Gothamknight

JawsTDS said:

"That was completely unjustified; and, to quote 3PO, ‘rather rude.’ "

So was assuming that people who like this movie are apologists.

Please read my posts on the use of the term “apologist.” You’re falsely assuming I meant something negative. Since I didn’t, I wasn’t being rude. I could have just as easily used the term “defender,” because that’s what I had in mind.

Jay said:
I don’t agree with people who think TLJ is a good Star Wars story/movie, but that doesn’t mean they’re making excuses for something they know deep down isn’t good, which I think is what many would call an “apologist” today.

There are contexts in which “apologist”/“apologetics” doesn’t carry that sense. It just presupposes that a given thing has been attacked, and so someone else is defending it. It makes no presumption as to whether the attack OR the defense is, in itself, right or wrong.

I’m accustomed to using the term positively in my own circles, and so I wasn’t making a veiled insult to anyone who likes TLJ.

Creox said:
Why does Rian owe you an explanation?

Nobody said he does. I’m just pointing out that it’s one of the reasons TLJ is perceived by a great many viewers as a poor follow-up to TFA. It’s analogous to chapters within a single novel that don’t logically progress from prior chapters. It’s not as if the novelist is under some moral obligation to me – but it’s certainly a reason I would negatively evaluate his/her novel.

Part of the reason I liked the movie was that there was no explanation for her powers or where she came from…as of YET.

That’s a fair point. But outside of the film itself, I have a negative impression from RJ’s reported statements to the effect that one of his objectives was to show that “anyone” can access the Force and become a Jedi. Statements like that lend themselves to the probability that there won’t be any explanation for Rey’s power and command.

And by the way, I have zero problem with that theme! It’s just that it doesn’t seem to jive with Rey’s uniqueness. Even in my conception of the OT and PT, I’ve never only associated the Force with bloodlines. I’ve normally thought of it as analogous to the skill-sets of real-world people: certain individuals will excel because they have a particular aptitude for something – but need training to hone that aptitude. Others can also receive training in the same area, despite not having an aptitude for it. If the new SW films made that sort of point, I’d have no problem with it.

Even if there isn’t one forthcoming I am fine with just understanding she came from nowhere.

I would wager that for the average movie or storytelling fan, that doesn’t sit well. If it doesn’t bother you, then by all means, enjoy future instalments! I’m hardly suggesting you’re a loathsome person for that reason. In the context of recent posts to this thread, however, what I object to is a mischaracterization of those who dislike TLJ, as if we don’t like it just because we “didn’t get what we wanted.” We have good storytelling reasons for not liking it.

JawsTDS said:

Why is this the operating assumption of TLJ apologists?

To quote Poe from The Last Jedi: “Shut up.”

That was completely unjustified; and, to quote 3PO, “rather rude.”

TV’s Frink said:
I’m sorry, I thought I was allowed to like a movie without “apologizing” for it.

I tend to move in circles where “apologist” is a technical term with either a neutral or positive context – not necessarily (or even usually) negative. It refers to someone who’s a defender (rightly OR wrongly) of something that others routinely attack (rightly OR wrongly).

As is well known, TLJ is the most controversial SW movie thus far, quite different from those that have gone before it. And as is generally acknowledged, there’s a healthy portion of SW fans who dislike it (I won’t put a percentage on it; just “healthy portion”). Therefore “apologist” is an apt term for the ones who defend it. My use of the term meant only that; nothing more.

DominicCobb said:
One thing I don’t get is not liking the movie but still buying the blu-ray. A year later I don’t even own Rogue One and I actually quite liked that.

I’d agree if I wasn’t into the whole reediting thing. That will be my reason for buying the Blu-ray. If I had no intention of reediting this 5/10 film, I wouldn’t buy any version of it.

TV’s Frink said:
I’d say there’s a disconnect between your [list of unresolved questions] and the [post] you quoted.

Not at all. I construed the term “continuity” as referring to an obvious relationship with, and natural progression from, TFA. But there simply wasn’t much.

DominicCobb said:
I think a big part of it must be the expectations thing. As evidenced by GothamKnight’s post, if you were expecting something after TFA and didn’t get exactly that, there might be a disconnect for you personally, even if in reality the two films actually fit very well together.

😒

Why is this the operating assumption of TLJ apologists? It’s not that I or other critics were expecting particular answers or resolutions. It’s that we were expecting . . . answers or resolves, or even just new information, of any kind, as long it was a plausible, natural progression from TFA.

So for example, let’s say I was speculating, like many, that Rey was a Skywalker. It’s not that I was disappointed, much less upset, that she wasn’t a Skywalker; that didn’t have to be the explanation for Rey’s Force-prowess. The problem is that TLJ provided no explanation for it; therefore it provided no natural or logical progression from TFA.

I get tired of the apologists arguing that critics are whining about “not getting what they wanted” in terms of specific plot developments. We just wanted . . . plot developments.

Matt.F said:
Reality check - The Last Jedi is a children’s film about wizards with laser swords, space battles and fantastical adventures.

Several problems with your “reality check”: (1) You missed the part of reality in which this is a forum dedicated to Star Wars – in which context (over)analysis is the order of the day.

(2) The “it’s just a kids’ fantasy” argument presupposes that we should accept lower storytelling standards for kids’ stories. Which makes zero sense.

(3) Why should Star Wars be viewed as necessarily /or/ only for kids, or considered only from a kid’s point of view? This presupposes that science-fantasy is only a child’s genre, and/or that Star Wars as a franchise can’t or shouldn’t mature in its storytelling. Yet for some reason the TLJ apologists have no problem with its obvious adult themes. The themes themselves are entirely valid; its the execution that was sorely lacking, and in fact unjustifiable.

Mjolnir Mark IV said:
[. . . Lots and lots . . .]

😮
👏

Awesome idea, Hal!!! I’m doing it!!

DominicCobb said:
I’m honestly mostly baffled when people say there’s a disconnect between TFA and TLJ. It’s probably one of the best sequels ever in terms of consistency with its predecessor (while of course also having its own identity).

• Why is Rey an extraordinary Force-user without any training?
• Who were the Knights of Ren?
• Who was Snoke, really?
• How did the First Order rise from the ashes of the Empire, and under the very nose of the New Republic? After the disastrous reign of Palpatine, why in blue blazes would anyone living in the SW galaxy, especially former Imperials who have a better idea of what was going on, fall under the sway a Sith-type tandem within a mere generation? (Contrast post-war Germany’s rabid anti-Nazi policies and attitude. The EU’s “Imperial Remnant” was much better thought-out and written than what we’ve got in the TFA-TLJ combo pack.)

lovelikewinter said:
Of course the person with Batffleck as his avatar would hate TLJ.

Hmm, not really relevant, is it?

The EU was 90% trash.

That’s simply a false statement. There were hundreds of books, comics, and TV episodes, with a wide variety of writers. That means that on the whole it was quite variegated rather than “90% trash.” There were a lot of great concepts in there; I gave you one example with Grand Admiral Thrawn. Another fine example was almost the entirety of the Yuzzhan Vong series, New Jedi Order, whose basic premise would have been a very, very awesome basis for a film-sequel trilogy.

There was no good way you could do a ST and incorporate all the post-ROTJ books into it.

That’s a fair statement; continuity with the entire EU would have been virtually impossible with a continuing film series. I guess Lucas never planned to do any sequels, and therefore could basically give free reign to EU writers.

TLJ followed TFA very well.

Not particularly.

fmalover said:
The fact that everyone is excited about Mr. Copy-paste returning for episode IX baffles me.

Abrams is a mixed bag for me. When TFA came out, I too was disappointed that it wasn’t more creative. I mean, despite the EU no longer being canon (a dumb, no-good-reason move on Disney’s part), there are still good story concepts embedded in it (e.g., Thrawn has been re-canonized). Why they couldn’t have tapped that treasure trove is beyond me.

Ah, but then came the dud that is TLJ. Ruin Johnson not only dissed the whole franchise – he even stupidly ignored questions and implications raised by TFA. The two movies are barely related to each other.

Say what you want about Abrams: at least he respects what has come before. And it’s for that reason – not cuz I think he’s a “genius” – that I’m glad he’s directing Ep9. I’m confident that if he makes an honest effort he can fix at least some of what Ruin ruined.

fmalover said:
OK guys, saw the movie a few more times. Still love it to bits but now I notice the movie does indeed have one flaw: when Luke becomes one with the Force his prosthetic hand vanishes along with him. I think it should have remained in the physical realm and dropped.

Hmm . . . “one flaw” . . . . Interesting.

😒

SilverWook said:
A lot of Raiders is outright borrowed from an almost forgotten 1954 Chuck Heston movie Secret Of The Incas, that’s curiously never even had a legit VHS release let alone a DVD.

You can watch it here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20TAGRElvfE

@OutboundFlight and NeverarGreat: Thanks, guys. I think I’ll go the same route.

Thanks, guys. You all seem to be on the same page, and that’s helpful. So in other words, Erso really only designed the laser itself, not the whole station? (Hey, I own these movies, and I’ll be rewatching them, but just thought I’d post this for some insights from the forum.)

Of course, I could just drop the Geonosis connection altogether, without negatively affecting the remaining storyline from that point all the way through A New Hope.

I’m roughly at the midpoint of my all-in-one PT mashup. I’m about to edit the part surrounding Count Dooku on Geonosis. Am I missing something – or is there somewhat of a conflict between the Death Star’s origin as portrayed in AOTC and the version in Rogue One centered on Galen Erso?

On a different but related front, in reading about the Death Star at Wikipedia I was reminded that the construction phase in Rogue One is called “Project Stardust.” It occurred to me: Could that make an ideal title for “Episode II” of my reedit super-series (“Episode I” being the PT mashup)…? Other title options that popped into my head:

• Stardust (no “Project”)
• From Dust to Stardust
• Dawn of Rebellion
• A Rebel Alliance
• Rogue Alliance
• Rogue Warriors

Thanks for any and all feedback!

Here’s an attempt at Vimeo:
https://vimeo.com/261949506

Password: origtril

It’s weird though: I see TONS AND TONS of Star Wars clips on Youtube, and various reedits and whatnot - but for some reason mine get banned due to copyright. I don’t get it.

Chapter 5 of Rise of the Empire:
https://youtu.be/jQHUeMfMttk

All feedback welcome!

Creox said:
It is the middle of the trilogy as per your last points. I didn’t expect an “end” in that respect for TLJ.

True, but there’s no reason it couldn’t have been solid, internally consistent storytelling. TLJ is no TESB, that’s for dang sure.

dahmage said:
. . . i would agree they are doing something a bit different. . . . It seems that it is the Jedi teaching that was the light vs dark, and Rey certainly hasn’t been steeped in that (yet).

In the EU’s New Jedi Order series (which I highly recommend and which should be adapted to film!!!), Jacen and Anakin Solo debate the nature of the Force: whether there are really “dark” and “light” sides, or if it’s just a neutral tool that someone can use for either good or evil purposes. It was an interesting subplot and it occurred to me that perhaps even within the canonical films, not every Jedi (or Sith) comprehended the nature of the Force or its uses. So I’m certainly open to different perspectives in the new films.

Sadly, you can only cover so much in a movie, and it would be a bit strange if they got philosophical at the expense of action.

Hey, Ben drops a few expository nuggets on Luke during Ep4. No reason another character couldn’t do the same thing on another occasion.

DominicCobb said:
The problem was that they apparently decided Han an Leia’s stories were done already, which is silly, they easily could’ve given them more interesting things to do.

I agree with that point (not with your assertion that TLJ is “ten times better than ROTJ”). One of the things that’s always bugged me about ROTJ is that Han wasn’t flying his own friggin ship in the climactic battle. I’d rather have had either Han and Leia aboard the Falcon, and Lando and Chewie on Endor - or Han and Chewie in space / Leia and Lando on Endor.

This is also something I disliked in TFA: Rey is given all the fancy flying scenes with the Falcon. Highly annoying for a Han Solo fan.

Regarding the hyperspace kamikaze: I didn’t have a problem with the physics of the stunt, and in isolation it’s undeniably a cool scene. I just don’t think it fits with overall SW worldbuilding. In a realm where hyperspace travel has existed for at least “a thousand generations” (Ben Kenobi, Ep4) - or more, if you count references in the EU - somebody, somewhere, at some point, should have had the lightbulb of weaponizing a hyperdrive. Not even necessarily a ramming maneuver, but perhaps, say, an “ISBM” - interstellar ballistic missle - that enters hyperspace, comes out wherever it’s programmed to, and devastates the target.

Even within the context of TLJ, if Holdo or some other character had voiced this idea, someone else could have briefly referenced why such weapons aren’t used (e.g., too much unavoidable or unpredictable collateral damage). That would have made it make sense. Ah, but Ruin Johnson wasn’t interested in well-thought-out storytelling.

In any case, I’m wondering what to do about this scene in my eventual reedit (TFA and TLJ will be combined). I think that, as it stands, it’s problematic in the larger SW context. I also don’t like the Holdo character; how much better if it had been Ackbar??? (Oh, that’s right - he’s male, so he can’t be smart or effective in the SW Disneyverse.) Currently I’m toying with either–

• cut it altogether
• make it something Luke does via long-distance use of the Force

Which of course raises the issue of Luke’s Force-projection. Oh, if only TLJ had included a scene like the capper in this HISHE vid: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCB8DUGpYQQ . Obviously HISHE is all about satire, yet a few of their ideas in this mock are quite the ass-kickers. Through satire they demonstrate that they “get” SW in a way RJ doesn’t.

In any case . . . I initially considered a reedit in which Luke’s pseudopresence on Crait is actually real, but now I’m leaning toward making the Force-projection itself “cooler” by expanding what he actually does with it.