DrDre

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

So calm down and stop trying to look for a “gotcha” when there isn’t one and start actually paying attention to what I’m saying before you post. By acting like that, you are you’re participating in that same kind of combative and disrespectful fan discourse that you talk about.

Nonsense. Don’t try to turn this on me. I’m not the one calling people pathetic for expressing their opinion, or saying most of these people harrass the creators, and it’s not the first time such generalizations have been expressed on these forums either.

You’re putting words in my mouth, which is not exactly what I’d consider positive discourse. You’re saying I’m disrespectful and feeding into the toxic fandom. I can call some people pathetic without calling everyone pathetic, believe it or not. By generalizing my statements your perpetuating a false notion that anyone calling out harrasers is calling everyone harassers. You’re eroding the nuance of the discussion and furthering the polarization. I don’t appreciate it and I think it’s incredibly frustrating.

You eroded the nuance of the discussion the moment you stated most of “these people” harrass. That’s not putting words in your mouth. You said that.

Read my post again Dre. Who are the people I’m talking about? Am I talking about fans who criticize? Or am I talking about fans who act like children?

If you weren’t skimming my posts for things to get mad about you’d realize that and we wouldn’t be having this discussion. Try harder.

You criticized those that complain, and feel entitled. So far, so good, but then you stated these people are pathetic, and that most of them harrass. That is a generalization, and a pretty nasty one. I criticized you for it, and now rather than admit you made a mistake, you try to make it about me, because I’m just waiting all day, hoping you say something bad, such that I can attack you for it.

Let’s drop this, and get back on topic.

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

So calm down and stop trying to look for a “gotcha” when there isn’t one and start actually paying attention to what I’m saying before you post. By acting like that, you are you’re participating in that same kind of combative and disrespectful fan discourse that you talk about.

Nonsense. Don’t try to turn this on me. I’m not the one calling people pathetic for expressing their opinion, or saying most of these people harrass the creators, and it’s not the first time such generalizations have been expressed on these forums either.

You’re putting words in my mouth, which is not exactly what I’d consider positive discourse. You’re saying I’m disrespectful and feeding into the toxic fandom. I can call some people pathetic without calling everyone pathetic, believe it or not. By generalizing my statements your perpetuating a false notion that anyone calling out harrasers is calling everyone harassers. You’re eroding the nuance of the discussion and furthering the polarization. I don’t appreciate it and I think it’s incredibly frustrating.

You eroded the nuance of the discussion the moment you stated most of “these people” harrass. That’s not putting words in your mouth. You said that, and I called you out on it.

DominicCobb said:

So calm down and stop trying to look for a “gotcha” when there isn’t one and start actually paying attention to what I’m saying before you post. By acting like that, you are you’re participating in that same kind of combative and disrespectful fan discourse that you talk about.

Nonsense. Don’t try to turn this on me. I’m not the one calling people pathetic for expressing their opinions on a movie, or saying most of these fans harrass people, and it’s not the first time such generalizations have been expressed on these forums either. You made an inaccurate generalization. That’s a fact. Take some responsibility for it, rather than to try to turn the tables.

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

I honestly enjoy seeing you always try to spin what I’m saying back around on me. It’s quite enjoyable really and happens without fail, even if you have to twist yourself into nonsensical contortions to do so.

Respect and empathy is something I value more than most honestly, but sometimes you just have to call it like you see it. A lot of the fans are entitled and honestly acting like children. I fully understand why they are, and I respect that they have a right to do so, but that doesn’t mean I can’t criticize them. Pathetic is the exact right word for it. Especially when most of these same people harass creators and others. At that point no respect is deserved and none will be given.

Also, if you’re implying I blew my fuse during the PT, you couldn’t be further off base.

I’m not spinning anything. You are not just criticizing toxic elements in the fandom, you are conflating criticisms and negative reactions to a property with harrassment. You are generalizing when you state, that most of these same people harass creators and others. That is what is nonsensical, and disrespectful.

Perhaps I should have said many not most. But I’m not talking about all people who criticize and never was. I’m talking about people that go out of their way on the internet to endlessly complain. You’ll find many of these same people responding to Rian Johnson et al saying that they ruined Star Wars.

I would consider the latter harrassment. However, I think rather than accepting that the fandom is divided, and that there are a lot of people unhappy with the direction of the franchise, a lot of fans of Disney Star Wars like to focus solely on toxic fans, manbabies, and harrassment. The Resistance trailer gets a negative response, and so it must be toxic fans downvoting it. It’s just unfathomable that Disney Star Wars can elicit a genuinely mixed response.

DominicCobb said:

I honestly enjoy seeing you always try to spin what I’m saying back around on me. It’s quite enjoyable really and happens without fail, even if you have to twist yourself into nonsensical contortions to do so.

Respect and empathy is something I value more than most honestly, but sometimes you just have to call it like you see it. A lot of the fans are entitled and honestly acting like children. I fully understand why they are, and I respect that they have a right to do so, but that doesn’t mean I can’t criticize them. Pathetic is the exact right word for it. Especially when most of these same people harass creators and others. At that point no respect is deserved and none will be given.

Also, if you’re implying I blew my fuse during the PT, you couldn’t be further off base.

I’m not spinning anything. You are not just criticizing toxic elements in the fandom, you are conflating criticisms and negative reactions to a property with harrassment. You are generalizing when you state, that most of these same people harass creators and others. That is what is nonsensical, and disrespectful.

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

More likely ST haters trying desperately to prove such.

There’s no doubt TLJ was a divisive movie, and that enthousiasm for the ST era has dropped considerably in parts of the fanbase because of it. So, there’s no need to prove anything. If there’s less appeal in the ST era, it’s because the powers that be failed to generate it. That’s not the fans’ fault.

It’s not a matter of enthusiasm. If fans were just unenthusiastic they would just not watch the trailer and not bother to press dislike. The dislike ratio is just indicative of petty and pathetic fans trying to prove that “new Star Wars bad, Clone Wars good” as if anyone cares.

Why is it pathetic to express dislike in the direction taken by your favourite franchise? Not being enthousiastic about the future of a property is not considered a good thing by fans of that property in general, and people tend to respond to that sort of thing, just like they did in the PT era. If you’re a fan, being indifferent to a new series is considered to be the anti-thesis of what being a fan is all about, and so in the eyes of those fans it is an extremely negative thing. Your reaction is akin to telling people to just not care, and stop being a fan.

It’s pathetic because their “dislike” isn’t necessarily indicative of their actual feelings for the trailer, but to try to prove a tangential point of some sort.

Which is an assumption on your part. I’m sure there are those that do, but for myself I find myself feeling indifferent to the ST era in general in the wake of TLJ, and this trailer hasn’t changed that.

As for the rest, that’s silly. Star Wars puts out plenty of stuff. Being a fan doesn’t mean you have to have a strong reaction to anything. In fact that mindset is part of the problem these days. You don’t have to have a strong reaction to everything, especially not a 1 minute trailer for a show that’s not necessarily even for them to begin with. Take Forces or Destiny for example. Fans lost their shit over that. They feel entitled. It’s pathetic.

It’s kind of ironic that many of the same people that blew a fuse in the PT era, and spent their days complaining about it, are now telling others to lighten up. The problem these days is not the reaction to the property, it’s the reaction of fans towards other fans, creators, actors, and what not, and your reaction is indicative of that problem. There’s just so little respect, and empathy going around these days. That is what’s truly pathetic.

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

More likely ST haters trying desperately to prove such.

There’s no doubt TLJ was a divisive movie, and that enthousiasm for the ST era has dropped considerably in parts of the fanbase because of it. So, there’s no need to prove anything. If there’s less appeal in the ST era, it’s because the powers that be failed to generate it. That’s not the fans’ fault.

It’s not a matter of enthusiasm. If fans were just unenthusiastic they would just not watch the trailer and not bother to press dislike. The dislike ratio is just indicative of petty and pathetic fans trying to prove that “new Star Wars bad, Clone Wars good” as if anyone cares.

Why is it pathetic to express dislike in the direction taken by your favourite franchise? Not being enthousiastic about the future of a property is not considered a good thing by fans of that property in general, and people tend to respond to that sort of thing. If you’re a fan, being indifferent to a new series is considered to be the anti-thesis, of what being a fan is all about, and so in the eyes of those fans it is an extremely negative thing. Your reaction is akin to telling people to just not care, be indifferent, and stop being a fan.

DominicCobb said:

More likely ST haters trying desperately to prove such.

There’s no doubt TLJ was a divisive movie, and that enthousiasm for the ST era has dropped considerably in parts of the fanbase because of it. So, there’s no need to prove anything. If there’s less appeal in the ST era, it’s because the powers that be failed to generate it. That’s not the fans’ fault.

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

dahmage said:

DrDre said:

It seems the Resistance trailer has not been recieved very well. The like/dislike ratio is 1:2 on youtube. Compare this to the 30:1 ratio for the upcoming Clone Wars season.

I doubt if those clicking like and dislike on YouTube are actually the Target demographic. I wouldn’t worry about it.

Shouldn’t the target demographic be in bed at 10pm? The time it is being broadcast seems to suggest LFM is not aiming this solely at children, although the trailer certainly has somewhat of a childish tone.

No Star Wars show is just for kids. But premiering it at 10 doesn’t magically mean it’s not primarily for kids, which it obviously is.

If it is not solely for kids then those liking or disliking it on youtube are part of the target demographic, and premiering it on a time where only grownups can watch it strongly suggests this is the case. If so, while the show may be primarily for kids, it should still have a broad appeal, and while it’s too early to judge the series on the basis of a trailer, the trailer thusfar seems to have failed to appeal to that broader audience. I’m sure kids will love it though.

YouTube is not the “broader audience.” And nothing that’s on Disney channel or Disney XD isn’t primarily targeting kids, doesn’t matter what time it premieres.

Youtube is a subsection of the broader audience. Star Wars is and always has been. Anything Star Wars related is always also targeted towards the fans, who are the big spenders in this franchise.

The hardcore fans will watch it whether they dislike the trailer or not. But they are ultimately a minority.

The hardcore fans are an exponent of the general audience, and they are expected to like Star Wars related material more, not less. So, the fact that a majority appears to be less than enthousiastic about this series is telling. They will watch it, and complain of course, but I’m also convinced at least part of the problem here is, that the ST has less appeal than the OT and PT eras to many fans. There doesn’t seem to be much interest, or buzz surrounding the series. I guess time will tell, if this series and the upcoming live action series will be able to generate more interest for the post-ROTJ period. I believe this series and the live action series are supposed to increase anticipation for episode IX, so a less than enthousiastic reception from the fans would not be a good thing. However, it’s early days. It may turn out great.

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

dahmage said:

DrDre said:

It seems the Resistance trailer has not been recieved very well. The like/dislike ratio is 1:2 on youtube. Compare this to the 30:1 ratio for the upcoming Clone Wars season.

I doubt if those clicking like and dislike on YouTube are actually the Target demographic. I wouldn’t worry about it.

Shouldn’t the target demographic be in bed at 10pm? The time it is being broadcast seems to suggest LFM is not aiming this solely at children, although the trailer certainly has somewhat of a childish tone.

No Star Wars show is just for kids. But premiering it at 10 doesn’t magically mean it’s not primarily for kids, which it obviously is.

If it is not solely for kids then those liking or disliking it on youtube are part of the target demographic, and premiering it on a time where only grownups can watch it strongly suggests this is the case. If so, while the show may be primarily for kids, it should still have a broad appeal, and while it’s too early to judge the series on the basis of a trailer, the trailer thusfar seems to have failed to appeal to that broader audience. I’m sure kids will love it though.

YouTube is not the “broader audience.” And nothing that’s on Disney channel or Disney XD isn’t primarily targeting kids, doesn’t matter what time it premieres.

Youtube is a subsection of the broader audience. Star Wars is and always has been targeting a broader audience. Anything Star Wars related is always also targeted towards the fans, who are the big spenders in this franchise.

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

dahmage said:

DrDre said:

It seems the Resistance trailer has not been recieved very well. The like/dislike ratio is 1:2 on youtube. Compare this to the 30:1 ratio for the upcoming Clone Wars season.

I doubt if those clicking like and dislike on YouTube are actually the Target demographic. I wouldn’t worry about it.

Shouldn’t the target demographic be in bed at 10pm? The time it is being broadcast seems to suggest LFM is not aiming this solely at children, although the trailer certainly has somewhat of a childish tone.

No Star Wars show is just for kids. But premiering it at 10 doesn’t magically mean it’s not primarily for kids, which it obviously is.

If it is not solely for kids then those liking or disliking it on youtube are part of the target demographic, and premiering it on a time where only grownups can watch it strongly suggests this is the case. If so, while the show may be primarily for kids, it should still have a broad appeal, and while it’s too early to judge the series on the basis of a trailer, the trailer thusfar seems to have failed to appeal to that broader audience. I’m sure kids will love it though.

dahmage said:

DrDre said:

It seems the Resistance trailer has not been recieved very well. The like/dislike ratio is 1:2 on youtube. Compare this to the 30:1 ratio for the upcoming Clone Wars season.

I doubt if those clicking like and dislike on YouTube are actually the Target demographic. I wouldn’t worry about it.

Shouldn’t the target demographic be in bed at 10pm? The time it is being broadcast seems to suggest LFM is not aiming this solely at children, although the trailer doesn’t seem to have a broad appeal. So, it’s sending mixed signals in my view.

It seems the Resistance trailer has not been recieved very well. The like/dislike ratio is 1:2 on youtube. Compare this to the 30:1 ratio for the upcoming Clone Wars season.

Another batch of frames is finished. Here are all four sets:

Congrats Puggo! It looks amazing! 😃

It depends what I’m looking for. ROTS has an almost operatic feel to me, and while it still has issues in the execution department, I think overall it has a good story, and great visuals, even if it’s a little too CGI heavy at times. I also think the performances range from acceptable to pretty good. At the same time there’s a part of me that prefers TPM. I think TPM is visually the most appealing, having the best blend of location shooting, traditional effects work, and CGI. I sort of see TPM as Star Wars with lower stakes, and blander characters, but overall still fairly entertaining. I was never really that bothered by Jar Jar as much as some.

Creox said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

Creox said:

NeverarGreat said:

yotsuya said:

NeverarGreat said:

djsmokingjam said:

DrDre said:

Here are two links from the same critic. The first discusses weaknesses in RJ’s story, and argues that TLJ’s biggest weakness is, that the story doesn’t go anywhere. There are no consequences.

Short summary:

"In The Last Jedi, a lot happens. But not a lot happens for long. Leia’s sudden and unexpected death only proceeds her jarring return to life.

Kylo Ren’s betrayal of Snoke, which leads to a team-up with Rey and himself against Snoke’s guards, implies his redemption… But it isn’t long lasting as his actions hardly reflect his intentions. After the fight, he has to explain himself to Rey, and how they still aren’t on the same side.

This is a classic break from “show, don’t tell.” Kylo has to tell us his motives for the scene to make sense. He essentially retcons the entire sequence, because it might as well not have happened. The scene ends up telling us nothing new. Kylo Ren is a bad guy. But we were already aware of that. Actions should speak for a character, but in the most powerful scene of the film, they don’t.

Lastly, when Luke finally faces Kylo, there’s a moment where we’re meant to believe this is the end for the Jedi Master. It seems as if Luke has accepted his fate as Kylo runs toward him with his blade drawn. Luke literally tells him something similar to what Ben Kenobi tells Darth Vader: “If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine.”

Luke seems fearless. But then, we realize Luke has nothing to fear after all. He’s not even actually there. This scene is meant for us to anticipate Luke’s death, only for it to be revealed he’s fine… Only for it to be revealed a moment later that he dies anyway."

Both these points seem incredibly pedantic and overinflated to me.

In the first instance, “show don’t tell” does not mean either that dialogue is redundant in cinema, or that actions and dialogue always have to be in perfect concert, especially regarding villains (who are often by nature duplicitous or unstable). The entire point of the throne room sequence is to set up an expectation (Kylo will side with Rey) that is then upended; in much the same way as the action at the end of ESB sets up an expectation (Vader wants to kill Luke) that is then contradicted by dialogue (“I am your father”) rather than action.

On the second point, he’s just being incredibly literal. The entire subtext of the dialogue is not that whether Luke will literally be struck down - Luke has already made it clear throughout the film that he does not fear death - but that in opposing him, Kylo ensures Luke’s reputation will echo throughout the galaxy and that thousands will be inspired by his example, which we see happen in the final scene.

To say there are no consequences to the events in the film is absurdly reductive, and frankly typical of the wilfully and uncharitably misreading “criticism” I’ve seen so much of about this film.

I think what the critic was trying to get at is that the story does its best to deflate its own most interesting ideas. There are obviously consequences and character progression, it’s just that these moments are ultimately not as consequential as we are first led to believe.

Leia is blown out into space, presumably to her death! But wait, she’s using the Force in a way we’ve never seen from her before! Has she had substantial training in those thirty years? Has the Force suddenly ‘awakened’ in her as well, making her the ‘new hope’ for the galaxy that Luke suggested in ROTJ?

No, sorry. It was just an instinctual reaction to her impending death and her Force powers will not be a big factor in the rest of the movie.

Kylo kills Snoke! Now he’s teaming up with Rey against the goofy red guards! Will he really turn to Rey’s side and will they strike out together in a new direction in order to prevent a repeat of Rebels vs Empire that we got in the previous trilogy?

No, sorry. Kylo’s still a bad egg and Rey still has a deep loyalty to the Jedi ideals (despite her teachers hating them) and the Resistance (despite knowing them for maybe a day at most). And it will be a Rebels vs Empire situation quite explicitly until the end of the movie.

You get the idea. The movie goes in some interesting directions, but it seems to make a point of teasing these truly interesting directions and pulling it back to something much more tame.

No, one of the points of this film is that anyone can use the force. Not everyone is powerful enough, but people who are powerful enough can come from anywhere. This is implicit in the PT Jedi code - attachment is forbidden and by extrapolations, so is procreation. That means that none of the powerful Jedi we see came from a long line of Jedi in the family. So if being powerful only runs in the blood, where did all the PT Jedi come from?

I don’t see what this has to do with my point. I don’t really care about Leia’s Force powers, since they don’t really affect the story, but the movie spends its time showing this impressive feat with sweeping wide shots and powerful music as if it has totally changed the game in terms of Leia’s role in the story, only to drop that and have nobody speak of it again. Cut from the bridge explosion to Leia unconscious and nothing is lost from a story perspective.

The movie does go in many interesting directions, but this is the middle chapter and we did not see a resolution to any of them. This lack of resolution leads to this erroneous conclusion that this movie did not further the story. It furthered the characters and changed them. It tackled grander things than the Resistance/Republic/First Order conflict, which it left mostly in limbo.

Are you mistakenly talking about ESB, where the larger war was in limbo? Because in TFA, the First Order was treated as a sort of terrorist fringe organization, whereas in TLJ it all-but rules the galaxy.
Besides, this is again missing the point. The critic is saying that we are first given a very interesting direction which is quickly undermined in favor of a far less interesting direction. It would be like Vader saying ‘I am your father!’ and Yoda later saying ‘Messing with you, Vader was. Your father, he definitely isn’t’ and that being that.

And we know from ROTJ that Leia is strong in the force and like her brother in TESB (who grabbed his light saber with no known training of doing that) she grabbed a ship and in keeping with the laws of physics, she moved not the ship. Rey, Leia, and the boy at the end show us that anyone can use the force, from a Skywalker to a stable boy.

That’s all very nice, but again, what does it have to do with anything? We already assumed that Leia had the capability of doing what Luke could do (even if it was left undeveloped). Why would Rian bother to show us what we already assume unless these powers are called upon later in the movie? Luke and his lightsaber is a set up for the duel with Vader, where he is now able to pull himself up out of the Carbonite pit. It shows the progression of his skills. Leia’s ability is one-and-done.

A movie experience is more than just moving to the next plot point in a straight line.

Good luck explaining that to Star Wars fans.

Yeah, I know…us critics are real dummies. I don’t like them foreign movies either, because them talk funny…

😉

I may disagree with your points at times but I do respect the time you take to make them. I also get that you are passionate about SW. That being said, a lot of criticisms I read about TLJ reflect the kind I responded to initially here.

😃

Working on it on and off. Hopefully some updates soon…

DominicCobb said:

Creox said:

NeverarGreat said:

yotsuya said:

NeverarGreat said:

djsmokingjam said:

DrDre said:

Here are two links from the same critic. The first discusses weaknesses in RJ’s story, and argues that TLJ’s biggest weakness is, that the story doesn’t go anywhere. There are no consequences.

Short summary:

"In The Last Jedi, a lot happens. But not a lot happens for long. Leia’s sudden and unexpected death only proceeds her jarring return to life.

Kylo Ren’s betrayal of Snoke, which leads to a team-up with Rey and himself against Snoke’s guards, implies his redemption… But it isn’t long lasting as his actions hardly reflect his intentions. After the fight, he has to explain himself to Rey, and how they still aren’t on the same side.

This is a classic break from “show, don’t tell.” Kylo has to tell us his motives for the scene to make sense. He essentially retcons the entire sequence, because it might as well not have happened. The scene ends up telling us nothing new. Kylo Ren is a bad guy. But we were already aware of that. Actions should speak for a character, but in the most powerful scene of the film, they don’t.

Lastly, when Luke finally faces Kylo, there’s a moment where we’re meant to believe this is the end for the Jedi Master. It seems as if Luke has accepted his fate as Kylo runs toward him with his blade drawn. Luke literally tells him something similar to what Ben Kenobi tells Darth Vader: “If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine.”

Luke seems fearless. But then, we realize Luke has nothing to fear after all. He’s not even actually there. This scene is meant for us to anticipate Luke’s death, only for it to be revealed he’s fine… Only for it to be revealed a moment later that he dies anyway."

Both these points seem incredibly pedantic and overinflated to me.

In the first instance, “show don’t tell” does not mean either that dialogue is redundant in cinema, or that actions and dialogue always have to be in perfect concert, especially regarding villains (who are often by nature duplicitous or unstable). The entire point of the throne room sequence is to set up an expectation (Kylo will side with Rey) that is then upended; in much the same way as the action at the end of ESB sets up an expectation (Vader wants to kill Luke) that is then contradicted by dialogue (“I am your father”) rather than action.

On the second point, he’s just being incredibly literal. The entire subtext of the dialogue is not that whether Luke will literally be struck down - Luke has already made it clear throughout the film that he does not fear death - but that in opposing him, Kylo ensures Luke’s reputation will echo throughout the galaxy and that thousands will be inspired by his example, which we see happen in the final scene.

To say there are no consequences to the events in the film is absurdly reductive, and frankly typical of the wilfully and uncharitably misreading “criticism” I’ve seen so much of about this film.

I think what the critic was trying to get at is that the story does its best to deflate its own most interesting ideas. There are obviously consequences and character progression, it’s just that these moments are ultimately not as consequential as we are first led to believe.

Leia is blown out into space, presumably to her death! But wait, she’s using the Force in a way we’ve never seen from her before! Has she had substantial training in those thirty years? Has the Force suddenly ‘awakened’ in her as well, making her the ‘new hope’ for the galaxy that Luke suggested in ROTJ?

No, sorry. It was just an instinctual reaction to her impending death and her Force powers will not be a big factor in the rest of the movie.

Kylo kills Snoke! Now he’s teaming up with Rey against the goofy red guards! Will he really turn to Rey’s side and will they strike out together in a new direction in order to prevent a repeat of Rebels vs Empire that we got in the previous trilogy?

No, sorry. Kylo’s still a bad egg and Rey still has a deep loyalty to the Jedi ideals (despite her teachers hating them) and the Resistance (despite knowing them for maybe a day at most). And it will be a Rebels vs Empire situation quite explicitly until the end of the movie.

You get the idea. The movie goes in some interesting directions, but it seems to make a point of teasing these truly interesting directions and pulling it back to something much more tame.

No, one of the points of this film is that anyone can use the force. Not everyone is powerful enough, but people who are powerful enough can come from anywhere. This is implicit in the PT Jedi code - attachment is forbidden and by extrapolations, so is procreation. That means that none of the powerful Jedi we see came from a long line of Jedi in the family. So if being powerful only runs in the blood, where did all the PT Jedi come from?

I don’t see what this has to do with my point. I don’t really care about Leia’s Force powers, since they don’t really affect the story, but the movie spends its time showing this impressive feat with sweeping wide shots and powerful music as if it has totally changed the game in terms of Leia’s role in the story, only to drop that and have nobody speak of it again. Cut from the bridge explosion to Leia unconscious and nothing is lost from a story perspective.

The movie does go in many interesting directions, but this is the middle chapter and we did not see a resolution to any of them. This lack of resolution leads to this erroneous conclusion that this movie did not further the story. It furthered the characters and changed them. It tackled grander things than the Resistance/Republic/First Order conflict, which it left mostly in limbo.

Are you mistakenly talking about ESB, where the larger war was in limbo? Because in TFA, the First Order was treated as a sort of terrorist fringe organization, whereas in TLJ it all-but rules the galaxy.
Besides, this is again missing the point. The critic is saying that we are first given a very interesting direction which is quickly undermined in favor of a far less interesting direction. It would be like Vader saying ‘I am your father!’ and Yoda later saying ‘Messing with you, Vader was. Your father, he definitely isn’t’ and that being that.

And we know from ROTJ that Leia is strong in the force and like her brother in TESB (who grabbed his light saber with no known training of doing that) she grabbed a ship and in keeping with the laws of physics, she moved not the ship. Rey, Leia, and the boy at the end show us that anyone can use the force, from a Skywalker to a stable boy.

That’s all very nice, but again, what does it have to do with anything? We already assumed that Leia had the capability of doing what Luke could do (even if it was left undeveloped). Why would Rian bother to show us what we already assume unless these powers are called upon later in the movie? Luke and his lightsaber is a set up for the duel with Vader, where he is now able to pull himself up out of the Carbonite pit. It shows the progression of his skills. Leia’s ability is one-and-done.

A movie experience is more than just moving to the next plot point in a straight line.

Good luck explaining that to Star Wars fans.

Yeah, I know…us critics are real dummies. I don’t like them foreign movies either, because them talk funny…

djsmokingjam said:

DrDre said:

Here are two links from the same critic. The first discusses weaknesses in RJ’s story, and argues that TLJ’s biggest weakness is, that the story doesn’t go anywhere. There are no consequences.

Short summary:

"In The Last Jedi, a lot happens. But not a lot happens for long. Leia’s sudden and unexpected death only proceeds her jarring return to life.

Kylo Ren’s betrayal of Snoke, which leads to a team-up with Rey and himself against Snoke’s guards, implies his redemption… But it isn’t long lasting as his actions hardly reflect his intentions. After the fight, he has to explain himself to Rey, and how they still aren’t on the same side.

This is a classic break from “show, don’t tell.” Kylo has to tell us his motives for the scene to make sense. He essentially retcons the entire sequence, because it might as well not have happened. The scene ends up telling us nothing new. Kylo Ren is a bad guy. But we were already aware of that. Actions should speak for a character, but in the most powerful scene of the film, they don’t.

Lastly, when Luke finally faces Kylo, there’s a moment where we’re meant to believe this is the end for the Jedi Master. It seems as if Luke has accepted his fate as Kylo runs toward him with his blade drawn. Luke literally tells him something similar to what Ben Kenobi tells Darth Vader: “If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine.”

Luke seems fearless. But then, we realize Luke has nothing to fear after all. He’s not even actually there. This scene is meant for us to anticipate Luke’s death, only for it to be revealed he’s fine… Only for it to be revealed a moment later that he dies anyway."

Both these points seem incredibly pedantic and overinflated to me.

In the first instance, “show don’t tell” does not mean either that dialogue is redundant in cinema, or that actions and dialogue always have to be in perfect concert, especially regarding villains (who are often by nature duplicitous or unstable). The entire point of the throne room sequence is to set up an expectation (Kylo will side with Rey) that is then upended; in much the same way as the action at the end of ESB sets up an expectation (Vader wants to kill Luke) that is then contradicted by dialogue (“I am your father”) rather than action.

I disagree. The expectation that Vader will kill Luke follows from the way his character is set up from the get go, namely he is the villain, and murderer of Luke’s father. The fact that he IS Luke’s father thus comes as a complete surprise. Kylo Ren has already been set up as the villain, and thus the twist, that he still is the villain after Rey and Kylo dispatch Snoke’s guards isn’t much of a reveal or surprise. Thus the movie ends where it started with Rey still the hero, and Kylo Ren still the villain having replaced Snoke, who’s treated as little more than a plot device. The author of the article is thus correct in my view, when he states that a lot happens, but with little consequences other than Kylo Ren replacing Snoke who TLJ largely makes redundant.

On the second point, he’s just being incredibly literal. The entire subtext of the dialogue is not that whether Luke will literally be struck down - Luke has already made it clear throughout the film that he does not fear death - but that in opposing him, Kylo ensures Luke’s reputation will echo throughout the galaxy and that thousands will be inspired by his example, which we see happen in the final scene.

Yes, and so Luke’s reputation is back to what it was before TLJ, that of a legend, which is the main criticism of the author. RJ shakes things up, and a lot happens in the story, but ultimately we more or less end up, where we started with the Resistance/rebels on the run from the FO, despite having won a symbolic victory (SKB’s destruction in TFA), Ben Solo has reaffirmed his villain status (which he also did in TFA by killing his father), Rey’s still a hero having learned to let go of her past (a lesson also given to her by Maz in TFA, when she tells her her parents aren’t coming back), and Luke’s back to being the legend he was after the defeat of the Empire.

Warbler said:

DrDre said:

Warbler said:

screams in the void said:

George was quoted as saying in 2012 , " Why should I make more when everyone yells at you and says what a terrible person you are ?"…granted , he came back after the Disney merger ,had a meltdown , then came to acceptance and then came back to support all the subsequent productions .I watched Mark Hamill’s ceremony for his star on the walk of fame earlier this year and George Lucas and Harrison Ford attended , an interviewer asked Lucas about Star Wars and he said he had nothing to say . I think he is still going through the stages of grief. He did say it was like a divorce after all . Also . on the subject of Jar Jar , Ahmed best has started doing some field notes on the backlash of his character , seems he feels George could have stuck up for him a bit more …https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoRD_SfIbwE

Maybe Lucas should have taken a deeper look at why the fans were yelling at him and saying what a terrible person he was? Maybe he should have more open to the idea that (gasp!) he could have made mistakes that led to the fan hate. The thing is, he could made a lot of the fan hate go away by doing one simple thing: give the oot the release it deserves.

Ah, so the abused should ask himself or herself, why he or she deserves to be abused, rather than expect respectful discourse?

Lucas is not a battered wife.

Kelly-Mary Tran, and Ahmed Best are not battered wifes… I don’t see how that has anything to do with toxic behaviour towards creators of a work for not getting what you want.

Some people simply deserve fan toxicity for not agreeing with said fans’ points of view.

When you don’t want to give the oot the release it deserves, don’t be surprised if toxicity occurs.

When you make a film like TLJ, and don’t give a character like Luke Skywalker the send-off he deserves, don’t be surprised if toxicity occurs. Seems like a pretty poor excuse for behaving in an obnoxious manner. Toxicity should be rejected in all its forms, and not only if it serves your own objectives.

In my view fan toxicity is not solved by pointing the finger at others, but by looking in the mirror.

So why shouldn’t Lucas be looking in the mirror?

Maybe he should, but as far as I can tell Lucas was operating within his rights as a creator, and copyright holder. We can disagree with his point of view, and try to convince the powers that be of our own, but that’s as far as it goes in my view.

There’s no objective truth in this situation, only opinions and factors that can be weighed differently depending on each individual, which include film history and preservation, but also Lucas’ rights as the creator of his works, and a whole bunch of other stuff including Lucas’ relationship with the fans. You weigh them one way, Lucas weighs them another way. Lucas has openly stated: “Why would I make any more [Star Wars movies], when everybody yells at you all the time and says what a terrible person you are?” In other words Lucas didn’t want to make new Star Wars movies at the time, because of fan toxicity.

The fan toxicity existed due to the bad decisions Lucas made, that isn’t too far fetched either.

That’s all nice and well, but the entire premise behind taking a stand against toxic fandom, is that there is no excuse for such reprehensible behaviour, and that includes not seeing your favourite movies released. The basis for this forum as I see it, is to make a case in favour of releasing the OOT in a respectful manner, based on well thought out arguments, not to hurl abuse at Lucas or anyone else who refuses to give in to our demands.

Warbler said:

screams in the void said:

George was quoted as saying in 2012 , " Why should I make more when everyone yells at you and says what a terrible person you are ?"…granted , he came back after the Disney merger ,had a meltdown , then came to acceptance and then came back to support all the subsequent productions .I watched Mark Hamill’s ceremony for his star on the walk of fame earlier this year and George Lucas and Harrison Ford attended , an interviewer asked Lucas about Star Wars and he said he had nothing to say . I think he is still going through the stages of grief. He did say it was like a divorce after all . Also . on the subject of Jar Jar , Ahmed best has started doing some field notes on the backlash of his character , seems he feels George could have stuck up for him a bit more …https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoRD_SfIbwE

Maybe Lucas should have taken a deeper look at why the fans were yelling at him and saying what a terrible person he was? Maybe he should have more open to the idea that (gasp!) he could have made mistakes that led to the fan hate. The thing is, he could made a lot of the fan hate go away by doing one simple thing: give the oot the release it deserves.

Ah, so the abused should ask himself or herself, why he or she deserves to be abused, rather than expect respectful discourse? Some people simply deserve fan toxicity for not agreeing with said fans’ points of view. Sorry Kelly-Mary Tran, you shouldn’t have accepted a role in that travesty!

In my view fan toxicity is not solved by pointing the finger at others, but by looking in the mirror.

Warbler said:

Sorry, but I don’t buy the idea that the fans are to blame. Lucas made bad changes when he did the SE. Lucas made bad movies when he made the PT. These things are Lucas’ fault, not the fans. But worst of all was his stubborn arrogant ego driven decision to refuse to treat the oot properly and give it the release it deserves.

Passing blame, a good basis for any relationship. As allways things are a little more complicated in reality. For one a lot of fans like, if not love the SE and the PT. It’s not Lucas’ fault you are not in their camp, a camp that seems to be growing with each year. The SE has now been available in a modern format longer than the OOT, which is slowly becoming a distant memory sadly. There’s no objective truth in this situation, only opinions and factors that can be weighed differently depending on each individual, which include film history and preservation, but also Lucas’ rights as the creator of his works, and a whole bunch of other stuff including Lucas’ relationship with the fans. You weigh them one way, Lucas weighs them another way. Lucas has openly stated: “Why would I make any more [Star Wars movies], when everybody yells at you all the time and says what a terrible person you are?” In other words Lucas didn’t want to make new Star Wars movies at the time, because of fan toxicity. It isn’t too farfetched, to infer that the same fan toxicity may have been a factor (along with a number of other factors) in his refusal to release the OOT.

SilverWook said:

I think Lucas had his mind made up long before anyone uttered Han shot first. The marketing hook back in 1995 was One last time.
https://youtu.be/V9077YR0t9E

Sure, but what happened in 2006? I also read a comment a while ago by a person who had worked on the 2004 master, that Lucas did consider also restoring the OOT back then, but ultimately didn’t because of time constraints related to the DVD release date. So, while I believe Lucas allways intended to phase out the OOT, I think he wasn’t completely opposed to restoring the OOT at some point, but after all the negative feedback and often personal attacks in response to the SE and PT stuck his feet in the sand, because he wasn’t going to let some angry abusive fans dictate what’s going to happen anymore than the studios whos meddling he worked so hard to avoid.