Hold up Sherlock, weren’t you the one complaining earlier about how there’s no reason Lando should be on Pasaana unless he was just chilling for 30 years? Why would we remove the one line that shuts down that misconception? lol.
Luke and Vader fighting there was supposed to show up in the vision. It was filmed and everything, if I’m not mistaken. I believe the reason they didn’t use it is because:
This may seem like a really stupid question and maybe I have missed something along the way but here we go, Kylo is looking for the wayfinder on mustafar where Vader’s castle is also located right but wouldn’t you expect the wayfinder to be hidden in Vader’s castle and not out his back somewhere?.
I know it may seem like a bit of a stupid question but only just really thought of this lol.
It’s an answer that takes a lot of vague canon stuff.
For one, the wayfinder was supposed to be under the protection of the Eye of Webbish Bog, who would have needed to be submerged in water.
For another, these particular cultists were obsessed with returning Mustafar to its original state, when it was a lush garden. As a result, they wanted to hang out in the forested area. Look up Lady Corvax if you want to know more.
I actually watched Rogue One and had a hard time figuring out exactly where the clip was taken from. And as for the TIE movement contrasting the camera movement, that was something I never really noticed, so it shouldn’t be an issue for the average person.
I’ll never understand why people think the Vader’s castle shot feels out of place. Kinda like how I don’t understand other things people feel are out of place…
I’d rather just stick with what we’ve currently got than implement the new shot, especially if it means we have to remove Vader’s castle.
No need to start swearing, Testing. It’s just a movie. Unfortunately, some people are never going to find some enjoyment in it. No big deal as long as you yourself have.
Well, I’d imagine that in the geography of what we’re creating there’s Vader’s castle, which is surrounded by various lakes of lava, and then there was a forest planted just beyond those lava lakes.
This is a tough one for me… I thought the reason we selected this shot from the documentary was the trees so that it could line up better with the forest shot. But the order we currently have it in would kinda disrupt that since the castle shot has no trees in it.
I think I agree with those people that suggested having TIE shadows in the shot with their audio in the distance.
Otherwise, I think we should stick with what we got. I’m not sure about this order, and I know Hal doesn’t want to try any other ordering.
Ah, so you aren’t following Hal’s decision to make that planet the Endor moon from ROTJ?
One thing I always found kinda strange about Star Wars is that every planet is entirely one biome. But then you take a look at Earth and we have all sorts of different environments. I suppose changing it would break that trend in Star Wars, but at least one world would have different sections to it.
I mean, yeah, it wasn’t a good continuation of TLJ objectively speaking. Isn’t related at all to its ideas really. But was it a good continuation/finale of the sequels for me? Yes, because now I am actually able to go back and enjoy TLJ as well.
All of this relentless back and forth doesn’t get us anywhere. It is fine and encouraged to state your opinions, but we’ll rarely, if ever, argue someone to our side. Nothing anyone is saying is wrong, it’s just that different story elements speak to each of us differently based on our own experiences. We have to accept that the story elements that we value most may not be as important to someone else. There is no “true” interpretation of the story or characters, just what they speak to us and our lives. Probably the best we can say is that a better developed and written trilogy might have had fewer offending elements to the fandom in general. Getting off my horse now.
I agree with this.
Although I will say that whatever George said in the past about Star Wars should be taken seriously at the very least. Unfortunately, he never really has commented on things such as Palpatine’s overarching role in the saga (as far as I’m aware).
I don’t think I’ve read/heard anything, just that he represents the “pure evil” kind of thing. But did Lucas have a role for him past 6 … Nope.
Only because he held the belief that the Sith, in their quest to attain immortal life, would be unable to achieve such a thing. He felt it would be best if only the Jedi would get it from being selfless. I agree with that sentiment, but the thing is that TROS makes it quite clear that Palpatine is experiencing a hellish existence for 30+ years. That’s not real immortality. It’s only when he drains the dyad that he is revitalized, and who knows if that new form would even last forever.
Furthermore, I find it ironic that George allegedly would have had Maul be the main villain of his sequels… when he is also a Sith that the audience would have always considered to be dead (unless you watched Clone Wars). As a result, I’d say he’s ok with a Sith living on as long as they’re miserable in that existence.
Like he’s lightning-incontinent?
Lmao old grandpa Palpatine has problems controlling his stream 🤣
All of this relentless back and forth doesn’t get us anywhere. It is fine and encouraged to state your opinions, but we’ll rarely, if ever, argue someone to our side. Nothing anyone is saying is wrong, it’s just that different story elements speak to each of us differently based on our own experiences. We have to accept that the story elements that we value most may not be as important to someone else. There is no “true” interpretation of the story or characters, just what they speak to us and our lives. Probably the best we can say is that a better developed and written trilogy might have had fewer offending elements to the fandom in general. Getting off my horse now.
I agree with this.
Although I will say that whatever George said in the past about Star Wars should be taken seriously at the very least. Unfortunately, he never really has commented on things such as Palpatine’s overarching role in the saga (as far as I’m aware).
It never actually appears in the novelization, either.
It’s better to draw more attention to his disfigured fingers than the fact that when he’s using the Force for anything lightning starts shooting out even though he didn’t mean it to.
Palpatine needed to be brought back. By bringing him back this ties the entire Skywalker saga together and gives IX a sense of true finality; he also needed to be related to Rey, to reinforce her toxic core belief that she is worthless. It also pays off RotS, in which he was set up to have a power to keep himself alive in a way Plagueis couldn’t.
I agree that Palpatine needed to be brought back for basically the reasons Abrams said in the quote you linked to. Star Wars isn’t the story of Anakin, it’s the story of Palpatine and those who fought against him. Not having him would make the Sequels feel like some unnecessary epilogue rather than a natural continuation.
That said, Rey being his granddaughter is dumb.
It’s called the Skywalker Saga, not the Palpatine Saga. But as stated previously, I do appreciate his appearance in the film. I’d take George Lucas’ word over what the Star Wars saga is supposed to be about over JJ any day of the week.
Something like the following is what I’d put somewhere in the novelization:
“She’d sensed that raw strength only once before, in her son Ben. It scared her enough then to have him sent to Luke to be trained. It didn’t scare her now. She would see Rey’s training through; she wouldn’t abandon her.”
I like the parallels to Luke’s dialogue in TLJ.
Yup, that’s why I feel it should either be removed or suggested that she knew something was up with her lineage but didn’t know exactly what.
I’d stick to the latter because otherwise the line, “Rey, never be afraid of who you are” doesn’t make much sense, because as far as she is aware Rey is nobody.
I was confused because it seemed like you were disagreeing with me even though we were both saying the exact same thing.
We both agree that an important lesson for Rey to learn is that it is her spirit and heart that determine her value, not her heritage.
I was simply suggesting that Leia should instead know there is something awry with her heritage, but isn’t able to place her finger on exactly what it is. She still decides to train her despite detecting this. That way you patch up the messy plot hole while achieving the same effect.
But… lineage and heritage are synonyms.
I don’t doubt that this is something Luke could detect through the Force. He was in Palpatine’s presence before and would have PTSD over the feelings associated with him after being tortured by him. But Leia never has been anywhere near the guy. That’s the issue I have with it.
I was saying that she could definitely detect a great source of power in her heritage, which could lead to corruption, but I personally don’t see how it’s possible she could narrow it down 100% on “Palpatine”.
Luke proves this wrong by reminding her of Leia training her, regardless of her heritage, showing that the value of others is determined by their heart, not their heritage, and convincing her to face Palpatine and determine the fate of the galaxy, showing that it is not her heritage that determines her future, but it is she, herself, who determines it.
This reminds me of something. Leia always having known she was a Palpatine specifically would never really work imo, even if they had the perfect footage/lines for it. It just comes out of nowhere and it isn’t explained how exactly she came to that conclusion - especially since Leia was never even in the presence of the Emperor.
I think what would have gone over better would be if Leia sensed a “raw strength” in her lineage, kinda like Luke did on Ahch-To. That way, she still realizes she is taking a risk by training her, but does it anyway because of her spirit and heart.
For fan editing’s sake, I think it is interesting to think about possible alternative to TROS’ ending.
One option is to have both Rey and Ben live. I can see how this would be an issue for some, because it might not feel right if Ben could literally resurrect Rey without sacrificing his own life. If things were to play out the same way up to this point, I kinda of agree with the sentiment.
Honestly, Rey’s death kind of comes out of absolutely nowhere. I bet it would be easy to justify her just kind of not dying.
That is true. Perhaps one can edit it to where she isn’t dead, or at the very least, on the verge of death. I could see a version of the sequence that plays out really similarly to what we got, but maybe we can hear Rey’s faint heartbeat during the sequence. Ben heals her like she did him, her heartbeat goes back to normal, and she wakes up.
Thanks for the idea! Definitely using this in my novelization. Otherwise there would be too many questions as to how exactly Ben could resurrect someone from the dead without dying himself.
And Sherlock, I was never denying that new ideas can’t be implemented. I think they are what make the prequels and TLJ stand out for the better. But I was talking about the overall themes when I said those things.
That’s why I wish TROS ended differently than ROTJ, wherein the redeemed villain survives to help the hero lead a new generation of Jedi. It would have been the same themes, but a unique spin on things.
Maybe I’ve lost it because of this darn movie, but besides the whole Ben living and Anakin inclusion thingies I am yet to read anything that I would have preferred over what we already have in TROS (or more specifically in Hal’s Ascendant edit).
I don’t doubt it was a last second decision. But that doesn’t mean that it wasn’t a warranted one.
I think both of you are forgetting that at its core Star Wars is a fairy tale. It’s for 12 year olds. Nev, your argument for how it should have been about the systems that subvert democracy would definitely work in a political drama or some movie that is for a much older audience. It definitely works as an underlying message in the prequels or TLJ, but I don’t believe it should be the overall message of the saga.
I much prefer the mythical good guys v. bad guys side of things, and the struggles that the good people go through to resist the evil side.
That’s not an excuse for it to suffer from bad writing, and certainly does not make it be immune from criticism. Not that I agree with Nev.
Idk, I mean, children’s stories tend to have a very basic, easy to understand central message. There can be some adult stuff added on top of that, but it shouldn’t be the focus.
You’re free to call it bad writing, but these sorts of stories have their roots in ancient stories all across the world.
I don’t doubt it was a last second decision. But that doesn’t mean that it wasn’t a warranted one.
I think both of you are forgetting that at its core Star Wars is a fairy tale. It’s for 12 year olds. Nev, your argument for how it should have been about the systems that subvert democracy would definitely work in a political drama or some movie that is for a much older audience. It definitely works as an underlying message in the prequels or TLJ, but I don’t believe it should be the overall message of the saga.
I much prefer the mythical good guys v. bad guys side of things, and the struggles that the good people go through to resist the evil side.
I do agree with you Testing that Palpatine needed to be brought back to some extent. The story of the overall saga needs to be rooted with Anakin and his struggle with the devil (Palpatine).
So they got part of that done right… but then missed the mark completely by not having Anakin included to a certain extent with this generation going up against him.
Yet again, I refer back to Kylo who should have essentially been the stand-in character for Anakin. And I feel that would have been conveyed much more clearly if he survived.