Considering it came out only a year after 1977’s A New Hope, it feels more Star Wars than the prequels and a lot of EU stuff.
Yeah, it’s incredibly cheesy, dull and weird but I still enjoy it.
The Boba Fett cartoon was great.
No.
The Force Awakens was a hit.
Rogue One was a hit.
The Last Jedi was a hit, but split fandom based on how the story played out. That’s understandable with an old franchise like this and an iconic character returns in a way that not everyone agrees with.Solo lost money though.
Why?
Maybe one reason is that the public is getting tired of a Star Wars-related movie every year.
But I don’t think because of one spin-off didn’t do well and fandom split on TLJ that Disney killed Star Wars.
If anything, they revived it.
I’m not a big fan of the new trilogy, but they managed to bring some of the magic back to the franchise: characters that you actually like and care about, the funny/comedic moments, and more believable worlds that aren’t just green screens.Kylo Ren alone is more interesting than any character of the prequels, and probably more interesting than the portrayals of our favorite group in Return of the Jedi.
No just no. Crylo Ruin is never going to be interesting. You need to rewatch ROTJ because the characters are interesting unlike the st where all original trilogy characters get ruined and all the magic gets stamped out.
I rewatched ROTJ, and yeah, they’re not anywhere near as interesting at they were in ANH and ESB.
The dialogue is clunky at times and Hamill and Fisher struggle with their delivery of it.
I understand that Luke is supposed to be a fully trained Jedi at this point, and confident in his abilities, not the same brash, impatient guy we saw in ESB.
But he just seemed like someone else entirely.
Leia gets told that, not only is Luke her brother, but the guy that murdered all her friends and family…is her father too.
“I know. Somehow I’ve always known.”
Kylo’s revelation to Rey about her parents was a much better scene. There’s nothing like that in ROTJ.
I didn’t understand what Lucas originally meant by that term.
Like an operatic story in space?
Later on, considering all the twists and turns of the original trilogy, like, “No…I’M your father,” and
“wait a minute, LEIA is my sister??”
Thinking about it some more, I later assumed Lucas meant that Star Wars was supposed to be a continuing soap opera, since the way some of these revelations unfolded felt more at home in day time soap opera, than a saga that was carefully planned out since the beginning.
No.
The Force Awakens was a hit.
Rogue One was a hit.
The Last Jedi was a hit, but split fandom based on how the story played out. That’s understandable with an old franchise like this and an iconic character returns in a way that not everyone agrees with.
Solo lost money though.
Why?
Maybe one reason is that the public is getting tired of a Star Wars-related movie every year.
But I don’t think because of one spin-off didn’t do well and fandom split on TLJ that Disney killed Star Wars.
If anything, they revived it.
I’m not a big fan of the new trilogy, but they managed to bring some of the magic back to the franchise: characters that you actually like and care about, the funny/comedic moments, and more believable worlds that aren’t just green screens.
Kylo Ren alone is more interesting than any character of the prequels, and probably more interesting than the portrayals of our favorite group in Return of the Jedi.
Gotta love the (almost) inbreeding implications…
On a serious note, yes, it does seem like Lucas was making things up as he went along… He may have felt a burden to conjure another “plot twist” or “surprise” like <span class=“Italics”>The Empire Strikes Back</span> had for RotJ (or at least attempt to make it as good as the plot twist in ESB).
Yes!
I grew up with her being his sister, so it didn’t bother me then.
But after watching the series as an adult, you can tell it wasn’t planned that way. I really like the idea that Leia is NOT Luke’s sister, and although they have a emotional Bond, Leia still falls for Han anyways. A nice twist on the trope that the hero always gets the girl. Something different.
Oh, but he only doesn’t get the girl because she turns out to be his sister…That’s lame. And weird, considering the kiss.
And your telling me Vader didn’t sense any Force connection when he interrogated Leia? Come on.
No. Once I read that the original plan was to have Luke discover he had a sister on the other side of the galaxy, and Return of the Jedi ending with Han dead, Leia resuming some powerful leader position in the newly restored Republic, and Luke walking off into the sunset to go in search of his lost sister…awesome.
I have some questions about the Jedi, the Force and Star Wars in general and was wondering if those on the forum could help me out.
Can Force users sense each other like immortals do in the Highlander series? I’d imagine so, because their Force sensitive, right? That’s how Obi-wan sensed that a pre-Jedi trained Anakin had a connection to the Force.
But if that’s the case, does that mean that a Force could never hide from another Force user? Like as far as being in a crowd, or laying in wait for a surprise attack?
In the prequels it’s implied that Force users can just hide their connection to the Force from other Force sensitives, like in the case of Palpatine. Even in-story that seems kind of far fetched (yeah, space wizards…). I mean, the Jedi are in-tuned to all this stuff. I find it hard to believe this Sith Lord was under their nose the whole time, around various Jedi constantly, and he never slipped up once. Not once did a Jedi get near Palpatine and feel some kind of bad vibes within the Force?
If that’s the case, why didn’t Obi-wan hide his Force “presence” when entering the Death Star?
Prior to the prequels was their an explanation or details on the parameters of how they could sense each other?
What are the rules for Force abilities? Is it open ended to whatever Disney comes up with? Were there rules and limitations prior to Disney, and/or prior to the Prequels?
Up until then it was just telekinesis, limited telepathic communication (Luke crying out for Leia and her “hearing” it), and shooting lightning.
But now they can have in-depth telepathic communication, and even extract secrets from the minds of people. That’s what Kylo was trying to do to Rey first time they met right? Does that mean that Force users can read people’s minds? That sounds like it makes them a little too powerful and knowing.
I mean, does that mean Jedi or Force users would always know when someone’s lying? If they wanted, they could just scan the persons mind for secrets?
Where do humans come from, and why is the Empire made up only of humans? The Republic was made up of different star systems within the galaxy. So…why all humans? Is there a reason for it?
A “Galactic Empire.” A galaxy is made up of hundreds of billions of stars, all with their own planets. The Republic, and later Empire, was governing and controlling all that? Really? I like the SW universe to feel vast, unlike the small world that the prequels made it to be, what with every thing connected (little Greedo for example). Were there other galaxies they knew of or came into contact with, or does everything in SW, expanded universe and films, limited to being within one galaxy?
If there are all hundreds of billions of star systems within the Republic, what are the planets like? Star Wars is pretty unique, in that every planet is all one thing. Like there’s an ice planet (Hoth), a forest planet (Endor), a water planet (Kamino), a lava planet, a desert planet (Tattooine), and a gas planet with just clouds (Bespin).
But damn, if you try to expand the universe, you kind of run out of all-one-thing planets. I think SW ended up reusing a desert planet already, twice: Geonosis and Jakku. The salt planet was obviously a heat to redo Hoth.
Would it be weird and un-Star Wars-like if you had more diverse planets? Like Earth for example?
Are there rules to Droids? Like Asimov’s the Three Laws? Can’t be 'cause they had a whole army of people-killing droids in Phantom Menace. What about prior to that? Was it assumed that all droids were just servants. Do Droids have their own place to chill? Are there planets or societies of free Droids? 3PO has pretty limited movement for a humanoid looking droid. He doesn’t even have a moving mouth. Does this mean that Droids haven’t been around that long?
How does technology work? Time-wise I mean. I’m sure at some point there were no servant droids, as the technology wasn’t there yet. How many generations back before droids could walk and talk and have sentience?
If there’s clone technology, how come we never see it in the original films, or in the new Disney ones? That sounds like some ground breaking stuff? Wouldn’t people want to clone their loved ones if they died? What are the ramifications of this? Why wouldn’t everyone have a clone army? Or make clone servants and slaves? Clone themselves?
Cyborgs. How common is it supposed to be? I never saw one metal-arm-type people in Star Wars. I’m assuming having a cybernetic arm, foot, or leg is pretty common, as well as it being undetectable, like Luke’s hand. Darth Vader aside, how far does that go? Could there be someone with just a human head, and have a total cybernetic body? Do you have to be rich to have it done? Are there sketchy cybernetic doctors out there, like maybe on Tattooine? And does that mean you get some people with malfunctioning limbs, or hands where they have bad skin jobs and there’s discoloration, or the metal is showing through? I have to admit, that feels less Star Wars-like, and more cyber punk.
Are there other religions in Star Wars? The Force is referred to as an ancient superstition or religion. So are there others? Does that mean the majority of the Republic/Empire are atheists? But they have a Hell, because Han says “if not I’ll see you in Hell.” A non-Christian Hell I suppose, but from what belief system then?
If anyone can answer these thanks!
Darth as a title sounds cooler than “Darth” being Vader’s first name.
“Darth, we must talk.” Just sounds kind of silly. Rhymes with Garth.
But, having a bunch of other dark side Force users with “Darth” as a title/name, along with a red light saber, makes Darth Vader less unique.
Grevious’ cough was another thing I disliked, because, like the above, it makes Darth Vader less unique. Here, we also have an asthmatic cyborg villain. Plus, despite all the crazy CGI robot kung fu, this coughing and wheezing video game villain didn’t seem that threatening. The cartoon version was so much better.
Exactly. He’s telling Luke that he’s going to fall to the Dark Side because, as far as the Emperor is concerned, “it is unavoidable”. Nothing can stop it, he has foreseen Luke defeating Vader and taking his father’s place at his side so he’s letting Luke know that it doesn’t make any difference whether he resists, because it is his destiny.
But doesn’t Vader tell Luke in ESB, “Luke, you can destroy the Emperor. He has forseen this. It is your destiny. Join me, and together we can rule the galaxy as father and son.”
In fact, prior to this the Emperor wants Luke killed, but Vader is the one who suggest he can turn Luke into an ally of the Empire.
We already know the Emperor is a master manipulator and that he sees the future. He deliberately let the Rebellion know where the second Death Star was and that he’d be there. He tells Vader that Luke will surrender himself to him to Vader’s disbelief, and yet, lo’ and behold, Luke does just that. He knows that the shuttle Tyderium was a Rebel ruse. He foresees Luke falling and as far as we’re concerned, we see Luke start down that path when he loses control and attacks the Emperor, which Palpatine sees as Luke fulfilling his destiny to join the Dark Side and replace Vader. If anything, that makes him a better villain: he’s spot on about everything so far, and then even Luke seems to fall into his trap.
The aspects you mentioned, like foreseeing that Luke will go to Vader, are good traits of a villain. You think this guy is one step ahead of your every move. But in his attempt to turn Luke, it was incredibly stupid, and that goes beyond simply being overconfident. And not only that, but other factors are at play which make me feel he’s one of the less interesting villains out there. Maybe if we didn’t see his eyes, like in The Phantom Menace when he was talking to the Asian stereotype aliens via hologram, and he had that same gravitas in his voice in that film, then he would come across more mysterious and intimidating. I prefer Frank Langella’s Skeletor from MOTU film over Palpatine. Better dialogue, better delivery, and better look.
Like Density said, the only reason his plan failed was because of his overconfidence and underestimation of the Rebel resolve against the Empire, Luke’s resolve against the Dark Side, and finally (as well as fatally) Vader’s resolve. When Luke defeats Vader, realizes where he is headed if he continues, and throws down his weapon to show that he is truly a Jedi, the Emperor realizes that he needs to up the ante, and so he tortures Luke in an attempt to break him, to turn him to the Dark Side by Force (hur hur). Again, he was overconfident in his ability to do so, in Vader’s allegiance to the Sith and his master, and he underestimated the good inside of Anakin and the love a father has for his son.
That’s how I see it at least.
Like I said, he comes off like a cartoon villain, in the same way that the cheesy villains tell the hero their whole plan before killing them.
WTF are you talking about? The Emperor is awesome. He’s by far the most fun character in all of Star Wars to imitate and he’s endlessly quotable. Plus he just takes so much joy in being pure evil. I mean look how giddy he gets when he says “Everything is proceeding as I have forseen” and then cackles maniacally. It’s just glorious. Ian McDiarmid is awesome. He elevated ROTJ in every scene he was in and he made the prequels watchable. Just some beautiful scenery chewing all around. The only comparison I can think of is when Al Pacino literally played the Devil in The Devil’s Advocate. Just insane over the top evil, but it’s perfect for the character. He basically is the Devil of the Star Wars universe. Not everybody has to have deep characterization and complex motives in a classic good vs. evil fantasy story like Star Wars. Palpatine wants “unlimited power” and that’s really all we need to know.
I find it fun to imitate him because he’s unintentionally funny. The expressions he makes in ROTS when he’s fighting the Jedi for example. Or when he says “Dyew it.”
Ian McDiarmid is awesome though, I agree. I don’t like his portrayal, but for what he was shooting for, he nailed it. The interview where he’s explaining that Lucas wanted him to imitate the voice in ESB, and instead, he thought the Emperoror’s voice should sound sepulchral makes me appreciate his performance more.
But he’s NOT the Devil of the Star Wars universe, because even the Christian Devil, as we know him, has a past and a motivation which makes him interesting. He was formerly an angel who led a rebellion against God, and justified his loss by saying, “better to reign in Hell, than to serve in Heaven.” Also, the Devil is known to be the father of lies, the ultimate deceiver. The Emperor may have shown flashes of that in ROTS, manipulating Anakin into believing only the Sith could prevent death, and making it look like the Jedi were evil, even though his sincerity seems less than convincing.
However, in ROTJ, he’s completely unconvincing. He’s not the master manipulator, he’s telegraphing his intentions at nearly every point. Luke might have killed his father when he had him at his mercy, but Palpatine ruins that when he starts cackling loudly and saying, “Good…now fulfill your destiny and take your father’s place at my side.” It’s like he’s using reverse psychology to keep Luke on the RIGHT path.
I did like Ep. II/Attack of the Clones, when it seems like Count Dooku actually is not completely good or completely bad. It seemed like for a moment, there was a third faction involved in the war, one who was against the Republic, but also against the Sith. It turned out he was just lying, but even THAT was a better example of the Devil, than what we saw in the ROTJ Emperor. Dooku was trying to appeal to Obi-Wan’s connection to his mentor Qui-Gon, and mixing truth with falsehood.
Yeah but in ROTS he tells Padme that he can overthrow the Chancellor and they can rule the Galaxy together. Molding the Galaxy in their own vision.
Yes, but it’s in context of what Anakain has gone through.
That isn’t an issue. He’s the reigning Dark Lord of The Sith. The Sith want to conquer thus Palpatine wants to as well. There’s no reason to give him a rich backstory that which gives him numerous motives as to why he would want to rule. Darth Sidious is not like Darth Vader or Kylo Ren who are 3 dimensional characters so there’s really no reason to elaborate more beyond the “normal” reasons one would want to rule the Galaxy.
It’s not an issue for you, for me it is. And I’ve already said, you can keep the character vague and mysterious but there have been much more successful executions at doing that. I don’t view The Emperor as seen in ROTJ, and in most of ROTS comes across as mysterious but interesting.
Why would Obi-Wan tell the Stormtroopers “These are not the droids you’re looking for”? Letting them know that he knows that they are looking for droids seems kind of suspicious, doesn’t it?
Oh snap, the Emperor was trying to use a Jedi mind trick, or in this case, a Sith mind trick on Luke! Okay…I get that whole scene now.
Lord Haseo said:
Given that Vader was there he said that knowing if Luke struck out in anger Vader would be there to protect him…which is exactly what happened. He only said those things so that Luke can cross the line of striking down an unarmed person out of spite.
Yeah, but wouldn’t it make more sense to taunt someone without saying admitting exactly what you want them to do? I mean, Luke’s not a child.
And Vader being right there only adds to the obviousness of what Luke should NOT do. It would have made more sense if he tried to convince Luke that the Empire was right in it’s actions, and that the dark side of the Force was the only way to maintain order among the chaos that is the universe. I know I’m asking a lot of what is essentially a kids fantasy film, but the script, dialogue, and acting was so well done in The Empire Strikes Back, and the story seemed to be more mature than A New Hope, that I would have expected (in hindsight of course) that ROTJ would continue that upward direction.
He didn’t have to be anything more than the ultimate form of evil. Also he didn’t need to be a testicle monster with laser beams shooting out of his eyes
But he didn’t come across as the ultimate form of evil. He the ultimate cliche of Saturday Morning Cartoon villainy. He’s Mr. Burns. And you don’t need to design a testicle monster with laser beam eyes to be visually interesting.
For the same reasons anyone has wanted to dominate the galaxy…to shape the way the Galaxy operates as you see fit, to dominate the destinies of all those within your grasp. To acquire a near infinite repository of knowledge, wealth and anything else you desire.
It seems like Anakin and the Emperor have different reasons. Anakin wants power so he could stop people, like his mother, from being killed. He grew up in an unfair world where people could be bought and sold as slaves. He feared that his wife would die like his mother, so he wanted more power fro the Force to prevent it from happening.
Vader, pre-prequel trilogy, seemed to just want order, and later, he wanted to rule with his reunited son.
The Emperor in the prequels though, just seems to want “unlimited powaaaaaaa.” We don’t know anything else about him. In the OT we know even less. And again, that works for a lot of fictional characters, but the build up to his formal introduction in the third Star Wars film seems pretty anti-climactic and boring.
Maybe not the worst, but he’s pretty close. We don’t get much of him in ESB so I can’t say he’s a good or bad villain. But in ROTJ he seems incredibly idiotic. Luke is about to kill Vader, but the Emperor interrupts him and essentially says, “Yes, kill your father so you can take his place at my side and be an evil, miserable POS for the rest of your life.”
He’s not clever AT ALL.
He taunts Luke saying that all his friends are gonna die, the rebel alliance will be destroyed. Luke is starting to feel anger and fear. Then the Emperor, instead of playing up the threat Luke’s friends face, he then says, “Yes, strike down, so you’re turn to the dark side will be complete.”
Obviously, the Emperor does not want to die. It’s pretty obvious that Luke should do the exact OPPOSITE of whatever the Emperor is saying.
I kind of wish he had more depth to him. Villains with vague motivations and unrevealed origins are fine, but at least make them visually interesting. Palpatine is just an old man in a black robe.
Why does he want to dominate the galaxy? He’s just a cackling, comic book villain, who’s just evil for the sake of evil. I like Star Wars, but he’s definitely not a very good villain. I did like his appearance in Strider though.
I think one of the old-EU explanations was that the Emperor purposely didn’t allow Vader to be fully healed so that he would always carry the pain and scars of his failure in order to better keep him under his heel.
I could see that. He’s completely servile to the Emperor in the originals. However, it really takes away from the character if he has the ability to regain his old appearance, but his boss is like, “No, pretty much destroyed the Jedi, ensured my domination of the galaxy, but you failed to kill Obi-Wan. I’m withholding plastic surgery from you.” I’d like to think the reason he holds a grudge towards Obi-Wan, is because he suffered irreparable damage from him, turning him into a monster. Even if his wife had still been alive, he’s disfigured and trapped in a walking respiratory device.
He didn’t just get a burn, he was on fucking fire. His clothes seared to his skin. If you look at him in Jedi, he looks really good for a burn victim.
So, we’re supposed to assume that his appearance in ROTJ represents the physical damages he incurred prior to the mask, or that he naturally healed very slowly from those injuries, or that his body/face took a long time to get repaired through medical means.
I think Lucas intended the first, because their was nothing to imply that he was trying to get his face fixed in the previous films, and probably he didn’t want Vader’s countenance to look too gruesome for the younger demographic he was aiming for (see The Ewoks).
Yes, he was on fire, so you’d think that the Emperor would have put him in some kind of therapy/rehabilitative/medical procedure, or something. I think the tech seen in SW would mandate that. Instead, he’s instantly put into the robotic suit. You’d think he’d be put on some kind of respiratory system, while trying to at least repair SOME of his injuries. Which is why I don’t think it makes sense with what we know of Star Wars.
They can recreate the look of Luke’s hand, seamlessly, when it wasn’t on fire, it was completely gone, but Vader’s charred body right away is put into a suit.
Star Wars is supposed to take place in the past, but has highly advanced technology. Luke gets his face messed up by the wampa at the beginning of ESB, but the rebels put him in, what looks like, a liquid rejuvenation chamber. Afterwards he looks healed, with left over bruises, marks, or stitches. Later, he gets his hand cut off, but he gets a flesh-covered, mechanical replacement that, from the outside, is undetectable.
Why is Anakin’s scarring permanent but not Luke’s? I read that at one point, Vader’s origin was going to include him falling into something radioactive, which might explain any attempts to fix his face/body not lasting very long. But wouldn’t burning be reparable in the SW universe?
-The music
-Most sound design and effects
-The world buildingThese I can agree with. I must say I liked the shooting locations and CGI created world.
The only planet I found interesting was Kamino but the subpar CGI took me out of it at times.
I really liked the idea and design of a water planet. I didn’t like the grey alien-type creatures, or the CGI structures of the cloning facility, but the everything else was cool, including the flying creatures. Easily my favorite planet in the prequels, among very boring looking ones.
Voss Caltrez said:
Geonosis looks too much like Edgar Rice Burroughs’ Barsoom/Mars. Younger audiences wouldn’t catch the reference, but I did, and it took me out of the movie.Maybe it reminded you of the Barsoom from your own imagination but for others probably not. It’s just another red planet. Vulcan being a red planet doesn’t take me out of the end of ST3. Of all the multitudinous things wrong with AOTC, this seems an odd one.
Personally, I found that Tatooine looked too much like Tunisia, which really took me out of Star Wars.
Red planet + coliseum battle + Frank Frazetta illustrated Barsoom-like creature + similar looking Barsoomians. That’s more than just another red planet.
But I’m aware that the whole of Star Wars is borrowed material: Flash Gordon, Dune, etc.
Voss Caltrez said:
Geonosis looks too much like Edgar Rice Burroughs’ Barsoom/Mars. Younger audiences wouldn’t catch the reference, but I did, and it took me out of the movie.Maybe it reminded you of the Barsoom from your own imagination but for others probably not. It’s just another red planet. Vulcan being a red planet doesn’t take me out of the end of ST3. Of all the multitudinous things wrong with AOTC, this seems an odd one.
Personally, I found that Tatooine looked too much like Tunisia, which really took me out of Star Wars.
The risks Han took in the OT were more in his favor. It was a major leap of faith to stand in front of Kylo without a blaster in his hand. Arguably the same leap Luke once took when he threw his lightsaber away in ROTJ.
The leap of faith Luke took in ROTJ still makes no sense to me. Unless he started adhering to a Ghandi/Jesus-like philosophy of non-violence in that moment. He refused to finish off Darth Vader when Vader was no longer a threat. Great, he truly is a Jedi. But throwing away his one of his quickest defenses? It would have been better had it shown him turning off his lightsaber but still holding it, THEN the Emperor blasts him with lightening, and he subsequently drops it due to the violent convulsions he’s experiencing. In between the momentary pauses of the Emperor’s attacks, Luke weakly tries to summon his lightsaber again, only to be overwhelmed once again by force-lightening wracking his body with pain, all the while Darth Vader, his father, coldly looks on…
Han in SW wouldn’t have believed in a kid who descended so far into evil. Especially enough to risk his life to save him. He may have been a scoundrel with a heart of gold but there’s nothing to indicate that he was entirely a good person at that point. The Han in ESB and ROTJ is a different story though.
Also what does the audience need?
Han was also risking his life in TFA for the sake of the galaxy, at least that’s how I saw it. Remember, Snoke is using Kylo Ren’s power. Without it, that weakens The First Order, and with it, it makes them that much more dangerous.
Han risked his life to fight for the Rebels and his new found friend, Luke in ANH. If Han somehow had a son in ANH that he had raised for a while, I think it’s pretty likely that he’d also risk his life to bring him back. He risked his life for Luke in ANH, but he wouldn’t do it for his own son?
As far as what the audience needs, I don’t know exactly with the case of Star Wars. But I’d imagine it’s something to do with challenging material rather than comfortable, predictable cliches. But unfortunately the studio is working with a lot of limitations. The original cast are all senior citizens now. Harrison Ford presumably wanted his character to die. They have a lot of baggage from the negative legacy of the prequels. They spent 4 billion just acquiring the rights to the material, so taking creative risk is practically irresponsible in financial terms. I believe even Abrams explained that they made TFA similar to ANH and the OT so the audience can get familiar before they add new stuff in Ep. 8 and 9. So I get all the decisions they made for TFA. However, I can’t fully enjoy a movie if I’m rationalizing all the cliches based on what ensures Disney’s investment.
Stormtroopers don’t get old very often. The few that do probably get a nice retirement package. 😉
What happened to his son was obviously painful to Han. Remaining with Leia and the Rebellion/Resistance would only remind him of that. I doubt being a war hero leads to lucrative product endorsement deals in the SW universe.
And I disagree that Han has not evolved. He cared enough to get back involved in the fight, take Rey under his wing, and risk his own life to try to save his son. That it cost him his life is beside the point. The old Han would never have walked out onto that bridge.
Why would we get all the answers to the mystery about Rey, when there are two more movies to explore that in?
@Stormtroopers
If they don’t get old very often, it’s almost like a death sentence. They’re not even officially at war though. Surely, part of their job description is just maintaining security, enforcing the laws.
@Han Solo
Maybe, but I would expect him to go looking for his son at any cost. With all the character progression he made in the OT, I can’t see that he would go back to being a criminal, while his son has become Hitler, or more appropriately, another Darth Vader.
About Han walking out onto the bridge, actually the old Han that WE know definetely would have done that. Remember, in ANH, he comes back in the end to help the rebels destroy the Death Star? He’s with the rebels in ESB. He’s with them again in ROTJ.
It’s more like an attempt to tap into audience nostalgia, rather than apply a natural approach to story progression. It’s giving the audience what they want, versus what they need.
@Rey
I’m sure we’ll get the answers, but it still comes off very cliche in TFA, and seems more like an excuse for a lightsaber fight in TFA, as opposed to a logical reason.
Wow, I’ve been assuming this whole time that The First Order was reusing the Empire logo. I agree, that it can be looked at, as if The First Order has conscription at the “youngling” age, rather than mass kidnapping. Maybe it’s akin to the child-soldiers we read about. However, Finn goes on to say that he was taken from a family he will never know. If Finn’s experience is common, what kind of society does The First Order have? Generational family relationships are virtually abolished in that section of the galaxy? You grow up not having a real name, and not having any siblings or parents. Or is that only for storm troopers? So the storm troopers are these weird people in society that, due to their conscription, don’t have families, don’t have real names, and are brainwashed. Are they trained to fight their whole life? What happens when they get too old? Are the genetically modified? I think what little tidbits were raised in TFA about stormtroopers just brings about way too many questions.
I’m not trying to nitpick it, as I understand it’s merely an adventure movie for general audiences, and as I watched it, things didn’t bother me too much.
However, considering what I know about Star Wars and the production involved, it slightly took me out of the movie because the ideas of proxy wars and armies comes across, really, as just a quick-fix-excuse, to reuse the Rebels vs Empire concept, and to essentially remake A New Hope with sprinkles of Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi. Disney paid billions and doesn’t want to take any risks with the franchise, so they’re relying on the familiar. They’re recycling things. Nothing feels organic. I can see the reasoning behind what appears on screen, before I see a story.
For example, Finn was taken as a child, and has a change of heart occurring during his first battle. On top of that he’s revealed to be a janitor. It seems like these revelations aren’t organic to the story and feel more like an excuse to make him appear pure of heart, a goody guy, fitting into the black and white concept of good vs evil.
The Star Killer. Most adult Star Wars fans know that the hero’s original name was Anakin Starkiller. Later on The Force Unleashed used the name for their protagonist. Now it’s being used for the Death Star 3.0. I see screen writing taking place before I see a story.
Han went back to what he knew-smuggling. Does it make sense story-wise? Maybe. But it makes more sense that the producers wanted to illicit nostalgia from the audiences by having Han look and act pretty much the same way they remember him from 25 years ago. He’s made no progress. While that’s true of some people in real life, it comes across more like producer-imposed restrictions on the screen writing.
Rey getting Force-knowledge and lightsaber skills out of nowhere? Maybe the Force has chosen her to bring balance once again. Maybe she’s a Skywalker or a Kenobi. But really, the producers wanted a cool light saber battle, but they also wanted to have a Luke Skywalker-like protagonist who’s just finding out about their destiny, and is ignorant of The Force. Just have her close her eyes and play some theme music. It’s the cart leading the horse.
I just want to be clear, TFA was a fun film, and I believe that Abrams, and all those involved, were successful in what they were trying to achieve. But I don’t see myself rewatching it anytime soon.
How many times are we going to have to rehash why the Resistance exists?
Yeah, I have no clue why people have so much trouble with the Resistance. It was obvious to me just from reading the crawl and watching various scenes in the movie that the whole idea is that there’s what amounts to a cold war going on between the New Republic and various fractured Imperial Remnants (because there’s no way a Galactic Empire on a thousand worlds just ends after one battle on a forest moon), most notably the First Order, and since the New Republic can’t/doesn’t want to openly wage war against the First Order, the Resistance popped up with under-the-table Republic support. It’s that simple and was adequately explained in the film, as adequately as the Imperial Senate and the Empire’s role in the galaxy in the original Star Wars.
People complained about all the exposition and political drama in the PT and after leaving TFA I feel like a lot of those same people were saying “I wish there was more exposition and political drama!”
Good points. I do remember the part where Hux says, “the Republic is supporting the Resistance.” So it explains the proxy war part. But what I didn’t get was any kind of idea that there were planets that were NOT part of the Republic, and were under the protection of “The First Order.” I only remember seeing the First Order being on the Star Killer Base. I never got the idea that they had established worlds, planets, or systems under their control. If anything, it felt like The First Order were the rebels/resistance/terrorists. I mean, if there are still remnants of systems or planets who resist the New Republic, why resort to kidnapping children and brainwashing them to be your soldiers? Wouldn’t you have volunteers, or at the very least, conscription from the planets you rule? It’s possible that not all the stormtroopers are kidnapped as children, but it heavily implies that by having
Does The Resistance comprise of people who live on the First Order controlled planets?
And if they’re proxy fighters, why do they look JUST LIKE the rebels from the OT? Shouldn’t they have different colored uniforms, and different looking star ships? I suppose the New Republic is supplying them, but then, how can it be in secret then? Why does the First Order use The Empire’s insignia? If they are remnants, shouldn’t they continue calling themselves The Empire, and the true ruling governing power in the galaxy, and consider The New Republic illegitimate? Or if they are like a defeated Nazi-Germany, wouldn’t they the New Republic demand that they stop using the Swastika-like insignia of the Empire?
The original opening for ESB had the crawl as black letters on a white ground, which was then revealed to be the snowy plains of Hoth seen from a bird’s eye view.
In post-production this was revised so that the opening scene of the film took place in space, with Vader’s fleet dispatching probes to look for the Rebels. This kind of accidentally cemented the idea that a SW movie must have its opening crawl take place against a backdrop of stars.
Really? checks youTube really quick
I think I would have liked the original better, but then again, maybe having the opening scene among the stars, better cements the idea that, hey, you’re about to watch a story about STAR Wars.Honestly yeah, I kinda like the continuity it provides. It’s part of the hype of sitting down and seeing the Lucasfilm logo… then the “A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away…”, then the starfield and STAR WARS. It would be weird without it.
After analyzing all the opening scenes, you almost need to have the yellow outlined Star Wars logo against the star field, and subsequently, a pan to whatever is taking place in outer space (star destroyer, star ship battles, etc).
However, I really like the idea for the original ESB opening, that it would take place on a completely white background, with the text scrolling, and then when it’s finished, the camera pans to show that it’s really the ice plains of Hoth.
The only problem with that is a white background usually subconsciously implies absence, blankness, something unfinished. But I think it would have been cool to have something different for every film.
