I’m creating a similar set of previews for 4k77 that I did for 4k83, such that those interested can get a better idea of how the color grading will look across the entire film. Here are the first six shots:
Eh, I think reactions will be different for generations to come who will be able to watch the entire saga one episode after the other. I mean, yeah, they might have expectations between each movie, but the time for them to build up any expectations will be hours/days/weeks rather than years to decades like many of us. Sure, not every kid is going to like it, but there are going to be kids who love it too.
Yes, but that’s precisely my point. TLJ fans in my view erroneously presume the distribution of movie ratings will somehow shift to a higher average, while I’m arguing that it’s more likely the distribution will become less wide around a very similar average. An analysis of the imdb ratings for TLJ show that the mean rating (6.9) and the median (7.0) are almost the same, which is solid evidence that the extremes don’t affect the overall perception of the movie, which stands as above average, but still the least liked saga film after the first two prequels.
It’s the fans that don’t like it…
Seems a fair few fans do like it (TLJ).
CRITICAL OPINION: THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK‘S ORIGINAL REVIEWS
JANUARY 23, 2014https://www.starwars.com/news/critical-opinion-the-empire-strikes-back-original-reviews
There’s some really interesting reading here - but I don’t see how this remotely resembles the reaction to TLJ. The critics cited in this article are basically writing off TESB - and Star Wars as an entity - as childish nonsense. That’s just typical movie-critic snobbery. The fans for the most part wouldn’t have given a damn, and the kids buying action figures in droves would’ve been equally oblivious.
On the other hand the critics loved TLJ. It’s the fans that don’t like it, and this is for reasons of tone and canon and story and so forth. It’s not the same thing at all IMO.
Wait for IX to come out. Absorb it. Watch the ST in its complete form and see how TLJ fits and then give us a more reasoned opinion. I bet some will change their mind as many of us did about TESB in the years since it came out.
yotsuya seemed to be saying that some people’s opinions may change or evolve on TLJ when the Sequel Trilogy is complete - and viewed in a different context to what it is now - in a Trilogy only two-thirds finished.
He didn’t seem to be comparing the levels of criticism to both Empire and TLJ - just that some people’s opinions may have changed after Jedi was released and time was taken to reevaluate the Original Trilogy as a whole.
Seems reasonable, that.
rodneyfaile just helpfully posted some additional reviews on Empire he found - doesn’t seem either he or yotsuya were comparing the differences between fan reviews and those of ‘professional’ film critics either.
I just think it’s a bit of a ‘Flying Spaghetti Monster’ argument. I’ve seen bad reviews of Citizen Kane. It doesn’t mean I’m going to extrapolate that Transformers Revenge of the Fallen might someday be lauded as genius because Citizen Kane also got some bad reviews. The timing, tone, circumstances etc surrounding TESB are nothing like what has happened with TLJ. I think the comparison is flawed.
I don’t actually care (just like I didn’t care about critics or bad press when I was a kid) but I’d prefer we discussed the movies on their own merits without this ‘TESB was also controversial’ meme. There was no ‘space Leia’ moment in TESB. No-one felt that Luke’s character arc had been betrayed or that general Rieeken was withholding information for no good reason or that Bespin was a waste of time. Let’s stay on point.
Flying Spaghetti Monster argument? Citizen Kane? Extrapolating Revenge Of The Fallen? What…?
In the context of me saying ‘yotsuya seemed to be saying that some people’s opinions may change or evolve on TLJ when the Sequel Trilogy is complete - and viewed in a different context to what it is now - in a Trilogy only two-thirds finished’ the point has been missed by quite some distance. No worries, I’ll leave it there.
Sorry, I’m probably not making my point very well. The ‘flying spaghetti monster’ is a response to shifting the burden of proof in matters of religious faith/discussion. A person of Faith will say “you can’t prove God doesn’t exist” and a skeptic will respond with “well, by that same measure you can’t prove the flying spaghetti monster doesn’t exist”. It’s a way of exposing the fallacy of this type of argument.
Not that this Star Wars stuff is in the same ballpark, but this TESB thing is an annoying meme that has gained lots of internet traction as some kind of clever slam-dunk for the merits of TLJ. Yes, people’s opinions may change when TLJ is viewed in the context of a completed trilogy, but so what? We can’t possibly know what people will think of TLJ years from now. TESB existed in an entirely different context. If the criticisms were actually similar (plotholes, Luke’s character ruined, pointless side-plots, overuse of humour, canon violations, perceived virtue-signalling etc etc) then we could extrapolate something at least slightly meaningful. But in this instance it’s about as ridiculous as my comparing Citizen Kane to Transformers.
I understand what’s being said here (and I have zero desire to insult anyone on these boards - let me be absolutely clear about that!). One of my favourite films, Conan 1982, was given some lousy feedback in its day and has since garnered an impressive reputation as a giant in the genre. So yes, it can and does happen. But we won’t know until it happens (it may be go the opposite way for all we know) and I just don’t think the comparison is a particularly valid one.
I think the fallacy is in the idea, that much of the criticism against the ST is based on nostalgia from the past and expectations that stem from previous installments. However, unlike the previous two trilogies, which can both be considered reasonable starting points for watching the Skywalker saga, episode IV being the one that started it all, and episode I being the actual beginning, the ST will never really stand on its own. As such those that watch TLJ in the more distant future will still watch it with expectations based on the previous episodes. In this context it’s important to point out that a lot of criticism against TLJ also came from those who felt it didn’t provide satisfactory answers to the mystery boxes introduced by TFA, so criticism against TLJ isn’t linked specifically to OT nostalgia. As such, those that like the Skywalker saga enough to eventually watch TLJ will generally have a similar reaction to it that the current generations have only with less extremes. I conjecture that unless episode 9 really manages to provide an overarching theme for the saga, and the story of Rey and the ST characters continues, the ST will be seen as superfluous, being overall too similar to the OT to really be considered a worthwhile continuation of the essentially completed story of episodes 1 through 6. The hate for TLJ will die out, but it won’t be loved either. Considering Abrams will likely attempt to bring the ST more in line with his original vision as set out by TFA and the rest of the saga, TLJ will forever be considered the odd one out for better or for worse.
Hard to argue that fan regard for TLJ won’t improve over time. To what extent is obviously up for debate. But a lot* of the complaints from fans have to do with expectations not matched or disliking how preexisting characters were used. As the years go on, and the younger fanbase (who don’t have the baggage of years of expectations) grows up and becomes a larger percentage of the whole, TLJ will certainly improve in standing. The same exact thing happened with the prequels (even as the critical appraisal seemed to go in the opposite direction).
*If you’re thinking of responding to this saying “but not all of the complaints,” how about just don’t respond instead. That’s not what I’m talking about and I’m very tired of that kind of bullshit at this point.
It’s actually pretty easy to argue, that fan regard won’t necessarily improve over time. You more or less regard the very negative opinions as outliers that will in future get less weight in the overall assessment of TLJ, but you totally disregard the positive outliers with extreme praise, that also stem from mostly older fans, who were pleased the ST distanced itself from the PT in both visuals and style.
I’m not talking about outliers. What are the extremes have nothing to do with my point. Obviously a significant portion of the fanbase disliked the film (and a significant portion liked it). What’s the majority and what’s the minority doesn’t matter. I just think it’s hard to argue that, in the future, there won’t undoubtedly be more and more fans who fall into the “like” column, as many of the reasons for the dislike fade away.
Additionally you disregard the effect episode IX will have on the overall assessment of the trilogy including TLJ. ROTS is largely lumped in with the other prequels, despite the fact that it was actually positively recieved, because the entire trilogy was mostly seen as a disappointment. It is quite possible episode IX will please neither fans or critics of TLJ, and so the entire trilogy may end up being regarded as pretty mediocre, and a missed opportunity. Anything is possible at this point. TLJ may improve in standing, or it may not.
You’re absolutely right that IX will affect the overall assessment of the trilogy. But again, with the prequels, you ignore my point, which is that there seems to be far more PT fans now than before, whether or not some other fans regard the whole trilogy as a disappointment or not.
There will also be far more films than ever before, so being a Star Wars fan won’t be linked to any specific set of films as it did before. The OT were the only films available for two decades, the PT era lasted for almost 15 years. The ST era will likely not last even half that long. So, unlike the OT and PT the ST will probably not amass a larger following through constant exposure to a single era over a prolonged period of time, as it will be eclipsed by the new kids on the block. As such I don’t see its reputation changing very much aside from dulling both the hatred and the praise as time progresses. The whole ST is just too similar to the OT to stand out from the immense crowd of films and series that will be the future of the franchise.
Hard to argue that fan regard for TLJ won’t improve over time. To what extent is obviously up for debate. But a lot* of the complaints from fans have to do with expectations not matched or disliking how preexisting characters were used. As the years go on, and the younger fanbase (who don’t have the baggage of years of expectations) grows up and becomes a larger percentage of the whole, TLJ will certainly improve in standing. The same exact thing happened with the prequels (even as the critical appraisal seemed to go in the opposite direction).
*If you’re thinking of responding to this saying “but not all of the complaints,” how about just don’t respond instead. That’s not what I’m talking about and I’m very tired of that kind of bullshit at this point.
It’s actually pretty easy to argue, that fan regard won’t necessarily improve over time. You more or less regard the very negative opinions as outliers that will in future get less weight in the overall assessment of TLJ, but you totally disregard the positive outliers with extreme praise, that also stem from mostly older fans, who were pleased the ST distanced itself from the PT in both visuals and style. Additionally you disregard the effect episode IX will have on the overall assessment of the trilogy including TLJ. ROTS is largely lumped in with the other prequels, despite the fact that it was actually positively recieved, because the entire trilogy was mostly seen as a disappointment. It is quite possible episode IX will please neither fans or critics of TLJ, and so the entire trilogy may end up being regarded as pretty mediocre, and a missed opportunity. Anything is possible at this point. TLJ may improve in standing, or it may not.
Abrams really robbed us of [the wider galactic situation]. TLJ had no reason to expand on it. Any lazy writing lies with Abrams.
That’s quite a lot of blame to place on one guy. And sure, his was the cardinal sin of failing to properly establish the relationship between the First Order, the Republic, and the Resistance, but these were issues that could have been resolved in a single scene in TFA and which could have just as easily been resolved in TLJ. Instead we are given no explanation for the First Order’s power nor its resilience after their primary base and weapon was destroyed. We are given no explanation for what remains of the Republic, nor of why the Resistance consists of only a few ships at the start of TLJ. As you say, the Republic doesn’t exist in TLJ in any tangible sense, which means that the only real relationship which now exists for the audience is between the First Order and the Resistance.
The setup belongs at the start. ANH set up the civil war and the basic political structure. TPM setup the old republic and the trade federation conflict. ATOC setup the new separatist conflict. TFA setup the First Order and then dwelled on Luke for the rest of the film. Pretty much the focus was on Luke from the crawl to the end. A few lines would not have been out of place to help understand the galactic situation and how wiping out the senate would destroy the Republic. So yeah, I blame Abrams. An explanation doesn’t really belong in the middle chapter for something that happened in the first chapter.
I will reiterate, that Abrams did not destroy the Republic or turn the Resistance into rebels. If anything Abrams at least (not very successfully) tried to keep up the semblance of a different political situation with the FO residing on some ice rock in the unknown regions, and the Resistance the guard dog of the Republic, even though it was pretty obvious that the Empire vs rebels vibe should be maintained. Johnson threw out the window dressing and cemented the whole Empire vs rebels retread, that has once again become the central conflict, even though many other scenerios were possible based on Abrams setup.
The Last Jedi is a well written and well made movie, and I think that is why many critics like it. The Last Jedi also takes Luke Skywalker, one of the most beloved characters of all time, in some very unexpected directions. Some people find that very refreshing and others find it a travesty, thus the split between fans. I think over time people will appreciate TLJ more.
I agree TLJ is well made with amazing visuals, and generally strong performances (except Hux, who’s just a buffoon in this one), but I’m not sure it is that well written. It’s not badly written, I think, and has plenty of good and sometimes even great elements, but a lot of criticism has been leveled at the rather contrived “slow chase”, which is the backbone of the movie, the tonal issues, the superfluous casino plot, the contrived introduction of DJ into the story, and the whole Poe/Holdo conflict, which relies on characters not communicating for no reason. I mean is a film that has Holdo perform a kamikaze maneuver in a universe, where droids can perform complex tasks really that well written, even if the excitement and visuals distract from this fact? I would say the writing is a rather mixed bag, where the good often outshines the bad. I conjecture the critics liked TLJ, because it is an above average movie with plenty of highlights and surprises when seen in a vaccuum, while the fans are split over the way the film connects to the previous episodes in the saga.
Ah… I finally found something with meat to it. Rather than just recollections, this article did research and pulled up actual fan reactions from TESB in 1980. Sure, today it is the gold standard of Star Wars for many, but what did people think when it was the dark sequel to an insanely popular movie. Well, fan letters published in Starlog reveal a lot of that.
http://www.acriticalhit.com/fans-react-empire-strikes-back-1980/
Reading this I can imagagine if modern social media had existed back then. I still remember my reaction. For the longest time TESB was the movie to watch between the amazing Star Wars and the incredible ROTJ. It was the Star TRek III to II and IV - the middle of a great story. Eventually I came around. But I see that same genius in TLJ. The characters are put through the ringer and come out the other side wiser for the experience. They handed TLJ to a good character writer who took where they started in TFA and carried on the story. It was written before we ever saw TFA. Before fans built up expectations. Lucas always waited until after one film came out to write the next, but the have been on a faster schedule and so TLJ was written when TFA was still in production and a few things about TFA were changed. And the more I look at the presented issues, the more I realize that all the big issues are not with TLJ, but with the setup in TFA that TLJ delivers on what was promised. Han gave us the concise narrative of Luke in TFA and TLJ didn’t deviate at all. This trilogy is driven by the fall of Ben Solo and the rise of Kylo Ren. Luke in exile, Leia and Han at odds and back to their old roles, everything was setup by Abrams in TFA.
When you think about May 1980, fans didn’t know what to expect. The had the novel and movie of Star Wars (with the published script to keep the movie fresh in lieu of home video). But in 1979, the got three new Star Wars novels as well as the Marvel comic that kept the story going. What came out in May 1980 was nothing like any of those. Irvin Kershner directed his typical people driven story with a script by the legendary Leigh Bracket with changes by Lawrence Kasdan and the original story by George Lucas. It took he wave of success that Star Wars ended with and dumped the characters into turmoil that didn’t end with the end credits. Many didn’t like the direction. Many didn’t believe that Vader was really Luke’s father. And who was this other Yoda spoke of? It was not the film people expected and they griped about it. There really wasn’t a platform for that voice to drown out the box office results. But it was there. And now we have the ST continuing the story and TLJ is the middle chapter and took a similar character based approach and also ended on a dark note. Though this time a beloved character wasn’t just in carbonite, he was dead. Well, as dead as a Jedi gets in Star Wars since he is expected to be back in the next film. And there were more characters to follow (TLJ has three stories instead of two). But the parallel in reaction is fascinating. And we have one of our own who never took to TESB, at least from what I hear. Mike Verta is a fan of Star Wars - as in the 1977 film only. I’m sure he isn’t alone. But most of us who watched the films when they came out have had our opinions change over time and I’m sure that will happen to TLJ as well. I personally love it and wouldn’t change anything. I don’t expect everyone to share that opinion, but saying TLJ ruined the saga, that is subverted expectations, that it threw out Abrams mystery boxes, etc. is just the initial reaction. Wait for IX to come out. Absorb it. Watch the ST in its complete form and see how TLJ fits and then give us a more reasoned opinion. I bet some will change their mind as many of us did about TESB in the years since it came out.
Why would a positive opinion in the absence of IX be any more reasoned than a negative one?
I also don’t really see how a few fan letters in Starlog can really be compared to the avalanche of reviews, analyses, rants, opinion pieces that followed in the wake of TLJ’s release. It’s apples and oranges as far as I’m concerned, and certainly should not be considered as some kind of proof that TLJ will be considered a masterpiece by posterity. Some films with mixed responses will be re-evaluated, or seen in a more postive light, while others won’t.
Haarspalter said:
So Star Wars is now a learning-lessons-about-life-meta-documentary which uses a fictional space fantasy fairy tale as a backdrop some old bearded guy invented in the 70s?Meh.
Star Wars should be about escapism, not realism.
Sounds like you didn’t understand the other movies either.
I don’t understand why this is needed. I didn’t like TLJ for a whole host of reasons, but I’m not going to tell you you don’t understand Star Wars for liking what I consider to be a deeply flawed film, that puts a post-modern perspective on a modern myth, by turning the saga into a meta commentary on itself, and has the characters in the mythology question the merits of their own reality. You might just accept that Star Wars is different things to different people. It’s fine that you consider TLJ a great film, and you’ve stated the reasons why, but many others including myself feel the ST and particulary TLJ weakens the overall saga, and its mythology as a whole for the reasons stated above, and the fact that it resets the galaxy to an Empire vs rebels conflict without proper context, or explanation to give us an alternate reality version of the OT, where great effort is taken to push a number of new characters to the foreground at the expense of the old.
Forgive me if I only focus on this paragraph, but after reading it I felt a couple of things needed to be answered. First, this is a new trilogy and it is supposed to focus on new characters and push the old into supporting roles. That was the vision of it from the get go. That is what Lucas told Hamill 30 years ago. The role we see for Luke, Han, and Leia is exactly what it is supposed to be. This is not their time any longer. That is the entire point of setting it 30 years later. Each trilogy is a different era of a much larger story. The OT is the core story - the rebellion and redemption. It is the classic myth in origin. The PT is the back story, the history. It is stilted and old fashioned in tone and depicts the events before and during the fall. The ST is now the new generation. This is Rey, Poe, Finn, and Kylo’s story. Han, Luke, and Leia are old people passing on the torch and sharing their wisdom. It is not their trilogy so the new characters are supposed to be pushed to the foreground at their expense. This is not Heir to Empire where the old group were still in their prime.
This is where what I keep talking about with expectations comes in. Just from that one sentence that you ended that paragraph with I can see you expected a new trilogy with the old characters and that was never the plan. Lucas never intended the third trilogy to be about 3 old farts saving things again. They were supposed to be the familiar faces to introduce the new heroes, and that is exactly what we got. In all the old myths and legends, there are sequels for a new generation where the old heroes are the ones who have become the mentors to the new heroes. Coming into this trilogy with any expectations for the cast of the OT to have big roles was setting yourself up for disappointment. It was never going to happen. That was the books of the EU (now Legends). This is something new. Something to bind the other 6 films together and bring the saga to a conclusion. This is a new tale of good vs. evil with something else to say. I think the point will be clear when IX comes out. But it is obvious from the way you describe what you didn’t like about TLJ that you had expected something different and a lot of your dislike lies in that. You have made some other really good points, but every time I read your posts on TLJ, it comes back to what about Luke, Han, and Leia you didn’t like and how it didn’t meet your expectations. And what you don’t like about their part in the ST is that they were derailed from where we left them in ROTJ by what happened to Ben Solo/Kylo Ren. That was the core of TFA and TLJ and as I understand it, George Lucas’s treatment for the ST.
As for the familiar feel to the two sides, that is often the way of history. Abrams did the setup and yet the ire is aimed at Johnson. Abrams failed to give us the little details Lucas loved to throw in to paint the picture. But we are stuck with what Abrams left us with in TFA. But it also isn’t that unreasonable. There has to be some conflict (it is called Star Wars after all) and making a weak republic and eliminating its government and fleet were a simple way to start the story. Abrams could have done better setting things up, but in the end, both Abrams and Johnson are focusing on the things that really matter - the characters that take us to the end of the Saga. What that end will be we don’t know and can only guess at this point.
You misunderstand me. I did not expect the old guard to be the focus of this story, but I don’t like the idea of turning the old crew into a bunch of losers, such that the new guard can shine by comparison. The entire outcome of the OT and much of the character arcs therein were undone without much context or explanation to reset the story to a highly similar premise of Empire vs rebels/Jedi vs Sith. That to me is not natural story progression, but a soft reboot.
It was explained, multiple times in both movies or shown in various ways. The crux is the fall of Ben Solo, which happened off screen. Luke vanished, Han and Leia broke up and went back to what they were good at. With Kylo and the Knights of Ren, the First Order rose and took the old Empire tech and improved on it and developed a new super weapon. About the only thing missing is any clear details about the new Republic, but they are wiped out in TFA. If you need to have everyone in the same place as 30 years ago or super detailed reasons why they aren’t, then you expect them to be main characters still instead of supporting characters. I can understand being critical of the film, but many of your points are based of a false assumption that the old cast is still the focus. This trilogy belongs wholly to the younger cast.
I don’t expect everyone to be in the same place, but I did expect an original story, that builds on what previous films established. In stead much of what was built has been broken down to give us something very similar. This might make money sense, since it’s the perfect way to maintain brand recognition by keeping the galaxy locked into an Empire vs rebels state, but in my view it doesn’t make much story sense. Palpatine was unique in the sense, that he alone through cunning was able to destroy a Republic that had stood for at least a thousand years. Snoke is just some random guy, who somehow seduced Ben Solo and essentially rebuilt the Empire in the unknown regions, while the Republic was looking the other way for plot convenience, and used a superweapon to turn back the clock some 35 years. No more explanation required according to the current creators. The fact that such a scenerio is possible, and we can point to real world examples to fill in the blanks, doesn’t mean it makes dramatic or story sense. It just seems like lazy writing, and makes the ST feel tacked on.
It is not just real world examples. Where we were at the end of ROTJ was the death of the Emperor. No more, no less. We have nothing of the story from there to TFA. In TFA, the Hosnian system housing the Republic Senate and the only fleet the new Republic has is destroyed. The First Order has yet to be shown occupying a single planet. We have setup the conflict and there are three players, not two. There is the First Order - the agressive invader. There is the Resistance - in the spirit of the old rebellion who has been trying to keep the First Order out. And then there is the Republic. That has yet to play any role. We don’t know what is left, what the mindset is, who they might side with, or anything. Yes their government and their fleet are gone, but the planets that had joined can reform the government. Some planets might welcome the First Order with open arms, some might fight to the bitter end. We don’t know, but your argument ignores all of them. In the OT, all these planets were part of the Empire. They were occupied. Only a few resisted and helped the Rebellion. The game, while on the surface has some similarity, is different. You are equating the situations in the OT and ST and ignoring the differences. In the OT, the death of the Emperor was a big deal that sealed the fate of the Empire. In the ST, the death of Snoke means nothing to the worlds of the Republic. How those republic worlds react is what will set the Trilogies apart. How the conflict between Rey and Kylo plays out will as well. Your comparison of the two trilogies is over simplistic. Had Lucas been doing this trilogy, I bet the story would be largely the same, but I bet the movies would be shorter and they would have more clues as to the wider galactic situation. Abrams really robbed us of that. TLJ had no reason to expand on it. Any lazy writing lies with Abrams. And even though I have not read a single add on book that might expound on any of this, I can still see many possibilities and a variety of larger pictures from what we do know (both what was in the films and the few deleted clips). I don’t see it as simple as a reset to exactly what we had in the OT. I can see the similarities in the presented story, but the wider story is very different and the ramifications of that change everything.
It wasn’t Abrams that took the New Republic out of the equation, seemingly gave the FO unlimited resources, and turned the Resistance into rebels again. That was all on Johnson. TFA ended with both the FO and the Republic having suffered major losses in personel and equipment. This left Johnson with a ton of possibilities to take the conflict in any other direction than simply rehashing Empire vs rebels. Guerilla warfare, terrorism, outright chaos, and a race for control of the remaining resources were all possibilities, but Johnson opted for the least original one, where a small band of rebels again has to fight a seemingly insurmountable force. For me personally the moment when the Resistance referred to themselves as rebels for the first time was the moment when I felt something was amiss, and cemented the idea that we would get a “what if” version of the OT rather than an original story.
Haarspalter said:
So Star Wars is now a learning-lessons-about-life-meta-documentary which uses a fictional space fantasy fairy tale as a backdrop some old bearded guy invented in the 70s?Meh.
Star Wars should be about escapism, not realism.
Sounds like you didn’t understand the other movies either.
I don’t understand why this is needed. I didn’t like TLJ for a whole host of reasons, but I’m not going to tell you you don’t understand Star Wars for liking what I consider to be a deeply flawed film, that puts a post-modern perspective on a modern myth, by turning the saga into a meta commentary on itself, and has the characters in the mythology question the merits of their own reality. You might just accept that Star Wars is different things to different people. It’s fine that you consider TLJ a great film, and you’ve stated the reasons why, but many others including myself feel the ST and particulary TLJ weakens the overall saga, and its mythology as a whole for the reasons stated above, and the fact that it resets the galaxy to an Empire vs rebels conflict without proper context, or explanation to give us an alternate reality version of the OT, where great effort is taken to push a number of new characters to the foreground at the expense of the old.
Forgive me if I only focus on this paragraph, but after reading it I felt a couple of things needed to be answered. First, this is a new trilogy and it is supposed to focus on new characters and push the old into supporting roles. That was the vision of it from the get go. That is what Lucas told Hamill 30 years ago. The role we see for Luke, Han, and Leia is exactly what it is supposed to be. This is not their time any longer. That is the entire point of setting it 30 years later. Each trilogy is a different era of a much larger story. The OT is the core story - the rebellion and redemption. It is the classic myth in origin. The PT is the back story, the history. It is stilted and old fashioned in tone and depicts the events before and during the fall. The ST is now the new generation. This is Rey, Poe, Finn, and Kylo’s story. Han, Luke, and Leia are old people passing on the torch and sharing their wisdom. It is not their trilogy so the new characters are supposed to be pushed to the foreground at their expense. This is not Heir to Empire where the old group were still in their prime.
This is where what I keep talking about with expectations comes in. Just from that one sentence that you ended that paragraph with I can see you expected a new trilogy with the old characters and that was never the plan. Lucas never intended the third trilogy to be about 3 old farts saving things again. They were supposed to be the familiar faces to introduce the new heroes, and that is exactly what we got. In all the old myths and legends, there are sequels for a new generation where the old heroes are the ones who have become the mentors to the new heroes. Coming into this trilogy with any expectations for the cast of the OT to have big roles was setting yourself up for disappointment. It was never going to happen. That was the books of the EU (now Legends). This is something new. Something to bind the other 6 films together and bring the saga to a conclusion. This is a new tale of good vs. evil with something else to say. I think the point will be clear when IX comes out. But it is obvious from the way you describe what you didn’t like about TLJ that you had expected something different and a lot of your dislike lies in that. You have made some other really good points, but every time I read your posts on TLJ, it comes back to what about Luke, Han, and Leia you didn’t like and how it didn’t meet your expectations. And what you don’t like about their part in the ST is that they were derailed from where we left them in ROTJ by what happened to Ben Solo/Kylo Ren. That was the core of TFA and TLJ and as I understand it, George Lucas’s treatment for the ST.
As for the familiar feel to the two sides, that is often the way of history. Abrams did the setup and yet the ire is aimed at Johnson. Abrams failed to give us the little details Lucas loved to throw in to paint the picture. But we are stuck with what Abrams left us with in TFA. But it also isn’t that unreasonable. There has to be some conflict (it is called Star Wars after all) and making a weak republic and eliminating its government and fleet were a simple way to start the story. Abrams could have done better setting things up, but in the end, both Abrams and Johnson are focusing on the things that really matter - the characters that take us to the end of the Saga. What that end will be we don’t know and can only guess at this point.
You misunderstand me. I did not expect the old guard to be the focus of this story, but I don’t like the idea of turning the old crew into a bunch of losers, such that the new guard can shine by comparison. The entire outcome of the OT and much of the character arcs therein were undone without much context or explanation to reset the story to a highly similar premise of Empire vs rebels/Jedi vs Sith. That to me is not natural story progression, but a soft reboot.
It was explained, multiple times in both movies or shown in various ways. The crux is the fall of Ben Solo, which happened off screen. Luke vanished, Han and Leia broke up and went back to what they were good at. With Kylo and the Knights of Ren, the First Order rose and took the old Empire tech and improved on it and developed a new super weapon. About the only thing missing is any clear details about the new Republic, but they are wiped out in TFA. If you need to have everyone in the same place as 30 years ago or super detailed reasons why they aren’t, then you expect them to be main characters still instead of supporting characters. I can understand being critical of the film, but many of your points are based of a false assumption that the old cast is still the focus. This trilogy belongs wholly to the younger cast.
I don’t expect everyone to be in the same place, but I did expect an original story, that builds on what previous films established. In stead much of what was built has been broken down to give us something very similar. This might make money sense, since it’s the perfect way to maintain brand recognition by keeping the galaxy locked into an Empire vs rebels state, but in my view it doesn’t make much story sense. Palpatine was unique in the sense, that he alone through cunning was able to destroy a Republic that had stood for at least a thousand years. Snoke is just some random guy, who somehow seduced Ben Solo and essentially rebuilt the Empire in the unknown regions, while the Republic was looking the other way for plot convenience, and used a superweapon to turn back the clock some 35 years. No more explanation required according to the current creators. The fact that such a scenerio is possible, and we can point to real world examples to fill in the blanks, doesn’t mean it makes dramatic or story sense. It just seems like lazy writing, and makes the ST feel tacked on.
Han Solo, General Leia, and Master Skywalker are not losers.
Han went from a hero and General in the Rebellion, and being ready for a committed relationship with Leia to going back to smuggling, abandoning his wife and son, and then got stabbed go death by his son in a last ditch effort to save him. Luke went from being the last Jedi, who redeemed his father to falling from his faith completely, just wanting to die, abandoning his family, friends, and the galaxy as a whole, only to die from Force exhaustion in a last ditch effort to save the handful of remaining rebels. Leia went from being one of the leaders of the Rebel Alliance and of the New Republic, while starting a family to being a general of a band of rebels that can fit in the Millenium Falcon having lost her husband and son. In the context of where they were at the end of the OT, each of the big three lost in a major way, and worst of all after building a powerful friendship over the course of three films would not share a single scene together in the new trilogy with Luke only becoming aware of the death of his best friend after the fact.
Hi Dre,
Just thought I’d say that you’re still doing a great job in representing those that found TLJ to be an abhorrent (or at the very least distasteful) addition to the Star Wars saga and continuing to shine light on all the reasons it is by far the worst Star Wars movie to date if only due to the damage it has done to the Star Wars fandom and the franchise itself. You’ve got my full support in standing up for our perspective and I wish I could be half as involved in discussing it as you are but currently I just can’t be bothered (nor have the time) to get entrenched again in arguments about TLJ and Disney/Lucasfilm reactions to the criticism.
Just didn’t want you to think you are alone in your views on TLJ that you always so accurately and thoroughly express 😃
Val
Thanks Val! 😃
In any case I am curious where Abrams will take the story, and whether he will succeed in making the total better than the sum of the parts.
I do, as they inspired Lucas, as did Buck Rogers, which opens THX-1138. George wanted to make a Flash Gordon film, but couldn’t get the rights. For all the Joseph Campbell stuff Lucas cites, he was essentially just doing his own Buster Crabbe serial.
I know, but being inspired by does not have to mean it should become the same, or that turning Star Wars into a Buster Crabbe serial will make it better.
One could say the same about the three Flash Gordon serials. Ming and his minions just keep coming back for more. 😉
I don’t hold the Flash Gordon serials in as high a regard as Star Wars. I enjoyed the Transformers cartoon in the 80s even though each episode ended with Megatron yelling “retreat!” at the end, but I wouldn’t want Star Wars to follow suit. 😉
There’s no such thing as happily ever after. Life goes on. New challenges arise. You don’t win once and never have to fight again. Just because WW2 came a little over 20 years after WW1 doesn’t mean all those that fought were losers.
I got to see beloved characters again and were introduced to great new characters too. The First Order is not like the Empire. They do not rule the galaxy. They are more like a terrorist organization that formed from the remains of an overthrown government.
In theory yes, in practise it’s more of the same. TLJ starts with the phrase “The First Order reigns”, and we are subsequently told they will control all major systems in weeks. There’s nothing in TLJ that suggests we’re dealing with a terrorist organisation, whilst everything suggests they are an oppressive force in firm control forcing the last remaining good guys to flee from their base, and ending up reducing them to the size of a football team.
It’s rebels, stormtroopers, X-Wings, Tie-fighters, Death Stars, At-At’s, and throne rooms with an evil Emperor all over again. To me those are not new challenges. They are a variation on what came before. It’s the same cross-roads, where we sometimes make a left in stead of a right, or in many cases feign a left only to go right again in the end.
What did you want the new movies to be then, romantic comedies?
No, I wanted new stories with new foes, and challenges, not another Empire vs rebels retread, and another Jedi apprentice betraying his master. Been there, done that. Now the victories of the old guard have been undone to give us more of the same. This approach devalues both the victories of the old and the new, since the galaxy can just be reset on a whim and without context or explanation. What will make the probable victory of Rey, Finn, and Poe so special at the end of Episode IX? History tells us that the answer is very little, since another “Emperor” with unlimited resources, stormtroopers, and Tie-fighters can be pulled from behind the curtain to continue the conflict ad nauseum.
By that definition then, everyone in the entire saga is a loser.
If you consider the fact that we went from liberating the galaxy from tyranny and being in a place of power with the potential to change things for the better, to a handful of people fitting into a tiny spaceship facing almost the exact same tyranny then yes, everyone is a loser.
Life is a series of ups and downs. Not everyone who experiences adversity is a loser.
That’s all good and well, but it doesn’t change the fact that the big three all fell from their pedestals in a major way and a big part of that failure was caused by their own actions. They were obviously the winners at the end of the OT, and through circumstances and their own mistakes let it all slip through their fingers. They lost almost everything they fought for over the course of a trilogy. I think the loser description is quite apt.
Han Solo, General Leia, and Master Skywalker are not losers.
Han went from a hero and General in the Rebellion, and being ready for a committed relationship with Leia to going back to smuggling, abandoning his wife and son, and then got stabbed go death by his son in a last ditch effort to save him. Luke went from being the last Jedi, who redeemed his father to falling from his faith completely, just wanting to die, abandoning his family, friends, and the galaxy as a whole, only to die from Force exhaustion in a last ditch effort to save the handful of remaining rebels. Leia went from being one of the leaders of the Rebel Alliance and of the New Republic, while starting a family to being a general of a band of rebels that can fit in the Millenium Falcon having lost her husband and son. In the context of where they were at the end of the OT, each of the big three lost in a major way, and worst of all after building a powerful friendship over the course of three films would not share a single scene together in the new trilogy with Luke only becoming aware of the death of his best friend after the fact.
Haarspalter said:
So Star Wars is now a learning-lessons-about-life-meta-documentary which uses a fictional space fantasy fairy tale as a backdrop some old bearded guy invented in the 70s?Meh.
Star Wars should be about escapism, not realism.
Sounds like you didn’t understand the other movies either.
I don’t understand why this is needed. I didn’t like TLJ for a whole host of reasons, but I’m not going to tell you you don’t understand Star Wars for liking what I consider to be a deeply flawed film, that puts a post-modern perspective on a modern myth, by turning the saga into a meta commentary on itself, and has the characters in the mythology question the merits of their own reality. You might just accept that Star Wars is different things to different people. It’s fine that you consider TLJ a great film, and you’ve stated the reasons why, but many others including myself feel the ST and particulary TLJ weakens the overall saga, and its mythology as a whole for the reasons stated above, and the fact that it resets the galaxy to an Empire vs rebels conflict without proper context, or explanation to give us an alternate reality version of the OT, where great effort is taken to push a number of new characters to the foreground at the expense of the old.
Forgive me if I only focus on this paragraph, but after reading it I felt a couple of things needed to be answered. First, this is a new trilogy and it is supposed to focus on new characters and push the old into supporting roles. That was the vision of it from the get go. That is what Lucas told Hamill 30 years ago. The role we see for Luke, Han, and Leia is exactly what it is supposed to be. This is not their time any longer. That is the entire point of setting it 30 years later. Each trilogy is a different era of a much larger story. The OT is the core story - the rebellion and redemption. It is the classic myth in origin. The PT is the back story, the history. It is stilted and old fashioned in tone and depicts the events before and during the fall. The ST is now the new generation. This is Rey, Poe, Finn, and Kylo’s story. Han, Luke, and Leia are old people passing on the torch and sharing their wisdom. It is not their trilogy so the new characters are supposed to be pushed to the foreground at their expense. This is not Heir to Empire where the old group were still in their prime.
This is where what I keep talking about with expectations comes in. Just from that one sentence that you ended that paragraph with I can see you expected a new trilogy with the old characters and that was never the plan. Lucas never intended the third trilogy to be about 3 old farts saving things again. They were supposed to be the familiar faces to introduce the new heroes, and that is exactly what we got. In all the old myths and legends, there are sequels for a new generation where the old heroes are the ones who have become the mentors to the new heroes. Coming into this trilogy with any expectations for the cast of the OT to have big roles was setting yourself up for disappointment. It was never going to happen. That was the books of the EU (now Legends). This is something new. Something to bind the other 6 films together and bring the saga to a conclusion. This is a new tale of good vs. evil with something else to say. I think the point will be clear when IX comes out. But it is obvious from the way you describe what you didn’t like about TLJ that you had expected something different and a lot of your dislike lies in that. You have made some other really good points, but every time I read your posts on TLJ, it comes back to what about Luke, Han, and Leia you didn’t like and how it didn’t meet your expectations. And what you don’t like about their part in the ST is that they were derailed from where we left them in ROTJ by what happened to Ben Solo/Kylo Ren. That was the core of TFA and TLJ and as I understand it, George Lucas’s treatment for the ST.
As for the familiar feel to the two sides, that is often the way of history. Abrams did the setup and yet the ire is aimed at Johnson. Abrams failed to give us the little details Lucas loved to throw in to paint the picture. But we are stuck with what Abrams left us with in TFA. But it also isn’t that unreasonable. There has to be some conflict (it is called Star Wars after all) and making a weak republic and eliminating its government and fleet were a simple way to start the story. Abrams could have done better setting things up, but in the end, both Abrams and Johnson are focusing on the things that really matter - the characters that take us to the end of the Saga. What that end will be we don’t know and can only guess at this point.
You misunderstand me. I did not expect the old guard to be the focus of this story, but I don’t like the idea of turning the old crew into a bunch of losers, such that the new guard can shine by comparison. The entire outcome of the OT and much of the character arcs therein were undone without much context or explanation to reset the story to a highly similar premise of Empire vs rebels/Jedi vs Sith. That to me is not natural story progression, but a soft reboot.
It has already been demonstrated that Force abilities and proficiencies manifest in people before any Jedi training. What does most Jedi instruction consist of? Clear your mind. Focus. Do or do not, there is no try. I am not sure what other instruction would be involved in levitating a rock.
Luke was very unfocused. He was sheltered by his aunt and uncle and was not very self reliant.
To me this is the sort of retrofitting I was talking about earlier. Both Anakin and Luke were presented to us as having immense talent, with Anakin having the greatest Force potential that had ever been recorded. Only now they seem barely average compared to Rey, who masters Force abilities in an instant, and by what was shown to us already stands on equal ground with Ben Solo in a matter of days. And so because of this the very talented Luke suddenly was always very unfocused, and the concept that any novice in the ways of the Force lacks focus and control no matter how great their talent is conveniently ignored, as is Lucas’ premise that any Jedi in training will face the temptation of the dark side, as their powers develop.
I’ll repeat the quote from Lucas I posted a few months ago with regards to the Force:
“The Force is really a way of seeing; it’s a way of being with life. It really has nothing to do with weapons. The Force gives you the power to have extra-sensory perception and to be able to see things and hear things, read minds and levitate things. It is said that certain creatures are born with a higher awareness of the Force than humans. Their brains are different. The Force is a perception of the reality that exists around us. You have to come to learn it. It’s not something you just get. It takes many, many years…Anyone who studied and worked hard could learn it. But you would have to do it on your own.”
There’s just no denying Rey’s sudden mastery of the Force is completely inconsistent with what has previously been established. Of course it’s up to each of us to decide whether this is an issue in the overall enjoyment of the films, but it seems rather silly to pretend like no such inconsistencies exist, or to retcon continuity by arguing the Chosen One, and his son never were that talented to begin with.
Rey is none of those things. She is very focused and extremely self reliant. She is confident and believes in herself.
I would agree with the self-reliant part, but I would not say that she’s all that confident, or believes in herself. She searching for an identity, and freely admits she doesn’t understand what’s happening to her. Her running off to save Kylo from Snoke is as brash and reckless as Luke’s attempt to save his friends from Vader’s clutches in TESB, only somehow Luke ends up hanging upside down below a city in the clouds minus one limb praying to be saved, while Rey conveniently escapes in Snoke’s shuttle, and arrives in time to save her friends with an awesome display of the Force.
Thanks for the reply Dre! I am kind of curious where you think TFA, and TLJ by extension, would have went if under Lucas’ reigns or closer to his original treatments. I’m not asking just so I can retort with why that wouldn’t have worked or whatever. Just curious.
I know some info exists on his treatments based off of sources like the Art of books for the new movies. And that one interview where vaguely mentions exploring the “microscopic world” in his treatments. Not sure what that meant though.
Thank you, good sir! 😃 I’m not sure the films would have been better, but I do have faith in Lucas’ imagination especially when combined with the talents of different writers and directors. I think one of the difficulties that the current generation of film makers face, is that they have to walk a fine line between trying to be original, and maintaining brand recognition. A consequence of this is, that the ST in some ways certainly breaks the mold, but in other ways feels like a retread. I don’t think Lucas would have had this problem, since he invented this universe, and could have thus shaped it in any way he wanted to. It would have featured the classic characters, but also had a different aesthetic, and delved into different unknown aspect of the Star Wars universe, including as you stated some sort of microscopic world.
But within the Star Wars universe, Luke Skywalker still is a Jedi in TLJ, and has all of the powers a Jedi has within that universe.
Luke appearing on Crait was an illusion, but that is still very much a real power. Probably one of the most powerful uses of the Force we’ve ever seen. One that succeeds in its goal of saving the Resistance, but also not allowing his nephew to get more blood on his hands.
So the projection might be some kind of metaphor, but it is not a metaphor in-universe. He very much performed a heroic feat that is worthy of the Jedi legend.
Within universe, Luke had began to doubt the function of the Jedi. He believes that since he has failed like the Jedi before him, that the very existence of the Jedi as they are now are just a part of the problem. That light begets dark. So he has begun to believe that the Jedi need to end in order to stop the cycle, and for something better to start from scratch and take its place.
But in the end, he sees the value of the Jedi, and instead of throwing it all away and starting over, like Kylo Ren wants to, he sees the merit in accepting those mistakes and learning from them in order to grow.So just because Luke questions that nature in TLJ, doesn’t undo himself as a real person or his very real powers. Because a meta-commentary exists within the film doesn’t necessarily mean that the meta-commentary exists in the universe the characters occupy.
The legend of Luke, in-universe, is an idealized, unchanging version of Luke that doesn’t exist, but Luke Skywalker still very much exists.
The Last Jedi actually still fulfills the latter steps of the Hero’s Journey as well, keeping in line with Luke’s Journey in the OT:
Rescue from Without
Just as the hero may need guides and assistants to set out on the quest, often he or she must have powerful guides and rescuers to bring them back to everyday life, especially if the person has been wounded or weakened by the experience.
The hero may have to be brought back from his supernatural adventure by assistance from without. That is to say, the world may have to come and get him. And yet, in so far as one is alive, life will call. >Society is jealous of those who remain away from it, and will come knocking at the door. If the hero. . . is unwilling, the disturber suffers an ugly shock.The Crossing of the Return Threshold
The trick in returning is to retain the wisdom gained on the quest, to integrate that wisdom and share it with the world.
The easy thing is to commit the whole community to the devil and retire again into the heavenly rock dwelling, close the door, and make it fast. But if some spiritual obstetrician has drawn the shimenawa across the retreat, then the work of representing eternity in time, and perceiving in time eternity, cannot be avoided" The hero returns to the world of common day and accepts it as real and worthy of salvation.Master of Two Worlds
This step is usually represented by a transcendental hero like Jesus or Gautama Buddha. For a human hero, it may mean achieving a balance between the material and spiritual. The person has become comfortable and competent in both the inner and outer worlds.
Campbell: "Freedom to pass back and forth across the world division, from the perspective of the apparitions of time to that of the causal deep and back—not contaminating the principles of the one with those of the other, yet permitting the mind to know the one by virtue of the other—is the talent of the master. The Cosmic Dancer, declares Nietzsche, does not rest heavily in a single spot, but gaily, lightly, turns and leaps from one position to another.Freedom to Live (for an eternity) Mastery leads to freedom from the fear of death, which in turn is the freedom to live (for an eternity)
This is a part of what I love about it. It can carry these messages that might seem contradictory, but they’re not. It’s gets closer to true understanding, like the Force representing the eternal Tao, which is in itself shows balance in contradictions.
The Last Jedi deconstructs the hero, while still following the hero’s journey. It deconstructs legend, but still shows that there is truth to legends. You just can’t confuse deconstruction with destruction. To me, the film simply asks, what makes a hero a hero, and what makes a legend a legend?
While the Last Jedi has post-modern ideas, it doesn’t conclude in nihilism like a lot of post-modernist thought does, saying none of it matters. By deconstructing certain ideas, it does shows their flaws, but also their crucial value.
From a more personal perspective though, I do really appreciate Luke’s story in VIII.
Luke was always my favorite character growing up. He was my hero. But as I’ve grown up I’ve realized that we can’t always stand up to that heroism. We make mistakes, we hurt people we care about, we fail people sometimes. But just because we fail doesn’t mean we should give up on trying to be better. It’s the constant struggle of self improvement that allows for us to be better. It is not a place you reach, but something that must be maintained.Which also makes me think of Luke. Even though he overcame the dark side in Return of the Jedi doesn’t mean he gets a key to never struggle with the dark side again. The constant struggle is much more appropriate to what the dark side represents.
While not my situation, one example I see a clear parallel to is raising kids. Kids often idealize their parents and as they grow up, eventually see that their parents aren’t perfect people. They have flaws, and probably those flaws will reflect on their children in someway, for better or worse. Eventually parents will slip up, say something that hurts their kids feelings, takes a punishment too far. Being imperfect, failing your kid sometimes, can feel horrible, but eventually you have to accept that you’re going to make mistakes, and despite them you have to learn from those mistakes and be the best parent you can possibly be, because that’s all you really can do.
Since Luke has gone through his own failure, and even gone as far as isolating himself because he thinks he will only makes things worse, gives me hope that even if I feel like I’m at my lowest point in my life, like Luke, that I still have a chance at bouncing back and becoming closer to that idealized version of myself than I ever thought possible.
For me, this makes Luke my hero even more than he was before.
Definitely not trying to say your opinion is wrong. It doesn’t work for you, and that’s totally fine! This movie isn’t a masterpiece, but it isn’t a disaster either. And I do disagree that The Last Jedi contradicts the mythology set up by the rest of the saga. To me, it is a great defense of that mythology, showing us why it is so important. All these movies carry life lessons within a fantastical setting, including this one, and that’s what makes these movies fairy tales.
EDIT: I’m not trying to change anyone’s mind and I know it probably isn’t going to, but I just want to ask others who might disagree with me to stay open-minded about what I said. I love Star Wars, and I just want others to love it to. Like them or not, the Prequels and Sequels are a part of the Saga. You can choose to ignore them, but I just want others to try accept them and find meaning in their stories so people can enjoy them and have fun with the whole saga. That’s all I want! You guys are great, thanks for all of the interesting discussions.
I agree with this and am keeping an open mind . I have a copy of Joseph Campbell’s Hero With A Thousand Faces and it has an outline of the hero’s journey and TLJ follows that outline brilliantly . It is also worth noting that Carrie Fisher was an in demand script doctor and lent her input into the TLJ script .Also , regarding the recent conversation here , the HelloGreedo post that OOJason made a page or so back addresses a lot of the dynamics of recent conversations .When someone comments like this …“So Star Wars is now a learning-lessons-about-life-meta-documentary which uses a fictional space fantasy fairy tale as a backdrop some old bearded guy invented in the 70s?” or this “Sounds like you didn’t understand the other movies either.” both are antagonistic . the first one is patronizing and the second one is insulting someones intelligence . You may not have intended it as you say , but perhaps people , and this includes myself , should think about how their comments will be received before making them .
I agree! I think great arguments are made from both parts of the fence, but I would be happier if there were no fence at all, and we would just accept we are all fans with different points of view willing to see the films through each other’s eyes.
But within the Star Wars universe, Luke Skywalker still is a Jedi in TLJ, and has all of the powers a Jedi has within that universe.
Luke appearing on Crait was an illusion, but that is still very much a real power. Probably one of the most powerful uses of the Force we’ve ever seen. One that succeeds in its goal of saving the Resistance, but also not allowing his nephew to get more blood on his hands.
So the projection might be some kind of metaphor, but it is not a metaphor in-universe. He very much performed a heroic feat that is worthy of the Jedi legend.
Within universe, Luke had began to doubt the function of the Jedi. He believes that since he has failed like the Jedi before him, that the very existence of the Jedi as they are now are just a part of the problem. That light begets dark. So he has begun to believe that the Jedi need to end in order to stop the cycle, and for something better to start from scratch and take its place.
But in the end, he sees the value of the Jedi, and instead of throwing it all away and starting over, like Kylo Ren wants to, he sees the merit in accepting those mistakes and learning from them in order to grow.So just because Luke questions that nature in TLJ, doesn’t undo himself as a real person or his very real powers. Because a meta-commentary exists within the film doesn’t necessarily mean that the meta-commentary exists in the universe the characters occupy.
The legend of Luke, in-universe, is an idealized, unchanging version of Luke that doesn’t exist, but Luke Skywalker still very much exists.
The Last Jedi actually still fulfills the latter steps of the Hero’s Journey as well, keeping in line with Luke’s Journey in the OT:
Rescue from Without
Just as the hero may need guides and assistants to set out on the quest, often he or she must have powerful guides and rescuers to bring them back to everyday life, especially if the person has been wounded or weakened by the experience.
The hero may have to be brought back from his supernatural adventure by assistance from without. That is to say, the world may have to come and get him. And yet, in so far as one is alive, life will call. >Society is jealous of those who remain away from it, and will come knocking at the door. If the hero. . . is unwilling, the disturber suffers an ugly shock.The Crossing of the Return Threshold
The trick in returning is to retain the wisdom gained on the quest, to integrate that wisdom and share it with the world.
The easy thing is to commit the whole community to the devil and retire again into the heavenly rock dwelling, close the door, and make it fast. But if some spiritual obstetrician has drawn the shimenawa across the retreat, then the work of representing eternity in time, and perceiving in time eternity, cannot be avoided" The hero returns to the world of common day and accepts it as real and worthy of salvation.Master of Two Worlds
This step is usually represented by a transcendental hero like Jesus or Gautama Buddha. For a human hero, it may mean achieving a balance between the material and spiritual. The person has become comfortable and competent in both the inner and outer worlds.
Campbell: "Freedom to pass back and forth across the world division, from the perspective of the apparitions of time to that of the causal deep and back—not contaminating the principles of the one with those of the other, yet permitting the mind to know the one by virtue of the other—is the talent of the master. The Cosmic Dancer, declares Nietzsche, does not rest heavily in a single spot, but gaily, lightly, turns and leaps from one position to another.Freedom to Live (for an eternity) Mastery leads to freedom from the fear of death, which in turn is the freedom to live (for an eternity)
This is a part of what I love about it. It can carry these messages that might seem contradictory, but they’re not. It’s gets closer to true understanding, like the Force representing the eternal Tao, which is in itself shows balance in contradictions.
The Last Jedi deconstructs the hero, while still following the hero’s journey. It deconstructs legend, but still shows that there is truth to legends. You just can’t confuse deconstruction with destruction. To me, the film simply asks, what makes a hero a hero, and what makes a legend a legend?
While the Last Jedi has post-modern ideas, it doesn’t conclude in nihilism like a lot of post-modernist thought does, saying none of it matters. By deconstructing certain ideas, it does shows their flaws, but also their crucial value.
From a more personal perspective though, I do really appreciate Luke’s story in VIII.
Luke was always my favorite character growing up. He was my hero. But as I’ve grown up I’ve realized that we can’t always stand up to that heroism. We make mistakes, we hurt people we care about, we fail people sometimes. But just because we fail doesn’t mean we should give up on trying to be better. It’s the constant struggle of self improvement that allows for us to be better. It is not a place you reach, but something that must be maintained.Which also makes me think of Luke. Even though he overcame the dark side in Return of the Jedi doesn’t mean he gets a key to never struggle with the dark side again. The constant struggle is much more appropriate to what the dark side represents.
While not my situation, one example I see a clear parallel to is raising kids. Kids often idealize their parents and as they grow up, eventually see that their parents aren’t perfect people. They have flaws, and probably those flaws will reflect on their children in someway, for better or worse. Eventually parents will slip up, say something that hurts their kids feelings, takes a punishment too far. Being imperfect, failing your kid sometimes, can feel horrible, but eventually you have to accept that you’re going to make mistakes, and despite them you have to learn from those mistakes and be the best parent you can possibly be, because that’s all you really can do.
Since Luke has gone through his own failure, and even gone as far as isolating himself because he thinks he will only makes things worse, gives me hope that even if I feel like I’m at my lowest point in my life, like Luke, that I still have a chance at bouncing back and becoming closer to that idealized version of myself than I ever thought possible.
For me, this makes Luke my hero even more than he was before.
Definitely not trying to say your opinion is wrong. It doesn’t work for you, and that’s totally fine! This movie isn’t a masterpiece, but it isn’t a disaster either. And I do disagree that The Last Jedi contradicts the mythology set up by the rest of the saga. To me, it is a great defense of that mythology, showing us why it is so important. All these movies carry life lessons within a fantastical setting, including this one, and that’s what makes these movies fairy tales.
I don’t think TLJ is a disaster. I don’t any of the films are. They each have their merits, but I view Johnson’s film as an attempt to delibirately deconstruct Lucas’ mythology only to reconstruct it in a more post-modern light. While I think the approach is interesting, I don’t think, it meshes well with Lucas’ vision, and would be suited better for a separate trilogy, rather than the eight part of a nine part story.
The latter is your erroneous interpretation of other people’s arguments including my own. I never stated Star Wars is devoid of symbolism and moral lessons, and nor did anyone else. Nobody but you claims “simple escapism” and symbolism and moral lessons are mutually exclusive. In fact you seem to treat the idea of simple escapism with an amount of disdain.
The entire conversation stemmed from this comment made by someone else:
“”“So Star Wars is now a learning-lessons-about-life-meta-documentary which uses a fictional space fantasy fairy tale as a backdrop some old bearded guy invented in the 70s?
Meh.
Star Wars should be about escapism, not realism.”""I said that that storytelling style has always been present in Star Wars and if you don’t think so, then you didn’t understand the other movies either. I stand by that statement.
I was not insulting anyone. It was not a personal attack. Just my advice to go back an look at the other Star Wars movies in a different light.
I disagree with you. There’s a marked difference in storytelling style between Lucas’ films and TLJ in my view in particular in the way Lucas shaped his modern myth, and in the way Johnsom deconstructs that myth, only to reconstruct in a more post-modern context. There’s a difference between viewing the original films in their original context, and by viewing them in the context TLJ provides. Some of us might be inclined to suggest the movies were always meant to be seen in this light, but I’m inclined to disagree, and believe Lucas would as well.