Sign In

Voss Caltrez

User Group
Trusted Members
Join date
5-May-2015
Last activity
4-Mar-2019
Posts
87

Post History

Post
#1264967
Topic
When did you realize that George Lucas was full of it
Time

Valheru_84 said:

I have much respect for the man for numerous reasons and could never thank him enough for giving us Star Wars

Yeah, same here.
The Star Wars OT, and the Indiana Jones trilogy were amazing, and a treasure to watch during my childhood.

I don’t think George is full of it but the point at which I started seriously getting pissed off with him was the changes to the OT crossing a culmulative threashold where Han no longer shoots first, there’s prequel level silly shit going on around Mos Eisley, Obiwan’s force scream mimic to scare of the Sand People sounds ridiculous that it makes me do a “WTF?” laugh, Luke now screams as he falls down the Cloud City shaft, Vader says “NOOOOOOOO!” when picking up the Emperor, completely different end celebration music after the funeral pyre with obvious CGI locations celebrating, including Gungans.

I think the actual animosity started not from the quality of prequels, but when he initially refused to release the theatrical versions on DVD, then later relented but there were a poor quality and not remastered or anything like most other films.
I think Ridley Scott’s final cut of Blade Runner is the perfect example of tweaking a film for the better.

I love the added effects to Cloud City in ESB. Makes it look so much better. Other than that, I don’t like any of the other SE changes.

Post
#1264890
Topic
When did you realize that George Lucas was full of it
Time

Wait, he edited midicholorians into The Making of Star Wars?

I think it was when he said that the the original films were too damaged or don’t exist, and that the only way to watch Star Wars on new media formats was with the SE versions. Then later he released the original OT on DVD, although it wasn’t remastered or anything.

It seemed to me that he wanted the updated SE’s to be seen as the definitive versions, and just made up excuses as to why he couldn’t put out the theatrical version of the OT.

I don’t necessarily have a problem with him making stuff up as he went along. Writers and creative types often do that for a variety of reasons. And on top of that, I can see why he wants to push the narrative that he had the whole thing planned out from the very beginning, and that Star Wars was always about the redemption of Anakin Skywalker. Some fans don’t want to hear that key aspects of their favorite story, good or bad, were a mistake or last minute.

Post
#1264473
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

Shopping Maul said:

But why repeat the mistake when you know you have a trilogy planned? It just doesn’t make sense to me at all, especially given how much scrutiny is inevitable with a franchise like this one.

Oh, I definitely agree on this point.
But I think it does make sense considering they don’t have an infinite amount of time to come up with the perfect story, while at the same time, they can’t take too many artistic risks considering how much they bought the property for. Which is why we get repeats of so many things from the OT.

I don’t think Luke was a Marty Stu at all. That first lesson on the Falcon still didn’t amount to anything that might dampen Han Solo’s cynicism (“I call it luck!”). Luke was like “I did feel something…” but it was pretty vague and hardly conclusive. It’s not like he turned around and mind-tricked Chewie into handing over his wallet. And the Death Star thing was just an extension of that lesson - “do that thing I showed you earlier” - not to mention that Luke was already pretty confident with regard to two-metre targets.

For me, I think it just felt too convenient, and in hindsight, it seems rushed and way too condensed. Lucas originally envisioned an epic story which took place over a series of films. He didn’t think he’d get the chance, so he condensed all the story into one film, which is why we never got to see Luke dueling with a lightsaber, and yet we still get to see him destroy the Death Star and save the galaxy.
Plus, that’s crazy how his x-wing shot literally turned to go down the corridor. Even Robot Chicken made fun of that.

By TESB it seemed clear to me (in 1980) that Luke, now fully aware of his heritage as a Jedi’s son, would have been practising as best he could in the intervening 3 years (“but I’ve learned so much!”) - and even then his levitation skills were pretty lacklustre on the Jedi scale. He got a boost under Yoda’s tutelage, managed to lift some rocks (but not an X-Wing), and of course Yoda wasn’t such a big fan of failure back then! We know the rest. He quit his training early and got his ass handed to him by Vader.

This is a good point. I would have thought that you would need someone to train you in the Force, but at least the film made it seem like there was some considerable amount of time between ANH and ESB.

ROTJ occurred some time later, and again - given Luke’s new attitude re Vader (sheer outrage had been replaced by a calm Zen ‘must save Dad’ attitude) - it seems clear that he had honed his skills during that time. There is at least a sense of growth, of progress, and of consequence. Rey just gets everything on a platter - mind tricks, levitation, you name it, and at no cost, no Dark Side issues etc.

I agree. I thought there was some slight implication Rey would be tempted by the dark side in TLJ, but mostly that was because Luke got scared at her abilities, and that thing with the hole in the ground. I didn’t sense there was much, if any, internal struggle with Rey.

Of course the Force doesn’t exist, so credulity is in the eye of the viewer. For me Luke’s journey was like that of the Karate Kid. Firstly, not any Tom, Dick, or Rey can do Karate. You have to train for it. Secondly, you have to master the self, balance the forces that can sway you one way or another and thwart your quest for mastery. Without this the Force is boring. It’s just an X-Men power that lucky kids wake up with one day.

I agree on this.
But despite the ST hitting most of the same beats as the OT, one beat they didn’t want to repeat was watching another Jedi-in-the-making struggle to train. It was shown in ESB for a reason: to show that Luke was impatient with the training, and that him taking the shortcut to save his friends was signaling to the audience that he too was making the same mistake as young Vader, and possibly was going to turn to the dark side.
Also, there’s a different message going on in the ST. Whereas the those adept with the Force in the OT might appear as “privileged” or members of an exclusive family dynasty, the Force in the ST is shown to be more inclusive. Power to the people and all that, rather than relying on a select few to make change in the world.

Post
#1264407
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

DrDre said:

So, there’s failure from a certain point of view, but from many others she is unrealistically successful (or lucky) given her lack of experience, and naive nature, and she achieves many of these successes with powers that she just almost instantly recieved from on high, and thus hasn’t really earned.

I agree with this.
But I don’t think it would play well if we saw Rey getting beat up like other action heroes tend to be.
Had Rey been rescued by Poe Dameron in a Hoth-like situation, people would accuse the filmmakers of resorting to the damsel-in-destress trope.
If Snoke had been hurling giant pieces of machinery at Rey’s back and head, she gets beaten and bruised with a black eye (ala Luke at the end of ESB) AND she loses the fight, it looks like a display of violence against women, and accusations of misogyny are made.

Post
#1264403
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

yotsuya said:

So Rey is not an overly physical strong character but is capable and is the main character and therefor supposed to outshine the others. She has setback after setback in what she wants to do as the story (which you can read as the force) pushes her to her destiny. She is exactly the type of strong character we need and definitely not a Mary Sue.

Maybe the problem is 1) using the term “Mary Sue” 2) politicizing of the issue and 3) amateur Youtube critics.

1)As I said, I didn’t think of the term “Mary Sue” when seeing TFA, and I didn’t think Rey being good at so many things right away was because the character was a woman.
I thought that they further explained her abilities, albeit vaguely, in TLJ. She’s particularly strong with the Force, like the Skywalker family was, for no other reason than the Force chose her. In fact she’s so powerful that it’s implied that she could be tempted to the dark side. But I do think there are some valid criticisms of her character.

  1. I can sympathize with amateur critics when they believe that the writer’s injecting too much of their own personal opinions, in a way that it’s not done well and it takes you out of the story. However, it seems like the ST has been used by political personalities to further their own agenda.
    I went into TLJ ready to dislike it, but despite interpreting, what I believe to be obvious socio-political messages I didn’t find it do be too distracting. I agree with some here that it could have been more subtle, but this is a mainstream popcorn flick, going after the same modern, young crowd who are political aware and involved. The story, characters and effects were done well enough, so I never felt like it took me out of the film.

3)I like average people reviewing movies on Youtube because often times they can be better than the “professional” stuff. But the problem is that some don’t have a solid background in film history and are critiquing movies from a very narrow perspective.
For example, accusations of “forced diversity” while citing how awesome Lando Calrissian is in the OT.
The original Star Wars was criticized for a lack of diversity, and some have said that the inclusion of Billy Dee Williams in ESB was a concession to those critics.

Post
#1264363
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

yotsuya said:

The entire idea of what Poe did being mansplaining is nonsense and idiotic. It really shows a lack of depth to a person’s education in film and fiction. What he did was question authority. I can’t even count the number of times that has appeared in movies, books, TV shows, etc. where both parties are men. It shows a lack of understanding of what mansplaining is. Because that ain’t it.

Maybe if Poe was shown also ignoring male superiors in the film, it would be more clear that he has a problem with authority in general. But considering that the only two superiors he ignores are female, and considering the cultural climate and timing of the film it’s hard to think that may NOT have been the intention of the film makers.
I’m not a fan of the term “mansplaining.” Any time a man talks condescending to a woman, how do you know it’s because she’s a woman? How do you know that the man isn’t condescending to men and women?

On it’s own though, I think Poe Dameron is just supposed to be the typical action hero who questions authority. I don’t think he’s supposed to be sexist as a character, but I think the way it’s presented is supposed to draw allusions to sexism in modern society, in order to make it more relevant.
We’ve seen the action hero who questions authority a thousand times. By having him question his superiors in this one who are all female, it makes it more interesting and more current.
And it also sets up the theme about learning from our mistakes.

And quit blaming Disney. In modern movies the Director and the writer (sometimes the same person as in TLJ) controls the film.

Didn’t Lord and Miller get fired from Solo after they started shooting?

Lucasfilm is a wholly owned subsidiary of Disney, but Kathleen Kennedy is running it the way Lucas wanted (and if you look at her resume she has some pretty awesome films to her credit). Blame the director because that is where the success or failure of a film (in terms of quality) lies.

So is Kathleen Kennedy in charge or is it the directors?

Post
#1264361
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

Shopping Maul said:

I can’t for the life of me understand why these people didn’t think to write a story first!

That’s how it feels at times.
But couldn’t the same be said of the OT?
It feels like Lucas was making it up as he went along.
ANH: Vader and Luke’s father are clearly different people.
ESB: Lucas decides he wants a twist in the story and makes Vader Luke’s father. And just some insurance to get you hooked for the final film, he has Yoda say, “there is another.”
ROTJ: Oh crap, how do we resolve Yoda’s line? Okay how about a twin sister? And make her be Leia.

And although I think Luke was more relatable in his failings compared to Rey, couldn’t he be seen as having aspects of a Marty Stu?
Obi-Wan gives him one brief lesson on the Millennium Falcon, and suddenly he’s able to use the Force and destroy the Death Star with it?
How did he learn telekinesis at the beginning of ESB?
As a kid I always assumed that Luke went back to Dagobah to finish his training before he went to rescue Han and that’s why he was more powerful. Rewatching it, that’s not the case. He returns to finish his training after all that went down, and Yoda just tells him, “nah, you’re training is finished, you just need to kill Vader and then you’ll be a Jedi.”
I always got the impression that to become a Jedi there had to be rigorous training involved, and looking back, Luke has very little training. At least they could have written it so that Luke DID continue his training with Yoda between ESB and the beginning of ROTJ.

Post
#1264357
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

DrDre said:

The darkness rises and light to meet it explanation seems contrived, underdeveloped, and a cheap shortcut in Rey’s development, such that we can focus on Luke and Kylo, and have a ROTJ like throne room confrontation in the middle chapter, which sees Rey being evenly matched with Kylo, despite the fact that she only learned about the Force a few days earlier, and Luke has taught her very little, aside from telling her the Jedi suck. The explanation for her sudden rise in power is just too thin, making Kylo seem weak by comparison, and no attempt is made to make it fit into existing canon. Like the FO’s unlimited resources, and Snoke’s ascension, it’s just pulled out of thin air, and we’re supposed to be entertained enough to ignore the undercooked nature of these story developments. It seems even the creators realized this, when they introduced the idea of Rey downloading the know how from Kylo’s mind in the novel.

This is how I felt watching the first film.
But here’s the problem: each generation of Star Wars usually consists of 3 films. But nowadays we’re used to epic franchises that span over multiple installments in order to build up characters and set up the story. Take The Harry Potter series and the MCU for example.
With Star Wars, Disney has to compete at that same level of epic grandeur in far less time. Not to mention they want to fulfill some degree of expectations and familiarity to fans: Deathstar 3.0. Darth Vader Jr, Rey being Han, Obi-Wan AND Luke in the first film, etc.

I don’t know if I’d site the problem with the ST as Rey being a Mary Sue. Instead, I see it more as a problem with trying to give fans what they want, trying to make a profit, and trying to do something new to stay relevant.
The explanation for the rise of the First Order in the first film seemed pretty thin. It’s just fast tracked and glossed over so we can get a story that’s almost the same as the original trilogy.

Post
#1263996
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

DominicCobb said:

First thing I think you should understand, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with it.

I didn’t say you did.
I worded it that way to underline to you, and other people, that I myself don’t think having political leanings in a film, Star Wars or otherwise, is a bad thing.

Just because others have interpreted it that way doesn’t make it the only “obvious” interpretation. Seems to me more Poe having an issue with authority in general. That they’re both women seems to be interpreting something that may or may not be there. At the very least, you have to agree it’s not in the text of the film, which by definition makes it subtext.

The point is you were saying these interpretations were absurd, when they don’t appear to be.
Everything is up for interpretation, and just because the term “mansplaining” is not used, and other characters don’t actually say, “Hey Poe, you’re ‘mansplaining’ to General Holdo because she’s a woman,” doesn’t mean the films lacks subtlety. Again, you’re isolating individual things, while I’m saying that taken as a whole, the political leanings of the film is very apparent, at least more so than Aliens.

“Now it’s worth it” has to do with the theme of “saving what you love.” I don’t see how that is an exclusively left-leaning message, or even all that political a message to begin with.

Again, on it’s own, it wouldn’t. Taken as a whole with everything else in the film, that’s a different story.

Any anti-capitalist sentiment is extremely overstated. Much like how you view Aliens, it’s really more critical about greed and people profiting off war, which is also not that controversial (please show me where anyone says money=bad).

I don’t think I said TLJ was anti-capitalist. Maybe I did, but I thought I was specifically mentioning the “one percent.”

I didn’t say there was nothing there that could be interpreted that way, just that complaints overstated them.

Except I wasn’t complaining about it. I specifically said that I believe that Disney wanted to make the film relevant to modern film audiences, and was successful in doing so.

Don’t forget they went there to find the code breaker, who seems to be a good enough guy (Maz lauds him). And Rose’s line is really, like I said before, condemning war profiteers. She’s not saying all rich people suck, just these.

She says “Only one thing gets you THIS rich. War.” The implication is that the extreme rich only get that way through immoral means.
We have different ideas of what constitutes “on the nose” or lack of subtlety.
For example, if Rose screamed out “Die capitalist pigs,” and her and Finn were plotting to overthrow the “capitalist system,” I wouldn’t merely being saying that the message lacked subtlety or was too on-the-nose.

You previously want examples of people explicitly stating things, yet Rose never says “only war profiteers are evil.” She’s goes out of her way to mention the rich elite, which would probably be the Star Wars equivalent of the “one percent.”

I didn’t say you did, and I wasn’t speaking directly to you, more just in general about those complaints.

Well then why mention it? Don’t lump me in with others, since I don’t have a problem with the themes in TLJ.

There aren’t many things that gets me stressed out and I can promise you this isn’t one. I love Star Wars and I love talking about Star Wars. This site has been where I’ve done that for years. But the discourse around this film specifically has been exhausting. I’m not upset, just disappointed. For once we were having an intelligent discussion about the movie and then on cue it devolved into the same old tired and silly talking points.

Everyone else seemed pretty cordial until one particular poster came in insulting others.
Right now, this particular discussion with you seems pretty chill and productive.

Post
#1263975
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

DominicCobb said:

The argument is absurd. There’s nothing about TLJ that is overtly political. Everything you mention is as “subtle” in TLJ as it is in Aliens.

No it’s not, but there’s nothing necessarily wrong with that either, if the goal is to have it immediately resonate with audiences now, rather than them discovering these themes years later.

There’s nothing in TLJ that’s has anything to do with “gender inequality” (literally only one reference to gender I can think of). There’s not a single instance of “mansplaining” or the calling out of such. There’s not a single instance of any male having trouble with a female in charge (Poe’s problems with Holdo have nothing to do with that).

Forget that Poe ignored General Organa’s orders, and then creates a mutiny against Holdo, both women.

And about “mansplaining”:
Vanity Fair: “Star Wars: The Last Jedi Offers the Harsh Condemnation of Mansplaining We Need in 2017”

The Washington Post: “…Leia is flanked by an unflinching vice admiral in the lavender-tressed Amilyn Holdo (Laura Dern), who, when called upon, has a deep sense of mission and knows well the painful wages of war. When challenged by a “mansplaining” flyboy like Poe Dameron (Oscar Isaac), she gives no quarter.”

TheMarySue.com: “his first conversation with her is to mansplain how they only have so much fuel left (something she would already have been briefed on) and let us not forget the first thing he does this movie is disobeying Leia’s orders, which leads to the destruction of all the current Rebel Bombers and the death of Rose’s sister.”

The “animal rights” message is barely anything (animal abuse being wrong is not a controversial or even liberal opinion, not to mention no one in the film even talks about it being wrong we just see it, and on top of that the Fathiers seem to be intelligent which makes this abuse specifically extra bad).

Considering how prominent it was in the film, with Rose and Finn saying “it was worth it” even if the Resistance is doomed, in conjunction with all the other themes, gives the film a more left-leaning tilt than Aliens. Which is fine.

Any anti-capitalist sentiment is extremely overstated. Much like how you view Aliens, it’s really more critical about greed and people profiting off war, which is also not that controversial (please show me where anyone says money=bad).

Isn’t there a part where Rose says something like “Only one business in the galaxy gets you this rich.”
Seems to be a criticism of the 1% percent, especially considering that we see all the rich elite drinking space wine while wearing tuxedos and gowns during a time of conflict. I immediately thought of video footage during Occupy Wall Street, of the rich drinking champagne from their balconies and looking down at the people on the streets protesting.

The arguments of TLJ being “shove in your face” political are some of the most annoying bullshit I’ve had to put up with talking Star Wars in this past year.

I never said TLJ “shoved” anything in anyone’s face. I agreed with someone else that it was more on the nose compared to something like Aliens. Disney obviously wanted to make Star Wars more relevant to today’s modern audiences, I think they succeeded in their approach.

How have you had to put up with it? Participating on message forums is voluntary. If it’s getting you that stressed out, take a break from certain topics.

I’m tired of the parroting of clunky, poorly thought out talking points. I try not to argue about this movie anymore but the Aliens comparison is particularly apt and really points out the extremely ridiculous double standard some guys apply to their analyses.

There was some nice arguments for and against Aliens handling a female action lead better.
You seem to the be the only one letting this discussion get under your skin while resorting to insults.

Post
#1263884
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

RogueLeader said:

Regarding Rey “downloading” lightsaber skills to defeat Kylo, I see what you’re saying but I look at it like this: A big part of the Force is that by “letting go”, you let the Force partially guide your actions. This is how the Force is described in the OT. So when Rey closed her eyes, she let go of her doubts and her fears, and let the Force flow through her and guide her actions. I think it carries a strong message of believing in yourself to overcome the challenges you face.

I think by that point in the battle, Kylo was afraid, injured and unbalanced, only going off his learned skills, which is no match to the power and reflexes the Force can give you, which Rey had at that moment.

Also with the Jakku chase, the First Order had orders to capture the droid, so they might have been trying to disable the ship rather than simply destroy it, which might’ve made their job a little harder.

The Jakku chase still seems a bit iffy-it’s been a while since I saw it-but what you said makes sense about Rey and the Force in her first showdown with Kylo. And there’s precedent with Luke in A New Hope. Obi-Wan just tells Luke to use the Force, and he’s able to blindly block the little floating sphere’s blasts. Same with him suddenly using the Force to target the Death Star’s weak spot instead of actual onscreen display schematics.
Plus, she already has experience fighting with a staff, so that, combined with allowing the Force to guide her actions, makes the scene work in hindsight.

Post
#1263880
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

DominicCobb said:

I think I already did? There’s no discernible difference in the way Aliens and TLJ treats “politics” but you seem to be able to pretend that in one it’s only obvious when you go back and look really hard but in the other it’s “in your face.”

I like both movies, but TLJ does seems more heavy handed in the way it handles politics compared to Aliens.
In TLJ it felt specifically geared to the political beliefs of left-leaning millennials.
It felt like there were allusions to the 1%, animal rights, “mansplaining”, gender inequality, and men being threatened by women in charge.

I guess Aliens could be considered anti-capitalism, although at the time I thought it was more specifically a criticism of corporate greed. Other than that, I didn’t detect any overt political messages in it.

Post
#1263879
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

Valheru_84 said:

The difference being in the case of Ripley is that the male characters aren’t shown as normal male characters that are dumbed down to make her stand out. Instead there are some actually dumb ones (that are essentially stereotyped grease monkeys) and there are smart and capable ones that work alongside Ripley in Alien to operate the mining vessel and later attempt to contain the alien.

That’s true. I think it was Lt. Gorman that was the dumb one, and it wasn’t presented as due to his gender, but because he had zero real life combat experience.
Burke is initially, one of the good ones (from the Company), since he’s the one who agrees with Ripley initially against Gorman’s objections.
Then there’s Hicks who sides with Ripley from the beginning.

And it that lays the example of how to do it right. The political issue is left to be discovered afterwards by means of critical analysis and introspection rather than the movie breaking the 4th wall to tell you directly about animal rights, capitalism and gender inequality as TLJ does and is so on the nose about it.

Val

You make some excellent points here too.
I thought Del Toro’s character challenging Rose and Finn’s belief that it’s not only the New Order that making the weapons dealers rich but also the Resistance was showing that the issue isn’t black and white. But yes, I think you’re argument that a more subtle and complex approach to these topics make usually make for a better story and discussion.

Post
#1263807
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

RogueLeader said:

I don’t mean people saying “It is wrong for you to like the new movies.” But I think people trying to say these movies are objectively bad is a form of gatekeeping.

Oh, okay, I see what you mean.
Yeah, while I think there’s some faults here and there with the ST, Disney has definitely recaptured the spirit of the OT, and there good fantasy-adventure films. I went in, expecting to hate TLJ, and found it to be really good, better than TFA.

I think that a significant portion of the extreme criticism of the ST is due to politics and monetized Youtube videos.
Some people exaggerate the flaws of TFA and TLJ in order to get clicks and subscribers.
Instead of objective film criticism, some is just pandering to tell people what they want to hear.

Post
#1263805
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

Mocata said:

I love that he goes on about Aliens so much (a movie I love) but then misses how laboured and on the nose the motherhood themes are after Ripley was just a straight edge pro in the original that was written without gender. If you wanted to be really silly about this it would be just as easy to suggest that like Terminator 2 James Cameron can’t help making his leads into simple child bearing stereotypes who must overcome very basic fears to become mothers/heroes.

Good point.
Also, the character of Ripley could also be accused of “pushing an agenda” since the lone voice of reason is a woman, arguing against a majority of stupid men.

Post
#1263804
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

RogueLeader said:

And George Lucas was the one who spearheaded the Special Editions and the Prequels. People back then wanted George’s head on a pike, but now people long to have George back and suddenly appreciate his “genius”.

Are you keeping track of the people who wanted “George’s head on a pike” to see if these same people are calling the prequels “genius”?

I myself have heard a small portion of overall critics of the new Star Wars, saying stuff like “at least the prequels attempted to do something different,” or “it had a good story, it just wasn’t executed well.”
I’ve only come across ONE Youtube video that was slamming the ST while playing up how good the OT and PT was. But it was like a 5 minute video from a channel that was pretty generic, and had other videos like “Top 5 cringe moments in Hollywood,” and “10 you didn’t know about Stranger Things” (ex: #4 the series is based on the stories of Stephen King).

So were the fans wrong then to criticize him enough to make George want to sell the franchise and not make his own sequel trilogy? Fans are quick to talk about how they miss George, but are so quick to forget who ran him off in the first place. If we were being unfair to George then, how can you tell me with any certainty that people aren’t being unfair to Kathleen Kennedy and Lucasfilm now?

George Lucas wanted to continue the series by focusing on the “Whills” and how the midichlorians worked.
Maybe it was good he sold it.

Post
#1263801
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

Me, personally, I like Rey as a character.
After seeing an unlikable Anakin and a dull Obi-Wan in the prequels, Rey is a breath of fresh air.
She wants desperately to find her place, to belong, to find her parents.
She’s likable, charismatic, and funny.

I don’t have a problem with Rey specifically, but more just the overall writing of The Force Awakens.
I think it has less to do with Rey being a woman, and more to do with the fact that the producers just want to give fans the obligatory starship dog-fights and lightsaber battle.

Rey and Finn are able to skillfully outmaneuver the New Order’s starships, but also shoot down experienced fighter pilots. It’s “explained” merely with Rey and Finn themselves acting surprised. “Have you ever done that before?” “No!” “Me either!”

Then we have to have the obligatory lightsaber battle, even though Rey has had no Jedi training whatsoever.
So they just have her close her eyes right before the fight, so audiences can see her using the Force to download Jedi lightsaber dueling skills.

For me, it seemed rushed.
I didn’t have a problem with the writing for Rey in The Last Jedi. They explained her incredible connection the Force sufficiently enough.

Post
#1263793
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

RogueLeader said:

^^Agreed, joe!

I don’t know. At least growing up I was oblivious to the prequel bashing. I was able to enjoy the movies outside that bubble for the most part. I hope kids nowadays aren’t having that problem, like being told they’re wrong for liking these new movies.

I haven’t come across anyone saying someone is wrong for liking the new movies.
With that said, people in general have been criticized for liking things for the longest time.
Star Wars is part of nerd culture and things like sci-fi and comic books have always had a stigma attached to them. Even romance novels have a stigma attached to them.
Then you have Marvel vs. DC where fans young and old argue about which side is better, and how the other film universe sucks.

Post
#1263790
Topic
Best Explanation Of Mary Sue Issue
Time

joefavs said:

RogueLeader said:

At least they actually have fun watching these movies, and their conversations are generally positive.

This. When your relationship with Star Wars consists largely of railing against Star Wars, you’re doing Star Wars wrong.

I disagree.
Take for example the case of the heavy criticism against the prequels and the OT Special Editions, I’d argue it’s not the fans doing Star Wars wrong, it’s the producers literally doing Star Wars wrong.

Post
#1260352
Topic
Reconstructing the prequels from what was implied in the original trilogy
Time

NeverarGreat said:

Voss Caltrez said:

@NevararGreat

Did you write a prequel story with clones who fight to live?

No, but wasn’t that the original idea of the Clone Wars from Lucas? I remember something about the clones being from rich families intent on gaining political power. My most developed outlines had the clones either follow the AOTC canon or have them be Bossk-esqe aliens who have ceased evolving with recombinant DNA and settled for massive replication.

Oh, okay.
Well, anyways, you’re above premise for how the prequels should have been was great. I like how their two different beliefs (family man vs nomad) would eventually and logically move them apart.

Post
#1260148
Topic
Reconstructing the prequels from what was implied in the original trilogy
Time

There’s a lot of tangles in what was implied from the original trilogy.

“You fought in the clone wars?”
That felt like a throw away line, but I assumed that there was were multiple wars involving clones. Like The Punic Wars. I also assumed that Obi-wan had had a long Jedi career, that involved him being involved in possibly multiple wars.

“I haven’t been called Obi-Wan since before you were born.”
This gives the film a nice past, as if so much had happened PRIOR to ANH. But it doesn’t make sense if you think about it. It’s assumed that Luke was conceived while Anakin was still good, and that means that Anakin hadn’t yet turned to the Dark Side, joined the Emperor and help establish the Empire.

“Powerful Jedi was he, powerful Jedi.”
It makes it sound like Anakin was this super powerful Jedi, but prior to his fall, we didn’t see him do anything that average Jedi couldn’t do.

“When I met you father, he was the best pilot in the galaxy.”
Anakin clearly had a different career prior to becoming a Jedi.

“You father’s lightsaber…he wanted you to have it.”
This implies that Anakin either knew he was going to have a kid, or that Luke was already born when he said that.

Post
#1259845
Topic
your thoughts: Did Disney kill star wars because it sounds like they did with the last jedi solo and resistance.
Time

fmalover said:

Setting aside my love for TLJ, I must say the movie contains what is IMO the most problematic line of dialogue in the ST, which is: “Selling weapons to the First Order”. Is Rose really telling us that the New Republic is run by a bunch of paupers who can’t afford shit? Even then I called bullshit.

Okay, so the New Republic didn’t want a strong military, because they didn’t want the temptation of becoming like the Old Empire, and they didn’t want to intimidate their member worlds.
But then, by doing so, they were able to be destroyed by the First Order.

Rose is upset about lifeforms selling weapons to the First Order, and getting rich, and that’s a real world reference to weapons manufacturers, to make the story relevant to younger audiences.

It seems like a no-win situation.
Strong military=you become corrupt fascists.
Weaken your military=you become vulnerable to terrorists/future fascists.