com/moviesremastered

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Ed Slushie said:

I just had an idea: what if we found a way to make it look like Snoke was the one who smashed Kylo Ren’s helmet? He insults the helmet multiple times so it seems like something he would do, and then it would make Kylo reforging his helmet seem like he’s growing rather than regressing.
Maybe, we could even move the scene of him reforging his helmet up to the end of The Last Jedi, as an epilogue/cliffhanger.

I’m sort of a fan

I think it sacrifices TLJ a bit too much for TRoS’s sake, but if you’re trying to bring TRoS back into the fold, this edit is a must.

Death of the Author

Author
Time

I just don’t understand how they’re gonna edit the trilogy to make Kylo an active antagonist at the end. Or is the goal to smooth out the transition from being Snoake’s errand boy to Palpatine’s without ever desiring autonomy?

Author
Time

JakeRyan17 said:

I just don’t understand how they’re gonna edit the trilogy to make Kylo an active antagonist at the end. Or is the goal to smooth out the transition from being Snoake’s errand boy to Palpatine’s without ever desiring autonomy?

Personally, I’m not trying to make Kylo an active antagonist, I just don’t want it to feel like his TLJ development is immediately undone. I think if Snoke destroyed the helmet and Kylo reforged it before he found Palpatine, then the symbolism would kind of get reversed - the mask would represent his independence instead of his dependence, and so having him wear it for the first half of TROS might make his character arc seem… smoother, I guess.

You’ve got to ask yourself one question: “Am I making Carrie Fisher’s ghost proud?”
Well, are ya, punk?

Author
Time

The perspective was to be unsettling to Kylo, who didn’t even notice that the saber he was duelling against had JUST been destroyed… it’s because Kylo wanted Darth Vader’s lightsaber that he used the blue one and not the green.

Author
Time

I don’t think he was suggesting that Luke should use the green saber, I think he meant that Luke should dual wield both the blue and green sabers. It’s a weird idea, but interesting.

Author
Time

It would’ve been a cool visual, but thematically for the moment I’m glad it didn’t happen. Like, had we seen both it would’ve pointed out to us that he’s not really there. I loved the subtlety of the blue saber, hair/clothes, and lack of footprints rather than anything too obvious or noticeable.

Author
Time

JakeRyan17 said:

It would’ve been a cool visual, but thematically for the moment I’m glad it didn’t happen. Like, had we seen both it would’ve pointed out to us that he’s not really there. I loved the subtlety of the blue saber, hair/clothes, and lack of footprints rather than anything too obvious or noticeable.

But the two sabers don’t tell us is a projection of Luke. We kinda expecting Luke to use the green saber to fight Kylo (after all, the blue one was just destroyed). What is weird is to see Luke NOT using the saber. So is true that a lot of fan edits replaced the Anakin’s saber with the Luke’s one in the scene. But I really like the idea of Luke using the blue because it get Kylo furious and also because he is back to the old days, carrying on the father’s legacy and finally accepting to use the saber he refused by the beggining of the movie.

But also, if that is a projection and everyone is expecting to see Luke with the green saber, I really don’t understand why he couldn’t fight with both sabers, what would also make a nice paralell with Anakin fighting Dooku at the end of AOTC.

“The greatest teacher failure is”
-Yoda

Author
Time

That’s the point though, having both sabers would’ve made everyone more aware of the destroyed saber being used. Luke didn’t know it had been broken apart, but knew Kylo would be further angered by its use. I know a lot of people didn’t even think about the destroyed saber being the one used when they first saw the scene.

I don’t think Kylo would fall for the projection of both sabers were used. I think he’d have been more aware and suspicious. Swapping to the green makes sense, but I prefer it as is.