Shopping Maul

The bottom line is that JJ didn’t care. As an audience we saw Snoke (along with all the other ‘mystery boxes’) and were like “wow, who is this guy? Where did he come from? Is that big scar a clue? What happened after the decisive Endor victory etc etc” and JJ was simply going “uh, we need an Emperor, a Death Star, a desert planet, a cantina, a Vader, a landspeeder…”

DominicCobb said:

From Holdo’s perspective, there’s no guarantee whatsoever that Poe will lie over like a lap dog and accept her plan. I don’t know why you think she should be able to assume this just because we as an audience see he does later, but that she shouldn’t have confidence that she can take back control. It makes a whole lot more sense to me that she’d trust her and her compatriots’ skills more than she’d trust Poe’s judgment, especially considering the whole reason she hasn’t told Poe in the first place is she doesn’t trust his judgment. She’s completely consistent here, staying steadfast to her plan and her judgment of Poe all the way (like I said, Poe attempting mutiny only serves to make her trust him less).

Not to mention, we can’t even really know for sure that Poe would’ve taken it well. There’s an argument to be made that having Leia tell the plan to him after his plan and mutiny was dead and buried and this was the only option left made him more open to Holdo’s plan. Who knows if in the moment, while Poe was trying to get everything to work, that he would’ve just given up and rolled over.

But this whole idea of Poe being untrustworthy is so bizarrely contrived. There’s nothing up to this point that indicates he has ill intentions or would not be amenable to Holdo’s plan. Okay, he disobeyed Leia’s order to retreat, but it turned out to be the right call given that the Dreadnaught would have destroyed them all upon re-entry into normal space. Even immediately after his demotion he is given the green light to ‘jump in an X-Wing and blow something up’ which shows that there is significant ambiguity to Leia’s position in this regard.

And why doesn’t he trust Holdo? It can’t be a gender thing because he happily works alongside a whole bunch of very capable women - Leia included! It can’t be Holdo’s appearance given that he also works alongside aliens, droids, and lobsters in flight suits. It’s like this whole “she’s not what I expected” routine from Poe is suddenly pulled out of thin air to force a conflict in order to generate this particular storyline.

And what’s the lesson here? What if a similar situation arises and the next leader who withholds information turns out to be a traitor after all? Will Poe sit idly by because, well, you must never question authority?

darthrush said:

DrDre said:

Jay said:

DrDre said:

dahmage said:

what the literal f*$&

goodness, i think i am gonna check out too. now we are saying that because one real life general doesn’t like what they did in star wars, that makes it bad? HAH. you can find a real life general to say that everything that happens in real life is bad too, doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. SMH.

Did you read the article? What’s so shocking about someone using his real life experience on military leadership to make an assessment of how a character behaves in a movie, and whether such behaviour in a real life situation would constitute good leadership? These characters are presented as role models to an extend, and people identify with them. It seems to me, that someone with actual expertise on military leadership would have a more informed opinion, than the average person, but I guess that only matters, if the opinion is favourable to TLJ, like for example when a physicist states Holdo’s kamikaze act would be physically plausible in their “expert” opinion.

You don’t even have to base your argument on a military context to show that Holdo is a bad leader. Bad workplace managers exhibit the same traits. I recoiled at her response to Poe’s questions. Is that how you inspire confidence and loyalty? Dressing down your subordinates and pulling rank?

Even brash, cocky people like Poe are usually well-meaning and only need appropriate outlets for their energy. I always do my best as a manager to maintain the delicate balance between keeping my employees informed and empowered, and still making it clear who’s in charge when the time comes to make a final decision. If I ever spoke to an employee like Holdo did to Poe, they’d be right to lack confidence in my leadership abilities, and if I had a manager who talked to me that way, I’d be looking for a new job. Not an option in the military, unfortunately (well, I guess Poe considered mutiny an option, and I was kind of rooting for him after seeing what a dickhead Holdo was).

I absolutely agree. I also believe one of the main issues here is, that the entire sequence to me is symptomatic of weak writing, since the writer’s intentions are not clear. Are we supposed to recoil at Holdo’s responses towards Poe, or is it RJ’s intention to sympathise with Holdo, since Poe has shown himself to be irresponsible? Why does Holdo treat Poe this way to the point that it results in a mutiny, only to tell Leia, that she likes him later? Why would she treat someone she apparently likes, and respects this way, to teach him a lesson? If so, is teaching Poe a lesson really worth endangering the entire rebel fleet by letting things spin out of control? These are some of my issues with this entire sequence, even if we agree Holdo is a bad leader, was it RJ’s intention to have her come across as such? If so, why does the entire sequence culminate in Poe realizing he was wrong about her? It seems RJ wants us to side with Poe, and experience the lesson through his eyes, but in my opinion Poe’s actions are justified, considering the situation, and her obvious poor grasp on the situation. As such, it doesn’t matter, if she had the greatest plan in the world, since her poor leadership almost resulted in that plan never becoming a reality. If so, why does the movie present the entire situation, as if she was right all the time, and he was wrong? Surely they shared responsibility for this entire fiasco?

This was very well written and put into words how I feel about the Poe/Holdo subplot.

I second this.

One nice nerdy way to view SW canon is to follow the creator’s/creators’ intentions. For example, since Lucas himself has ruled the unaltered OT ‘non-canon’, it’s fair to say that these stories (and their accompanying optional EU) constitute one canon. The prequel outline as discussed by Lucas and Kasdan circa '81 marks the accompanying backstory to that particular canon, including the notion that Leia’s mother died when the twins were toddlers.

The SEs are designed to fit with the PT, so that’s another canon right there (again with optional corresponding EU). Here we get Midichlorians, the Chosen One prophecy, a younger Anakin, Kiwi Boba, and so forth.

With the ST it gets tricky, given that despite Disney’s canon declarations it is clear that JJ Abrams favours the unaltered OT (Han shot first according to JJ) while Rian Johnson seems keen to mention Darth Sidious out loud. At this point canon becomes somewhat a la carte. Clearly the old EU no longer applies though.

For me, during my crankier moments, my canon consists of Star Wars and Empire (unaltered) with Revenge of the Jedi still yet to be made…

TV’s Frink said:

Shopping Maul said:

Oh please. Did we criticise Ewoks because of ‘toxic masculinity’? Did we balk at the plotholes created by the prequels because of latent sexism? Did we hate Midichlorians because it threatened the patriarchy? Did we cringe at Padme/Anakin’s romance dialogue because we’re trapped in some selfish power-fantasy? No, these were simply film critiques. Nothing more, nothing less. And despite a few racist/sexist imbeciles on the internet (which are everywhere - it’s not a ‘Star Wars thing’) TLJ is getting exactly the same treatment as every other SW movie. This ‘toxic fandom’ crap is getting old. We should be able, as fans, to discuss potential plotholes and canon discrepancies without being told by some sanctimonious article that we don’t understand the nuances of this brilliant film because we’re secretly struggling with our own deeply held sexism/racism.

Must have hit a little close to the mark to get you all riled up like that.

Jokes aside (I’m assuming you were going for humour rather than hostility) this actually illustrates the problem with this kind of argumentation. The author sets up a strawman which goes something like “the detractors are actually reacting to their own inner flaws rather than the ones they’re supposedly highlighting in the film, and any defensive reaction to this claim on their part is proof of its validity”.

Oh please. Did we criticise Ewoks because of ‘toxic masculinity’? Did we balk at the plotholes created by the prequels because of latent sexism? Did we hate Midichlorians because it threatened the patriarchy? Did we cringe at Padme/Anakin’s romance dialogue because we’re trapped in some selfish power-fantasy? No, these were simply film critiques. Nothing more, nothing less. And despite a few racist/sexist imbeciles on the internet (which are everywhere - it’s not a ‘Star Wars thing’) TLJ is getting exactly the same treatment as every other SW movie. This ‘toxic fandom’ crap is getting old. We should be able, as fans, to discuss potential plotholes and canon discrepancies without being told by some sanctimonious article that we don’t understand the nuances of this brilliant film because we’re secretly struggling with our own deeply held sexism/racism.

Chewielewis said:

Just Write | Why We Can’t Agree About The Last Jedi (Or Art In General)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJhOpY7bh6s

An interesting perspective on the Last Jedi controversy.

And here’s the resulting debate between Just Write and Mauler/Wolf…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXqj7jfgspQ

Having Luke scream in the Emperor’s voice as he takes the plunge in TESB.

The whole Lucas problem is a simple one - the things he likes about Star Wars are not the things the fans (generally speaking) like about Star Wars. This isn’t hyperbole, it’s pure math. He was famously 30% happy with Star Wars (a 1978 Rolling Stone interview confirms this and the SEs spell it out conclusively) and 100% happy with The Phantom Menace. The fan percentages run the opposite way.

screams in the void said:

Shopping Maul said:

screams in the void said:

I have to say those are my two favorite films as well , although the 1982 Conan did lead me to the works of Robert E. Howard , the creator of Conan , and while the movie uses a lot of his concepts ,there has never been a faithful adaptation to screen of any of Howard’s stories save for a little short story called Pigeons From Hell that was adapted for a 1961 tv show Boris Karloff’s thriller. I love the movie regardless , would just love to see a direct adaptation of a Howard Conan story . Conan was never a slave and would never have gone quietly.I even made a fan edit of the movie showing how I believe the movie could have skewed a bit closer to Howard’s work which you can see here…https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0iZSC3LMTw8

Thanks for the link - really interesting take on it all. I must confess I absolutely hated Conan 2011, but I like what you’ve done there. Marvel’s Conan movie adaptation is my favourite comic book of all time (particularly the painted Super Special version) so I loved how you cut between the book and the movie scenes.

I guess where I part company with my fellow Conan-lovers is on the subject of fidelity to Howard. When I discovered Conan in the early 80s I had little sense of where Howard began and ended, diluted as it all was by DeCamp and Thomas and so forth. It was only when Del Rey released their volumes in 2003 that I finally read ‘pure’ Howard. What struck me the most was just how deeply I felt Milius had nailed it. But for me it’s not about the minutiae of Conan’s origins or fidelity to the exact stories so much as it’s about capturing Howard’s attitude. Indeed, it seems to me that the Conan character was really just a foil for Howard to tell a bunch of different stories - from swashbucklers to mysteries to pirate tales to westerns and so on. Conan’s almost a side-character in many of these. He also comes into it all more or less fully formed. There’s no real arc beyond his growing from young upstart to leader of men (and finally King) - which is perfect for the haphazard short stories Howard was telling, but not so great for a movie hero. So I think it was entirely appropriate for Milius to give Conan an arc - an origin and a driving purpose.

I also feel that other writers were scared of REH. DeCamp certainly was. Roy Thomas smoothed out many rough edges to make Conan more heroic and noble (and he completely destroyed Belit IMO). The 2011 film seemed to think that extra violence and nudity was the key - which is juvenile. I think Milius really got Howard. I think he got the essence of Howard, the deep passion and melancholy (and mirth!), the pure love of storytelling at a primal level, the mythic quality. There are some great nods to Howard’s other works in the film - even while the film strays in ‘canon’ terms - and overall I think the movie captures the keynotes of Conan’s life really well. A proper sequel would have had Conan reaching Argos and heading for the sea, very much in keeping with his post-thief career. But alas, we got Conan the Destroyer…

I’m no Howard scholar by any stretch, so I may be well off base here. I think capturing Conan’s character is such a subjective undertaking. Dark Horse’s determination to make a truly Howardian Conan in 2004 (and beyond) was fun but still didn’t feel like Howard to me, even though they ticked all the canon boxes.

Sorry about the rambling! And thanks again for the link - really interesting stuff. May the Crom be with you…

you’re welcome . And speaking of capturing the essence of Howard’s stories , I thought the movie Solomon Kane came the closest .

Oh yeah, Solomon Kane was great. Purefoy was wonderful as Kane. Think I’ll dig it out this weekend…it’s been a while! Thanks!

screams in the void said:

I have to say those are my two favorite films as well , although the 1982 Conan did lead me to the works of Robert E. Howard , the creator of Conan , and while the movie uses a lot of his concepts ,there has never been a faithful adaptation to screen of any of Howard’s stories save for a little short story called Pigeons From Hell that was adapted for a 1961 tv show Boris Karloff’s thriller. I love the movie regardless , would just love to see a direct adaptation of a Howard Conan story . Conan was never a slave and would never have gone quietly.I even made a fan edit of the movie showing how I believe the movie could have skewed a bit closer to Howard’s work which you can see here…https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0iZSC3LMTw8

Thanks for the link - really interesting take on it all. I must confess I absolutely hated Conan 2011, but I like what you’ve done there. Marvel’s Conan movie adaptation is my favourite comic book of all time (particularly the painted Super Special version) so I loved how you cut between the book and the movie scenes.

I guess where I part company with my fellow Conan-lovers is on the subject of fidelity to Howard. When I discovered Conan in the early 80s I had little sense of where Howard began and ended, diluted as it all was by DeCamp and Thomas and so forth. It was only when Del Rey released their volumes in 2003 that I finally read ‘pure’ Howard. What struck me the most was just how deeply I felt Milius had nailed it. But for me it’s not about the minutiae of Conan’s origins or fidelity to the exact stories so much as it’s about capturing Howard’s attitude. Indeed, it seems to me that the Conan character was really just a foil for Howard to tell a bunch of different stories - from swashbucklers to mysteries to pirate tales to westerns and so on. Conan’s almost a side-character in many of these. He also comes into it all more or less fully formed. There’s no real arc beyond his growing from young upstart to leader of men (and finally King) - which is perfect for the haphazard short stories Howard was telling, but not so great for a movie hero. So I think it was entirely appropriate for Milius to give Conan an arc - an origin and a driving purpose.

I also feel that other writers were scared of REH. DeCamp certainly was. Roy Thomas smoothed out many rough edges to make Conan more heroic and noble (and he completely destroyed Belit IMO). The 2011 film seemed to think that extra violence and nudity was the key - which is juvenile. I think Milius really got Howard. I think he got the essence of Howard, the deep passion and melancholy (and mirth!), the pure love of storytelling at a primal level, the mythic quality. There are some great nods to Howard’s other works in the film - even while the film strays in ‘canon’ terms - and overall I think the movie captures the keynotes of Conan’s life really well. A proper sequel would have had Conan reaching Argos and heading for the sea, very much in keeping with his post-thief career. But alas, we got Conan the Destroyer…

I’m no Howard scholar by any stretch, so I may be well off base here. I think capturing Conan’s character is such a subjective undertaking. Dark Horse’s determination to make a truly Howardian Conan in 2004 (and beyond) was fun but still didn’t feel like Howard to me, even though they ticked all the canon boxes.

Sorry about the rambling! And thanks again for the link - really interesting stuff. May the Crom be with you…

screams in the void said:

also worth mentioning is that the first writer of the original Marvel Star Wars , Roy Thomas , was best known as the writer of Conan Comics and petitioned George Lucas to green light the comic and convinced Stan Lee to take it on . I am also a huge Conan fan , almost as much a fan of it as Star Wars . And Roy Thomas’ writing helped shape my vocabulary as a kid

I second this! TESB and CTB are my absolute favourite films. I have a (more or less) full set of the Marvel Conan series.

I guess it makes sense, given that Time Magazine called CTB a ‘psychopathic Star Wars’!

screams in the void said:

ZkinandBonez said:

A while back I found these six pages from an old article about the “Goodwin-years” of Marvel Star Wars. I don’t know what magazine this is from, but I made them into a PDF and figured I’d share it here.

‘Star Wars Under Archie Goodwin’ by Kurt Busiek

Cool article , thank you for sharing . I saw Archie Goodwin signing and talking to fans about this series at the Chicago Comic Con back in early 1995 and he was one hell of a nice guy. I think he had a great handle on the characters , I have to disagree with part of this article though as I thought his first story arc on the water world felt like it could have been an awesome Star Wars movie and it had the sense of grand scale and pacing that are a Star Wars hallmark . And while I like that Infantino had a quirky style that got the essence of the characters in interpretation , I am partial to Walter Simonson or Ron Frenz with Tom Palmer . Goodwin did write some of the best stories though and David Michellinie wrote the penultimate arc between issues 55 and 63 with the Shira Brie /Pariah story arc.One of the things I like most about Goodwin though , and he mentioned this himself in the letters column of one of the issues he wrote, was that he realized Darth Vader was too good a villian to be over used and was more effective when used sparingly so he had more of an impact .This is one thing Current Marvel does not get . While some of it has been ok in my opinion , having a Darth Vader series misses the point.And back to the article , yeah , Michellinie’s Tarkin/Death Star story was a bit of a rehash , but it did anticipate the events of ROTJ and the same could be said of TFA. I also enjoyed a lot of the stories written by Jo Duffy with both Ron Frenz and Cynthia Martin prior to them getting their hands tied and the series getting a little wonky the last few issues .

I think Michelinie did ROTJ better than Lucas did! The Tarkin made sense because it used Death Star tech in an innovative way (as opposed to “hey, here’s a bigger one!” a la ROTJ and TFA). Plus its destruction was from within rather than just another ‘exhaust port/main reactor’ scenario. The Hoojibs on Arbra (complete with hover-bikes) did ‘cuteness’ and Endor much better than ROTJ. And finally Shira Brie would’ve made an infinitely better ‘other hope’ than the clumsily shoehorned Leia.

The real answer to all this remains the same - treat the SEs as ‘Director’s cuts’ and leave the OT alone, matte lines and all. Make both available on modern formats.

In the case of Mos Eisley, an often overlooked point is this - filling the spaceport with dinosaurs and CGI hijinks completely detracts from what made the cantina work in the first place. The scene worked because the spaceport itself was quite tame on initial approach - some Stormtroopers, some droids, some Jawas etc. Then Ben says “this place can be a little rough” and boom! - alien weirdos everywhere. That’s the magic of the scene. That’s why it was iconic. It was about the timing and unexpectedness of the moment. That’s why when Lucas tried to top it with Jabba’s palace, many folks were like “eh, it’s just a bunch of muppets”. The joke had already been told.

Now we have a giant overpopulated CGI city followed by a descent into a roomful of dudes in cheap rubber masks.

Way to kill a moment George.

Mavimao said:

Shopping Maul said:

Sorry to change the subject, but during the scene where Threepio said “Master Luke!” on Crait, did anyone else wish Luke had said “no, just Luke” before he winked?

Nice!

I’d thought of another “small touch” idea, but it would probably have been really clunky to include: Kylo Ren tells his subordinates to broadcast the destruction of the Resistance live to the public.

Well I did wonder how Broom Boy and co. got wind of the new Skywalker legend, so that’s a cool idea!

Sorry to change the subject, but during the scene where Threepio said “Master Luke!” on Crait, did anyone else wish Luke had said “no, just Luke” before he winked?

Creox said:

Shopping Maul said:

Seriously, we’re on a site that was created by adults (like me) who can’t handle the fact that their favourite childhood film had some cartoon dinosaurs inserted into it. We collect action figures and read comic books and discuss at great length just how white the snow on Hoth might have been on the original 1980 film stock. Yet someone writes a long dissertation about one of these movies and suddenly everyone’s like “gee, get a life dude”.

Isn’t this exactly the place for such a post?

Actually your two thoughts on the matter are not the same issue imo.

One is about finding anything and everything about a movie you dislike and with surgical accuracy complete a thesis on why it sucks so bad.

This is much different than falling in love with a movie despite it’s flaws and enjoying discussions around that…

One thing is not like the other.

This site exists because we all want the original SW movies to be released on modern formats. We have petitions and discussions and fan edits and long debates about colour correction. We endlessly lament the SEs and ‘Han shot first’ and discuss which changes we can live with and so on and so forth.

Normal people don’t care. Normal people go “eh, it’s just a couple of scenes, get a life nerd”. And I say screw them! I don’t come here to be ‘normal’. I come here to nerd out over dumb stuff like the Sith rule of two and why a giant lobster should have had a noble death in TLJ.

I just find it odd that, in a sea of SW obsessiveness, a person writing a long and well-thought out piece about one of the movies constitutes some kind of limit.

Matt.F said:

Someone writes a long ‘negative’ dissertation.

Didn’t your grandmother tell you “If you don’t have anything nice to say then don’t say anything at all”.

There’s some truth to the notion that positivity is more inspiring and engaging than negativity. The context of this being a kids film further adds to the ‘whiny entitled fanboy’ feeling one gets when reading such post.

The guy also flagged so many points of grievance that it becomes impossible to reply to with anything other than ‘get a life’ style comment (just one or two and we could have debated).

Following such grandmotherly advice means we may as well not have a forum. By that logic we’d merely have a series of very boring posts praising each and every aspect of the films. Like I said, the entire premise of this site was to call out the creator of the franchise on a creative decision that ‘normal’ people generally don’t give a toss about. We’re all ‘whiny fanboys’ here - whether it be disliking aspects of the saga or moaning about the crushed blacks in the official blu rays. I see no problem with this. The poster clearly loves SW enough to write a detailed and well-thought out essay on why he/she disliked an aspect of the saga. That in itself IS positive.

If any of us really felt that SW was ‘just a kids film’ then none of us would be here. Of course there are subjective limits to what might constitute a healthy fannish obsession with the movies, but merely writing a long negative review about one of the movies hardly qualifies IMO. I take your point about ‘positivity’ in general, and there is some real bile out there on the net. I just don’t think this is an example of such, and I’d hate to think that anyone who was tempted to really nerd out and write something substantial would now find themselves self-censoring on a site that is, by definition, a place for SW nerds to share and enjoy their nerdiness unfettered.

Seriously, we’re on a site that was created by adults (like me) who can’t handle the fact that their favourite childhood film had some cartoon dinosaurs inserted into it. We collect action figures and read comic books and discuss at great length just how white the snow on Hoth might have been on the original 1980 film stock. Yet someone writes a long dissertation about one of these movies and suddenly everyone’s like “gee, get a life dude”.

Isn’t this exactly the place for such a post?

Mjolnir Mark IV said:

Great post - pretty much agree with everything here.

The only thing I will say is that I liked the 3 versions of the Kylo/Luke incident. It was an interesting exercise in personal perspective given that each viewpoint was so different.

I will never understand why Holdo didn’t just tell Poe her plan and save us from the entirely useless (and actually detrimental) Canto Bight arc.

You’re right about the Yoda/Luke dynamic. Luke actually surpassed his mentors in ROTJ. His compassion outweighed their “just kill the bad guys” stance. It’s ludicrous that Yoda would be back lecturing Luke about “always looking to the horizon” when it was precisely that sense of emotional romanticism that won the day in Ep 6.

I finally got the Blu Ray two days ago and watched it, making this my third time. To me it is/was akin to going out on a date with the most gorgeous person you’ve ever seen, and every time the conversation seems to be going well he/she drops something so stupid/offensive that you’re not even sure you heard right. This keeps happening until, by the end of the date, you have to concede that he/she is great to look at but - to be honest - that’s largely because he/she reminds you of your high school sweetheart.

Creox said:

ChainsawAsh said:

Creox said:

DrDre said:

Creox said:

Ms. Thrawn said:

I’m subscribed to a ton of reviewers and critics on YouTube whose opinions tend to vary from one another on a lot of things. But the only name I can think of off the top of my head who gave TLJ a glowing review would be Movie Bob. Doug Walker gave it a mostly positive, if I remember right?

Other than that, my subscription updates and recommendations have been inundated with negative reviews since the movie came out. YouTube has a kind of cynical culture going to it anyway, but I’ve never seen the hate bandwagon toward a work of fiction reach “Look What This Cuh-raaazy SJW Feminist Did On Campus” levels until now. I’m pretty sure there’s what amounts to a zombie horde of angry fans waiting to rip Kathleen Kennedy and Rian Johnson to shreds at the first opportunity, if the comments on a lot of those videos are any hint.

TLJ is just OK in my opinion, and I don’t rush to its defense. That said, if you want to call the backlash against it a little bit ridiculous, then you might have something there.

The informed and rational detractors of the film get washed up in the wave of hysteria you mention in your last sentence. That being said I find it puzzling why someone would spend so much time posting on a film they don’t like. I am talking to people like Dre who is obviously taking the time and feels passionately about his thoughts on the film. He makes good points but is unswayed so…why continue talking about it? IMO he feels (like many do in his position) that we will finally see the light and agree with him. Disney is not going to change their film.

That is a pretty crass assumption. Why should you not want to discuss something you feel passionate about? Do you think it gives me discomfort? Why do I need to be swayed, and why should I desire others to see the light? Why can’t it just be about exchanging ideas? Should this forum just be an echo chamber for positive opinions?

And yes, it makes more sense to me to continue to talk about a film you like then one you dislike simply because most people are not bothered to keep engaged in activities they dislike. If I don’t like a book I stop reading, If I don’t like a song on the radio I switch stations etc. But if I DO like that song I listen to it a lot and tell other people about it.

There are whole sections in this forum devoted to stuff many people don’t like: the Special Editions, and the PT. These films and versions have existed for decades, and people are still discussing them, more often than not in a negative light. So, why should I not be discussing TLJ after just three months?

Remember: the greatest teacher failure is, and in my view TLJ is a failure, and there’s a lot to learn from this particular failure in terms of my own appreciation of the Star Wars universe and works of fiction in general.

I don’t think it’s crass at all. I get speaking your mind on a flick that bugs you, disappoints you…but to talk about it for months? That I don’t get. How many times do the same talking points have to be brought up before it gets old?

If you feel passionately about this film then I am truly puzzled because your posts are mostly quite critical.

I am more perplexed about your posts then angry…

He feels passionately about Star Wars. The Last Jedi is a part of Star Wars. It’s not just a movie he was disappointed in.

As do I. I saw SW in a theater in '77 as a 12 year old boy and haven’t looked back since. I have very mixed feelings about the PT as many here do but don’t spend a lot of time debating minutia about them to point out their flaws.

When you are talking about debate among an singular group of people (mostly) as with this forum when does it become obvious that you’re just spinning your wheels and getting nowhere?

Maybe it’s just for the entertainment of debating??

I guess it’s really down to one’s personal motivation. I just love talking about Star Wars. Like you I saw SW as a kid in ‘77 and have watched the saga morph and grow, even as my own head-canon and biases were pushed and pulled by comics and prequels and now the new movies. I’m fascinated by what peoples’ particular ‘canon limits’ are and I just think that nerding out over all this stuff is fun.

My own head-canon has proven flexible too. I was 100% on board with the prequels as they emerged, but over time found myself rejecting them and settling into a more conservative ‘unaltered OT only’ position. But that doesn’t mean that I now hate the prequels or don’t like discussing them.

TLJ is fascinating because it has been so polarising. For some it is a poorly written mess and for others a work of total genius. So I just enjoy picking it apart and discussing it through the lens of my own own (and others’) certain points of view. Yes, there is an element of wheel spinning, but I think it’s less about simply hating on TLJ and more about using the polarisation a means to address the saga as a whole.

Ms. Thrawn said:

Even if we count the prequels for fun . . . the impression I got from the original six films is that the Jedi viewed “bring balance to the Force” as “make sure the light side wins”. Whether or not that qualifies as balance is up in the air, but it at least makes sense inside the story. Luke helps turn Vader back into Anakin, who then kills the Emperor.

Then TLJ throws a monkey wrench by implying that the Force tries to balance itself between light and dark. Snoke could’ve just been sharing his weird opinion, but it goes too far in explaining Rey’s aptitude.

As far as the Force having a will? That could very well be but a superstition among Jedi and to a lesser extent Sith (who like to preach about destiny). There are ghosts living in the spiritual realm who have minds of their own, I guess. Maybe “will of the Force” is the majority vote of a ghost committee. 😛

Your interpretation of the awakening is nice and sound. I agree. 😃

I don’t recall Snoke’s exact speech about ‘balance’ in TLJ (looking forward to revisiting it all on Bluray next week!) but the idea of the Force automatically balancing itself renders the whole thing rather redundant. Luckily with all the broad strokes painted throughout the saga we can generally take our canon a la carte!

The ghost committee is interesting, although it would have to be comprised only of Qui Gon, Yoda, Obi Wan, and a somewhat red-faced Anakin (not sure anyone else learned netherworld conversion techniques). Perhaps ol’ Plagueis is there too wondering why all these Jedi are standing around smiling!

Ms. Thrawn said:

But the Force had awoken by the time the boy summoned the broom. Didn’t you feel it?

“…yes” (spoken in deep menacing voice).

Seriously though, I myself (and this is entirely my own bias here) don’t like or embrace the idea of the Force having a will of its own. I don’t even like the ‘balance’ stuff. There was no ‘balance to the Force’ back in '83, or even a Sith ‘rule of 2’ for that matter. The Force was just an energy and certain skilled people got to tap into it, for good or for ill.

When Snoke said “there has been an awakening” I took it as “someone is tapping into it in a way we haven’t seen in a long time” - that being Rey who, to my mind, had huge natural potential and had basically ‘self-trained’ to an extent under the duress of her Jakku lifestyle. Even though Rey is…uh…overpowered…there was still a logic to it that didn’t necessarily point to the Force having its own will or trotting out another ‘chosen one’. I just thought Snoke was feeling the ripple of Rey’s coming into her powers.

I can’t explain Broom Boy. Maybe he was bitten by a radioactive Lightsaber…

SilverWook said:

Shopping Maul said:

Frank your Majesty said:

You’re overthinking this. The point of Broom Boy is to show how the Force is for everyone and that you don’t need to be mentioned in a prophecy or part of a certain family to use it. And in order to establish this in a quick and subtle way, they showed him grabbing the broom. Showing his enhanced reflexes would require a way longer scene, putting too much emphasis on him. And simply mentioning his abilities in dialogue would be lazy and too on the nose.

Of course I’m overthinking this. I’m a Star Wars nerd!

Seriously though, I actually like the sentiment - that the Force is for everybody (as opposed to genetic a la the PT). But it isn’t free. In the OT (and the PT despite Midichlorians) the Force is a discipline. Luke struggled to levitate his lightsaber in the Wampa cave. He was 23 yrs-old and had been aware of his heritage for the past 3 years. He couldn’t raise his X-wing. Yoda could. This was a clear indication of learning, of slow progress, of mastering his self and his fears and his ego in order to reach for such mastery. I just happen to like that idea. If kids can levitate brooms and Rey can lift a mountain without training then Luke clearly sucked as a Jedi, 'cos apparently this stuff ain’t so difficult!

RJ had already made his point about the Force via Luke’s explanation and Rey’s parentage. We didn’t need Broom Boy. I’d have preferred the film end on the Falcon or have Broom Boy simply holding the Resistance badge and looking to the stars.

Luke was also injured, upside down, (blood rush to the head!) and probably already suffering from the cold.
Broom Boy’s™ broom was not stuck in a pile of snow either.

Yes, but that wasn’t the point of Luke’s scene. It wasn’t a demonstration in ‘levitation under duress’. It was to show that Luke had been expanding upon what he’d learned in the previous film whilst adding to the Force powers lexicon. Given Luke’s progressive struggle with levitation throughout TESB, it naturally follows that this is something of a difficult skill to master. Indeed, Yoda takes Luke on largely on the basis that he’s ‘learned so much’ already. Surely Yoda would’ve said “heh, levitation a five-year old novice could achieve without effort!” if it really was such a casual ability on the Jedi scale.

DominicCobb said:

Shopping Maul said:

Creox said:

Ms. Thrawn said:

I’m subscribed to a ton of reviewers and critics on YouTube whose opinions tend to vary from one another on a lot of things. But the only name I can think of off the top of my head who gave TLJ a glowing review would be Movie Bob. Doug Walker gave it a mostly positive, if I remember right?

Other than that, my subscription updates and recommendations have been inundated with negative reviews since the movie came out. YouTube has a kind of cynical culture going to it anyway, but I’ve never seen the hate bandwagon toward a work of fiction reach “Look What This Cuh-raaazy SJW Feminist Did On Campus” levels until now. I’m pretty sure there’s what amounts to a zombie horde of angry fans waiting to rip Kathleen Kennedy and Rian Johnson to shreds at the first opportunity, if the comments on a lot of those videos are any hint.

TLJ is just OK in my opinion, and I don’t rush to its defense. That said, if you want to call the backlash against it a little bit ridiculous, then you might have something there.

The informed and rational detractors of the film get washed up in the wave of hysteria you mention in your last sentence. That being said I find it puzzling why someone would spend so much time posting on a film they don’t like. I am talking to people like Dre who is obviously taking the time and feels passionately about his thoughts on the film. He makes good points but is unswayed so…why continue talking about it? IMO he feels (like many do in his position) that we will finally see the light and agree with him. Disney is not going to change their film.

And yes, it makes more sense to me to continue to talk about a film you like then one you dislike simply because most people are not bothered to keep engaged in activities they dislike. If I don’t like a book I stop reading, If I don’t like a song on the radio I switch stations etc. But if I DO like that song I listen to it a lot and tell other people about it.

I can’t speak for anyone else here, but I think at some level I’m hoping to be swayed. As a fan I want to be able to keep enjoying Star Wars. If someone can offer me a better way to view aspects of the film that bug me (Holdo’s withholding information, new canon regarding the Force, Luke’s personality etc) then I’m all for it.

Thing is, those are things that are all explained in the film and have been discussed ad nauseam here. Either you buy it, or you don’t. Sounds like you don’t, and I’m not sure there’s anything that could be added to the last 241 pages that’d sway you one way or the other.

Well ya can’t blame a guy for trying!

No-one has necessarily ‘swayed’ me here - that’s true - although I enjoy the discourse and respect those involved (mostly). Perhaps ‘swayed’ is the wrong word. But one example of what I was talking about is a series of Youtube vids by someone called Mauler (not sure if you’ve seen them). Now this guys rips into TLJ like nothing else, and I think his points are spot on and well thought out and certainly not troll-like. But I don’t agree with all of his points despite my respect for his position and reasons, which gives me scope to see aspects of the movie in a new light and appreciate it a little more.