NFBisms

Racer Cool said:

NFBisms said:

I think disliking TLJ and not thinking its direction was worth taking is totally valid. Those against it and its Luke are only judging it in the context of their own personal perceptions of what the franchise has been to them and should continue being. There’s probably something to be said - positive or negative - about how Johnson opted to double down on a specific interpretation of the world, rather than keep it broad enough for everyone to appreciate.

No, that’s not quite right. We are judging it in context of what has come before. Meaning, what has already been developed over an entire trilogy concerning the character of Luke. Luke was “the new hope”. The whole point of the original trilogy was that good can overcome evil, primarily by taking the high ground, being patient, facing ones fears, sacrificing self, and ultimately by redemption. Against all advice and conventional wisdom, Luke persisted in his mission to save his father, and therefore destroy the Sith. He proved that he was right, and he succeeded, sacrificing himself in the process. (He didn’t actually end up dying, but he was willing to do that and nearly did). Same thing for running across the galaxy to save his friends.

But suddenly, with no real transition, here’s Luke abandoning his friends (and his own family!) when they’re struggling in a fighting retreat against the new bad guys, and on top of it he even tries to kill his own nephew, in his sleep, because he sensed darkness within him. Darkness…? Within a young Skywalker…? Say it ain’t so!

…um…Luke, have you completely forgotten everything you’ve done, seen, and learned…? Did Palpatine’s lighting assault actually fry your brain?

In no way does this make any sense at all, and goes against everything Lucas and company worked hard to develop in the entire OT. So yes, with respect, we’re stuck in our established perceptions of who Luke is and should be. Maybe, as I said, if there was some transition that shows us why Luke would veer so far off course (it won’t be sudden because radical changes like that are a process), then maybe it could be accepted. But as it is, it makes no sense at all. Even the Prequel Trilogy took three films to show a slow corruption of Anakin, and his ultimate fall.

So, there’s been a lot of discussion about this already, and I don’t want this thread to keep going in circles, so I’ll just link to posts I’ve made before about how I personally feel about it:

http://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/1152347
http://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/1152366

This is ok for me actually because DrDre just dropped our discussion after my last post, so it’d be nice to continue it with someone else.

Basically, the fact that he went through all of that - had that entire arc in the OT - is why it’s as big of a failure as it is. Anything less than Luke doing something against the ideals he spent so long developing would make the failure less pertinent. If you feel let down and disappointed in where Luke starts in this movie, to me, that’s the point. That’s how Luke feels about himself. After everything he’s been through… how could he? He then stops seeing himself as the hero he was. Maybe even as the friend, uncle, and brother that he was.

Valheru_84 said:

NFBisms said:
Honestly? I wasn’t even talking really about what you’re ranting about here…

I’m not ranting thank you.

NFBisms said:
…but if you want my thoughts, a lot of what you have to say - the entire premise of it, actually - is too presumptive about what TLJ was doing or trying to say. We don’t have a hard and fast answer about the nature of Rey’s or broom boy’s force sensitivity, so I personally haven’t really been touching that. I have my own ideas, but it’s just speculation and not anything the movies explicitly say at all. I don’t actually think TLJ was saying that the force works the way you described, though.

Too presumptive? Snoke, the most powerful force user we’ve ever seen who’s character hints at having been around for a long, long time, probably influencing events before even the PT (we know at least long enough to see the rise and fall of the Empire) and who seems to have an immense knowledge of the force to the extent he can perform force-skype calls between other force users light years apart without them realising it, proclaims that as Kylo has been increasing in strength, so would his equal opponent in the light side appear. This was a clear explanation to the audience in response to all the flak Rey got in TFA for advancing in her force use too quickly and easily. Jake also only a little earlier in the movie explains the balance in the force which now in retrospect seems like it’s also priming us for the explanation Snoke gives. I’m only going off what TLJ has served up in regards to how the force apparently works now. Other people have also picked up on this, asking why then had Snoke’s opposite equal in the force not shown up from the light side? Maybe that is now Luke, but what about during the events of the OT?

NFBisms said:
But yes, if that (ending the Jedi = good idea) is what is supposedly going through Luke or Jake’s mind, it is at odds with the idea that the force naturally balances itself. The thing is - the movie goes out of it’s way to tell us Luke was wrong to do and think what he did. So. There you go. Again, though. I don’t think the force works the way you think it does.

The movie would also have us think that Jake was that powerful and in touch with the force that he understands at its root level the source and relationship that the force shares with everything in the universe which causes him to reject the dogma of the Jedi teachings and enables him to astro project himself and objects even when he’s not present (the dice) across light years which is not that dissimilar to Snoke’s force-skype calls and speaks to the same level of mastery and knowledge of the force. So why would Luke not also know about this fact of the force self balancing? That his self sacrifice would essentially be for nothing, lending more weight to the fact the reasons for his actions are inherently flawed regardless of conflicts with his OT character and that he should have just gone to confront Kylo in person, if at the very least to still just buy the resistance fighters time to flee and then fade away into the force as Kylo is about to strike, like Obi-wan does as Vader strikes. They actually set this scene up just like that to create this expectation but because the entire movie is built on subverting expectations, at the very last second RJ yanks the rug with Jake instead pulling a matrix move and shortly after is revealed to be an astro projection. Then he fades away into the force anyway as a double subvert.

NFBisms said:
There’s nothing to prove definitively that it’s random magic.

No there’s nothing 100% definitive but there’s not much missing to make it so.

NFBisms said:
FWIW I personally think Lucasfilm not having an overarching plan for the trilogy is fine, because it ensured we got at least one actual movie and not just run-of-mill product flicks. I liked that Johnson was able to imprint more of himself onto TLJ and that it was allowed to be more of a character study than a “can’t you wait for even more SW buy your tickets now1!1!” kind of movie. I know a lot of people wanted something else than what we got, but characters/themes are right up my alley, and I’m ok with it.

In regards to an overarching plan - I’m fine for directors to take trilogy movies in unexpected ways but they still need to maintain some logical connection to the main story arcs it is part of and stay within the rules already established by previous movies or at most, expand upon them. Not fundamentally change them.

Also when I go to see a SW movie, I’d like to see a SW movie - not a RJ imprinted fan film of SW.

.Val

I don’t know what to tell you, I just didn’t get any of that from the movie. Sorry. xP

Or at least, we know too little about what’s going on for me personally to make any statements or judgements about it. We know absolutely nothing about Snoke to say where he came from. And what I got out of the whole balance thing is that balance between dark and light happens naturally in , well, nature. Saying that “darkness rises and light to meet it” was like cheekily saying “survival of the fittest.” A fact of nature and animals (but about the nature of the force) applied to human infrastructure as an idiom, not exposition about how the force works. Where there’s villain, someone will always try to be the hero. The force doesn’t “belong to anyone” as Luke says in this movie, just people harnessing that naturally balanced energy field. It doesn’t randomly just “appear” in people to balance things out; there isn’t enough for me to assume that’s what’s going on.

I apologize for saying you were ranting, you just responded to my post about something else entirely with a huge wall of text. It seemed like you had this whole thing prepared and just used my post as a way to put it out there. Which is fine.

Valheru_84 said:

NFBisms said:
In his mind, his presence and the spread of the teachings that turned Vader and Kylo, endangered the galaxy and only doomed it to more of the same darkness. A cycle that would only continue repeating itself.

Maybe that’s what was supposedly in Jake Skywalker’s mind (I’m not going to acknowledge that this is Luke, much like Hamill couldn’t in order to act out this character) but how does this ultimately serve the story in any way if the force just magically grants super powers to random people anyway in order to balance out power in the galaxy? Say that Rey kills Kylo in the next film and goes on to become the new Jedi Master (since Jake proclaims he is now NOT the last Jedi, completely negating his reasons for supposed self exile and what he tried to teach Rey about the folly of the dogmatic religion to the force). According to these new rules, another dark side user will simply rise and be granted these powers without any significant effort required on their part in order to counter the imbalance in only Rey then existing for the light side. And what’s not to say that Rey won’t start her own Jedi school which grows and exists for hundreds of generations, generating it’s own rules and lore revering the force with the Sith / dark side users always lurking in the shadows, waiting to strike or leading their own military faction within the galaxy? We’re right back to the start of the PT.

The mere fact that the force itself will always ensure there is balance by automatically empowering individuals to face of against each other actually means the cycle will never end. The only way it could have ended in the way Jake envisioned it would be for him to actually kill of all the dark side users (Kylo and Snoke) and then kill himself so that there is no immediate imbalance in the force. This is not to say though that another person that is force sensitive couldn’t eventually teach themselves (how else would the Jedi have come into being in the first place?) and thereforce recreate the imbalance, starting the cycle all over again.

No, these new rules create many more problems that the OT force rules ever did. The fact under the “old guard” of force lore that you needed someone to guide and teach you in the ways of the force and continue to train over years to reach any significant level of control meant that there was merit and reason in defeating Vader and the Emperor as it meant the removal of that threat and the chance of it returning for a bloody long time. Even if someone was to discover the force themselves and start self teaching, it would be generations later before their offspring became anywhere near proficient and powerful enough to start equalling the jedi / sith of old and there’s still the matter of whether they went down the light or dark side in the end. The idea that because Kylo is gaining in power on the dark side that the force will grant someone on the light side increased power simply to balance out the force sounds cool at first but really it’s pretty silly. What if Rey turns to the dark side with Kylo? Then two other random people will just pop up out of no where with new light side abilities to fight the dark side users? And if they win, what’s the point if the force will then just grant someone else instant access to the dark side since there’s now an imbalance again?

I really don’t think Johnson had much of an idea what he was really doing and the implications they had for SW based on what is already established in the OT. More so it’s becoming pretty evident Disney don’t even have some kind of overarching plan for the ST based on the below comments from RJ:

“When I was writing the movie, I was doing it while they were shooting “The Force Awakens.” So it wasn’t like I was reading all these theories online and being at my typewriter and going “Ha! Ha! Gotcha!”” (which is absolute bullshit) “It was me coming up with a story. I was writing purely from a personal reaction to the script of “The Force Awakens” and what they were shooting.”

“…the first thing I had to crack in the movie is why Luke is on that island. I had to figure out something that made sense, and you don’t know much about where’s Luke’s head is at coming out of “The Force Awakens.””

“…I also have to say I’m not writing the next one, and I’m not sure what J.J. [Abrams] and [screenwriter] Chris Terrio are going to do in the next one with Luke. But setting up possibilities for the next one, honestly, it seems much like Obi-Wan going where he did after “New Hope”…"

https://www.businessinsider.com.au/star-wars-rian-johnson-interview-about-the-last-jedi-fan-backlash-2017-12?r=US&IR=T

.Val

Honestly? I wasn’t even talking really about what you’re ranting about here, but if you want my thoughts, a lot of what you have to say - the entire premise of it, actually - is too presumptive about what TLJ was doing or trying to say. We don’t have a hard and fast answer about the nature of Rey’s or broom boy’s force sensitivity, so I personally haven’t really been touching that. I have my own ideas, but it’s just speculation and not anything the movies explicitly say at all. I don’t actually think TLJ was saying that the force works the way you described, though.

But yes, if that (ending the Jedi = good idea) is what is supposedly going through Luke or Jake’s mind, it is at odds with the idea that the force naturally balances itself. The thing is - the movie goes out of it’s way to tell us Luke was wrong to do and think what he did. So. There you go. Again, though. I don’t think the force works the way you think it does.

There’s nothing to prove definitively that it’s random magic.

FWIW I personally think Lucasfilm not having an overarching plan for the trilogy is fine, because it ensured we got at least one actual movie and not just run-of-mill product flicks. I liked that Johnson was able to imprint more of himself onto TLJ and that it was allowed to be more of a character study than a “can’t you wait for even more SW buy your tickets now1!1!” kind of movie. I know a lot of people wanted something else than what we got, but characters/themes are right up my alley, and I’m ok with it.

Like I’ve been saying, so far the ST isn’t concerned about plot or context. The characters/themes have been taking precedence, because we pretty much already know roughly how it will turn out.

The stories are similar, but the things driving them are different. TLJ was more of a character study than a “see what happens next” kind of movie.

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

Literally the whole point of Luke showing up and making a scene is inspiring hope across the galaxy.

“The Rebellion is reborn today.”

The Resistance won’t be able to fit on the Falcon for long. This is made pretty clear in the film.

Yeah, but that all depends how the FO will rule the galaxy. It’s not two major organisations backed by various systems like in the OT. In ANH many systems were rebellung against the Empire, because it was oppressing the galaxy. Now it’s hundreds of thousands of troops versus fifty people. If the FO are smart, there won’t be a Resistance ever.

Luke didn’t just inspire little kids with brooms. He inspired everyone who sympathizes with the Resistance’s plight, including, as is implied, their allies in the Outer Rim.

Sympathy that will only last if the FO are an oppressive force. The Resistance have no allies. Their socalled allies in the outer rim didn’t answer.

If the FO set up a benevolent form of government, the Resistance will never rise again, and quickly fade into obscurity. That is as decisive a victory as victories can be. It’s completely up to the FO to drop the ball.

Not technically wrong about how the FO can win, but that’s probably not how it’s going to go lol.

They’re probably going to continue being an evil empire.

DrDre said:

NFBisms said:

Even then, it’s clearly not an end-of-war victory; the goal was to get what’s left of the Resistance the hell away from the FO safely, and Luke accomplished it.

No war in the history of the world was won by killing every single enemy soldier. What happened at the end of TLJ wasn’t a victory in any shape or form. The Resistance lost, but a few survived, as in any lost war. The Resistance has no allies. Everyone has turned their backs to them. If for the sake of argument the FO creates a benevolent dictatorship or perhaps even some form of democracy, the Resistance have zero change of ever rising again. So, the few Resistance members still alive have their fate lying completely in the FO’s hands. The Resistance cannot win, the only thing that can happen is for the FO to screw up.

I assumed yhwx was defining victory as realizing the goal. The Resistance is just fighting to survive the entire movie, not necessarily win. That ship sailed in like the first ten minutes because of Poe. (Rose very cheesily and unnecessarily spells out the theme: winning isn’t about fighting what you hate, it’s saving what you love). Luke wins the climax for the Resistance because all that’s left does manage to get away. And then there’s hope at the end with broom kid that people out there do still believe in the Resistance.

I agree that it wasn’t a victory in the grand scheme of a war, but that was never the point in this movie.

Even then, it’s clearly not an “end-of-war” kind of victory; the goal was to get what’s left of the Resistance the hell away from the FO safely, and Luke accomplished it.

DrDre said:

NFBisms said:

I don’t even think you have to assume Luke changed at all within the 30+ years, tbh.

The Luke I know coming out of ROTJ would absolutely hold himself accountable for failing himself and his ideals in the way he did that night. He wouldn’t just brush off messing up like that with Ben and continue pretending to be so self-righteous, when he feels that he isn’t. I can understand his reaction to keep himself away from the galaxy because of his arc in 4-6 teaching him that action doesn’t always mean heroism.

In his mind, his presence and the spread of the teachings that turned Vader and Kylo, endangered the galaxy and only doomed it to more of the same darkness. A cycle that would only continue repeating itself.

You see this kind of thinking with “I shouldn’t have come I’m jeopardizing the mission” when he senses Vader is on Endor with them. And you see an extension of it when he assures Leia that she is the next hope if he doesn’t make it back from the Death Star II. If he feels he can only make something worse, he feels it best to stay away, and he knows that even when he’s gone, there is still light in the galaxy - heroes that will fight for good.

“To say that because the Jedi die the light dies, is vanity.”

I’m not saying he was right to stay away. The whole idea is that he’s wrong, and that he can still be a hero. But it fits with the character for me. I don’t think he changed drastically in those 30 years. A huge thing just put him in a drastically different place.

Yes, but to me this ignores the obviously better solution of him trying to stop Snoke and Kylo, and then retire. If he succeeds, he will have saved the galaxy, and then no more Jedi. If he fails, he dies, no more Jedi. Why choose for certain failure, if there’s a chance of success? Success doesn’t preclude him from ending the Jedi. How can he make things worse, than by leaving an evil Force user in charge, and allow him to train as many evil Force users, as he sees fit? Snoke didn’t need Luke. He just wanted him dead to prevent the rise of the new Jedi. The worst thing Luke could do, is to oblige, and go to some island to die. Luke’s decision just doesn’t make sense.

So is this about being true to Luke or making Luke do more heroic things?

Whatever the case, I think what you said is fair criticism of TLJ and TFA for not expanding on what really got us here. Character and theme taking precedence over plot, leaving us with very little context.

But Snoke only just got control of most of the galaxy in TFA/TLJ. The First Order hadn’t really done anything until they revealed themselves and pretty swiftly took control of the galaxy with Starkiller Base. Luke cut himself off from the force before anything even happened. Remember, he’s already missing at the start of all of this.

He wasn’t leaving Snoke in charge at the time, he was just taking himself out of the equation and all future ones. (Presuming Leia and/or the light of the galaxy would be enough to replace the Jedi). The extent of the First Order’s power and knowledge of Starkiller Base wasn’t even a thing. Even Ben and his friends probably weren’t officially the “Knights of Ren” yet.

So there’s a reason why Snoke wants to find Luke. Sure, once he finds out Luke seemingly just wants the Jedi to end, it’s about snuffing out hope, but before that, it’s obvious it’s because Luke represents a real threat. Luke coming back after what they’ve done (in my mind) was inevitable, because what they did is too big for someone like Luke to ignore. And try as he might, but Luke didn’t sneak onto the Falcon after learning of the state of the galaxy because he wanted to continue ignoring his friends.

edit: im glad this where this discussion ended i really didnt want to keep talking about it. (/s)

I don’t even think you have to assume Luke changed all that much within the 30+ years, tbh.

The Luke I know coming out of ROTJ would absolutely hold himself accountable for failing himself and his ideals in the way he did that night. He wouldn’t just brush off messing up like that with Ben and continue pretending to be so self-righteous.

I can understand his reaction to keep himself away from the galaxy because of his arc in 4-6 teaching him that action doesn’t always mean heroism. In his mind, his presence and the spread of the teachings that turned Vader and Kylo, endangered the galaxy and only doomed it to more of the same darkness. A cycle that would only continue repeating itself.

You see this kind of thinking with “I shouldn’t have come I’m jeopardizing the mission” when he senses Vader is on Endor with them. And you see an extension of it when he assures Leia that she is the next hope if he doesn’t make it back from the Death Star II. If he feels he can only make something worse, he feels it best to stay away, and he knows that even when he’s gone, there is still light in the galaxy - heroes that will fight for good.

“To say that because the Jedi die the light dies, is vanity.”

I’m not saying he was right to stay away. The whole idea is that he’s wrong, and that he can still be a hero. But it fits with the character for me. I don’t think he changed drastically in those 30 years.

A huge thing just put him in a drastically different place.

Gimpy said:

Had a thought for a slight change to TLJ. When Luke is “thinking” fleetingly about ending Ben Solo’s life, we should use Audio of Snoke saying something like “kill him!” If Snoke was the impetus for Luke’s actions, that would be much better than Luke himself thinking of doing it.

That would undermine it being Luke’s failure, though. xP

“Oh it was just Snoke!” is a cop-out to Luke having actually fucked up, and then just makes him look a little dumb for holding himself 100% accountable for something that wasn’t even really his fault.

How they handled the direction of Luke’s arc in TLJ really resonated with me, but I don’t actually think most of those that do dislike it, didn’t “get” it or just want a dumbed down Star Wars. For the most part, I think they understand what was trying to be done, they just disagree that it should have been done at all.

It really comes down to how people individually view Star Wars. The world and its characters mean something different to everyone. You won’t get the same answer from person to person. Whether it’s just a series of individual films, an entire multimedia franchise, just three movies, or just six - Star Wars is what you make it.

I think disliking TLJ and not thinking its direction was worth taking is totally valid. Those against it and its Luke are only judging it in the context of their own personal perceptions of what the franchise has been to them and should continue being. There’s probably something to be said - positive or negative - about how Johnson opted to double down on a specific interpretation of the world, rather than keep it broad enough for everyone to appreciate.

I think the idea that it could ruin anything that came before it, or that it doesn’t have its place in the consciousness for others, is what’s wrong imo. And conceding that it has it’s place, but only for “sheeple” or “general audiences” and “casuals” is equally as unhelpful because it’s passive aggressively disrespectful.

I do think that the ST and any new Star Wars movies are technically unnecessary, but they have their place. The fact that the OT is a complete story means that the ST can’t (or shouldn’t be able to) take away from them just for existing and being at odds with it. You don’t have to acknowledge their existence or canon if you don’t want to.

So yeah, the new movies are a different universe. If you want it to be. They can also be the same one. If you want it to be.

DrDre said:

NFBisms said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

SW is nothing like the MCU. And I say that mostly liking the MCU.

(https://memegenerator.net/img/instances/500x/75245044/it-will-be.jpg)

TLJ has set things up perfectly for the franchise to fit in the mold.

TLJ does more to show that it won’t be tbh, but I have thought it would become more MCU-like since the announcement of standalone films.

From a fan perspective I would agree, from the general audience perspective not so much, at least not from the point of view of where the story ends, and episode IX will begin. Episode IX will be the film with the least connections to the past and it’s overarching themes of all Star Wars films. This is why it is the perfect setup for the MCU treatment in my view.

Or it could be a culmination of all Star Wars has been, as the new ending point for the saga. We don’t know yet. The themes of TLJ already play off of the rest of the series, all that JJ has to do is make where those themes disconnect connect.

The idea of Ben being lost forever, could easily be turned back around using the new human-sided lens of morality that TLJ gives us. If it was saying that pure good and compassion won’t turn him back like it did for Vader, then TLJ lays the groundwork for the theme: redemption only comes if you want it. Kylo has rejected Han, Leia, and Rey at this point. Whether or not he is redeemed, something IX could tackle that expands upon the idea of redemption that was set up in the OT, is that doing evil is a choice. Not a magical cancer. Which was true for Vader, even when Anakin thought “It was too late for him,” he was still able to do one last act of good.

And that’s just one way they could do it. The fact is, there’s like one movie left in the saga. Whether or not SW becomes MCU through its standalones, TLJ leaves a lot in the way for the disparate themes to interplay with each other for the last installment. The plot may be superficially empire vs rebels, but it’s informed with new layers. They’re not going to throw away the old themes for the last movie when all the set up for it was about examining those ideas through a more human lens.

Basically:

PT (Here’s a tragic story)*
OT (Here’s a pretty story)**
ST (Here’s why those stories are important)

*can ignore
**resolves tragic story

…

That said, of course Lucasfilm is trying to do an MCU-style cinematic universe going forward. I just don’t think TLJ is proof of that. More like an outlier.

Porkins4real said:

NFBisms said:

Porkins4real said:

TV’s Frink said:

Porkins4real said:

TV’s Frink said:

Porkins4real said:

DrDre said:

NFBisms said:

DrDre said:

Creox said:

DrDre said:

I’ve been thinking a bit more about the broad stroke differences between TLJ and the rest of the saga, particulary the OT, and why some find TLJ refreshing, while others reject it. So, for a change I’m not going to talk about Rey’s Force powers, or Luke’s characterization, but more about in-universe history, and how that affects the story.

I think it is fair to say the OT is steeped in melancholy, and powerful connections to the past. The entire premise of ANH is to defeat the evil Empire, and to return the galaxy to a previous state, the fabled Old Republic. Luke is largely driven by the legend of his father, who’s friend Obi-Wan promises to teach him about an all but forgotten religion that both he and Luke’s father were a part of. The rest of the trilogy is largly set up such that Luke needs to vanguish the enemies of old, Darth Vader, and the Emperor, and avoid the pitfalls, that caused Vader, later revealed to be his father, to turn on his friend, and join the dark side.

To a large degree TFA operates in the same way. It treats Luke Skywalker as a legend of old, that both the heroes and villains are looking for. Luke went looking for the first Jedi temple, a place presumably steeped in Jedi history. It’s hinted, that Rey has a strong connection to the past, and Kylo Ren, who’s directly related to two other legends of the past, Han and Leia, was seduced to the dark side by some mysterious larger than life old anti-Yoda figure. Both Rey and Kylo Ren are struggling with their past, and the film ends with Kylo severing one of the links to his past by killing a past legend, while Rey connects with it by finding a past legend.

TLJ completely breaks with this Star Wars tradition. It actively deflates the past by telling us the history and legends we cherish are not as great as we want to believe. It actively cuts almost all ties to the past by killing off the remaining classic heroes (Leia technically not in the film), and even the links to the past TFA introduced. The mysterious Snoke is unceremoniously cast aside, and the secret of Rey’s past is, that she has no past, at least not one that’s relevant to her future. The family connection between good and evil that drove the OT and TFA is all but ignored, and then finally killed for good, when Leia gives up on her son, and Luke dies. What remains is a conflict between new heroes and new villains, that either killed their past, or don’t really have one.

It’s a bold move, which is sadly undercut by a strict adherence to the OT aesthetic and the OT’s basic premise of an Empire versus a small band of rebels. The question is why did the creators and by extension Disney decide to reboot the franchise, whilst also severing most connections to the past? My theory is, that it was done to make Star Wars more accessible to the general audience. Most of us hardcore fans will see the movies anyway. I know I probably will, despite my lack of enthousiasm. Anyone without much knowledge of Star Wars history will be able to see and enjoy episode IX. It’s starting point is similar to episode IV. There’s an evil Empire led by an evil maniac, a struggling rebellion led by an aspiring Jedi, and it looks like it’s part of the Star Wars brand. You need not know more.

It IS a bold move and one in which I think needed to happen for SW to evolve.

I might agree, if the bold move was used to create a new story, and new Star Wars lore but it wasn’t. It’s a reboot, and one that strips Star Wars from much of the deeper layers and themes, that made it stand out from the average blockbuster, in my opinion of course.

I think the themes and layers of TLJ are deeper and a little more meaningful than anything in both the OT and PT, especially in how the philosophical ideas tackled are all about our understanding of those previously established themes. It may be more of a meta-deconstruction of the themes, rather than a continuing re-affirmation of them, but they are still there and are still needed to be understood.

Well to me deconstructing and understanding are two very different things. IMO TLJ deconstructs the themes of the previous films not to provide understanding, but to devalue them. It’s thesis is not just that these themes are far less relevant going forward, but that they weren’t all that important in the first place, punctuated by Yoda’s page turner remark. The fact that the legends of old are used (or abused depending on your point of view) to transmit this message is also in of itself a clear attempt at devaluation, since even they are made to adhere to the new order.

I think it’s disingenuous to say TLJ is an average blockbuster or that anything it has to say is on that level of Transformers, or Geostorm, or Avengers. If anything, it’s a little too heady for its own good. I definitely think it has pacing and tonal issues, as well as one too many plot threads that clearly have muddled what it was trying to say in the end, but its intentions and fundamental ideas have more depth than just “insert SW brand here.” It can’t be that, as well as trying to burn down Star Wars traditions, at the same time. It’s trying to be so much more, and whether or not it succeeds is just a matter of opinion.

And while something can be said about how it uses an evil Empire and plucky rebellion, as well as TIEs, X-Wings, and lightsabers, that’s all superficial when what informs and drives those things are clearly different enough to not be “Star Wars” to many people thematically.

Yes, but the whole point is, that the general audience doesn’t care about the themes that drove Star Wars in the past. In my view the current owners of the franchise feel Star Wars’ themes and connections to the past are a stumbling block for the general audience to connect with the material. In order to facilitate the growth of the potential market of these films, these themes and historic connections need to be simplified or removed.

Then the people running the franchise are DUMB. My kids, nieces and nephews all love the OT more than anything that came after, they were born 30+ years after ANH, yet they love it. I had 5-year-old ask “why luke doing that?”. They don’t need to worry about growing the audience, and ignoring what made the franchise so popular is not the way to do it.

Disney should know better. Look at the lineups they have for crappy rides that have been around for 60 years. Why? they still work and multigenerations experienced them in their youth and enjoy seeing their kids enjoy them.

Disney should know better? I think the box office for TFA and TLJ shows they understand how to make money just fine. And of course that’s their goal, they’re a giant corporation.

My daughters saw the OT before TFA, and they really like the OT. But they love TFA. Rey is their hero, not Luke. The OT has basically like one female character.

They have to play the long game. The movies are the catalyst for a lot of money making enterprises. So my comment about the DC universe. Good numbers out of the gate as fans wanted to see these stories as movies forever, but then numbers turned bad.

It would not have taken much to give something to the long to fans of SW and still build new appeal.
Crapping all over Luke was a bad move. He may not be the hero to your daughters, but for many he was and he deserved better.

If they continue this trend - one day your daughters get to enjoy a movie where Rey turns out to be piece of crap who tries to kill babies in her spare time.

This is ludicrous. I know the movie hurt you bad but come on.

Also to a large percentage of us who grew up with Luke, TLJ Luke was fantastic. “Crapping all over Luke” is just your opinion.

Just a ludicrous as Lukes story base on his ROFTJ character. IF they can take Luke have luke make such a turn, why not Rey in the future? Nothing sacrosanct anymore in the SW universe.

Wasn’t the whole idea of the movie that Luke can still be a hero in spite of his failures? I think that’s an important message, because what if some kid fucks up and feels he can’t come back from that? I know I’ve had those moments growing up, and it’s cool that TLJ tries to show that you aren’t defined by your flaws, but the good that you do and can do. It’s a very human approach to the hero, and one that I think is important.

“No one’s ever really gone…”

I think that would have been a great point, but his failings were not true to who he was. The last Luke we saw, would risk and do anything for his friends and believed there was light in even the (second) darkest person in the universe. This luke actively ignored his friends and those needing his help and considered murdering his nephew in his sleep because saw the POTENTIAL of darkness.

Sure 30 years has passed, but that is still a massive leap in who this person is. If the movie wants to make that leap it needs to actually support it to make it believable. But we don’t see that and the leap does not make sense. Within the movie, no new bad thing has happened since ROTJ to Luke before he considers murdering his nephew in cold blood. From everything we know of Luke and Jedi, that moment seems inconceivable to me.

Given that the one single moment is what triggers much of the movie’s events I see it as a pretty big flaw. Now if you remove the context of the other movies than Luke and his story is easier to buy in TLJ

His failure was not being true to who he was, or thought he was.

Whether or not it was developed enough is obviously in the eye of the beholder, but to feel let down and disappointed in where we find Luke at the start of this movie is the point.

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

SW is nothing like the MCU. And I say that mostly liking the MCU.

(https://memegenerator.net/img/instances/500x/75245044/it-will-be.jpg)

TLJ has set things up perfectly for the franchise to fit in the mold.

TLJ does more to show that it won’t be tbh, but I have thought it would become more MCU-like since the announcement of standalone films.

Porkins4real said:

TV’s Frink said:

Porkins4real said:

TV’s Frink said:

Porkins4real said:

DrDre said:

NFBisms said:

DrDre said:

Creox said:

DrDre said:

I’ve been thinking a bit more about the broad stroke differences between TLJ and the rest of the saga, particulary the OT, and why some find TLJ refreshing, while others reject it. So, for a change I’m not going to talk about Rey’s Force powers, or Luke’s characterization, but more about in-universe history, and how that affects the story.

I think it is fair to say the OT is steeped in melancholy, and powerful connections to the past. The entire premise of ANH is to defeat the evil Empire, and to return the galaxy to a previous state, the fabled Old Republic. Luke is largely driven by the legend of his father, who’s friend Obi-Wan promises to teach him about an all but forgotten religion that both he and Luke’s father were a part of. The rest of the trilogy is largly set up such that Luke needs to vanguish the enemies of old, Darth Vader, and the Emperor, and avoid the pitfalls, that caused Vader, later revealed to be his father, to turn on his friend, and join the dark side.

To a large degree TFA operates in the same way. It treats Luke Skywalker as a legend of old, that both the heroes and villains are looking for. Luke went looking for the first Jedi temple, a place presumably steeped in Jedi history. It’s hinted, that Rey has a strong connection to the past, and Kylo Ren, who’s directly related to two other legends of the past, Han and Leia, was seduced to the dark side by some mysterious larger than life old anti-Yoda figure. Both Rey and Kylo Ren are struggling with their past, and the film ends with Kylo severing one of the links to his past by killing a past legend, while Rey connects with it by finding a past legend.

TLJ completely breaks with this Star Wars tradition. It actively deflates the past by telling us the history and legends we cherish are not as great as we want to believe. It actively cuts almost all ties to the past by killing off the remaining classic heroes (Leia technically not in the film), and even the links to the past TFA introduced. The mysterious Snoke is unceremoniously cast aside, and the secret of Rey’s past is, that she has no past, at least not one that’s relevant to her future. The family connection between good and evil that drove the OT and TFA is all but ignored, and then finally killed for good, when Leia gives up on her son, and Luke dies. What remains is a conflict between new heroes and new villains, that either killed their past, or don’t really have one.

It’s a bold move, which is sadly undercut by a strict adherence to the OT aesthetic and the OT’s basic premise of an Empire versus a small band of rebels. The question is why did the creators and by extension Disney decide to reboot the franchise, whilst also severing most connections to the past? My theory is, that it was done to make Star Wars more accessible to the general audience. Most of us hardcore fans will see the movies anyway. I know I probably will, despite my lack of enthousiasm. Anyone without much knowledge of Star Wars history will be able to see and enjoy episode IX. It’s starting point is similar to episode IV. There’s an evil Empire led by an evil maniac, a struggling rebellion led by an aspiring Jedi, and it looks like it’s part of the Star Wars brand. You need not know more.

It IS a bold move and one in which I think needed to happen for SW to evolve.

I might agree, if the bold move was used to create a new story, and new Star Wars lore but it wasn’t. It’s a reboot, and one that strips Star Wars from much of the deeper layers and themes, that made it stand out from the average blockbuster, in my opinion of course.

I think the themes and layers of TLJ are deeper and a little more meaningful than anything in both the OT and PT, especially in how the philosophical ideas tackled are all about our understanding of those previously established themes. It may be more of a meta-deconstruction of the themes, rather than a continuing re-affirmation of them, but they are still there and are still needed to be understood.

Well to me deconstructing and understanding are two very different things. IMO TLJ deconstructs the themes of the previous films not to provide understanding, but to devalue them. It’s thesis is not just that these themes are far less relevant going forward, but that they weren’t all that important in the first place, punctuated by Yoda’s page turner remark. The fact that the legends of old are used (or abused depending on your point of view) to transmit this message is also in of itself a clear attempt at devaluation, since even they are made to adhere to the new order.

I think it’s disingenuous to say TLJ is an average blockbuster or that anything it has to say is on that level of Transformers, or Geostorm, or Avengers. If anything, it’s a little too heady for its own good. I definitely think it has pacing and tonal issues, as well as one too many plot threads that clearly have muddled what it was trying to say in the end, but its intentions and fundamental ideas have more depth than just “insert SW brand here.” It can’t be that, as well as trying to burn down Star Wars traditions, at the same time. It’s trying to be so much more, and whether or not it succeeds is just a matter of opinion.

And while something can be said about how it uses an evil Empire and plucky rebellion, as well as TIEs, X-Wings, and lightsabers, that’s all superficial when what informs and drives those things are clearly different enough to not be “Star Wars” to many people thematically.

Yes, but the whole point is, that the general audience doesn’t care about the themes that drove Star Wars in the past. In my view the current owners of the franchise feel Star Wars’ themes and connections to the past are a stumbling block for the general audience to connect with the material. In order to facilitate the growth of the potential market of these films, these themes and historic connections need to be simplified or removed.

Then the people running the franchise are DUMB. My kids, nieces and nephews all love the OT more than anything that came after, they were born 30+ years after ANH, yet they love it. I had 5-year-old ask “why luke doing that?”. They don’t need to worry about growing the audience, and ignoring what made the franchise so popular is not the way to do it.

Disney should know better. Look at the lineups they have for crappy rides that have been around for 60 years. Why? they still work and multigenerations experienced them in their youth and enjoy seeing their kids enjoy them.

Disney should know better? I think the box office for TFA and TLJ shows they understand how to make money just fine. And of course that’s their goal, they’re a giant corporation.

My daughters saw the OT before TFA, and they really like the OT. But they love TFA. Rey is their hero, not Luke. The OT has basically like one female character.

They have to play the long game. The movies are the catalyst for a lot of money making enterprises. So my comment about the DC universe. Good numbers out of the gate as fans wanted to see these stories as movies forever, but then numbers turned bad.

It would not have taken much to give something to the long to fans of SW and still build new appeal. Crapping all over Luke was a bad move. He may not be the hero to your daughters, but for many he was and he deserved better.

If they continue this trend - one day your daughters get to enjoy a movie where Rey turns out to be piece of crap who tries to kill babies in her spare time.

This is ludicrous. I know the movie hurt you bad but come on.

Also to a large percentage of us who grew up with Luke, TLJ Luke was fantastic. “Crapping all over Luke” is just your opinion.

Just a ludicrous as Lukes story base on his ROFTJ character. IF they can take Luke have luke make such a turn, why not Rey in the future? Nothing sacrosanct anymore in the SW universe.

Wasn’t the whole idea of the movie that Luke can still be a hero in spite of his failures? I think that’s an important message, because what if some kid fucks up and feels he can’t come back from that? I know I’ve had those moments growing up, and it’s cool that TLJ tries to show that you aren’t defined by your flaws, but the good that you do and can do. It’s a very human approach to the hero, and one that I think is important.

“No one’s ever really gone…”

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

Well this thread grew in my brief absence (I suppose not a surprise at all).

All I’ll say is I’m with NFB, what TLJ did is exactly what SW needed to not become any other blockbuster franchise.

The MCU is not like any other blockbuster franchise. It’s far more successful for one thing, and also get’s a lot of praise from critics. In my view Star Wars will share many traits of the MCU, while also maintaining enough of it’s own identity to be extremely marketable. Disney knows what they’re doing. In the world of movies they’re top dog. It will be an entertaining ride. Whether it will be inspiring? Every now and then, I suppose.

I don’t even disagree with this, tbh. 👍

Mrebo said:

NFBisms said:

DrDre said:

Creox said:

DrDre said:

I’ve been thinking a bit more about the broad stroke differences between TLJ and the rest of the saga, particulary the OT, and why some find TLJ refreshing, while others reject it. So, for a change I’m not going to talk about Rey’s Force powers, or Luke’s characterization, but more about in-universe history, and how that affects the story.

I think it is fair to say the OT is steeped in melancholy, and powerful connections to the past. The entire premise of ANH is to defeat the evil Empire, and to return the galaxy to a previous state, the fabled Old Republic. Luke is largely driven by the legend of his father, who’s friend Obi-Wan promises to teach him about an all but forgotten religion that both he and Luke’s father were a part of. The rest of the trilogy is largly set up such that Luke needs to vanguish the enemies of old, Darth Vader, and the Emperor, and avoid the pitfalls, that caused Vader, later revealed to be his father, to turn on his friend, and join the dark side.

To a large degree TFA operates in the same way. It treats Luke Skywalker as a legend of old, that both the heroes and villains are looking for. Luke went looking for the first Jedi temple, a place presumably steeped in Jedi history. It’s hinted, that Rey has a strong connection to the past, and Kylo Ren, who’s directly related to two other legends of the past, Han and Leia, was seduced to the dark side by some mysterious larger than life old anti-Yoda figure. Both Rey and Kylo Ren are struggling with their past, and the film ends with Kylo severing one of the links to his past by killing a past legend, while Rey connects with it by finding a past legend.

TLJ completely breaks with this Star Wars tradition. It actively deflates the past by telling us the history and legends we cherish are not as great as we want to believe. It actively cuts almost all ties to the past by killing off the remaining classic heroes (Leia technically not in the film), and even the links to the past TFA introduced. The mysterious Snoke is unceremoniously cast aside, and the secret of Rey’s past is, that she has no past, at least not one that’s relevant to her future. The family connection between good and evil that drove the OT and TFA is all but ignored, and then finally killed for good, when Leia gives up on her son, and Luke dies. What remains is a conflict between new heroes and new villains, that either killed their past, or don’t really have one.

It’s a bold move, which is sadly undercut by a strict adherence to the OT aesthetic and the OT’s basic premise of an Empire versus a small band of rebels. The question is why did the creators and by extension Disney decide to reboot the franchise, whilst also severing most connections to the past? My theory is, that it was done to make Star Wars more accessible to the general audience. Most of us hardcore fans will see the movies anyway. I know I probably will, despite my lack of enthousiasm. Anyone without much knowledge of Star Wars history will be able to see and enjoy episode IX. It’s starting point is similar to episode IV. There’s an evil Empire led by an evil maniac, a struggling rebellion led by an aspiring Jedi, and it looks like it’s part of the Star Wars brand. You need not know more.

It IS a bold move and one in which I think needed to happen for SW to evolve.

I might agree, if the bold move was used to create a new story, and new Star Wars lore but it wasn’t. It’s a reboot, and one that strips Star Wars from much of the deeper layers and themes, that made it stand out from the average blockbuster, in my opinion of course.

I think the themes and layers of TLJ are deeper and a little more meaningful than anything in both the OT and PT, especially in how the philosophical ideas tackled are all about our understanding of those previously established themes. It may be more of a meta-deconstruction of the themes, rather than a continuing re-affirmation of them, but they are still there and are still needed to be understood.

I’m glad someone who really liked the movie put it this way. I think you’re right that this is what the movie is doing and that’s what I really dislike about it. There is a tremendous navel-gazing quality that overtakes telling a good Star Wars story (because apparently it’s running out of fuel).

My initial impulse is that where TFA insulted our intelligence, TLJ flatters it. That is part of the appeal, especially to professional critics. As an intelligent/educated person I feel that allure. Yet, I do not agree that the themes in TLJ are deeper or more meaningful. That is the seduction of a meta-deconstruction of past themes but it is an illusion.

The split between the fans, like the split on Starkiller Base, is almost itself meta. We may never know who won…

Maybe not deeper per se, but they are certainly new to the franchise, and that was fine for me.

Let’s not make this about intelligence levels btw. I’m not even done with college lol, so I’m not about to start jacking off my intelligence, because lord knows I’m a headass in all the ways that matter. xP

DrDre said:

NFBisms said:

DrDre said:

NFBisms said:

DrDre said:

Creox said:

DrDre said:

I’ve been thinking a bit more about the broad stroke differences between TLJ and the rest of the saga, particulary the OT, and why some find TLJ refreshing, while others reject it. So, for a change I’m not going to talk about Rey’s Force powers, or Luke’s characterization, but more about in-universe history, and how that affects the story.

I think it is fair to say the OT is steeped in melancholy, and powerful connections to the past. The entire premise of ANH is to defeat the evil Empire, and to return the galaxy to a previous state, the fabled Old Republic. Luke is largely driven by the legend of his father, who’s friend Obi-Wan promises to teach him about an all but forgotten religion that both he and Luke’s father were a part of. The rest of the trilogy is largly set up such that Luke needs to vanguish the enemies of old, Darth Vader, and the Emperor, and avoid the pitfalls, that caused Vader, later revealed to be his father, to turn on his friend, and join the dark side.

To a large degree TFA operates in the same way. It treats Luke Skywalker as a legend of old, that both the heroes and villains are looking for. Luke went looking for the first Jedi temple, a place presumably steeped in Jedi history. It’s hinted, that Rey has a strong connection to the past, and Kylo Ren, who’s directly related to two other legends of the past, Han and Leia, was seduced to the dark side by some mysterious larger than life old anti-Yoda figure. Both Rey and Kylo Ren are struggling with their past, and the film ends with Kylo severing one of the links to his past by killing a past legend, while Rey connects with it by finding a past legend.

TLJ completely breaks with this Star Wars tradition. It actively deflates the past by telling us the history and legends we cherish are not as great as we want to believe. It actively cuts almost all ties to the past by killing off the remaining classic heroes (Leia technically not in the film), and even the links to the past TFA introduced. The mysterious Snoke is unceremoniously cast aside, and the secret of Rey’s past is, that she has no past, at least not one that’s relevant to her future. The family connection between good and evil that drove the OT and TFA is all but ignored, and then finally killed for good, when Leia gives up on her son, and Luke dies. What remains is a conflict between new heroes and new villains, that either killed their past, or don’t really have one.

It’s a bold move, which is sadly undercut by a strict adherence to the OT aesthetic and the OT’s basic premise of an Empire versus a small band of rebels. The question is why did the creators and by extension Disney decide to reboot the franchise, whilst also severing most connections to the past? My theory is, that it was done to make Star Wars more accessible to the general audience. Most of us hardcore fans will see the movies anyway. I know I probably will, despite my lack of enthousiasm. Anyone without much knowledge of Star Wars history will be able to see and enjoy episode IX. It’s starting point is similar to episode IV. There’s an evil Empire led by an evil maniac, a struggling rebellion led by an aspiring Jedi, and it looks like it’s part of the Star Wars brand. You need not know more.

It IS a bold move and one in which I think needed to happen for SW to evolve.

I might agree, if the bold move was used to create a new story, and new Star Wars lore but it wasn’t. It’s a reboot, and one that strips Star Wars from much of the deeper layers and themes, that made it stand out from the average blockbuster, in my opinion of course.

I think the themes and layers of TLJ are deeper and a little more meaningful than anything in both the OT and PT, especially in how the philosophical ideas tackled are all about our understanding of those previously established themes. It may be more of a meta-deconstruction of the themes, rather than a continuing re-affirmation of them, but they are still there and are still needed to be understood.

Well to me deconstructing and understanding are two very different things. IMO TLJ deconstructs the themes of the previous films not to provide understanding, but to devalue them. It’s thesis is not just that these themes are far less relevant going forward, but weren’t all that important in the first place, punctuated by Yoda’s page turner remark. The fact that the legends of old are used (or abused depending on your point of view) to transmit this message is also in of itself a clear attempt at devaluation, since evdn they are made to adhere to the new order.

Well, the two aren’t really disparate concepts, right? You can’t begin to deconstruct or devalue effectively without understanding what it is you’re deconstructing or devaluing in the first place. I wasn’t saying that TLJ was trying to provide clarity to the original trilogy’s themes - I do think TLJ and the originals are thematically different, just that they don’t conflict or clash like you say. TLJ can’t take away from the originals in my mind, because what it has to say, while different, is dependent on also understanding what the originals had to say and what it was that drove those films.

I think it’s disingenuous to say TLJ is an average blockbuster or that anything it has to say is on that level of Transformers, or Geostorm, or Avengers. If anything, it’s a little too heady for its own good. I definitely think it has pacing and tonal issues, as well as one too many plot threads that clearly have muddled what it was trying to say in the end, but its intentions and fundamental ideas have more depth than just “insert SW brand here.” It can’t be that, as well as trying to burn down Star Wars traditions, at the same time. It’s trying to be so much more, and whether or not it succeeds is just a matter of opinion.

And while something can be said about how it uses an evil Empire and plucky rebellion, as well as TIEs, X-Wings, and lightsabers, that’s all superficial when what informs and drives those things are clearly different enough to not be “Star Wars” to many people thematically.

Yes, but the whole point is, that the general audience doesn’t care about the themes that drove Star Wars in the past. In my view the current owners of the franchise feel Star Wars’ themes and connections to the past is a stumbling block for the general audience to connect with the material. In order to facilitate the growth of the potential market of these films, these themes and historic connections need to be simplified or removed. Star Wars is to be molded in the image of other franchises like the MCU universe, where connections between films are superficial at best. Anyone can watch a future MCU film, and enjoy them on their own terms, without having seen past entries. So will it be for Star Wars.

My point was that TLJ went out of its way to be alienating and have more depth than Star Wars as a franchise typically has. I don’t think the thematic differences = dumber, because the film was way too philosophical and dependent on understanding the previous concepts to be “simplified.” What it tackles about shame, hero worship, legacy, regret, and failure - the general human condition - is something that the typically morally binary Star Wars hadn’t even touched until now. But, like I said, it only touches those things in the context of us initially believing what we have about Star Wars as a universe.

Sure, this dumb hypothetical general audience doesn’t care about anything below surface level, but that’s the whole point. They could do anything with the Star Wars brand and it wouldn’t matter. Why would choosing to do and include things that makes Porkins4real’s 5-year-old ask “why Luke do that” and fans like you angry mean wider MCU-like appeal? The MCU is successful because it taps into that general audience AND die-hard comic book nerds, not one over the other. TLJ tried (imo) maybe way too hard to not be mass-appeal and bit itself in the ass critically. I don’t think the idea that Kennedy or Johnson thought doing that was a way to simplify things for a mass audience makes sense when you look at it.

Star Wars and Jaws were the two movies that heralded the blockbuster as a market/genre in the first place. Adhering to what Star Wars has been doing since 1977 would be what you described.

TLJ was only alienating to a group of die-hard fans. The critics and general audience ate it up. Many fans seem to be happy with it also. That’s about as general as the appeal can get. Like I said, I predict that there will be much less connective tissue between Star Wars films going forward. Individual directors may rise above the occassion, and provide depth and nuance, but to Star Wars as a brand and business, that won’t matter. Star Wars will become the MCU with space ships and lightsabers. Star Wars is hardly new and original anymore. However, for me personally something essential has been lost.

It has a 51% audience score on RT, which is as close to 100% divided as you can get. And aside from probably inaccurate and irrelevant website ratings systems, you can’t honestly believe TLJ is only getting flack from die-hard fans, right? It is intensely polarizing all over the internet - you’ve definitely observed that - and for me personally, it is irl as well.

(Tbh, I don’t like the assertion that only this upper tier of fan is who doesn’t like TLJ. Anyone can dislike this movie, not just the “die-hard fans.” Anyone can have problems with it, not just “woke” fans. )

That’s all beside the point, though. How does TLJ of all films support the claim that it will become MCU with ships and lightsabers? I don’t even disagree that that’s what KK is trying to do, with standalones coming out every year, but TLJ of all things is what proves that? If anything, it shows me that they’re willing to take risks that the MCU wouldn’t take. It can’t be so thematically incongruous and subversive to the SW formula for you, but also too safe and simplified.

DrDre said:

NFBisms said:

DrDre said:

Creox said:

DrDre said:

I’ve been thinking a bit more about the broad stroke differences between TLJ and the rest of the saga, particulary the OT, and why some find TLJ refreshing, while others reject it. So, for a change I’m not going to talk about Rey’s Force powers, or Luke’s characterization, but more about in-universe history, and how that affects the story.

I think it is fair to say the OT is steeped in melancholy, and powerful connections to the past. The entire premise of ANH is to defeat the evil Empire, and to return the galaxy to a previous state, the fabled Old Republic. Luke is largely driven by the legend of his father, who’s friend Obi-Wan promises to teach him about an all but forgotten religion that both he and Luke’s father were a part of. The rest of the trilogy is largly set up such that Luke needs to vanguish the enemies of old, Darth Vader, and the Emperor, and avoid the pitfalls, that caused Vader, later revealed to be his father, to turn on his friend, and join the dark side.

To a large degree TFA operates in the same way. It treats Luke Skywalker as a legend of old, that both the heroes and villains are looking for. Luke went looking for the first Jedi temple, a place presumably steeped in Jedi history. It’s hinted, that Rey has a strong connection to the past, and Kylo Ren, who’s directly related to two other legends of the past, Han and Leia, was seduced to the dark side by some mysterious larger than life old anti-Yoda figure. Both Rey and Kylo Ren are struggling with their past, and the film ends with Kylo severing one of the links to his past by killing a past legend, while Rey connects with it by finding a past legend.

TLJ completely breaks with this Star Wars tradition. It actively deflates the past by telling us the history and legends we cherish are not as great as we want to believe. It actively cuts almost all ties to the past by killing off the remaining classic heroes (Leia technically not in the film), and even the links to the past TFA introduced. The mysterious Snoke is unceremoniously cast aside, and the secret of Rey’s past is, that she has no past, at least not one that’s relevant to her future. The family connection between good and evil that drove the OT and TFA is all but ignored, and then finally killed for good, when Leia gives up on her son, and Luke dies. What remains is a conflict between new heroes and new villains, that either killed their past, or don’t really have one.

It’s a bold move, which is sadly undercut by a strict adherence to the OT aesthetic and the OT’s basic premise of an Empire versus a small band of rebels. The question is why did the creators and by extension Disney decide to reboot the franchise, whilst also severing most connections to the past? My theory is, that it was done to make Star Wars more accessible to the general audience. Most of us hardcore fans will see the movies anyway. I know I probably will, despite my lack of enthousiasm. Anyone without much knowledge of Star Wars history will be able to see and enjoy episode IX. It’s starting point is similar to episode IV. There’s an evil Empire led by an evil maniac, a struggling rebellion led by an aspiring Jedi, and it looks like it’s part of the Star Wars brand. You need not know more.

It IS a bold move and one in which I think needed to happen for SW to evolve.

I might agree, if the bold move was used to create a new story, and new Star Wars lore but it wasn’t. It’s a reboot, and one that strips Star Wars from much of the deeper layers and themes, that made it stand out from the average blockbuster, in my opinion of course.

I think the themes and layers of TLJ are deeper and a little more meaningful than anything in both the OT and PT, especially in how the philosophical ideas tackled are all about our understanding of those previously established themes. It may be more of a meta-deconstruction of the themes, rather than a continuing re-affirmation of them, but they are still there and are still needed to be understood.

Well to me deconstructing and understanding are two very different things. IMO TLJ deconstructs the themes of the previous films not to provide understanding, but to devalue them. It’s thesis is not just that these themes are far less relevant going forward, but weren’t all that important in the first place, punctuated by Yoda’s page turner remark. The fact that the legends of old are used (or abused depending on your point of view) to transmit this message is also in of itself a clear attempt at devaluation, since evdn they are made to adhere to the new order.

Well, the two aren’t really disparate concepts, right? You can’t begin to deconstruct or devalue effectively without understanding what it is you’re deconstructing or devaluing in the first place. I wasn’t saying that TLJ was trying to provide clarity to the original trilogy’s themes - I do think TLJ and the originals are thematically different, just that they don’t conflict or clash like you say. TLJ can’t take away from the originals in my mind, because what it has to say, while different, is dependent on also understanding what the originals had to say and what it was that drove those films.

I think it’s disingenuous to say TLJ is an average blockbuster or that anything it has to say is on that level of Transformers, or Geostorm, or Avengers. If anything, it’s a little too heady for its own good. I definitely think it has pacing and tonal issues, as well as one too many plot threads that clearly have muddled what it was trying to say in the end, but its intentions and fundamental ideas have more depth than just “insert SW brand here.” It can’t be that, as well as trying to burn down Star Wars traditions, at the same time. It’s trying to be so much more, and whether or not it succeeds is just a matter of opinion.

And while something can be said about how it uses an evil Empire and plucky rebellion, as well as TIEs, X-Wings, and lightsabers, that’s all superficial when what informs and drives those things are clearly different enough to not be “Star Wars” to many people thematically.

Yes, but the whole point is, that the general audience doesn’t care about the themes that drove Star Wars in the past. In my view the current owners of the franchise feel Star Wars’ themes and connections to the past is a stumbling block for the general audience to connect with the material. In order to facilitate the growth of the potential market of these films, these themes and historic connections need to be simplified or removed. Star Wars is to be molded in the image of other franchises like the MCU universe, where connections between films are superficial at best. Anyone can watch a future MCU film, and enjoy them on their own terms, without having seen past entries. So will it be for Star Wars.

My point was that TLJ went out of its way to be alienating and have more depth than Star Wars as a franchise typically has. I don’t think the thematic differences = dumber, because the film was way too philosophical and dependent on understanding the previous concepts to be “simplified.” What it tackles about shame, hero worship, legacy, regret, and failure - the general human condition - is something that the typically morally binary Star Wars hadn’t even touched until now. But, like I said, it only touches those things in the context of us initially believing what we have about Star Wars as a universe.

Sure, this dumb hypothetical general audience doesn’t care about anything below surface level, but that’s the whole point. They could do anything with the Star Wars brand and it wouldn’t matter. Why would choosing to do and include things that makes Porkins4real’s 5-year-old ask “why Luke do that” and fans like you angry mean wider MCU-like appeal? The MCU is successful because it taps into that general audience AND die-hard comic book nerds, not one over the other. TLJ tried (imo) maybe way too hard to not be mass-appeal and bit itself in the ass critically. I don’t think the idea that Kennedy or Johnson thought doing that was a way to simplify things for a mass audience makes sense when you look at it.

Star Wars and Jaws were the two movies that heralded the blockbuster as a market/genre in the first place. Adhering to what Star Wars has been doing since 1977 would be what you described.

DrDre said:

Creox said:

DrDre said:

I’ve been thinking a bit more about the broad stroke differences between TLJ and the rest of the saga, particulary the OT, and why some find TLJ refreshing, while others reject it. So, for a change I’m not going to talk about Rey’s Force powers, or Luke’s characterization, but more about in-universe history, and how that affects the story.

I think it is fair to say the OT is steeped in melancholy, and powerful connections to the past. The entire premise of ANH is to defeat the evil Empire, and to return the galaxy to a previous state, the fabled Old Republic. Luke is largely driven by the legend of his father, who’s friend Obi-Wan promises to teach him about an all but forgotten religion that both he and Luke’s father were a part of. The rest of the trilogy is largly set up such that Luke needs to vanguish the enemies of old, Darth Vader, and the Emperor, and avoid the pitfalls, that caused Vader, later revealed to be his father, to turn on his friend, and join the dark side.

To a large degree TFA operates in the same way. It treats Luke Skywalker as a legend of old, that both the heroes and villains are looking for. Luke went looking for the first Jedi temple, a place presumably steeped in Jedi history. It’s hinted, that Rey has a strong connection to the past, and Kylo Ren, who’s directly related to two other legends of the past, Han and Leia, was seduced to the dark side by some mysterious larger than life old anti-Yoda figure. Both Rey and Kylo Ren are struggling with their past, and the film ends with Kylo severing one of the links to his past by killing a past legend, while Rey connects with it by finding a past legend.

TLJ completely breaks with this Star Wars tradition. It actively deflates the past by telling us the history and legends we cherish are not as great as we want to believe. It actively cuts almost all ties to the past by killing off the remaining classic heroes (Leia technically not in the film), and even the links to the past TFA introduced. The mysterious Snoke is unceremoniously cast aside, and the secret of Rey’s past is, that she has no past, at least not one that’s relevant to her future. The family connection between good and evil that drove the OT and TFA is all but ignored, and then finally killed for good, when Leia gives up on her son, and Luke dies. What remains is a conflict between new heroes and new villains, that either killed their past, or don’t really have one.

It’s a bold move, which is sadly undercut by a strict adherence to the OT aesthetic and the OT’s basic premise of an Empire versus a small band of rebels. The question is why did the creators and by extension Disney decide to reboot the franchise, whilst also severing most connections to the past? My theory is, that it was done to make Star Wars more accessible to the general audience. Most of us hardcore fans will see the movies anyway. I know I probably will, despite my lack of enthousiasm. Anyone without much knowledge of Star Wars history will be able to see and enjoy episode IX. It’s starting point is similar to episode IV. There’s an evil Empire led by an evil maniac, a struggling rebellion led by an aspiring Jedi, and it looks like it’s part of the Star Wars brand. You need not know more.

It IS a bold move and one in which I think needed to happen for SW to evolve.

I might agree, if the bold move was used to create a new story, and new Star Wars lore but it wasn’t. It’s a reboot, and one that strips Star Wars from much of the deeper layers and themes, that made it stand out from the average blockbuster, in my opinion of course.

I think the themes and layers of TLJ are deeper and a little more meaningful than anything in both the OT and PT, especially in how the philosophical ideas tackled are all about our understanding of those previously established themes. It may be more of a meta-deconstruction of the themes, rather than a continuing re-affirmation of them, but they are still there and are still needed to be understood.

I think it’s disingenuous to say TLJ is an average blockbuster or that anything it has to say is on that level of Transformers, or Geostorm, or Avengers. If anything, it’s a little too heady for its own good. I definitely think it has pacing and tonal issues, as well as one too many plot threads that clearly have muddled what it was trying to say in the end, but its intentions and fundamental ideas have more depth than just “insert SW brand here.” It can’t be that, as well as trying to burn down Star Wars traditions, at the same time. It’s trying to be so much more, and whether or not it succeeds in being a good movie is just a matter of opinion.

And while something can be said about how it uses an evil Empire and plucky rebellion, as well as TIEs, X-Wings, and lightsabers, that’s all superficial when what informs and drives those things are clearly different enough to not be “Star Wars” to many people thematically.

He probably could have beat a very injured Kylo. xP

Collipso said:

TV’s Frink said:

[cue several (more) pages of complaints about Rey still being a Mary Sue]

Don’t you think that final scene where she lifts all the rocks undermines the one in TESB, where Luke struggles so much to do the same thing?

Edit: and I loved how she’s a nobody. Her parents being special would’ve been no excuse for her unrealistic abilities.

Rey’s character arc isn’t exactly the same as Luke’s though, right?

Luke’s problem and arc in the originals was dealing with his impatience and rashness, whereas Rey has been fine waiting her entire life. Her innate personality lended itself to the force, her idealism and patience allowing her to discover her abilities much easier than Luke. Which, granted, is kind of Mary-Sue-ish - but I don’t think Rey represents the hero’s journey in this trilogy. She’s not the analog to Luke like I think a lot of people assume. If anything, Finn takes that role.

If anything, Rey is on more of an emotional journey, like you said, about her being a nobody, and coming to terms with that. I know it’s kind of sexist to lump in the females from both trilogies, but she’s more like Leia’s character in the OT - the character who already kind of had their shit together. Leia doesn’t really grow or change as much as Luke or Han. She’s already a hero in her own right when we meet her, and her growth and change comes from things more abstract and emotional than whether or not she can overcome her own flaws.

I do think the fact that everyone is so engaged in the conversation about who Luke actually is, means TLJ was at least successful in some of its goals. That’s a question the film itself poses, and that people fall so adamantly on either side means that it did its job. I appreciate how challenging this movie is for fans, and it’s something that I think is good for the franchise to prevent it from becoming just another unspecial billion dollar property. It’s polarizing and controversial in all the right ways I think.

“Obi-Wan once thought as you did…”

Testing a few things using some of the video game audio…

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1X25bTguCYXxYA-JimeOazdgXczUX4psq
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1PKoJfhe0JFQXt0ff8xDhagM-DIBsiKxi

I like discussing with people who think differently than I do about it, tbh.