DominicCobb

timdiggerm said:

idir_hh said:

A plethora of concept art from the rise of skywalker including Kylo Ren and chewbacca and the jedi temple on coruscant:

https://mobile.twitter.com/fpdlffh/status/1218114589352529920?s=20

Surely these are from the “Duel of the Fates” draft

Actually those were from a scene that was cut from the film pretty late in the game.

This is a picture from the Art book that seems to a still from the film:

Still very possible this was something originally developed for Trevorrow’s version, though. With so little time I imagine they had no choice but to use some of the visual concepts already being developed.

What do you have in mind?

OutboundFlight said:

DominicCobb said:

StarkillerAG said:

DominicCobb said:

StarkillerAG said:

DominicCobb said:

How important is it really to this story? The First Order is trying to take over the galaxy, the Resistance is trying to stop it. Is a lot more information than that really important to the stories of these new characters? The logistics of the New Republic are no more important to Rey’s story than they are to the Mandalorian’s.

When one of the main characters of the story is the ruler of the galaxy, you should expect to have at least some explanation of how the system works. It’s fine to not explain anything for a small-scale TV show like The Mandalorian, but the sequels have events that happen on a galactic scale, so the movies should at least give us some broad idea as to the political situation.

I mean, Snoke is neither a main character nor the ruler of the galaxy, so I’m not sure that’s the most salient point.

I was referring to Kylo.

I thought we were talking about TFA. I feel like the political situation is pretty unconfusing in both TLJ and TROS.

If you mean derivative, then yes, the ST more or less repeats the OT to the point I have to wonder if it damages the overall themes more, because by including another 30 years worth of evil rising and good winning, it almost seems to imply the conflict will never end.

Almost like that was the point (well, before TROS muddled the waters).

RogueLeader said:

That’s true! You could actually leave the shots in the same order, and not have to meddle with the soundtrack at all. Really, all you would need to do is add a line like, “We can still save her” to make it clearer that Leia played a role in saving Rey, and providing enough of an explanation as to how Ben also survived the process.

Then you can cut away before Ben’s smile begins to fade. Later, Rey and Ben can then meet up on Tatooine. And I have a practical idea for how to achieve that without shooting any new footage.

Hmm, would it involve using footage of Ren on Pasaana? That’s the thought that occurred to me recently.

RogueLeader said:

DominicCobb said:

Honestly too I think having Anakin’s hand involved would just be kind of unintentionally funny, considering the romantic nature of the scene (and somewhat undercut the hand-taking throughline of their relationship).

Okay, fair enough! I just laughed out loud imagining it with that in mind and I see your point! 😂

Grandpa watching over baby’s first kiss.

What do you think of the Leia idea instead?

That’d work much better, and maybe if you put Leia’s body disappearing after one could assume some part of Leia’s lifeforce helped bring Rey back or something.

Interesting thoughts, but not for me. I know you tend to be democratic when it comes to devising edit ideas, but personally I don’t care that people wanted Anakin in the movie. I don’t like how the PT tried to reframe the saga as his story, and I don’t care much for making sure his status as ‘chosen one’ is kept intact.

Honestly too I think having Anakin’s hand involved would just be kind of unintentionally funny, considering the romantic nature of the scene (and somewhat undercut the hand-taking throughline of their relationship).

StarkillerAG said:

DominicCobb said:

StarkillerAG said:

DominicCobb said:

How important is it really to this story? The First Order is trying to take over the galaxy, the Resistance is trying to stop it. Is a lot more information than that really important to the stories of these new characters? The logistics of the New Republic are no more important to Rey’s story than they are to the Mandalorian’s.

When one of the main characters of the story is the ruler of the galaxy, you should expect to have at least some explanation of how the system works. It’s fine to not explain anything for a small-scale TV show like The Mandalorian, but the sequels have events that happen on a galactic scale, so the movies should at least give us some broad idea as to the political situation.

I mean, Snoke is neither a main character nor the ruler of the galaxy, so I’m not sure that’s the most salient point.

I was referring to Kylo.

I thought we were talking about TFA. I feel like the political situation is pretty unconfusing in both TLJ and TROS.

StarkillerAG said:

DominicCobb said:

How important is it really to this story? The First Order is trying to take over the galaxy, the Resistance is trying to stop it. Is a lot more information than that really important to the stories of these new characters? The logistics of the New Republic are no more important to Rey’s story than they are to the Mandalorian’s.

When one of the main characters of the story is the ruler of the galaxy, you should expect to have at least some explanation of how the system works. It’s fine to not explain anything for a small-scale TV show like The Mandalorian, but the sequels have events that happen on a galactic scale, so the movies should at least give us some broad idea as to the political situation.

I mean, Snoke is neither a main character nor the ruler of the galaxy, so I’m not sure that’s the most salient point.

StarkillerAG said:

DominicCobb said:

StarkillerAG said:

DominicCobb said:

It’s a such a small aspect of the film, I don’t really care that it’s confusing.

What do you mean, “small aspect?” The First Order vs Resistance conflict was the main story of the sequels, and it wasn’t handled well at all. If you want to reset the galactic situation to Brave Rebels vs Evil Empire, at least give a satisfying explanation.

That’s just the backdrop for the story, not the story itself.

The backdrop for the story is necessary to tell the story. If the backdrop makes no sense, the whole story falls apart.

1. It’s only part of the backdrop
2. It doesn’t “make no sense,” it’s just confusing because it’s glossed over
3. TFA is pretty good evidence that the story does not fall apart even if you don’t explain one small aspect

OutboundFlight said:

Wexter said:

Of course they could have made a much more personal story without the need to flesh out the political state of the Galaxy. It’s just complicated when some of the most prominent characters are a “supreme leader”, a general princess and the last Jedi master. Not calling for six hours of Senate meetings here, just a clear idea about the current state of the Galaxy. But I guess that’s just another mystery box.

Exactly. No one is calling out the Mandalorian for not explaining the exact logistics of the Guild, Garrison or New Republic… because they aren’t important to the story. I’d say a movie that picks off right after the old government was toppled should explore what’s next.

How important is it really to this story? The First Order is trying to take over the galaxy, the Resistance is trying to stop it. Is a lot more information than that really important to the stories of these new characters? The logistics of the New Republic are no more important to Rey’s story than they are to the Mandalorian’s.

StarkillerAG said:

DominicCobb said:

It’s a such a small aspect of the film, I don’t really care that it’s confusing.

What do you mean, “small aspect?” The First Order vs Resistance conflict was the main story of the sequels, and it wasn’t handled well at all. If you want to reset the galactic situation to Brave Rebels vs Evil Empire, at least give a satisfying explanation.

That’s just the backdrop for the story, not the story itself.

Have you watched the prequels recently? I don’t think the politics in those movies were as bad as you make it seem. There were only one or two Senate scenes per movie, and the political situation wasn’t confusing at all. I actually liked how we saw the downfall of the corrupt Republic and the seeds of Palpatine’s manipulation. The political scenes were some of the highlights of the prequels in my opinion.

I’ve seen them enough to basically have them memorized. I just watched them last month. Yes, I have seen them recently.

DominicCobb said:

I don’t just consider scenes set in the Senate chambers to be political scenes. There are a lot of moments in all three films that would qualify. And when I talk about politics being boring, I’m not just talking about specific scenes. I’m also talking about the specific political conflicts themselves.

Anyway, it’s hardly the worst aspect of the prequels. But it’s not very good either.

I don’t just consider scenes set in the Senate chambers to be political scenes. There are a lot of moments in all three films that would qualify. And when I talk about politics being boring, I’m not just talking about specific scenes. I’m also talking about the specific political conflicts themselves.

Anyway, it’s hardly the worst aspect of the prequels. But it’s not very good either.

It’s a such a small aspect of the film, I don’t really care that it’s confusing. I’ll take the ST. The politics in the PT were not only boring, they often didn’t make sense and they didn’t add much to the story.

pleasehello said:

StarkillerAG said:

pleasehello said:

Wexter said:

The weird thing about the new trilogy is that the state of the larger galaxy is just absolutely incomprehensible. While the prequels clearly show the might and fall of the Old Republic, the OT depicts the Rebel Alliance defeating Palpatine’s Empire. The obvious next step would probably be showing the struggles of the New Republic or something along those lines.

Instead we got what seems to be two fringe groups of fanatics and has-beens fighting it out in the Outer Rim while the larger galaxy doesn’t really care about any of that until like the last ten minutes of the story.

You kind of just described the OT. We never really see the effect of the Empire on the galaxy at large. Only how it relates to the rebellion and our main characters. The only reason we know of the Empire’s reach is because it’s called “the Empire”. I agree it’s less clear what the scope of the First Order’s power is, but only because their name is more ambiguous.

The OT doesn’t need as much explanation though, because the story is relatively simple. An evil empire rules the entire galaxy, and a brave group of rebels has to stop them. With the sequels, you need more backstory to explain where this mysterious First Order came from, how much influence it has, and why the Resistance is a separate group from the Republic, none of which is explained by the movies. You need to read the EU to find out the basic plot of the sequels, which isn’t a good approach to storytelling.

Right. It’s obvious that Abrams was trying to do something simpler, eschewing the politics of the prequels. In his mind, I bet the story made as much sense as the OT. But the ST is a continuing story, the First Order is not the Empire and at least a bit more (not much) explanation was definitely warranted.

I think the issue is that the situation was originally written to be rather different than the OT ‘rebels vs. empire,’ but overtime they cut out all the political stuff that they thought people might find confusing/boring, and just kept it the simple ‘rebels vs. empire.’ The problem is this was done after the fact so you can tell it’s more complicated than the film suggests, but they don’t explain it. I doubt Abrams thought worked perfectly, and he seemed to try to rectify this sort of confusion in TROS by having a conference room scene that tried to clearly delineate the dynamics of the different factions.

OutboundFlight said:

DominicCobb said:

There’s no reason there has to be peace for a thousand generations. Ben just says the Jedi were the guardians of peace in that time.

Palpatine in AOTC says the Republic has stood for a thousand years. Potentially a discrepancy between that and Ben’s line, but you could explain it. Either way neither of them says there was no war at all for that long.

Ah, nice. So going off that we could say:

The Jedi have stood for a thousand generations, acting as a separate religion, and when the Republic was formed they became their guardians of peace and justice. It makes sense for Ben to group the two together when explaining to a young boy with a limited attention span.

The Republic was founded one thousand years ago, and could have had all the major conflicts Disney wants to fill their story. Personally I’m very excited to explore this period.

Yeah. You could argue though that Ben’s says they were the guardians in the Old Republic, which implies that was there for a thousand generations too, but who cares. You could even just say there’s been multiple iterations of the Old Republic, like there was a new constitution a thousand years ago. Either way, I think it’s all ambiguous enough that they could pretty much do whatever they want.

There’s no reason there has to be peace for a thousand generations. Ben just says the Jedi were the guardians of peace in that time.

Palpatine in AOTC says the Republic has stood for a thousand years. Potentially a discrepancy between that and Ben’s line, but you could explain it. Either way neither of them says there was no war at all for that long.

RogueLeader said:

I have a very clear idea for how to handle a Ben Lives alternate ending, which will be the first thing I work on once the film comes out on Blu-ray, but I kind of want to wait and see how much I can do on my own before I share it.

But speaking of Ben Lives, I’m still kind of debating on how to handle Ben bringing Rey back to life. It makes sense that if Ben resurrects Rey, that he will die since he gave her his life Force. So just cutting him dying might feel like it goes against what the movie established about the power.

So should we just have Ben save Rey and not die, regardless of the questions it might raise, or introduce some “divine intervention”?

Yeah, you could probably have some more Jedi voices if you wanted to suggest they were helping. Maybe something as simple as Luke’s “A thousand generations live in you now.”

Also, regarding the earlier discussion about Leia’s body disappearing when Ben dies and her vision of her son dying… you could actually solve both of these problems pretty easily by simply not having Ben die. Of course then you have another problem - what happens to him after Exegol?

RogueLeader said:

I hope it is too. I think you can see Vader’s castle in the distance in that shot from the Art book, actually.

Agreed. I think Rey and Kylo’s feelings for each other should have been built up more blatantly throughout the film. Not doing that left some people feeling unsure of what to think about this kiss. I felt like Abrams turned them into surprises, when really it was a matter of set ups and pay offs.

Even for someone like me who assumed they were in love after TLJ, you still aren’t really sure in this, because they could have easily gone a different direction because it wasn’t explicit. I think solidifying Kylo’s feelings for her right off the bat are important for grounding his headspace right from the start, and colors his intentions differently (and more clearly) throughout.

Between this image and the leaked November cue list, I’m hoping it’s a finished scene on the BD.

With that in mind, here’s an idea for a first act restructure (based on the November cut):

• Kylo on Mustafar
• Oracle
• Rey meditating
• Rey training/Kylo touching Vader’s mask/visions
• Poe and Finn’s mission
• Kylo goes to Exegol
• Falcon returns to base

I hope they include the Oracle scene on the BD. I suspect they cut it because it revealed Kylo was in love with Rey, something they wanted to save as a surprise for the end of the film. I’m speculating now but I believe I read somewhere that Rey had a scene with Maz before she left for Pasaana. I bet that Maz explained in that scene that Leia was dying, and they cut it for the same reason (leaving her death a surprise). Hope if true they include that as well. I much preferred JJ’s TFA approach where he just dropped Kylo being a Solo like it was no big deal.

Hal 9000 said:

Oh, right. Damn.

Her not being at peace until Ben dies just makes it seem like she was intentionally trying to distract him so Rey could kill him.

That, plus Luke says Leia has a vision that her son will die, so she stops training. But her son still ends up dead. I feel like they really didn’t think this aspect of the film through that much, or at the least the last minute changes they did messed with how it came across.

I’m not really sure how to untie this knot, honestly. Really the simplest solution is just to leave it as is.

Hal 9000 said:

Would it do to just insert Leia disappearing after Ben tosses his saber? That might fit in nicely with the next line being about how “the Princess of Alderaan messed up my plan.”

The problem with that is the later scene where Poe speaks to her dead body.

I just want to work out the logistics in my head of moving the Ben/Han scene.

This is the sequence of events in the film, from what I recall:

• Rey leaves Ben and takes his TIE
• The Falcon returns to the base
• Kylo and Han
• Palpatine and Pryde/Destruction of Kijimi
• Resistance hears broadcast
• Poe speaks to Leia/Lando
• Poe speaks to Finn
• Rey on Ahch-to
• Transmission from Red 5

According to the music cues, basically the film originally followed the same trajectory, except Rey on Ahch-to was split into two sequences, and Han and Ben were in between.

For me, the only reason to do this is so that you can have Leia’s body disappear when Ben tosses his saber, rather than when he dies. First of all because it implies Leia sent Ben the memory of Han, and second because, if you think about it, the suggestion in the film is that Leia isn’t at rest until her son is dead. That’s dumb. Moreover, my guess is this was how it was originally conceived, as Leia’s body disappears at night, but the Resistance leaves during the day and comes back during the day too. The other reason in support is that you better organize the turn from “things are bad” to “things are looking up.”

But here’s the problem. The Palpatine/Pryde scene (which needs to come before the next few Resistance scenes) doesn’t work unless Kylo has turned good. You could make the argument that Palpatine’s statement is vague enough, and Kylo’s out of commission enough, that it still works. But it’d be weird. The other issue, is Rey’s scenes on Ahch-to are so brief that you can’t split them up without it feeling weird as well. I suspect all of these moments were reshot to fit the new structure (we know Rey and Luke was reshot, it’s an easy guess that Palpatine and Pryde was reshot, or perhaps just some line changes in ADR).

Glad we’re starting to have some new arguments about this movie.

snooker said:

Here’s the cue list for Rise of Skywalker, apparently:

https://www.jwfan.com/forums/index.php?/topic/31290-jwfan-exclusive-the-rise-of-skywalker-partial-cue-list-revealed/

The order of scenes at the start went (roughly) Rey Training -> Mustafar (Vader’s Castle?) -> Rey Training -> Getting the message from the spy. The names also hint at scenes that were cut at some point.

Yes, I’ve been digging through this. The order for a lot of things is very different, and might give editors some ideas for rearrangement. For example, the cue titled “Father Knows Best” and its placement would seem to imply the Kylo and Han moment came much later, similar to what someone here (can’t remember who) was considering doing.

yotsuya said:

DominicCobb said:

idir_hh said:

I disagree, a story is like looking at a finished picture puzzle, the specifics are the pieces that make the puzzle, if you have two puzzles with different pieces but end up with the same picture it’s really irrelevant that the pieces were different.

But what you’re describing is that the whole picture is just the plot. That’s silly. The picture would be the story. The plot would just be what the shapes are that put the pieces together. But it’s a bad analogy.

Think of it more like a building. The plot is just the foundation. It’s what you build on top of that that really matters.

Um… a story is the overall chain of events. A lot of real stories can be boring. You could make a movie about someone’s day at work and if you pick a normal day the movie would be boring. Plot is the literary device that takes a story and elevates it to something special. The plot is the specific chain of events (sometimes a web of events if you have multiple characters) with one thing leading to another. Plot would be using flashbacks to take that otherwise boring seeming day and making it something unusual. For Star Wars, the crawl sets up the story and the plot. You can also think of story as timeline and plot as how the scene connect. Story tells you someone died, plot tells you how and gives you the emotional impact.

Nope.