pleasehello

Tack said:

This is legitimately awful. The Lando/Leia scene is pretty decent, but the rest seems like it would have just been an even more awkward follow up to a film that already didn’t leave much of an out for its sequels.

Also, maybe I’m reading too much into it, but that Rose torture scene makes me very uncomfortable…

I don’t think that’s what Rose means when she asks if he is “trying to use the force” on her.

FreezingTNT2 said:

Exactly. She only appears in one movie.

She only appears in one movie, yet we know more about her than we do Admiral Ackbar. I agree that she doesn’t have a complete character arc, but she’s far more developed in TLJ than Admiral Ackbar ever was in ROTJ. She helps give characterization to one of our main protagonists and she has a very direct impact on story and plot.

So I would argue that she is a character while Ackbar is not.

Deleted

NFBisms said:

StarkillerAG said:

NFBisms said:

^But, that’s not Luke’s arc in TLJ. That’s the moment it starts, but the overall journey isn’t about Luke overcoming his darkness. In fact, the arc itself is very specifically about why his failures aren’t a regression. I don’t know what to tell you.

I don’t know what to tell you, either. I saw Luke’s failure with Ben as a clear regression. Yoda supports that, saying “young Skywalker, still looking to the horizon.” This implies that Luke hasn’t evolved at all since the beginning of ESB, which seems like the definition of a regression.

When I say “needed to be told this way” I just mean that it’s clearly relevant. A logical next step to take from the OT that is more meaningful than Luke “finding the first Jedi temple” or something. This actually expands upon the themes introduced in those films. TROS is the film that rehashes.

Luke trying to kill Ben isn’t a “logical next step.” Like I said, there are a thousand ways TLJ could have expanded Luke’s character that wouldn’t feel like a regression. He could be tired of the endless cycle of war, and want the conflict to resolve itself. Or he could be scared of Snoke’s power, and worried that he wouldn’t be able to handle the situation. That would be a true evolution of Luke’s character. Instead, Rian chose to repeat a conflict that Luke has already faced.

For starters, Luke is not conflicted at all in this film about what he did to Ben. Hence, not the conflict. Not rehashed. (he even says this to ben: “you here to save my soul?” “nope”)

It’s all about the aftermath of that failure. And it’s about how failure doesn’t define you. How what you’ve done doesn’t dictate what you can do, how you aren’t your past, you’re your future. It stops relegating responsibility for heroism on a character arc or bloodline or the light side or the dark - and on people. Their choices and their actions. Luke Skywalker as the son who loved his father, not a heroic Jedi who defeated Vader and the Emperor.

Luke taking responsibility as who he was, the boy looking out at the horizon, and not the pretty story he became as Luke the Legend - reinforces those ideals. Are there other things they could have done? Of course, but this isn’t bad at all. It’s an idealistic human message that I think we missed out on when Vader died. Redemption is about moving on with every mistake as a part of yourself. Not atoning for or running away from your past. Moving forward. Star Wars isn’t the superhero story TROS seems to think it was; it was always the little guys standing up to the big impossible odds, thrust into a world bigger than themselves. Luke’s arc here reinforces that spirit. Making him a superhero wouldn’t not work, but it’s cheaper than understanding the humanity behind his actions.

I guess, if anything TLJ says “regression doesn’t exist” and holding the world to that standard is what leads to disappointment and cynicism. That’s a mature take on heroic idealism that I’m glad Star Wars grappled with at least once before becoming mindless nonsense. That even if you and everything you’re fighting against lets you down or becomes harder, doesn’t mean you should give up. In fact, that’s why you should continue. And you will have to, because there is no happily ever after.

Word.

FreezingTNT2 said:

snooker said:

who cares about the meme fish man. why do people care about the meme fish man?

Because there was no point in adding him into the trilogy if he was going to be killed off in the second installment after barely getting to appear on-screen.

If there was no point in adding him, what’s the point in removing him?

Are you going to remove Nien Numb too? He barely gets any screen time.

Luke and Ben not interacting at all in TROS may be one of the films biggest missed opportunities. I wanted Luke’s ghost haunting him mercilessly and then as you suggest, a small moment of recognition between them after Ben’s redemption.

idir_hh said:

Art is subjective. You might think some of this is stupid, I happen to think it’s a masterpiece.

The grass is always greener, but “masterpiece” seems a tad strong for a partial screenplay of a film that was never made. There is some good stuff in there, though. I rather liked Trevorrow’s version of Ben’s redemption. I think J.J.s version was good too. Both seem a bit abrupt though.

FreezingTNT2 said:

StarkillerAG said:

I agree that Luke was the only good character in the sequel trilogy, but I do feel like they took his character too far. I’m not saying Luke isn’t allowed to make mistakes, but I don’t think Luke from ROTJ would go to die on an island the instant something bad happened. He always seemed more hopeful than Obi-Wan or Yoda. I enjoyed Luke’s character arc, but I found it hard to accept that this is the same Luke from the OT, and I understand the complaints of those who felt they ruined his character.

They also undid Luke’s arc of overcoming darkness in Return of the Jedi. That moment he considered the cold-blooded murder of a sleeping Ben Solo undermines the scene in Return of the Jedi where he realizes his mistake after attacking Vader, tosses his lightsaber forward, and promises he will never turn to the dark side, knowing that it isn’t the way of the Jedi, which showed that he has matured to better face and overcome darkness.

He redeemed his father and conquered the darkness, only to fall victim to it yet again?

You could easily look at his temptation as an ongoing struggle. It makes his character more human and hence more interesting in TLJ. Plus he didn’t do it, so I still don’t know why certain people get all bent out of shape about this. He’s not space-Jesus.

DominicCobb said:

idir_hh said:

Knight of Ren Actor Juan Bautista Confirms Ending was changed a week before TROS release.

https://youtu.be/QR6veQEzcu0

Seems like the actor is speaking in strange terms so as to not get himself sued.

Apparently total bullshit.

Sounds like bullshit.

I would argue against the idea that most people disliked this movie. The reactions of a few personal friends doesn’t equal “most people”. Most of my friends liked it, but I don’t take that as evidence that most people liked it. RT has a very favorable audience score while Metacritic has a rather unfavorable one. So I wouldn’t presume to state so matter of factly how most people feel about this movie.

Also, over $1 billion box office doesn’t seem like very convincing evidence either. The fact that it did less than TLJ could have just as much to do with reactions to TLJ as it does with TROS.

idir_hh said:

Wow this video really hit the nail on the coffin.

Yeah! The final nail in the head, so to speak.

Seriously though, it really did thoughtfully and accurately breakdown perhaps the movie’s biggest technical flaw.

FreezingTNT2 said:

DominicCobb said:

StarkillerAG said:

I know DJ was wrong too, but the movie explicitly tries to make a compromise between DJ’s beliefs and the beliefs of the Resistance, resulting in the whole “save the things you love” scene, which was one of the worst scenes of the movie in my opinion. Throughout the movie, it felt like Rian was trying to make it seem like the heroes and villains should find a compromise, which doesn’t seem like a good lesson for a franchise all about the light always winning.

I’m not sure I understand. “Saving what we love” isn’t about finding a compromise. It’s about caring more for helping people than killing others. It’s the very ethos of the franchise. Selflessness, and all that. Vader takes down the Emperor not because of hatred, but because of love for his son. The Jedi defend what they love, the Sith attack using hatred to fuel them.

I get people not liking the line because it’s on the nose, but the message is very important. I don’t know what it has to do with DJ’s line.

That line creates an inconsistency in Rose’s character: earlier she was fighting what she hated (animal cruelty) by freeing the Fathiers at Canto Bight, and yet she stops Finn’s sacrifice and tells him that Saving What We Love™ is more important than Fighting What We Hate™, resulting in the First Order’s giant laser cannon blowing up the metal door.

Uh, wasn’t she explicitly saving what she loved by freeing the fathiers?

yotsuya said:

She makes plenty of mistakes. They are there in each of the movies. She does not perform perfectly any more than Luke did. That is the role of the hero. They have to succeed more often than they fail. Rey fails big when she unleashed the force lightning. She is lucky she was trying to stop the wrong ship.

She’s an underwritten character. I guess maybe she makes mistakes (can’t think of many). But as with her using force-lightning on the ship, her mistakes never seem to have any real consequences. Guess she’s just “lucky” that Finn mixed up the ships.

Okay, I’ll ask again since my post was deleted.

Have you considered removing the idea that Luke and Leia already knew that Rey was a Palpatine? That was one of the dumber retcons for me and causes some logic issues with the last film.

nowt said:

I agree. It humanizes the character way too much. He should be monstrous and untouchable, not canoodling behind the reactor with some floozy.

His child would have been conceived after he became emperor, so I can only imagine that women are brought to him and made to caress his bloated monster face etc. Then they both have a smoke before his guards pay the woman and kindly escort her out, after which they ask Palps if he wants to keep her number on file.

StarkillerAG said:

I disagree with that article completely. Rey Palpatine wasn’t done for any storytelling reason, it was just done to please people who were pissed that Rey was a nobody in TLJ.

It’s possible that it was initially conceived as a reaction to fan outrage (though I doubt it), but it absolutely serves a storytelling function. Destiny is not determined by lineage or the sins of the father. That’s Rey’s story (such as it is) and maybe the only thematic material we get in the whole movie. It’s not strong, but it’s there.

And I really don’t like Rey taking the Skywalker name without permission, just because some ghosts smiled at her. If Jeff Bezos smiled at me, would that mean I’m a billionaire? Rey’s arc in TROS makes no sense, and it devalues TLJ’s message that anyone can be a hero. It’s one of those moments that was clearly designed to be a dig at TLJ, like “Go away, Rose!” and “A Jedi’s weapon deserves more respect.”

Luke already passed the mantle to her in TLJ. Leia clearly has a maternal relationship with her in this movie, so it’s more than just smiling ghosts. Her choosing the name Skywalker is symbolic, it implies that she will continue the Skywalker legacy and reinforces the only theme in the movie of choosing your own path and not letting lineage define you.

Rey being a Palpatine is probably a regression, but her accepting the Skywalker name I think was inevitable and probably would have happened either way.

I don’t know about love, but I’m so glad they used a new recording of the opening fanfare and not the same tinny one that they used for both TFA and TLJ.

yotsuya said:

Finn was defintely on a suicide mission and he might have damaged the weapon, but not likely. Remember in Independence Day he has weapons to fire. Finn has nothing. He is trying to run into a Locomotive with a Citroen. It isn’t going to do more than scratch it. The angles they show to make it clear how small the speeder is, the parts crumpling from the power, Poe’s earlier comment about how flimsy and decrepit the speeders are (when he puts his foot through the side). It is all story telling to indicate that Finn’s run is hopeless so we are relieved when Rose stops him.

“Never underestimate a Citroen”

I still disagree that the movie is clearly telling us that his suicide run would not disable the cannon. For me it’s not made abundantly clear either way and maybe that’s intentional. As you said about Poe’s decision at the beginning of the film, whether or not Finn damages the cannon is immaterial to the point that the movie is trying to make, so it seems entirely appropriate for it to be kind of ambiguous.

StarkillerAG said:

pleasehello said:

Almost everything you mentioned has a 1:1 counterpart in the sequel trilogy.

Which shouldn’t be taken as a compliment towards the sequels.
Copying a much better story does not make your story good.

Yeah, it’s not a compliment. I’m saying they’re comparable in this one specific regard. Wexter seems to think they aren’t

Wexter said:

pleasehello said:

Wexter said:

The weird thing about the new trilogy is that the state of the larger galaxy is just absolutely incomprehensible. While the prequels clearly show the might and fall of the Old Republic, the OT depicts the Rebel Alliance defeating Palpatine’s Empire. The obvious next step would probably be showing the struggles of the New Republic or something along those lines.

Instead we got what seems to be two fringe groups of fanatics and has-beens fighting it out in the Outer Rim while the larger galaxy doesn’t really care about any of that until like the last ten minutes of the story.

You kind of just described the OT. We never really see the effect of the Empire on the galaxy at large. Only how it relates to the rebellion and our main characters. The only reason we know of the Empire’s reach is because it’s called “the Empire”.

This is simply not true. We see the Empire terrorize the citizens of Tatooine and Bespin, having spies and mercenaries everywhere, shattering the residues of the old Republic with the dissolution of Senate and destruction of Alderaan, which itself is supposed to be a clear message towards potentially dissenting systems.

Sure, the First Order somehow built the SKB, but that was supposedly a one-off device with no clear follow-up and nobody really reacts to the obliteration of several systems. My point still stands.

Almost everything you mentioned has a 1:1 counterpart in the sequel trilogy.

Like I said, it doesn’t make the ST galaxy any more comprehensible, but the two are completely comparable.

StarkillerAG said:

pleasehello said:

Wexter said:

The weird thing about the new trilogy is that the state of the larger galaxy is just absolutely incomprehensible. While the prequels clearly show the might and fall of the Old Republic, the OT depicts the Rebel Alliance defeating Palpatine’s Empire. The obvious next step would probably be showing the struggles of the New Republic or something along those lines.

Instead we got what seems to be two fringe groups of fanatics and has-beens fighting it out in the Outer Rim while the larger galaxy doesn’t really care about any of that until like the last ten minutes of the story.

You kind of just described the OT. We never really see the effect of the Empire on the galaxy at large. Only how it relates to the rebellion and our main characters. The only reason we know of the Empire’s reach is because it’s called “the Empire”. I agree it’s less clear what the scope of the First Order’s power is, but only because their name is more ambiguous.

The OT doesn’t need as much explanation though, because the story is relatively simple. An evil empire rules the entire galaxy, and a brave group of rebels has to stop them. With the sequels, you need more backstory to explain where this mysterious First Order came from, how much influence it has, and why the Resistance is a separate group from the Republic, none of which is explained by the movies. You need to read the EU to find out the basic plot of the sequels, which isn’t a good approach to storytelling.

Right. It’s obvious that Abrams was trying to do something simpler, eschewing the politics of the prequels. In his mind, I bet the story made as much sense as the OT. But the ST is a continuing story, the First Order is not the Empire and at least a bit more (not much) explanation was definitely warranted.

I know this has been said ad nauseum, but I’ll take the confusing galactic status of the ST over the political minutia of the prequels any day of the week. It’s still too bad a middle road wasn’t taken.

Wexter said:

The weird thing about the new trilogy is that the state of the larger galaxy is just absolutely incomprehensible. While the prequels clearly show the might and fall of the Old Republic, the OT depicts the Rebel Alliance defeating Palpatine’s Empire. The obvious next step would probably be showing the struggles of the New Republic or something along those lines.

Instead we got what seems to be two fringe groups of fanatics and has-beens fighting it out in the Outer Rim while the larger galaxy doesn’t really care about any of that until like the last ten minutes of the story.

You kind of just described the OT. We never really see the effect of the Empire on the galaxy at large. Only how it relates to the rebellion and our main characters. The only reason we know of the Empire’s reach is because it’s called “the Empire”. I agree it’s less clear what the scope of the First Order’s power is, but only because their name is more ambiguous.

It may be a joke, but it’s still an apt comparison.

yotsuya said:

They are junk speeders and falling apart. The weapon is about to blast a whole in the very thick door and Finn is trying to fly down the barrel. His ship starts disintegrating around him and his weapons are destroyed. It took no brain power for me to understand Finn was going to kill himself and do no damage the first time I saw it. Nothing needs to be added or explained. None of it is fan theory. The movie properly shows us what we need instead of giving us a boring speech to lay it out. Show don’t tell is basic writing 101.

I disagree. It’s not made clear at all that his sacrifice would have had no effect. But I don’t think it matters. Either way, Rose’s point remains the same.

Valheru_84 said:

You’re not meant to stop and think and try to make sense of it all Hal 😉

You jest, but it’s true. That’s the way Star Wars has always been. It’s emotional, not logical. None of it makes any sense logically and if you think about the viability of certain plot elements in those terms, it falls apart. So no, you’re not meant to make sense of it all.

I don’t think that’s even close to being this film’s biggest problem.