Sign In

Shopping Maul

User Group
Members
Join date
12-Oct-2013
Last activity
5-Dec-2019
Posts
362

Post History

Post
#1308985
Topic
I hate the Jedi
Time

theprequelsrule said:

Shopping Maul said:

I always beat this particular Tauntaun but I think the Force went off the rails in ROTJ. Yes, in TESB Yoda was a moralising grouch, but that didn’t necessarily give him the final word. Gary Kurtz indicated that the original story idea for ROTJ would have had Luke wandering off into the sunset via a bittersweet ending. To me that indicates a possible sense of ambiguity for Luke - perhaps a blurring of the divide between the so-called Light and Dark. In ROTJ a simple loss of temper is a path to eternal damnation, which I think is childish. ROTJ also added the genetic component (via the ludicrous shoehorning of Leia into the ‘other hope’ role) which in turn led to Midichlorians and virgin births. The Force was, in Lucas’ words back in the day, “space-Yoga”, and could easily have transcended Yoda’s take on things after TESB.

I believe it was bittersweet because the triumvirate of Luke, Han, and Leia were going to split up. Han dies, Leia becomes leader of the New Republic, and Luke goes off to create a New Jedi Order. But there is nothing to indicate that Luke’s Jedi would be taught a new take on The Force. And again the idea that anger leads to the darkside is first made explicit in TESB, not ROTJ.

You’re right in that this doesn’t necessarily indicate a shift in the ‘anger’ position re the Force, but it does point (however vaguely) to a stronger film with a less binary sense of victory. Kurtz was talking as someone who wanted to carry on the more philosophical and characterisation-heavy attitude of TESB (which, as a fan, I was hoping for), so going on that alone we can assume more depth with regard to Luke’s outcome with Vader and Palpatine - even if only by virtue of stronger dialogue and better direction. I see Yoda’s stance in TESB as more of a ‘don’t lose your focus’ type of thing rather than ‘any violence whatsoever is bad’. I still think it’s ROTJ that dumbs it all down to ‘be nice to daddy or you’ll turn evil’.

Post
#1308962
Topic
I hate the Jedi
Time

I always beat this particular Tauntaun but I think the Force went off the rails in ROTJ. Yes, in TESB Yoda was a moralising grouch, but that didn’t necessarily give him the final word. Gary Kurtz indicated that the original story idea for ROTJ would have had Luke wandering off into the sunset via a bittersweet ending. To me that indicates a possible sense of ambiguity for Luke - perhaps a blurring of the divide between the so-called Light and Dark. In ROTJ a simple loss of temper is a path to eternal damnation, which I think is childish. ROTJ also added the genetic component (via the ludicrous shoehorning of Leia into the ‘other hope’ role) which in turn led to Midichlorians and virgin births. The Force was, in Lucas’ words back in the day, “space-Yoga”, and could easily have transcended Yoda’s take on things after TESB.

Post
#1308012
Topic
Worst Ideas in Star Wars/Good Ideas that went Horribly Wrong
Time

theprequelsrule said:

DominicCobb said:

theprequelsrule said:

DominicCobb said:

like too how the EU novel Labyrinth of Evil sets up that Anakin has basically been, unbeknownst to Obi-wan, slowly but surely tapping into the power of the dark side as a means to help win the Clone Wars. What if Anakin’s whole goal was to end the war, and really kinda thought he was a good man, trying to bring peace to the galaxy (words that ring hollow in ROTS as is), which is why he agreed to quickly wipe out the Jedi so that they wouldn’t quickly fall into another war? It’s funny because you can see that’s sort of Lucas’s intent but it ends up as subtext, at best.

We are never shown the implied addictive character of the Darkside are we? You start to use it because you feel you need the power, but in the end it masters you. There is an implication that it is a malevolent force that twists it’s users to pure evil even if they had noble goals. Palpatine is the end result of the process; power for power’s sake.

Yes, that’s exactly how it was portrayed in the OT and then Lucas dropped the ball. Just look at the scene where Anakin kills Dooku - instead of instinctively killing him after unleashing his anger to best him, he has to be goaded into doing it after he’s already admitted that it’s not the right thing to do. So stupid.

Garbage acting and directing as well. Compare it to the scene it “rhymes with” in ROTJ and there is no comparison. The emotional impact and physical ferocity (man, is Luke pissed off!) in ROTJ are miles beyond the ROTS scene.

edit: forgot to add that the music in the ROTJ scene is much better too.

I disagree - I think Anakin’s fall made infinitely more sense. When Anakin hesitates to kill Dooku, Palpatine appeals to his sense of vengeance. He knows that Anakin is confused and immature and on an ethical knife’s edge, so he just gives a little push. What this does is place Anakin in the position of having done something he cannot walk away from, which in turn feeds his self-deception all the way through to finally betraying the Jedi. I’m not saying it was handled well, but at least we get a sense of manipulation, corruption, and some blurry ethical lines.

In ROTJ all Luke does is lose his temper when Vader threatens his sister. So what? How is that a path to the Dark Side when throwing the Emperor to his death is apparently a free pass to Jedi heaven?

Post
#1307116
Topic
Worst Ideas in Star Wars/Good Ideas that went Horribly Wrong
Time

DuracellEnergizer said:

Shopping Maul said:

Tack said:

I feel like ESB did more harm than good for Vader. I came across an article in an old issue of Famous Monsters of Filmland (around 1978) and it had a really interesting point about the code of honor which Vader seems to exhibit in the original Star Wars, and it read quite a bit of character into him that is easy to imagine being a reason for the spike of popularity he achieved between 1977 and 1980. I’ll try and post it if I can find it again. It made some interesting points.

Anyway, in Empire Strikes Back I feel like the nuance of Vader’s characterization was almost entirely lost. The constant killing of his subordinates (to a degree it almost becomes a running gag), the comparatively angry delivery of his lines versus the more soft-spoken delivery of the original, and the fact that his dialogue becomes considerably more blunt. He has his moments of greatness, certainly, but I feel like from the outset of development they were too far gone into making him over-the-top evil rather than the comparatively mysterious and intimidating figure he was in the original film.

I’m actually curious, does anyone else think this?

I like the transition from ANH to TESB because it sets Vader up as a creature of pure rage. He’s kind of out of his element in ANH - being on the Death Star with Tarkin and everything - but in TESB he’s running his own show. And yes, the strangulations become something of a running joke but it’s a pretty sick joke - and not something you can really come back from. This guy kills people who piss him off! Which for me really fuels the horror of the revelation at the film’s climax. Had Vader been more sympathetic, we might not have been so floored by that iconic reveal. The fact that Vader is not a good guy lends weight to Luke’s (and our own) shock IMO.

Unfortunately, it runs counter to the notion that this is a man who “still has good in him.”

Not at the time. The ‘still has good in him’ thing was a ROTJ addition.

Post
#1306978
Topic
Worst Ideas in Star Wars/Good Ideas that went Horribly Wrong
Time

Tack said:

I feel like ESB did more harm than good for Vader. I came across an article in an old issue of Famous Monsters of Filmland (around 1978) and it had a really interesting point about the code of honor which Vader seems to exhibit in the original Star Wars, and it read quite a bit of character into him that is easy to imagine being a reason for the spike of popularity he achieved between 1977 and 1980. I’ll try and post it if I can find it again. It made some interesting points.

Anyway, in Empire Strikes Back I feel like the nuance of Vader’s characterization was almost entirely lost. The constant killing of his subordinates (to a degree it almost becomes a running gag), the comparatively angry delivery of his lines versus the more soft-spoken delivery of the original, and the fact that his dialogue becomes considerably more blunt. He has his moments of greatness, certainly, but I feel like from the outset of development they were too far gone into making him over-the-top evil rather than the comparatively mysterious and intimidating figure he was in the original film.

I’m actually curious, does anyone else think this?

I like the transition from ANH to TESB because it sets Vader up as a creature of pure rage. He’s kind of out of his element in ANH - being on the Death Star with Tarkin and everything - but in TESB he’s running his own show. And yes, the strangulations become something of a running joke but it’s a pretty sick joke - and not something you can really come back from. This guy kills people who piss him off! Which for me really fuels the horror of the revelation at the film’s climax. Had Vader been more sympathetic, we might not have been so floored by that iconic reveal. The fact that Vader is not a good guy lends weight to Luke’s (and our own) shock IMO.

Post
#1305898
Topic
Episode IX: The Rise Of Skywalker - Discussion * <strong><em>SPOILER THREAD</em></strong> *
Time

TavorX said:

I overall have little issue with how Luke in TLJ was portrayed. From my perspective, Luke always had this fear of losing his closet friends whom largely became his family. It’s what prompted him to leave Dagobah and head straight into the Bespin death trap. In ROTJ, he lost his cool whenever Vader mentioned Leia. His core fear is losing anyone tragically and he tends to act irrationally whenever that possibility arises. Therefore, when it came to Ben Solo, and how seemingly one Padawan could ruin the peace he worked so hard to create, he reverted back to his instinctual fear.
You could say he should grow into a wise sage that never succumbs to those kind of emotions but I like to think he held onto those humanly flaws. It would had been very bizarre if he had actually killed Ben, but the good in Luke that is always within him stops that aggression that plagued Vader.

It’s not the Luke many of us wanted to see post-Jedi, but that’s pretty much one of the few RJ choices I could get behind. I still, however, view TLJ as a terrible middle act overall.

I liked the vibe of it (and unlike many fans I loved the ‘Luke wasn’t really there’ showdown/death) but I still concur with other fans that the idea of murdering Kylo (however fleeting) was off. I’d have preferred something like Luke being locked in a sense of prophecy where the only outcome he could foresee was killing Kylo in the future. If they shared such a vision it would feed Kylo’s paranoia about uncle Luke wanting to kill him whilst justifying Luke’s going AWOL to seek better answers.

I know…wrong thread…

Post
#1303345
Topic
Star Wars Prequel Trilogy CGI Free
Time

UncutIsSuperior said:

I’ve just recently got this idea. It’s the Star Wars Prequel Trilogy in the style of the Original Theatrical Versions of the Original Trilogy. It’s basically a what-if scenario with the Prequels, where the CGI effects would be either removed or replaced with stop-motion effects and/or puppets. I’m not sure if this is even possible, but I think it’s one hell of a concept.

I like the idea in theory. I used to ponder the notion of a PT being made in a 50s/60s style, so that it feels as if it had been made 20 years earlier than the OT and makes for a logical viewing experience. Commercial suicide of course…

Post
#1300850
Topic
The Surprisingly Strange Story of &quot;Lapti Nek&quot;
Time

oojason said:

Star Wars: the changing face of Sy Snootles & the Rebo band’ - article from 2016:-

https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/star-wars/38603/star-wars-the-changing-face-of-sy-snootles-the-rebo-band
 

The article features videos for both the original Lapti Nek and the SE’s Jedi Rocks, as well as a BTS type video of ‘Fancy Man’ - and some other intriguing info on the differing versions of the song that were recorded (and allegedly why one version was used over the other…), ILM’s creature workshop, the later CGI work for the SE, quotes from Lucas, and more…
 

That was really interesting. I don’t know if this has been mentioned (I haven’t gone through the whole thread) but Lapti Nek always reminded me of the Bee Gees’ ‘You Should Be Dancing’. If I had the know-how I’d do a mash-up…!

Post
#1299772
Topic
Small details that took you <em><strong>FOREVER</strong></em> to notice in the <em>Star Wars</em> films
Time

Booman said:

Mocata said:

The original cantina bartender voice also makes me laugh.

“OI! We don’t serve their koind 'ea!”

“What?”

“Ya droids, they’ll have to wait oit-side, they don’t wantem 'ea.”

I love how genuinely confused and bewildered Luke sounds when he responds to him, it’s like he’s never seen an australian in his entire life.

Slightly off-thread, but I love the footage (Empire of Dreams?) where someone’s reading Yoda’s lines in a British accent to Luke when he’s about to take off for Bespin - “if you choose the quick and easy path you will find it’s all a big load of bollocks…” (I’m exaggerating for effect of course!)

Post
#1299761
Topic
Small details that took you <em><strong>FOREVER</strong></em> to notice in the <em>Star Wars</em> films
Time

SomethingStarWarsRelated said:

Shopping Maul said:

SomethingStarWarsRelated said:

I’m not sure if this counts as a “small detail” but I totally used the title of this thread in my video:

https://youtu.be/dYb8ezhwuk8

Harrison Ford does it even more blatantly while Leia is saying “Captain, being held by you isn’t quite enough to get me excited” in TESB.

Yes I know…did you finish watching the video? Or are you being sarcastic?

oojason said:

SomethingStarWarsRelated said:

I’m not sure if this counts as a “small detail” but I totally used the title of this thread in my video:

https://youtu.be/dYb8ezhwuk8

You big meany-head! 😉

I put the hyphen in the wrong place? Damn! 😄

Ha ha, no I’m just an idiot! Sorry! (Actually, my wife distracted me at the very last moment whilst watching your clip so, um, egg on face)…

Post
#1299716
Topic
Small details that took you <em><strong>FOREVER</strong></em> to notice in the <em>Star Wars</em> films
Time

SomethingStarWarsRelated said:

I’m not sure if this counts as a “small detail” but I totally used the title of this thread in my video:

https://youtu.be/dYb8ezhwuk8

Harrison Ford does it even more blatantly while Leia is saying “Captain, being held by you isn’t quite enough to get me excited” in TESB.

Post
#1299346
Topic
Best viewing order to introduce Star Wars to children?
Time

I say start with Star Wars '77 because it is the purest expression of Star Wars there is. We often forget that this was the first of everything - the Force, the lightsabers, the alien cantinas etc etc etc. I see the saga as a kind of wheel with SW '77 as the hub in its centre. Everything flows from this wonderful moment in 1977 and I think it would be cool for a child to experience it the way we did. Then, with her imagination tingling (assuming she likes the movie!), you can give her TESB, and then ROTJ and beyond…

Post
#1297542
Topic
Anyone else think Empire Strikes Back's Special Edition is actually better than the Theatrical Cut?
Time

Back in 1980 I didn’t notice transparent Speeders or repeated set corridors - nor did I care that I never saw the shuttle Vader referred to. All I saw was total awesomeness.

Now of course I can see the rough edges. I can see the genius of how the Hoth battle was achieved, or how the sets were cleverly designed to give the impression of greater scope and distance. Lucas calls them ‘faults’ - I call them craft.

I’m a conservative on this point. I think the films should have been left alone. They are (as Gary Kurtz said) a product of their time, and no amount of tinkering will make them otherwise. The SE were a cute novelty in 1997 and should have remained such - a bonus disc to compliment a stunning remaster of the theatrical OT in whatever format.

If Paul McCartney decided to remix the Beatles’ catalogue with all-new digital sounds, tweaks to the songs, Katy Perry on a couple of tracks etc etc, and then try to bury the originals, he would probably have to go into hiding - and with good reason. This is how I see the Star Wars issue. The sight of Lucas banging on about ‘mythological motifs’ at a 40th anniversary celebration of a film he won’t let us see anymore made my blood boil.

So no, I’m in the unaltered TESB camp.

Post
#1297121
Topic
Small details that took you <em><strong>FOREVER</strong></em> to notice in the <em>Star Wars</em> films
Time

Broom Kid said:

Only just recently noticed this in Empire, but I don’t know if I really noticed it or if I think I noticed it.

The guy in Star Wars who says “enemy fighters coming your way” is, I think, in Empire too? As the same rebel?

I looked it up and apparently that guy’s name is Del Goren, played by Burnell Tucker. IMDB is showing that Burnell Tucker is also in The Empire Strikes Back, and I think he’s the guy who is monitoring the Imperial Probe Droid transmission before Han and Chewie go out after it.

I love that guy! He seems to take his sweet-a## time saying “we’ve picked up a new group of signals…enemy fighters…”. It’s like he was an extra that was given one line and decided to milk the heck out of it.

Post
#1296492
Topic
Episode VIII : The Last Jedi - Discussion * <strong><em>SPOILER THREAD</em></strong> *
Time

yotsuya said:

DrDre said:

StarkillerAG said:

DrDre said:

StarkillerAG said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

Actually the Luke of TLJ is the one who has finally internalized the lessons of TESB. Rey says herself that Luke is purposefully ignoring his success in ROTJ (which repudiated Yoda and Obi-wan), but he has a reason for doing so - saving Anakin did not destroy the Death Star in the short term, nor the Empire in the long term. On the contrary, Luke sees his victory there and elsewhere as having a direct line to his hubris in training Ben.

And anyway, Luke in ROTJ is very pointedly not able to avoid the emotions affiliated with the dark side. He brings his weapon with him when he goes to see Vader. He gives in to his fear, anger, and hatred. It is only when he is on the verge of killing his father does his rationality come in, and he realizes what he has done - it is an exact mirror of the flashback in TLJ. Of course the argument then is that “he should have known better.” Well fine if you feel that way. But in my mind, the dark side is a constant temptation, and the factors leading to that moment in Ben’s hut were such that Luke was, in his arrogance, unaware of what he was getting into (it was a far more subversive challenge than the explicit manipulation of the Emperor on the Death Star). This arrogance is of course a mirror to the arrogance of the Jedi in the PT not realizing the fear and the anger they were giving into, which caused their downfall. Luke, seeing the cycle of things he’s found himself perpetuating, decides to end the Jedi for good. I don’t see any regression at all.

To me this presents a very narrow point of view, and just like much of Luke’s character development seems to be ignored, reducing him down to his mistakes at some moment in the past, so too the Jedi are reduced to their mistakes at the darkest time in their history. Like Luke there is much more to the Jedi than their mistakes at a specific moment in time. The Jedi guarded the peace in the galaxy for over a thousand generations. That to me is clear proof, that the Jedi code works, and that Luke in TLJ was turned into a fool, not being able to look beyond the flaws of a couple of individual Jedi, who by no means seem to be representative of the Jedi over their millenia long history.

I mean, yeah, Luke is looking at it the wrong way, and he’s ultimately proven to be wrong. But Luke is no fool. All we know about the Jedi is that they were the guardians of peace for a thousands generations, but even that doesn’t mean there were a thousand generations of peace. They were exerting their will of the Force over the galaxy. Luke only cites the rise of Darth Sidious and the creation of Vader (because these are things we can connect to as we’ve seen those films), but the whole point of him being on the island is to study the long history of the Jedi, and this is the conclusion he came to, that the Jedi must end. You can nitpick that they didn’t give you sufficient explanation, but in my opinion the implication is clear, that there are more flaws to the order than just the ones we’ve seen in the films.

Yet, Luke then changes his mind.

He doesn’t change his mind about the Jedi, he changes his mind about helping the Resistance. This is shown very well in the Yoda scene. Yoda tells Luke that the teachings of the Jedi were flawed, and tells Luke to pass on everything he learned, both success and failure. Luke still believes that the old Jedi were flawed, but he decides to create a new order of Jedi, learning from the failures of the old.

I didn’t hear anything about a new order of Jedi. All I saw was Yoda chastising Luke for not living up to his potential as a Jedi.

You obviously weren’t paying attention during that scene. Yoda specifically says:

“Heeded my words not, did you. Pass on what you have learned. Strength, mastery, but weakness, folly, failure also. Yes, failure most of all. The greatest teacher, failure is. Luke, we are what they grow beyond. That is the true burden of all masters.”

It was Luke who chose to only see the Jedi through the lens of his own failure, and thus couldn’t see the bigger picture.

Yes, but Yoda’s speech allowed Luke to see the bigger picture. Once again, the quote above clearly contradicts the point you’re trying to make.

No it doesn’t. There is nothing in Yoda’s lesson to Luke, that indicates he’s presenting Luke with some new insight, that did not exist when the Jedi were in their prime. In fact Yoda saying “heeded my words not”, suggests the opposite of what you are suggesting. What Yoda is telling Luke is, that he did not do as he was taught. He should not only pass on his successes, but also allow others to learn from his failures, a lesson he probably gave to many Jedi in the past.

Um… yes, he is presenting Luke with a new lesson that Luke has not had before. He may have used it before the heyday of the Jedi, but it is not among the lesson’s we saw him teach Luke and the way the dialog is written makes it clear that he had only told Luke to pass on what he had learned without specifying that his failures were included in that. So this was a new lesson for Luke.

Well, the last time Yoda mentioned failure to Luke, it was a grim “that is why you fail” after the even more absolute “do or do not, there is no try”. No wonder the poor guy didn’t consider failure as a good thing!

Post
#1296369
Topic
Episode VIII : The Last Jedi - Discussion * <strong><em>SPOILER THREAD</em></strong> *
Time

An easier example of the same thing is Han Solo in TFA. Han returns to smuggling? Why? Han didn’t enjoy smuggling, or do it because it was his lifelong dream. He did it to get ahead, to make a buck. Why the heck would he return to a life of crime after having been a war-hero married to a princess/politician? Didn’t Leia and Han have a shared bank account? It’s just absurd. A better alternative would have been that Han was using his old skills to find allies for the Resistance. Since the New Republic has their heads in the sand re the First Order, Han decides (in lieu of his separation from Leia) to go off and recruit allies from the galaxy’s fringes. That way we get the Solo of old (as per TFA’s intention) but with new noble purpose that doesn’t negate his OT arc.

Similarly a disillusioned Luke with the weight of his own legend bearing down on him after his failure to train Ben Solo could absolutely have been conceived without backtracking Luke’s arc to pre-ROTJ status. As with Han, we could have had new challenges and new circumstances that necessarily resurrected the heroes’ old selves in a progressive rather than regressive way.

Post
#1296356
Topic
Episode VIII : The Last Jedi - Discussion * <strong><em>SPOILER THREAD</em></strong> *
Time

RogueLeader said:

I actually have not read it! I’m familiar with it and some of its ideas through its place in science fiction, its comparisons to Star Wars, and the Lynch adaptation (which I’ve never watched all the way through). I don’t know I haven’t read it yet, I know it is considered a classic and I’ve been wanting to pick it up, but now that movie is coming out I thought about holding off and getting my perspective on the film through a non-reader lens. Maybe we could discuss the film and compare our thoughts once it comes out since you are a repeat reader and I’ve never picked it up.

I will say the director, Denis Villenueve, is basically the best pick to adapt it. He is also a book fan, and all of his films have been pretty great (most recently Sicario, Arrival, Blade Runner 2049), and it has a stellar cast line up. I think they’ve split it into two parts in order to not cram in as much just in two hours. I think it is promising, and if he can’t adapt it satisfyingly I don’t think anyone can!

Well that does sound promising. I mean with the Lynch film I was like “well, what are you gonna do?”. I loved the visuals and general weirdness of the movie, but I basically felt (without slighting Lynch at all) that Dune just isn’t movie material. The books are just so rich in scope, and go waaay deep into politics and how myths are formed and how religion can manipulate all these things etc etc. I actually come away from reading Dune feeling smarter each time ha ha! But yeah, breaking the story up into a couple of parts would be wise! Thanks for the posts - I’m getting kinda excited for it now!

Post
#1296319
Topic
Episode VIII : The Last Jedi - Discussion * <strong><em>SPOILER THREAD</em></strong> *
Time

RogueLeader said:

If you guys don’t mind me going off topic briefly, are you excited/anxious about the upcoming Dune film, Maul? Since you mentioned it I thought you might be a fan.

I haven’t looked into it to be honest, although a good friend of mine (we read Dune together in High School during the 80s) is super psyched. I quite liked the '84 film, even though it was arguably pretty hokey. My Dune relationship slightly echoes my Star Wars one in that I considered it all ‘canon’ (that is all of Frank’s novels as well as the Anderson/Herbert additions) until I had an inexplicable mental shift and realised it all didn’t quite add up. So, strictly speaking, I think the first four (Frank Herbert) books are awesome and everything else is a few rungs down from there. But I re-read Dune every couple of years. I think it’s basically a work of genius.

How about you? Are you a Dune-ist?

Post
#1296257
Topic
Episode VIII : The Last Jedi - Discussion * <strong><em>SPOILER THREAD</em></strong> *
Time

The whole legend/messiah/hermit routine was done really well in the Dune novels IMO. It’s a similar scenario (maybe Rian’s a fan?) where Paul’s prescience/power comes to a standstill and he wanders off into the desert to die. He survives of course, and becomes this ragged preacher who rails against the current regime from the sidelines, challenging his own legend as he does so.

The difference is Frank Herbert still manages to maintain the dignity of the character. I’m a big fan of the Gary Kurtz ‘disillusioned Luke wandering off into the sunset’ idea, but it comes with the caveat that Luke not become pathetic. Since I find ROTJ to be disappointingly dumbed-down (after the brilliantly nuanced TESB), I still cling to the notion of Luke rejecting the binary view of the Force shared by his mentors, and seeking a new path.

This is what TLJ should have been IMO. Not Luke ‘giving up’, but Luke rejecting the notion of Jedi orthodoxy. Perhaps he and Kylo could have shared a vision where death to one of them was revealed as the only outcome. Kylo embraces the vision (in his lust for power and the restoration of his grandfather’s evil legacy) and Luke rejects it because he’s sick of this ‘Dark Side/Light Side’ business and doesn’t want to kill his sister’s son. His not training Rey could be a ruse, a deliberate way of setting her on a new path free of the old Jedi constraints. When Yoda appears in TLJ, Luke reveals the ruse - that the old ways are gone now - and then does the Force-skype with Kylo. This would be a way of restoring the legend, setting a new agenda as well as a new ethical framework for Star Wars (there is no Dark Side, only the choices we make), and kickstarting a new type of Jedi.

I mean this essentially what the film was doing, but I don’t believe we needed to have Luke stand over Kylo with murderous (however fleeting) intent, or revert Luke to pre-ROTJ status with Yoda repeating the “always looking to the horizon” lecture. Luke’s ‘looking to the horizon’ was his strength. This movie should have, and could have, reinforced this.

Post
#1295621
Topic
Taking a stand against toxic fandom (and other )
Time

StarkillerAG said:

I don’t know why you like Mauler so much. Most of his videos are multiple-hour rants about surface-level nitpicks and complaints that don’t even make sense. He’s one of my least favorite film analysis Youtubers.

While I don’t share your view, I certainly don’t hold Mauler as some paragon of truth, even if I do enjoy his content. And while I’m at it, I’m not the biggest fan of EFAP as it tends to slide into a ‘bullying gang’ mentality at times - more because of the other participants than Mauler himself. In fact during the debate I cited, I often felt Major Lee wasn’t getting a fair hearing, even if I didn’t agree with his comments. I think a one-on-one with Mauler would’ve been much more productive and civil.

But I think Mauler does an admirable job of attempting to stay on point. When it’s about plot, it’s about plot. When it’s about lore, it’s about lore. He’s very clear about when he’s being subjective (ie his rants) and objective (his analyses). He’s all about the films and the craft. It doesn’t mean he’s always right - I often disagree with him - but I do think he’s fair and doesn’t resort to the kind of strawmanning that other Youtubers do. And even more ironically, Major Lee had supposedly insulted Mauler on Twitter way before the EFAP thing and found himself having to apologise when he discovered that Mauler was rather reasonable. Like I keep saying, toxicity goes both ways.

And to Screams (if it is indeed me you’re referring to), I’m not trying to derail the thread or get a rise out of anyone. The thread, as I see it, is about toxicity and I honestly feel that the Major Lee video is feeding the fire, not extinguishing it. I don’t like the idea of internet bullying any more than you do, so I hope you understand that this is all in the interest of conversation and a shared desire for a nicer, more civil conversational space.

Peace and may the Force do its thing…