# Star Wars Spoilers Thread [Spoilers]



## Morrus

There are no spoilers in this first post, but there are many in the comments within.  This thread is the _Star Wars_ spoiler thread (we did this for the _Lord of the Rings_ and _Hobbit_ movies, too). If you've seen the movie and want to discuss it, here's the place. For the time being, this is the only place to put Star Wars spoilers on the site. No need for spoiler tags. They don't work on touchscreen devices anyway, making the the thread either entirely visible or completely inaccessible. So, if you're reading this and you haven't seen it yet, spoilers may exist from any post after this one. You should leave the thread and come back when you've seen it!


----------



## delericho

Yep, I'd agree with pretty much all of that.

It definitely felt like "Star Wars Greatest Hits" at times - we have another droid with a message to be delivered, another planet-destroying superweapon, another trench, X-wings, TIE fighters, lightsabers...

But it was enjoyable and well done, and definitely served to set up VIII and IX.

I was a bit disappointed with Captain Phasma, though, who really didn't seem to do much. I guess she gets added to the list of characters who just don't live up to their hype (along with Boba Fett, Darth Maul, and Aurra Sing).

Oh yes, and I feel kinda sorry for Hayden Christensen - BB8 manages to evoke more emotional response in his first five minutes than he did in two whole films.


----------



## horacethegrey

Just watched it. Here be my thoughts.

Things I liked:

- Characters feel human. If there was one thing the Original Trilogy did right that the Prequels got spectacularly wrong, it was having a strong cast play off each other and make their roles feel alive. Rey, Finn, and even Kylo Ren all give spirited performances and even have real chemistry with some of the old cast. And speaking of the old cast..

- Damn. I have to give mad props to Harrison Ford. He probably gives his best performance here in years. He plays off well with the younger actors and really looks like he's into it. I suspect though that his performance was influenced by the fact that...

- Han bites it. Like HOLY S#!T! I didn't think Abrams would have the balls to kill off one of the main characters. I mean, I can't say I'm surprised since the movie was hinting at it halfway through. And I knew the moment the he faced off with Kylo Ren on the bridge that that would be his finale. But still, I held out hope that they'd spare Han, but all for naught. It doesn't surprise me though, as Lawrence Kasdan was one of the screenwriters, and he always wanted to kill one of the mains in the original trilogy but Lucas wouldn't allow it. Though I imagine the hardline Star Wars fanboys are screaming for Abrams and Kasdan's blood. Poor Chewie. 

- Surprisingly, the character I thought was most intriguing was Kylo Ren. Aside from the fact we find out he's Han and Leia's kid Ben, we see from the movie that despite his power and training as a Sith Lord he harbors a deep set inferiority complex in being compared and living up to his grandfather (Vader). We can see it in his numerous temper tantrums when things don't go his way, which remind me more of a spoiled child acting out rather than a Sith Lord coldly dispensing with weaker subordinates (as Vader was wont to). And he's clearly struggling in committing himself to the Dark Side, as we see in one of his moments alone and the scene with Han at the bridge. Though with the morally reprehensible act of killing his father in cold blood, it's safe to say he's fully committed now and will be the big bad for the rest of the series.

- It doesn't look too fake. I think it's great that Abrams and company committed themselves to making the film look realistic by using practical effects in conjuction with CGI. I mean, you can tell which parts are clearly CGI, but at least it doesn't have the plastic looking visuals of the Prequels which were often distracting. 

- Action was decently shot and paced. At least it didn't become a confusing mess like the action Abram's Star Trek films.

- Rey and Kylo Ren's duel. After the wuxia jedi fights in the Prequels, it was nice to see a lightsaber duel that echoed the original trilogy's weighted and desperate melees. Ren and Rey look they're heaving around weighted broadswords rather than elegant weapons from a more civilized age. And Rey's victory took me by surprise. Given that she has no training I thought the duel would end with Ren kicking her ass or perhaps a draw. But the fact that Rey was able to triumph is an indicator of how powerful she is. Who knows how strong she can become in future installments when Luke trains her. And speaking of Luke..

- Damn does Mark Hamill look impressive as an elderly Jedi Master. Farmboy no more, Luke looks like he's seen s#!t and become stronger and wiser for it. 

Course the fact that he only appears at the end leads me to Stuff I Disliked:

- Luke's absence. I mean WTF? Why is the last remaining Jedi AWOL during the New Republic's darkest hour? I mean it's what sets off the plot of the film, but Luke is the last person you'd expect to leave his friends and family in dire straights and go hopping around the galaxy. There'd better be a good reason for why he's rarely been seen in upcoming sequels.

- A New Hope Redux. Stop me if you've heard this before, a scavenger on a desert planet finds a lost droid with vital information and escapes with a newfound friend on a piece of junk aided by a smuggler and his furry friend but are pursued by masked man in black who resides in a planet shaped weapon that can vaporize other planets but it all ends when ragtag group of rebels destroy the big weapon in a planet wide kaboom. I mean come on! Did they really need to rehash the first film's plot? I mean don't get me wrong it's been done well but could they have gone for a different way to tell the story? I agree with delericho's assertion, this felt like Star Wars Greatest Hits.

- Imperial Security Fail. Well, nice to know that the First Order is keeping the Imperial tradition of lax security measures alive and well. X-Wing squardron attacking base? No problem! Four Resistance fighters infiltrating said base? Well, now we have a problem. Not mentioning the fact that 40 years later we still haven't installed safety rails around the dangerously high areas, imperial bases seemed destined to be staffed by troopers who can't perform basic security and officers who will turn off your defense shields off when threatened. Speaking of which.

- Gwendoline Christie as Captain Phasma. They got Brienne of F$#%ing Tarth to play a badass Imperial officer, and despite her initial intimidating presence in the film's beginning, she get's relegated to being held hostage by Han and company and dumped in the garbage. What a waste of an actor. Well, not the first time it's happened in Star Wars, but still... :

So there be my assessment of the film. It's very good, despite some flaws. But it's Star Wars through and through and way better than any of the prequels. And that's good enough for me.


----------



## Morrus

You can see the Marvel/Disney influences -- some of it was very Guardians of the Galaxy in terms of tone. Lots and lots and lots of quips. I expect each movie in the trilogy will have its own tone, since they'll have different writers and directors

Was it my imagination, or did all the stormtroopers in that rally do a Nazi salute? Obviously the analogy has always been there, but that must be the most blatantly explicit example.


----------



## Hypersmurf

Morrus said:


> Was it my imagination, or did all the stormtroopers in that rally do a Nazi salute? Obviously the analogy has always been there, but that must be the most blatantly explicit example.




Well, Captain Phasma was there.  If any stormtroopers hadn't followed along, she might have sternly instructed them to report to her division.

-Hyp.


----------



## Morrus

I have a question about the scene on the bridge with Kylo Ren and han.

So, Kylo gives the little speech to Han about how he has all this pain inside him and will Han help him, and Han says "yes, anything". 

So I was kinda with the scene up until that moment. Kylo seemed to be struggling with the dark/light side, Han was trying to appeal to his better instincts, all that stuff. 

And then Han and Kylo hang on to Kylo's lightsaber and gaze into each others' eyes for a bit before the big event happens. I don't quite understand what happened in that scene. What was the subtext?


----------



## horacethegrey

I took it as Ren finally making his choice and literally cutting off all ties to his old life by killing Han. The long pause was probably him hesitating (this is his father after all) and finally giving in, and in that split second Han knew he'd failed and accepted his fate.


----------



## Eltab

horacethegrey said:


> - Action was decently shot and paced. At least it didn't become a confusing mess like the action Abram's Star Trek films.
> 
> - Damn does Mark Hamill look impressive as an elderly Jedi Master. Farmboy no more, Luke looks like he's seen s#!t and become stronger and wiser for it.



I'm still looking for the right combination of light to watch Star Trek 0.0 and figure out what is happening during the battles against that Romulan mining freighter.  Watching in a dark theater was un-enlightening (pardon the pun) and watching it at home with the lights on just makes reflection spots on my TV screen.

I thought the idea might be that Luke needs to find some of Yoda's old stuff, now that a Sith Lord is rising.  Unlike the old Jedi Council, he's not just going to sit around, meditate on the Force, and complain that his view is clouded ... but he needs to _prepare_ himself.  (I hope he spends some time training Leia too. - Maybe in Movie VIII, TESB's Greatest Hits?)
Nasty thought: Luke is in fact creating a Sith trap: prove you are good enough, by tracking me down.  He wasn't expecting to draw in his own nephew.
I predict that at the climax of Movie IX, Luke and Ren will be lightsaber-dueling; Ren will threaten to attack Leia, and Luke will go berserk.  Because RotJ's Greatest Hits.


----------



## Morrus

New question! How does Starkiller Base work?

It's a planet. It drains it's sun (which would kill a star system in itself). It then fired the sun's energy at another star system, destroying all the planets in it.

So now it's floating in space without a sun itself. Is it able to move to another star system to drain a new sun? And if so, does it really need to shoot planets if it can drain stars?


----------



## ccs

Hmm.  I guess my overall rating for this Episode would be: Entertaining.  
About a C+.  (It loses major points for being Episode IV, Redux.)
Seriously, if I hadn't seen the original?  This would've been pretty good.  Alas....

The good:
* Practical effects
* I liked Rey, Finn, & Po.  And BB8 to an extent.
* Harrison Ford.

The bad:
* I've been watching Episode 4 & versions of it for almost 40 years already.
* Kyle Ren - Well, for the moment he's better than Anikin.  But he's still in the catagory of Who-Cares, Kill him off & bring in an interesting villain.
* Third act is completely pointless.  The good guys know where the target is.  Know how to bypass the shields.  And instead of hitting the capacitor with entire droid crewed ships popping out of warp just above it (just crash into it at near LS)?  Opt to send in just 3 people with charges, followed by an x-wing strike - that is 100% reliant upon that shield coming down & virtually gauanteed to cost apparently scarce resources (pilots/ships).  And this plan is devised/aurhorized by the vets who've done this all before. ???
At the very least send in more ground commandos aboard the Falcon!  (They did it in Jedi!)
* Alot of time could be saved if they'd just rebooted R2....
* A scattered map leading to Luke?  Why?? Well, I guess that could be the thread for episodes 8 & 9.  Go here, go there, encounter bad guys, etc.  But they wrap that up right before the credits roll with a simple jump to lightspeed.
* The good guys are the "resistance" & seem to have limited resources.  WHY?  As in why isn't the Republic itself fighting against the 1st order?  
Yes, I realize some of that would make for a dull movie.


----------



## delericho

horacethegrey said:


> - Luke's absence. I mean WTF? Why is the last remaining Jedi AWOL during the New Republic's darkest hour? I mean it's what sets off the plot of the film, but Luke is the last person you'd expect to leave his friends and family in dire straights and go hopping around the galaxy. There'd better be a good reason for why he's rarely been seen in upcoming sequels.




Ah, well, Han and Leia went through this, though they didn't realise they were talking about Luke too - when the kid went bad, they each went back to the thing that they're best at. Han went back to smuggling, Leia went back to running a revolt against tyrants.

As for Luke, he's a Jedi. And when a Jedi's student goes bad, they proceed to go into a self-imposed exile until such time as the next generation of chosen one comes of age. At which point, R2-D2 will lead the kid to the master to be half-trained in the Jedi arts.


----------



## Morrus

Interesting casting notes -- movie stars who just wanted to be in a Star Wards film, I guess1

Apparently the stormtrooper who threatened to tighten Rey's restraints before she mind-tricked him was Daniel Craig.

One of the aliens on Jakku who Rey deals with - the one handing out the food rations - was Simon Pegg.


----------



## horacethegrey

delericho said:


> Ah, well, Han and Leia went through this, though they didn't realise they were talking about Luke too - when the kid went bad, they each went back to the thing that they're best at. Han went back to smuggling, Leia went back to running a revolt against tyrants.
> 
> As for Luke, he's a Jedi. And when a Jedi's student goes bad, they proceed to go into a self-imposed exile until such time as the next generation of chosen one comes of age. At which point, R2-D2 will lead the kid to the master to be half-trained in the Jedi arts.




Yeah. I suddenly realized that Luke would feel doubly bad about the situation with Kylo Ren, seeing as he was the one who trained him. And Ren did kill the rest of Luke's apprentices so I imagine that failure weighs heavily upon his shoulders. I'm guessing in Episode VIII he'll be in the same position as Yoda was in _The Empire Strikes Back_ and be a reluctant mentor to Rey.



Morrus said:


> Interesting casting notes -- movie stars who just wanted to be in a Star Wards film, I guess1
> 
> Apparently the stormtrooper who threatened to tighten Rey's restraints before she mind-tricked him was Daniel Craig.
> 
> One of the aliens on Jakku who Rey deals with - the one handing out the food rations - was Simon Pegg.




I knew about Pegg as I saw him in the Comic-Con footage, but Craig was a complete surprise for me. Heh. Not many people know he's a geek.


----------



## Orlax

This movie was frickin awesome.  I love what was done with it, and how's it was done.  The imagery, and symbolism, and thematic ties to previous films in the series were just excellent.  There's a whole bunch to dissect in this movie, but some of those discussions might get a little heated so for now I'm just going to enjoy a day of the afterglow, and get back into some detailed dissection later this weekend (possibly after I see it again there's some details I need to get a second time because I missed then the first time).


----------



## billd91

Morrus said:


> I have a question about the scene on the bridge with Kylo Ren and han.
> 
> So, Kylo gives the little speech to Han about how he has all this pain inside him and will Han help him, and Han says "yes, anything".
> 
> So I was kinda with the scene up until that moment. Kylo seemed to be struggling with the dark/light side, Han was trying to appeal to his better instincts, all that stuff.
> 
> And then Han and Kylo hang on to Kylo's lightsaber and gaze into each others' eyes for a bit before the big event happens. I don't quite understand what happened in that scene. What was the subtext?




I don't know about subtext between Han and Kylo, but that's when the starkiller finished draining the sun's energy and the light faded from the sky. So I think it's more of a mood setting device for the filmmaking process - this is where the dark side rises in ascendancy after a period of teetering on the balance point to build suspense - both in the starkiller readying to fire and in Kylo resisting the lighter side still within him.


----------



## Curmudjinn

horacethegrey said:


> And Ren did kill the rest of Luke's apprentices so I imagine that failure weighs heavily upon his shoulders.




They said Ren destroyed it all, but I took that as him destroying the new Jedi academy itself. I believe the Knights of Ren might be the other students that Ren was able to turn from Luke's tutelage.


----------



## Curmudjinn

Also, was that Coruscant that was destroyed? It left it kind of ambiguous. I want to know a lot more about the New Republic, it's fleets(and their lack of combating the First Order.), and if the Republic is back to using clones.

Hux mentioned hand-picked recruits being better than clones, leading me to believe some other military is using them.

The comedy was great. I thought Poe's comedic parts were excellent and if he plays a prominent role in the next two installments, he could fill the hole left by Han.


----------



## Morrus

Curmudjinn said:


> They said Ren destroyed it all, but I took that as him destroying the new Jedi academy itself. I believe the Knights of Ren might be the other students that Ren was able to turn from Luke's tutelage.




Ren's a title (like Darth); his name changed from Ben Solo to Kylo Ren when he joined the Knights of Ren. At least that's what I took from it.


----------



## Morrus

Curmudjinn said:


> Also, was that Coruscant that was destroyed?




It was 5 planets, all of which were visible from whatever planet it was Han was on. So in the same system, presumably. That's about all it said, though, and no mention was made of it again!


----------



## Eridanis

tl;dr: Good movie, stands proudly with the original trilogy.

I have a lot of the reactions others have. This is an interesting hybrid of a reboot and a new story. Didn't bother me, though, as a lot of the tiresome tropes were thankfully missing (hallelujah for the lack of severed limbs).

Saw Han's death coming a mile off, but it was done well. It's what a father would do, and he died trying to save his son; no regrets. There was real struggle in Ren's face. I don't think that act is irredeemable; Anakin killed dozens of Jedi, including children, and was redeemed 20 years later. But now that Rey has done with him for now, he has reason to be wearing that mask after the scar she gave him!

BB-8 was a lot better than I thought he'd be. In fact, I'm on board with Finn and Rey and Po and the other new characters we met; well written, well acted/CGI'd, and people I want to spend more time with. That I did NOT expect.

When I saw Squidward (or whatever his name was) on the screen, my first thought was "Gollum is a Sith Lord!" And then I watched the credits and saw I wasn't wrong. I guess the Ring wasn't destroyed after all.

Overall, this is the movie Disney wanted and needed. They needed a fresh start to set the next decade-plus of yearly movie releases on a solid storytelling and fanbase-supported footing, and I think they did it. JJ Abrams was born to direct this movie, and I think he can call it quits now. I just wish he hadn't tried to work out these Star Wars urges on Star Trek last decade; very similar energy in both films.

I had very low expectations going in to the movie, but now I'm ready to see what else is in store. In other words, spend money. That's also something I didn't expect.


----------



## Morrus

Eridanis said:


> Anakin killed dozens of Jedi, including children, and was redeemed 20 years later.




Was he, really, though? I don't think there is any action you can take which redeems something like that. Chucking an old man who was lightning blasting your son down a hole certainly doesn't redeem him! And he did plenty of other evil things, too. I don't think Anakin gets to have redemption.

Well, I'm wrong, because clearly he does - he appeared next to Yoda and Kenobi as a happy force ghost. But I think that's a terrible misstep.


----------



## Falkus

Morrus said:


> It was 5 planets, all of which were visible from whatever planet it was Han was on. So in the same system, presumably. That's about all it said, though, and no mention was made of it again!




From what I gathered of the supplementary material; it was the Hosnian system, which was serving as the current capitol of the Republic, which was moved from Coruscant. The Capitol is changed on a semi-regular basis.


----------



## Curmudjinn

Falkus said:


> From what I gathered of the supplementary material; it was the Hosnian system, which was serving as the current capitol of the Republic, which was moved from Coruscant. The Capitol is changed on a semi-regular basis.




I googled it for the hell of it and got a bunch of canon info. I read that Chandrilla was the current capitol of the New Republic, while the Hosnian system to the Republic was like Hawai'i to the U.S. during WW2.

I'm going to read some more into it.

I wanted to add: Kylo punching his own wound to keep his anger strong was a great extra. Little things like that can make a scene. Adam Driver was great. I now wish he played Anakin in 2 and 3.


----------



## Falkus

Ahh, my mistake then. I probably conflated the two while I was reading up on it.


----------



## Curmudjinn

Falkus said:


> Ahh, my mistake then. I probably conflated the two while I was reading up on it.




You could still be right. I read it on the internet, so you know it's true..


----------



## Orlax

Morrus said:


> Was he, really, though? I don't think there is any action you can take which redeems something like that. Chucking an old man who was lightning blasting your son down a hole certainly doesn't redeem him! And he did plenty of other evil things, too. I don't think Anakin gets to have redemption.
> 
> Well, I'm wrong, because clearly he does - he appeared next to Yoda and Kenobi as a happy force ghost. But I think that's a terrible misstep.




Similar feelings here.  Going to the dark side properly involves doing things there are no redemptions for like for instance when they genocided 5 planets.  It's why vader's "redemption" came alongside immediate death.  He did the one possible thing he could do to even remotely start making up for all the evil he'd done (by attempting to save the galaxy and his son from the emperor), and suffered a death penalty alongside his only possible redeeming act. 

 The force ghost at the end, when the original had it happen was fine because Vader was only amorphously evil and had, by his hand and command, killed very few people in fact.  However after the prequel trilogy when Vader stopped being amorphously evil and became so definitively evil they should have taken that out.


----------



## Klaus

A short article explaining what is known (and what is theorized) about the current state of the Star Wars Galaxy, collected from available canon: http://www.bleedingcool.com/2015/12...he-resistance-in-star-wars-the-force-awakens/


----------



## Orlax

Curmudjinn said:


> I googled it for the hell of it and got a bunch of canon info. I read that Chandrilla was the current capitol of the New Republic, while the Hosnian system to the Republic was like Hawai'i to the U.S. during WW2.
> 
> I'm going to read some more into it.
> 
> I wanted to add: Kylo punching his own wound to keep his anger strong was a great extra. Little things like that can make a scene. Adam Driver was great. I now wish he played Anakin in 2 and 3.




I frickin loved the punching his own wound bit as well.  It's also an old tactic, punch an injury to make it hurt more so that the normal plain it is inflicting seems less terrible.


----------



## Eridanis

Morrus said:


> Was he, really, though? I don't think there is any action you can take which redeems something like that.




From my personal moral standpoint, I agree 150%. But if Anakin is a glowy knight at the end of RotJ, then I guess screenwriter Lucas and the Force have a different perspective.


----------



## halfling rogue

Oh man. SUCH a great movie. Lived up to the hype.

I've seen reviews saying it was a retread of _New Hope_ (kind of mashed with _Empire_) and calling it lazy writing. I'm calling it brilliant. For a couple reasons: 1) Just from a fan perspective, what was everyone longing nearly the moment he prequels arrived? To generalize it, I think the longing was for something Star-Warsy. The prequels were too clean, slow, somber when compared to the gritty, fast, fun originals. All of the elements that we were clamoring for were there in this movie. 2) Beyond that though, I think it was necessary. This film serves as an extremely important transition from old to new and it needed to be a set up film. This film, like _New Hope_ needs to leave us with lots of questions, and it's hard to do that without a solid foundation. And frankly, I'm glad it echoed New Hope. I was glad for the parallels and I didn't feel like it was a retread at all, more like an echo, almost like a flowering (that's sounds sappy, but it's true).

I like what they did with Kylo Ren. A lot. I like that he is devoted to Vader. His saber tantrums. His struggle between the light and dark. How he confessed that the light was pulling him and how it was 'weakness'. And ultimately with the death of his father...the very thing the Emperor desired for Luke...to strike down his own father. You could tell Kylo was struggling and his choice was extremely ominous. He knew it was what he needed to complete his transition. Han slowly stroking his face as if to say "My boy, I still love you" Oh man, that got me good.

Rey and Finn and Poe were all home runs. I can't wait to see the adventures they go on. Rey is still a mystery. Everything within me says she must be Luke's daughter but if that is the case, they're going to really have to convince me (I almost wanted to think she was Han and Leia's daughter...but that simply would not make sense). If she's Luke's daughter 1) why wouldn't Leia feel it or Han consider it. She was left on Jakku as a young girl, but I'm sure old enough to remember the face of her parents. If it was Luke, why was she left behind to such a bad life? So even though Luke pops first to the mind, I don't think she's Luke's daughter. But all the same, I feel she has some connection to the Skywalkers.

As to someone's hand being lopped off, me and the kids were discussing that on the ride home. I was under the impression that Rey cut Kylo Ren's hand off just before she slashed his face, as they were struggling and forcing his saber into the ground. She cut something...was it the saber or was it his hand? I thought it was his hand, but it wasn't clear. Definitely something I want to rewatch for.

There's about a million other things I love and want to talk about...AHH! STAR WARS!


----------



## halfling rogue

Morrus said:


> Was he, really, though? I don't think there is any action you can take which redeems something like that. Chucking an old man who was lightning blasting your son down a hole certainly doesn't redeem him! And he did plenty of other evil things, too. I don't think Anakin gets to have redemption.
> 
> Well, I'm wrong, because clearly he does - he appeared next to Yoda and Kenobi as a happy force ghost. But I think that's a terrible misstep.




I'm only just now coming to think about things in this way (after Kylo Ren's speech to Han) but I wonder if it's less the redemption of Vader and the triumph of Anakin... That is to say, Anakin (and Ben Solo) are both considered, by themselves and others, to be dead. Once they've crossed to the dark side, they become someone new. Anakin becomes Vader. The light fades and the darkness spreads. So when Luke says he still believes there is some good in his father (or Leia, her son) they are speaking in terms of the force. It is Anakin, not Vader, who destroys the Emperor, and this doesn't redeem his dark actions, but signifies that the darkness has not overcome the light. I'll admit, it isn't quite satisfactory, but maybe it's better to think about it in those terms (light overcoming the darkness) rather than in redemption/atonement (though that can't be fully left out)


----------



## Morrus

halfling rogue said:


> I'm only just now coming to think about things in this way (after Kylo Ren's speech to Han) but I wonder if it's less the redemption of Vader and the triumph of Anakin... That is to say, Anakin (and Ben Solo) are both considered, by themselves and others, to be dead. Once they've crossed to the dark side, they become someone new. Anakin becomes Vader. The light fades and the darkness spreads. So when Luke says he still believes there is some good in his father (or Leia, her son) they are speaking in terms of the force. It is Anakin, not Vader, who destroys the Emperor, and this doesn't redeem his dark actions, but signifies that the darkness has not overcome the light. I'll admit, it isn't quite satisfactory, but maybe it's better to think about it in those terms (light overcoming the darkness) rather than in redemption/atonement (though that can't be fully left out)




I'll try that when I next get a speeding ticket. It wasn't me, it was Darth Morrus!


----------



## halfling rogue

Morrus said:


> I'll try that when I next get a speeding ticket. It wasn't me, it was Darth Morrus!




Make sure to use the force (and try again if it doesn't work the first time)


----------



## billd91

Orlax said:


> Similar feelings here.  Going to the dark side properly involves doing things there are no redemptions for like for instance when they genocided 5 planets.  It's why vader's "redemption" came alongside immediate death.  He did the one possible thing he could do to even remotely start making up for all the evil he'd done (by attempting to save the galaxy and his son from the emperor), and suffered a death penalty alongside his only possible redeeming act.
> 
> The force ghost at the end, when the original had it happen was fine because Vader was only amorphously evil and had, by his hand and command, killed very few people in fact.  However after the prequel trilogy when Vader stopped being amorphously evil and became so definitively evil they should have taken that out.




Oh, I don't think the prequels changed a jot. We already had the impression that Vader was a pretty wicked guy. After all, he did supposedly hunt down and kill the Jedi. 

What we're seeing with Vader's redemption and appearance of his force ghost is Lucas's fairly hamhanded treatment of redemption in general. It's too fast, ultimately too easy, but *it's important* to the story arc,  and to Luke's optimism and heroism. And the movie would suffer with its loss. Keep in mind this is a mythic journey, not the reality of morality and psychology.


----------



## halfling rogue

Does anyone know who the old man at the beginning was? I was still euphoric after the scroll so I might have missed something. 
1) he either knew where Skywalker was and created the information 
2) he was entrusted with the information (and if so...by whom and why give it up...again, I really may have just missed the reason)
3) he apparently knew who Kylo Ren was (tho we didn't at the time...which confused me..heh)
4) he seemed to know some deep things about the Force (could just be my imagination)
5) did he have a Dooku vibe to anyone else?


----------



## Morrus

halfling rogue said:


> 5) did he have a Dooku vibe to anyone else?




Max Von Sydow. Certainly one of Christopher Lee's contemporaries. He was Ming the Merciless and Blofeld. You've probably seen him in loads of things.

His character name in this film is Lor San Tekka.


----------



## billd91

halfling rogue said:


> Does anyone know who the old man at the beginning was? I was still euphoric after the scroll so I might have missed something.
> 1) he either knew where Skywalker was and created the information
> 2) he was entrusted with the information (and if so...by whom and why give it up...again, I really may have just missed the reason)
> 3) he apparently knew who Kylo Ren was (tho we didn't at the time...which confused me..heh)
> 4) he seemed to know some deep things about the Force (could just be my imagination)
> 5) did he have a Dooku vibe to anyone else?




He's one of the questions raised by the movie. Unfortunately, I don't know that they'll answer this particular one, though I hope they'll answer why the Skywalker lightsaber called to Rey, who her parents are, and why she was left on Jakku.


----------



## halfling rogue

billd91 said:


> He's one of the questions raised by the movie. Unfortunately, I don't know that they'll answer this particular one, though I hope they'll answer why the Skywalker lightsaber called to Rey, who her parents are, and why she was left on Jakku.




Same here, but the more burning question for me regarding the lightsaber is how (can't recall her name) the goggle/glasses alien came into possession of it. Han wanted to know the same thing. I don't know if her answer was a cop out or if they will address it later.

I was glad most of the questions I personally had were answered more or less in the film, or at least pulled along enough for me to realize they'll be addressed eventually. The only thing that bugged me (which really isn't a big deal) was the fact that Rey understood BB8. I always thought when R2 beeped and people understood him, it was because C3P0 was there, or there was some screen to interpret. But Rey had none of that, so I guess people can understand droid beeps. I mean, Chewie roars and barks and is understood so I guess it shouldn't be too big of a stretch!


----------



## Morrus

Everyone in Star Wars understands droid beeps. It's just one of the things about that universe.


----------



## Curmudjinn

billd91 said:


> He's one of the questions raised by the movie. Unfortunately, I don't know that they'll answer this particular one, though I hope they'll answer why the Skywalker lightsaber called to Rey, who her parents are, and why she was left on Jakku.




I took the force visions not so much as "meant for Rey", but as that saber was used by the most powerful Jedi of their eras in great and terrible actions, leaving behind something of a force echo. And her latent abilities kickstarted when she contacted the overwhelming force echo.

I also can't wait to see who Rey's parents are, who whom Tekka truly was. And the triumphant return of Captain Phasma whom is supposed to play a larger role in VIII, or so I read.


----------



## Curmudjinn

I was so happy to see the lightsaber fights return to their roots in REAL swordplay, and not crouching tiger overdone choreography where they attack each others weapons for an hour. It was desperation, anger, fear, and swinging right at their enemy in short, true to form bursts trying to land a blow before tiring out.

I may get a few gasps, but this bumped RotJ from my top 3. And it's not too far from tying ANH, but ESB is far ahead.


----------



## halfling rogue

Curmudjinn said:


> And the triumphant return of Captain Phasma whom is supposed to play a larger role in VIII, or so I read.




Because of the marketing I was a little surprised at the lack of Phasma as well...but the 'trash chute' line was great


----------



## Morrus

halfling rogue said:


> Because of the marketing I was a little surprised at the lack of Phasma as well...but the 'trash chute' line was great




Was it?


----------



## halfling rogue

Morrus said:


> Was it?




you didn't like it?


----------



## Morrus

halfling rogue said:


> you didn't like it?




Every callback isn't comedy genius. I watch Marvel stuff for the 90 quips a minute, and that's fine. Star Wars can pull back a little on them, I feel. My favourite Star Wars film was Empire, which was pretty quip-light. 

That particular quip? Meh. Next they'll be winking at the camera.


----------



## halfling rogue

Morrus said:


> Every callback isn't comedy genius. I watch Marvel stuff for the 90 quips a minute, and that's fine. Star Wars can pull back a little on them, I feel. My favourite Star Wars film was Empire, which was pretty quip-light.
> 
> That particular quip? Meh. Next they'll be winking at the camera.




I hear you, but I actually thought that line fit right in with Han's character. It was a win win quip in my book. I can see how it causes some to eyeroll though.


----------



## billd91

Morrus said:


> My favourite Star Wars film was Empire, which was pretty quip-light.




Quip light? Empire? I just watched it and it probably has the most verbal humor of the whole series.
Edit: Though Force Awakens may challenge it on that score.


----------



## Morrus

billd91 said:


> Quip light? Empire? I just watched it and it probably has the most verbal humor of the whole series.




It has black humour. It doesn't have quips. Well, not many.


----------



## Kramodlog

I'm not impressed. Not bad like the prequels, but nothing original or captivating. The movie is just fast paced and that help us from thinking too much about plot holes, stereotypical dialogues and just copie/past from the first films. There were no risks taken by the director, no real surprises*. Abrams gave fans what they wanted, not what they didn't know what they wanted, to paraphrase a critic. 


*Tell me Rey isn't Rey Skywalker.


----------



## Morrus

goldomark said:


> I'm not impressed.




Shocker.


----------



## Kramodlog

Morrus said:


> Shocker.




Having standards can be shocking to some. But please, continue to ignore my arguments and make this about me.


----------



## Morrus

goldomark said:


> Having standards can be shocking to some. But please, continue to ignore my arguments and make this about me.




Edit -- on reflection, I came on a little strong there. Edited out the mod comment. I've dropped you a brief note.


----------



## Istbor

I was always in the belief that you either had to learn the droid beeps or be lucky enough to be a Jedi and pretty much understand everything through the force.  That is what I thought was the first tip to Rey being a force adept. She understood both the droid and the Chewy.  

I thought the movies were fine.  While I do see the parallels with the previous movies, I thought that was done to simply draw us all in to the new additions to the saga, the following two may be completely unique now that we are 'hooked'.


----------



## Morrus

Istbor said:


> I was always in the belief that you either had to learn the droid beeps or be lucky enough to be a Jedi and pretty much understand everything through the force.




I don't think so. I mean, sure you learn them, but everybody does. I can't think of anyone who was unable to understand droid beeps. I figure everyone grows up learning it.


----------



## Hypersmurf

Morrus said:


> I can't think of anyone who was unable to understand droid beeps.




I'm trying to think of anyone in the original trilogy who _can_.  In ESB, Luke reads the translation off his X-Wing screen; everywhere else, it's usually Threepio translating with "Sir, Artoo says..."

Example:
Luke Skywalker: What is it?
C-3P0: I'm afraid I'm not quite sure, sir. He says "I found her", and keeps repeating, "She's here."
Luke Skywalker: Well... who? Who has he found?
C-3P0: Princess Leia.
Luke Skywalker: The princess? She's here?
Han Solo: Princess?
Luke Skywalker: Where? Where is she?
Han Solo: Princess? What's going on?
C-3P0: Level 5, Detention block AA23. I'm afraid she's scheduled to be terminated.

If everyone understood Binary, they wouldn't need to go via Threepio for that conversation...

-Hyp.


----------



## Morrus

Hypersmurf said:


> I'm trying to think of anyone in the original trilogy who _can_.




I don't know about the original trilogy, but certainly Anakin could in TPM. And I'm pretty sure I recall Luke talking to R2 on Dagobah.

But I think you're right.  After a bit of investigation, I found this, which seems to answer the question pretty definitively.

[video=youtube;C-hFh35U3go]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-hFh35U3go[/video]


----------



## Klaus

Binary (droid bleeps) are an actual language in the Star Wars universe.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Morrus said:


> Ren's a title (like Darth); his name changed from Ben Solo to Kylo Ren when he joined the Knights of Ren. At least that's what I took from it.




And he is the master of the Knights of Ren. So, it's likely he turned many of Luke's other students, and killed or scattered the rest.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Orlax said:


> Similar feelings here.  Going to the dark side properly involves doing things there are no redemptions for like for instance when they genocided 5 planets.  It's why vader's "redemption" came alongside immediate death.  He did the one possible thing he could do to even remotely start making up for all the evil he'd done (by attempting to save the galaxy and his son from the emperor), and suffered a death penalty alongside his only possible redeeming act.
> 
> The force ghost at the end, when the original had it happen was fine because Vader was only amorphously evil and had, by his hand and command, killed very few people in fact.  However after the prequel trilogy when Vader stopped being amorphously evil and became so definitively evil they should have taken that out.




I disagree. Part of the point of that whole thing is that Anakin's actions as Vader set up the idea that the Dark Side kills the person who succumbs to it, and turns them into a people shaped monster, in both a moral and metaphysical sense. 
Another important aspect of the Vader arc is that some crimes cannot be redeemed in life, but by bringing balance to the force, killing the only two Sith (himself and Sidius) and crippling the Empire he has sacrificed himself to give the galaxy a chance, a hope, of fixing the evil caused by the Empire. 
If Lucas was willing to just call the story done, instead of seeking more cash, it would have been a perfect end. The Empire has lost, the Galaxy is saved from supernatural evil, the Force is healed, and he doesn't make any vain attempt to weasel out of his just punishment. 
And for that sacrifice, he is redeemed in death, and becomes one with the Force, which he couldn't have done had he not found some measure of peace, and freed himself from the Dark Side. WHich is why I view putting young Anakin next to Ben and Yoda as pretty much the only correct addition/change to come out of that version of the films. 

The Force isn't bound to a Judeo Christian morality of divine punishment for sins, and it certainly doesn't seem to function on a system where once tainted, you are just screwed forever. In the ethos of The Force, it seems, redemption isn't really about paying for your crimes, but more about finding absolution, and becoming a force for good, life, etc rather than corruption and death.


----------



## Hypersmurf

doctorbadwolf said:


> In the ethos of The Force, it seems, redemption isn't really about paying for your crimes, but more about finding absolution, and becoming a force for good, life, etc rather than corruption and death.




Only the Sith deal in absolution!

-Hyp.


----------



## Morrus

Hypersmurf said:


> Only the Sith deal in absolution!




Absolutes. Absolution is something else.

And that phrase is ironic in a way that Alanis Morrisette never was!


----------



## Umbran

Morrus said:


> Question: WHY was there a map to Luke, and why was it split into two? I feel like I missed something.




So that if someone really needed him, it could be put together, but the casually curious wouldn't have the drive to find both bits?



> For that matter, why a map and not just some coordinates?




This one we can answer - because hyperdrives don't go to coordinates.  They follow paths - hyperspace lanes.  It isn't enough to know where someone is, if you don't know the hyperspace lanes required to get there.  Luke was reportedly going to find the first Jedi Temple, which would be on some out of the way world nobody's visiting any more, and the lanes might no longer be on the usual charts.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Absolution aside, I absolutely loved the movie. 

It was great. 

It came full circle in a way that cyclical sagas are supposed to do, and the prequels totally failed at, the characters were spot on, the dialogue was on the quippy side of natural, which beats the pants off the annoying somber stilted dialogue of the prequels, and I think rivals the originals. The effects were gorgeous, everything Lucas kept not quite achieving when he went back and prettied up the originals and more. Only a couple times were the special effects obviously computer generated, and it all just worked. I have some quibbles, but no moreso than with any of the originals, or any of my favorite movies in general. 

Honestly, I think that if the next two are on the same level, when kids watch all the movies together with no nostalgia bias someday, the new ones will be viewed as the best of the franchise. It hasn't supplanted Jedi as my favorite, but that is largely due to nostalgia. Critically, I think it is a better movie. 


I love all the unanswered questions, things that were left for us to piece together, etc. Like, you can tell that the Resistance is a separate thing from the Republic, and not officially sanctioned, which I guess matches up with info from the new books, but the movie just establishes that off screen, and then tells a story that takes it into account, so you have to be paying attention to get it, which is a hard thing to do well. 

I feel like these new movies will inspire just as much head cannon speculation, roleplaying characters and adventures, and endless nerd discussions as the originals, and for me, that is the most exciting thing. 

Random point about the map plot: I think the whole idea was that Luke left behind a way to find him, trusting in the Force to guide the right person at the right time. He may even have seen it in a vision. 

quibbles: The Kylo Ren reveal could have waited, IMO. That quibble may well disappear with subsequent movies, though. We will see. 

The old guy in the beginning seemed like a waste of a great actor. Hopefully he comes into play either later somehow, or gets used in offshoot movies down the line that tell us what happened before TFA. 

If Phasma is dead, that's a terrible waste. Hopefully she isn't, and gets the focus she deserves in the next one, or the one after. 

The destruction of an entire star system didn't hit as hard as it should have. 5 minutes worth of establishing an emotional connection to an otherwise inconsequential character on one of the planets would have done the trick. Have some info conveyed to Liea before the attack via a character that is then shown in the attack. 

That's pretty much it.


----------



## Morrus

doctorbadwolf said:


> The Kylo Ren reveal could have waited, IMO. That quibble may well disappear with subsequent movies, though. We will see.




Completely disagree. It could only ever be a weak version of the Empire reveal, with the added disadvantage that everyone suspected it anyway. Just getting it out of the way immediately solved that perfectly. Very well played. 

Trying to make a mystery out of something that would be a weak-assed copy of a mystery would have ruined the film completely. They handled it the best way possible: state it upfront and move on. 



> The old guy in the beginning seemed like a waste of a great actor.




You can catch up with him in Flash Gordon and early Bond flicks. 



> The destruction of an entire star system didn't hit as hard as it should have.




Agreed. That didn't work. A combination of confusing physics/distances and brevity made that kinda feel like an aside. I felt nothing. The super weapon was the film's weakest point, and never had the resonance or threat of the Death Star. It was just a McGuffin, though. It wasn't the point of the film.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

I'm familiar with Sidow's other work. My point was that his part was a waste of Sidow's talents. Hopefully he will be used more in some capacity. 


As for Ben/Ren, I get where you're coming from, but I think it didn't need to be something we expected before walking into the theater, and/or we didn't need so much of his story/journey shown so quickly, surprise or not.it felt like they were impatient to get him to a certain place, and it felt rushed.


----------



## Water Bob

Saw it tonight and LOVED IT. It's the Star Wars movie that I had hoped the prequels would be.  I think it's as good as A New Hope or The Empire Strikes Back, and, in a way, the film is almost a remake or reimagining  of A New Hope.

My favorite thing about the films?  It's something small.  The weapons--the blasters--are portrayed like real weapons.  Not once in the prequels did I think I was seeing real weapons being used.  Those were comic-booky laser guns.  Not in this film.  The blasters--all types, from capital ship weapons to those used on fighters to hand weapons--are devastating weapons that fire plasma bolts with a real punch.

Even the lightsabers in this new film improve on the old.  The lightsabers are deadly, amazing weapons that can do a ton of damage.  They never felt more real than in this film.

Star Wars The Force Awakens is a damn good film.  I can't wait for the next installments, and I want to see this one again.


----------



## tomBitonti

Morrus said:


> Agreed. That didn't work. A combination of confusing physics/distances and brevity made that kinda feel like an aside. I felt nothing. The super weapon was the film's weakest point, and never had the resonance or threat of the Death Star. It was just a McGuffin, though. It wasn't the point of the film.




I mostly liked the movie, but also thought the super weapon was a weak point.  It didn't fit very well in the decent character story happening in the other parts of the movie.  And it looked a bit silly.  And made no sense.  Walls hundreds of miles high holding back magma at pressure ...

Thx!
TomB


----------



## Umbran

Morrus said:


> New question! How does Starkiller Base work?




Inefficiently.  But, that's to be expected.  It's designed by someone on the Dark Side.  While destructive power is important, even more important is the showmanship - for generating fear.  The Dark Side *loves* fear.



> Is it able to move to another star system to drain a new sun? And if so, does it really need to shoot planets if it can drain stars?




Presumably, it can move.  And yes, you want to still shoot from a distance.  Notice that the thing was taken down by a bunch of fighters - not a single capitol ship in sight!  If you bring it in-system to eat the star of your real target, well, it's pretty darned vulnerable.


----------



## Umbran

Eridanis said:


> From my personal moral standpoint, I agree 150%. But if Anakin is a glowy knight at the end of RotJ, then I guess screenwriter Lucas and the Force have a different perspective.




Here's a thought:  The Force is not so much like D&D alignment, judging the moral character of what you've done over your whole life.  The Force is about your internal emotional and psychological state.  For most of his life, Anakin was given over to pain, fear, and anger.  When he decided to save Luke, that wasn't about pain, anger, or fear any more.  It was about love of his child, and compassion.

Also, Palpatine was the root cause of pretty much *all* the pain and suffering throughout the galaxy in the original trilogy, and another war in the prequels.  Giving up on his own power and life to get rid of him is kind of a big deal.


----------



## ExploderWizard

Morrus said:


> Everyone in Star Wars understands droid beeps. It's just one of the things about that universe.






Istbor said:


> I was always in the belief that you either had to learn the droid beeps or be lucky enough to be a Jedi and pretty much understand everything through the force.  That is what I thought was the first tip to Rey being a force adept. She understood both the droid and the Chewy.




Yeah, the binary language might be known to a lot of folks who work or interact with a lot of droids. The fact that Rey understood Chewie right away was a big hint that she had a connection to the force. We don't know a whole lot about her life on Jakku but there wasn't anything there to suggest that she had previous dealings with wookies. 

Minor quibbles and unanswered questions aside, I loved this movie. I want to go see it again before it leaves the theaters. I really liked all the new generation characters and look forward to geeking out over the next films.


----------



## Klaus

ExploderWizard said:


> Yeah, the binary language might be known to a lot of folks who work or interact with a lot of droids. The fact that Rey understood Chewie right away was a big hint that she had a connection to the force. We don't know a whole lot about her life on Jakku but there wasn't anything there to suggest that she had previous dealings with wookies.




She doesn't need to learn it from a wookiee, she could have been taught by someone else, like Max Von Sydow's character (whose voice we hear when we get the flashback of young Rey being left on Jakku).

If she is Luke's daughter, and the Empire (and later the First Order) was actively hunting him, it'd make sense for him to leave her in the care of a trusted ally, with no knowledge of her real heritage, trusting that the Force would bring them together at some point.


----------



## Umbran

goldomark said:


> I'm not impressed. Not bad like the prequels, but nothing original or captivating. The movie is just fast paced and that help us from thinking too much about plot holes, stereotypical dialogues and just copie/past from the first films. There were no risks taken by the director, no real surprises*. Abrams gave fans what they wanted, not what they didn't know what they wanted, to paraphrase a critic.




Yes, well, critics make their money off being *critical*, which is not the same as being correct.

There was a whole lot on the screen that was captivating.  The audience in my theater was captivated - drawn in, wrapped up, and engaged - for most of the film.  I'm sorry if you weren't captivated, but that is often as much about the viewer as the medium, so that's very difficult to dissect or critique.  As for original... new is actually incredibly hard to come by - it is said that there are no new plots, no new characters, that we tell so many stories that you will have to repeat other things.  And whether or not that it literally true, is is a practical hurdle, at least. 

I personally find that new is not a very major selling point, in and of itself.  I think of it this way - we've each had many meals in our lives, many dishes.  You've had lasagna before, you'll have it again.  There's nothing *new* in lasagna.  But, when someone hands you are really good plate of lasagna, that can be an excellent meal.


----------



## Umbran

Eridanis said:


> Didn't bother me, though, as a lot of the tiresome tropes were thankfully missing (hallelujah for the lack of severed limbs).
> 
> Saw Han's death coming a mile off, but it was done well. It's what a father would do, and he died trying to save his son; no regrets. There was real struggle in Ren's face. I don't think that act is irredeemable; Anakin killed dozens of Jedi, including children, and was redeemed 20 years later. But now that Rey has done with him for now, he has reason to be wearing that mask after the scar she gave him!




New trope!  Evil inside is marked by flaws without!  Anakin.  Kylo Ren.  Snoke.  All scarred.



> BB-8 was a lot better than I thought he'd be.




I was ready to really dislike BB-8.  It was so clearly *engineered* to be cute, that my gut reaction going in was to dislike being manipulated.  However, BB-8 is so well engineered to be cute that you can't help liking the droid!  In a cinematography sense, I really see the point of what would otherwise be a completely inane piece of engineering.  BB-8 has all the cute of R2-D2, with added expressiveness from being able to move the head more.



> When I saw Squidward (or whatever his name was)




"Supreme Leader Snoke".

With how things are often named in the Star Wars universe, I am half-expecting there to be a lot of misapprehension.  That *huge* hologram - the dude is compensating, and is probably Yoda-sized.  "Snoke and mirrors" if you will.


----------



## SailorNash

Luke totally _Language!_ that puppet. That's why she kept his saber in her purse, he made the ultimate Walk of Shame to the far side of the galaxy, and the look at the end? That was him being thankful that his kid didn't need those big goofy glasses or take after her mom.

*Mod Edit:* Inappropriate language.  If we can tell you used foul language, then you used foul language, even if you cover it. ~Umbran.


----------



## Umbran

Mod note:  And no, that's not where she gets it.  Luke lost it on Bespin, when he got his hand cut off by Vader.  In the next movie, he has a new saber.


----------



## Curmudjinn

Umbran said:


> Presumably, it can move.  And yes, you want to still shoot from a distance.  Notice that the thing was taken down by a bunch of fighters - not a single capitol ship in sight!  If you bring it in-system to eat the star of your real target, well, it's pretty darned vulnerable.




What I don't get, is removing the star destroys the system, so why shoot anything? The system loses its heat, its gravity well, and everything not sealed up dies. That's one of the few things that made me scratch my head.


----------



## Umbran

Curmudjinn said:


> What I don't get, is removing the star destroys the system, so why shoot anything? The system loses its heat, its gravity well, and everything not sealed up dies. That's one of the few things that made me scratch my head.




You kill the star in one system, and then shoot the planets in *another* system.  The thing reaches across interstellar distances, through hyperspace.


----------



## ExploderWizard

Umbran said:


> New trope!  Evil inside is marked by flaws without!  Anakin.  Kylo Ren.  Snoke.  All scarred.




Nothing new here. Move along. The dark side grants power easily but it comes with a price. Look what happened to Palpatine when his force lightning account was overdrawn. The dark side will have its payment sooner or later. Kylo Ren has yet to truly know how much power will cost him. 

If an untrained girl can kick his butt, then he is going to need a massive power up before facing her again. I am curious to see how expensive that will be for him in the next film. 



Curmudjinn said:


> What I don't get, is removing the star destroys the system, so why shoot anything? The system loses its heat, its gravity well, and everything not sealed up dies. That's one of the few things that made me scratch my head.




Against our planet Earth that would do the trick. We don't massive numbers (or even 1) of star ports and ways to quickly leave the planet. Blowing a planet up destroys it RIGHT NOW instead just really soon. 

The plant killer gun-when you absolutely, positively HAVE to kill every inhabitant on the planet in a single shot!


----------



## nerfherder

Interesting review by Mark Kermode for BBC Radio 5.  He says up front that he isn't particularly a Star Wars fan, but I found myself agreeing with a lot of his comments.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPHor1G-uqY


----------



## Kramodlog

Umbran said:


> There was a whole lot on the screen that was captivating.  The audience in my theater was captivated - drawn in, wrapped up, and engaged - for most of the film.



By the story or by its pacing? There is an hypnotic effect to bombarding people with rapid images. You'll have them captivated, but not in the same way a good story will be captivating.

Plus there is the whole Star Wars brand + excitement of seeing new films that affects impression. People wanted to like it, which is understandable. Star Wars has a special place in pop culture. Again, I'll say it isn't a terrible film, but I wonder what people would say about it if didn't have the Star Wars logo on it. Guardians of the Galaxy was a much better film if we compare. 

People in this thread have already questioned the point of the map to Luke and the "we can always destroy these things" comment about the Starkiller. It is pretty meta, but laughing at your own weak plot doesn't make your weak plot better. There weren't any stakes when it came to destroying the Starkiller. After watching it a few times with a cool head, people will be more critical. Like why was it so easy to get into the Millenium Falcon and just take it? Why couldn't Solo track it before it flew? How come Rey progressed so fast with her mastery of the Force? How did Tekka find the missing piece of Luke's map? Maz Kanata had the potential of being a Jar Jar if she had more screen time and talk about vacuous dialogues and a stereotypical character.

More stuff like this will surface after time will pass.

Part of the proble is that there is lots of pressure on director and screen writers. They couldn't produce film of prequel quality. So they played it safe, pandered to fans and went with lowest common denominaters. Maybe with a director that has more of a personal vision the next films will be better. 

Sure, I'm rather harsh for a film about space wizards and I do not mention the positive. Finn and Po where great characters. Well acted and some nice lines. There arc at the start of the film works. The actors for Kylo and Rey are good choices for roles that will obviously be central to the new trilogy. It is really nice that the central Jedi for the new trilogy is a woman. BB-8 wasn't just comic relief, he didn't exist just to sell toys to kids and he wasn't too CGI-ish. I originally thought the ball-droid was a mistake, but he works. It is just that the film doesn't deserve all the excitement it gets. Yeah, I'm great at parties.


----------



## trappedslider

well at least you didn't use "star bores"

EDIT: I honestly enjoyed it,and it caused me to think about getting back into the books,and see what they have done with those. I plan to see it again when i have the money.


----------



## Janx

I saw it this morning.  I spose I liked it, but I have some quibbles.

I did not like the opening text setup for how we transition from RotJ to this movie.

The rebels won on all the planets in RotJ, we saw the party (at least in the re-worked version).  I have no doubt hordes of bad commanders slunk off somewhere, but the Republic should have reformed (or some other named thing) and had 20-40 years to grow and potentially set up for the new bad guys to try to take it down (making the bad guys be the Rebels).

Instead, we pretty much have the Empire with a new name still in power it seems.

As somebody else commented, Leia doesn't command the Resistance, they are supposed to already be in charge.  It's the bad guys who should be rising.

Otherwise, as I read it, RotJ didn't accomplish a darn thing but change the name of the current evil leader.


The whole planet turned into a death star was a neat idea, kind of like some NASA guy's comment on making a death star from an asteroid.  The fact that it kills its own star to fuel itself seems poorly thought out.

And as we all know, this film is suspiciously like A New Hope.  Very same plot elements.  That's unfortunate.  It was nice to watch, but I didn't like finishing the film and having that comment come up as we talked about the film on the way home.  At least on Trek's Into Darkness, it is SUPPOSED to have parallels to Wrath of Khan because it's the altered timeline.


----------



## Morrus

Janx said:


> I saw it this morning.  I spose I liked it, but I have some quibbles.
> 
> I did not like the opening text setup for how we transition from RotJ to this movie.
> 
> The rebels won on all the planets in RotJ, we saw the party (at least in the re-worked version).  I have no doubt hordes of bad commanders slunk off somewhere, but the Republic should have reformed (or some other named thing) and had 20-40 years to grow and potentially set up for the new bad guys to try to take it down (making the bad guys be the Rebels).
> 
> Instead, we pretty much have the Empire with a new name still in power it seems.
> 
> As somebody else commented, Leia doesn't command the Resistance, they are supposed to already be in charge.  It's the bad guys who should be rising.
> 
> Otherwise, as I read it, RotJ didn't accomplish a darn thing but change the name of the current evil leader.




No, that's not it.

The Republic is in charge. The First Order (made up of Empire leftovers and sympathisers) is the up and coming threat.

The Resistance (led by Leia) exists because the Republic doesn't take the threat seriously. At least yet. Presumably the destruction of 5 planets will convince them.


----------



## Kramodlog

Calling it the Resistance doesn't make it clear that the First Order wasn't in power. I thought it was.


----------



## Curmudjinn

From what I've read of others' thoughts, Luke didn't make a map for people to find him. 
He was plotting his course using R2D2 as he sought out the First Temple. The last section was shown to him by Max Von Sydow's character, whom reproduced that piece for Leia. Luke had R2 intentionally power down when he was given the last piece just in case Kylo Ren found the droid.

Makes sense.


----------



## Greg Benage

I liked it quite a lot. The new characters and performances were excellent. Kylo Ren is a fascinating villain. There are a lot of unanswered world-building questions, but that's fine -- there were in the OT too. I'm sure some of those questions will be answered eventually, but honestly, I'm pretty okay with the idea, voiced by Maz Kanata, that there always has been and always will be some manifestation of the Dark Side, whether Empire, First Order, or whatever. It seems appropriate that it's not something that can really be defeated in the Star Wars universe. Maybe we had unrealistic expectations for what victory would look like after RotJ.

Mostly, though, I really loved the characters and the acting and I look forward to what comes next.


----------



## Hypersmurf

Morrus said:


> No, that's not it.
> 
> The Republic is in charge. The First Order (made up of Empire leftovers and sympathisers) is the up and coming threat.
> 
> The Resistance (led by Leia) exists because the Republic doesn't take the threat seriously. At least yet. Presumably the destruction of 5 planets will convince them.




The destruction of five planets specifically including the Republican seat of government, wasn't it?

And there was a line about the Resistance having to do it without the assistance of the Republic Fleet, but I'm not clear on whether that's because "There's no time for the fleet to get here" or because "It just blew the hell up along with the President, the Senate, and the rest of the Republican bigwigs".

-Hyp.


----------



## Hypersmurf

Curmudjinn said:


> From what I've read of others' thoughts, Luke didn't make a map for people to find him.
> He was plotting his course using R2D2 as he sought out the First Temple. The last section was shown to him by Max Von Sydow's character, whom reproduced that piece for Leia. Luke had R2 intentionally power down when he was given the last piece just in case Kylo Ren found the droid.
> 
> Makes sense.




Huh.  That does actually make sense, at least for the Luke/R2/von Sydow/BB8 side of things.

Implication was that the First Order also had access to the larger (R2) piece of the map from Imperial records, which doesn't quite fit the theory, but it's close enough that I'm happy to adopt it as my understanding of what's happening 

-Hyp.


----------



## Water Bob

Morrus said:


> No, that's not it.
> 
> The Republic is in charge. The First Order (made up of Empire leftovers and sympathisers) is the up and coming threat.
> 
> The Resistance (led by Leia) exists because the Republic doesn't take the threat seriously. At least yet. Presumably the destruction of 5 planets will convince them.




I didn't get that from the movie at all.  What I saw was that the First Order was the most influential political body in the universe, but it wasn't near at the strength of the old Empire.  The Rebellion had hurt them, badly.  And,the war is still going on.  After their victory, the Rebels became the "Resistance".  The Empire became the "First Order".  And, much of the galaxy is independent--self ruled.


----------



## Water Bob

I wonder if ADF's novelization is worth reading to clear up some of these questions.


----------



## Water Bob

And...I wasn't clear on why Kylo Ren wears a mask and talks through a speaker.  Is that just part of his Vader worship?

And...just how much does Ren's helmet weigh?  The two times he set it down, it sounded like he was dropping a canon ball.


----------



## Morrus

Water Bob said:


> I didn't get that from the movie at all.  What I saw was that the First Order was the most influential political body in the universe, but it wasn't near at the strength of the old Empire.  The Rebellion had hurt them, badly.  And,the war is still going on.  After their victory, the Rebels became the "Resistance".  The Empire became the "First Order".  And, much of the galaxy is independent--self ruled.




Nah, the other canon stuff (the book Aftermath and other things) tell us that the Republic is in control. I agree that the movie isn't very clear; hopefully they'll put more info in the next one. The First Order is more akin to those Nazis on the moon in Iron Sky - remnants who hid and are trying to come back now.


----------



## Water Bob

Morrus said:


> Nah, the other canon stuff (the book Aftermath and other things) tell us that the Republic is in control. I agree that the movie isn't very clear; hopefully they'll put more info in the next one. The First Order is more akin to those Nazis on the moon in Iron Sky - remnants who hid and are trying to come back now.




I just downloaded the first of the Aftermath trilogy.  I'll start listening to it on my commute Monday.

The reason the Resistance doesn't "look" in charge is because, besides their name, they don't LOOK in charge.  That base they have looks like a secret Rebel installation.  You'd think the government in charge would have more permanent looking HQs.

What I saw in the film made me think that the Resistance is held together with hope, shoestring, and gum, just like the Rebel Alliance from 30 years ago.


----------



## Hypersmurf

Water Bob said:


> The reason the Resistance doesn't "look" in charge is because, besides their name, they don't LOOK in charge.  That base they have looks like a secret Rebel installation.  You'd think the government in charge would have more permanent looking HQs.
> 
> What I saw in the film made me think that the Resistance is held together with hope, shoestring, and gum, just like the Rebel Alliance from 30 years ago.




It would make sense if the Resistance are considered to be unsanctioned paranoid fearmongers by the Republican leadership.

-Hyp.


----------



## Morrus

Water Bob said:


> I just downloaded the first of the Aftermath trilogy.  I'll start listening to it on my commute Monday.
> 
> The reason the Resistance doesn't "look" in charge is because, besides their name, they don't LOOK in charge.  That base they have looks like a secret Rebel installation.  You'd think the government in charge would have more permanent looking HQs.
> 
> What I saw in the film made me think that the Resistance is held together with hope, shoestring, and gum, just like the Rebel Alliance from 30 years ago.




No, Republic, not Resistance. They aren't the same thing. The former is the current galactic government. The latter is a ramshackle military operation run by Leia.


----------



## Curmudjinn

The Hosnian system, which is destroyed, is not the New Republic's seat. It is just the nearest Republic system to the Starkiller Station, not unlike the Death Star test on Alderaan, or the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.

The Republic allows the Resistance to operate and fight the First Order to keep their hands clean of war. They are specifically the Resistance against the First Order, and nothing more. The New Republic's capitol is Chandrila and Mon Mothma is Chancellor of the new Galactic Senate there. I'm not for sure if she is still in charge during the events of The Force Awakens though.


----------



## ZzarkLinux

*About the Movie*

Just saw the movie today with an uncle.

Nice Review:

My initial feeling is that it was "alright". Not great, not terrible. It carries the " Star Wars torch" forward and progress and stuff. I feel like it had 3 target audiences: new kids, new family parents, and hardcore fans. They couldn't put in too much detail or they'd lose the "new crowd". They had to cover all the selling points (force, resistance, republic, desert planet, etc) to verify it for "existing fans". Hopefully the next movies won't have such a "Bland & Generic Star Wars for Dummies" feel.

Naughty Review

WHY DID EVERYTHING FEEL FORCED ??
Why did they need to show the Republic destruction? It lasted like 5 minutes, and had nothing related to anything else in the movie. Should have cut it!
Why did they force the relationship between the Rey and the dude? Maybe to hit some target audience (just add romance)? But wow it wasn't done well.
Why did they even show Luke at the end? It wasn't needed, and could have been saved for the start of the next movie!
What was the motivation for going to visit Luke at the end? It added nothing. Lol okay I killed some bad guys, now I'ma take this LightSabre to some guy that's having a mid-life crisis. Why does she care!

I give it 4/5 stars. It would be 3/5 stars for any other movie, but the brand-name adds a star all by itself. The next one won't get a bonus star on it's own...


----------



## Water Bob

Curmudjinn said:


> The Hosnian system, which is destroyed, is not the New Republic's seat. It is just the nearest Republic system to the Starkiller Station, not unlike the Death Star test on Alderaan, or the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.
> 
> The Republic allows the Resistance to operate and fight the First Order to keep their hands clean of war. They are specifically the Resistance against the First Order, and nothing more. The New Republic's capitol is Chandrila and Mon Mothma is Chancellor of the new Galactic Senate there. I'm not for sure if she is still in charge during the events of The Force Awakens though.




Where'd you get your info?


----------



## Water Bob

There's a lot of unanswered questions in the film--exactly the way that there were a lot of unanswered questions after A New Hope came out.

What is this "Sith"?  Now, it is, "Who are the Knights of Ren?"

It was, "what do we know about the Old Republic and now, the Empire?"  Now, it's, "What is the Resistance, and what is their place in the Republic?  What is the First Order?"

There were important people that we know little about:  Dodonna and Wedge Antilles.  Here, it's Lor San Tekka and Max Kanata.

In A New Hope, we saw a large Star Destroyer that blocked out our view overhead.  Here, we saw an even larger Star Destroyer that blocked out the sight of a planet.

The Death Star = Starkiller Base.

The desert planet of Jakku.  And, of course, Tatooine.

Grand Moff Tarkin.  General Hux.

And so on.





I think that we sometimes take for granted the 38 years of information we've learned about the Star Wars universe that was _outside_ of the first film.   

With this sequel/re-launch, we're in basically the same place, almost 40 years later.


----------



## Hypersmurf

Curmudjinn said:


> The Hosnian system, which is destroyed, is not the New Republic's seat. It is just the nearest Republic system to the Starkiller Station, not unlike the Death Star test on Alderaan, or the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.
> 
> The Republic allows the Resistance to operate and fight the First Order to keep their hands clean of war. They are specifically the Resistance against the First Order, and nothing more. The New Republic's capitol is Chandrila and Mon Mothma is Chancellor of the new Galactic Senate there. I'm not for sure if she is still in charge during the events of The Force Awakens though.




Hmm... apparently according to _Star Wars: The Force Awakens: The Visual Dictionary_, Hosnian Prime was serving as the Republic's Capital and headquarters of the Galactic Senate at the time of its destruction.

Chandrila was chosen as the capital immediately after Endor, but the label moved from planet to planet based on elections.

Source: Wookieepedia.

-Hyp.


----------



## Umbran

Hypersmurf said:


> Hmm... apparently according to _Star Wars: The Force Awakens: The Visual Dictionary_, Hosnian Prime was serving as the Republic's Capital and headquarters of the Galactic Senate at the time of its destruction.
> 
> Chandrila was chosen as the capital immediately after Endor, but the label moved from planet to planet based on elections.




This was my understanding as well - and they did say it was the Capitol when they shot at it.


----------



## Ningauble

Saw it last night.  Here is my quick review after sleeping on it.  Overall, a B-.  Visually stunning, great new characters, but the plot was terrible (Episode IV copy cat) and too many unexplained things.  I felt like they rammed the new characters down your throat when they should have eased you in a bit more, and JJ played it too safe.  Felt like too much was thrown in just to sell toys.

Pros:
* Daisy Ridley is fantastic.  I was totally sucked in once she started using Jedi powers.
* Liked Finn, but his character could have used some more explanation.  How did he break the storm trooper conditioning?  What are his talents?  He's seriously a stormtrooper garbage man?
* Adam Driver was great.  Loved Kylo Ren.  Seriously psychotic with some major anger and daddy issues.  Love that he feels conflict between light and dark sides of the force.
* My kids loved it and I was on the edge of my seat during the Rey / Ren battle and Rey going to the Jedi Temple to find Luke.
* Harrison Ford was awesome.  Loved seeing Solo and Chewie as smugglers again.

Cons:
* JJ Abrams seriously messed up Threepio & R2D2.  Threepio has always been the greatest comic relief.  They missed a huge opportunity to have Threepio annoy Solo again.  The droids have always been a centerpiece of Star Wars, and now they are relegated to a dusty corner in low power mode and an unexplained red arm (unless you want to read a Marvel comic book - no thanks).
* No explanation of the rise of the New Order / state of affairs of the galaxy.  I sense a disney marketing ploy here to make you read the novels / books.
* Poe's character was basically a cardboard cut out.  He's the greatest pilot in the Resistance.  That's really all I learned about him.
* I was underwhelmed by the X-wing / Tie-fighter battles.  Visually ok, but little real suspense.
* The giant gollum, Snoke.  Is he really giant sized?  He could have potential, but again could have used some explanation.  My kids really said, "Is that gollum?"
* Solo was really going to let the Falcon be taken from him?  It was always his baby - plus the fastest ship.
* Maz or whatever the big eyed orange alien was called was horrible.  Episode VII's Jar Jar.  Very annoying and visually not cool.  What's with the goggles?
* What was the Awakening in the force?  Rey?  Where were the Force Ghosts?  I was expecting to see or hear a Force Ghost of Yoda or Obi-wan.
* Most of the New Order guys were cardboard characters.  The red haired general's over acting was hard to watch.  Why didn't Captain Phasma get to do anything (except be another action figure to sell?)
* I wanted to see more cool new aliens / random monsters / weird quirkiness.  They tried to do this a bit in Maz's cantina but nothing blew me away.  

There's still hope for the next movie at least.  I left the theater really wanting to see what happens next so that's a good sign.


----------



## Umbran

Ningauble said:


> Cons:
> * he droids have always been a centerpiece of Star Wars, and now they are relegated to a dusty corner in low power mode and an unexplained red arm (unless you want to read a Marvel comic book - no thanks).




Anthony Daniels is still signed on for two more movies.  There's time to tell some more story with them.



> * No explanation of the rise of the New Order / state of affairs of the galaxy.  I sense a disney marketing ploy here to make you read the novels / books.
> * Poe's character was basically a cardboard cut out.  He's the greatest pilot in the Resistance.  That's really all I learned about him.
> * The giant gollum, Snoke.  Is he really giant sized?  He could have potential, but again could have used some explanation.
> * Most of the New Order guys were cardboard characters. ... Why didn't Captain Phasma get to do anything (except be another action figure to sell?)
> * I wanted to see more cool new aliens / random monsters / weird quirkiness.




There is only so much story that can be told in two hours.  What would you give up to have these things?



> * What was the Awakening in the force?  Rey?  Where were the Force Ghosts?  I was expecting to see or hear a Force Ghost of Yoda or Obi-wan.




Why were you expecting that?  Neither of those characters have had contact with the new characters here.  And Sir Alec Guinness has been dead for 15 years.  And Ewan MacGregor was probably the best thing in the prequels, but it wouldn't do to have his young voice there.


----------



## Water Bob

Ningauble said:


> * JJ Abrams seriously messed up Threepio & R2D2.  Threepio has always been the greatest comic relief.  They missed a huge opportunity to have Threepio annoy Solo again.




There is that scene where Solo waits for the ship to land that he knows is carrying Leia.  The hatch opens.  People come out.  Then....Han sees the love of his life.  And, just as she approaches, C-3P0 steps between them, "Captain Solo!  It is so good to see you!"




> * No explanation of the rise of the New Order / state of affairs of the galaxy.  I sense a disney marketing ploy here to make you read the novels / books.




Very much like the movie that started it all, A New Hope.  What did we know of Vader or the Emperor, or really, of much of the Empire?  What were the Sith, and why was Vader a Lord of them?  Is the Grand Moff a rank?  If so, what is it equivalent to?  Why were the stormtroopers so loyal?

We've got several questions about The Force Awakens as we did after seeing A New Hope.







> Poe's character was basically a cardboard cut out.  He's the greatest pilot in the Resistance.  That's really all I learned about him.




And, what did we know of Wedge Antilles after seeing A New Hope?





> * I was underwhelmed by the X-wing / Tie-fighter battles.  Visually ok, but little real suspense.




Wow!  They blew me away.  I think they're some of the best scenes in all seven movies.





> * The giant gollum, Snoke.  Is he really giant sized?




I think it was just part of the projection--the Emperor on a power trip.





> * What was the Awakening in the force?  Rey?  Where were the Force Ghosts?  I was expecting to see or hear a Force Ghost of Yoda or Obi-wan.




The Awakening was Rey.  Rey discovered her Force ability.


----------



## MarkB

goldomark said:


> After watching it a few times with a cool head, people will be more critical. Like why was it so easy to get into the Millenium Falcon and just take it?



From her numerous comments on the ways it had been modified, it becomes clear over the course of their escape that Rey had some part in its ongoing retrofitting process. So she was familiar with it and knew what it would take to get it flying.



> Why couldn't Solo track it before it flew?



Seriously? What do you think, he was tracking it by shape and colour? He even mentions its energy signature being distinctive enough that the First Order will also be able to track it - so yeah, in order for him to track its energy signature, it has to actually be using energy.



> How come Rey progressed so fast with her mastery of the Force? How did Tekka find the missing piece of Luke's map?




Deliberately left ambiguous for the sequel, and welcome in that regard. It's nice that there's an unfolding plot here that isn't tied up neatly in one package.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Klaus said:


> She doesn't need to learn it from a wookiee, she could have been taught by someone else, like Max Von Sydow's character (whose voice we hear when we get the flashback of young Rey being left on Jakku).
> 
> If she is Luke's daughter, and the Empire (and later the First Order) was actively hunting him, it'd make sense for him to leave her in the care of a trusted ally, with no knowledge of her real heritage, trusting that the Force would bring them together at some point.



Hadn't thought of that. GOod point! 



Umbran said:


> I personally find that new is not a very major selling point, in and of itself. I think of it this way - we've each had many meals in our lives, many dishes. You've had lasagna before, you'll have it again. There's nothing *new* in lasagna. But, when someone hands you are really good plate of lasagna, that can be an excellent meal.



Also, Star Wars has always been a cyclical epic saga. The story of how the new generation takes the torch from the old is going to have call backs to the story of how the old generation got started. And it should. It's not necessarily an insanely new and original plot, but so what? It's a good one, and it's not the same one as before. It's just cyclical. 
Most of history's greatest story tellers didn't give us much that was super original. Look at Hamlet. 

It's not like A New Hope was good because of it's originality. It was a space samurai hero's journey. It was great for a host of other reasons. 



Morrus said:


> Nah, the other canon stuff (the book Aftermath and other things) tell us that the Republic is in control. I agree that the movie isn't very clear; hopefully they'll put more info in the next one. The First Order is more akin to those Nazis on the moon in Iron Sky - remnants who hid and are trying to come back now.




This may be unpopular, but the fact that we don't get all the worldbuilding details in the first film was a huge "pro" for me. I really dislike when films try to give you the entire state of the universe in the first half hour. Or even at all. I don't need to know how the politics of the setting work ever, unless that is specifically part of the plot, and in a multi movie setup, I don't need to understand it all in the first film, even if it is part of the plot. 

Absolutely one of the best things about the movie, IMO, was all of the unanswered questions. I hope that some of them remain that way until at least the third film, and some are only ever answered in books or cartoons or whatever. 

As for the resistance, I think the idea is that the New Republic doesn't officially support them, and maybe isn't even united in it's underhanded support of them, but the Resistance is getting support from them. Remember the speech, nazi guy says that the Republic is lying to it's people, and secretly supporting the Resistance. To me, that clearly establishes that the New Order is essentially a rival state, but that the Republic is the biggest game in town, as it were. Meanwhile, the Resistence recognizes the threat, is fighting against it, but lacks official govt sanction.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

Finally I can look at this thread!

Just got back from seeing it.  Overall: very entertaining, quite good, but not quite great.  In the continuum of Star Wars material I’d put it behind Star Wars and ESB, just ahead of RotJ, and well ahead of the prequels, in quality. Specific opinions:

The Great

- Starfighter & Falcon battles rock. Great to see a good pilot who’s a good pilot, not a jedi (I miss Wedge).
- Atmospheric combat (can I get some love in X-Wing for in-atmo now, please? I want to do Hoth, and now whatever the name of the green water planet is).
- BB-8 stealing the show, and a practical effect to boot. I loved that little droid. One flaming thumb up!

The Good

- Character development, done early, but succinctly. Really enjoyed the three new heroes.
- Hits the major Star Wars themes
- The repeated theme of “family” echoing through the series
- Lived-in universe (well, except the First Order)
- Cantina filled with weird creatures, check.
- Subtle throw-backs to the originals (“I’ve got a bad feeling”, the trash compactor, etc)
- Humanized Stormtroopers
- Some great mysteries.  Who is Rey? Who is Snoke? How’d Kylo get corrupted? Who was Max Von Sydow’s character, and what was his relationship with Luke?
- Han/Leia motivations and relationship.
- Han being pirate/smuggler-y
- Ren punching himself in his wound to get his Dark Side mojo up. Clearly, he’s conflicted. And yet nicely psychotic.
- No bouncing Jedi fights? I’m looking at you, Yoda.
- Admiral Ackbar, back in the saddle. Wish he’d said “It’s a Trap!”

The Bad

- How’d Poe come back? Jarring Deus-Ex, when he was wearing his jacket flying (assuming he ejected).
- Captain Phasma is “Boba Fett in RotJ” competent
- Some missing links. What’s going on in the New Republic, and can we learn a little more about the relationship to the Resistance? Why isn’t the Republic publicly resisting?
- Sometimes, this universe is just too small.  Map to a location in the uncharted Unknown Regions of the galaxy? Check, we’ll be there in 15.
- Luke pulling a Yoda, running and hiding for 20+ years. Such wusses, these Jedi.
- Rabid octopuses on a freighter scene … pretty unnecessary.
- My wife saying “Look, it’s Gollum!” when Snoke is introduced.  Guess they need a different mo-cap actor than Andy Serkis, ‘cause he only does one character.
- We blew up the New Republic Senate (I think … seemed vague) and basically no one notices.
- Cliffhanger … you just leave it there and we have to wait how long for resolution? 

The Ugly

- First Order as mustachio-twirling eeeevil. Some depth, or at least development, please? Why are they obsessed with order? Tarkin had more depth.
- Yet Another SuperWeapon trope. Really, we break into the Death Star to rescue the girl and then blow it up after a major character dies on a lightsaber …again? Especially when combined with RotJ’s “blow up the shield generator so the attack can proceed” subplot.

4 stars out of 5.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

Curmudjinn said:


> What I don't get, is removing the star destroys the system, so why shoot anything? The system loses its heat, its gravity well, and everything not sealed up dies. That's one of the few things that made me scratch my head.




I struggle with this too.  So, it sucks in the star.  FIne.  The gravity well doesn't go anywhere; all of the mass is still there (or moved only slightly). Though the planet should then implode under the gravity of all that mass.  And then it spits it across the galaxy at a zillion times light speed, so that it's visible everywhere? A wha huh?

I know, I know, don't ask about Star Wars physics; it's space magic.

Future speculations:

- Rey is Luke's daughter. By whom TBD; whether he knew her TBD, but Mom left her with the Max Von Sydow character because he knew Luke and about the Force and would send Rey on to Luke when the time was right. Max = Ben Kenobi + Uncle Owen.

- Snoke is someone we've encountered before.  He knows the force, and is horribly scarred. The Emperor returned would be too trite.  How about Boba Fett, scarred from his escape from the Sarlacc?

- Since family seems to be a theme, finding Finn's will be a plot point. Is this where Lando enters?

- Luke trains Rey to be a Jedi as Kylo Ren hunts down (and eventually kills) Luke.

- The Knights of Ren are Luke's other surviving apprentices, turned to the Dark Side.


----------



## Morrus

I have a theory about Phasma. We know she was originally a male part before Christie got it. I bet that original character didn't have a cool chrome costume either.

Imagine that part. Same lines, same events. But instead of Gwendolyn Christie in shiny armour, it's an officious officer in uniform. 

They changed the appearance, but not the actual role.


----------



## tomBitonti

Is the star gone for good, or just temporarily?

Physics-wise, sucking *all* of the energy would cause at least a nova.  But, Star Wars physics in play, so maybe that oughtn't be used as a reason.

TomB


----------



## Kramodlog

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> - How’d Poe come back? Jarring Deus-Ex, when he was wearing his jacket flying (assuming he ejected).




He was supposed die and not come back. http://io9.gizmodo.com/wait-redacted-was-supposed-to-die-in-the-force-awake-1748949179

It seems like a "last minute" change like Phasma being played Gwendoline Christie instead of a man.


----------



## Shasarak

Morrus said:


> Everyone in Star Wars understands droid beeps. It's just one of the things about that universe.




Everyone except for Stormtroopers.

I have to say that I really liked Rey and Fin and of course Han and Chewie were fantastic.

But otherwise I really felt let down by this movie over all.

First was the Darth Vader-lite character who was super lame making Anakin look good in comparision.

Second was the New Death Star - just like the old one except ten times bigger and it fires suns at five planets at once!  Oh my god some one needs to think these things through.

Third was having shields that you can go through at light speed.  I mean WTF just send a ship through hyperspace and let mass times velocity do the trick for you.

Probably the only thing that could make this worse would be adding a Cylon in to the mix and wait...they did that too!

At least if there was a part in the movie where the bad guys F'd up then they were probably killed to make a point to the rest of us about how bad the bad guys were, right?  Nope, but boy were random chairs etc in danger.

Such a disappointment.  Abrams strikes again - is no franchise safe from his meddling?


----------



## trappedslider

Tell us how you really feel. Don't hold back


----------



## Umbran

trappedslider said:


> Tell us how you really feel. Don't hold back




Everyone's allowed to have an opinion.  There is, in the end, no accounting for taste.


----------



## Shasarak

Umbran said:


> This one we can answer - because hyperdrives don't go to coordinates.  They follow paths - hyperspace lanes.  It isn't enough to know where someone is, if you don't know the hyperspace lanes required to get there.  Luke was reportedly going to find the first Jedi Temple, which would be on some out of the way world nobody's visiting any more, and the lanes might no longer be on the usual charts.




If the Force Awakens has taught us nothing it is that you do not need hyperspace lanes to go to hyperspace.  Heh - you dont even need a nav computer.


----------



## Shasarak

Umbran said:


> Everyone's allowed to have an opinion.  There is, in the end, no accounting for taste.




Exactly - somewhere there is someone letting Abrams make movies.


----------



## Umbran

Shasarak said:


> Exactly - somewhere there is someone letting Abrams make movies.




Sorry, but in this case, Abrams delivered something that pleases the vast majority.  He's by no means perfect, but in this case, for most folks, he did good work.


----------



## Shasarak

Umbran said:


> Sorry, but in this case, Abrams delivered something that pleases the vast majority.  He's by no means perfect, but in this case, for most folks, he did good work.




There is no need to be sorry, it is not your fault.


----------



## Greg Benage

Shasarak said:


> Exactly - somewhere there is someone letting Abrams make movies.




With a $518 million global debut and nearly universal positive reviews (sitting at 95% on Rotten Tomatoes), someone somewhere probably has a promotion coming.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Greg Benage said:


> With a $518 million global debut and nearly universal positive reviews (sitting at 95% on Rotten Tomatoes), someone somewhere probably has a promotion coming.




Yep. The movie delivered. Period.


----------



## MarkB

Shasarak said:


> If the Force Awakens has taught us nothing it is that you do not need hyperspace lanes to go to hyperspace.  Heh - you dont even need a nav computer.




When? I don't recall any such instance in this movie.


----------



## Shasarak

MarkB said:


> When? I don't recall any such instance in this movie.




Han jumps the Millenium Falcon from within his Freighter as the Falcon is being eaten by a Sharktopus and while taking fire from the other smugglers.


----------



## delericho

Ningauble said:


> * What was the Awakening in the force?  Rey?  Where were the Force Ghosts?  I was expecting to see or hear a Force Ghost of Yoda or Obi-wan.




You did. When Rey picked up the lightsaber there was a mix of voices, which included Yoda and Obi-Wan. Even better...



Umbran said:


> Why were you expecting that?  Neither of those characters have had contact with the new characters here.  And Sir Alec Guinness has been dead for 15 years.  And Ewan MacGregor was probably the best thing in the prequels, but it wouldn't do to have his young voice there.




Ewan MacGregor came in to record a new line for that scene, "Rey, these are your first steps." But in post-production they apparently switched out part of his voice for that of Alec Guiness - because "Rey" sounds an awful lot like the middle of "Afraid".


----------



## Bagpuss

Ningauble said:


> The plot was terrible (Episode IV copy cat) and too many unexplained things.




Personally I like the fact that a lot of what happened between was left untold, most of it wasn't necessary for the story they were telling then.



> * Liked Finn, but his character could have used some more explanation.  How did he break the storm trooper conditioning?  What are his talents?  He's seriously a stormtrooper garbage man?




I suspect he is a force sensitive, there were a number of hints pointing to it.



> Cons:
> * JJ Abrams seriously messed up Threepio & R2D2.  Threepio has always been the greatest comic relief.  They missed a huge opportunity to have Threepio annoy Solo again.




I thought they did that perfectly when he is first introduced, with him playing gooseberry on Han and Leia's reunion.




> * What was the Awakening in the force?  Rey?  Where were the Force Ghosts?  I was expecting to see or hear a Force Ghost of Yoda or Obi-wan.




I think it was Fin, rather than Rey (perhaps both). There is something of an exchange between Snoke and Kylo Ren, after Fin's defection, that suggested they sensed some change. Kylo Ren also knew instantly which trooper was involved.


----------



## Staffan

Bagpuss said:


> Kylo Ren also knew instantly which trooper was involved.



I figured that was because he saw 2187 acting strangely down at the planet.


----------



## Bagpuss

Staffan said:


> I figured that was because he saw 2187 acting strangely down at the planet.




I doubt he could tell one Stormtrooper from another over that distance. Although granted he could have started investigations (off camera) after the raid, and learned his designation then. To me he seemed to look towards Fin, because he sensed something different about him.


----------



## delericho

Bagpuss said:


> I doubt he could tell one Stormtrooper from another over that distance. Although granted he could have started investigations (off camera) after the raid, and learned his designation then.




One of them was conveniently marked with bloodstains from a fallen comrade...


----------



## Eejit

Bagpuss said:


> I doubt he could tell one Stormtrooper from another over that distance. Although granted he could have started investigations (off camera) after the raid, and learned his designation then. To me he seemed to look towards Fin, because he sensed something different about him.




He's strong in the Force. Like, really strong. 

Recognising people is something Force-sensitives are good at.


----------



## Cor Azer

Shasarak said:


> Han jumps the Millenium Falcon from within his Freighter as the Falcon is being eaten by a Sharktopus and while taking fire from the other smugglers.




That doesn't mean they didn't calculate anything - it just means they had a very narrow opening to start out from (the docking bay opening).


----------



## delericho

Cor Azer said:


> That doesn't mean they didn't calculate anything - it just means they had a very narrow opening to start out from (the docking bay opening).




They certainly didn't show them calculating it - certainly nothing on a par with the calculation shown in the original film when fleeing Tattooine.

Though perhaps the Falcon had had an upgrade in the interim - does Moore's Law apply even there?


----------



## Umbran

delericho said:


> You did. When Rey picked up the lightsaber there was a mix of voices, which included Yoda and Obi-Wan. Even better...
> 
> 
> Ewan MacGregor came in to record a new line for that scene, "Rey, these are your first steps." But in post-production they apparently switched out part of his voice for that of Alec Guiness - because "Rey" sounds an awful lot like the middle of "Afraid".




Huh.  That was too subtle and fast for me to get on the one viewing.  If he really intended that to be a point to get across, they needed a slightly different edit.


----------



## delericho

Umbran said:


> Huh.  That was too subtle and fast for me to get on the one viewing.  If he really intended that to be a point to get across, they needed a slightly different edit.




Yeah, I completely missed it as well - I only knew because of that article I linked.


----------



## Umbran

delericho said:


> They certainly didn't show them calculating it - certainly nothing on a par with the calculation shown in the original film when fleeing Tattooine.
> 
> Though perhaps the Falcon had had an upgrade in the interim - does Moore's Law apply even there?




Unfortunately, it is pretty clear that technology in the Star Wars Galaxy is pretty stagnant.

I think it is more that Han Solo is the bestofthebestofthebest, and can do things on the fly that others need computers for.  

Or, alternatively - the bad guys were shooting at him, and a thing was trying to eat his ship.  Staying where he was just wasn't an option.  The risk of a blind jump vs the risk of certain death?  You take the blind jump.


----------



## Umbran

delericho said:


> Yeah, I completely missed it as well - I only knew because of that article I linked.




What I did get from that scene read to me as less "Force ghosts" and more "Force-driven precognition and post-cognition".  I will see it at least one more time, and will watch for it then to see if my opinion changes.


----------



## delericho

Umbran said:


> Unfortunately, it is pretty clear that technology in the Star Wars Galaxy is pretty stagnant.




Yep.



> Or, alternatively - the bad guys were shooting at him, and a thing was trying to eat his ship.  Staying where he was just wasn't an option.  The risk of a blind jump vs the risk of certain death?  You take the blind jump.




Yeah, that would be my guess, too. I _really_ don't like the hyperbole attached to Han in much of the EU, and was actually very glad to see that TFA showed him as a much more fallible, and thus human, character. So I'd rather he not be considered the bestofthebestofthebest.


----------



## Cor Azer

delericho said:


> Yep.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, that would be my guess, too. I _really_ don't like the hyperbole attached to Han in much of the EU, and was actually very glad to see that TFA showed him as a much more fallible, and thus human, character. So I'd rather he not be considered the bestofthebestofthebest.




I haven't read much of the EU, but yeah,  to me Han always came off as more (over?) confident and extremely lucky as opposed to best of the best of the best.


----------



## Cor Azer

delericho said:


> They certainly didn't show them calculating it - certainly nothing on a par with the calculation shown in the original film when fleeing Tattooine.
> 
> Though perhaps the Falcon had had an upgrade in the interim - does Moore's Law apply even there?




I only saw it once, and was a bit in the giddy/excited mood, so I may be giving it more slack.

That said, a quick/blind calculation doesn't mean a hyperspace lane wasn't used.

And one change to the Falcon was made (although neither Han or Rey considers it an upgrade), so maybe others were too.


----------



## ccs

Curmudjinn said:


> The Hosnian system, which is destroyed, is not the New Republic's seat. It is just the nearest Republic system to the Starkiller Station, not unlike the Death Star test on Alderaan, or the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.




Pearl Harbor was not attacked because it was the nearest target.  It was attacked because it was an important target.

And your wrong as to why the Empire destroyed Alderaan as well....
(Though to be fair Lucas might have altered that in some version  with his constant tinkering)


----------



## ccs

Umbran said:


> Unfortunately, it is pretty clear that technology in the Star Wars Galaxy is pretty stagnant.
> 
> I think it is more that Han Solo is the bestofthebestofthebest, and can do things on the fly that others need computers for.
> 
> Or, alternatively - the bad guys were shooting at him, and a thing was trying to eat his ship.  Staying where he was just wasn't an option.  The risk of a blind jump vs the risk of certain death?  You take the blind jump.




Or maybe raise your rear shields, fly out of blaster rifle range at normal(?) Speed & then plot a course.....  
I mean if your not willing to jump blind when Star Destroyers are shooting at you, why risk it because of mere rifles?


----------



## Morrus

Second viewing is even better.

The first was IMAX 3D and a visual spectacle. Second time I deliberately chose a regular 2D showing so I would be less distracted. I'm glad I did that.

I had some pacing reservations the first time. Second time they kinda vanished. Not sure why. Things weren't all the length I remembered them being.


----------



## Umbran

ccs said:


> Or maybe raise your rear shields, fly out of blaster rifle range at normal(?) Speed & then plot a course.....




That'd be great, except they were in an enclosed space!  There was a big cargo bay door in the way, and controls for the door are out with the people shooting and the monster eating.


----------



## Raunalyn

halfling rogue said:


> Rey and Finn and Poe were all home runs. I can't wait to see the adventures they go on. Rey is still a mystery. Everything within me says she must be Luke's daughter but if that is the case, they're going to really have to convince me (I almost wanted to think she was Han and Leia's daughter...but that simply would not make sense). If she's Luke's daughter 1) why wouldn't Leia feel it or Han consider it. She was left on Jakku as a young girl, but I'm sure old enough to remember the face of her parents. If it was Luke, why was she left behind to such a bad life? So even though Luke pops first to the mind, I don't think she's Luke's daughter. But all the same, I feel she has some connection to the Skywalkers.




Take a look at pictures of Daisy Ridley alongside Natalie Portman and tell me if you see a resemblance. That cannot be coincidental. I agree with you...I think she's Luke's kid.


----------



## Morrus

Raunalyn said:


> Take a look at pictures of Daisy Ridley alongside Natalie Portman and tell me if you see a resemblance. That cannot be coincidental. I agree with you...I think she's Luke's kid.




In which case Luke has turned to the dark side if he abandoned his infant child to scavenge on a desert planet. 

How long ago did he disappear? She's about 20, I'd guess.

As for resemblance to Portman. I don't see it.


----------



## Umbran

Raunalyn said:


> Take a look at pictures of Daisy Ridley alongside Natalie Portman and tell me if you see a resemblance. That cannot be coincidental. I agree with you...I think she's Luke's kid.




Eh.  Modern movie standards of beauty make some resemblance pretty likely.  That being said, I will be unsurprised if we find out she's a Skywalker, but it will take some storytelling to make it work.  Kylo Ren and Rey are too similar in age - she'd have to have been born well before Ben Solo turned, well before Luke went on walkabout.  

So, why don't Leia and Han mention this when they're talking about the missing Luke?  Han and Leia are not the sorts to ignore the fate of a niece!


----------



## Raunalyn

Morrus said:


> In which case Luke has turned to the dark side if he abandoned his infant child to scavenge on a desert planet.
> 
> How long ago did he disappear? She's about 20, I'd guess.
> 
> As for resemblance to Portman. I don't see it.




Not if he doesn't know. Which would, again, echo the original trilogy; Vader did not know about Luke until the second movie.


----------



## Umbran

Raunalyn said:


> Not if he doesn't know. Which would, again, echo the original trilogy; Vader did not know about Luke until the second movie.




It isn't a move to the dark side if he does it to protect her, either.  

Let's say it is after the Battle of Endor, everything looks good. New Republic starts up.  Luke sets up his academy.  He finds a lady he likes, starts a relationship....

And then the First Order shows up, and starts taking potshots at him.  He takes his academy on the road to avoid those potshots.  But anyone with him is still a target.  His daughter, maybe still too young, is left behind for her own safety (under the watchful eye of Lor San Tekka, played by Max Von Sydow, who stays close enough to make sure she's okay, far enough to not bring attention to her) while Luke takes the more advanced students on the road.

Luke would *totally* make sure that his daughter's guardian could find him, in case of dire need.  Thus Tekka has  the map (though this comes later)...

Note that this would separate Ben Solo from his parents, and put him under stress.  Luke is busy with all his apprentices, and doesn't have enough time for Ben, who feels Luke, as his uncle, should give him special attention.  A pouty teenage boy, effectively sent off to boarding school, told he's special but not getting special attention.... resentment builds... you see where this goes?


----------



## darjr

So what was the first time you saw the falcon? Mine was when they ran past it before the ship they were headed toward blew up. It was a fast blurry glimpse and at first I wasn't sure. Someone said it shows up earlier at a glance.


----------



## Morrus

darjr said:


> So what was the first time you saw the falcon? Mine was when they ran past it before the ship they were headed to blew up. It was a fast blurry glimpse and at first I wasn't sure. Someone said it shows up earlier at a glance.




I looked out for it the second time and couldn't see it. I'm not sure they show it.


----------



## darjr

It is blurry and I was I could have imagined it.


----------



## Water Bob

Morrus said:


> Second viewing is even better.
> 
> The first was IMAX 3D and a visual spectacle. Second time I deliberately chose a regular 2D showing so I would be less distracted. I'm glad I did that.
> 
> I had some pacing reservations the first time. Second time they kinda vanished. Not sure why. Things weren't all the length I remembered them being.




I'm doing the reverse.  I saw it in 2D the first time, and I'm going to go see it in IMAX 3D the next time.


----------



## Water Bob

IT is confirmed.  Captain Phasma will return in Episode VIII.  I guess she found her way out of the trash compactor.


----------



## ccs

Water Bob said:


> I'm doing the reverse.  I saw it in 2D the first time, and I'm going to go see it in IMAX 3D the next time.




I did this earlier this evening with friends that couldn't make it to the Thur show.
IMO the 3d added nothing to the experience except cost.  
My general complaint against 3d is that - unless the movies filmed in 3d - it mutes the colors.  And this is exactly what happened in this case.


----------



## Umbran

ccs said:


> My general complaint against 3d is that - unless the movies filmed in 3d - it mutes the colors.  And this is exactly what happened in this case.




Even when it is filmed in 3d, there is a muting effect, simply because the polarized lenses reduce the light intensity - the screen they uses is a brighter white, so the total effect is that when watching the usual 3d film today, you get about 35% of the light you'd see watching the same film in 2d.  There's a resultant lack of contrast.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Shasarak said:


> Han jumps the Millenium Falcon from within his Freighter as the Falcon is being eaten by a Sharktopus and while taking fire from the other smugglers.




Han can't have had escape coordinates ready when he went to get the Falcon? 




Bagpuss said:


> I doubt he could tell one Stormtrooper from another over that distance. Although granted he could have started investigations (off camera) after the raid, and learned his designation then. To me he seemed to look towards Fin, because he sensed something different about him.




This seemed, to me, what the scene was telling us. He was basically in mid stride, and soemthing made him stop. Maybe he sensed a moral conflict nearby with force magic, but sensing just...something odd, that he wasn't trained enough to recognize as force sensitivity, seems much more likely. 



delericho said:


> Yeah, I completely missed it as well - I only knew because of that article I linked.




I recognized Ben's voice, but didn't catch any of the words. I think it was one of those things where you don't need to know what the words were, but subsequent viewings will be cooler for the experience of figuring it out. Which is a thing I really like in this sort of film. I want to have to wait for some things, and rewatch and pay closer attention for others. That's, for me, part of the fun. 



delericho said:


> They certainly didn't show them calculating it - certainly nothing on a par with the calculation shown in the original film when fleeing Tattooine.
> 
> Though perhaps the Falcon had had an upgrade in the interim - does Moore's Law apply even there?




He seems to have become a much better pilot and navigator over the course of thirty years. Which makes sense. 

Also, see above. He probably had coordinates set up for an escape, whereas in ep4 he had to calculate on the fly. And who knows, maybe the falcon has a better nav computer. Thirty years has passed. Or it just has more complete star charts, due to his connections in government and a life of rebel work and smuggling. 



delericho said:


> Yeah, that would be my guess, too. I _really_ don't like the hyperbole attached to Han in much of the EU, and was actually very glad to see that TFA showed him as a much more fallible, and thus human, character. So I'd rather he not be considered the bestofthebestofthebest.




Being the best doesn't make him less human. Or fallible. He's just an extraordinary pilot and navigator. I mean, he made the Kessel run in 12 parsecs. If that isn't a feat of navigation...I mean...

But seriously, the best explanation for the 12 parsecs thing is that he is an insanely good navigator, and made a trade run through a hyperspace lane in an exceptionally efficient line, and was bragging about his navigation/the Falcon's nav computers, more than anything. ie, "man, me and this ship can nav so good, we flew Kessel straighter than anyone ever has!" 
It's weak, but it works. 


Anyway, I don't know what I think of Rey as Luke's kid. I mean, unless Han and Leia also didn't know about the kid. 

Having a few days to think about it, I really like the ending. It's more dramatic than natural, with how long they stand there, frozen in silent face acting, but it really works. It communicates more than the scene would have if they'd spoken, IMO. 

It was a little weird to not see anyone force jumping, but I like how Kylo Ren's force use is very brutal, immediate, visceral. He is definitely not Vader. He is Anakin with less panache and more open rage. Frankly, I fracking love it. 

Snoke isn't gollum. Am I the only one who didn't think anything in the vein of "hey look gollum?" or have anyone I went with say anything like that? 
I mean, yeah it's Andy Serkis, but I didn't see Max von Sidow and think "Hey, it's the old Judge from Judge Dredd"...idk. 
Like, he didn't act in any way even vaguely similar to gollum...?



I'm glad Chewie shot Ren. And I'm glad that they showed Leia feeling it happen, because it reminds viewers that she has the force. I wish we could see her use it more outwardly, but I can also totally see her not being interested in learning to throw people and use a lightsaber, and so never doing so. 

Poe's escape from death...I like it. I know it's jarring for some, but the surprise of it, and the "wait...how?" reaction of Fin and Poe's "I know! It's crazy! My jacket! Let's hug!" response just works. They're bros, and it's cool. It's something I wish the orig trig (thank you cracked) had done better with Luke and Han. I love their genuine, unironic enjoyment of eachother's company, and I love that they have at least as much friend chemistry as Fin and Rey have _-potentially romantic but not for certain we'll see-_ chemistry. 

SPeaking of which. Fin and Rey. Are perfect. I admit I am rooting for romantic entanglements. I thought they had awesome chemistry, and it would just be rad. I mean, as a bisexual man in a pretty homophobic world, I would be cool with Fin/Poe, too, and I'm sure the fanfic writers are hard at work on that, but I'm "team Fin/Rey", all day. And no, it's not out of an sjw desire to see the black male lead romance the white female lead. For once. OK, it's only like...10% that, at most. 

The lightsabers. 

The LIGHTSABERS! 

Thank you, JJ, for awesome lightsaber fights. I loved the prequel duels (most of them), and the originals were awesome in their own right (before I played star wars video games or ttrpgs), but the new ones are perfect for the story they're in. ANd the effects for them are my favorite lightsaber effects thus far. 

And hate all you want, I love Kylo Ren's saber. 

I wish the Resistance pilots had been a mix of ships. I'd especially loved to have seen some a-wings and y-wings. I've always liked the a-wing more than the x-wing.


----------



## delericho

doctorbadwolf said:


> Being the best doesn't make him less human. Or fallible. He's just an extraordinary pilot and navigator. I mean, he made the Kessel run in 12 parsecs. If that isn't a feat of navigation...I mean...
> 
> But seriously, the best explanation for the 12 parsecs thing is that he is an insanely good navigator...




Nah, the best explanation for the "12 parsecs" thing is that Han is spinning a line to the newbs. Obi-wan doesn't call him on it because it's not a good idea to embarrass someone when you need their help, and Luke doesn't know any better.


----------



## Shasarak

delericho said:


> Though perhaps the Falcon had had an upgrade in the interim - does Moore's Law apply even there?





What is it that Ren says,  something like "Dont fly that, its garbage"


----------



## delericho

Shasarak said:


> What is it that Ren says,  something like "Dont fly that, its garbage"




Yeah, but is "garbage" better or worse than a "piece of junk"?


----------



## Shasarak

delericho said:


> Yeah, but is "garbage" better or worse than a "piece of junk"?




And can you rely on a Nav computer that has not been updated in the last decade?


----------



## delericho

Shasarak said:


> And can you rely on a Nav computer that has not been updated in the last decade?




Yeah. I'm inclined to agree with Umbran's suggestion - it must have been a (very short) blind jump, and then they spent some time gathering themselves before their next step.

Either that, or JJA just went for "cool visuals" rather than "makes sense, per the established lore of the setting". But surely _that_ can't be right...?


----------



## doctorbadwolf

delericho said:


> Nah, the best explanation for the "12 parsecs" thing is that Han is spinning a line to the newbs. Obi-wan doesn't call him on it because it's not a good idea to embarrass someone when you need their help, and Luke doesn't know any better.




Nah. No way Luke the amatuer pilot, obsessed for years with all becoming a real space pilot, doesn't know what a parsec is. In a deleted scene with Biggs (who looks like Freddy Mercury, btw. never noticed till the other day), Biggs calls Luke something like the best pilot in the sector, or somesuch. 

But the navigation=speed explanation works just fine. It makes perfect sense, it's only weak because we all know the real situation is that Lucas didn't know what a parsec was when he wrote it.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Shasarak said:


> And can you rely on a Nav computer that has not been updated in the last decade?




Odd assumption. How do we know the navcom doesn't auto update when it's fired up? Or that Han didn't send coordinates remotely when he pulled it into his hangar bay? Or that the guy who had it hadn't updated the computer and charts recently? 

There are enough plausible explanations, it just isn't a real plot hole. The movie does a lot of not showing the details, which IMO is a good thing. This isn't Asamov, we don't need full detailed explanations of every little thing in a Space Opera.


----------



## delericho

doctorbadwolf said:


> Nah. No way Luke the amatuer pilot, obsessed for years with all becoming a real space pilot, doesn't know what a parsec is.




He might know what a parsec is but not why it's relevant, or not, to the Kessel Run.

Perhaps more to the point, from the Internet Movie Script Database:



> *HAN:* It's the ship that made the Kessel run in less than twelve parsecs!
> 
> Ben reacts to Solo's stupid attempt to impress them with obvious misinformation.


----------



## Leatherhead

There was a bit too much nostalgia bait. And Kylo Ren did not end the movie as a credible threat.

He started off great, what with being able to mind-read better than anyone else in the movies. Which would have been enough, an enemy that _knows_ what you are doing is terrifying as hell, especially if they used to be your friend/family. 

But then the Stormtroopers comically avoiding his tantrums, untrained Ray overpowering his mind-hax, and all that screaming to Finn about him being a traitor after stabbing his old man, just totally ruined the character for me. 

I feel the character would have been more interesting if he had actually "fell" to the light side and he spent the 2nd movie dealing with the guilt of killing all those people while they looked for Luke. It would make a nice contrast to Finn, who ran away from the order presumably before he killed anyone. They could even throw in a scene about Finn not taking orders from him anymore.


----------



## Bagpuss

Leatherhead said:


> There was a bit too much nostalgia bait. And Kylo Ren did not end the movie as a credible threat.




I think a much better ending would have been if Rey was losing the fight and the only thing that saved her was the ground separating the two of them.

It would make the Kylo Ren appear to be a more credible threat,
It would make Rey less of a Mary Sue character.
It would mean she could get some training from Luke in the next film, harking back to Empire.

I think that was one of the few wrong steps they took with this film.


----------



## delericho

Bagpuss said:


> I think a much better ending would have been if Rey was losing the fight and the only thing that saved her was the ground separating the two of them.
> 
> It would make the Kylo Ren appear to be a more credible threat,
> It would make Rey less of a Mary Sue character.
> It would mean she could get some training from Luke in the next film, harking back to Empire.
> 
> I think that was one of the few wrong steps they took with this film.




The way things are, when they come face to face in the next movie she'll be over-confident, having beaten him once. Of course, in the interim he'll have been trained as well, he'll no longer be wounded, and he'll have resolved his internal conflicts.

Rey is probably in for a nasty shock.


----------



## AriochQ

I was 10 when the original SW came out, so I was old enough to appreciate it and young enough to buy all the toys!  Needless to say, I am a big fan of SW and I loved the new movie.  That being said...

It is pretty clear they essentially changed direction at some point during filming.  The first half of the movie is all about the mystery of Rey and finding Luke.  Then they switch gears and it becomes about Starkiller base.  I have only seen it once so far, but I am pretty sure there is very little mention of the Starkiller base until about halfway.

I think what happened was the movie was originally going to focus on the search for Luke, but for some reason they decided that wasn't going to be enough, so they bolted on the Starkiller thing.  Even the planets they exploded were just sort of random.  You can actually remove all the Starkiller stuff from the movie and barely notice, except for the final action scene.


----------



## Kramodlog

The Resistance and the First Order explained. 



> Here's the situation: After the events of Return of the Jedi, the decapitated Empire collapses into a fragmented series of successor regimes lead by various Moffs. The Alliance to Restore the Republic announces the formation of a New Republic, absorbs a number of star systems, and signs a peace treaty delineating borders with remaining Imperial leftovers.
> 
> Over time, at least some part of the former Empire becomes the First Order, which the Republic decides it wants to topple. Republic stateswoman Leia Organa establishes the Resistance inside First Order borders, which operates as a nominally independent insurgent group rather than an official branch of the Republic military. The Republic is supporting the insurgency — specifically, General Hux suggests in the film, with money and weapons. However, there's no in-text evidence that uniformed Republic military forces are directly engaging the First Order.



http://www.vox.com/2015/12/21/10634568/star-wars-the-force-awakens-spoilers-republic-first-order

Yeah, I didn't get any of that from the film.


----------



## Umbran

delericho said:


> Either that, or JJA just went for "cool visuals" rather than "makes sense, per the established lore of the setting". But surely _that_ can't be right...?




Given that most of that lore was set in the EU, which they're largely ignoring, yeah....

Much of working with a science fiction show is finding ways *around* the science errors and inconsistencies.  It is not plausible that a person part of a galactic empire doesn't know what a parsec is, any more than it is not plausible that we don't know what a time zone is.  So, fleecing the newbs really isn't an good explanation.

The better explanation is that the Kessel Run is a pretty twisty thing, and that Han's ship managed a more straight course.  Being "fast" in hyperspace may be part outright speed, and part ability to steer closer to things that other ships have to avoid.  Like the fastest cars in racing aren't only faster because of their engine, but because of their very precise handling.


----------



## delericho

Umbran said:


> Given that most of that lore was set in the EU, which they're largely ignoring, yeah....




In this instance, the lore they're ignoring (or working around) comes direct from the first film - "Without precise calculations we could fly right through a star or bounce too close to a supernova and that'd end your trip real quick, wouldn't it?"

(The Kessel Run thing is a slightly different conversation - dealt with here.)


----------



## Cor Azer

Bagpuss said:


> It would make Rey less of a Mary Sue character.




I've seen this sentiment a few places. I disagree with it, but even allowing for it, how is Rey's treatment any different than Luke's or Anakin's treatments in A New Hope or The Phantom Menace respectively? Arguably, Anakin's is worse, because while we knew he'd grow into a good pilot and powerful user of the Force, there was really no reason to also tack on expert mechanical skills as well.

Do you consider Luke and Anakin to be Gary Stu's?


----------



## Raunalyn

Leatherhead said:


> There was a bit too much nostalgia bait. And Kylo Ren did not end the movie as a credible threat.
> 
> He started off great, what with being able to mind-read better than anyone else in the movies. Which would have been enough, an enemy that _knows_ what you are doing is terrifying as hell, especially if they used to be your friend/family.
> 
> But then the Stormtroopers comically avoiding his tantrums, untrained Ray overpowering his mind-hax, and all that screaming to Finn about him being a traitor after stabbing his old man, just totally ruined the character for me.
> 
> I feel the character would have been more interesting if he had actually "fell" to the light side and he spent the 2nd movie dealing with the guilt of killing all those people while they looked for Luke. It would make a nice contrast to Finn, who ran away from the order presumably before he killed anyone. They could even throw in a scene about Finn not taking orders from him anymore.




What I took away from that fight was that the only reason that Rey was able to overcome Ren was because he was injured. He was growing weak and getting distracted by the pain. This was evident with the wild, unpredictable swings from both of the combatants. I think that the next time they meet, Ren will be ready for her and Rey may not be ready for him.


----------



## Umbran

Bagpuss said:


> It would make the Kylo Ren appear to be a more credible threat,




He's not supposed to be, yet!  He hasn't even finished his training!  He's like Luke in Empire.

Kylo Ren is *not* Darth Vader.  He is clearly established as a wannabe, not yet a real power unto himself.  He apes confidence, but when he gets frustrated, the young and petulant child emerges, and lashes out.  Compare:  When Darth Vader is told of a failure, he may be angry, but he is in control of that anger, and uses it to effect - he force chokes an officer and replaces him.  Kylo Ren, when faced with frustration of his plans, lashes out at consoles with his lightsaber in a blatant temper tantrum.

This is the place where, among all the other homage to the original film, we see a departure from the formula.  We are not watching the growth of a hero into his power, aiming to take down the established Baddest-Assed villain ever.  We are watching the parallel growth of young heroes and young villain.  



> It would make Rey less of a Mary Sue character.




To quote someone who put it better than I:

"A "Mary Sue" is an author surrogate poorly inserted into an existing story who is ridiculously adept/sexy/cute/talented.
Rey is not a Mary Sue. Rey is what we in the writing field like to call a "woman."
A "woman" is kind of like a girl, but mature, capable, and not requiring your ****.
Please get used to the character type; you will be seeing more of them. Hopefully."


----------



## Bagpuss

Cor Azer said:


> I've seen this sentiment a few places. I disagree with it, but even allowing for it, how is Rey's treatment any different than Luke's or Anakin's treatments in A New Hope or The Phantom Menace respectively? Arguably, Anakin's is worse, because while we knew he'd grow into a good pilot and powerful user of the Force, there was really no reason to also tack on expert mechanical skills as well.
> 
> Do you consider Luke and Anakin to be Gary Stu's?




Boy Anakin in Episode 1 is pretty much a Gary Stu. Older Anakin makes mistakes and loses his fight with Obi-Wan.

I've no problem with Rey being an good pilot, mechanic and speaking several languages, after all she is kind of filling the Luke role in the movie and he is all those things. Being a decent pilot and mechanic seem to go hand in hand, and being multi-lingual isn't that uncommon in the Star Wars universe.

However Luke requires training to use the lightsabre, and even then he loses pretty much every battle he is in using it. You see Luke fail on several occasions. He also starts the film as a whinny bitch, but develops as the series goes on. The only point of vulnerability Rey shows in the film is when Kylo Ren holds her with the force, before bringing her back to Starkiller base, yet within moments of that, she is blocking his mind reading, and developing mind control all by herself. Now there maybe some explanation for all of this (like she's Luke's daughter, and very strong in the Force), but I still think it would have made for a more dramatic film if the hero was a little more at risk, and threatened.


----------



## Bagpuss

Umbran said:


> He's not supposed to be, yet!  He hasn't even finished his training!  He's like Luke in Empire.




Unlike Rey who as far as we are aware has had no training, rather than at least some, yet she seems to brush off his mind reading and develop mind control by herself.



> We are not watching the growth of a hero into his power, aiming to take down the established Baddest-Assed villain ever.  We are watching the parallel growth of young heroes and young villain.




Only we aren't Rey has clearly been established as superior without any apparent training. If anything she is the Vader.



> To quote someone who put it better than I:
> 
> "A "Mary Sue" is an author surrogate poorly inserted into an existing story who is ridiculously adept/sexy/cute/talented.
> Rey is not a Mary Sue. Rey is what we in the writing field like to call a "woman."
> A "woman" is kind of like a girl, but mature, capable, and not requiring your ****.
> Please get used to the character type; you will be seeing more of them. Hopefully."




Yeah "Mary Sue" as a trope has lost it's original meaning somewhat, and is now often used to refer to any flawless character that seems to be good at anything they turn their hand to, especially with little or no justification.

I've no problems with her being an expect mechanic, and climber it appears something she learned to do to survive on that planet. Her knowing the Falcon well, again no problem, it seemed implied she at least had something to do with the modifications that were done to it. Expert pilot? Well okay that seems to be something common among force users, they seem to be naturals already established with Luke/Anakin. 

But why the force as well? Perhaps that will be revealed in the next film but really films should be able to stand on their own.


----------



## Umbran

You realize that she's not really more competent than Finn - who somehow manages to break his brainwashing, run around in active battle grounds and not get shot, BS trained diplomats into allowing _an enemy soldier_ to lead an assault and rescue mission, intimidate officers with vastly superior experience, and with no apparent Force powers at all manages to stand his ground for a while against someone trained with a lightsaber?

And yet she's seen as too competent.  She's vulnerable enough to get captured and strapped to a chair, but that's not vulnerable enough for you?  Exactly how vulnerable do female characters need to be, for you to be happy?


----------



## Morrus

I think you guys were watching a different movie to me! She crashed the Falcon several times, she got her ass utterly kicked by Kylo Ren once, and in her second fight with him was pretty much desperately staggering back trying to survive until the last bit where she used the Force. I don't think she's as super-competent as folks are saying, though she clearly has an advantage by virtue of being strong in the Force (like Luke and Anakin were natural super-pilots, etc.)

Nah, she wasn't a Mary Sue.  She competent, and a Force user. In other words, a real female protagonist. 

Kylo  was a stroke of genius. Trying to make him into a super villain like Dart Vader - the greatest movie villain ever to exist - would have instantly doomed the film to failure. There is no way to win that comparison, and even if you managed it, you'd be accused of simply copying.  So they did the right thing - they took a completely different route.  The fact that he's not as awesome as Vader is built-in to his character and drives his flaws. It makes him interesting.

Kylo Ren is Luke from the original trilogy, not Vader. The role is reversed - he's learning the dark side and trying to resist the light, unlike Luke whose arc was learning the light said and trying to resist the dark. Vader is the wrong comparison in terms of both ability and story role.  This is the story of an evil Luke, not a second Vader.


----------



## Morrus

Bagpuss said:


> However Luke requires training to use the lightsabre, and even then he loses pretty much every battle he is in using it.




Does he? His battles include two with Vader, one on Jabba's skiff, and deflecting a few stormtrooper shots on Endor.  Am I missing any lightsaber battles?

By my count he loses just one battle he uses it in - the one against Vader in Empire. And that guy's the Biggest Bad around, and he still knocks him down twice, and gets a couple of glancing blows in.

Nah, Luke's pretty darn good.


----------



## TheWriterFantastic™

halfling rogue said:


> The only thing that bugged me (which really isn't a big deal) was the fact that Rey understood BB8. I always thought when R2 beeped and people understood him, it was because C3P0 was there, or there was some screen to interpret. But Rey had none of that, so I guess people can understand droid beeps. I mean, Chewie roars and barks and is understood so I guess it shouldn't be too big of a stretch!




As problematic as the prequel trilogy was (what prequel trilogy), there was a deleted scene in Episode III that sort of answered the droid interpretation - there's a dialogue between Anakin and Obi-Wan while waiting for the lift in Grievous's warship, with Anakin throwing out Binary phrases (beeps, etc), asking for Obi-Wan's interpretation of the beeps. The scene finally answers the question, but since it didn't do much to drive the story, they likely cut it for that reason.


----------



## billd91

Morrus said:


> Does he? His battles include two with Vader, one on Jabba's skiff, and deflecting a few stormtrooper shots on Endor.  Am I missing any lightsaber battles?
> 
> By my count he loses just one battle he uses it in - the one against Vader in Empire. And that guy's the Biggest Bad around, and he still knocks him down twice, and gets a couple of glancing blows in.
> 
> Nah, Luke's pretty darn good.




Darn straight he's good. He flies an X-wing (one of the most sophisticated ships in the fleet) like an ace with no training and hits an impossible shot. Rey's good, possibly better than Luke at her core competencies, but she doesn't pull off anything quite that spectacular.

I think anyone complaining that Rey is a Mary Sue needs to remember that she's a hero protagonist. They're almost always going to be better at stuff than everyone else in our everyday experiences... unless we're watching slapstick comedy and even then they'll pull things through. They're supposed to be a bit larger than life and see things through in the end. That doesn't make them a Mary Sue.


----------



## dd.stevenson

Just saw it.

Not bad, but the plot wasn't anywhere near as tight as I felt a star wars movie should have been. Han's death was a pretty good case in point--han had (apparently) no agency in the moment of his death, and it bore no real consequences for the remainder of the story (consider: if he had been badly injured instead of killed, would anything have played differently?)

Nice to see the brand being competently managed, though.


----------



## Umbran

Bagpuss said:


> yet within moments of that, she is blocking his mind reading, and developing mind control all by herself.




Note something - she generally shows new power *after having power used upon her*.  She's learning from Kylo Ren, not from thin air.


----------



## Jester David

We still don't know how the Force Awakens. That title was particularly meaningless compared to the others. Not very Star Wars at all.

During the credits I thought to myself, how was the Starkiller Base needed at all. They were going after Rey anyway. All the major character stuff would have happened anyway, even if it was on a spaceship like the star destroyer we saw. That whole bit was superflous. 
Then I started thinking about all the similar unneeded bits. Like the big CGI chase in Han's ship that feels just as pointless as the big alien chase in _Star Trek_ or the giant fish scene in _Phantom Menace_. 

Or completely and totally wasting Gwendoline Christie. She could have been giving the speech or fighting Finn with the electro-club thing. 

I really didn't like how so much of the movie was a retread, a mishmash of old bits from Episodes 4-6. The orphan on the desert planet. The rescue while dressed as a stormtrooper. A droid carrying secret data. An untrained kid just handed a lightsaber kept in a chest. Deactivating a shield generator on a planet. A trench run to blow up a base. The older mentor figure dying. Going off to train on a remote planet with the last Jedi. 
Small homages are one things (shots, lines, etc) but this was large segments of the plot. 

Much of the original content also didn't feel original either. Never read any EU books or comics, but I was familiar enough from the RPG and video games to know Luke has a kid named Ben and Han and Leia have two, one of which goes to the dark side. And Chewie dies, being the token major character to snuff it. But the novel authors purposely avoided having Ben Skywalker go dark side because that'd just be retelling the story of Anakin, the obvious tale this movie runs headlong into. 
It really felt like they removed the entire EU just so they could retread some of the same narrative ground from a slightly different perspective, but in a more obvious route.

The movie is also unclear how the First Order, Resistance, and Republic interact. Is the Resistance a branch of the army of the republic? Is the First Order the actual empire rebranded, a side nation, or a terrorist organization? Did the Republic take over the empire? Having just watched the movie and read none of the books, it really looked like the Rebels lost after Endor and the Empire is still around. Everyone is afraid of the First Order but dismissive of the Republic. 
The original Star Wars was also light on the backstory, but this was unneeded. Everyone knows the archetype of the evil, corrupt government and the rebels fighting. 

I liked a lot of the film. Rey was good and Finn's character arc was interesting and I want to know where it goes. The movie was at its best when it wasn't copying an established structure and going off in its own direction. There was a lot of potential, but so much was squandered. Much like the prequels. 
I'm excited for Episode VIII and the possibility of something new and original.

Not sure where I would put this on the Star Wars scale. While they had some horrible moments, Episodes 1-3 had a lot of redeeming qualities. If you watch a fan edit it's surprising how enjoyable they are. They weren't poor movies, just poorly edited movies. And having better dialogue and editing doesn't make a movie more original, and being endlessly inventive was always something Star Wars had done well. 
I'd put _Force Awakens_ above Episode 1 and 2 but below _Revenge of the Sith_.


----------



## Cor Azer

Bagpuss said:


> Boy Anakin in Episode 1 is pretty much a Gary Stu. Older Anakin makes mistakes and loses his fight with Obi-Wan.
> 
> I've no problem with Rey being an good pilot, mechanic and speaking several languages, after all she is kind of filling the Luke role in the movie and he is all those things. Being a decent pilot and mechanic seem to go hand in hand, and being multi-lingual isn't that uncommon in the Star Wars universe.
> 
> However Luke requires training to use the lightsabre, and even then he loses pretty much every battle he is in using it. You see Luke fail on several occasions. He also starts the film as a whinny bitch, but develops as the series goes on. The only point of vulnerability Rey shows in the film is when Kylo Ren holds her with the force, before bringing her back to Starkiller base, yet within moments of that, she is blocking his mind reading, and developing mind control all by herself. Now there maybe some explanation for all of this (like she's Luke's daughter, and very strong in the Force), but I still think it would have made for a more dramatic film if the hero was a little more at risk, and threatened.




As pointed out, Luke doesn't lose very many fights at all.

I will also point out, to the best of our knowledge, Luke didn't really get in many fights before getting his lightsabre either (the Tuskan Raiders got the drop on him). Rey has apparently for some time carried around and fought with her staff, so she already has some insight of the ins-and-outs of melee (and if D&D's BAB has taught us nothing else, it's that being trained in one weapon lets you use others too - Yes, that's tongue-in-cheek).

Plus, the on-screen training Luke got with his lightsabre was pretty much centered around blocking laser blasts from a remote. I don't recall seeing Rey trying any of that defection stuff, so we really don't know if she can do any of that very well at all.

Also also - Kylo Ren was shot by Chewie, then fought Finn while injured, and then fought Rey while still injured. I think being beaten after facing essentially three-on-one odds doesn't hurt his potential threat level too much.

Also also also  - When the call of destiny came, Luke overcame the deaths of his uncle/aunt pretty darn quickly without an apparent lingering thought. Rey considered ignoring her call to destiny several times (and outright ran when finding Anakin's/Luke's lightsabre triggered its Force vision thing). She has plenty of weaknesses to face ahead of her.


----------



## Umbran

Jester Canuck said:


> During the credits I thought to myself, how was the Starkiller Base needed at all. They were going after Rey anyway.




No, they weren't.  Finn wanted to go after Rey.  Solo and Chewbacca have no real drive to do so, and certainly the rest of the Resistance doesn't.


----------



## Jester David

Umbran said:


> No, they weren't.  Finn wanted to go after Rey.  Solo and Chewbacca have no real drive to do so, and certainly the rest of the Resistance doesn't.



They don't need the rest of the Resistance. They were irrelevant to that scene without the weapon. 

Solo liked Rey and wanted to give her a job. It wouldn't have been a stretch for him and Chewie to want to rescue her, with the ulterior motive of finding Ren.   And they would know she'd seen the map, and Poe could tell them Ren reads minds, so there's the incentive to rescue her before he can find Luke. 
They all go to the base or ship and everything unfolds exactly the same. 

The Starkiller Base is redundant and unneeded in every way and just makes the movie more of a copy and less original.


----------



## Morrus

Umbran said:


> No, they weren't.  Finn wanted to go after Rey.  Solo and Chewbacca have no real drive to do so, and certainly the rest of the Resistance doesn't.




Indeed. Finn had to lie about being able to shut the shields down to get a mission going. His plan was to rescue Rey. Everyone else was just there to lower the shields and then blow up the base.


----------



## Shasarak

Morrus said:


> I think you guys were watching a different movie to me! She crashed the Falcon several times, she got her ass utterly kicked by Kylo Ren once, and in her second fight with him was pretty much desperately staggering back trying to survive until the last bit where she used the Force. I don't think she's as super-competent as folks are saying, though she clearly has an advantage by virtue of being strong in the Force (like Luke and Anakin were natural super-pilots, etc.)
> 
> Nah, she wasn't a Mary Sue.  She competent, and a Force user. In other words, a real female protagonist.
> 
> Kylo  was a stroke of genius. Trying to make him into a super villain like Dart Vader - the greatest movie villain ever to exist - would have instantly doomed the film to failure. There is no way to win that comparison, and even if you managed it, you'd be accused of simply copying.  So they did the right thing - they took a completely different route.  The fact that he's not as awesome as Vader is built-in to his character and drives his flaws. It makes him interesting.
> 
> Kylo Ren is Luke from the original trilogy, not Vader. The role is reversed - he's learning the dark side and trying to resist the light, unlike Luke whose arc was learning the light said and trying to resist the dark. Vader is the wrong comparison in terms of both ability and story role.  This is the story of an evil Luke, not a second Vader.




I wish I had seen your movie - sounds cool!


----------



## Morrus

Shasarak said:


> I wish I had seen your movie - sounds cool!




Did she not crash the Falcon, get easily captured by Kylo, and get beaten about by him until she used the Force when you saw it? Or are you disputing that any of those events took place? I'm not sure where you're going with that.


----------



## Umbran

Jester Canuck said:


> Solo liked Rey and wanted to give her a job. It wouldn't have been a stretch for him and Chewie to want to rescue her, with the ulterior motive of finding Ren.




I disagree.  If Kylo Ren had taken her back to a major First Order base that wasn't a megaweapon poised to shoot anyone down, I don't see as he's got a compelling reason to go after her.  Given the situation where Kylo has a potential map to Luke, and the Resistance has a map to Luke, the top priority becomes a race to Luke - his longtime friend and the last known Jedi who is now at risk, not rescuing a girl he'd just met.  Without the threat of the megaweapon, Leia would send Han (best pilot, fastest ship) to save her brother, not save the otherwise unknown girl.

If he wants to find Ben, the best thing to do is to find Luke first, and wait for Ben to show up.

By the way, I don't think we should refer to him as "Ren" any more than we'd refer to later Annakin as "Darth".  There are potentially several "Ren"s - all part of the Knights of Ren.  HIs personal name there is "Kylo".


----------



## Shasarak

Morrus said:


> Did she not crash the Falcon, get easily captured by Kylo, and get beaten about by him until she used the Force when you saw it? Or are you disputing that any of those events took place? I'm not sure where you're going with that.




In the movie I saw she never crashed (unlike the best pilot in the Resistance) in fact she was in so much of control that she was able to line up Fin for a shot with his damaged blaster.

If scraping up a little sand counts as crashing then Han was also crashing when he came in on the Deathstar planet and we know that is unpossible.


----------



## Jester David

Umbran said:


> I disagree.  If Kylo Ren had taken her back to a major First Order base that wasn't a megaweapon poised to shoot anyone down, I don't see as he's got a compelling reason to go after her.  Given the situation where Kylo has a potential map to Luke, and the Resistance has a map to Luke, the top priority becomes a race to Luke - his longtime friend and the last known Jedi who is now at risk, not rescuing a girl he'd just met.  Without the threat of the megaweapon, Leia would send Han (best pilot, fastest ship) to save her brother, not save the otherwise unknown girl.
> 
> If he wants to find Ben, the best thing to do is to find Luke first, and wait for Ben to show up.



It'd be odd but not unsellable and not a huge plot point. It would have irked me a heck of a lot less than bringing yet another megaweapon into the Star Wars universe, which every bad EU writer seemed to want to do as well. 

I just find it annoying that you can play "bad EU novel plot Bingo" with the first major Star Wars film in a decade. 



Umbran said:


> By the way, I don't think we should refer to him as "Ren" any more than we'd refer to later Annakin as "Darth".  There are potentially several "Ren"s - all part of the Knights of Ren.  HIs personal name there is "Kylo".



I don't recall the knights of Ren. Where were those in the movie?


----------



## darjr

Mentioned by snoke and standing around kylo in reys vision.


----------



## darjr

Shasarak said:


> In the movie I saw she never crashed (unlike the best pilot in the Resistance) in fact she was in so much of control that she was able to line up Fin for a shot with his damaged blaster.
> 
> If scraping up a little sand counts as crashing then Han was also crashing when he came in on the Deathstar planet and we know that is unpossible.




Uh yea, han was crashing. There was even broken trees and a slide up to a cliff.


----------



## Morrus

Shasarak said:


> In the movie I saw she never crashed (unlike the best pilot in the Resistance) in fact she was in so much of control that she was able to line up Fin for a shot with his damaged blaster.




My interest level in discussing the semantics of the word "crash" are pretty minimal, I'm afraid. Substitute whatever word you prefer.



> If scraping up a little sand counts as crashing then Han was also crashing when he came in on the Deathstar planet and we know that is unpossible.




Yes, Han crash-landed.


----------



## Shasarak

darjr said:


> Uh yea, han was crashing. There was even broken trees and a slide up to a cliff.




This is crashing:

View attachment 72574


----------



## Umbran

Jester Canuck said:


> It'd be odd but not unsellable and not a huge plot point. It would have irked me a heck of a lot less than bringing yet another megaweapon into the Star Wars universe, which every bad EU writer seemed to want to do as well.




So, you figure the fact that the first movie had a Death Star, the second had a Super Star Destroyer, and the third another Death Star... had nothing to do with the trope?  



> I don't recall the knights of Ren. Where were those in the movie?




Snoke mentions that Kylo is the leader of the Knights of Ren.  We don't know much about them otherwise.  They are presumed to be the folks behind Ben Solo in the momentary flashback of him killing Luke's other apprentices.


----------



## Umbran

Shasarak said:


> This is crashing:




Any landing you can walk away from...


----------



## Shasarak

Morrus said:


> My interest level in discussing the semantics of the word "crash" are pretty minimal, I'm afraid. Substitute whatever word you prefer.




The only time Rey flew by her self she managed to get into space to be captured by Han.

Exactly when in the movie did she crash?



> Yes, Han crash-landed.




No, he was "keeping low" so that the Falcon would not be detected.


----------



## WayneLigon

Morrus said:


> I think you guys were watching a different movie to me!. ... Nah, she wasn't a Mary Sue.  She competent, and a Force user. In other words, a real female protagonist.





Shasarak said:


> I wish I had seen your movie - sounds cool!




I saw that movie. It was good enough I'm going to a third showing tonight.


----------



## Umbran

Shasarak said:


> No, he was "keeping low" so that the Falcon would not be detected.




Yeah, 'cause doing a belly-skid through the snow up to the edge of a cliff was his plan all along!

Han Solo is actually a cat.  No matter what happens, he walks a way with, "I meant to do that!"


----------



## Morrus

Shasarak said:


> The only time Rey flew by her self she managed to get into space to be captured by Han.
> 
> Exactly when in the movie did she crash?




I was uninterested the "definition of the word 'crash'" discussion when I lasted posted that I was. Now I'm in an actual coma. It's just not interesting to me. Sorry! You carry on and enjoy, though!


----------



## Shasarak

WayneLigon said:


> I saw that movie. It was good enough I'm going to a third showing tonight.




Lucky son of a gun.


----------



## darjr

That wasn't crashing. That was being shot down.

Lol


----------



## Jester David

Umbran said:


> So, you figure the fact that the first movie had a Death Star, the second had a Super Star Destroyer, and the third another Death Star... had nothing to do with the trope?



The super star destroyer wasn't really a big plot point, just a big menacing vehicle. And the repetition of the Death Star plot in Jedi _was_ a criticism of that movie upon release, and is a problem. It was one of the weaker parts of Episode VI. 
A plot problem doesn't become less of a plot problem when it's repeated, and just becomes _more_ unoriginal.


----------



## AriochQ

In my mind, when you "crash" a vehicle, it no longer operates until repaired.


----------



## Morrus

I think it's safe to say that when someone fixates solely on the dictionary definition of one word somebody casually used, they've pretty much departed the debate.


----------



## Umbran

Jester Canuck said:


> A plot problem doesn't become less of a plot problem when it's repeated, and just becomes _more_ unoriginal.




Originality is hard to come by - as noted upthread, while the statement that there are no new plots may not be technically accurate, there's something to be noted in the practical difficulty in coming up with them.  And new, for the sake of new, isn't actually adding value. 

Moreover, it can be seen as saying something about evil - that it isn't terribly original itself, that Evil and creativity don't go hand in hand.  The Emperor isn't actually good at *building* thing, only at destroying things.

It isn't really a "plot problem" insofar as there's no reason this couldn't or shouldn't happen, in terms of the fiction's internal consistency - it even seems sensible, in that the Empire has the upper hand at the end of Empire Strikes Back - why would they feel a need to try something different?  Nor is it a plot problem, in the sense that while the icon is repeated, the path to dealing with the thing - the actual plot - is very different.

It is a repeated trope, yes.  But that's what genre pieces do - stick to a set of tropes to support common themes and styles.  Megaweapons are a Star Wars trope.


----------



## MarkB

Bagpuss said:


> However Luke requires training to use the lightsabre, and even then he loses pretty much every battle he is in using it. You see Luke fail on several occasions. He also starts the film as a whinny bitch, but develops as the series goes on. The only point of vulnerability Rey shows in the film is when Kylo Ren holds her with the force, before bringing her back to Starkiller base, yet within moments of that, she is blocking his mind reading, and developing mind control all by herself. Now there maybe some explanation for all of this (like she's Luke's daughter, and very strong in the Force), but I still think it would have made for a more dramatic film if the hero was a little more at risk, and threatened.




My takeaway from the mind-probing scene where Rey reversed Kylo's attempted mind-meld was that she didn't just pull a few memories out of him - that glimpse into his mind also let her see some aspects of how to use the Force. That's what led to her mind-tricking the guard a few minutes later.

I think Kylo realised it too - that's part of what's behind his warning that the longer she stays free, the more powerful she'll become.

The other part of that warning is an acknowledgement that this _is_ an Awakening of the Force. Rey's strong innate Force abilities were sparked into life first by the visions from Luke's lightsaber and then by her meld with Kylo, and through the rest of the movie her potential is being gradually expanded as she begins to understand and apply the things she saw in those brief glimpses.


----------



## Desh-Rae-Halra

Isn't there an OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) that would require some safety rails on small walkways over large mechanical chasms????
Also, where did the engineers for these bases earn their degrees?

Where were the Y wings? Did I miss them? Arent those the actual Bombers you would want on a bombing run?


----------



## Umbran

Desh-Rae-Halra said:


> Isn't there an OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) that would require some safety rails on small walkways over large mechanical chasms????




No, in the Empire and its decendants it is the SHSA (Sith Health and Safety Administration).  The appropriate regulation is 137.43/9ZA, and it says, "Do what you're told or a lightsaber takes your head off".

This is closely related to regulation 137.42/8RM which says, "Let the Wookie win."



> Also, where did the engineers for these bases earn their degrees?




"Not Get Force-Choked University".  Where did you get yours?



> Where were the Y wings? Did I miss them? Arent those the actual Bombers you would want on a bombing run?




In EU canon, the Y-wings are already old at the time of A New Hope, iirc.  In this... the Resistance is funded, but that funding has limits.  They aren't a fully-equipped military.


----------



## Leatherhead

Umbran said:


> You realize that she's not really more competent than Finn




That's my problem with it.

I find it believable for Finn to know how to exploit the incompetence in his fellow Troopers, seeing as how that is a case of "knowing yourself."  His flaws would be similar to the flaws of every other Trooper due to the way they are brought up. Perhaps it is a bit more believable for me because I was in the military myself. And while he does continue to lie to everyone he meets, it gets exposed and resolved quickly. His escape from the base may or may not have been helped along by Kylo Ren (who knew what was up) conveniently looking the other way while it happened, in order to cause trouble for the General.

Rey vs Kylo Ren is trying to do the same thing. But in this case they are opposites. Which makes Kylo Ren look totally incompetent despite the fact he already has significant (if incomplete) training and did Anakin's "kill all the younglings" bit before the movie started. When your main antagonist looks totally incompetent, it makes the Hero look artificially too good.


----------



## MarkB

Desh-Rae-Halra said:


> Where were the Y wings? Did I miss them? Arent those the actual Bombers you would want on a bombing run?




They're marginally more capable in that role than X-Wings, yes, but they were already an outdated design by the time of the original trilogy, with X-Wings able to match or outperform them in most roles.

It's a similar progression to that seen in real-world military aircraft over the last several decades, with dedicated tactical bombers being largely phased out in favour of multirole aircraft that can perform well as both fighters and bombers.


----------



## Umbran

Leatherhead said:


> Rey vs Kylo Ren is trying to do the same thing. But in this case they are opposites.




No they aren't. They establish early on that she's no novice to armed combat.  

And the comparison of styles in various trilogies is astonishingly clear - compare the prequels, with its wuxia-esque lightsaber combat, to this.  



> Which makes Kylo Ren look totally incompetent despite the fact he already has significant (if incomplete) training and did Anakin's "kill all the younglings" bit before the movie started.




He's _not supposed to be amazingly competent_, yet.  He's not actually a slouch, though.  He can take on a trained fighter while injured (Finn), but he can't take on multiple fresh attackers in a row.  He's formidable to a normal human - stormtroopers and First Order officers won't want to  cross him, as individuals, but he is not supposed to be Vader. 

Note in the flashback, Ben had six or seven people helping him deal with the apprentices.  The only real threat there was probably Luke.  And if they had a lick of sense they'd have done it while Luke wasn't right in front of them.  That step was probably less a test of his combat prowess (because they were apprentices, likely no more advanced than himself) but of his emotional commitment to Snoke.


----------



## Jester David

Umbran said:


> It is a repeated trope, yes.  But that's what genre pieces do - stick to a set of tropes to support common themes and styles.  Megaweapons are a Star Wars trope.




Right, and a new megaweapon might be fun. But a planetoid super weapon that shoots big beams and destroys planets but is blown up by a small fighter? That's when it crosses the line from trope to "been there, done that". 

Even if you include the battle droid ship from Episode One and the super star destroyer in the "super weapon" camp, only 4/6ths had superweapons and half were planet destroyers and spherical. 

Why not something akin to the star forge from _Knights of the Old Republic_? Or a starkiller that just destroys stars and leaves freezing planets behind? Or something that makes use of the Force showing it's not insignificant in comparison to the Death Star. 
Or any of a dozen new ideas that are something different than the Death Star just turned up to 11?

Even the movie itself seems to treat the megaweapon as irrelevant and tacked-on. The Starkiller Base also just seems to come out of left field. Halfway through the movie the evil bad guys just develop this new scheme. "Oh yeah, and we have this crazy weapon." Why were they even bothering with anything in the first half when they were just going to obliterate the rest?
The map is somewhat important, but at the end that doesn't seem to matter since they were quite willing to just destroy the Resistance anyway. (How they knew where the Resistance were is another matter.)


----------



## Jester David

Leatherhead said:


> Rey vs Kylo Ren is trying to do the same thing. But in this case they are opposites. Which makes Kylo Ren look totally incompetent despite the fact he already has significant (if incomplete) training and did Anakin's "kill all the younglings" bit before the movie started. When your main antagonist looks totally incompetent, it makes the Hero look artificially too good.




I initially reacted to that poorly, wondering when she learned to fight with a lightsaber. But she was more competent in hand to hand combat, and does use a staff. Melee is her thing, opposed to Finn who was a blaster man. I totally buy her being a saber natural.


----------



## werecorpse

I quite enjoyed it. I liked the 4 young new characters, Po, Finn, Rey & Kylo. 
I felt it drew too much from movies 4-6 (especially 4) - it's like Hollywood have got used to just making reboots and remakes. (Desert planet, ice planet, forest planet)
I thought Harrison Ford's performance was generally poor, more Ham Solo than I would have liked- the quips, the blind shot over the shoulder etc made it feel like he was performing in a remake of spaceballs rather than Star Wars. 
I felt the star killer base was unecessary and annoying (rerun plus were the shields, the prison and the exhaust port (or whatever weakness it was) all in the same building?) and the first order didn't just have a nod to the third reich, they all but goose stepped.
I also disliked the final quick trip to Luke. They should have ended it after the battle and shown Luke getting ready or something -saved the meeting of Luke (who we all know anyway and who didn't reveal anything) until movie 8.
I liked BB-8, the small glasses lady, the storm trooper turning good, I wasn't bothered by Rey's competence (she is just less whiny farm boy more competent street rat than Luke - I'm fine with that) though her use of the force seemed a bit advanced. I felt Kylo's loss might have been partially due to having just killed his father, being shot by chewbacca's weapon that plainly packs a punch, and having fought Finn.
I liked Solo's death scene, Finns relationship with Po and Rey, Rey telling Finn to stop holding my hand while we run.

All in all a welcome addition to Star Wars after episodes 1-3 went off track IMO.


----------



## lyle.spade

MarkB said:


> They're marginally more capable in that role than X-Wings, yes, but they were already an outdated design by the time of the original trilogy, with X-Wings able to match or outperform them in most roles.
> 
> It's a similar progression to that seen in real-world military aircraft over the last several decades, with dedicated tactical bombers being largely phased out in favour of multirole aircraft that can perform well as both fighters and bombers.




I was thinking about my dear Y-Wings when the squadron took off for the attack...looked for them, and knew they'd likely not be there. They were current during the Clone Wars, and old by the time the Rebellion starting blowing things up. I remember reading somewhere they they had no body panels by EpIV: mechanics had spent so much time fixing them that they stopped bothering putting them back on.

I actually like them more in the EpIV-VI style, rather than from the Clone Wars; I guess I just got used to them looking so rough.


----------



## lyle.spade

Curmudjinn said:


> From what I've read of others' thoughts, Luke didn't make a map for people to find him.
> He was plotting his course using R2D2 as he sought out the First Temple. The last section was shown to him by Max Von Sydow's character, whom reproduced that piece for Leia. Luke had R2 intentionally power down when he was given the last piece just in case Kylo Ren found the droid.
> 
> Makes sense.




That makes a lot of sense - thanks! I'm going to use that.

Q: what/who was Max Von Sydow supposed to be?


----------



## Jester David

double post somehow...


----------



## Cor Azer

For those who are looking for deeper answers, some spoilers/info from the novelization (which is based on an earlier draft of the film): http://www.dailydot.com/geek/star-wars-force-awakens-novelization-highlights/

And to add to Umbran's comments about building up Kylo Ren in this film, that's apparently J.J. Abrams' goal: http://www.themarysue.com/that-kylo-ren-scene-in-the-force-awakens/


----------



## Morrus

Jester Canuck said:


> Right, and a new megaweapon might be fun. But a planetoid super weapon that shoots big beams and destroys planets but is blown up by a small fighter? That's when it crosses the line from trope to "been there, done that".
> 
> Even if you include the battle droid ship from Episode One and the super star destroyer in the "super weapon" camp, only 4/6ths had superweapons and half were planet destroyers and spherical.




Maybe _Star Wars_ movies aren't your thing?  I mean, that _is_ their general theme, prequels included. If you're looking for something thematically different, might I suggest _Star Trek?
_
Wait, that was JJ Abrams aswell. I take that back!


----------



## Grumpy RPG Reviews

So I bet Kylo Ren freaks out and smashes the hell out of things even over small disappointments. Like he's at a Space Tex-Mex place and they bring him a cheese enchilada rather than the chicken one he ordered, and he totally loses his s--t and out comes the flaming lightsabre.


----------



## Grumpy RPG Reviews

lyle.spade said:


> Q: what/who was Max Von Sydow supposed to be?




[deadpan]Mace Windu.[/deadpan]


----------



## GX.Sigma

I'm glad we have an EU explanation for the political situation, but that really should've been in the movie itself. The whole time I was watching it, I was thinking, if the Republic is in charge, doesn't that mean the _bad guys_ are the "resistance?" All we ever see of the First Order is one Star Destroyer, so I thought they were a minor thing.

I agree with what has been said about General Phasma. She really didn't need to be there. They could have given all her lines to that _other_ generic British villain (no, not _that_ other generic British villain, the OTHER other generic British villain!) and the movie would be exactly the same. I guess they just needed a minorly threatening faceless authority figure to be the punch line of the "trash compactor" joke. 

Anyone know whether she was supposed to be a droid or a human?


----------



## Morrus

GX.Sigma said:


> I'm glad we have an EU explanation for the political situation, but that really should've been in the movie itself.




We don't have an EU explanation. The EU has been declared all non-canon.

It should be in *a* movie, I agree. It doesn't have to be this one. They have plans for a lot of movies.



> The whole time I was watching it, I was thinking, if the Republic is in charge, doesn't that mean the _bad guys_ are the "resistance?" All we ever see of the First Order is one Star Destroyer, so I thought they were a minor thing.




I guess up till this point they were a minor thing. At least on a Galactic scale. Starkiller Base allowed them to enter the big leagues and kill the Rebublic, turning the status quote into an ungoverned Galaxy (like Earth, which has no world government). 



> I agree with what has been said about General Phasma. She really didn't need to be there. They could have given all her lines to that _other_ generic British villain (no, not _that_ other generic British villain, the OTHER other generic British villain!) and the movie would be exactly the same. I guess they just needed a minorly threatening faceless authority figure to be the punch line of the "trash compactor" joke.
> 
> Anyone know whether she was supposed to be a droid or a human?




I posted this earlier, but we know she was originally a male character. My theory is that she was a male Imperial-style officer in a grey uniform and cap. Watch her, and her lines, and her role, and ignore the fancy armor, and she works perfectly. Imagine Captain Needa (who is still on the Star Destroyer in this film!) remonstrating with Finn for taking his helmet off. At no point does her role include military action on her part. I content that the part was written as an officious grey-uniformed bureaucrat, she got the role, the appearance changed to the cool chrome armor, but the role did not change.

The difference, I'll bet, is that grey uniform Phasma would have died. But cool Chrome Phasma gets trash-shunted instead, because now they have an idea for her in VIII.

So she was an incidental character. Still is, really. But they have written a bigger role for her in VIII, so she needed to survive. Thus weak trash compactor callback.


----------



## Jester David

Morrus said:


> Maybe _Star Wars_ movies aren't your thing?  I mean, that _is_ their general theme, prequels included. If you're looking for something thematically different, might I suggest _Star Trek?
> _
> Wait, that was JJ Abrams aswell. I take that back!




Even in that movie the big planet destroying weapon wasn't a sphere.


----------



## Umbran

Morrus said:


> Thus weak trash compactor callback.




It made seemingly everyone in my theater laugh.  So, maybe it worked as intended.


----------



## Morrus

Umbran said:


> It made seemingly everyone in my theater laugh.  So, maybe it worked as intended.




Mime too, sadly. I still maintain that mentioning a thing people remember is a long way from comedy genius! I reckon in a few years, you'll cringe at that. Callbacks can be used by expert comedians to great effect (Stewart Lee does this very well), so I acknowledge it is a valid comic device. This is not a good example of it though.

Combine that with my above theory on who Phasma was supposed to be, I'd be willing to wager that her survival was a late-written line. I may be wrong - we'll probably never know - but I stand by my bet that in a few years you'll wonder why you found that funny.


----------



## ZzarkLinux

*Re: Was StarDestroyer necessary?*

I'm late to the discussion, but reading Umbran & Jester discuss plot, I think has helped me understand my displeasure with the movie. Thanks to both of you for stimulating my ideas.

SHORT VERSION:

The First Order SHOULD HAVE ATTACKED the Resistance Base. The movie got it backwards, and it broke my immersion. The plot incoherently jumped from "First Order is chasing Rey" to "Big Bad Enemy has a Weapon of Doom".

CASUAL READING VERSION:

The whole first-half of the movie was "First Order is hunting for Rey" and the First Order should have attacked the Resistance Base. It continues the theme of the movie: First Order sends army to hunt Rey & hunt Resistance. The First Order pursues and attacks. The Resistance evades the threat. Rey evades the threat.

Star Destroyer breaks that plot in half. Instead of StarDestroyer as a theat, add a "the First Order has an Attack Fleet" as the threat. I was expecting First Order to be a big bad army, not a bunch of pansies who hide on a planet.

By attacking the Resistance:
(1) First Order captures Rey & interrogates her in the fleet
(2) The fleet continues moving towards the Resistance Base, same theme as before
(3) The fleet attacks Resistance Base. Lots of battle.
(4) The Rebel Base has "Defense Cannon" which fires at the First Order
(5) The First Order's mothership is disabled in the skies above Resistance Base

Now the movie can continue exactly as before: The First Order wants to land on the planet to eliminate the Resistance. The Resistance wants to board the First Order mothership to destroy it's shields and free Rey. Tie Fighter battles in the sky. Sneaky Hans Solo on the First Order mothership. Lightsabre battle on the Resistance Base planet. Instead of Rey casually visiting Luke, now the pressure can escalate with the Resistance barely survivong and Rey anxious to get help from Luke.

Anyway, I think that I would have liked that movie more. Everyone's a critic


----------



## Cor Azer

Umbran said:


> It made seemingly everyone in my theater laugh.  So, maybe it worked as intended.




When I saw that scene, while I did obviously catch the reference to A New Hope, to me it also showed that Finn was a good guy because he wouldn't kill a captured enemy combatant. In combat? Kill away. But a captured one? Nope, not killing.


----------



## Grumpy RPG Reviews

The First Order did not know where the Resistance was located when they destroyed the republic capital. They only learned that later.


----------



## SkidAce

Morrus said:


> Maybe _Star Wars_ movies aren't your thing?  I mean, that _is_ their general theme, prequels included. If you're looking for something thematically different, might I suggest _Star Trek?
> _
> Wait, that was JJ Abrams aswell. I take that back!




I love Star Wars, but I have to admit groaning when I saw the superweapon was a deathstar BIGGER!

I believe they could have done better, and that's not a reason to say "maybe star wars movies aren't your thing"

But overall I think the movie was fantastic.  One thing that did bug me.  Super killer octopus kills and rips multiple people to shred...but drags our hero across the ship for some reason.  Glad it did...but odd...


----------



## ZzarkLinux

Re: Grumpy RPG Reviews

I must have missed that, thanks for clarifying.

Then I think they should have ret-conned that. If the movie writers moved Finn & Hans & Chewy to the Resistance Base, then the movie writers needed to give them a reason to leave that base to continue the movie. Obviously the writers dug themselves a hole, because searching for "Mid-Life Crisis Luke" wasn't a big enough reason to move on. The writers wanted more X-Wing battles !!! More LightSabre battles !!! More Sneak Into Enemy Territory !!!

Instead of inventing the Star Destroyer, why didn't they just say "the First Order discovers the Resistance and attacks". Much more immersive in my opinion.

Hell, it could have been FYNN's ship-fleet that attacks the Resistance Base. You'd still get all the X-Wing battles, LightSabre battles, and Sneak OnBoard to save Rey. You'd still get all the character development and "Garbage Chute" jokes too. You'd get more "The Force Awakens in Rey & Fynn" and less "The Force Awak--- OhMyGodAGiantSpaceLaser!!!!!"

Maybe they thought it was too identical to episode VI.
Oh well, I still gave the movie 4/5 stars


----------



## der_kluge

Saw it on Sunday.  Two days' later I finally got the reference to "Ben" Solo.  Presumably, he's named after Ben Kenobi. I guess... Although Leia doesn't refer to Obi Wan as Ben. R2's message has her asking for "Obi Wan", and Leia never even really interacted with him, and Han only knew him as a crazy old man he took to the Death Star, who then died.


----------



## Hypersmurf

der_kluge said:


> Although Leia doesn't refer to Obi Wan as Ben.




Luke: "I'm here with Ben Kenobi!"
Leia: "Ben Kenobi? Where is he!?"

-Hyp.


----------



## MarkB

Cor Azer said:


> When I saw that scene, while I did obviously catch the reference to A New Hope, to me it also showed that Finn was a good guy because he wouldn't kill a captured enemy combatant. In combat? Kill away. But a captured one? Nope, not killing.




The reason I found it funny, aside from the callback, was that we'd just recently learned that Finn's job on Starkiller Base was sanitation, so of course he'd know exactly where the trash compactors were.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Bagpuss said:


> I think a much better ending would have been if Rey was losing the fight and the only thing that saved her was the ground separating the two of them.
> 
> It would make the Kylo Ren appear to be a more credible threat,
> It would make Rey less of a Mary Sue character.
> It would mean she could get some training from Luke in the next film, harking back to Empire.
> 
> I think that was one of the few wrong steps they took with this film.




100 percent disagree. Rey had a moment of force clarity, and otherwise would have died. She was saved by the force from a Kylo Ren who was already _severely_ injured, and had just beaten Finn. Both Kylo Ren and Rey end the movie in desperate need. Ren of surgery, and Rey of training. Because without training, a second encounter with Ren would end the other way. 

And the fact that they are both gone to train is perfect. This set of films isn't as singularly about the good guy force user main character, and that's a great thing. They made exactly the right choice. 



goldomark said:


> The Resistance and the First Order explained.
> 
> http://www.vox.com/2015/12/21/10634568/star-wars-the-force-awakens-spoilers-republic-first-order
> 
> Yeah, I didn't get any of that from the film.





The parts about the New Republic unofficially supporting the Resistance (which clearly establishes them as separate things) is explicitly stated in the film. That speech also clearly establishes that the First Order and New Republic are two separate "states". 

IIRC, the scroll also sets some of it up pretty succinctly and clearly. 



Umbran said:


> Given that most of that lore was set in the EU, which they're largely ignoring, yeah....
> 
> Much of working with a science fiction show is finding ways *around* the science errors and inconsistencies. It is not plausible that a person part of a galactic empire doesn't know what a parsec is, any more than it is not plausible that we don't know what a time zone is. So, fleecing the newbs really isn't an good explanation.
> 
> The better explanation is that the Kessel Run is a pretty twisty thing, and that Han's ship managed a more straight course. Being "fast" in hyperspace may be part outright speed, and part ability to steer closer to things that other ships have to avoid. Like the fastest cars in racing aren't only faster because of their engine, but because of their very precise handling.




Exactly. The Kessel Run is a hyperspace route, possibly through a fairly frequently shifting starscape, and so making the run in a much straighter line is the hyperspace equivalent of hugging turns so well that it literally requires both expert driving and knowledge of the track/car/how these things work, and a very, very well made car, with the kind of suspension that only comes custom. 

In that context, what starts as a gaff, actually ends up making sense. Any galactic citizen with a halfway decent knowledge of ships and hyperspace and who has heard of the Kessel Run (which Han seems to assume they have) will know that if he isn't lying, he and the Falcon are impressive, and a good choice for getting somewhere fast while avoiding the Empire. 

Heck, I wouldn't be surprised in nav factors lead to parsecs being a normal measure of hyperspace efficiency. Crappy navcoms end up taking the long way round, because they can't account for the ever changing starscape of the galaxy well enough to go between rather than around two neighboring systems, thus taking multiple parsecs longer (in the space sense of long, rather than the time sense). 

a navcom is taking star charts and known routes, and then using a lot of math to figure out where everything is _now_, based on where it was x amount of time ago and how fast things are moving, and then planning a safe route that doesn't collide you with a star. I'd say that shaving off _distance_ is functionally the same thing as shaving off time. 

As someone who has worked as a delivery driver for an auto supply chain, this makes perfect sense to me. Driving faster isn't always on the table, but you can shave time off the run by shaving distance off the route. 

Anyway, someone refered to Rey as having "brushed off" Keylo Ren's mind search thing. 
What. 
She...the scene spends multiple minutes showing her struggle against it, fail at first, then they strain against eachother, and she manages to scratch the surface of his thoughts, at which point he got angry and left to gain control of himself again. 

Sorry, but that isn't "brushing off". 



Morrus said:


> Does he? His battles include two with Vader, one on Jabba's skiff, and deflecting a few stormtrooper shots on Endor. Am I missing any lightsaber battles?
> 
> By my count he loses just one battle he uses it in - the one against Vader in Empire. And that guy's the Biggest Bad around, and he still knocks him down twice, and gets a couple of glancing blows in.
> 
> Nah, Luke's pretty darn good.




Seriously. In Empire, he has _barely_ trained at all with the saber, and Vader is a literally war hero turned war...villain? whatever. who then has gone on to dedicate his whole existence to being the biggest baddest BBEG in town. And Luke still makes him work for it. 

Rey barely survives a fight with a guy who wouldn't survive his wounds much longer without medical attention. 

Rey is awesome as a character, but a mary sue? Nah.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

WalkingCorpse said:


> As problematic as the prequel trilogy was (what prequel trilogy), there was a deleted scene in Episode III that sort of answered the droid interpretation - there's a dialogue between Anakin and Obi-Wan while waiting for the lift in Grievous's warship, with Anakin throwing out Binary phrases (beeps, etc), asking for Obi-Wan's interpretation of the beeps. The scene finally answers the question, but since it didn't do much to drive the story, they likely cut it for that reason.



they cut a lot of the scenes that gave characters some amount of humanity and personality, sadly. 

That scene and the one where they confront Greivous and then cut a hole in the floor are exactly what the prequels needed more of. 

I also feel like, going back to the new movie, that a lot of people didn't listen to a lot of the dialogue. Like, the political situation is painted in broad strokes in the nazi speach, snoke calls Kylo Ren the Master of The Knights of Ren, or something very like that, etc. 
idk. 



Jester Canuck said:


> I initially reacted to that poorly, wondering when she learned to fight with a lightsaber. But she was more competent in hand to hand combat, and does use a staff. Melee is her thing, opposed to Finn who was a blaster man. I totally buy her being a saber natural.




I just assumed that lightsabers were part of stormtrooper training. or at least vaguely similar weapons. I mean, the guy he fights outside the cantina temple thing seems to have a weapon designed to deal with lightsabers, and Finn immediately uses it like it isn't totally foreign, while Rey clearly knows melee combat, but is adjusting to a new weapon, and only manages to win because Kylo is literally near death and about to collapse.


----------



## CapnZapp

It was completely derivative and did not have a original story thread whatsoever. Pure nostalgia pandering.

Still miles better than the prequels. Rey was good. BB-8 was good. Sandy Star Destroyer hulks were good.

Three and a half stars. Cautiously optimistic for future films, which might just dare to reintroduce a sliver of original storytelling and unexpectedness.


----------



## CapnZapp

Morrus said:


> So here's my review: 100% a Star Wars film which belongs with the original trilogy.
> 
> It's a transitional film, but it does it well. The new generation is really good.
> 
> I think the major death was kinda signposted a bit. You knew it was coming long before it happened. I felt worse for Chewie, but he, Rey, and BB8 make a great team.
> 
> Is this the first Star Wars film where nobody gets their hand cut off?
> 
> Luke lives in Ireland, eh?
> 
> Question: WHY was there a map to Luke, and why was it split into two? I feel like I missed something. For that matter, why a map and not just some coordinates? Seems like a random puzzle set up for the sake of it.



I wouldn't think too hard. It's the usual Star Wars plotting.

Finns plan is the most honest depiction of star wars logic yet "I have no plan, let's just use the force" Hilarious!


----------



## Raunalyn

Jester Canuck said:


> I really didn't like how so much of the movie was a retread, a mishmash of old bits from Episodes 4-6. The orphan on the desert planet. The rescue while dressed as a stormtrooper. A droid carrying secret data. An untrained kid just handed a lightsaber kept in a chest. Deactivating a shield generator on a planet. A trench run to blow up a base. The older mentor figure dying. Going off to train on a remote planet with the last Jedi.




I just watched Episode 4 the other night...the chest that Rey got the lightsaber from looks almost exactly like the chest that Obi-wan had Anakin's lightsaber in.

Don't get me wrong...I loved the movie...it was fun! But the homage to episode 4 was a bit heavy handed at times...


----------



## Neonchameleon

My take on the whole thing is that it was a remake that could have actually been better than Star Wars dragged down by trying to pretend to be a sequel rather than a remake. And as a sequel rather than a standalone it made The Phantom Menace look good.

Rey was fine, and certainly wasn't a Mary Sue. She was poking with the light sabre _as if it was a staff_ (the fight choreographer was far more on point than they were in any of the original trilogy) - and she was dealing with a badly wounded and part-trained Sith, not with Vader. And whoever said she put the TIE into the gunsights wasn't watching. The guns were locked forward rather than unable to move at all - so she did what she needed to, which was a sharp turn so she could get behind the TIE rather than the other way round.

And most of what [MENTION=1]Morrus[/MENTION] has praised I also saw. Making it an enjoyable standalone - and with the sense not to have Ren try to go head to head with Vader (although he could have tried to slow down his dialogue when wearing the mask for a more intimidating and more bluffy effect). Of course the argument could be that Ren was trying to be Anikin, but that's a whole different can of worms.

But the planet destroyer felt like cheap and unnecessary drama to me (rescuing Rey felt like it had far more emotional investment) and the super-weapon could have been cut entirely while just making the story a tighter one. Turning Han back into a straight smuggler felt as if it just undercut the character; with all his Rebellion contacts he would have been better off as a blockade runner - same basic job but with humanitarian cargoes. Progress leaning on his roots rather than straight regression. And don't get me started on the confusing mess that was the Republic/Rebellion/Resistance.

And I'd have appreciated not thinking "Han's about to do an Obi-Wan isn't he? Yup. There he goes." Also does anyone else think Snoke's about 6" tall like that fear demon from Buffy?


----------



## billd91

GX.Sigma said:


> I agree with what has been said about General Phasma. She really didn't need to be there. They could have given all her lines to that _other_ generic British villain (no, not _that_ other generic British villain, the OTHER other generic British villain!) and the movie would be exactly the same. I guess they just needed a minorly threatening faceless authority figure to be the punch line of the "trash compactor" joke.




Except that we've learned that Gwendoline Christie is contracted for Episode VIII, so Captain Phasma's reason for being there, aside from the trash compactor event, is to become a recurring enemy - probably looking out to revenge the trash humiliation. You can't have a recurring enemy that only occurs once. I have absolutely no problem with an actor's part being small in one movie and expand it later in a follow-up. In fact, I prefer it when looking at the development of franchises.


----------



## Umbran

ZzarkLinux said:


> I'm late to the discussion, but reading Umbran & Jester discuss plot, I think has helped me understand my displeasure with the movie. Thanks to both of you for stimulating my ideas.
> 
> SHORT VERSION:
> 
> The First Order SHOULD HAVE ATTACKED the Resistance Base.




That's using hindsight and viewer-knowledge.

You attack the Resistance base first only if you're more worried about short-term tactical threats.  And they weren't, because as far as they could tell, there was no threat!  Starkiller Base was perfectly safe from Resistance assault.  The Resistance could be safely ignored for the larger strategic goal.  Except that Han Solo conceived and executed a piloting feat nobody does - coming out of hyperspace *that close* to a planetary body.  It just isn't done.  It is as if Han pulled a secret weapon out of his butt, and you can't expect the First Order to have considered that possibility.

Now, why is the First Order jumping back and forth like that?  That's simple, when we think about it....

It seems like the First Order (and by extension, Snoke) wants to destroy the Republic and take over, right?  Do you want to do that with a protracted war?  No!  Starkiller Base is a way to do that quickly and cleanly - destroy the capitol and then while the Republic thrashes about with it's head cut off, mop up and move in.  Simple, clean, effective.  To be honest, maybe Starkiller isn't mobile - it may only really be intended for one shot. 

Except for one thing:  Starkiller or not, a Jedi probably poses the only credible threat to the plan, and Snoke's life.  Snoke has learned from Palpatine - being in power only makes you a target of Jedi.  Snoke's best bet is to not be too much of a threat until *after* he's killed Luke.  He can't even use Starkiller without alerting Luke - Jedi can sense the death of a planet over interstellar distances.  

But, the Resistance getting a copy of the map throws a zero-grav spanner into the works.  Major attacks on bases will not assure that the Resistance does not alert Luke to the situation - one guy in an X-Wing slipping by, and the jig is up.  The plan only survives by retrieving the map before the Resistance has seen it.  There's some thrashing around trying to do that, but ultimately Kylo Ren fails to accomplish it.  Then, there's no point in waiting.  Snoke must assume Luke is going to find out one way or another.  He sets off Starkiller, taking out the highest priority target first, and pulls Kylo Ren back for training, because that Jedi may take a while, but is on his way....


----------



## JediSoth

Jester Canuck said:


> Right, and a new megaweapon might be fun. But a planetoid super weapon that shoots big beams and destroys planets but is blown up by a small fighter? That's when it crosses the line from trope to "been there, done that".
> 
> <snip>




To be fair, Starkiller base wasn't destroyed by a small fighter. It was destroy by  the massive amounts of energy it was storing in preparation to fire. The bombs detonated by Chewie and the damage done by the X-Wings merely disabled the regulator thing that kept the energy in check.

It was actually pretty well-defended, too. The bombs didn't damage it enough to impair its function, and the initial attack by the X-Wings didn't do enough damage to impair its function. It was only because the bombs blew open a large enough opening for a crazy pilot to fly inside that they were finally able to do enough damage (a Star Warsian contrivance to be sure, but these types of movies run on that).


----------



## Jester David

JediSoth said:


> To be fair, Starkiller base wasn't destroyed by a small fighter. It was destroy by  the massive amounts of energy it was storing in preparation to fire. The bombs detonated by Chewie and the damage done by the X-Wings merely disabled the regulator thing that kept the energy in check.



And the Death Star wasn't blow up by a single proton torpedo. The energy in the reactor exhaust port just started a chain reaction which caused it to blow up.

The effect is the same: small fighter + planetoid megaweapon = explosion


----------



## ZzarkLinux

Umbran said:


> You attack the Resistance base first only if you're more worried about short-term tactical threats.  And they weren't (...) Starkiller Base was perfectly safe from Resistance assault.  (...) Except that Han Solo executed a piloting feat nobody does - coming out of hyperspace *that close* to a planetary body.
> 
> Now, why is the First Order jumping back and forth like that? It seems like the First Order (and by extension, Snoke) wants to destroy the Republic and take over.  Starkiller Base is a way to do that quickly and cleanly (...)
> 
> Except for one thing:  Jedi probably poses the only credible threat to the plan, and Snoke's life. (...) He can't even use Starkiller without alerting Luke - Jedi can sense the death of a planet over interstellar distances.
> 
> But, the Resistance getting a copy of the map throws a zero-grav spanner into the works. (...) There's some thrashing around trying to do that, but ultimately Kylo Ren fails to accomplish it.  Then, there's no point in waiting. (...)




I'm still parsing through this. I snipped the quote for brievity sake.

What you say makes sense now. So they were trying to add focus to Hans & Snoke. There were motivations and assumptions outside the movie which back this up. Overall a good goal I suppose.

My uncle & I are casual fans, and we missed almost everything you mention during the viewing. The force is weak in us :-( We were led to believe the movie was about Rey, Fynn, and escaping the Order.

I wish they could have dropped some hints about the greater OverPlot earlier in the movie. Yes there is a time limit, and the child-audience needs a shorter time limit. Maybe break it up into two movies, so the Rey/Fynn romance didn't feel so forced.

Thanks for the insight


----------



## Ovinomancer

Morrus said:


> Mime too, sadly. I still maintain that mentioning a thing people remember is a long way from comedy genius! I reckon in a few years, you'll cringe at that. Callbacks can be used by expert comedians to great effect (Stewart Lee does this very well), so I acknowledge it is a valid comic device. This is not a good example of it though.
> 
> Combine that with my above theory on who Phasma was supposed to be, I'd be willing to wager that her survival was a late-written line. I may be wrong - we'll probably never know - but I stand by my bet that in a few years you'll wonder why you found that funny.




What an odd thing to say.  How can you can be so sure that everyone else will agree with your tastes, if just given enough time?


----------



## Morrus

Ovinomancer said:


> What an odd thing to say.  How can you can be so sure that everyone else will agree with your tastes, if just given enough time?




Same way anybody makes a bet, I guess. One wagers based on one's estimate of the outcome, and then says "I bet X happens".

It's not that unusual, I promise you.


----------



## Umbran

Jester Canuck said:


> The effect is the same: small fighter + planetoid megaweapon = explosion




Yah.  Such is the point of heroic fiction:  One person *can* make a difference.


----------



## Umbran

ZzarkLinux said:


> I'm still parsing through this. I snipped the quote for brievity sake.
> 
> What you say makes sense now. So they were trying to add focus to Hans & Snoke.




No, not add focus.  Do not conflate "this is the sensible statement of what's likely going on" with "this is what the audience is supposed to focus upon".  

Consider that the real main characters here are Rey, Finn, and Kylo Ren.  All three of them are young, inexperienced, scared, and confused.  And, they are your viewpoint characters.  Do you expect to come out with a clean vision of what's going on if your viewpoint comes from characters like that?  No!  If you need to sit down and think out exactly what's going on, then the movie did its job of giving you the view from someone who doesn't really understand what's going on, yet!




> We were led to believe the movie was about Rey, Fynn, and escaping the Order.




It is about them, and Kylo Ren.  Finn, for example, doesn't give a rat's butt about Snoke's larger plan.  He cares about the only people who have recognized him and respected him as an individual - Poe and Rey.  So, yeah, Finn's story won't really show you Snoke's larger plan.  But, Finn's story *can't happen* unless Snoke has a larger plan in motion.  

And, since the movie is about those smaller stories, and not directly about that larger picture, you don't come away automatically understanding that larger picture until you sit down and really think about it for a few minutes, and work through the implicatiosn fo what we see.

Heaven's forefend, did Abrams give us a movie we have to *think* about!?!


----------



## Jester David

Umbran said:


> Yah.  Such is the point of heroic fiction:  One person *can* make a difference.



The one person isn't the problem. Had it been sabotage inside by reversing the polarity or setting off bombs that'd have worked. Or any of a dozen handwavy explanations for how the plucky band of rebels (sorry, resistance fighters) stop the big weapon. 
That'd be fine. And, since they had charges, that was even in the story. Han and Chewie set the bombs, blow up something importanty, and the weapon misfires. Everyone goes home. Medals all around. 

The problem comes when the superweapon is destroyed in the exact same method we've seen before. I already saw that movie already. Twice. Copying what I've seen before and liked doesn't make me automatically enjoy something. Otherwise I'd have liked the retread of _Into Darkness_. 


The best justification I saw for the copying is that Disney is trying to set up the franchise, and is doing so through emulation. They're showing they're connected to the past and history of the franchise. Beholden to it. So that when the future movies go off and do their own thing and get different, we'll accept that it's tied to the universe. They didn't want to start off completely new, because that would seem like they're ignoring what came before and aren't really Star Wars. 
That all makes great sense from a business perspective. And a lot of the stuff in Force Awakens might work well in Episode VIII, with the new Republic in disarray with their capital gone. This movie might just be setting up the new status quo, and doing so wrapped in familiar tropes. 
I understand that, and might even agree with that, but that doesn't make me _like_ the story any more.
And we end up with a situation similar to after Episode I, where we're waiting on the next film to see if that justifies the problems with the previous film. "Episode II/VIII will fix things!" 

Well... at least _Rogue One_ will likely do something different...


----------



## Umbran

Jester Canuck said:


> Copying what I've seen before and liked doesn't make me automatically enjoy something.




That's not a critique unless there exists a plot structure that *will* make you automatically like it.  I'm pretty sure that doesn't exist, so this isn't really an argument against it.  No *single* thing about it will make you like the whole.  They are banking on the entire package.  I daresay that structure was chosen not because it will make you like it, but because it is familiar, and therefore stays out of the way of the real meat of the thing - and the meat of it is where they *differ* from the previous movies, not where they are similar.


----------



## trappedslider

You know...26 pages and no one mentions that Starkiller was going to be Skywalker's original last name.....what kind of fans are you people?!?


----------



## smiteworks

Overall, I enjoyed the movie, but there was something I couldn't quite put my finger on that I didn't like about it. The new characters were all likable and the acting was much better than the prequels.  Even when Kylo Ren was throwing a temper tantrum, it didn't grate on my nerves like Jar Jar did. I think for me the biggest part that I didn't like was just the idea that Han and Leia would have a kid that turned to the dark side. The history of the series seems to show that this happens all the time, but when it was first discussed in the original trilogy, you had the sense that it was a rare and unfortunate thing that happened to Anakin and the results of this were so bad that it basically shaped the entire galaxy. Then the prequels came out and it showed it happening not just to Anakin but also to Count Dooku. Repeating it yet again makes you want to simply warn everyone you know and love away from ever using or learning about The Force. The force is bad, mkay. 

I thought the acting was great with a few small exceptions. I didn't like the beginning where FIN was in storm trooper armor. For me, it felt like he had to overact to convey his conflicted emotions while wearing armor. I thought Vader did a better job of this within ROTJ while still wearing a helmet. Outside of the armor, he was excellent. Rey was awesome. Han was good, as usual. Leia doesn't seem like her face can move anymore and I found her hard to watch this time around.

The blending of the CGI and the special effects was very well done. The story didn't try to explain everything in one go and there were no horrendous exposition like they did with midichlorians in Phantom.


----------



## MarkB

Neonchameleon said:


> And whoever said she put the TIE into the gunsights wasn't watching. The guns were locked forward rather than unable to move at all - so she did what she needed to, which was a sharp turn so she could get behind the TIE rather than the other way round.




Sorry, but you're misremembering there, or misinterpreting - the gun was locked straight down (which is "forward" from Finn's viewpoint because the Falcon's internal gravity orients perpendicular to the rest of the ship in the turrets so that "forward" is up for the top turret and down for the bottom turret - watch the spacefight in Episode IV when they escape the Death Star to see this explicitly).

When Finn is finally given a straight shot at the TIE Fighter, it's because Rey flips the ship up on its side so that its belly is directly facing the fighter.


----------



## Umbran

smiteworks said:


> I think for me the biggest part that I didn't like was just the idea that Han and Leia would have a kid that turned to the dark side.




I saw one essay that had an interesting point.  We had the original three movies, and they gave us heroes who won... and until now, we presumed they lived happily ever after (at least, most people did - barring the comparatively small number who read the EU books).  These movies make canon the idea that, quite frankly, rather than live happily ever after, they had major misery, and everything they fought and suffered for got torn down within their own lifetimes - Luke manages to help beat the Emperor, but his own apprentices all die or turn, and set him alone on the run.  Han and Leia's love turns to pain and separation when their own son becomes a murderer and joins up with the First Order that's just like the Empire they worked so hard to defeat, and Han's on son kills him.

They could very well ask what the point of it all was. 



> The history of the series seems to show that this happens all the time, but when it was first discussed in the original trilogy, you had the sense that it was a rare and unfortunate thing that happened to Anakin and the results of this were so bad that it basically shaped the entire galaxy. Then the prequels came out and it showed it happening not just to Anakin but also to Count Dooku. Repeating it yet again makes you want to simply warn everyone you know and love away from ever using or learning about The Force. The force is bad, mkay.




With great power comes great responsibility... and risk.  Note that in all the cases where we see someone turn, it is under the influence of someone who is already on the Dark Side.  Specifically, we don't see in the films anyone trained by the Jedi turn spontaneously.  What they do seems to work, and requires a full-on Sith master to break asunder.


----------



## dd.stevenson

Yeah the more I think about TFA, the less happy I am.

--Why don't they tell us who Rey is waiting for at Jaku? She's (apparently) the protagonist, since she's the one with agency during the climax--why isn't her motivation made clear?
--Why does she run away from the lightsaber? Why did the vision scare her? It didn't scare me. Again, I need to know the protaganist's motivation.
--How did Rey beat Kylo Ren? How did his offer inspire her to use the force and beat him?

I mean, I think I get it: Rey was one of the students in Luke's ill-fated academy, and whoever killed the other students wasn't willing/able to kill her, so she was dropped off at Jaku (means "weakness" in japanese, btw,) and she's waiting for whomever and then remembers her training because of what Kylo says. But you can't leave me guessing at the protagonist's motivations and arc--not in a Star Wars movie. 

There's more:

--Why does Han's death carry no consequences for the plot? The scene could be omitted, and nothing would change. Compare that to Ben's death in A New Hope--take that scene out, and the entire movie would fall apart.
--Why was it originally important to find Luke? I need to understand the motivations of the key players--that's not an optional piece of exposition.
--Why did he leave a map to his location in two separate pieces? Less important, but it's a weird choice to leave the mcguffin completely unexplained.

None of the above are plot holes; they're evidence that the plot is not self-contained. Compare that to the originals, which were each Hollywood trendsetters for their tight plot and dense storytelling.

It's a good movie, and better in some ways than any star wars movie to date; but I completely understand why it will never stand shoulder to shoulder with the originals in the eyes of many fans.


----------



## Sacrosanct

dd.stevenson said:


> Yeah the more I think about TFA, the less happy I am.
> 
> --Why don't they tell us who Rey is waiting for at Jaku? She's (apparently) the protagonist, since she's the one with agency during the climax--why isn't her motivation made clear?
> --Why does she run away from the lightsaber? Why did the vision scare her? It didn't scare me. Again, I need to know the protaganist's motivation.
> --How did Rey beat Kylo Ren? How did his offer inspire her to use the force and beat him?
> 
> I mean, I think I get it: Rey was one of the students in Luke's ill-fated academy, and whoever killed the other students wasn't willing/able to kill her, so she was dropped off at Jaku (means "weakness" in japanese, btw,) and she's waiting for whomever and then remembers her training because of what Kylo says. But you can't leave me guessing at the protagonist's motivations and arc--not in a Star Wars movie.
> 
> There's more:
> 
> --Why does Han's death carry no consequences for the plot? The scene could be omitted, and nothing would change. Compare that to Ben's death in A New Hope--take that scene out, and the entire movie would fall apart.
> --Why was it originally important to find Luke? I need to understand the motivations of the key players--that's not an optional piece of exposition.
> --Why did he leave a map to his location in two separate pieces? Less important, but it's a weird choice to leave the mcguffin completely unexplained.
> 
> None of the above are plot holes; they're evidence that the plot is not self-contained. Compare that to the originals, which were each Hollywood trendsetters for their tight plot and dense storytelling.
> 
> It's a good movie, and better in some ways than any star wars movie to date; but I completely understand why it will never stand shoulder to shoulder with the originals in the eyes of many fans.




There are other movies.  I wouldn't say things had nothing to do with the plot yet until we see those other movies.  For example, if Kylo's big plan is to kill Darth Pagious (sp) with a jedi (Rey) at his side when he does so (because he's fulfilling Vader's goal--to have a sith and jedi work together), then killing his father is the thing he's talking about when he says he doesn't know if he has the strength to do what is necessary (go full dark side).  Also, Rey was waiting for Han Solo (only she didn't know it).  When they get to the new planet and she says, "I've never seen this  much green in the galaxy", Han looks at her with a lot of regret in his eyes.  Regret for dropping her off on a desert wasteland planet with no green.


Really, my only really big issue was with the Starkiller weapon in general.  The projectiles don't travel at light speed, so how do they take out planets in completely different systems?  If the resistance fighters had to go into light speed to get to starkiller, and the weapon fires at a speed much slower than light speed (they watch it slowly go across the screen), then it makes no sense.

"Well General Organa, they fired on us.  It will take approximately 5984 years to hit our planet at that distance...."

And how did they see Corasaunt blow up from the planet they were on?  I'm guessing this is one of those issue like in Empire, when Luke is only on Degobah for less than 8 hours total (because the time from when Han flees the star destroyer and gets captured on Bespin isn't very long, and the distance from Degobah to Bespin is MUCH farther than Hoth is).


----------



## dd.stevenson

Sacrosanct said:


> There are other movies.  I wouldn't say things had nothing to do with the plot yet until we see those other movies.




But that's the point: it's not self-contained. It's not tight.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Jester Canuck said:


> And the Death Star wasn't blow up by a single proton torpedo. The energy in the reactor exhaust port just started a chain reaction which caused it to blow up.
> 
> The effect is the same: small fighter + planetoid megaweapon = explosion




Your definition of the same is...well, wrong. 


and it was two torpedoes. 

But anyway, luke destroyed the Death Star with one attack, making a shot that...honestly, the biggest plot hole in episode 4 is the rebels thought the plan could work. It only did because The Force. 

Starkiller Base, OTOH, was destroyed by a two pronged assault, and almost failed but for luck (which means the force). 

One force taking down the containment, one bombarding the exterior, and then an ace pilot doing a stunning maneuver is very, very different from one guy shooting a torpedo into a tiny hole. 


Folks who aren't fans of the Rey Finn romance, a question: What about it felt forced? (that's the only distinct criticism i've heard about it) 
if there is something else you don't like about it, what? 

imo, it isn't even a sure thing yet that there is a romance. meta, we know bc the fact that there_ will _be one, and we know it's not poe because he was supposed to die without ever meeting Rey, so it's gotta be Rey and Finn. But if we pretend those factors don't exist, it could easily just be setting up a friendship. Yeah, Finn clearly wants to touch her butt, but that hardly means there's a romance brewing. 

Heck, if I thought there was any way they'd do a gay romance, I'd be inclined to think Finn and Poe are just as likely. 


ANyway, I do have one thing I didn't like. IMO, you give Han and Leia and Luke a relatively happy ending. Having them watch everything they accomplished and built either turn on them or die is bullcrap. Save that pessimistic gritty realism garbage for the 50000 tv shows focused on it. 
Luckily it didn't ruin the movie for me, but it was a strictly wrong turn, IMO.


----------



## Morrus

doctorbadwolf said:


> Folks who aren't fans of the Rey Finn romance, a question: What about it felt forced? (that's the only distinct criticism i've heard about it)




Eh? What romance? It was made pretty clear there is no romance, IMO. Their theme is friendship and loyalty.


----------



## CapnZapp

Umbran said:


> Yah.  Such is the point of heroic fiction:  One person *can* make a difference.



But the tired joke of SW is that one person/fighter ALWAYS makes the difference... 

The Imperials should have learned that by now, you'd think.


----------



## delericho

dd.stevenson said:


> But that's the point: it's not self-contained. It's not tight.




Should the seventh episode in a series of (at least) nine be self-contained? Should the first part of a new trilogy be self-contained?



dd.stevenson said:


> --Why does Han's death carry no consequences for the plot? The scene could be omitted, and nothing would change. Compare that to Ben's death in A New Hope--take that scene out, and the entire movie would fall apart.




How so?

The only real consequences of Ben's death in the first film are that Lucas had to introduce _another_ bearded older general (Dodonna) to brief the X-Wing pilots about the Death Star weakness, and that Ben had to advise Luke to use the Force from beyond the grave, rather than over the radio.

Apart from that, the consequences of his death consist of a bit of moping from Mark Hamill and three lines: "Nooooo....!", "I can't believe he's gone.", and "I only wish Ben were here." Oh, and possibly "He's not dead... not yet", but given Kenobi's age at that point, that line still works.


----------



## Morrus

Yeah, Kenobi's death had no consequence whatsoever. It was only there because (like Ford), Alec Guinness wanted out. He could easily say "Use the Force, Luke!" over the radio. Solo's death, on the other hand, is a very strong character defining moment for Kylo.


----------



## SkidAce

Ben's death kept Vader from getting to the docking bay where the group was, saving them all.  Big consequence.


----------



## dd.stevenson

delericho said:


> Should the seventh episode in a series of (at least) nine be self-contained? Should the first part of a new trilogy be self-contained?



By the standards of western story telling, the story the movie tells should be self-contained, meaning that for example the protagonist's conflicting motivations should be made clear during the rising action.

The standards of star wars are higher, IMO, because of the tightly-woven precedent set by the originals; but I guess that's a matter of opinion and taste.



delericho said:


> The only real consequences of Ben's death in the first film are that Lucas had to introduce another bearded older general (Dodonna) to brief the X-Wing pilots about the Death Star weakness, and that Ben had to advise Luke to use the Force from beyond the grave, rather than over the radio.





Morrus said:


> Yeah, Kenobi's death had no consequence whatsoever. ... He could easily say "Use the Force, Luke!" over the radio.



Yes it did; kenobi, as promised, became more powerful than vader could possibly imagine. Sure one could edit the rest of the movie so kenobi's death wasn't paid off, but that's the point: one couldn't alter kenobi's death scene in in isolation, without changing other parts of the movie too. In contrast, Han's death wasn't paid off, other than the shot with chewie crying and maybe leia and rey hugging.

It's a very minor point in comparison to leaving us to guess so much about the protagonist's motivations, but one that bothered me nonetheless.


----------



## Morrus

dd.stevenson said:


> By the standards of western story telling, the story the movie tells should be self-contained




There is no standard of story telling. And serial stories are hardly a new thing. Just look at the LotR movies for a modem example - or almost any TV show. 



> Yes it did; kenobi, as promised, became more powerful than vader could possibly imagine.




He did promise that. Then just turned into a ghost who could occasionally give vague advice. Something he was already quite capable of doing while alive.

It had zero impact on the narrative. He died because Alec Guinness wouldn't do the sequels and thought the movie ludicrous and beneath him.


----------



## delericho

dd.stevenson said:


> Yes it did; kenobi, as promised, became more powerful than vader could possibly imagine. Sure one could edit the rest of the movie so kenobi's death wasn't paid off, but that's the point: one couldn't alter kenobi's death scene in in isolation, without changing other parts of the movie too. In contrast, Han's death wasn't paid off, other than the shot with chewie crying and maybe leia and rey hugging.




Plus the small matter of Chewie's freak-out, leading to Kylo Ren being wounded (and so Finn and Rey surviving), and the shield generator being destroyed (leading to the Starkiller being destroyed, and thus the Resistance surviving).


----------



## billd91

Morrus said:


> There is no standard of story telling. And serial stories are hardly a new thing. Just look at the LotR movies for a modem example - or almost any TV show.




And that's without even bringing up the idea that Star Wars itself was a big homage to (or pastiche of) movie serials.


----------



## Umbran

Morrus said:


> Yeah, Kenobi's death had no consequence whatsoever. It was only there because (like Ford), Alec Guinness wanted out.




Not true.  Guinness wasn't happy with the film, no, but Lucas has gone on record as deciding Obi Wan died separate from Guiness thinking the dialogue was hackneyed   It is kind of required for the Hero to come to the fore, that the old mentor must get out of the way.


----------



## Morrus

Umbran said:


> Not true.




True.

_"Alec disliked his role as "Obi-Wan Kenobi" in the Star Wars movies, and even claimed that he persuaded George Lucas to kill off the character as a way to limit his involvement in the films. He also claimed to have thrown away all of his Star Wars-related fan mail unopened."_

http://www.tv.com/people/alec-guinness/trivia/

Well, as true as we can know. He says one thing and Lucas says another. He certainly claimed that was the case.


----------



## Umbran

Morrus said:


> True.




He *claimed* it.  However, Lucas had had the idea before Guinness was on board, and had been waffling over it:

_"In the end, the answer to the question of who came up with the idea to kill Obi-Wan in the first Star Wars film, originated with creator George Lucas. The script underwent several revisions in which the Jedi had a more significant role, however, by the fourth draft — dated January 15, 1976 — it had been decided that the evil Darth Vader killed Obi-Wan Kenobi.

According to Comic Book Resources, even as Alec Guinness was brought on board, George Lucas wasn’t sure what Obi-Wan’s fate would be. Once again, the British actor wrote on his diary.

“Irritated by Lucas saying he hadn’t made up his mind whether to kill off my part or not. A bit late for such decisions. And Harrison Ford referring to me as Mother Superior didn’t help.”

Alec Guinness seems to contradict himself when he expresses how angry he is about being killed off, but we can take his complaint as just frustration with Lucas’ indecision regarding whether Obi-Wan Kenobi lived or died."_

Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/1995711/wa...s-sir-alec-guinness-idea/#FIRkWE7SVcFxQpYT.99


----------



## dd.stevenson

Morrus said:


> There is no standard of story telling.



I'm not sure there's much of a conversation to be had here.

Unless you're objecting to the word "standard"? If "norm," or some other word/phrase would work better for you, please substitute it and we can continue where we left off.


----------



## Morrus

dd.stevenson said:


> I'm not sure there's much of a conversation to be had here.
> 
> Unless you're objecting to the word "standard"? If "norm," or some other word/phrase would work better for you, please substitute it and we can continue where we left off.




No, I'm not objecting to the word (yes, I know how annoying that would be). I'm disagreeing with the very concept that there is a standard/norm/right way//default/whatever of any kind. Storytelling is done in many, many different ways by different people, and it changes constantly.  The idea that a film has to be self-contained is nothing more than a personal preference, and not one that I share.

And if there *was* a standard, I'd say that the looking-like-going-to-be-the-most-successful-film-ever has as good a claim to setting it as anyone else.


----------



## Morrus

Umbran said:


> He *claimed* it.  However, Lucas had had the idea before Guinness was on board, and had been waffling over it:




I don't think the latter fact contradicts the former. The claim isn't that he had the idea; it's that he wanted it to happen. From the sounds of those quotes, it looks like he was pushing for it. I dunno man; when we have an actor make a claim about something he did, and no direct contradiction, I'm inclined to take him at his word absent a fairly strong level of proof otherwise. Just like the Rowling thread, I guess.


----------



## dd.stevenson

Morrus said:


> No, I'm not objecting to the word (yes, I know how annoying that would be). I'm disagreeing with the very concept that there is a standard/norm/right way//default/whatever of any kind. Storytelling is done in many, many different ways by different people, and it changes constantly.  The idea that a film has to be self-contained is nothing more than a personal preference, and not one that I share.
> 
> And if there *was* a standard, I'd say that the looking-like-going-to-be-the-most-successful-film-ever has as good a claim to setting it as anyone else.




Fair enough, though I think you're outspoken on the second sentence and I would bet an awful lot of money against you being correct on the last sentence.

Either way, my wife is threatening me with hasty and severe bodily harm if I continue to spend Christmas Eve arguing about star wars on the internet.

Merry Christmas!


----------



## mistahbiru

Unlimited technology and they still cant email the plans or use an encrypted flash drive.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Morrus said:


> Eh? What romance? It was made pretty clear there is no romance, IMO. Their theme is friendship and loyalty.




Nah, they definitely set it up for there to be a romance. It's possible there won't be one, but they clearly established Finn as being interested, and there are multiple points between them where chemistry indicates possible future romance. 



dd.stevenson said:


> It's a very minor point in comparison to leaving us to guess so much  about the protagonist's motivations, but one that bothered me  nonetheless.




What guessing? When and where are her motivations other than crystal clear?


----------



## Morrus

doctorbadwolf said:


> Nah, they definitely set it up for there to be a romance. It's possible there won't be one, but they clearly established Finn as being interested, and there are multiple points between them where chemistry indicates possible future romance.




If there was any hint of romance, Finn and Poe get the nod there, not Finn and Rey.

He started off trying to be awkwardly chivalrous, sure.  That was just a thing about him, and a convenient plot device to illustrate Rey's independence.  There's no hint of romance there.


----------



## ZzarkLinux

dd.stevenson said:


> it's not self-contained. It's not tight.




Just posting my agreement  I think casual fans were expecting a more tighter focus. But they added more content, and some fans understand it better than us; C'est la vie

I wonder how many other fan sites are having this same discussion ?:-c

Merry Christmas all


----------



## dd.stevenson

doctorbadwolf said:


> What guessing? When and where are her motivations other than crystal clear?



Please see my first post.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Morrus said:


> If there was any hint of romance, Finn and Poe get the nod there, not Finn and Rey.
> 
> He started off trying to be awkwardly chivalrous, sure.  That was just a thing about him, and a convenient plot device to illustrate Rey's independence.  There's no hint of romance there.



Yeah, you're missing it somehow, but it's definitely there. 
Also, disagree about Finn's "chivalry". He has a strong sense of empathy, and a will to help people. Chivalry assumes weakness on the part of women, which he never does. 



dd.stevenson said:


> Please see my first post.




Yeah, I read it. You don't actually do anything other than state that her motivations aren't clear, and some fan theory stuff about her having been one of Luke's apprentices, which would make no sense.


----------



## GobiWon

Morrus said:


> Max Von Sydow. Certainly one of Christopher Lee's contemporaries. He was Ming the Merciless and Blofeld. You've probably seen him in loads of things.
> 
> His character name in this film is Lor San Tekka.





I think we will see a young version of Lor San Tekka in the Rogue One movie played by Mads Mikkelsen.


----------



## Morrus

doctorbadwolf said:


> Yeah, you're missing it somehow, but it's definitely there.




One man's "you're missing it" is another man's "you're projecting". Not all chemistry is  romantic. 

Now Finn and Poe - I can see that. They even wear each other's clothes.


----------



## Orlax

Morrus said:


> If there was any hint of romance, Finn and Poe get the nod there, not Finn and Rey.
> 
> He started off trying to be awkwardly chivalrous, sure.  That was just a thing about him, and a convenient plot device to illustrate Rey's independence.  There's no hint of romance there.





Dude, how do you even miss the Finn Rey connection.  They've both imprinted on each other hard.  Finn explained his, and he just wanted to run away with Rey, and as far as Rey is concerned Finn is the first person to actually come back for her.  Rey has massive abandonment issues and Finn is the first one to not abandon her, and to actively strive to return to her.


----------



## Morrus

Orlax said:


> Dude, how do you even miss the Finn Rey connection.  They've both imprinted on each other hard.  Finn explained his, and he just wanted to run away with Rey, and as far as Rey is concerned Finn is the first person to actually come back for her.  Rey has massive abandonment issues and Finn is the first one to not abandon her, and to actively strive to return to her.




I didn't miss the Finn and Rey connection. I said it wasn't romantic.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Morrus said:


> One man's "you're missing it" is another man's "you're projecting". Not all chemistry is  romantic.




Can be. Not in this case. He awkwardly flirts with her on the Falcon, and asks if she has a "boyfriend? A cute boyfriend?" using body language that is classic "character hoping the other character has no cute boyfriend". It's almost hokey in how obvious it is. 
Their chemistry could be friendly or romantic, but unless they are going to go the Finn/Poe route, I doubt they're going to waste that good chemistry between the male and female lead. Like I said upthread, the romance angle isn't forced at all (as someone claimed), but it definitely exists. 



> Now Finn and Poe - I can see that. They even wear each other's clothes.




I wish. I like their excited space bros thing, and it would be rad if they touched butts, but...I just don't see the people running the show taking that "risk". 
But maybe they will surprise me.


----------



## Orlax

doctorbadwolf said:


> Can be. Not in this case. He awkwardly flirts with her on the Falcon, and asks if she has a "boyfriend? A cute boyfriend?" using body language that is classic "character hoping the other character has no cute boyfriend". It's almost hokey in how obvious it is.
> Their chemistry could be friendly or romantic, but unless they are going to go the Finn/Poe route, I doubt they're going to waste that good chemistry between the male and female lead. Like I said upthread, the romance angle isn't forced at all (as someone claimed), but it definitely exists.
> 
> 
> 
> I wish. I like their excited space bros thing, and it would be rad if they touched butts, but...I just don't see the people running the show taking that "risk".
> But maybe they will surprise me.





This, all of it.

Also they might just leave romance out of it entirely, three friends that need no romantic entanglements, more familial love than romantic love.


----------



## Morrus

Orlax said:


> This, all of it.
> Also they might just leave romance out of it entirely, three friends that need no romantic entanglements, more familial love than romantic love.




I would like that. Obligatory romances are kinda tiresome to me. I like to see other forms of relationship addressed in stuff. They do a lot with parent/child in Star Wars, and the themes of friendship and loyalty (and betrayal) are strong.


----------



## MechaPilot

I just saw the film last night.  I have to say that it was a fun film to watch, but it definitely didn't live up to the hype: it's Star Wars, it literally couldn't live up to the hype even if it was 100% as good as the original films.



Although I found the film enjoyable (the thumbs-up/lighter moment between Fin and BB8 was absolutely precious), I do have some issues with the movie.

The big Han death scene was just bad.  I like the Han character.  I even like Kylo Ren.  However, this film gave us absolutely nothing about the relationship between Han and Ren.  When Ren then betrays that relationship, it's a great moment that falls flat because they didn't put the work in to make me care about their relationship.


Another major issue that I had was that the film was fairly unoriginal.  It parallels and copies the original trilogy so hard that I felt like I was watching a mashup of episodes 4, 5 and 6:

1) We have an important piece of intel being placed in a droid.
2) We have a young person gifted with the force living on a desert planet.
3) We have that person meeting the droid who didn't make it straight back to the rebels.
4) We have that young person's life being completely uprooted and thrown into disarray because of her association with the droid carrying the intel.
5) We have a masked dark jedi working for the empire.
6) That dark jedi was trained by a good jedi and was then seduced to evil by a dark master.
7) The dark jedi has two relatives, one of which tells the other that there is still good in the dark jedi.
8) The dark jedi has a master that we only see in holographic communications.
9) There is conflict between the dark jedi and the non-jedi imperial officers, who live under the threat of that dark jedi's wrath.
10) The force-gifted young person meets a father like mentor who agrees to help with the droid issue.
11) We have a wizened old person giving a lightsaber to the force-gifted young person.
12) We have the young person rejecting the heroes call at first and then taking it up when a person she cares about is hurt.
13) We have a massive weapon capable of killing planets.
14) We have a mission to knock out a force field generator.
15) We have a bombing run on the one vulnerable spot on the planet-killing weapon.
16) We have C3PO interjecting himself into a romantic moment between Han and Leia: to quote Cinemasins, "The 'C' stand for cock-block."
17) We have a force-gifted young person going off on her own to train with a jedi master in exile.
18) We have the heroes hiding under the deck-plates when the falcon is swallowed up by a larger ship.
19) We have the he's my relative revelation about the one of the heroes and the dark jedi.
20) We have the death of the father-like mentor to the force-gifted young person, which eventually spurs the seeking of a new mentor (see #17).


Also, if you suck up a sun to use as a weapon to destroy planets, when that weapon is destroyed the sun is not going to simply reconstitute itself.


----------



## Orlax

MechaPilot said:


> I just saw the film last night.  I have to say that it was a fun film to watch, but it definitely didn't live up to the hype: it's Star Wars, it literally couldn't live up to the hype even if it was 100% as good as the original films.
> 
> 
> 
> Although I found the film enjoyable (the thumbs-up/lighter moment between Fin and BB8 was absolutely precious), I do have some issues with the movie.
> 
> The big Han death scene was just bad.  I like the Han character.  I even like Kylo Ren.  However, this film gave us absolutely nothing about the relationship between Han and Ren.  When Ren then betrays that relationship, it's a great moment that falls flat because they didn't put the work in to make me care about their relationship.
> 
> 
> Another major issue that I had was that the film was fairly unoriginal.  It parallels and copies the original trilogy so hard that I felt like I was watching a mashup of episodes 4, 5 and 6:
> 
> 1) We have an important piece of intel being placed in a droid.
> 2) We have a young person gifted with the force living on a desert planet.
> 3) We have that person meeting the droid who didn't make it straight back to the rebels.
> 4) We have that young person's life being completely uprooted and thrown into disarray because of her association with the droid carrying the intel.
> 5) We have a masked dark jedi working for the empire.
> 6) That dark jedi was trained by a good jedi and was then seduced to evil by a dark master.
> 7) The dark jedi has two relatives, one of which tells the other that there is still good in the dark jedi.
> 8) The dark jedi has a master that we only see in holographic communications.
> 9) There is conflict between the dark jedi and the non-jedi imperial officers, who live under the threat of that dark jedi's wrath.
> 10) The force-gifted young person meets a father like mentor who agrees to help with the droid issue.
> 11) We have a wizened old person giving a lightsaber to the force-gifted young person.
> 12) We have the young person rejecting the heroes call at first and then taking it up when a person she cares about is hurt.
> 13) We have a massive weapon capable of killing planets.
> 14) We have a mission to knock out a force field generator.
> 15) We have a bombing run on the one vulnerable spot on the planet-killing weapon.
> 16) We have C3PO interjecting himself into a romantic moment between Han and Leia: to quote Cinemasins, "The 'C' stand for cock-block."
> 17) We have a force-gifted young person going off on her own to train with a jedi master in exile.
> 18) We have the heroes hiding under the deck-plates when the falcon is swallowed up by a larger ship.
> 19) We have the he's my relative revelation about the one of the heroes and the dark jedi.
> 20) We have the death of the father-like mentor to the force-gifted young person, which eventually spurs the seeking of a new mentor (see #17).
> 
> 
> Also, if you suck up a sun to use as a weapon to destroy planets, when that weapon is destroyed the sun is not going to simply reconstitute itself.





Bond between parent and child, no need for any kind of setup.  Most especially between a parent and a child believed lost forever (trust me that  gets messy).  The face touch at the end is really all you need to get the weight of the scene.

The parallels are there purposefully.  One of the major things jj identified on his way in is that there was always something distinctly Star Wars missing about the PT.  So he took a hard look at the OT to develop his trilogy.  He hit alot of the same beats but the song and themes are very different here.  To me that's actually a fairly awesome part of the movie.  It's so identifiably Star Wars, most especially hitting the beat of the dead master in the first of the trilogy (though you've misidentified who the master was teaching, the force user didn't need the basics, the old master was teaching Fin).  Yet at that same time it is definitely still telling it's own story with those similar story beats.  I understand why some might not have liked it the most, but I absolutely loved the level of homage.  I will say I hope it doesn't continue entirely through the ST.


----------



## Orlax

Also quick aside, had anyone yet mentioned the hilarity of the fact that it's essentially an OT Fangirl vs a PT Fanboy.


----------



## MarkB

Orlax said:


> This, all of it.
> 
> Also they might just leave romance out of it entirely, three friends that need no romantic entanglements, more familial love than romantic love.




I figure they're just playing it safe in this movie, in case they decide to make some or all of the protagonists siblings a couple of sequels down the line.


----------



## Morrus

MechaPilot said:


> Another major issue that I had was that the film was fairly unoriginal.  It parallels and copies the original trilogy so hard that I felt like I was watching a mashup of episodes 4, 5 and 6:




Whether one likes that or not, it's a deliberate feature, not a bug. The movie serves as a regrounding.


----------



## MechaPilot

Orlax said:


> Bond between parent and child, no need for any kind of setup.  Most especially between a parent and a child believed lost forever (trust me that  gets messy).  The face touch at the end is really all you need to get the weight of the scene.




I get the parent and child thing.  I do.  But, for me it needs more.  The face touch was helpful to the mood of the scene, but it was just incapable of lifting the weight they were placing on it.  They either needed a little more dialogue between them before the slaying, or they needed to linger longer on the intimacy of the consequences before Han fell off the walkway.  Now, maybe some fans are projecting the emotion from Han's more fleshed-out relationship with his son in the books onto the film, or projecting from their own relationships onto the film, but I am rather unbiased on this because I am not a parent, and I have not read any of the books where Han has a son.  Being unbiased, I just felt that the scene as it was shown fell flat because they didn't make me care about the relationship.




Orlax said:


> The parallels are there purposefully.  One of the major things jj identified on his way in is that there was always something distinctly Star Wars missing about the PT.  So he took a hard look at the OT to develop his trilogy.  He hit alot of the same beats but the song and themes are very different here.  To me that's actually a fairly awesome part of the movie.  It's so identifiably Star Wars, most especially hitting the beat of the dead master in the first of the trilogy (though you've misidentified who the master was teaching, the force user didn't need the basics, the old master was teaching Fin).  Yet at that same time it is definitely still telling it's own story with those similar story beats.  I understand why some might not have liked it the most, but I absolutely loved the level of homage.  I will say I hope it doesn't continue entirely through the ST.




For me, the parallels were too many.  I agree that the film was identfiably Star Wars, even if it felt like they dropped the ball a bit on maintaining the depth of the fantasy feeling that the original trilogy had.


----------



## MechaPilot

Morrus said:


> Whether one likes that or not, it's a deliberate feature, not a bug. The movie serves as a regrounding.




It's not that I have an issue with some parallels to tie the new film to the original trilogy, but I listed 20 of them and I'm sure I probably missed a couple.  I think they could have done just as well with fewer parallels.  If nothing else, they could have ditched the whole "let's just make an even bigger planet-killing moon/planet like weapon/base and recycle the destruction of the already recycled death star."


----------



## Morrus

MechaPilot said:


> Now, maybe some fans are projecting the emotion from Han's more fleshed-out relationship with his son in the books onto the film, or projecting from their own relationships onto the film, but I am rather unbiased on this because I am not a parent, and I have not read any of the books where Han has a son.  Being unbiased, I just felt that the scene as it was shown fell flat because they didn't make me care about the relationship.




Your special "unbiased" status is not unique, or even rare. I am not a parent, nor have I read the books. My feelings about the scene are very different to yours though.


----------



## MechaPilot

Morrus said:


> Your special "unbiased" status is not unique, or even rare. I am not a parent, nor have I read the books. My feelings about the scene are very different to yours though.




I didn't say that my status was "special."  I was merely pointing out that Star Was has a significant portion of their fanbase who either are parents or have read the extended universe materials (or both).  All film is subjective, and other people who share my unbiased condition may very well view things differently than I do.  However, for me, the film committed the cardinal story-telling sin of making a major point of the film hinge on something that they didn't make me care about.

Edit: believe me, with the number of times I've seriously contemplated suicide I absolutely know there's nothing special about me.  Maybe the exact combination of traits and quirks is semi-unique, but every part of who I am is utterly replaceable.


----------



## Cristian Andreu

I finally watched it last night, and I absolutely loved it. I'm already planning to watch it again with some friends next week.

The movie felt like a homage to the original trilogy; it's clear the plot is almost the same as Episodes IV, V, and VI combined, but rather than a copy with new paint, I got the impression they were trying to both recreate the impact of the old movies and pay their respects to the story that sparked the whole thing. It felt like a dignified way of telling the new generations _"Now it's your time to enjoy this thing as much as we did the first time"_, while at the same time getting the nostalgia of the older fans into overdrive.

Three key moments I got from the experience:

1.-Hearing the Star Wars fanfare again inside a theatre was incredibly stirring.

2.-The scene when they fire the Starkiller while the First Order soldiers stand in formation, the laser occupying the entire horizon. The mix of fury and discipline, the cold brutality of the scene was by far the biggest visual impact of the movie for me.

3.-Han's death. Though as others have said you could see it coming, the collective gasp I heard in the theatre when it actually happened followed by like two minutes of utter silence from the audience created a truly shocking moment. Han Solo is now dead; damn. As far as emotional reactions go, that was the best part of the movie for me.

Loved the cast (BB-8 was great), the character interactions, the lines, the way they made Han and Chewie have crucial roles rather than cameos, how the fights looked like those of the old trilogy, the way they tried to make the Force a mystical and mysterious thing again, all the little hints meant to trigger nostalgia, and a long et cetera. And while I agree we got to see too little of Phasma (considering how much she was hyped), it feels to me they were setting up the structure for future plots or even entire movies (understanding that they want to go the same route as Marvel with multiple stories being told in parallel), so maybe it'll look better in retrospective.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Orlax said:


> This, all of it.
> 
> Also they might just leave romance out of it entirely, three friends that need no romantic entanglements, more familial love than romantic love.




I wouldn't mind that, but I don't like when a movie or show or game tries to just ignore the whole idea of romance. It's more unbelievable than force lightning or Padme loving Anakin. 

Which is saying something.


----------



## Morrus

doctorbadwolf said:


> I wouldn't mind that, but I don't like when a movie or show or game tries to just ignore the whole idea of romance.




Has that ever happened in the history of movies ever? Which movie which ignored the idea of romance is on your mind? 

Though Ripley totally should have got it on with that Alien. Missed opportunity there! And that love scene between Arnie and the Predator will go down in history. Sexy! 

And Clooney and Bullock should totally have engaged in zero-g sexy times. And the new Mad Max totally failed because Max and Furiosa didn't get it on.

Platoon was also awesome the way it focused on romance. Reservoir Dogs, too! Terminator 2's romantic plot is legendary. The Godfather is a noted romantic movie.

Sometimes things can be about things other than romance.

Oh, wait. Are you thinking of _Deliverance_?


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Morrus said:


> Your special "unbiased" status is not unique, or even rare. I am not a parent, nor have I read the books. My feelings about the scene are very different to yours though.



Same. 

They set up Han's feelings with him and Leia, they set up Ben Ren's feelings in various scenes where he insists that Han means nothing to him, and they reinforce both on the catwalk. It also seemed pretty clear to me that Han represents his conflict between the Light and Dark, throughout the film. 

I'm not sure how they could have made it clearer without getting ham fisted. 



Morrus said:


> I would like that. Obligatory romances are kinda tiresome to me. I like to see other forms of relationship addressed in stuff. They do a lot with parent/child in Star Wars, and the themes of friendship and loyalty (and betrayal) are strong.




As long as they don't just abstain from showing any romance between anyone. 

Can't stand that. DOn't want a romance between leads, fine. BUt don't try to sell me on the 100% BS notion that in times of crisis, people don't seek romantic entanglements.


----------



## Morrus

doctorbadwolf said:


> BUt don't try to sell me on the 100% BS notion that in times of crisis, people don't seek romantic entanglements.




Nobody tried to sell you this notion. They just didn't make a film about it.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Morrus said:


> Has that ever happened in the history of movies ever? Which movie which ignored the idea of romance is on your mind?
> 
> Though Ripley totally should have got it on with that Alien. Missed opportunity there! And that love scene between Arnie and the Predator will go down in history. Sexy!
> 
> And Clooney and Bullock should totally have engaged in zero-g sexy times. And the new Mad Max totally failed because Max and Furiosa didn't get it on.
> 
> Platoon was also awesome the way it focused on romance. Reservoir Dogs, too! Terminator 2's romantic plot is legendary. The Godfather is a noted romantic movie.
> 
> Sometimes things can be about things other than romance.
> 
> Oh, wait. Are you thinking of _Deliverance_?




Don't be an ass. 

There's a big difference between a movie like Alien or Predator and a movie like Star Wars, and you know it, so stop being aggressively obtuse just for the sake of it.


----------



## Morrus

doctorbadwolf said:


> Don't be an ass.
> 
> There's a big difference between a movie like Alien or Predator and a movie like Star Wars, and you know it, so stop being aggressively obtuse just for the sake of it.




Please remain civil. This is not appropriate. If you can't make your point without calling people names, please refrain from posting. Address the argument, not the poster. If you strongly disagree, do so in a civil manner. That means no name calling.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Morrus said:


> Nobody tried to sell you this notion. They just didn't make a film about it.



What are you even talking about? I was responding to people _hoping_ for a romance free film. So, that means I'm asking, rhetorically, that the people suggesting that a no romance movie would be a good thing to rethink that position. You are literally responding to nothing.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Morrus said:


> Please remain civil. This is not appropriate. If you can't make your point without calling people names, please refrain from posting. Address the argument, not the poster. If you strongly disagree, do so in a civil manner. That means no name calling.




Will do. 

Maybe as the guy running the site and moderating the forum, you should hold yourself to a higher standard of civility than others, instead of habitually condescending and/or being rude to others and acting like it's fine as long as you don't use any bad words.


----------



## MarkB

doctorbadwolf said:


> As long as they don't just abstain from showing any romance between anyone.
> 
> Can't stand that. DOn't want a romance between leads, fine. BUt don't try to sell me on the 100% BS notion that in times of crisis, people don't seek romantic entanglements.




And fortunately, in this case, we had Han and Leia, showing that despite their long estrangement, they still had feelings for each other, and still shared some hope for their son.


----------



## Morrus

doctorbadwolf said:


> What are you even talking about? I was responding to people _hoping_ for a romance free film. So, that means I'm asking, rhetorically, that the people suggesting that a no romance movie would be a good thing to rethink that position. You are literally responding to nothing.




You've completely lost me.

You said "BUt don't try to sell me on the 100% BS notion that in times of crisis, people don't seek romantic entanglements."

I said "Nobody tried to sell you this notion. They just didn't make a film about it."

Then you called me rude names and I asked you not to.

And now you say you don't know what I'm talking about. I'm flummoxed. But please don't call me rude names, even if you disagree with me.

I haven't used any red mod text in this thread. It was a disagreement about a sci-fi movie. Please don't make it into anything more than that.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Morrus said:


> You've completely lost me.
> 
> You said "BUt don't try to sell me on the 100% BS notion that in times of crisis, people don't seek romantic entanglements."
> 
> I said "Nobody tried to sell you this notion. They just didn't make a film about it."
> 
> Then you called me rude names and I asked you not to.
> 
> And now you say you don't know what I'm talking about. I'm flummoxed. But please don't call me rude names, even if you disagree with me.
> 
> I haven't used any red mod text in this thread. It was a disagreement about a sci-fi movie. Please don't make it into anything more than that.




Why are you bringing the rude names thing into this? I've been told that responding to moderation in thread is against the rules. If you want to talk about that, we are already having a PM conversation about that. 

What you've quoted here wasn't in any way about that. 

"Don't sell me on X" is a common linguistic device use to indicate a nonplussed reaction to the suggestion of X. I used it in that manner. 

Then you went on a condescending and rude tangent, using obviously and intentionally obtuse examples instead of actually responding like an adult. 

SO, yeah, I've no idea what on Earth you're talking about.


----------



## Water Bob

One thing about the film...the plot is simple.  Real straight forward.  Yes, like A New Hope (but Empire's plot gets a little more complicated).

One of the good things about the prequels is that the plot, in all three movies, was actually pretty damn involving and interesting--and complicated.  The presentation of that plot is lacking (and I wish another director had been used).  But, the story of Darth Vader's fall and Palpatine's rise is written (not presented) quite well.

As much as I liked the film, I think The Force Awakens suffers because of its simple plot.


----------



## Water Bob

Check this out:  Gary The Stormtrooper 

It starts out mildly amusing, but by the end, with the Endor scenes, I was holding my gut with tears rolling out of my eyes.

Funny!


----------



## Morrus

doctorbadwolf said:


> Why are you bringing the rude names thing into this? I've been told that responding to moderation in thread is against the rules. If you want to talk about that, we are already having a PM conversation about that.




It's not moderation. It was a request that you not call me rude names.  Not unreasonable. 

We're done, dude. Direct your anger elsewhere; I won't be responding to you on this further.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

What anger? This whole thing is incomprehensible.


----------



## megamania

Can we get back to talking about Star Wars?


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Crazy talk! 

I liked the cantina, and Maz. Someone upthread called her this movie's Jar Jar, but that person watched a different movie from the one I watched.


----------



## ccs

Morrus said:


> There is no standard of story telling. And serial stories are hardly a new thing. Just look at the LotR movies for a modem example - or almost any TV show.
> 
> 
> 
> He did promise that. Then just turned into a ghost who could occasionally give vague advice. Something he was already quite capable of doing while alive.
> 
> It had zero impact on the narrative. He died because Alec Guinness wouldn't do the sequels and thought the movie ludicrous and beneath him.




And yet there he was, playing Obi-Wans ghost, in ESB & RotJ....


----------



## ZzarkLinux

Quick Update: I talked with 2 of my cousins and they loved the movie. They liked BB8 and all the action and everything.

So me and my uncle were "meh", but some of my cousins were " yea". Maybe the people you take with you affect your perception of the movie?


----------



## MechaPilot

When Poe was referred to during one of the fighter scenes as "black leader" I remember thinking "man, it's a good thing Fin didn't just take Poe's place in the resistance or we would have had a real power falcons situation here."


----------



## SkidAce

MarkB said:


> And fortunately, in this case, we had Han and Leia, showing that despite their long estrangement, they still had feelings for each other, and still shared some hope for their son.




I think you accidentally quoted me incorrectly.


----------



## AverageCitizen

1. Fin can't understand droid beeps. He says so.
2. Fin calls Kylo Ren "Ren". I don't think it's a title, I think the Knights of Ren are named after Kylo Ren.


----------



## Umbran

AverageCitizen said:


> 2. Fin calls Kylo Ren "Ren". I don't think it's a title, I think the Knights of Ren are named after Kylo Ren.




Possible.  We shall have to see if/when the Knights of Ren are more fully explicated.


----------



## MechaPilot

Umbran said:


> Possible.  We shall have to see if/when the Knights of Ren are more fully explicated.




If Ren is following the example of Darth Vader as far as the script goes (we know he's following Vader as far as wanting to be like him), Kylo could be a title like Darth was, and then Ren being the name part of his moniker.


----------



## Hypersmurf

AverageCitizen said:


> 2. Fin calls Kylo Ren "Ren". I don't think it's a title, I think the Knights of Ren are named after Kylo Ren.




"Only a master of evil, Darth."

-Hyp.


----------



## MarkB

SkidAce said:


> I think you accidentally quoted me incorrectly.




Sorry SkidAce - I accidentally multiquoted, and trimmed it in the reply, but apparently I fumbled the attribution. Now corrected.


----------



## CapnZapp

To widen the discussion:

I am very glad I saw it in 2D. 

All my friends that went for the bigger screen and thus saw it in 3D agreed it was an irritation.


----------



## Morrus

CapnZapp said:


> To widen the discussion:
> 
> I am very glad I saw it in 2D.
> 
> All my friends that went for the bigger screen and thus saw it in 3D agreed it was an irritation.




I did both. I very much preferred the 2D non-IMAX version.


----------



## Nikosandros

Sacrosanct said:


> Really, my only really big issue was with the Starkiller weapon in general.  The projectiles don't travel at light speed, so how do they take out planets in completely different systems?  If the resistance fighters had to go into light speed to get to starkiller, and the weapon fires at a speed much slower than light speed (they watch it slowly go across the screen), then it makes no sense



At some point in the movie, they mention that it is a hyper-speed weapon. I guess that the "projectiles" are launched, they then go to hyper-speed off-screen and then they drop to sub-light shortly before impact. Is still doesn't explain how the explosion was visible on Maz's planet, unless it is in the same system as the capitol of the Republic.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

MarkB said:


> And fortunately, in this case, we had Han and Leia, showing that despite their long estrangement, they still had feelings for each other, and still shared some hope for their son.




Yeah, their scenes were great. And I liked that the movie didn't try to focus on any new romance. Its a trilogy, there is plenty of time.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

AverageCitizen said:


> 1. Fin can't understand droid beeps. He says so.
> 2. Fin calls Kylo Ren "Ren". I don't think it's a title, I think the Knights of Ren are named after Kylo Ren.




Ben calls Darth Vader "Darth" in ep4.


----------



## billd91

doctorbadwolf said:


> Ben calls Darth Vader "Darth" in ep4.




Indeed he does, clearly a line written before Lucas decided Darth was a title not a name.


----------



## Umbran

doctorbadwolf said:


> Ben calls Darth Vader "Darth" in ep4.




Yeah, and that's probably much like a curse when Kenobi says it.  

It isn't like Finn knows the meaning of much of anything, having grown up to be a Stormtrooper.


----------



## AverageCitizen

Hypersmurf said:


> "Only a master of evil, Darth."
> 
> -Hyp.




Fair point.


----------



## ZzarkLinux

Forgot to mention: my cousins reminded me that Carrie Fisher's voice acting (Leia) was pretty bad. Really deep and rash. Her makeup was used, well but her voice was bad.

I think the rest of the acting in the movie was good, though I admit that I'm easily impressed. Was there any other obvious bad acting that I missed?


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Ah. But Finn was a stormtrooper. One thing he almost certainly knows is the proper way to address a Knight of Ren. And unlike Kenobi and Vader, there is no familiarity there, no bitter memory of friendship betrayed, or the cold familiarity of long time enemies. 
I can't imagine Finn using Kylo Ren's familiar name. He wasn't trying to show up, like with Phasma. 

About Carrie Fisher. Huh? Her acting was bad because her voice was older and rougher? No. She was great, her voice just isn't the same as when she was in her twenties or whatever.


----------



## darjr

Yea, I liked Carrie Fisher's acting a lot in this. The first time I saw it the last parting of Han and Leia was touching, the second time I saw the movie it broke my freaking heart. 

I thought it must have just been me and what I know, but upon seeing it a third time I've noticed that she does play the scene both ways. As if she hated to see him go, again, and yet somehow knowing it was the last time ever.


----------



## Staffan

CapnZapp said:


> But the tired joke of SW is that one person/fighter ALWAYS makes the difference...
> 
> The Imperials should have learned that by now, you'd think.




#46: If an advisor says to me "My liege, he is but one man. What can one man possibly do?", I will reply "This." and kill the advisor.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

"What can one Rebel Pilot do?" 
"Save the criffing world, if pressed." 


(Dragon Age and Star Wars. Dragon Wars?)


----------



## Hypersmurf

billd91 said:


> Indeed he does, clearly a line written before Lucas decided Darth was a title not a name.



Canon nevertheless  

-Hyp.


----------



## MoonSong

Just need to say two things after reading the whole thread...

1) Why can't anybody here say good things about the Force Awakens without also saying mean things about parts I-III? The prequels are part of somebody childhood too...

2) It's been less than a week and we already have shipping.... really?  (Having said that, I think good names would be Fey -Finn/Rey-  and Foe -Finn/Poe-. Team Poe for the win! )

WIll post my actual feeling later


----------



## Mark CMG

billd91 said:


> Indeed he does, clearly a line written before Lucas decided Darth was a title not a name.





Perhaps it is similar to someone, in a familiar way, calling Capt America "Cap" or "Captain."


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

MoonSong(Kaiilurker) said:


> Just need to say two things after reading the whole thread...
> 
> 1) Why can't anybody here say good things about the Force Awakens without also saying mean things about parts I-III? The prequels are part of somebody childhood too...
> 
> 2) It's been less than a week and we already have shipping.... really?  (Having said that, I think good names would be Fey -Finn/Rey-  and Foe -Finn/Poe-. Team Poe for the win! )
> 
> WIll post my actual feeling later




What, no Prey?


----------



## SkidAce

MoonSong(Kaiilurker) said:


> Just need to say two things after reading the whole thread...
> 
> 1) Why can't anybody here say good things about the Force Awakens without also saying mean things about parts I-III? The prequels are part of somebody childhood too...
> 
> 2) It's been less than a week and we already have shipping.... really?  (Having said that, I think good names would be Fey -Finn/Rey-  and Foe -Finn/Poe-. Team Poe for the win! )
> 
> WIll post my actual feeling later




What does "shipping" mean in the context that you used it?


----------



## MarkB

SkidAce said:


> What does "shipping" mean in the context that you used it?




Short for "relationshipping", it's the tendency of fans to assign romantic relationships to characters in an ongoing fiction, and to factionalise in their support of those potential relationships.


----------



## Staffan

SkidAce said:


> What does "shipping" mean in the context that you used it?




"Ship" as in "relationship". Basically, significant portions of the fanbase going "these two* characters should be in a romantic relationship with one another" even if such a thing is at best hinted at in the source material. In fandom, this goes back at least to Star Trek TOS, when you had portions of the fanbase shipping Kirk with Spock, even if that's not the term used at the time.

* Occasionally more.


----------



## Umbran

Hypersmurf said:


> Canon nevertheless




I saw the movie again today - actually, several folks call him "Ren".  So, to them at least, it is pretty much a surname.  

Which starts to make it look like the Knights of Ren are named after him... and that makes them even more a sop to his immature ego....


----------



## MoonSong

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> What, no Prey?




But they don't really interact with each other, they barely share a scene, Chewey is way more likely, with them bonding over the Millenium Falcon and comforting each other over their mutual loss.... That would be a good FF... we could even change the names and publish it to closet furries!


----------



## Hypersmurf

Umbran said:


> I saw the movie again today - actually, several folks call him "Ren".



Likewise... I noticed Finn to another trooper ('Ren wants the prisoner'), and Hux a couple of times, when he was being dismissive and contemptuous.

Hux obviously has a military/technological vs Force/mysticism rivalry going on with Ren. Makes me wonder if the average stormtrooper takes his (or her) cue from Hux, referring to him as 'Ren' as a mark of contempt for his immaturity and childishness... but not to his face on account of his power (... and immaturity and childishness...)

-Hyp.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

I'd say all of those support the idea it's a title. It doesn't have the weight of Darth, so no calling him "lord", but also no one calls his Kylo. Imo, part of that is simply that Ren has a better ring than Kylo, which sounds like a diminutive form of a girl name, but in universe in sure there is a better reason. 
The ginger nazi calling him Ren could lead either way. On the title side, he could be calling him that as a cold formality. Too professional to be openly disrespectful to the Supreme Leaders pet force adept, but too distrustful of him and his methods to be informal or do or say anything that might break the ice.


----------



## Hypersmurf

doctorbadwolf said:


> I'd say all of those support the idea it's a title. It doesn't have the weight of Darth, so no calling him "lord", but also no one calls his Kylo. Imo, part of that is simply that Ren has a better ring than Kylo, which sounds like a diminutive form of a girl name, but in universe in sure there is a better reason. ��
> The ginger nazi calling him Ren could lead either way. On the title side, he could be calling him that as a cold formality. Too professional to be openly disrespectful to the Supreme Leaders pet force adept, but too distrustful of him and his methods to be informal or do or say anything that might break the ice.



The way Hux says 'Ren', though - the tone he uses - makes it sound like a veiled substitution for 'Monkey-Boy, here'.

'... But _Ren_ didn't feel the droid was necessary any longer.'

It definitely doesn't feel like it's in any way a term of respect when he says it.

-Hyp.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Hypersmurf said:


> The way Hux says 'Ren', though - the tone he uses - makes it sound like a veiled substitution for 'Monkey-Boy, here'.
> 
> '... But _Ren_ didn't feel the droid was necessary any longer.'
> 
> It definitely doesn't feel like it's in any way a term of respect when he says it.
> 
> -Hyp.




I didn't say respect. He just can't openly disrespect him, so he settles for cold formality, and lets his tone speak for him. Imo, it wouldn't fir the character AT ALL to have Hux speak familiarly with a rival he either hates, or at least thinks is full of crap/screwing up the mission with poor decisions. IMO, that character uses a formal title and derisive tone while sticking to the letter of formality, at least in front of a superior.


----------



## Umbran

doctorbadwolf said:


> Imo, part of that is simply that Ren has a better ring than Kylo, which sounds like a diminutive form of a girl name...




Really?  That's an issue a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away?  Poor wannabe dark lord has a girly name?  Base sexism's going to be the issue?


----------



## Stacie GmrGrl

Seen it three times now. I love this movie. Sure its a bit of a repeat of Episodes 4 and 6 mashed together, but I don't mind. Get that out of the way so they can focus on doing new things. I know I will see it at least a couple more times in theaters. 

Maz Kinada is one of my new favorite characters in the Star Wars universe. I think she had one of the most important lines in the entire movie when she talked about how there is only the one war worth fighting, the Light Side vs the Dark Side, and I believe that the next two movies will focus on that immensely. 

I also really like Kylo Ren, seeing just how messed up he is, and how far he felt he had to try to become a dark sider before he eventually will redeem himself, which I believe he will do as him killing his father probably messed him up way more than he was expecting. That's my fan theory at the moment. 

Now I am just wondering how they will start Episode 8. Will they start right where 7 left off, with Luke and Rey staring at each other and us hearing their first words to each other, or will it begin a year or two later, after he has probably trained her and after Kylo Ren has received more training?


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

Hypersmurf said:


> The way Hux says 'Ren', though - the tone he uses - makes it sound like a veiled substitution for 'Monkey-Boy, here'.




It's a thinly veiled Ren & Stimpy joke.  Think of Kylo Ren as Ren and you'll never see the movie the same way again.



			
				Stacie GmrGrl said:
			
		

> Maz Kinada is one of my new favorite characters in the Star Wars universe. I think she had one of the most important lines in the entire movie when she talked about how there is only the one war worth fighting, the Light Side vs the Dark Side, and I believe that the next two movies will focus on that immensely.




I'm hoping we get to see more of her. She's an effective mentor/sage character, a good reboot of Yoda, and it would be a shame if this were her only appearance.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Hypersmurf said:


> The way Hux says 'Ren', though - the tone he uses - makes it sound like a veiled substitution for 'Monkey-Boy, here'.
> 
> '... But _Ren_ didn't feel the droid was necessary any longer.'
> 
> It definitely doesn't feel like it's in any way a term of respect when he says it.
> 
> -Hyp.




Replace the use of 'Ren' with 'Duke' or a similar title and see how it plays.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Umbran said:


> Really?  That's an issue a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away?  Poor wannabe dark lord has a girly name?  Base sexism's going to be the issue?




In universe? Probably not. I was referring to the script, however.


----------



## Umbran

doctorbadwolf said:


> In universe? Probably not. I was referring to the script, however.




They have an intimidating and threatening villain named "Snoke".  I don't think they're all that worried about whether the character's name is macho.


----------



## Morrus

Umbran said:


> They have an intimidating and threatening villain named "Snoke".  I don't think they're all that worried about whether the character's name is macho.




Beats "Dooku"!


----------



## Cor Azer

Morrus said:


> Beats "Dooku"!




So that's the plan of the Dark Side - they want to rename everything so it's impossible to take anyone seriously through the fits of laughter!


----------



## MoonSong

Well, I have finally gotten the chance to stick around and write.


[I am a huge fan of the prequels, I started watching the saga with Episode I, and didn't see the original trilogy until after Attack of the clones, and somehow had to have the Palpatine=Sidious thing being spelled out to me. 

so in short, my opinions could be very unorthodox, so please don't get angry or mad]

One of the biggest problems of long franchises is the way they handle second and third generation fans during major revivals that go "back to basics". The first generation demands this revival be as suited to them as possible  at the expense of younger fans. This was a problem for DC comics, this was a problem for D&D, and it is a problem for Star Wars. The force awakens spends quite a long time disowning the prequel trilogy it isn't funny. There are a subtle "take that prequels" here and there, but nowhere as bad as in the attack on the Republic, I cringed on my seat as I saw Coruscant blown apart without they even bothering to call it by name -well, reading this thread it turns out it wasn't Coruscant, but I didn't know that when I saw a planet that looked like Coruscant, had the narrative role of Coruscant and made quack like Coruscant, so to me it was Coruscant and I had the same emotional response as if it was Coruscant-. The message was clear, they went scorched earth on the prequels, no more intrigue, no more politics, only adventure and lone pilots singlehandedly solving problems by blowing massive superweapons.

Thankfully the movie has actual substance to make up for the cheap pandering to the original trilogy die-hards. While the main plot is a carbon copy of A new hope, the actual story is far more interesting and completely distinct, with the main revelations well kept in secret instead of spoilered in the trailers. And there are enough hints and little reminders that somehow redeem the prequels, for example Kylo Ren/Ben Solo truly looks and feels like Anakin's grandchild.

The movie really feels like a Star Wars movie; it hits all the points you'd expect from a Star Wars movie. It relies a lot more on comedy than usual, but it helps the movie to be child friendly, because it is way darker than the other entry points: A new Hope and the Phantom Menace.  The fast pace works like a charm, the acting is amazing, and the new characters are interesting and likable. The dramatic exchange between Ben and Han was great. The tension and the expectation go perfectly, you really want Ben not to smash that door, you really want Han to reach him, you want to believe it is possible, yet deep down you know it is not true and it is the end for Han... 

And speaking of Han, his character goes full circle. Despite it being a tragedy, it was a worthy end for him. From a selfish rogue who cares for nothing but his own hide to a mature man who dies for love. I can't think of a more beautiful swansong.

(Oh yes, and this is also the first time stormtroopers are allowed to be competent and scary on-screen.)


----------



## Shadowdweller00

Overall a reasonably strong positive for me.  Some things I really liked and some things I...didn't care for much.
(Hope none of the following qualify as spoilers).

Good:
- Plotting
- Characters in general.
- The "secret" tragedy
- The fact that neither Finn nor Rey are unrealistically fantastic pilots.
- Loved the whininess of Kylo Ren, and the occasional temptations he has by the Light Side of the force.
- The resilience of the latest superweapon, in contrast to a certain convenient ventilation duct in the original film (SW IV)

Bad:
- Finn's "transition" at the beginning doesn't quite seem believable to me.  Good try, but doesn't quite get there.
- I thought the First Order's dogma could have been fleshed out a bit better.  What do they claim to fighting against exactly?  (There is a speech explaining this, it's just a bit too nebulous)
- I also think the operating relationship between First order, Republic, and Resistance could have used a bit more detail.
- Seemed like Supreme Leader Snoke could have used a bit more gravitas.  But perhaps he will be fleshed out a bit better in later films.
- Couple plot holes.  For example - Kylo Ren is supposedly a well-trained warrior, but gets defeated and embrassed by individuals who have no prior training with a lightsaber.  There are ways this could have been made more believable - play up the debilitation of Ren's previous wound a bit more or the Fate/Destiny aspect of the Force, for example.
- Another: Why does a supposedly minor officer like Phasma get a name whereas the basic stormtrooper grunts get only a designation code?
(Both fairly minor niggles)
- Use of yet another superweapon to create urgency.


----------



## Umbran

Shadowdweller00 said:


> - I thought the First Order's dogma could have been fleshed out a bit better.  What do they claim to fighting against exactly?  (There is a speech explaining this, it's just a bit too nebulous)




Is the truth likely to be anything more than, "Snoke wants to run everything"?  If not, then why do we care what they say their issues are, if the reality is that Snoke is a BBEG?  



> - Couple plot holes.  For example - Kylo Ren is supposedly a well-trained warrior, but gets defeated and embrassed by individuals who have no prior training with a lightsaber.




With respect, Kylo Ren just took a bowcaster shot.  You know, that weapon they took great pains, several times, to show usually sends people flying?   So, you know, wounded and bleeding.  And while they may not have been Jedi, both Finn and Rey were experienced or trained combatants.



> - Another: Why does a supposedly minor officer like Phasma get a name whereas the basic stormtrooper grunts get only a designation code?




She's _Captain_ Phasma.  Not a minor officer.  She's the equivalent of someone in command of a Star Destroyer, but for ground troops.


----------



## Umbran

Oh, and one of the Best Things Ever:

https://twitter.com/KyloR3n?ref_src=twsrc


----------



## Shadowdweller00

Umbran said:


> Is the truth likely to be anything more than, "Snoke wants to run everything"?  If not, then why do we care what they say their issues are, if the reality is that Snoke is a BBEG?



Because unless you're deliberately pushing the unknown nature of a villain toward some purpose such as creating fear or mystery, then a nondescript villain is equally as unimposing, uninspiring, and ineffective as a nondescript hero.



			
				Umbran said:
			
		

> With respect, Kylo Ren just took a bowcaster shot.  You know, that weapon they took great pains, several times, to show usually sends people flying?   So, you know, wounded and bleeding.  And while they may not have been Jedi, both Finn and Rey were experienced or trained combatants.



Until the point (after a token bit of chest-thumping) he seems to completely shrug the injury off in hackneyed, action-hero style.  Don't get me wrong - the rudiments of justification are potentially there.  There's just nothing (that I recall) that communicates the apparent weakness during the fight...such as a flinch, misstep, or slightly shaking hands.  There's equally no real hint of supposed form, skill, or prior training on Ren's part beyond the contrast of Finn's fumbling with the saber. 



			
				Umbran said:
			
		

> She's _Captain_ Phasma.  Not a minor officer.  She's the equivalent of someone in command of a Star Destroyer, but for ground troops.



The supervisor of a sanitation worker.


----------



## Grumpy RPG Reviews

Cor Azer said:


> So that's the plan of the Dark Side - they want to rename everything so it's impossible to take anyone seriously through the fits of laughter!







Olgar Shiverstone said:


> It's a thinly veiled Ren & Stimpy joke.  Think of Kylo Ren as Ren and you'll never see the movie the same way again.




In the next movie Ren start's slapping the hell out of Hux,, calling him a fat bloated idiot.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Umbran said:


> They have an intimidating and threatening villain named "Snoke".  I don't think they're all that worried about whether the character's name is macho.




Not about macho. Supreme Leader Snoke rolls of the tongue, and sounds like a villains name. Just not the same kind of villain as Darth Vader or Kylo Ren. Emperor Palpatine isn't scary, and Darth Sidious sounds villainous in an entirely different way from Darth Vader. 
I wouldn't expect the same, or even similar, naming conventions for Snoke and Kylo Ren. 



Shadowdweller00 said:


> Until the point (after a token bit of chest-thumping) he seems to  completely shrug the injury off in hackneyed, action-hero style.  Don't  get me wrong - the rudiments of justification are potentially there.   There's just nothing (that I recall) that communicates the apparent  weakness during the fight...such as a flinch, misstep, or slightly  shaking hands.  There's equally no real hint of supposed form, skill, or  prior training on Ren's part beyond the contrast of Finn's fumbling  with the saber.
> 
> The supervisor of a sanitation worker.




His technique gets less and less smooth and controlled as the fights  wear on. By the end, he's swinging just as desperately as Rey, relying  entirely on strength and familiarity with the weapon, and still almost  kills her. ALso, Finn uses the saber in a way that indicates that he's  been trained, at least in the basics. The guy he first fights also seems  to know how to counter a lightsaber. These things suggest that First  Order troopers are trained to use and counter lightsabers. 

Capt.  Phasma isn't his direct supervisor. She's the scary person he had to  report to for evaluation as to his ability to continue performing his  duty. She's also clearly in charge of the ground assault in the  beginning.


----------



## AverageCitizen

Umbran said:


> I saw the movie again today - actually, several folks call him "Ren".  So, to them at least, it is pretty much a surname.
> 
> Which starts to make it look like the Knights of Ren are named after him... and that makes them even more a sop to his immature ego....




Exactly. Seems like Snoke used the idea of Ren being Luke's rival instead of his student as part of his conversion. Luke founded the Jedi, Kylo founded the Knights. This movie focused on Han and Ren but I expect there is plenty of inferiority complex baggage in Ren's relationship with his old master/uncle.


----------



## Umbran

Shadowdweller00 said:


> The supervisor of a sanitation worker.




1) He was in sanitation when he was on the station, before the movie.  The first time we see him, he's shifted to a combat role.

2) Not the direct supervisor, no.  He said it was his first combat, so he is perhaps the equivalent of a Private or Corporal.  His direct supervisor would be something like a Sergeant.  However...

3) A Captain is typically in charge of a company of soldiers or an individual ship, and will still take interest in the performance of individuals.  I would imagine especially if there's a conditioning program that needs monitoring... when she probably also came through that program.


----------



## dd.stevenson

doctorbadwolf said:


> You don't actually do anything other than state that her motivations aren't clear



Sorry, I'm not understanding the question. How do you feel complaints about missing motivation should be formulated?



delericho said:


> Plus the small matter of Chewie's freak-out, leading to Kylo Ren being wounded (and so Finn and Rey surviving), and the shield generator being destroyed (leading to the Starkiller being destroyed, and thus the Resistance surviving).



Eh, chewie's always moaning and shooting at bad guys. And they had planned to blow the explosives anyway, whether Han died or not.

Look, I'll freely admit that I might have missed something, as I saw this in 4DX with a full bladder, and my seat came to life just as the shooting started. But from memory, I'm just not seeing these as plot consequences of Han's death.


----------



## PurpleDragonKnight

Istbor said:


> I was always in the belief that you either had to learn the droid beeps or be lucky enough to be a Jedi and pretty much understand everything through the force.  That is what I thought was the first tip to Rey being a force adept. She understood both the droid and the Chewy.



if i remember well from my old d20 star wars games you had to spend a rank to learn that language (understand but can't speak unless you're a droid; same goes for Wookie language...)

it's fair to assume that any junkers like Anakin or Rey would understand droid binary...


----------



## trappedslider

The reactions i have seen here and elsewhere made me go look for this old article Star Wars fans hate Star Wars


----------



## PurpleDragonKnight

Morrus said:


> I have a theory about Phasma. We know she was originally a male part before Christie got it. I bet that original character didn't have a cool chrome costume either.
> 
> Imagine that part. Same lines, same events. But instead of Gwendolyn Christie in shiny armour, it's an officious officer in uniform.
> 
> They changed the appearance, but not the actual role.




My theory - and it's probably a horrible one - is that she's one of the first stormtrooper to have broken from her conditioning, and she's now secretly on the lookout for other "awakened" soldiers (The Force Awakens actually having an effect on other things than Jedis or Force Users? plus we later see Finn wielding a lightsaber pretty good...)  Could explain why she was so quick to pick up on Finn's 'helmet off' break... has she been tailing him? has she been on his case for a while? his quick response seemed to indicate a certain 'I'm used to this crap' attitude, like a soldier who always gets picked on for badly shined shoes and has grown complacent in the getting caught and follow up punishment routines...

That could explain why she doesn't put much of a fight dropping down the Star Killer's shields.  I can see her in SW VIII, helmet off, leading a bunched of Awakened Stormtroopers and kicking some random general bootey....


----------



## MoonSong

trappedslider said:


> The reactions i have seen here and elsewhere made me go look for this old article Star Wars fans hate Star Wars




Ohh, that explains a lot. I'm not a Star Wars fan so I'm free to love it.


----------



## Umbran

PurpleDragonKnight said:


> My theory - and it's probably a horrible one - is that she's one of the first stormtrooper to have broken from her conditioning, and she's now secretly on the lookout for other "awakened" soldiers (The Force Awakens actually having an effect on other things than Jedis or Force Users? plus we later see Finn wielding a lightsaber pretty good...)




Another theory (repeated from another thread) - like Rey, Finn is actually one of Luke's prior students, left behind when the First Order really started gunning for Luke.  Phasma found him and put him into training rather than turn him over to Snoke.  This has a certain Soap Opera feel which is appropriate for the series.

Having both Rey and Finn be left behind in obscurity, only to come back to be a threat to the BBEG would be a callback to the original - as Luke and Leia were hidden from Vader...


----------



## Umbran

MoonSong(Kaiilurker) said:


> T
> Thankfully the movie has actual substance to make up for the cheap pandering to the original trilogy die-hards.




Hey!  I'll have you know that's *very expensive* pandering!  The movie took some $200 million to make - so every minute of pandering is about $1.5 million!


----------



## Staffan

Umbran said:


> Hey!  I'll have you know that's *very expensive* pandering!  The movie took some $200 million to make - so every minute of pandering is about $1.5 million!




I wonder how much of that went to pay Mark Hamill for all the time he spent on-screen. That has to be the highest "credit position" to screen time in decades.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

dd.stevenson said:


> Sorry, I'm not understanding the question. How do you feel complaints about missing motivation should be formulated?




OK, let's try this a different way? What wasn't clear about her motivation? Without recapping the whole movie, I'm not sure how else to proceed here. 
But her motivations were crystal clear at all points. 

Do you perhaps require explicit verbal statements from characters? Body language and facial expressions that coincide with external stimulus not enough for you?


----------



## Water Bob

One of the big differences in the original trilogy and the new film, compared to the prequel trilogy, is the focus of the films.  The originals and the new films are about key moments in time--key incidents that happen.  In A New Hope, it was a story about how the Death Star was destroyed.  The Empire Strikes Back was about how the Rebels lost their base on Hoth and about the meeting between Vader and Luke for the first time.  Return of the Jedi is about how the Rebels won with the death of Vader and the Emperor.

So much of the Big Picture stuff happened off screen.  The dismantling of the Galactic Senate and the Rebels gaining the Death Star plans in A New Hope.  All the stuff that was going on with the Empire and the Rebels everywhere--as the film focused just on a couple of events--in The Empire Strikes Back.  How the Bothans gained the plans to the Second Death star, and how the Emperor really weaved a web to destroy the Rebels at Endor.

All of this stuff happened off screen.

Yet, in the prequels, we live through most of the major events.  We see how Palpatine becomes Chancellor of the Republic.  We see how the Republic gets an Army.  We see how the Jedi Knights are pressured into becoming soldiers--because the Republic previously had no officers to lead the clones.  We see, over all three movies, what it took for a good man to fall to the Dark Side.  We see how the Republic became an Empire.

In the originals, all of this type of stuff--this type of plot--would be delivered off-screen with dialogue like, "Vader tracked down and murdered your father."



The new movie is much more like the originals--lots of questions, things happening off camera, and holes in history to fill.


----------



## dd.stevenson

doctorbadwolf said:


> Without recapping the whole movie, I'm not sure how else to proceed here.




In that case, perhaps the best way for us to proceed is to leave off discussing the matter, since we clearly don't share the right parlance to make this conversation work.


----------



## Cor Azer

Staffan said:


> I wonder how much of that went to pay Mark Hamill for all the time he spent on-screen. That has to be the highest "credit position" to screen time in decades.




I recall reading Ford's salary was something like 50x that of Hamill and Fisher.

And there very well have been a lot more filmed; editing does tend to trim things down.


----------



## Umbran

doctorbadwolf said:


> OK, let's try this a different way? What wasn't clear about her motivation? Without recapping the whole movie, I'm not sure how else to proceed here.
> But her motivations were crystal clear at all points.




You guys have been using pronouns for so long, that perhaps I have lost the original referent.  You guys talking about Rey, here?

I also don't have any confusion about her motivations.  But, I understand it is difficult for someone to answer the question, "Where/how did they fail to get her motivations across?"  Because all the person will know is that the motivations failed to get across - if they had figured out where the statements of her motivations were, they'd likely not have failed to get them.

It would be better for you to state the things that made her motivations clear to you, and see if he got them, and if not, discuss why they were ineffective at communicating to him.

I'll start with an example:  What motivates her to help BB-8 when she first meets the droid?  She has a fairly basic respect for others.  This is made clear by contrast - she points out the guy with the net doesn't respect anyone.


----------



## Morrus

Umbran said:


> I'll start with an example:  What motivates her to help BB-8 when she first meets the droid?  She has a fairly basic respect for others.  This is made clear by contrast - she points out the guy with the net doesn't respect anyone.




Interestingly, the novelisation changes that a little. She haggles with Simon Pegg a bit over the price of the droid, before changing her mind. She later says she did that to spite him.


----------



## Morrus

Cor Azer said:


> I recall reading Ford's salary was something like 50x that of Hamill and Fisher.
> 
> And there very well have been a lot more filmed; editing does tend to trim things down.




How awesome would an extended edition be?

I don't think Disney tends to do that though.  There have been no extended Marvel movies.


----------



## dd.stevenson

Umbran said:


> I also don't have any confusion about her motivations.  But, I understand it is difficult for someone to answer the question, "Where/how did they fail to get her motivations across?"  Because all the person will know is that the motivations failed to get across - if they had figured out where the statements of her motivations were, they'd likely not have failed to get them.
> 
> It would be better for you to state the things that made her motivations clear to you, and see if he got them, and if not, discuss why they were ineffective at communicating to him.
> 
> I'll start with an example:  What motivates her to help BB-8 when she first meets the droid?  She has a fairly basic respect for others.  This is made clear by contrast - she points out the guy with the net doesn't respect anyone.




It isn't so much a matter of declaring motivations (which even the prequels do), as establishing motivations. If the motivation is fairly expected and pedestrian, like Rey's desire to help the droid in that early establishing shot, then we don't need a great deal of setup--the simple contrast is enough. (I thought that scene was a fantastic take on the Be Nice To Animals trope, btw; and it did plot work as well!)

But if the character is acting against her own self interest, then more work is required to establish their motivation, else the narrative risks its characters acting stupid on demand (e.g., exhibiting contrived behavior for plot convenience.) One of the points that bugged me was the scene on the forest planet (I don't remember the place's name) when Rey insists that she's going to return to Jaku, despite being aware that she can do a lot better for herself. Who is she waiting for that she's willing to undergo so much hardship to wait for them at Jaku? Why is it so important that she personally be there, rather than just pay someone to deliver a message? Rey is the sympathetic protagonist, the character the audience is meant to follow and learn with, but in this scene her motivations are left to the imagination.

I understand that her reasons are probably being withheld for a reveal in a later installment. But personally I would rather wait and see THAT movie, instead of being strung along with a less-than-perfectly comprehensible protagonist, waiting for the punchline which never comes.


----------



## Neonchameleon

Umbran said:


> She's _Captain_ Phasma. Not a minor officer. She's the equivalent of someone in command of a Star Destroyer, but for ground troops.




Really, really not. She's an army or marine Captain, not a navy one. By default a naval Captain is equivalent to an army Colonel (and an army Captain to a naval Lieutenant). And an army Captain is one rank up from first lieutenant.


----------



## Umbran

Neonchameleon said:


> She's an army or marine Captain, not a navy one.




By what we see, I am not convinced the First Order has that rank distinction, and I don't think they'd allow such unique armor to someone that far down the ladder.

It it matters, we'll see it on screen.  It hasn't so far.


----------



## Morrus

Neonchameleon said:


> Really, really not. She's an army or marine Captain, not a navy one. By default a naval Captain is equivalent to an army Colonel (and an army Captain to a naval Lieutenant). And an army Captain is one rank up from first lieutenant.




Well, she's neither. She's a First Order captain. Could mean anything!


----------



## Lord Twig

I didn't have time to read the whole thread, but a couple things stuck out to me.

Why does everyone assume the star is completely consumed by the Starkiller base? They only say that the star, "goes dark", not that it is destroyed. I see it as one of two things happening. Either the star's total output is being drained while the main weapon is fired, then released back to the star, where it re-ignites, or all nuclear activity is stopped and the star collapses into a neutron star. The mass of the star would still be there.

Honestly if it only temporarily drained the star then they would never need to move the base at all, just pull some power from the star, fire and let the star re-ignite. Rinse and repeat.

Another thing I notice is everyone talking about the similarities between The Force Awakens and previous movies, but ignore the differences. Sure Rey is an orphan, but she grew up alone "on the streets" as it were. Luke had a loving family and a relatively normal childhood (for Star Wars at least). He hung out with his friends and worked on his speeder (a.k.a. car) and did pretty much what most teenage boys do. Rey clawed and scraped to survive and relied on no one but herself. Those seem like two very different stories to me.

The rescue from the enemy? Luke and Co infiltrate an Imperial base and bust out the princess in A New Hope. In TFA Finn the Stormtrooper defects from the First Order and grabs a pilot prisoner to help him escape. Again, quite a different story.

I loved the new villains. I didn't even know that Snoke was Andy Serkis till I checked out IMDB after I saw the movie. I never got a Gollum vibe, nor did anyone I talked to till I checked this thread. People have already talked about how Kylo Ren is half trained vs. Darth Vader's complete mastery, so I won't go into that.

I think Chewbacca really came into his own in this movie. Before he was just there and he fired his bowcaster a few times, but it was nothing special. This time he seemed like a really powerful fighter. His bowcaster was shown to be as powerful as the lore says it is supposed to be. When Han Solo was killed he howls and immediately fires on Kylo Ren, a person that he must have known since he was a baby. Then he blasts his way out like a badass and completes the mission by blowing the charges. He then gets the Falcon and rescues Rey and Finn. He finally felt like a real character and a hero in his own right.

Wow, so much to talk about with this movie. I guess that's enough for now. I loved it. Not perfect, but it was really good. It was not the movie we needed, but the movie we wanted. Which was the movie we needed.


----------



## Ovinomancer

dd.stevenson said:


> It isn't so much a matter of declaring motivations (which even the prequels do), as establishing motivations. If the motivation is fairly expected and pedestrian, like Rey's desire to help the droid in that early establishing shot, then we don't need a great deal of setup--the simple contrast is enough. (I thought that scene was a fantastic take on the Be Nice To Animals trope, btw; and it did plot work as well!)
> 
> But if the character is acting against her own self interest, then more work is required to establish their motivation, else the narrative risks its characters acting stupid on demand (e.g., exhibiting contrived behavior for plot convenience.) One of the points that bugged me was the scene on the forest planet (I don't remember the place's name) when Rey insists that she's going to return to Jaku, despite being aware that she can do a lot better for herself. Who is she waiting for that she's willing to undergo so much hardship to wait for them at Jaku? Why is it so important that she personally be there, rather than just pay someone to deliver a message? Rey is the sympathetic protagonist, the character the audience is meant to follow and learn with, but in this scene her motivations are left to the imagination.
> 
> I understand that her reasons are probably being withheld for a reveal in a later installment. But personally I would rather wait and see THAT movie, instead of being strung along with a less-than-perfectly comprehensible protagonist, waiting for the punchline which never comes.




Rey makes a comment on the Falcon, to Finn, that she needs to go back.  Something along the lines of 'they'll come back for me.'  So that establishes that she's waiting for someone to return for her.  Then, in the force echo images, we see her being left on Jakku with Simon Pegg as a ship flies away and she screams, 'no, come back!'  Clearly, these are the people she's waiting for.  Then, immediately after the force echo imagery, Maz Kanata tells her that she needs to let go of her belief that "they" are ever going to come back for her and she needs to accept her destiny with the lightsaber.  Rey rejects this, and runs, becoming captured and setting up a chain of events where she does reject her childish beliefs and motivations and does accept her destiny.  Or, at least, enough to get through the end of the movie, it might pop back up again.

So, to me, that motivation was clearly established -- it was foreshadowed with Finn, shown with Han, flashbacked in the force echo, and then challenged with Maz.  All within about 30 minutes.


----------



## Umbran

dd.stevenson said:


> One of the points that bugged me was the scene on the forest planet (I don't remember the place's name) when Rey insists that she's going to return to Jaku, despite being aware that she can do a lot better for herself. Who is she waiting for that she's willing to undergo so much hardship to wait for them at Jaku? Why is it so important that she personally be there, rather than just pay someone to deliver a message?




I thought it was made pretty clear that she was waiting for family, who left her there as a child.  There's no "message" to leave with someone else - if she goes wandering for any length of time, her family will show up, not find her, and likely leave again.



> Rey is the sympathetic protagonist, the character the audience is meant to follow and learn with, but in this scene her motivations are left to the imagination.




The scene in her flashback, with the young girl crying as a ship flies away, made it pretty clear to me.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

dd.stevenson said:


> It isn't so much a matter of declaring motivations (which even the prequels do), as establishing motivations. If the motivation is fairly expected and pedestrian, like Rey's desire to help the droid in that early establishing shot, then we don't need a great deal of setup--the simple contrast is enough. (I thought that scene was a fantastic take on the Be Nice To Animals trope, btw; and it did plot work as well!)
> 
> But if the character is acting against her own self interest, then more work is required to establish their motivation, else the narrative risks its characters acting stupid on demand (e.g., exhibiting contrived behavior for plot convenience.) One of the points that bugged me was the scene on the forest planet (I don't remember the place's name) when Rey insists that she's going to return to Jaku, despite being aware that she can do a lot better for herself. Who is she waiting for that she's willing to undergo so much hardship to wait for them at Jaku? Why is it so important that she personally be there, rather than just pay someone to deliver a message? Rey is the sympathetic protagonist, the character the audience is meant to follow and learn with, but in this scene her motivations are left to the imagination.
> 
> I understand that her reasons are probably being withheld for a reveal in a later installment. But personally I would rather wait and see THAT movie, instead of being strung along with a less-than-perfectly comprehensible protagonist, waiting for the punchline which never comes.




Why is that confusing? She's an abandoned kid. You don't ever stop being an abandoned kid. She has to wait because they're coming back. Sure, that's never going to happen, but just being gone as long as she has will have had her mind becoming more and more convinced that she may have missed them. They may have come back for her, and then she wasn't there. IT takes a lot to force someone out of that mindset. "Doing better for herself" isn't a strong motivator. In fact, for many people, in general, it's not a strong motivator. 
The movie also suggests so strongly it might as well be explicit that she is waiting for family. Whether that is literally her parents, or someone with a similar role in her life at a young age doesn't really matter. 

"Why does she run away from the lightsaber? Why did the vision scare her?  It didn't scare me. Again, I need to know the protaganist's motivation." 
It took me a while to know where to begin with this, because it just seems almost explicitly obvious. First of all, she's never experienced anything like that before. Second, the vision demands of her that she fulfill a destiny, one that runs counter to her obsessive need to keep faith that her parents/whatever will come back. The vision also shows her some dark stuff. It's totally nomal, especially in a story, for someone to run from something like that. 

And there is literally nothing in the film that suggests that Rey is one of Luke's former students. She certainly isn't well trained with a lightsaber. She not only vaguely uses it like a staff, she also hesitantly mimics Finn's stance when she starts using it. 

Maybe rewatch it without that impression, and her motivations will make more sense to you? 

Let's see...the need to find Luke: 
He's Leia's brother. If there was nothing else, that would be enough. 
He is the guy who trained Kylo Ren. If there was nothing else, that would be enough. 
He is the most powerful and knowledgeable light side force user anyone knows of. If there was nothing else, that would be enough. 
He's the guy who defeated Vader and Palpatine, the guy who destroyed the first Death Star, probably the greatest hero of the Galactic Civil War. See above. 
He's the last Jedi. For both sides, that is enough. 

the Map: Why on earth would he leave it in one place/piece? That would not help him stay hidden. He left one part with R2, a trustworthy and reliable ally who has delivered such valuable intel a time or two before, and the other piece with an old friend and ally that most people would never even know to look for, hidden on a backwater world. 
What about that doesn't make sense?


----------



## Lord Twig

Umbran said:


> I thought it was made pretty clear that she was waiting for family, who left her there as a child.  There's no "message" to leave with someone else - if she goes wandering for any length of time, her family will show up, not find her, and likely leave again.
> 
> 
> 
> The scene in her flashback, with the young girl crying as a ship flies away, made it pretty clear to me.




This was very clear to me as well. She was waiting for her family. That's a pretty strong motivation.

As to _why_ her family left her there, that's a big question. But it is a good one. One that makes me want to see the future movies to find out that "why".

So who is Rey? I don't think she is Han and Leia's daughter, that just doesn't fit for me. She _might_ be Luke's daughter, but if she is, I don't think Luke knows he has a daughter. There is no way he would leave her with the unpleasant scavenger guy. If she was left, then she was left by her mother. Maybe a brief fling with a Force using woman (possibly dark side)? I'm not really in to the expanded universe stuff, but even I am aware of Mara Jade.

All that said I would be perfectly happy if she was completely unrelated. There are other people that can use the force besides the Skywalkers.


----------



## Umbran

Lord Twig said:


> There is no way he would leave her with the unpleasant scavenger guy.




Well, I don';t think he did leave Rey with him.  In the flashback of child-Rey, she's crying as a ship leaves, and there is a hand on her arm, holding her back.  I think that hand is human, and there's a voice that I believe is Max Von Sydow, not Pegg - I think she was left with Lor San Tekka, who watches over her from a distance, to avoid drawing attention to her.  Her dealing with Unkar Plutt (Pegg's character) then wasn't guardianship.  That was just business to get her food.

And then it becomes more clear why Tekka had the map...  

I have heard apocrypha/rumor that Tekka is a religious follower of the Force (as opposed to a *user* of it.  Maz Kanata might also be a follower).  It may be he was a scholar that Luke turned to when searching for old temples.  So, perhaps it is less that Luke left the map with Tekka, as Tekka gave the map to Luke, and thus had the same information to give to Poe.


----------



## Morrus

Umbran said:


> Well, I don';t think he did leave Rey with him.  In the flashback of child-Rey, she's crying as a ship leaves, and there is a hand on her arm, holding her back.  I think that hand is human, and there's a voice that I believe is Max Von Sydow, not Pegg - I think she was left with Lor San Tekka, who watches over her from a distance, to avoid drawing attention to her.




That's my guess. I'm also wondering if the word "family" is used in a broad sense here, meaning her "jedi trainee family", and that memory is what's been suppressed in her by Luke with a mental block to protect her, leaving her with just a vague familial impression.


----------



## Hypersmurf

Umbran said:


> Well, I don';t think he did leave Rey with him.  In the flashback of child-Rey, she's crying as a ship leaves, and there is a hand on her arm, holding her back.  I think that hand is human...




That's one ugly, bulbous, Unkar-Plutt-looking human!

Regarding Tekka and the map - doesn't the opening crawl imply he has only recently discovered it?

-Hyp.


----------



## Umbran

Hypersmurf said:


> That's one ugly, bulbous, Unkar-Plutt-looking human!




I wasn't watching for it, specifically, so I might be wrong.  And I'm not paying for another ticket to double check  



> Regarding Tekka and the map - doesn't the opening crawl imply he has only recently discovered it?




The opening crawl of "Empire Strikes Back" claims that Luke is the leader of the Rebels at Hoth, which seems a bit of an overstatement.

The opening crawl of "Attack of the Clones" claims Dooku is in charge of the Separatists, when in reality it is Palpatine.

The opening crawl of "Revenge of the Sith" claims that General Grievous is a droid, when he's actually a cyborg.

So, the crawls are not necessarily 100% accurate, and in one case gives less than the absolute truth to avoid spoiling the plot. 

Maybe he "discovered" it like, "Hey, lookit this!  It has been at the bottom of my sock drawer for, like, a decade, now?  And stuff looks bad out there.  Maybe it is time to get it to the Resistance..."


----------



## MechaPilot

Lord Twig said:


> The rescue from the enemy? Luke and Co infiltrate an Imperial base and bust out the princess in A New Hope. In TFA Finn the Stormtrooper defects from the First Order and grabs a pilot prisoner to help him escape. Again, quite a different story.




There's more than one rescue in TFA.  The rescue of Rei is very much a callback to rescuing Leia from the death star (although Rei was holding her own much more ably than Leia was due to Rei's strength with the force).


----------



## Lord Twig

MechaPilot said:


> There's more than one rescue in TFA.  The rescue of Rei is very much a callback to rescuing Leia from the death star (although Rei was holding her own much more ably than Leia was due to Rei's strength with the force).




Fair point. Of course Leia is supposed to be very strong with the Force as well, but it probably didn't occur to her to try and use it. It probably did help her resist the interrogation, just like Rey.

But again, just as there are similarities, there are differences. The various bits are mixed up enough with a bunch of new things to make it distinctly its own story. It never felt like I was watching a remake or a reboot. It was only after the movie was over that I started thinking about the similarities.

Really Rey isn't like Leia getting captured, it is more like Luke getting captured.

And I'm pretty sure it was Unkar Plutt's hand that was holding Rey back. I didn't notice it the first time I saw the movie, but the second time I though it looked like his. I could be wrong of course, it was just a quick look.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Lord Twig said:


> Fair point. Of course Leia is supposed to be very strong with the Force as well, but it probably didn't occur to her to try and use it. It probably did help her resist the interrogation, just like Rey.
> 
> But again, just as there are similarities, there are differences. The various bits are mixed up enough with a bunch of new things to make it distinctly its own story. It never felt like I was watching a remake or a reboot. It was only after the movie was over that I started thinking about the similarities.
> 
> Really Rey isn't like Leia getting captured, it is more like Luke getting captured.
> 
> And I'm pretty sure it was Unkar Plutt's hand that was holding Rey back. I didn't notice it the first time I saw the movie, but the second time I though it looked like his. I could be wrong of course, it was just a quick look.




I paid attention in my second viewing.  It was Unkar Plutt's hand and voice.

As for Rey escaping, she did that on her own, and was doing a very credible job of eluding the very motivated search parties.  While not explicit, I credit that with her growing up crawling inside Imperial starships, and the 1st Order very clearly using the same designers for their facilities.  Also, while it's not ever mentioned in the story, when Han/Chewie/Rey/Finn party storm the oscillator, Rey and Finn split off to open the blast doors for Han and Chewie to get inside.  If you pay attention to that scene, it's a perfect mirror for the first shot of Rey pulling the same part out of the Star Destroyer wreck on Jakku.


----------



## billd91

Lord Twig said:


> Fair point. Of course Leia is supposed to be very strong with the Force as well, but it probably didn't occur to her to try and use it. It probably did help her resist the interrogation, just like Rey.




Maybe, but she wasn't strong in the force at the time the movie was made. That was a later invention.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Umbran said:


> Well, I don';t think he did leave Rey with him.  In the flashback of child-Rey, she's crying as a ship leaves, and there is a hand on her arm, holding her back.  I think that hand is human, and there's a voice that I believe is Max Von Sydow, not Pegg - I think she was left with Lor San Tekka, who watches over her from a distance, to avoid drawing attention to her.  Her dealing with Unkar Plutt (Pegg's character) then wasn't guardianship.  That was just business to get her food.
> 
> And then it becomes more clear why Tekka had the map...
> 
> I have heard apocrypha/rumor that Tekka is a religious follower of the Force (as opposed to a *user* of it.  Maz Kanata might also be a follower).  It may be he was a scholar that Luke turned to when searching for old temples.  So, perhaps it is less that Luke left the map with Tekka, as Tekka gave the map to Luke, and thus had the same information to give to Poe.




I like this. 



Morrus said:


> That's my guess. I'm also wondering if the word  "family" is used in a broad sense here, meaning her "jedi trainee  family", and that memory is what's been suppressed in her by Luke with a  mental block to protect her, leaving her with just a vague familial  impression.




So, is there a specific reason multiple people think she's a former student of Luke's? 

I can't think of anything that even vaguely kinda maybe comes close to implying it a little, so I'm confused.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

billd91 said:


> Maybe, but she wasn't strong in the force at the time the movie was made. That was a later invention.




Do any of the movies ever suggest that she is strong in the force, as opposed to just force sensitive to an unknown degree?


----------



## Valador

Hypersmurf said:


> That's one ugly, bulbous, Unkar-Plutt-looking human!
> 
> Regarding Tekka and the map - doesn't the opening crawl imply he has only recently discovered it?
> 
> -Hyp.




I agree with you. I noticed this as well on my second viewing.

Also, you can sorta see it in this video at roughly the 50 second mark.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2Bg3NQes8o

Its fuzzy, but you can tell that's not a human.


----------



## Morrus

doctorbadwolf said:


> So, is there a specific reason multiple people think she's a former student of Luke's?
> 
> I can't think of anything that even vaguely kinda maybe comes close to implying it a little, so I'm confused.




I can't speak for anybody else, but for me it's just a hunch.


----------



## dd.stevenson

Ovinomancer said:


> Rey makes a comment on the Falcon, to Finn, that she needs to go back.  Something along the lines of 'they'll come back for me.'  So that establishes that she's waiting for someone to return for her.  Then, in the force echo images, we see her being left on Jakku with Simon Pegg as a ship flies away and she screams, 'no, come back!'  Clearly, these are the people she's waiting for.  Then, immediately after the force echo imagery, Maz Kanata tells her that she needs to let go of her belief that "they" are ever going to come back for her and she needs to accept her destiny with the lightsaber.



Yes, I noticed all this groundwork, but it clearly wasn't enough to carry me through the scene. I wanted to share Rey's moment of doubt as she rejects the hero's call, and I wasn't able to because I didn't know the first thing about who she was waiting for, or why she was waiting for them.

Compare that with Finn: even though I did't love his decision to hop a freighter for the far reaches of space as I felt he was veering toward stupid on demand, I still clearly understood WHAT he was running from, because I had seen the bad guys in all their nefarious glory. I could join him at the crossroads, and contemplate the consequences of accepting or rejecting the hero's call.



Umbran said:


> I thought it was made pretty clear that she was waiting for family, who left her there as a child.  There's no "message" to leave with someone else - if she goes wandering for any length of time, her family will show up, not find her, and likely leave again.




I'm not sure it was made very clear at all--I was listening for any indication one way or the other, and I don't believe we were even assured it was her family. Just "someone" and "somebody." Perhaps I'm mistaken--but the fact that I'm not 100% certain means the exposition wasn't even close to clear enough for me.


----------



## Eltab

billd91 said:


> Maybe, but she (Leia) wasn't strong in the force at the time the movie was made. That was a later invention.



Something I pulled out of the SW4 scene between Han ("there's no all-powerful mystic energy field guiding MY destiny") and Kenobi ( -covers his mouth with his hand and suppresses a laugh- ) was that Han is also a low-grade Force-adept, totally untrained of course, and "the famous Solo luck" is actually his inexpert tugs and yanks at the Force around him.

A little later on, Kenobi's Force-presence swamps both Han and Luke: Vader "I feel something ... that I haven't sensed since I was in the presence of my old master..."  All three men are hiding together in a smuggling compartment within the Millenium Falcon.


----------



## Umbran

doctorbadwolf said:


> So, is there a specific reason multiple people think she's a former student of Luke's?




Mostly because it makes a lot of sense out of a large heap of coincidences.  She *just happens* to be a pretty powerful force sensitive, and *just happens* to be in the same neighborhood as Lor San Tekka.  And it makes her very sudden rise to power more plausible in the minds of many.  And because when missing family is a major point, it is usually because they are story-relevant.  And it makes Luke's lightsaber calling to her seem more natural, if she's part of the same line of training, and so on.   

There's nothing concrete, but there are points left for you to wonder about, so people will posit theories.


----------



## MarkB

doctorbadwolf said:


> Do any of the movies ever suggest that she is strong in the force, as opposed to just force sensitive to an unknown degree?




Yoda and Obi-Wan consider her to be the galaxy's last hope if Luke is lost. That suggests she's more than just a mild talent.


----------



## Ovinomancer

dd.stevenson said:


> Yes, I noticed all this groundwork, but it clearly wasn't enough to carry me through the scene. I wanted to share Rey's moment of doubt as she rejects the hero's call, and I wasn't able to because I didn't know the first thing about who she was waiting for, or why she was waiting for them.
> 
> Compare that with Finn: even though I did't love his decision to hop a freighter for the far reaches of space as I felt he was veering toward stupid on demand, I still clearly understood WHAT he was running from, because I had seen the bad guys in all their nefarious glory. I could join him at the crossroads, and contemplate the consequences of accepting or rejecting the hero's call.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure it was made very clear at all--I was listening for any indication one way or the other, and I don't believe we were even assured it was her family. Just "someone" and "somebody." Perhaps I'm mistaken--but the fact that I'm not 100% certain means the exposition wasn't even close to clear enough for me.




So the issue isn't that there wasn't an establishment of her motivations, it's that those motivations were not laid out with enough crunchy details for you?  Okay, I'm good with that.  I didn't need the details to understand the motivation, but I guess I can see where someone else might.


----------



## Staffan

doctorbadwolf said:


> Do any of the movies ever suggest that she is strong in the force, as opposed to just force sensitive to an unknown degree?




"The Force is strong in my family. My father has it. I have it. My sister has it."


----------



## Umbran

Staffan said:


> "The Force is strong in my family. My father has it. I have it. My sister has it."




Along with:  "There is another" - Yoda.


----------



## dd.stevenson

Ovinomancer said:


> So the issue isn't that there wasn't an establishment of her motivations, it's that those motivations were not laid out with enough crunchy details for you?  Okay, I'm good with that.  I didn't need the details to understand the motivation, but I guess I can see where someone else might.




Without wishing to debate semantics, I think that establishing motivation means laying out the motivation in sufficient crunchy detail for the viewer. But, yes, whichever way you want to call it, I was unsatisfied with Rey's motivation in this and other scenes.


----------



## MechaPilot

Umbran said:


> Along with:  "There is another" - Yoda.




Speaking of which, did Obi Wan lose some memories in the ghost transformation?

Obi Wan: "That boy is our last hope.  Man, it would be awesome if he had a twin, right?"
-Yoda sighs audibly-

At least that's how that part always plays in my head.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Staffan said:


> "The Force is strong in my family. My father has it. I have it. My sister has it."




This and the Yoda line just establish that Leia is force sensitive. They give no indication of her power. The strength here refers to the bloodline. All Skywalkera are sensitive, BC the bloodline is strong in the force.this gives us no reason to assume a power level for any given Skywalker.


----------



## Ovinomancer

dd.stevenson said:


> Without wishing to debate semantics, I think that establishing motivation means laying out the motivation in sufficient crunchy detail for the viewer. But, yes, whichever way you want to call it, I was unsatisfied with Rey's motivation in this and other scenes.




Yeah, that was my point.  They did so for me, but not for you, and the only difference seems to be that you wanted more questions answered before you'd accept the presented motivation.  Again, that's cool, we disagree.


----------



## Flexor the Mighty!

Finally went and watched this. Not sure, it was good but far from great.  Way too much rehashing of the original trilogy and getting the story to the same point they were at in EP4.  Seems like the struggle of the original trilogy was largely wasted and kind of meaningless ultimately which I found disappointing.  The political situation here was not very well explained and kind of silly I thought. Wasn't very impressed by Kylo Ren as a villain, I didn't get any menace from him at all.  Hopefully the next one is to this one what ESB was to the original SW.


----------



## Hand of Evil

With Rey, just want to point out the "doll" in her hut (walker wreckage) was of a rebel pilot.  

It should be noted she was on the planet where the Falcon ended up, which we are told was stolen, but we don't know when it was stolen, it is possible that she was on it at the time it was taken.


----------



## MoonSong

dd.stevenson said:


> Yes, I noticed all this groundwork, but it clearly wasn't enough to carry me through the scene. I wanted to share Rey's moment of doubt as she rejects the hero's call, and I wasn't able to because I didn't know the first thing about who she was waiting for, or why she was waiting for them.
> 
> Compare that with Finn: even though I did't love his decision to hop a freighter for the far reaches of space as I felt he was veering toward stupid on demand, I still clearly understood WHAT he was running from, because I had seen the bad guys in all their nefarious glory. I could join him at the crossroads, and contemplate the consequences of accepting or rejecting the hero's call.
> 
> I'm not sure it was made very clear at all--I was listening for any indication one way or the other, and I don't believe we were even assured it was her family. Just "someone" and "somebody." Perhaps I'm mistaken--but the fact that I'm not 100% certain means the exposition wasn't even close to clear enough for me.




Well, she was abandoned by her primary caretaker, that is way enough for me to relate to and understand. The first time I was completely alone I was terrified -I was four-, and afraid my mom would never come back. In the end I could cope because I knew she was coming back, and thankfully she came back after less than an hour. But what if she hadn't? Rey was alone for years and only by hanging on to "they'll be back, they'll be back" mantra she could cope and adapt. She felt anxiety the moment she wasn't in the same place anymore, because she no longer had the illusion of control. It doesn't matter exactly who she was waiting for; it had to be a parent or a parent by proxy.


----------



## Curmudjinn

A strong conversation going on was that Rey was at the school, and possibly part of the defectors or significant to Ben Solo, relating to Kylo dispatching the Jedi that was attacking her in her vision. Many think it was Ben himself that dropped Rey off on Jakku, hoping to hide her from the whole thing.
This was to explain why he lost it when they said "a girl" was helping Finn. The random force pull strangle seemed excessive.


----------



## Eltab

Hand of Evil said:


> It should be noted she was on the planet where the Falcon ended up, which we are told was stolen, but we don't know when it was stolen, it is possible that she was on it at the time it was taken.



If I was Han, and wanted to hide (from Leia?  From a Force-user who frightens even Luke?), I would HAVE to give up the Millenium Falcon - it is distinctive, unique, has its own legend a-building, can be used to track me like I had a neon searchlight hung around my neck.  I'd arrange to have it quote stolen unquote so the new owner can draw off attention while I go hide - since I'm not likely to call a cop about it, right?

In several of the novels, we see a random Imperial sensor officer report to his Captain, "Sir, I've detected a YZ-104 freighter with non-standard modifications."  "Hmmm, I wonder what ship THAT could be.  Battle stations !"  And I can see similar happening in the new Movie Universe.


----------



## Eltab

Curmudjinn said:


> A strong conversation going on was that... <snip>



If Disney is smart, they will lift fan ideas for plot points, and work them into future movies.
Because it's a REAL draw when you see something happen (or hear it said) and realize, "I guessed right!"


----------



## Maxperson

Morrus said:


> I don't think so. I mean, sure you learn them, but everybody does. I can't think of anyone who was unable to understand droid beeps. I figure everyone grows up learning it.




C3PO has to translate for R2D2 in Jabba's lair in Return of the Jedi and I'm pretty sure he has translated for others.  I always thought that it was droids and Jedi/force sensitives who could pick up what was being said.  It might just be a plot device to understand or not, though.


----------



## Maxperson

Water Bob said:


> There's a lot of unanswered questions in the film--exactly the way that there were a lot of unanswered questions after A New Hope came out.
> 
> What is this "Sith"?  Now, it is, "Who are the Knights of Ren?"
> 
> It was, "what do we know about the Old Republic and now, the Empire?"  Now, it's, "What is the Resistance, and what is their place in the Republic?  What is the First Order?"
> 
> There were important people that we know little about:  Dodonna and Wedge Antilles.  Here, it's Lor San Tekka and Max Kanata.
> 
> In A New Hope, we saw a large Star Destroyer that blocked out our view overhead.  Here, we saw an even larger Star Destroyer that blocked out the sight of a planet.
> 
> The Death Star = Starkiller Base.
> 
> The desert planet of Jakku.  And, of course, Tatooine.
> 
> Grand Moff Tarkin.  General Hux.
> 
> And so on.
> 
> I think that we sometimes take for granted the 38 years of information we've learned about the Star Wars universe that was _outside_ of the first film.
> 
> With this sequel/re-launch, we're in basically the same place, almost 40 years later.




Yeah.  This movie was essentially a re-make of A New Hope.  I thought it was brilliant, though.  If they had announced a re-make of A New Hope, there would have been riots in the streets.  However, by billing it as Episode VII and altering things slightly, they produced a great movie that is a strong foundation for going off into different directions for Episodes VIII and IX.


----------



## Water Bob

Maxperson said:


> Yeah.  This movie was essentially a re-make of A New Hope.  I thought it was brilliant, though.  If they had announced a re-make of A New Hope, there would have been riots in the streets.  However, by billing it as Episode VII and altering things slightly, they produced a great movie that is a strong foundation for going off into different directions for Episodes VIII and IX.




_What is Old will be New Again.

-- Jedi proverb​_


----------



## Maxperson

Water Bob said:


> _What is Old will be New Again.
> 
> -- Jedi proverb​_




I thought that was from The Wheel of Time


----------



## Umbran

Curmudjinn said:


> A strong conversation going on was that Rey was at the school, and possibly part of the defectors or significant to Ben Solo, relating to Kylo dispatching the Jedi that was attacking her in her vision. Many think it was Ben himself that dropped Rey off on Jakku, hoping to hide her from the whole thing.




I don't think this will turn out to be true.  By the flashback, is seem she was very young when she was left on Jakku.  Little children do not make credible defectors.  And it doesn't seem plausible that he would then not reference that at all when they did meet.



> This was to explain why he lost it when they said "a girl" was helping Finn. The random force pull strangle seemed excessive.




It was excessive.  That's the point - he's immature and prone to throwing tantrums. He is not Darth Vader, not calm, cool, and in control - the contrast that he's a somewhat childish wannabe is strong and intentional.  It has nothing to do with it being a girl, specifically, and everything to do with yet another entity in the universe thwarting his desires.


----------



## Umbran

And, because no good bit of comedy goes without imitators:

https://twitter.com/VeryLonelyLuke


----------



## Maxperson

Umbran said:


> I don't think this will turn out to be true.  By the flashback, is seem she was very young when she was left on Jakku.  Little children do not make credible defectors.  And it doesn't seem plausible that he would then not reference that at all when they did meet.
> 
> It was excessive.  That's the point - he's immature and prone to throwing tantrums. He is not Darth Vader, not calm, cool, and in control - the contrast that he's a somewhat childish wannabe is strong and intentional.  It has nothing to do with it being a girl, specifically, and everything to do with yet another entity in the universe thwarting his desires.




I think she will turn out to be his sister or cousin.  The way the Solos acted with her and Ren's preoccupation with her seem to strongly hint at family ties.


----------



## Cor Azer

/Film does a breakdown of TFA using the official script (submitted for awards considerations), which reveals several clarifying details:

http://www.slashfilm.com/star-wars-the-force-awakens-ending/

As discussed in this thread, Rey was left with Unkar Plutt. Other interesting bits: Those are the Knights of Ren in Rey's vision, Luke knows who Rey is (but it doesn't elaborate why), Rey feels the pull of the Dark Side when battling Kylo Ren, and Kylo Ren is not as cold-hearted and ruthless as he wishes...


----------



## Goodsport

I just came back from watching the movie in 3D in the theater. 

BTW, when was "Jub Jub" actually said in the movie? 


[video=youtube;UBJlToFZVHM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBJlToFZVHM[/video]​


-G


----------



## dd.stevenson

MoonSong(Kaiilurker) said:


> Well, she was abandoned by her primary caretaker, that is way enough for me to relate to and understand.



That is not, I believe, established in the movie; it's a narrative that you're substituting for the missing exposition. Are you so certain, for example, that Rey wasn't crying for her twin brother who was being carried away on the ship whose last words were "wait here, I'll come find you"? 

It is of course perfectly valid for screenplays to demand viewer interpretation of the protagonist's primary motives--but that's a technique that runs counter to the goal of building a sympathetic protagonist, which Rey was clearly intended to be and (imo) should be.


----------



## Umbran

dd.stevenson said:


> That is not, I believe, established in the movie;




Well, she's a young child, and in the care of a non-human.  Her human parents are not present.  In some sense, she was left without them.  Whether or not they abandoned her or were killed or otherwise made non-available to her, she was left without them.



> but that's a technique that runs counter to the goal of building a sympathetic protagonist




I think you overstate the case.  We can care about the character without knowing the details of her losses.  She was left without her family as a child - that's sufficient to gain our sympathy.


----------



## dd.stevenson

Umbran said:


> I think you overstate the case.  We can care about the character without knowing the details of her losses.  She was left without her family as a child - that's sufficient to gain our sympathy.




False attribution: I never said you can't care. 

What I did say was that withholding major salient details makes the character less accessible.


----------



## Maxperson

dd.stevenson said:


> False attribution: I never said you can't care.
> 
> What I did say was that withholding major salient details makes the character less accessible.




How much does that really matter, though?  If she's sympathetic and accessible, why do we need more major details?  At what point do we say we've had enough major details and she's sympathetic enough?

For me, the past as was revealed plus her great need to be back on the desert world waiting was more than enough.


----------



## dd.stevenson

Maxperson said:


> How much does that really matter, though?  If she's sympathetic and accessible, why do we need more major details?




If you've read this thread, then you already know I don't agree that Rey was super accessible. Others disagree and that's fine--accessibility is a subjective value, after all.


----------



## Umbran

dd.stevenson said:


> False attribution: I never said you can't care.
> 
> What I did say was that withholding major salient details makes the character less accessible.




What you said was, (and I quote now, as I did before), "that's a technique that runs counter to the goal of building a sympathetic protagonist"

A sympathetic character (protagonist or otherwise) is one you care about. If you don't really need the details to care about the character, then, no, the technique doesn't run strongly counter to the goal. 

But, to address the issue of accessibility:  I think empirical evidence is against you here.  I see little sign that most of the audience finds the missing details make her notably less accessible.  As far as I can tell (looking at commentary and critique from several sources) she's one of the most successful characters the franchise has seen in decades.  That doesn't speak to her being inaccessible.  Whatever may be missing in backstory details has been more than made up for by the actress giving us insight to her emotional states and patterns.


----------



## MoonSong

Umbran said:


> What you said was, (and I quote now, as I did before), "that's a technique that runs counter to the goal of building a sympathetic protagonist"
> 
> A sympathetic character (protagonist or otherwise) is one you care about. If you don't really need the details to care about the character, then, no, the technique doesn't run strongly counter to the goal.
> 
> But, to address the issue of accessibility:  I think empirical evidence is against you here.  I see little sign that most of the audience finds the missing details make her notably less accessible.  As far as I can tell (looking at commentary and critique from several sources) she's one of the most successful characters the franchise has seen in decades.  That doesn't speak to her being inaccessible.  Whatever may be missing in backstory details has been more than made up for by the actress giving us insight to her emotional states and patterns.




You mean like show don't tell?


----------



## dd.stevenson

Umbran said:


> A sympathetic character (protagonist or otherwise) is one you care about. If you don't really need the details to care about the character, then, no, the technique doesn't run strongly counter to the goal.




A sympathetic protagonist (in particular) is one the audience is expected to identify with, as opposed to an unsympathetic protagonist with whom they are meant to be uncomfortable and unsure. Withholding details of a protagonist's primary motivation in any scene by definition and by experience runs counter to making the character accessible to the widest possible audience to identify with.



Umbran said:


> But, to address the issue of accessibility:  I think empirical evidence is against you here.  I see little sign that most of the audience finds the missing details make her notably less accessible.




You're right, I'm afraid. Chalk it up to the screenplay using every cheap trick in the book to compensate for the weakness of Rey's arc, or to Ridley's above-average performance, or to the fact that everyone's just glad to see a competent star wars movie, but even the critics I'd normally expect to complain, are instead glossing over nearly all the issues I saw with this movie. Heck, I halfway agree myself--it's great to see a strong female lead and a star wars entry that doesn't make me want to vomit with shame for being a star wars fan.

But you'll also hear a fair number of comments comparing the movie to fan fiction that will never stand with the originals. And fan fiction in addition to being derivative is also notable for being weak on the fundamentals of craft. So I don't feel like it's impossible that others, perhaps many others, felt the same disconnection and disappointment I did, or that a critique of the basics is out of order.


----------



## trappedslider

dd.stevenson said:


> But you'll also hear a fair number of comments comparing the movie to fan fiction that will never stand with the originals. .




I honestly think no SW movie is going to live up to the expectations of the fans that saw the original movies back in the late 70s and 80s. I also think that holds true for some of the younger fans as well (those of us who got SW fever during the 90s) 

I also think the best time for this movie to have come out was back in the time around the release of the OT, before those first viewers taste and knowledge and expectations could change.


----------



## Cor Azer

dd.stevenson said:


> A sympathetic protagonist (in particular) is one the audience is expected to identify with, as opposed to an unsympathetic protagonist with whom they are meant to be uncomfortable and unsure. Withholding details of a protagonist's primary motivation in any scene by definition and by experience runs counter to making the character accessible to the widest possible audience to identify with.
> 
> 
> 
> You're right, I'm afraid. Chalk it up to the screenplay using every cheap trick in the book to compensate for the weakness of Rey's arc, or to Ridley's above-average performance, or to the fact that everyone's just glad to see a competent star wars movie, but even the critics I'd normally expect to complain, are instead glossing over nearly all the issues I saw with this movie. Heck, I halfway agree myself--it's great to see a strong female lead and a star wars entry that doesn't make me want to vomit with shame for being a star wars fan.
> 
> But you'll also hear a fair number of comments comparing the movie to fan fiction that will never stand with the originals. And fan fiction in addition to being derivative is also notable for being weak on the fundamentals of craft. So I don't feel like it's impossible that others, perhaps many others, felt the same disconnection and disappointment I did, or that a critique of the basics is out of order.




Perhaps not what you intended to say, but that comes off very strongly as a No True Scotsman argument...


----------



## dd.stevenson

Cor Azer said:


> Perhaps not what you intended to say, but that comes off very strongly as a No True Scotsman argument...




Sorry, I don't follow. How so?

Edit: Perhaps that was a misquote?


----------



## Cor Azer

dd.stevenson said:


> Sorry, I don't follow. How so?




Audiences and critics seem to have overwhelmingly agreed Rey is an accessible character. To me, your comments make it sound like they all think she isn't and are just playing along, or were tricked into thinking she's more accessible than you, a "true and honest" critic, believe.

I'm not saying that's what you intended to say. Just that's what it sounds like to me.

And to be fair, while I haven't exactly gone looking, the only comparisons of TFA to fan fiction that I've seen were claims of Rey being a Mary Sue, which have been thoroughly debunked.


----------



## dd.stevenson

Cor Azer said:


> I'm not saying that's what you intended to say.




It's not what I intended to say, not what I think, and not what I said.


----------



## Cor Azer

dd.stevenson said:


> It's not what I intended to say, not what I think, and not what I said.




That's why I asked for clarification 

Because when Umbran pointed out audience and critics found Rey plenty accessible, you replied with, in part:



dd.stevenson said:


> Chalk it up to the screenplay using every cheap trick in the book to compensate for the weakness of Rey's arc.




Which implies you think the audiences and critics were, in part, tricked into finding her more accessible than she "actually" was, rather than consider that many people found her plenty accessible in the first place.

I'm not saying the movie, or even Rey's arc, is beyond reproach, but accessibility isn't a big flaw in Rey's character.

One problem with multi-volume stories is that some things need to remain unrevealed so that there's stuff to explore in later volumes. So writers are left with essentially four options:

1. leave nothing of a character's past to be explored later
2. waste time explaining things that won't be relevant until later (if ever)
3. have random, but important, background elements pop up in later volumes (Star Trek series are full of this)
4. touch on stuff just enough to show there's something there, but leave the details vague

I would like to think it's obvious 1 and 2 are poor choices for character development and pacing, respectively. 3 is typically inevitable in any sort of media where you don't have an overall story and/or multiple writers working only partially in concert, but good editing and writing can mitigate it. 4 is what they opted for in TFA.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Cor Azer said:


> That's why I asked for clarification
> 
> Because when Umbran pointed out audience and critics found Rey plenty accessible, you replied with, in part:
> 
> 
> 
> Which implies you think the audiences and critics were, in part, tricked into finding her more accessible than she "actually" was, rather than consider that many people found her plenty accessible in the first place.
> 
> I'm not saying the movie, or even Rey's arc, is beyond reproach, but accessibility isn't a big flaw in Rey's character.
> 
> One problem with multi-volume stories is that some things need to remain unrevealed so that there's stuff to explore in later volumes. So writers are left with essentially four options:
> 
> 1. leave nothing of a character's past to be explored later
> 2. waste time explaining things that won't be relevant until later (if ever)
> 3. have random, but important, background elements pop up in later volumes (Star Trek series are full of this)
> 4. touch on stuff just enough to show there's something there, but leave the details vague
> 
> I would like to think it's obvious 1 and 2 are poor choices for character development and pacing, respectively. 3 is typically inevitable in any sort of media where you don't have an overall story and/or multiple writers working only partially in concert, but good editing and writing can mitigate it. 4 is what they opted for in TFA.



I think the argument is that, since there are unknown and potentially bad things about Rey we should assume she's accessible.  Why, I don't know, but that the gist of the argument I'm getting.  Rey can't be fully trusted because she has unknown qualities.  But, as you note, leaving Rey an open book might instill that trust (until the bits you didn't know you didn't know show up at least) but it leaves her very flat for the sequels.


----------



## Jhaelen

Umbran said:


> That *huge* hologram - the dude is compensating, and is probably Yoda-sized.  "Snoke and mirrors" if you will.



Yup, I had two immediate reactions regarding Snoke:

- Oh dear, it's a crossover with Lord of the Rings - Gollum's back!

and

- I guess Snoke stole his hologram trickery from the Wizard of Oz.


----------



## Umbran

dd.stevenson said:


> It's not what I intended to say, not what I think, and not what I said.




I kind of have to agree with Cor Azer on this.  Apparently, *you* know what an accessible character is, and *everyone else* is just wrong, mistaken, misled, or shallow.  That is a strange definition of "accessible" in this context - accessible is what Mr. Stevenson says it is, and how accessible everyone else seems to find it to be can go hang?


----------



## Bedrockgames

I just saw the movie last night and really enjoyed it. Personally I found Rey and Finn both very accessible characters that I was eager to follow (primarily because of the actors which is what I think it almost always really boils down to). This was a well cast star wars movie and it felt like it fit in with the originals but also like it was picking up where they left off. I was expecting it to be mediocre (entertaining but mediocre) but was pleasantly surprised. For me this probably my second favorite star wars film after Empire.


----------



## dd.stevenson

Umbran said:


> accessible is what Mr. Stevenson says it is, and how accessible everyone else seems to find it to be can go hang?




That's uncharitable at best, as I've already said accessibility is a normative value upon which people are free to disagree.

At any rate, I don't think my opinion of TFA is going to be presented any more clearly, or that it needs to take up any more thread space than it already has. To recap, I don't think it was a bad movie, but it was hampered by the need to withhold key information about the background and protagonist. I have hopes that this movie will be more enjoyable when seen after watching its scheduled sequels, but as a standalone experience I just couldn't love it.


----------



## Vagabond234

I posted this in another thread but I'll say it again.  Hate how Rey just knew the force and could use a lightsaber against a guy who was training for a long time.  I'll all for female power but this seemed too much.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Vagabond234 said:


> I posted this in another thread but I'll say it again.  Hate how Rey just knew the force and could use a lightsaber against a guy who was training for a long time.  I'll all for female power but this seemed too much.




Ren didn't appear particularly well trained. He was also thrice wounded at that point.  Also, that you think it was a sop to girl power that the female lead used magic to be competent is a bit misogynistic.


----------



## Klaus

Vagabond234 said:


> I posted this in another thread but I'll say it again.  Hate how Rey just knew the force and could use a lightsaber against a guy who was training for a long time.  I'll all for female power but this seemed too much.




She was making a running fight, slashing blindly, against a somewhat-trained (even Snoke said Kylo's training wasn't complete) Force user who took a bowcaster (repeatedly shown during the movie to pack a mean punch) blast. Only when she tapped into the Force (and Kylo himself admitted that she was strong in the Force, even if untrained) did she manage to get the upper hand.


----------



## Bedrockgames

Vagabond234 said:


> I posted this in another thread but I'll say it again.  Hate how Rey just knew the force and could use a lightsaber against a guy who was training for a long time.  I'll all for female power but this seemed too much.




This really didn't bother me for a few reasons. Personally I am not a big fan of judging movies on whether they pass a diversity test or "do better". I don't really care about that stuff when I evaluate a film. But Rey's development seemed to make a lot sense internally. The movie is called The Force Awakens and Kylo Ren says "there has been an Awakening" so clearly something is going on with her that normally doesn't. This is some special case in all likelihood just like Anakin was a special case. More importantly though, I enjoyed watching her realize she had that power and use it to do some cool things. It was fun and entertaining and made her more compelling. 

I would liken it to how characters behave in wuxia films (which is basically what Jedi are, they are pretty much a western version of the kinds of heroes you see in wuxia). 

The other reason that last scene didn't bother me is Kylo Ren had just done something that visibly affected him and he was hit by a blaster that they had made a point of saying was hugely powerful. He was still bleeding and punching himself near the wound to psyche himself up to fight. So it isn't like they were taking on a fully rested and healed Kylo Ren. There is also the obvious fact that Kylo wasn't trying to kill her. He was trying to turn her to the dark side. 

The most important reason though is Rey was a character I really enjoyed following. The actress did a great job and was right up there with Harrison Ford and Carrie Fischer from the first series. I was interested in her story. If it had felt to me like that was all done just to have a powerful female, I don't think it would have been enjoyable. But this was a quality powerful female character, played well and presented well. If she had been male, I'd have been just as engaged.


----------



## Raunalyn

Vagabond234 said:


> I posted this in another thread but I'll say it again.  Hate how Rey just knew the force and could use a lightsaber against a guy who was training for a long time.  I'll all for female power but this seemed too much.




There were extenuating circumstances there. Keep in mind that Kylo Ren *was injured!*

This article sums it up nicely, and I don't know if anyone else has posted it (since this particular thread has grown quite long). Keep in mind that it is a bit vulgar, but brings the point across nicely:

http://geekxgirls.com/article.php?ID=6221


----------



## MarkB

Vagabond234 said:


> I posted this in another thread but I'll say it again.  Hate how Rey just knew the force and could use a lightsaber against a guy who was training for a long time.  I'll all for female power but this seemed too much.




Note that most of Rey's focused use of the Force follows Ren's attempted Force interrogation of her, which she reverses through force of will, pulling out details from his own mind.

It's certainly not made explicit, but my immediate assumption was that she'd grabbed more than just a few flashbacks from Ren - she'd seen something of his own Force ability and how he used it.

That's more than sufficient to account for the limited uses she makes of the Force following that scene.


----------



## Maxperson

Ovinomancer said:


> Ren didn't appear particularly well trained. He was also thrice wounded at that point.  Also, that you think it was a sop to girl power that the female lead used magic to be competent is a bit misogynistic.




It was absurd that with no training or knowledge, she just up and dominated the storm trooper.  Competence implies skill and she had none.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Skill hasn't ever been necessary for the mind trick. She probably risked dark side points, as it were, but it's far from absurd that a force user who just defended themselves from a mind probe could learn from that and turn it around into pushing their will onto another, already weak mind.


----------



## MarkB

Maxperson said:


> It was absurd that with no training or knowledge, she just up and dominated the storm trooper.  Competence implies skill and she had none.




Maybe, or maybe the real trick with Mind Trick is gaining conscious control so that you don't use it accidentally. That might explain how Luke got his own X-Wing in Episode IV.

Luke: "Please, you gotta let me join the attack. I'm a pretty good pilot, really!"
Rebel officer: "I gotta let you join the attack. You're a pretty good pilot, really."


----------



## doctorbadwolf

MarkB said:


> Note that most of Rey's focused use of the Force follows Ren's attempted Force interrogation of her, which she reverses through force of will, pulling out details from his own mind.
> 
> It's certainly not made explicit, but my immediate assumption was that she'd grabbed more than just a few flashbacks from Ren - she'd seen something of his own Force ability and how he used it.
> 
> That's more than sufficient to account for the limited uses she makes of the Force following that scene.




also note that Rey _barely_ pushed back the mind probe and couldn't keep it going when Kylo Ren decided he'd had enough, all of which was after he probed the crap out of her mind while she tried to stop it, failed at first to mind trick the Daniel Craig the stormtrooper and only succeeded after an obvious moment of frustration and then focus, and then didn't use the force again until another moment of desperation and _then_ only because Ren unwittingly reminded her that she could, using it to empower her strikes and _still barely_ overpower the already near death and exhausted Kylo Ren. 
At not point was any of it done with finesse, or skill, or any obvious competence. She used the Force equivelent of raw muscle power, combined with luck and good timing. 

You know, like Luke being able to guide a flying torpedo while piloting into a hole he could probably barely see in the midst of his first ever space battle, after learning only...a week before, that he could use the force, and having learned _literally nothing about moving things with it?_

Or how Luke spent a hella short time on Degobah, ate a few Yoda meals and did a couple X-Wing dead lifts and all of a sudden he's gone from noob who can barely survive a remote to fairly skilled swordsman, reaching out with his feelings, force jumping, and holding his own for surprisingly long against the galaxy's biggest badass since...idk, probably a character that doesn't exist anymore? And intuits that he can telepathically reach out to Leia, apparently extrapolating from his interaction with Ben's force ghost? 

I mean, at what point does Rey do _anything_ as jarringly beyond her experience as half of what Luke does? Hell, he's a farmboy. A level 1 character, full stop. Rey is clearly already a couple/few levels in when the movie starts. IT would be absurd if she wasn't competent from the third dot on the ellipses.


----------



## delericho

doctorbadwolf said:


> You know, like Luke being able to guide a flying torpedo while piloting into a hole he could probably barely see in the midst of his first ever space battle, after learning only...a week before, that he could use the force, and having learned _literally nothing about moving things with it?_




I never got the impression that Luke moved the torpedo using the Force. Rather, the impression I got was that he used it to line up his shot, in effect replacing his targetting computer - Sense, rather than Alter.

Which was something he had long experience with doing intuitively, from back when he bullseyed womp rats in his T-16 back home.



> Or how Luke spent a hella short time on Degobah




We don't know how long he spent there. But given that the Falcon had to make it from Hoth to Bespin at sublight speed, it probably wasn't a day trip. It's just that ESB didn't bother to show endless scenes of C-3P0 asking Han, "Are we there yet?"


----------



## Herobizkit

I completely enjoyed the movie... even its heavy-handed story-telling, specifically how everything went great for the heroes by sheer and utterly insane coincidence.

That final fight though... the 'DM' literally putting giant chasms in the way of the players so they don't solve main plot issues too early.  I did that stuff to my players in high school as a gag.

I was worried that Finn was going to be stuck being the TBG, especially when they added in some TBG vernacular (Droid, please!), but they turned him around VERY well.  Also, did Finn's jacket and attitude remind anyone of Star-Lord (Guardians of the Galaxy)?

I did get the same feel of Ep IV Redux, but I thought it was a nice way to edge folks into the new movies while remembering what was great about the old ones.

And the comedy was MUCH better, too.  That's important.  I'm ever-so-tired of the grimdark/woe-is-me/Crapsack World that movies have offered over the first half of this decade.


----------



## Morrus

Herobizkit said:


> 'm ever-so-tired of the grimdark/woe-is-me/Crapsack World that movies have offered over the first half of this decade.




They have?  Did you miss Marvel's 1,426,921 quip-laden movies?


----------



## Maxperson

Morrus said:


> They have?  Did you miss Marvel's 1,426,921 quip-laden movies?




Is that a reference to how many movies of that nature Marvel put out, the number of quips in them, or both?


----------



## doctorbadwolf

delericho said:


> I never got the impression that Luke moved the torpedo using the Force. Rather, the impression I got was that he used it to line up his shot, in effect replacing his targetting computer - Sense, rather than Alter.
> 
> Which was something he had long experience with doing intuitively, from back when he bullseyed womp rats in his T-16 back home.
> 
> 
> 
> We don't know how long he spent there. But given that the Falcon had to make it from Hoth to Bespin at sublight speed, it probably wasn't a day trip. It's just that ESB didn't bother to show endless scenes of C-3P0 asking Han, "Are we there yet?"




Weeks, at the most. 
And we know he had that experience about as much as we know Rey had experience using the force to find good salvage, and influence people to keep out of trouble. IE, we can guess, because we figure latent force users use the force in subtle ways their whole lives without realizing it, but that's it. 

The point is, Rey is no more inexplicably force competent than Luke. She's just generally more competent, as a person. 



Morrus said:


> They have?  Did you miss Marvel's 1,426,921 quip-laden movies?




A handful of marvel movies doesn't outweigh the colossal mountain of grimdark.


----------



## Morrus

doctorbadwolf said:


> A handful of marvel movies doesn't outweigh the colossal mountain of grimdark.




I must be seeing different films to you. Most of what I remember in the last decade is (mainly weak) comedies, remakes of 80s action stuff, extravagant action special effects extravaganzas, and about a billion superhero flicks.

I'd love to see a few grimdarks to make up for the intense, relentless quippyness of the 21st century.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Morrus said:


> I must be seeing different films to you. Most of what I remember in the last decade is (mainly weak) comedies, remakes of 80s action stuff, extravagant action special effects extravaganzas, and about a billion superhero flicks.
> 
> I'd love to see a few grimdarks to make up for the intense, relentless quippyness of the 21st century.




I think you just really dislike quippy dialogue, and that is skewing your perceptions. 
Also, quippy dialogue doesn't preclude a show or film being grimdark. 

As for superhero flicks, Man of Steel. The Nolan Batman crap.  
Superhero movies are definitely not free of grimdark. 

I will say, though, that TV is _much_ grimdarkier than movies, and has been for at least a handful of years. But still, most of those remakes you mention are darker and less optimistic than the original version, the action movies are all grey morality at the lightest, but just as often they are "watch this bad person kill lots of other bad people in a world with vanishingly few good people! FUn!" 

We are not in an optimistic decade, when it comes to popular fiction. no amount of quips changes that.


----------



## Umbran

doctorbadwolf said:


> I will say, though, that TV is _much_ grimdarkier than movies, and has been for at least a handful of years.




Look at two of the most popular shows - Game of Thrones and The Walking Dead.  Both pretty grim.


----------



## delericho

doctorbadwolf said:


> Weeks, at the most.




Weeks, with the undivided attention of a Jedi Master with _eight hundred years_ of experience training Jedi. After which he knows a handful of tricks and is _wildly_ outclassed by Vader. Sounds about right to me.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

delericho said:


> Weeks, with the undivided attention of a Jedi Master with _eight hundred years_ of experience training Jedi. After which he knows a handful of tricks and is _wildly_ outclassed by Vader. Sounds about right to me.



that works for you, great. For me, the transformation has always been a handwave that didn't really make sense. 



Umbran said:


> Look at two of the most popular shows - Game of Thrones and The Walking Dead. Both pretty grim.




Yep. Also, scrolling through various lists of most popular shows last year, mostly dark stuff. And then there's the walking dead, sons of anarchy, breaking bad, scandal, i mean seriously other than sitcoms and supergirl and the flash...I can't think of anything happy on tv.


----------



## Morrus

doctorbadwolf said:


> I think you just really dislike quippy dialogue, and that is skewing your perceptions.




And I think you're wrong on both of those two theories. 



> As for superhero flicks, Man of Steel. The Nolan Batman crap.
> Superhero movies are definitely not free of grimdark.




What, 4 films over a period of 15 years? One every 4 years, on average?

But meh. I've gone and gotten myself into an argument I have no interest in again.  I seem to keep boring myself to sleep doing that...


----------



## billd91

doctorbadwolf said:


> that works for you, great. For me, the transformation has always been a handwave that didn't really make sense.




Handwave?!? That's not a handwave, that's a *Training Montage™*! And as we all know, any amount of training or gadgeteering can be accomplished for the necessity of a plot with a *Training Montage™*.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

billd91 said:


> Handwave?!? That's not a handwave, that's a *Training Montage™*! And as we all know, any amount of training or gadgeteering can be accomplished for the necessity of a plot with a *Training Montage™*.




lol That's a good point.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Morrus said:


> And I think you're wrong on both of those two theories.
> 
> 
> 
> What, 4 films over a period of 15 years? One every 4 years, on average?
> 
> But meh. I've gone and gotten myself into an argument I have no interest in again.  I seem to keep boring myself to sleep doing that...




Yeah, pretending you've no interest in a topic once the discussion isn't going your way really is a bad habit. 

It's ok, though. We all have a few of those. 

I, for instance, am terrible at just rolling my eyes and scrolling past.

srsly, though. you said a thing that suggested that superhero movies were a counter argument to the idea that movies are more grimdark these days, so I pointed out that there are also grimdark superhero movies. 
That's not hard to understand, right?


----------



## Herobizkit

To clarify, I wasn't commenting on grimdark in Marvel movies (Supes and Batman hold the prize atm, both DC, and that's kinda their jam as anti-Marvel), but in all of media over the past decade or so.

The media's need to be dark and edgy outweighed the quality of stories they told.


----------



## ccs

Vagabond234 said:


> I posted this in another thread but I'll say it again.  Hate how Rey just knew the force and could use a lightsaber against a guy who was training for a long time.  I'll all for female power but this seemed too much.




So I guess you missed the sub-title of this episode?
You know; "The Force Awakens"
Tell me, where do you think the Force is awakening?


----------



## Maxperson

ccs said:


> So I guess you missed the sub-title of this episode?
> You know; "The Force Awakens"
> Tell me, where do you think the Force is awakening?




Up and coming force sensitives that need to be trained.


----------



## Bedrockgames

Maxperson said:


> It was absurd that with no training or knowledge, she just up and dominated the storm trooper.  Competence implies skill and she had none.




The truth is we don't know what her level of training might be until we have more background information on her. It is entirely possible she was trained at a very young age before they left her on that planet. Also possible a force Awakening is some kind of instant and intuitive awareness of how to use force abilities. I do agree it is something the filmmakers are going to want to explain in the next two movies, but my reading of the seen is it was intentionally presented as a mysterious event we are meant to wonder about. If it turns out they just did it for plot reasons, I will be less impressed, but it is still a highly enjoyable movie and Rey was a great character in my view. Definitely more enjoyable following her and Finn around on their adventures than Anakin in the prequels.


----------



## Jhaelen

ccs said:


> So I guess you missed the sub-title of this episode?
> You know; "The Force Awakens"
> Tell me, where do you think the Force is awakening?



Actually, I thought the sub-title was a bit misleading, and said so immediately after watching the movie for the first time. I had been expecting something on a much wider scale, not just a single person becoming Force-Sensitive.


----------



## delericho

Jhaelen said:


> Actually, I thought the sub-title was a bit misleading, and said so immediately after watching the movie for the first time. I had been expecting something on a much wider scale, not just a single person becoming Force-Sensitive.




There was, though it's not entirely clear what:

"There has been an Awakening. Have you felt it?"

That was asked quite some time before Rey woke up to the Force.

(Incidentally, one possibility: in the prequels, the Jedi note that their ability to use the Force has diminished. In the OT, the Force-users are much more limited - possibly justified by Vader being a cyborg and Luke being half-trained, but perhaps not. Perhaps there has been a long-term decline in people's ability to use the Force, that is now being quickly reversed. Which would explain why Rey seems to powerful so quickly - it's not that _she's_ so much more powerful than we're used to, but more that the Force is suddenly much easier to use.)


----------



## Bedrockgames

delericho said:


> There was, though it's not entirely clear what:
> 
> "There has been an Awakening. Have you felt it?"
> 
> That was asked quite some time before Rey woke up to the Force.
> 
> (Incidentally, one possibility: in the prequels, the Jedi note that their ability to use the Force has diminished. In the OT, the Force-users are much more limited - possibly justified by Vader being a cyborg and Luke being half-trained, but perhaps not. Perhaps there has been a long-term decline in people's ability to use the Force, that is now being quickly reversed. Which would explain why Rey seems to powerful so quickly - it's not that _she's_ so much more powerful than we're used to, but more that the Force is suddenly much easier to use.)




The whole "There has been an awakening thing" mirrors the dialogue between Palpatine and Vader in Empire when the emperor says he has felt a disturbance in the force, and Vader says he has felt it as well (in reference to Luke).


----------



## delericho

Bedrockgames said:


> The whole "There has been an awakening thing" mirrors the dialogue between Palpatine and Vader in Empire when the emperor says he has felt a disturbance in the force, and Vader says he has felt it as well (in reference to Luke).




The difference being that the Emperor and Vader had that conversation _after_ Luke appeared on the scene. The 'awakening' conversation happened before Rey started using the Force, so shouldn't refer to her. (I say shouldn't, rather than couldn't, because I'm not absolutely confident in the team who made this one.)


----------



## Bedrockgames

delericho said:


> The difference being that the Emperor and Vader had that conversation _after_ Luke appeared on the scene. The 'awakening' conversation happened before Rey started using the Force, so shouldn't refer to her. (I say shouldn't, rather than couldn't, because I'm not absolutely confident in the team who made this one.)




I'd have to watch the movie again to put the timeline in correct order, but my recollection was that happened after she tried to pick up the light saber (which is where I assumed the awakening to begin). However I could be wrong, since i am a little fuzzy on the order. But don't know for sure when the awakening began with her (it could have been as early as when she flew the Falcon). We know it culminated with her using her force abilities, but I could buy that Snoke felt something awakening in her much earlier as her adventure began). 

I don't share you lack of confidence personally. Frankly I thought this was better than Jedi or A New Hope (Not better than Empire though). I haven't enjoyed a film this much in ages. So for me, the team was doing something right.


----------



## delericho

Bedrockgames said:


> I'd have to watch the movie again to put the timeline in correct order, but my recollection was that happened after she tried to pick up the light saber (which is where I assumed the awakening to begin).




Ah, yes. You're right.



> I don't share you lack of confidence personally. Frankly I thought this was better than Jedi or A New Hope (Not better than Empire though). I haven't enjoyed a film this much in ages. So for me, the team was doing something right.




I enjoyed the film. I'm just not convinced they've locked down every aspect of continuity - my experience is that JJA tends to be more interested in getting to cool visual and running things so fast the audience is blown away than he is with making sure it stands up to much scrutiny.


----------



## Bedrockgames

delericho said:


> I enjoyed the film. I'm just not convinced they've locked down every aspect of continuity - my experience is that JJA tends to be more interested in getting to cool visual and running things so fast the audience is blown away than he is with making sure it stands up to much scrutiny.




i have to be honest, even though I like Star Trek, I have not seen the Star Trek reboots and am not certain what other Abrahms films I may have seen (though I liked regarding Henry and know he was involved in that somehow). So I can't comment based on the history of the team. You may well be correct. I got the sense that continuity with the series was important to them watching this film...but whether internal consistency is more important that coolness, I can't say for sure until we see the next movie (because we have some mysteries they could choose to hand wave or explain). I did just see a new hope and empire again and those films definitely have consistency issues and suspension of disbelief issues as well if one is inclined to probe them. There is no doubt in my mind that some of the twists were decided later and don't really align with earlier material (unless Lucas was invoking incest deliberately, which I doubt, he made them twins for Jedi because it made for a better plot, but the viewer has to disregard or explain things like that deep kiss).


----------



## Umbran

Bedrockgames said:


> There is no doubt in my mind that some of the twists were decided later and don't really align with earlier material (unless Lucas was invoking incest deliberately, which I doubt, he made them twins for Jedi because it made for a better plot, but the viewer has to disregard or explain things like that deep kiss).




There's nothing to explain - they didn't know they were siblings at the time.


----------



## Bedrockgames

Umbran said:


> There's nothing to explain - they didn't know they were siblings at the time.




Personally I don't find that a satisfactory explanation. I understand that genetic sexual attraction is a thing and that bit within the film, you could say they don't know they are brother and sister so that is why it happened. But it seems like a strong indication that Lucas didn't initially intend them to be brother and sister. I really doubt he was making a case for genetic sexual attraction with that moment. There are two possibilities here: he knew they were siblings when they kissed (which seems a very unusual choice for a film like star wars) or he didn't know (which to me makes a lot more sense). I suppose he also could have been undecided on the matter, but even then, having that kiss scene there...people can explain it, to me it really seems like he was intending a love triangle and went another direction when he did Jedi (in the end a better direction and one that worked brilliantly, but still not the initial direction). My point isn't that this harms the film (it is a soap opera in space for crying out loud), I'm just making the point that it isn't like the Star Wars films have always been airtight and devoid of inconsistency. Lots of things were hand waved in the original trilogy and lots of events that were convenient to the plot took place (though many of them could indeed be explained as brought about by the Force).


----------



## Umbran

Bedrockgames said:


> I understand that genetic sexual attraction is a thing




You don't need genetic sexual attraction* to be a thing.  You simply need them to not know they are siblings.  Humans have no innate significant mechanism for detecting close relatives they didn't grow up with!  There is no way for them to select *against* their siblings if they don't know them!

I agree that, as a filmmaker, I don't think Lucas had decided to have them be siblings when he wrote that kiss.  But it isn't like it needs some deep explanation to handle. They were two people who had just met, who found a bit of an emotional connection in a stressful situation.  Over time, that connection didn't develop.  Leia went with Han (who, by what we've seen, looks more like Bail Organa!), so there's no real big deal.  



> I'm just making the point that it isn't like the Star Wars films have always been airtight and devoid of inconsistency.




I'd agree with that.  Star Wars is not, say, B5, with a well-developed arc set before any production began.





*For those who don't know the term - it is the tendency for humans to be attracted to people who they have never met, but are genetically closely related to them.  The name is a little misleading - humans have a tendency to be attracted to people who are phenotypically similar to the parent who raised you of the opposite sex.  If you are a man, you'll tend to be attracted to women who looked like the woman who raised you.  As I understand it, this holds even if you, as an infant, were adopted by parents of another race - a Caucasian male child adopted by Asian parents will tend to be attracted to Asian women.  It isn't so much "genetic attraction," as an imprinting when you are young.  I'm told this holds even if you are gay or lesbian - a lesbian woman has a tendency to be attracted to women who look like their fathers.  In this sense, genetic sexual attraction really shouldn't apply, as Luke and Leia didn't grow up with their natural parents!  Unless Luke looks like Bail Organa and Leia looks like Aunt Beru!

There is also a tendency for humans to be attracted to people who are somewhat similar to us - intelligent people tend to be attracted to intelligent people, musical people tend to be attracted to musical people, and so on.    Both this, and the imprinting, are small tendencies, often overridden by other factors.

If you *know* your close genetic relatives, there is an imprinting that has the opposite effect - if you grew up with your siblings, you'll tend to not be attracted to them.


----------



## Bedrockgames

Umbran said:


> I agree that, as a filmmaker, I don't think Lucas had decided to have them be siblings when he wrote that kiss.  But it isn't like it needs some deep explanation to handle. They were two people who had just met, who found a bit of an emotional connection in a stressful situation.  Over time, that connection didn't develop.  Leia went with Han (who, by what we've seen, looks more like Bail Organa!), so there's no real big deal..
> .




To you it might not be. But pretty much everyone who watches the trilogy notices, and for me, sensing that it wasn't clear really stands out and is hard to just dismiss as no big deal. It doesn't ruin the film or anything, it is actually a pretty amusing side note, but it definitely stands out as a weird bump in the story line that they obviously didn't intend. You can point to how there is no reason for it to be an issue, but I think anyone who has siblings is going to react to that on a gut level.


----------



## Umbran

Bedrockgames said:


> You can point to how there is no reason for it to be an issue, but I think anyone who has siblings is going to react to that on a gut level.




Of course people will react.  My point isn't that they won't react.  My point is that the one event doesn't actually need any special explanation to make sense.  Yeah, it happened.  Within the fiction, there's no reason why it shouldn't have happened.  The only reason for it to not happen is on the meta-level of storytelling.

The world is imperfect, people change their minds and rework things.  Deal with it and move on.


----------



## Bedrockgames

Umbran said:


> Of course people will react.  My point isn't that they won't react.  My point is that the one event doesn't actually need any special explanation to make sense.  Yeah, it happened.  Within the fiction, there's no reason why it shouldn't have happened.  The only reason for it to not happen is on the meta-level of storytelling.
> 
> The world is imperfect, people change their minds and rework things.  Deal with it and move on.




Keep in mind I raised this point to show people probably should lighten up about expecting consistency in the new films. I agree that films are not perfect things and we ought to accept that changes are sometimes made in the middle of the telling (particularly in soap opera). They are a fun romp and we shouldn't take them too seriously. But incest is one of the biggest taboos across most cultures...and while one can dismiss it, it is hard not to notice they probably are not intended to be attracted to each other. So there feels like a consistency issue in terms of motivation and feelings of the characters. I certainly think it doesn't ruin the movie but I don't think it is all that internally consistent when you understand their relationship. i think it is one of the few bumps in the films that is really difficult to ignore. It is certainly an aspect of the film people feel a need to discuss, which I think is pretty understandable given the taboo in question. You don't see many movies gloss over incest like that (I think if Luke and leia actually addressed it in Jedi, it would be less of a consistency issue (because you expect them to at least have some reaction to the revaluation and the fact that they kissed).


----------



## MechaPilot

Umbran said:


> There's nothing to explain - they didn't know they were siblings at the time.




Except for Leia, who had apparently always known according to her own words in RotJ.


----------



## Bedrockgames

MechaPilot said:


> Except for Leia, who had apparently always known according to her own words in RotJ.




What scene is that in (I am about to re-watch RotJ and will keep an eye out for it).


----------



## billd91

MechaPilot said:


> Except for Leia, who had apparently always known according to her own words in RotJ.




I don't think we can ever assume she thought so consciously. It's more like a situation when someone reveals a bit of information and all of a sudden everything falls into place.


----------



## Istbor

billd91 said:


> I don't think we can ever assume she thought so consciously. It's more like a situation when someone reveals a bit of information and all of a sudden everything falls into place.




I have to agree with this. I don't think she knew or suspected Luke was her brother on any level that she was aware of.  So the line is likely just confirming a feeling she had maybe of familiarity or a sense of ease that his presence instilled?  Something along those lines as bill points out, just makes sense when additional information is included.


----------



## MechaPilot

Bedrockgames said:


> What scene is that in (I am about to re-watch RotJ and will keep an eye out for it).




The bridge of the Ewok village, when Luke tells Leia that Vader is his father.


----------



## MechaPilot

billd91 said:


> I don't think we can ever assume she thought so consciously. It's more like a situation when someone reveals a bit of information and all of a sudden everything falls into place.




I get what you're saying, which basically that it's a more dramatic way of saying "yeah, that makes sense."  However, the phrasing is that she has somehow always known, which is all kinds of dueling banjo fuel.


----------



## dd.stevenson

Bedrockgames said:


> My point isn't that this harms the film (it is a soap opera in space for crying out loud), I'm just making the point that it isn't like the Star Wars films have always been airtight and devoid of inconsistency.




If this twist feels contrived to you, then I'm in no position to say you're wrong--glass houses and such.

But do note that there is a big distinction between plot inconsistencies and seat-of-the-pantsing the plot. In particular, the fact that Lucas might not have intended them to be family from the beginning, is not evidence that the story is less than airtight; it's just evidence that he didn't have everything planned out from the beginning. Growing the story as you go is a time-honored means of storytelling, and long as you don't contradict what's been established in-universe, it's no more or less valid than working everything out beforehand.

Probably you already know this, but I'll be darned if I can see how else to interpret the last part of your post.


----------



## Umbran

dd.stevenson said:


> the fact that Lucas might not have intended them to be family from the beginning, is not evidence that the story is less than airtight;




Which is to say, we should not confuse "airtight" with "we like what happens in it".


----------



## Bedrockgames

dd.stevenson said:


> If this twist feels contrived to you, then I'm in no position to say you're wrong--glass houses and such.
> 
> But do note that there is a big distinction between plot inconsistencies and seat-of-the-pantsing the plot. In particular, the fact that Lucas might not have intended them to be family from the beginning, is not evidence that the story is less than airtight; it's just evidence that he didn't have everything planned out from the beginning. Growing the story as you go is a time-honored means of storytelling, and long as you don't contradict what's been established in-universe, it's no more or less valid than working everything out beforehand.
> 
> Probably you already know this, but I'll be darned if I can see how else to interpret the last part of your post.




But telling a story by the seat of your pants can lead to inconsistency and I think that is the outcome with the Luke-Leia sibling relationship reveal. In RotJ they just kind of gloss over the fact that Luke and Leia kissed. To me that is a big consistency issue, because it is pretty clear we were going one direction, went another, and something happened that really stands out as a result. So it is this thing in the plot that both creates 1) a consistency issue and 2) makes you realize they were building as they went (at least when it came to that reveal). It creates an inconsistency because it is as if the audience is supposed to pretend that never happened. I think it was the right storytelling direction to go, but it would have been more consistent if they hadn't kissed. Again, it isn't the end of the world. It doesn't really harm the film in my view (it is just an oddity of it). My point is, if you can handle luke and leia kissing them being revealed as brother and sister, you can probably handle any hand wavy thing they introduce in The Force Awakens.

So I think the Luke-Leia aspect of the story definitely isn't air tight. If it were air tight, they wouldn't have kissed or the kiss would have been folded into the film somehow to make it consistent (i.e. they address it in RotJ in some way). But since neither of these things really happens, the impression I've always had is we are meant to pretend the kiss either didn't happen or it blow it off as being barely a peck on the lips (which given the depth of the kiss, is just impossible to do). I love star wars. I don't really care that much about this aspect of it. But it stands out and it is definitely not air tight storytelling when it comes to the Luke Leia Kiss and sibling relationship.

And again, my point isn't to say the film is awful because of that bit of inconsistency. I'm just trying to point out that Star Wars has always been on the soap opera end of things and it isn't the kind of storyline I would refer to as having a long history of being air tight.


----------



## dd.stevenson

Bedrockgames said:


> My point is, if you can handle luke and leia kissing them being revealed as brother and sister, you can probably handle any hand wavy thing they introduce in The Force Awakens.




But that isn't true. I, for example, didn't mind the kiss, but plenty of things cropped up in TFA that I didn't like.



Bedrockgames said:


> So I think the Luke-Leia aspect of the story definitely isn't air tight. If it were air tight, they wouldn't have kissed or the kiss would have been folded into the film somehow to make it consistent (i.e. they address it in RotJ in some way).




I might be tripping over your terminology. "Airtight" is a colloquialism that IME means the absence of plot holes; whereas it sounds like you were bothered by an extreme action that had insufficient closure or follow-up on screen. 

In that case, I can see where you're coming from. Some of the reasons it might not have bothered me are (1) RotJ wasn't exactly tight anyway; (2) the kiss occurred in a different film, so its not as if the narrative arc of either film was disrupted; and (3) I actually liked the mature way the luke and leia chose not to think about the childish "ew" aspect of their relationship and instead dwell exclusively on the overwhelming threat to themselves and the galaxy--for me this was a huge character growth moment that increased my appreciation for both of them as serious-minded individuals carrying an immense weight on their shoulders.


----------



## Bedrockgames

dd.stevenson said:


> But that isn't true. I, for example, didn't mind the kiss, but plenty of things cropped up in TFA that I didn't like.
> 
> 
> 
> I might be tripping over your terminology. "Airtight" is a colloquialism that IME means the absence of plot holes; whereas it sounds like you were bothered by an extreme action that had insufficient closure or follow-up on screen.
> 
> In that case, I can see where you're coming from. Some of the reasons it might not have bothered me are (1) RotJ wasn't exactly tight anyway; (2) the kiss occurred in a different film, so its not as if the narrative arc of either film was disrupted; and (3) I actually liked the mature way the luke and leia chose not to think about the childish "ew" aspect of their relationship and instead dwell exclusively on the overwhelming threat to themselves and the galaxy--for me this was a huge character growth moment that increased my appreciation for both of them as serious-minded individuals carrying an immense weight on their shoulders.




No, I consider it a plot hole because it is clear to the viewer they are not brother and sister when they kiss, but are brother and sister in Jedi. So it isn't a lack of closure but a lack of explanation after the fact that I was pointing to (had they addressed it and both were clearly uncomfortable or weirdly okay with it, that would have maybe smoothed out some of that inconsistency, but that they never address it, just highlights it even more for me). 

Again, it is incest. It isn't a minor taboo. It is significant enough, that not addressing it, just attracts more attention to the inconsistency of it (because if we were meant to accept the kiss, I'd expect it to be dealt with down the road and not off camera). A little bit of 'ew' is how I would have expected adults to handle it. I am sure some people never found this terribly inconsistent, but it is one of the most common plothole concerns I encounter. Yes, you can read it as all being internally consistent within the film if you accept that the kiss happened and they didn't know. But it is so clear and obvious they didn't intend that, that it is very difficult to do.


----------



## Bedrockgames

dd.stevenson said:


> But that isn't true. I, for example, didn't mind the kiss, but plenty of things cropped up in TFA that I didn't like.
> s.




This is all pretty subjective. But I find the kiss incredibly glaring and very much a big plothole in the original trilogy (still love the trilogy). I think the stuff that happened in The Force Awakens is fairly minor by comparison.


----------



## dd.stevenson

Bedrockgames said:


> No, I consider it a plot hole because it is clear to the viewer they are not brother and sister when they kiss, but are brother and sister in Jedi. So it isn't a lack of closure but a lack of explanation after the fact that I was pointing to (had they addressed it and both were clearly uncomfortable or weirdly okay with it, that would have maybe smoothed out some of that inconsistency, but that they never address it, just highlights it even more for me).
> 
> Again, it is incest. It isn't a minor taboo. It is significant enough, that not addressing it, just attracts more attention to the inconsistency of it (because if we were meant to accept the kiss, I'd expect it to be dealt with down the road and not off camera). A little bit of 'ew' is how I would have expected adults to handle it. I am sure some people never found this terribly inconsistent, but it is one of the most common plothole concerns I encounter. Yes, you can read it as all being internally consistent within the film if you accept that the kiss happened and they didn't know. But it is so clear and obvious they didn't intend that, that it is very difficult to do.




Yeah, definitely not connecting with any of this. I see no evidence that the in-universe truth of their relationship changed between movies (ignoring the meta-plot speculation about Lucas.) Nor do I agree that an open mouth kiss is actual incest.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Herobizkit said:


> To clarify, I wasn't commenting on grimdark in Marvel movies (Supes and Batman hold the prize atm, both DC, and that's kinda their jam as anti-Marvel), but in all of media over the past decade or so.
> 
> The media's need to be dark and edgy outweighed the quality of stories they told.




This. 



Bedrockgames said:


> To you it might not be. But pretty much  everyone who watches the trilogy notices, and for me, sensing that it  wasn't clear really stands out and is hard to just dismiss as no big  deal. It doesn't ruin the film or anything, it is actually a pretty  amusing side note, but it definitely stands out as a weird bump in the  story line that they obviously didn't intend. You can point to how there  is no reason for it to be an issue, but I think anyone who has siblings  is going to react to that on a gut level.




Gut reaction, sure. But that doesn't mean it's, say, a plot hole.  Meta, we know it kinda is, but sans that knowledge, it's just not. 
It's  not a bump or an inconsistency. At all. It's just a somewhat humorous,  somewhat uncomfortable thing that happens, that the characters don't  make a thing of, much later after a lot of much more important things  have happened.


----------



## Bedrockgames

doctorbadwolf said:


> Gut reaction, sure. But that doesn't mean it's, say, a plot hole.  Meta, we know it kinda is, but sans that knowledge, it's just not.
> It's  not a bump or an inconsistency. At all. It's just a somewhat humorous,  somewhat uncomfortable thing that happens, that the characters don't  make a thing of, much later after a lot of much more important things  have happened.




Except it becomes an inconsistency because the viewer senses that it wasn't intended and therefore their relationship is totally different in Empire versus Jedi. It isn't just about the discomfort around incest, it is that you can't but help be aware of the writer's decision to change that aspect of the story. So it feels like they go form not being siblings to being siblings with no real explanation or attempt to smooth it over. To me that is definitely a plot hole.

I think with movies meta can mater a lot. We know in our bones they were not brother and sister in Empire, so it becomes a consistency issue when they don't deal with that. 

And again, not disparaging the movie. I am just puzzled that people would be okay with that inconsistency but not okay with some of the relatively minor things in The Force Awakens.


----------



## Bedrockgames

dd.stevenson said:


> Yeah, definitely not connecting with any of this. I see no evidence that the in-universe truth of their relationship changed between movies (ignoring the meta-plot speculation about Lucas.) Nor do I agree that an open mouth kiss is actual incest.




Well we clearly have a fundamental disagreement about the incest issue. The kiss that was presented on screen, to me that was incestuous if they are brother and sister. That wasn't a hello kiss. I really think anyone with siblings would naturally recoil at the thought of that kind of kiss. I'm not going to get into a debate on incest, but I don't think labeling their kiss a violation of the incest taboo is at all that controversial. 

But I guess we just disagree. I don't feel one can escape noticing lucas' intention and I feel like the kiss is significant enough that it hi lights the shift in story direction and creates a point of illogic in the story.


----------



## dd.stevenson

Bedrockgames said:


> Well we clearly have a fundamental disagreement about the incest issue. The kiss that was presented on screen, to me that was incestuous if they are brother and sister. That wasn't a hello kiss. I really think anyone with siblings would naturally recoil at the thought of that kind of kiss. I'm not going to get into a debate on incest, but I don't think labeling their kiss a violation of the incest taboo is at all that controversial.




Deep kissing a nearby warm-bodied human male in order to make the point to han solo that you'd rather kiss a wookie, and later finding out that the person you kissed was your brother? Borderline at worst. Certainly not something that two serious-minded people would absolutely HAVE TO wring their hands over while weighing the fate of the galaxy.

Lucas would have been within his rights to bring development/closure to this event during the sibling reveal, and maybe it would have been a better movie had he done so. But a plot hole that he didn't? No. No way.

And--this is by the way--given Lucas' on-the-nose style, I'm plenty glad he didn't show them discussing it (or that he was prevented from doing so, as the case may be.)


----------



## Bedrockgames

dd.stevenson said:


> Deep kissing a nearby warm-bodied human male in order to make the point to han solo that you'd rather kiss a wookie, and later finding out that the person you kissed was your brother? Borderline at worst. Certainly not something that two serious-minded people would absolutely HAVE TO wring their hands over while weighing the fate of the galaxy.




This seems like a very odd position. Again, I really don't want to get into a debate on what constitutes incest. But I have sisters. That is something normal people would get very hand wringing over. That kiss was far too intimate, far too passionate, even if it was done initially to just make a point, from what you'd expect between a brother and sister. And if they did find out they were siblings later, I'd certainly expect that revelation to be a bit horrifying (though maybe incest isn't a taboo in the star wars universe). 



> Lucas would have been within his rights to bring development/closure to this event during the sibling reveal, and maybe it would have been a better movie had he done so. But a plot hole that he didn't? No. No way.




Again, it is subjective, but to me by not addressing it, it creates an inconsistency in the film, where we almost have two separate pairs of Leia and Luke held in our minds at once. 



> And--this is by the way--given Lucas' on-the-nose style, I'm plenty glad he didn't show them discussing it (or that he was prevented from doing so, as the case may be.)




It might be that having the plot hole is better than addressing it. Plotholes are sometimes a necessity. They don't ruin a film if they add enough to it. Personally I am a little tired of hearing about plotholes in movies. I'm not saying the films were bad or should have been done differently. I am merely saying that the original trilogy isn't perfect and has plenty of plotholes. That it feels like people may be holding the newer trilogy to a higher standard in that respect.


----------



## Maxperson

I've known families that kiss on the mouth instead of the cheek with no sexual desire present at all.  It's just a thing some people do.  It's not something I would do with a family member, but it's not incest.


----------



## dd.stevenson

Bedrockgames said:


> Again, it is subjective, but to me by not addressing it, it creates an inconsistency in the film, where we almost have two separate pairs of Leia and Luke held in our minds at once.




Then this is merely a lexical disconnect, since I don't agree that plot holes (logical inconsistencies, direct contradictions, etc.) are subjective.



Bedrockgames said:


> It might be that having the plot hole is better than addressing it. Plotholes are sometimes a necessity. They don't ruin a film if they add enough to it.




Oh, absolutely. Hollywood and genre fiction usually have one or more plot holes, and they're fine unless one aspires to literary status. Audiences don't usually care about plot holes unless they disrupt the narrative; and conversely are more likely to be more unforgiving about a disruption to a narrative than to a genuine plot hole.


----------



## Bedrockgames

Maxperson said:


> I've known families that kiss on the mouth instead of the cheek with no sexual desire present at all.  It's just a thing some people do.  It's not something I would do with a family member, but it's not incest.




Sure. There is another scene (in empire or a new hope) where leia kisses him on the mouth but there is nothing sexual about it. But the kiss in from of Han is definitely not that sort of kiss. It was not a familial kiss at all. If you'r kissing your sibling like that, you are in incest territory (which is why people always point to that kiss as an odditity in the film).


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Bedrockgames said:


> Except it becomes an inconsistency because the viewer senses that it wasn't intended and therefore their relationship is totally different in Empire versus Jedi. It isn't just about the discomfort around incest, it is that you can't but help be aware of the writer's decision to change that aspect of the story. So it feels like they go form not being siblings to being siblings with no real explanation or attempt to smooth it over. To me that is definitely a plot hole.
> 
> I think with movies meta can mater a lot. We know in our bones they were not brother and sister in Empire, so it becomes a consistency issue when they don't deal with that.
> 
> And again, not disparaging the movie. I am just puzzled that people would be okay with that inconsistency but not okay with some of the relatively minor things in The Force Awakens.




NO one thinks you're disparaging the movie, man. WE all get what you're saying. We just disagree. 

I never felt that way. Not even 1 percent, ever. From when I was little to the last time I watched the original trilogy, I have always gone from seeing Leia kissing Luke to make Han jealous/annoy him/make a point to "hah! they're siblings. Bet she wishes she'd known that in that one scene!" 

Nothing jarring about it. It just played out like a humorous plot twist. Like new information, shedding light on older scenes. 

It never even occured to me as a possibility that the whole thing wasn't planned that way from the beginning, until it came to my attention that Lucas didn't have the next movie planned out at any point in the making of the trilogy, and was mostly full of it when he acted like he had the whole story from prequels to the future planned out long ago.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

dd.stevenson said:


> Then this is merely a lexical disconnect, since I don't agree that plot holes (logical inconsistencies, direct contradictions, etc.) are subjective.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, absolutely. Hollywood and genre fiction usually have one or more plot holes, and they're fine *unless one aspires to literary status*. Audiences don't usually care about plot holes unless they disrupt the narrative; and conversely are more likely to be more unforgiving about a disruption to a narrative than to a genuine plot hole.




I'd say that the bolded text makes the statement partially untrue. Or, rather, that the sentence would be completely accurate if you deleted said text.


----------



## Bedrockgames

dd.stevenson said:


> Then this is merely a lexical disconnect, since I don't agree that plot holes (logical inconsistencies, direct contradictions, etc.) are subjective.




I would agree logic and logical inconsistencies are objective things. But I do think our perceptions of plot holes and logical inconsistencies in films are quite subjective. In the instance of Luke and Leia, I just find it inconsistency because in part 5 they are clearly not brother and sister, then in part 6 they suddenly are brother and sister. Without dealing with the scenes that raise that issue, for me the inconsistency remains.


----------



## Bedrockgames

doctorbadwolf said:


> NO one thinks you're disparaging the movie, man. WE all get what you're saying. We just disagree.
> 
> I never felt that way. Not even 1 percent, ever. From when I was little to the last time I watched the original trilogy, I have always gone from seeing Leia kissing Luke to make Han jealous/annoy him/make a point to "hah! they're siblings. Bet she wishes she'd known that in that one scene!"
> 
> Nothing jarring about it. It just played out like a humorous plot twist. Like new information, shedding light on older scenes.
> 
> It never even occured to me as a possibility that the whole thing wasn't planned that way from the beginning, until it came to my attention that Lucas didn't have the next movie planned out at any point in the making of the trilogy, and was mostly full of it when he acted like he had the whole story from prequels to the future planned out long ago.




And that is fine, I am not saying you have to agree, but the opinion I am expressing is not an uncommon one. To me it isn't just a plot twist, those prior scenes don't just become attempts at humor, they just don't make sense in light of the new information because it is obvious they are not brother and sister in those scenes. Yes, a brother and sister might meet, not know they are siblings, and kiss....but we know the film makers wouldn't do that. It is meta but it is meta that I think is nearly impossible to ignore (at least for me it is). I believe that it isn't a problem for you. I believe that you don't notice it. But I assure you, I notice it every time I watch the trilogy and it always stands out to me as a glaring inconconsistency. It is an inconsistency I've come to find nothing more than a peculiar oddity at this point, but an inconsistency still. And that is fine. A movie about knights romping through space can have inconsistencies like that.


----------



## dd.stevenson

Bedrockgames said:


> I would agree logic and logical inconsistencies are objective things. But I do think our perceptions of plot holes and logical inconsistencies in films are quite subjective. In the instance of Luke and Leia, I just find it inconsistency because in part 5 they are clearly not brother and sister, then in part 6 they suddenly are brother and sister. Without dealing with the scenes that raise that issue, for me the inconsistency remains.




Sure, there's a tenable case for inconsistent characterization.


----------



## Bedrockgames

dd.stevenson said:


> Sure, there's a tenable case for inconsistent characterization.




And that is what I am trying to get at. To me an essential aspect of the characters (their relationship as siblings or as potential lovers because they are not siblings) completely changes form V to VI.


----------



## Umbran

Bedrockgames said:


> To me an essential aspect of the characters (their relationship as siblings or as potential lovers because they are not siblings) completely changes form V to VI.




If there's a change, it is between IV and V.  We see right at the beginning of Empire Strikes Back that Han is the romantic interest for Leia, in the tunnels of ice on Hoth.  And, the famous, "I love you,"  "I know," exchange between Han and Leia is in Empire Strikes Back as well.  Heck, it was right there on the poster!

View attachment 72964

Luke had ceased being a potential lover before V.  And we don't need it to be the fact that they are siblings to make it go - she simply is more attracted to Han.


----------



## Bedrockgames

Umbran said:


> If there's a change, it is between IV and V.  We see right at the beginning of Empire Strikes Back that Han is the romantic interest for Leia, in the tunnels of ice on Hoth.  And, the famous, "I love you,"  "I know," exchange between Han and Leia is in Empire Strikes Back as well.  Heck, it was right there on the poster!
> .




I agree that by the end of Empire Strikes back it is clear that Han and Leia are in love. My point is an essential aspect of Leia and Luke (their relationship to each other and their physical attraction to each other) changes from that episode to the last. She may have loved Han by the end of Empire, and that kiss may have been to piss him off, but it was still not a brother-sister kiss and clearly tender. In episode V they are visibly not brother and sister. This is very clear to the viewer. In Episode VI they are brother and sister. It is the same problem with Vader as the father. However that they at least address so it becomes less of a plot hole issue (with the whole speech ben gives about "from a certain point of view). But it is a similar problem. In episode four it is pretty clear vader isn't meant to be the father, but in episode V he is meant to be the father. I will say that Luke being Vader's son and Leia's brother makes the film work in the end. Those were both the right call, but they do create plot holes in the storyline because it is a big change to Luke's character that you sense with each film (and you know as you watch them that there is a trace of inconsistency there). At least that has always been my reaction to the films.


----------



## MechaPilot

Bedrockgames said:


> Again, it is incest. It isn't a minor taboo. It is significant enough, that not addressing it, just attracts more attention to the inconsistency of it (because if we were meant to accept the kiss, I'd expect it to be dealt with down the road and not off camera). A little bit of 'ew' is how I would have expected adults to handle it. I am sure some people never found this terribly inconsistent, but it is one of the most common plothole concerns I encounter. Yes, you can read it as all being internally consistent within the film if you accept that the kiss happened and they didn't know. But it is so clear and obvious they didn't intend that, that it is very difficult to do.




Actually, in all fairness do we know that's a taboo in that galaxy far, far away?  Also, she is royalty.  Maybe it's not taboo to her.  Maybe on Alderaan they've been brother-loving to keep their royal bloodline pure like the Pharaohs of Egypt.


----------



## Bedrockgames

MechaPilot said:


> Actually, in all fairness we do know that's a taboo in that galaxy far, far away?  Also, she is royalty.  Maybe it's not taboo to her.  Maybe on Alderaan they've been brother-loving to keep their royal bloodline pure like the Pharaohs of Egypt.




I did mention that as a possibility but they give us no indication that is the case. But it feels like a reach to me. If the audience is meant to accept it on those grounds, I'd expect them to address it in some way, to give the audience an idea that is the case.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Bedrockgames said:


> And that is fine, I am not saying you have to agree, but the opinion I am expressing is not an uncommon one. To me it isn't just a plot twist, those prior scenes don't just become attempts at humor, they just don't make sense in light of the new information because it is obvious they are not brother and sister in those scenes. Yes, a brother and sister might meet, not know they are siblings, and kiss....but we know the film makers wouldn't do that. It is meta but it is meta that I think is nearly impossible to ignore (at least for me it is). I believe that it isn't a problem for you. I believe that you don't notice it. But I assure you, I notice it every time I watch the trilogy and it always stands out to me as a glaring inconconsistency. It is an inconsistency I've come to find nothing more than a peculiar oddity at this point, but an inconsistency still. And that is fine. A movie about knights romping through space can have inconsistencies like that.



It isn't an inconsistency, though. It is just a thing that bugs you because meta.


----------



## Maxperson

Bedrockgames said:


> I agree that by the end of Empire Strikes back it is clear that Han and Leia are in love. My point is an essential aspect of Leia and Luke (their relationship to each other and their physical attraction to each other) changes from that episode to the last. She may have loved Han by the end of Empire, and that kiss may have been to piss him off, but it was still not a brother-sister kiss and clearly tender. In episode V they are visibly not brother and sister. This is very clear to the viewer. In Episode VI they are brother and sister. It is the same problem with Vader as the father. However that they at least address so it becomes less of a plot hole issue (with the whole speech ben gives about "from a certain point of view). But it is a similar problem. In episode four it is pretty clear vader isn't meant to be the father, but in episode V he is meant to be the father. I will say that Luke being Vader's son and Leia's brother makes the film work in the end. Those were both the right call, but they do create plot holes in the storyline because it is a big change to Luke's character that you sense with each film (and you know as you watch them that there is a trace of inconsistency there). At least that has always been my reaction to the films.




Leia never found out that Luke was her brother until on Endor when Luke told her.  The kiss she gave Luke was one where she didn't know he was her brother, so the type of kiss isn't really inappropriate.


----------



## Bedrockgames

Maxperson said:


> Leia never found out that Luke was her brother until on Endor when Luke told her.  The kiss she gave Luke was one where she didn't know he was her brother, so the type of kiss isn't really inappropriate.




I realize that she wasn't aware he was her brother when she kissed him. But I'd expect the kiss to dawn on them once they became aware of their relationship and have some reaction to it.


----------



## Maxperson

Bedrockgames said:


> I realize that she wasn't aware he was her brother when she kissed him. But I'd expect the kiss to dawn on them once they became aware of their relationship and have some reaction to it.




Why?  If it happened to me I'd do my best to pretend it never happened.  I wouldn't bring it up and be like, "Hey, do you remember the time..."


----------



## Bedrockgames

Maxperson said:


> Why?  If it happened to me I'd do my best to pretend it never happened.  I wouldn't bring it up and be like, "Hey, do you remember the time..."




And that would be fine because that is a reaction that is consistent with the revelation. But I'd expect a filmmaker to make that reaction clear to the viewer through visual cues or something, because it is a significant event.


----------



## Morrus

Bedrockgames said:


> And that would be fine because that is a reaction that is consistent with the revelation. But I'd expect a filmmaker to make that reaction clear to the viewer through visual cues or something, because it is a significant event.




I think it was best washed over. We know it happened. Lucas knew it happened. Lucas knew we knew it happened. But a side trek into incest discussion wouldn't add anything to the movies. Best just move on and place that conversation in the same bucket as "when does Han Solo poop?"

We don't need to know that, and knowing it would probably diminish the film.


----------



## Bedrockgames

doctorbadwolf said:


> It isn't an inconsistency, though. It is just a thing that bugs you because meta.




Well, we disagree on that point. But I don't see any reason for me to keep hammering home the same argument again and again. It is a relatively minor side trek that stemmed from me just trying to point out the first trilogy had plenty of flaws too. Somehow we got into a debate over whether Luke and Leia kissing constituted a plot hole.


----------



## Bedrockgames

Morrus said:


> I think it was best washed over. We know it happened. Lucas knew it happened. Lucas knew we knew it happened. But a side trek into incest discussion wouldn't add anything to the movies. Best just move on and place that conversation in the same bucket as "when does Han Solo poop?"
> 
> We don't need to know that, and knowing it would probably diminish the film.




I agree. I think the films were good and that even though it presents a consistency issue, they made the right call. I was just trying to make the point that the new movie, like the original movie, can have those kinds of things and still be a good film. It isn't the end of the world for a movie to have plot holes or minor believability issues, if it serves the overall story.


----------



## Maxperson

Bedrockgames said:


> And that would be fine because that is a reaction that is consistent with the revelation. But I'd expect a filmmaker to make that reaction clear to the viewer through visual cues or something, because it is a significant event.




Nah.  Not that long after the event.  I'm good with how it played out.


----------



## dd.stevenson

Bedrockgames said:


> Somehow we got into a debate over whether Luke and Leia kissing constituted a plot hole.




That's because calling a tonal inconsistency a plot hole is a HuffPo-editor level of clickbaity misrepresentation. Just like calling THAC0 objectively bad, for example. Anyone's free to do it, but you have no reason to be bemused or puzzled that your lightning rod attracts lightning.


----------



## Bedrockgames

dd.stevenson said:


> That's because calling a tonal inconsistency a plot hole is a HuffPo-editor level of clickbaity misrepresentation. Just like calling THAC0 objectively bad, for example. Anyone's free to do it, but you have no reason to be bemused or puzzled that your lightning rod attracts lightning.






Well, I genuinely consider it an inconsistency in the film and a plot hole.


----------



## Eltab

Umbran said:


> <Luke and Leia> didn't know they were siblings at the time.



I saw this 'alternate script' in a book aimed at grade-school kids:

Scene: Dagobah.  Yoda has just died.  Ben's "ghost" and Luke talk.

Ben:     ... and so, your sister has remained safely anonymous.
Luke:   Leia! Leia is my sister!
Ben:    Your insight serves you well. ... Something is troubling you?
Luke:   Eeewww ! I KISSED her ! 

I wonder why, once the true relationship was established, all Ep4 re-releases since then don't show Leia giving Luke a huge smooch on the cheek "...for luck".


----------



## Eltab

Bedrockgames said:


> in episode 5 <Vader> is meant to be the father. -snip- At least that has always been my reaction to the films.



When I first heard his classic line, I thought Vader was lying through his teeth (speech grille?) because (a) he's the villain! and (b) he wanted to confuse Luke, persuade Luke to stop fighting / resisting, and get curious enough to actually follow Vader away - to a place where he can better 'persuade' Luke.  Such as, in the Emperor's presence.

Vader has no way to know this, but Luke held Uncle Owen in high regard.  (Only obvious in retrospect; Owen serves as a barricade to Luke's youthful energy while alive.)  When Luke says to Ben's ghost, "...I can't kill my own father...", he had to have images of Uncle Owen swimming before his eyes.  Owen WAS his dad / father, in everything but name.


----------



## Eltab

Bedrockgames said:


> But I'd expect the kiss to dawn on them once they became aware of their relationship and have some reaction to it.



In the middle of a war, the night before they initiate a major battle, against superior forces, and on a countdown clock?  Maybe THAT discussion would be best left until the day after ... which coincidentally is also after the movie ends.

to all:
Incidentally there are TWO kiss scenes to explain: just before swinging over the Death Star bottomless pit, and in Luke's medical recovery room.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Maxperson said:


> Why?  If it happened to me I'd do my best to pretend it never happened.  I wouldn't bring it up and be like, "Hey, do you remember the time..."




If it even comes to mind at all. I mean, they definitely have bigger fish to fry. And it was a while ago. And it wasn't an important moment in anyone's life. 



dd.stevenson said:


> That's because calling a tonal inconsistency a plot hole is a HuffPo-editor level of clickbaity misrepresentation.  Just like calling THAC0 objectively bad, for example. Anyone's free to  do it, but you have no reason to be bemused or puzzled that your  lightning rod attracts lightning.




I'm not sure how THACO isn't objectively bad. That's not clickbaity  misrepresentation, that's literally just a reasonable assertion. 

I mean it might be _subjectively_  not bad, in that it's arguably better than referencing multiple tables  or whatever, but the extra complexity doesn't serve any useful purpose,  and turned people off the game, because there are just easier ways to  enjoy some time with friends, and some groups try to introduce the  mechanics before introducing what's cool about roleplaying games, and  the system it was replaced with accomplishes all the same goals, but  does so more efficiently, while being easier to teach, since it is  almost literally as straightforward and simple, yet effective, as such a  system can be. 

/rant 

sorry, but sometimes even things we enjoy or enjoyed are just objectively less good than other similar things. 


Anyway, this is getting nowhere. Those of us who never saw any inconsistency in them not mentioning or dealing with the kiss aren't going to suddenly see one now, and vise versa.

ALso, that article is legitimately fracking _terrible!_ 

Half of the points rely on misunderstandings of obvious things about the movie, and the rest are _at least_ a stretch.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

"34. How do the Rathtars on Han's freighter get loose? If he's just keeping them loose in the hanger, why don't they kill him when he's walking through the freighter toward the Millennium Falcon, or at any other time? And if he's got them chained up, how do they escape?"

lol....um...I'm not sure this person even watched the movie. This is literally explicitly shown on screen.


----------



## Bedrockgames

doctorbadwolf said:


> If it even comes to mind at all. I mean, they definitely have bigger fish to fry. And it was a while ago. And it wasn't an important moment in anyone's life.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure how THACO isn't objectively bad. That's not clickbaity  misrepresentation, that's literally just a reasonable assertion.
> 
> I mean it might be _subjectively_  not bad, in that it's arguably better than referencing multiple tables  or whatever, but the extra complexity doesn't serve any useful purpose,  and turned people off the game, because there are just easier ways to  enjoy some time with friends, and some groups try to introduce the  mechanics before introducing what's cool about roleplaying games, and  the system it was replaced with accomplishes all the same goals, but  does so more efficiently, while being easier to teach, since it is  almost literally as straightforward and simple, yet effective, as such a  system can be.
> 
> /rant
> 
> sorry, but sometimes even things we enjoy or enjoyed are just objectively less good than other similar things.
> 
> 
> Anyway, this is getting nowhere. Those of us who never saw any inconsistency in them not mentioning or dealing with the kiss aren't going to suddenly see one now, and vise versa.
> 
> ALso, that article is legitimately fracking _terrible!_
> 
> Half of the points rely on misunderstandings of obvious things about the movie, and the rest are _at least_ a stretch.




I think THAC0 is objectively more mathy and has a slower learning curve. one benefit is that fuzziness makes things more cloudy for the players. So I find when I am a player in a game like that I tend to be less focused on my chances of success and more focused on what I am doing as a character (same with attack matrices). I do like that THAC0 is more contained than 3E (though I do think d20 is way more intuitive).


----------



## Bedrockgames

Eltab said:


> When I first heard his classic line, I thought Vader was lying through his teeth (speech grille?) because (a) he's the villain! and (b) he wanted to confuse Luke, persuade Luke to stop fighting / resisting, and get curious enough to actually follow Vader away - to a place where he can better 'persuade' Luke.  Such as, in the Emperor's presence.
> 
> Vader has no way to know this, but Luke held Uncle Owen in high regard.  (Only obvious in retrospect; Owen serves as a barricade to Luke's youthful energy while alive.)  When Luke says to Ben's ghost, "...I can't kill my own father...", he had to have images of Uncle Owen swimming before his eyes.  Owen WAS his dad / father, in everything but name.




I saw Jedi first because I was a kid when that came out in the theater, so by the time I saw Empire, I knew Vader was his father (and Leia was his sister).


----------



## Bedrockgames

Eltab said:


> In the middle of a war, the night before they initiate a major battle, against superior forces, and on a countdown clock?  Maybe THAT discussion would be best left until the day after ... which coincidentally is also after the movie ends.
> 
> to all:
> Incidentally there are TWO kiss scenes to explain: just before swinging over the Death Star bottomless pit, and in Luke's medical recovery room.




maybe. I think they demonstrated there was time for more petty concerns than having kissed your own sibling. Again, it is only one of the biggest possible taboos out there. It is true it may not be in a galaxy far, far away but to the intended audience, it would very much have been.


----------



## MarkB

Bedrockgames said:


> Again, it is only one of the biggest possible taboos out there.




Which is a really good reason _not_ to touch upon it at all. Drawing attention to it wouldn't have made it any less awkward, only more visible.


----------



## Bedrockgames

MarkB said:


> Which is a really good reason _not_ to touch upon it at all. Drawing attention to it wouldn't have made it any less awkward, only more visible.




And as I said before, I agree. I think it was the right call not to get into it. But for me the result is it still an inconsistency I can't help but notice. I was never tying to attack the film or that plot point by raising this issue, I brought it up to show that lots of great movies have these kinds of wrinkles in them and it doesn't make them bad (and sometimes the wrinkles are worth it because the twists that create them add so much to the story).


----------



## dd.stevenson

Bedrockgames said:


> But for me the result is it still an inconsistency I can't help but notice. I was never tying to attack the film or that plot point by raising this issue, I brought it up to show that lots of great movies have these kinds of wrinkles in them and it doesn't make them bad (and sometimes the wrinkles are worth it because the twists that create them add so much to the story).



It's interesting to imagine how much more sympathy you'd get for this position if the kiss and the sibling reveal had taken place in the same movie.


----------



## Hussar

Bedrockgames said:


> I realize that she wasn't aware he was her brother when she kissed him. But I'd expect the kiss to dawn on them once they became aware of their relationship and have some reaction to it.




Meh, this was a character who spared not a single moment to worry about the murders of his adopted family.  And another character who watched her homeworld destroyed, sheds a gasp and never brings it up again.  Kissing a sister?  Not a big issue.


----------



## Bedrockgames

Hussar said:


> Meh, this was a character who spared not a single moment to worry about the murders of his adopted family.  And another character who watched her homeworld destroyed, sheds a gasp and never brings it up again.  Kissing a sister?  Not a big issue.




Really? I think that was just a function of condensing scenes down to efficiently tell a story. I don't think they were trying to convey Luke was some sort of psychopath who doesn't grieve for loved ones and flaunts social convention. Also his care and concern was converted by having him go back to help them despite the obvious danger. That seems a very strange analysis of Luke as a character. Certainly he was whiny, but I never came away from the movie feeling that he was unmoved by the deaths of his aunt and uncle.


----------



## Maxperson

Bedrockgames said:


> Really? I think that was just a function of condensing scenes down to efficiently tell a story. I don't think they were trying to convey Luke was some sort of psychopath who doesn't grieve for loved ones and flaunts social convention.




They aren't trying to convey Luke as incestuous, either.  You don't get to have it both ways.  Either the things that are not mentioned again that any normal person WOULD mention again, including death of family and home world are important and therefore wrong, or they aren't, including the kiss.  All three are in the same category, though the death of family and home world are much larger and stronger issues, and therefore much worse "plot holes" when the characters fail to mention them again.


----------



## Umbran

Bedrockgames said:


> Really? I think that was just a function of condensing scenes down to efficiently tell a story.




I see, so condensing away *GEONOCIDE* isn't an issue, but condensing away a kiss that didn't go anywhere.... isn't?  Death of *BILLIONS*.  A single kiss.

To mirror your first word... really?


----------



## Bedrockgames

Umbran said:


> I see, so condensing away *GEONOCIDE* isn't an issue, but condensing away a kiss that didn't go anywhere.... isn't?  Death of *BILLIONS*.  A single kiss.
> 
> To mirror your first word... really?




Both Luke and Leia react to those things though. It is an adventure movie, they are not going to play out Leia's grieving process in real time, but we do see her react to the destruction of Alderaan and we do see Luke both attempt to help his aunt and uncle and grieve when they die. These are both tragedies that get acknowledged by the characters. But the incest has no on screen acknowledgement. To the that is an inconsistency. Again, I am not saying they should have acknowledged it. I understand why they didn't and think they were right not to do so. My only reason for bringing up the point is to respond to people criticizing the new movies for consistency issues that are much smaller than things like the Luke-Leia kiss to point out the original trilogy was not this perfect diamond, it had rough spots (and in many ways those rough spots are one of the reasons it is so good, because if they polished it too much, we wouldn't have some of the cooler plot developments).


----------



## Bedrockgames

Maxperson said:


> They aren't trying to convey Luke as incestuous, either.  You don't get to have it both ways.  Either the things that are not mentioned again that any normal person WOULD mention again, including death of family and home world are important and therefore wrong, or they aren't, including the kiss.  All three are in the same category, though the death of family and home world are much larger and stronger issues, and therefore much worse "plot holes" when the characters fail to mention them again.




But the kiss isn't mentioned at all. Both of the other issues raised get dealt with when they happen (no one pretends they didn't the way they pretend the kiss never occurred). It is just efficiency of the medium moving things along. We even see Obi-Wan react to the destruction of Alderaan when he senses it.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Umbran said:


> I see, so condensing away *GEONOCIDE* isn't an issue, but condensing away a kiss that didn't go anywhere.... isn't?  Death of *BILLIONS*.  A single kiss.
> 
> To mirror your first word... really?




Monkey-sphere.  

Luke and Leia are known and therefore their actions have elevated importance.  I barely know Larses, and don't know anyone on Alderaan, so their tragedies are only as real as the people in my monkey-sphere make them.  Therefore, the incestuous kiss (which, in reality, doesn't even count as incest) gains a paramount importance due it occurring within my monkey-sphere, while Owen and Beru burning and the geocide (I like this word better) of Alderaan don't even register as things I should really care about.


----------



## Bedrockgames

Ovinomancer said:


> Monkey-sphere.
> 
> Luke and Leia are known and therefore their actions have elevated importance.  I barely know Larses, and don't know anyone on Alderaan, so their tragedies are only as real as the people in my monkey-sphere make them.  Therefore, the incestuous kiss (which, in reality, doesn't even count as incest) gains a paramount importance due it occurring within my monkey-sphere, while Owen and Beru burning and the geocide (I like this word better) of Alderaan don't even register as things I should really care about.




I think you guys are misreading my point. It isn't about the moral outrage one should feel toward the incest kiss versus other things in the setting, it is about the inconsistency in characterization the incest kiss creates in light of their behavior once they know they are brother and sister. It is notable because it is incest and you expect them to have some kind of reaction to that. But it isn't notable because the viewer is supposed to be outraged about it or something.


----------



## amerigoV

I am not sure I would disregard the incest angle. After all, Leia had major daddy issues - her father did torture her, blow up her planet, and disapproved of her choice in men (who wouldn't want to toss some sex-crazed kid after their daughter in carbinite?). She knew exactly what she was doing - Leia is never portrayed as confused or indecisive in any of the movies. And all of this is confirm by Han in Episode 7 "its true, all of it."

Lets face it, there is no more deviant family in that galaxy than the Starwalkers. They would make a killing on the day-time talk show circuit.

To me the more fun thing is how does Vader torture a woman that is exactly like his dead (love of his life) wife in looks, attitude, hairstyle, and occupation plus is force sensitive but yet he has no idea who she is. Nothing is ever said of it the rest of the trilogy.

(unless Obi Wan is really Luke and Leia's father... then it all makes sense)


----------



## Istbor

Bedrockgames said:


> I think you guys are misreading my point. It isn't about the moral outrage one should feel toward the incest kiss versus other things in the setting, it is about the inconsistency in characterization the incest kiss creates in light of their behavior once they know they are brother and sister. It is notable because it is incest and you expect them to have some kind of reaction to that. But it isn't notable because the viewer is supposed to be outraged about it or something.




Yes, all movies have issues.  I am not sure anyone is really hardcore against you on this fact.  People point out the consistency issues in the latest movie, because it is fresh in their minds. I am not sure it is simply people only thinking about the Original Trilogy as a perfect gem. 

What should the other movies have done? Waste time with the brother and sister acting like awkward young adults? Or could they have just come to terms with it and been like, "Yup, there is a lot more important things out there than worrying about a kiss we shared, in the heat of a tense moment, when were didn't know each other at all."

I prefer to focus on what was important for the story, now worry over some kiss.  (Either the death star one, OR the Hoth one.)


----------



## Umbran

Bedrockgames said:


> But the kiss isn't mentioned at all. Both of the other issues raised get dealt with when they happen (no one pretends they didn't the way they pretend the kiss never occurred).




None of these events are directly referenced after they happened.  The kiss happens, and is never mentioned again.  Lars and Beru die, and once that scene is over, as far as I recall they are never mentioned again in the trilogy.  Luke should be in mourning for months afterwards - for all intents and purposes, he saw the burned corpses of his *parents* lying on the ground, for cryin' out loud!  Obi-Wan should be directly referencing this event as he trains Luke, as Luke should be *filled* with anger and pain, and a ripe target for the Dark Side at that moment, but... nope.  Not a peep - five minutes later it is like nothing major has happened, and we never hear about them again.  

Alderaan dies, and there are some gasps and a Jedi senses badness, and it is never referenced again in the film.  You'd imagine that some pilot going at the Death Star would shout "For Alderaan!" or something.  But, as I recall it, *nothing* is said.

None of which we actually have a problem with.  And I'm okay with us not having a problem with them.  We are okay glossing over these things, and that's fine.  There's some extended canon that deal with Alderaan, at least, but I've never read it and I'm fine with that.

The kiss was innocent enough at the time, given what the people knew.  They find out they are siblings *a year later*, while they are rather busy trying to deal with war with the Empire, another dead mentor, a new megaweapon, and Luke is trying to redeem Vader, and you think it is notable issue that they don't go back and deal with a kiss that is only awkward in retrospect?

It seems to me that, in terms of glossing over things that should have major emotional impact, but don't, the kiss is the *least* offender.  I'm sorry, but it seems less like valid critique, and more like cherrypicking, to call this out separately as an issue.


----------



## Bedrockgames

Istbor said:


> Yes, all movies have issues.  I am not sure anyone is really hardcore against you on this fact.  People point out the consistency issues in the latest movie, because it is fresh in their minds. I am not sure it is simply people only thinking about the Original Trilogy as a perfect gem.
> 
> What should the other movies have done? Waste time with the brother and sister acting like awkward young adults? Or could they have just come to terms with it and been like, "Yup, there is a lot more important things out there than worrying about a kiss we shared, in the heat of a tense moment, when were didn't know each other at all."
> 
> I prefer to focus on what was important for the story, now worry over some kiss.  (Either the death star one, OR the Hoth one.)






This is exactly the point I was trying to make. People are too obsessed with plot holes. The kiss is fine, Luke and Leia bring brother and sister are fine. Addressing it would have been awkward and wasted time on something that wasn't an intentional issue but arose because of how the movie was written. Sometimes plot developments introduce inconsistencies or things that make you do s double take and wonder about, but if they yield good material that makes the movie better (like having Luke and Leia be twins does) then it is the right call. Too often in these discussions I think people act as if plot holes automatically mean the movie is bad, or that it would have been better if they fixed/addressed the plot hole. But screen time is precious and every decision is made weighing the good and the bad.


----------



## amerigoV

Over lunch, I just saw a "deleted kiss" - a deleted scene from Jedi when the group splits up from rescuing Han (4min mark in the link). Leia is just like all over Luke all the time. Sickening, really. I almost paused eating my lunch.

https://youtu.be/y1qyXxLIXLw


----------



## Bedrockgames

Umbran said:


> None of these events are directly referenced after they happened.  The kiss happens, and is never mentioned again.  Lars and Beru die, and once that scene is over, as far as I recall they are never mentioned again in the trilogy.  Luke should be in mourning for months afterwards - for all intents and purposes, he saw the burned corpses of his *parents* lying on the ground, for cryin' out loud!  Obi-Wan should be directly referencing this event as he trains Luke, as Luke should be *filled* with anger and pain, and a ripe target for the Dark Side at that moment, but... nope.  Not a peep - five minutes later it is like nothing major has happened, and we never hear about them again.




I would have to watch the movies again looking for references to both events, but I believe you are right that after the initial occurrences, they don't get mentioned. This is certainly something that might stand out, but I don't think it is the same consistency issue the Leia and Luke kiss present. We do see both Obi-Wan and Leia react to Alderaan. In a more dramatic movie, that emotion would have been milked longer. In an adventure, things generally move on. We are not meant to assume they are less sad about it after the fact. It was simply dealt with, when it was dealt with to keep the tone and move of the movie consistent (also someone shouting 'for Alderaan' later would probably have undercut Ben's somewhat moving reaction to the event---which I think of as a central point in the film). So one never really gets the impression that Alderaan or Uncle Owen and Aunt Beru never happened. We just understand that those emotions were dealt with efficiently when they happened, but Alderaan is still gone at the end of Jedi. With Luke and Leia kissing, there is a change in the setting and characters that is simply never addressed. So it is just this thing that stands out in the movie for me, where when it happens I think, well that is odd because they are brother and sister, but clearly the film maker hadn't written them as bother and sister at this point. It is a characterization issue that is never really dealt with. Frankly I am surprised Lucas never edited it out. 

Personally I am fine with that. The twist of them being twins is so iconic, and such a nice way to bring Luke's sister into the story without introducing a whole other character, that I feel it was the right move. My point here is not to say we should stop and condemn the kiss or that it was bad film making. I just raised the issue because it points to where a plot hole or weird development that isn't fully explained can be a good thing for a movie. 



> Alderaan dies, and there are some gasps and a Jedi senses badness, and it is never referenced again in the film.  You'd imagine that some pilot going at the Death Star would shout "For Alderaan!" or something.  But, as I recall it, *nothing* is said.




And it would have been a worse movie if they did that. 



> None of which we actually have a problem with.  And I'm okay with us not having a problem with them.  We are okay glossing over these things, and that's fine.  There's some extended canon that deal with Alderaan, at least, but I've never read it and I'm fine with that.




Which has been my point the whole time. Glossing over the kiss is fine, just like glossing over other rough edges (and allowing rough edges and inconsistencies to crop up when they add something to the story) is fine. 

The kiss was innocent enough at the time, given what the people knew.  They find out they are siblings *a year later*, while they are rather busy trying to deal with war with the Empire, another dead mentor, a new megaweapon, and Luke is trying to redeem Vader, and you think it is notable issue that they don't go back and deal with a kiss that is only awkward in retrospect?

It seems to me that, in terms of glossing over things that should have major emotional impact, but don't, the kiss is the *least* offender.  I'm sorry, but it seems less like valid critique, and more like cherrypicking, to call this out separately as an issue.[/QUOTE]


----------



## Istbor

Why don't we instead talk about Ewoks and our love for them?


----------



## Bedrockgames

Istbor said:


> Why don't we instead talk about Ewoks and our love for them?




Personally I have no beef with the Ewoks. I loved Jedi and thought the Ewoks were a great part of it.


----------



## MarkB

Umbran said:


> None of these events are directly referenced after they happened.  The kiss happens, and is never mentioned again.  Lars and Beru die, and once that scene is over, as far as I recall they are never mentioned again in the trilogy.  Luke should be in mourning for months afterwards - for all intents and purposes, he saw the burned corpses of his *parents* lying on the ground, for cryin' out loud!  Obi-Wan should be directly referencing this event as he trains Luke, as Luke should be *filled* with anger and pain, and a ripe target for the Dark Side at that moment, but... nope.  Not a peep - five minutes later it is like nothing major has happened, and we never hear about them again.




The scene at the destroyed sandcrawler seemed perfectly adequate for action-movie purposes - with the sad music, the droids on cremation detail, and Obi-Wan telling Luke not to blame himself - if he'd been there, there was nothing he could have done except die with them - is all a sufficiently somber scene of grieving.

And I don't think Luke got over them easily at all - I think the whole reason he fixated upon Obi-Wan and embraced his training was as a surrogate father-figure in place of his lost loved ones.



> Alderaan dies, and there are some gasps and a Jedi senses badness, and it is never referenced again in the film.  You'd imagine that some pilot going at the Death Star would shout "For Alderaan!" or something.  But, as I recall it, *nothing* is said.




"You're safe! When we heard about Alderaan we feared the worst."

"We have no time for sorrows, Commander."

Brief, but made effective enough by the mournful embrace that accompanies it.


----------



## Umbran

MarkB said:


> The scene at the destroyed sandcrawler seemed perfectly adequate for action-movie purposes




Yes, I agree.  And already said that how they handled it was okay, for what the movie is.  But, by extension, how they deal with the kiss (not at all) is also perfectly adequate for action-movie purposes.

I simply have issue with the *kiss* being a big deal, when we compare to other things that get similarly glossed over.  The kiss is not special, in this regard.


----------



## Istbor

Bedrockgames said:


> Personally I have no beef with the Ewoks. I loved Jedi and thought the Ewoks were a great part of it.




Good.  I don't really either. 

I mean sure, they can beat some storm troopers who lets face it, probably made a mistake in underestimating them. They also get the meat kicked out of them too in a few shots. 


And the kiss? That is still to me, the strange part of this whole conversation.  The mere fact that we are discussing it as such a length is completely unexpected.  It was such an innocuous event, even when you learn the truth.


----------



## RPGer

I agree with it feeling like "Star Wars Greatest Hits" at times, even with Luke playing the Yoda role.  It had the humor back from the first series as well.  Overall, very enjoyable start to the new trilogy.


----------



## Maxperson

Bedrockgames said:


> But the kiss isn't mentioned at all. Both of the other issues raised get dealt with when they happen (no one pretends they didn't the way they pretend the kiss never occurred). It is just efficiency of the medium moving things along. We even see Obi-Wan react to the destruction of Alderaan when he senses it.




Dealt with?!?!?  Luke mourns for a few seconds and is completely over the murder of his entire family by the time he gets to Mos Eisley for the droid scene.  Leia shows a similar lack when Alderaan is destroyed.  The briefness of their mourning is comparable to the brief discomfort of parties that accompanies the kissing scenes.  Again, you don't get to have it both ways.


----------



## Maxperson

Bedrockgames said:


> Both Luke and Leia react to those things though. It is an adventure movie, they are not going to play out Leia's grieving process in real time




It's an adventure movie.  We are not going to see them play out incest horror waaaaaaay after the fact.


----------



## Maxperson

Istbor said:


> Why don't we instead talk about Ewoks and our love for them?




Yes!  They're absolutely delicious when roasted slowly on a spit.  I just love them.


----------



## Bedrockgames

Maxperson said:


> It's an adventure movie.  We are not going to see them play out incest horror waaaaaaay after the fact.




Well, I stated I felt they handled it correctly. I don't think they ought to have addressed it. I consider it an inconsistency but an inconsistency that is worth the wrinkle it creates, and addressing it would have just been odd. That said it wouldn't have to be played for horror to be addressed. It could have been handled with humor (which probably would have been more in keeping with the spirit of the film).


----------



## Bedrockgames

Maxperson said:


> Dealt with?!?!?  Luke mourns for a few seconds and is completely over the murder of his entire family by the time he gets to Mos Eisley for the droid scene.  Leia shows a similar lack when Alderaan is destroyed.  The briefness of their mourning is comparable to the brief discomfort of parties that accompanies the kissing scenes.  Again, you don't get to have it both ways.




Yes. It was dealt with. Again, efficiency of the medium. In movies like this, you deal with those things efficiently and then move on. Like the other poster I agree that having Luke go back to risk his life to intervene demonstrates his care (the fact that he fully embraces becoming a Jedi after also shows the impact) and the music clearly is meant to indicate the profound impact this has on him (and in star wars half the story is told through the music). After that though, yes we are focused on the adventure, which is fine. That isn't a lack of consistency. That is efficiency. The kiss is inconsistent because it is never addressed at all. 

The same with Leia. She definitely shows how she feels about Alderaan when it happens. So it is dealt with. Plus we get plenty of weight from Obi-Wan's reaction when he senses it. Then the full weight of it is shown to the viewer when all that is left are bits and pieces of it. For a movie like star wars any further dwelling on the issue would have taken away from the impact of Obi-Wan's sensing the deaths of the inhabitants of Alderaan. So these were both addressed and the movie does move on (though arguably these things both strengthen Luke and Leia's resolve).


----------



## Maxperson

Bedrockgames said:


> Yes. It was dealt with. Again, efficiency of the medium. In movies like this, you deal with those things efficiently and then move on. Like the other poster I agree that having Luke go back to risk his life to intervene demonstrates his care (the fact that he fully embraces becoming a Jedi after also shows the impact) and the music clearly is meant to indicate the profound impact this has on him (and in star wars half the story is told through the music). After that though, yes we are focused on the adventure, which is fine. That isn't a lack of consistency. That is efficiency. The kiss is inconsistent because it is never addressed at all.
> 
> The same with Leia. She definitely shows how she feels about Alderaan when it happens. So it is dealt with. Plus we get plenty of weight from Obi-Wan's reaction when he senses it. Then the full weight of it is shown to the viewer when all that is left are bits and pieces of it. For a movie like star wars any further dwelling on the issue would have taken away from the impact of Obi-Wan's sensing the deaths of the inhabitants of Alderaan. So these were both addressed and the movie does move on (though arguably these things both strengthen Luke and Leia's resolve).




We're going to have to agree to disagree on that.  There's no way they dealt with it.  They glossed over and virtually ignored it, which is fine for an action movie.  However, it is equally fine to do what they did with the kiss.  There is no meaningful difference between the three incidents.


----------



## Hussar

Just because it's topical:


----------



## Herschel

I saw it during the opening showing and I have to say, I don't think I've ever been more disappointed with a movie. They assembled a great cast, the practical effects were nice, John Williams and the cinematography were on-point and then deliver a story that's nothing but rehashed drivel and devoid of surprises. 

While I have always had issues with the "Kumbaya" ending to Return of the Jedi (Oh, take out the Emperor and the entirety of this massive, galactic empire just falls apart?), this one turns around and says 'not only did we whitewash that, but the emperor was actually a pretty good guy because he kept things from actually being that bad.' 

I'm not sure whether I applaud or shake my head at Abrams cutting the scene where Chewbacca rips Simon Pegg's arm off. 

How the heck does Han Solo not know where/ leave the Millennium Falcon sit for so long? Instead it's deus ex falcona. 

Han's been with Chewbacca for how many decades and is just now figuring out the power of the bowcaster? 

The Starkiller Base is Nigel Tuffnel's amp. 

You can't say it's just a remake of a New Hope, I mean they threw in Hoth and Endor too. 

The elegant lightsaber is once again the equivalent of a 7-pound hunk of claymore rather than the finesse of the katana. 

There was no real gravitas behinds Finn's switch. "Oh, look, here's a stormtrooper who is having doubts" without any background or context making it actually _mean  something. 

Everything in the story that made any sense was utterly predictable, as in Michael Bay predictable. 

We left the theater feeling just plain let down. The elements were all there to deliver a knockout but instead we got a kludgy, fanboi nostalgia trip._


----------



## Water Bob

Just walked in from seeing it a second time.  This viewing was in IMAX 3D, and I loved it more than I did the first time.  Yeah, if pressed, I'd still put Empire and A New Hope in front of this one as better films, but Force Awakens is waaaaayyyyy better than any of the prequels or Jedi.

Some things that I was on the edge about I found that I liked better this time.  Han Solo's death had more emotion for me (weird, since I knew it was coming).  And, I like Kylo Ren much more--he's not a master, like we're used to seeing.  He's no Vader or Darth Maul or Emperor Palpatine.  He's like a Journeyman Force User.  Yeah, he can do things that boggle the minds of normal people, but he's definitely not up to snuff with the baddies that we're used to.  I find that kinda neat.  I bet he'll grow, over the next two films, into a bad-ass.  Right now, he's just a conflicted kid not completely in control of his emotions.

Yeah, I really like this new Star Wars.  I can't wait for the next installment.


----------



## Water Bob

Herschel said:


> I saw it during the opening showing and I have to say, I don't think I've ever been more disappointed with a movie. They assembled a great cast, the practical effects were nice, John Williams and the cinematography were on-point and then deliver a story that's nothing but rehashed drivel and devoid of surprises.
> 
> While I have always had issues with the "Kumbaya" ending to Return of the Jedi (Oh, take out the Emperor and the entirety of this massive, galactic empire just falls apart?), this one turns around and says 'not only did we whitewash that, but the emperor was actually a pretty good guy because he kept things from actually being that bad.'
> 
> I'm not sure whether I applaud or shake my head at Abrams cutting the scene where Chewbacca rips Simon Pegg's arm off.
> 
> How the heck does Han Solo not know where/ leave the Millennium Falcon sit for so long? Instead it's deus ex falcona.
> 
> Han's been with Chewbacca for how many decades and is just now figuring out the power of the bowcaster?
> 
> The Starkiller Base is Nigel Tuffnel's amp.
> 
> You can't say it's just a remake of a New Hope, I mean they threw in Hoth and Endor too.
> 
> The elegant lightsaber is once again the equivalent of a 7-pound hunk of claymore rather than the finesse of the katana.
> 
> There was no real gravitas behinds Finn's switch. "Oh, look, here's a stormtrooper who is having doubts" without any background or context making it actually _mean  something.
> 
> Everything in the story that made any sense was utterly predictable, as in Michael Bay predictable.
> 
> We left the theater feeling just plain let down. The elements were all there to deliver a knockout but instead we got a kludgy, fanboi nostalgia trip._



_


Obviously, I disagree with just about everything you've said (though I do sympathize with some of your statements), but I wanted to comment about the lightsaber duels.  I really disagree with you here.  This movie gives the lightsaber duels in the original trilogy more weight--legitimacy.  

Plus, the ones in the prequel, while more flashy, didn't not sell me on how deadly they were.  When Kylo Ren fights Rey and Finn, I felt those dangerous weapons.  Never once did I feel that in any of the prequel films.

In this film, the weapon is treated more realistically, imo.  The Jedi wielding them in the prequels seems too comic-booky to mee._


----------



## Grumpy RPG Reviews

Maxperson said:


> Dealt with?!?!?  Luke mourns for a few seconds and is completely over the murder of his entire family by the time he gets to Mos Eisley for the droid scene.  Leia shows a similar lack when Alderaan is destroyed.  The briefness of their mourning is comparable to the brief discomfort of parties that accompanies the kissing scenes.  Again, you don't get to have it both ways.



This movie doesn't work like that. It is more like a fairytale. You can give it that kind of in-depth analysis, demanding answers to why no one showed grief or moral outrage. But it is like dissecting a soap bubble.


----------



## Maxperson

Grumpy RPG Reviews said:


> This movie doesn't work like that. It is more like a fairytale. You can give it that kind of in-depth analysis, demanding answers to why no one showed grief or moral outrage. But it is like dissecting a soap bubble.




That wasn't the point.


----------



## Water Bob

This is interesting.  The _Finalizer_, the star destroyer shown in the film, looks like a beast, doesn't it?  I've been thinking that it is just the latest in the bigger and badder super star destroyers.

Looking around on the net at pages from the new books coming out, _Finalizer_ doesn't qualify as a super star destroyer.  Vader's _Executor_ from *The Empire Strikes Back* and *Return of the Jedi* measures 19,000 meters.  The _Finalizer_ is just a spec compared to it, measuring almost 3,000 meters.

In fact, _Finalizer_ is about double the size of _Devastator_, Vader's Imperial class star destroyer seen in the opening moments of A New Hope.





*FINALIZER launching Storm Trooper landing craft above Jakku.*










*EXECUTOR with Imperial class star destroyer escorts near Hoth.*









*DEVASTATOR in pursuit of the Millennium Falcon near Hoth. *


----------



## dd.stevenson

Grumpy RPG Reviews said:


> This movie doesn't work like that. It is more like a fairytale. You can give it that kind of in-depth analysis, demanding answers to why no one showed grief or moral outrage. But it is like dissecting a soap bubble.




You completely missed the point, which was that an inconsistent standard was being applied.


----------



## Water Bob

Here's something else interesting--the design of the new T-70 X-Wings.

Notice the old T-65 had a full wing, upper and lower, and a full engine, dorsal and ventral.








The new T-70 has a single wing that splits into two pieces when the S-foils are deployed, and the single thruster engine also splits into two pieces.


----------



## Grumpy RPG Reviews

dd.stevenson said:


> You completely missed the point, which was that an inconsistent standard was being applied.




Fairy tales and fairy tale movies are always going to be wildly inconsistent is terms of morals, backgrounds, incest and the like because they are about the razzle-ma-tazzle, not about consistent nuance.


----------



## Hussar

The point being though, [MENTION=6678305]Grumpy RPG Reviews[/MENTION], that you can't, on one hand, complain about how the impact of one element (in this case, possible incest) isn't dealt with on screen, and then brush off the idea that burying your entire family after they have been brutally murdered is a non-issue.  Or watching your entire planet be destroyed gets a single, "no" and then is never mentioned again.  In this case, all three are dealt with in a consistent manner - they are entirely ignored.


----------



## Bedrockgames

Hussar said:


> The point being though, [MENTION=6678305]Grumpy RPG Reviews[/MENTION], that you can't, on one hand, complain about how the impact of one element (in this case, possible incest) isn't dealt with on screen, and then brush off the idea that burying your entire family after they have been brutally murdered is a non-issue.  Or watching your entire planet be destroyed gets a single, "no" and then is never mentioned again.  In this case, all three are dealt with in a consistent manner - they are entirely ignored.




I just want to clarify my point here. All three are glossed over as I would expect them to be in a movie like this. I wasn't saying that the kiss needed to be addressed. They handled all those things just fine. But the glossing isn't equal in my view. The tragedies both get acknowledgement, I would argue movingly given the space they were working within. The kiss was never really acknowledged in light of the brother-sister revelation. This is why it stands out more to me. When I watched Star Wars for the first time, it never struck me as odd that they didn't spend more time dwelling on his family dying or on Alderaan being blown up. However when I found out Luke and Leia were Brother and Sister, the kissing scene always stood out as unusual. Again, it isn't a big deal. This is soap opera in space. But if someone is going to argue that the Force Awakens is bad because it wasn't as perfect as the original trilogy, I think things like the kiss, like R2-D2 rolling easily over sand dunes on wheels that are inferior to the ones on my swivel chair, like Han never finding a way to get the money to Jabba before he gets frozen, like storm troopers never hitting anything but Leia's shoulder despite being 'so precise' with blasters, are all worth pointing to to remind people the first movies were not perfect and they were basically making them up as they went (and they worked beautifully). But sure, if you feel those tragedies were also odd bumps in the movies, then I'd just add them to the list of things as well.


----------



## Water Bob

There's so many Star Wars comics that have been written over the decades since A New Hope came out, I guess it's inevitable that similar ideas would appear.  I saw several ideas used in the prequels and original trilogy long before those scenes made it to Star Wars feature films.

Think the idea of exiting hyperspace inside the atmosphere of a world is new (as we saw in the new film)?  Nope.  Here's the same idea used by the pilots of Rogue Squadron as they attacked the Imperial base on Tandankin.


----------



## Hussar

Heh. Maybe they borrowed the idea from Battlestar Galactica. 

Something I'm confused about. Ten kills all the Jedi and Luke goes into seclusion twenty years ago right?  Why is Ren so young?  Shouldn't he be like late thirties at least?  Or am I confused?


----------



## Water Bob

Hussar said:


> Heh. Maybe they borrowed the idea from Battlestar Galactica.




THAT was a cool scene.





> Something I'm confused about. Ten kills all the Jedi and Luke goes into seclusion twenty years ago right?  Why is Ren so young?  Shouldn't he be like late thirties at least?  Or am I confused?




The way I understand it, Luke has been missing for years, but it wasn't quite 20 years ago that the Knights of Ren destroyed the New Jedi Order.  It probably happened about a decade or so ago.

We know little about the Knights of Ren at this point.  I'll bet that they emerged from the Jedi that Luke was training.

And, Luke is all screwed in the head because his attempt at cultivating new Jedi has gone so horribly wrong, creating a new evil order.


----------



## Hussar

That makes more sense I suppose.  I didn't think there would be ten years between the actors, but, actually there is between Daisy Ridley and Adam Driver.  

Of course, that does raise the question of what the heck has Kylo Ren been doing for the past decade?  Why didn't he finish his Sith training?  That was one of the weaker parts of the movie, IMO, that Rey, while proficient with a staff, holds her own in a sword fight against someone who's supposed to have been doing this for decades.  Finn rightly goes down quickly, but, Rey actually holds her own for a while.  Although, to be fair, I suppose, she is losing by the end.  It just makes Kylo Ren seem a lot weaker than maybe he should.

Then again, maybe this gets explained in the next movie.  Maybe he wasn't full on Sith until he killed Han, so, his powers weren't all that strong.


----------



## Hypersmurf

Hussar said:


> That was one of the weaker parts of the movie, IMO, that Rey, while proficient with a staff, holds her own in a sword fight against someone who's supposed to have been doing this for decades.  Finn rightly goes down quickly, but, Rey actually holds her own for a while.  Although, to be fair, I suppose, she is losing by the end.  It just makes Kylo Ren seem a lot weaker than maybe he should.



As has been pointed out, Ren _was_ a lot weaker than usual at that point.  The film took several opportunities to say "Look how super-awesome Chewie's bowcaster is!", and then shot Ren with it just before he fights Finn and Rey...

-Hyp.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

And he is kicking her butt in that fight, right until the end, even though he is badly injured, exhausted physically and emotionally, etc. and she may not be trained with a saber, but she is very good with that staff. 
In my experience, for those lucky ppl who are gifted in melee fighting, it definitely carries over. I've fought ppl who are using a new weapon for the first time, but are really good in general, and it is eye opening how quickly they can pick it up. Yes, even a few exchanges into a sparring session. They don't become experts, and neither did Rey, but her fight choreography was spot on with my experiences relating to talented fighters picking up a new weapon. Also, again IME,  staff fighters are freakishly good at picking up new weapons and styles quickly.


----------



## Bedrockgames

Hussar said:


> Of course, that does raise the question of what the heck has Kylo Ren been doing for the past decade?  Why didn't he finish his Sith training?  That was one of the weaker parts of the movie, IMO, that Rey, while proficient with a staff, holds her own in a sword fight against someone who's supposed to have been doing this for decades.  Finn rightly goes down quickly, but, Rey actually holds her own for a while.  Although, to be fair, I suppose, she is losing by the end.  It just makes Kylo Ren seem a lot weaker than maybe he should.
> .




Kylo Ren was pretty badly wounded right before that scene, and he had just killed his own father (and according to Abrahms, that had more than just an emotional impact on him). Personally I'd like more explanation on the latter bit, but the Bow caster was built up as super powerful for most of the movie, so I think that was a fair reason for him being defeated by Ren. 

There is a another possibility I find interesting, which is maybe Ren has been Miyagi'd her whole life and was trained without knowing it. We know she is important for some reason (either because she is Luke's kid, Obi-Wan's kid, etc). So they may have planted the seeds to keep her trained while she was on Jaaku, but to do so without fully awakening her force abilities. It is entirely possible her scavenging work was a way of training her force powers for example, the way Daniel learned to block doing wax on, wax off. I doubt they would go this direction, but I still thought this was a fun possibility, especially if there were someone else present subtly training her while she grew up.


----------



## Water Bob

I'm not clear on how the "sun-gun" works.  It sucks energy from the star--so much that the star goes dark.  I got that from the movie.  So..does the star re-ignite?  It would have to, I would think.  Otherwise, the weapon is a one-time use galactic shotgun.


----------



## Morrus

Water Bob said:


> I'm not clear on how the "sun-gun" works.  It sucks energy from the star--so much that the star goes dark.  I got that from the movie.  So..does the star re-ignite?  It would have to, I would think.  Otherwise, the weapon is a one-time use galactic shotgun.




Or it moves.

In fact, it must do, because it destroyed the Republic system and then intended to destroy the Resistance system.


----------



## MarkB

Morrus said:


> Or it moves.
> 
> In fact, it must do, because it destroyed the Republic system and then intended to destroy the Resistance system.




I'm pretty sure they established that it fires through hyperspace, so it doesn't have to be in the system it's targeting. But yeah, I'd tend to assume that it uses the star up, and then moves on to a new one.


----------



## Water Bob

I was curious, so I used a little Google-fu.  Yep, it looks like Starkiller Base is a mobile world.  And, it does, indeed, use up the energy of an entire star when the weapon is fired.

I didn't quite get all the from the film.  I wish it had been more clear because it makes Starkiller Base more interesting.


----------



## ccs

Water Bob said:


> I was curious, so I used a little Google-fu.  Yep, it looks like Starkiller Base is a mobile world.  And, it does, indeed, use up the energy of an entire star when the weapon is fired.
> 
> I didn't quite get all the from the film.  I wish it had been more clear because it makes Starkiller Base more interesting.




No it doesn't, it makes it even more ridiculous.


----------



## MarkB

Water Bob said:


> I was curious, so I used a little Google-fu.  Yep, it looks like Starkiller Base is a mobile world.  And, it does, indeed, use up the energy of an entire star when the weapon is fired.
> 
> I didn't quite get all the from the film.  I wish it had been more clear because it makes Starkiller Base more interesting.




To be fair, while the moving part is only implied, the star-killing part is right there on the tin.


----------



## Water Bob

ccs said:


> No it doesn't, it makes it even more ridiculous.




Ah, man, c'mon!  Star Wars isn't hard science fiction.  It's Space Opera!

Isn't large, terrible weapons built into moving rogue planets that can suck dark energy from a star and send it through hyperspace to destroy an entire solar system the definition of Space Opera?

I think so!


----------



## dd.stevenson

Hypersmurf said:


> As has been pointed out, Ren _was_ a lot weaker than usual at that point.  The film took several opportunities to say "Look how super-awesome Chewie's bowcaster is!", and then shot Ren with it just before he fights Finn and Rey...




I think the fact that this needs to be pointed out again and again is a testament to the weakness of the bowcaster foreshadowing, and to the flatness of this arc's payoff during the climax.


----------



## Water Bob

dd.stevenson said:


> I think the fact that this needs to be pointed out again and again is a testament to the weakness of the bowcaster foreshadowing, and to the flatness of this arc's payoff during the climax.




Rey saw his blood in the snow, and Ren kept slapping himself on the wound, walking around in a circle, during the fight.


----------



## Eltab

Water Bob said:


> I wish it had been more clear because it makes Starkiller Base more interesting.



I disagree.  (from Hollywood Squares)

It's the Star Wars universe, so great big super-laser cannons are the Ultimate Weapon of choice.  

I would prefer a plotline more along the lines of Ep6: take it out before it's ready.
I would even more prefer a plotline where the decision to build - much less use - the Super Weapon has been made tentatively but not finally.  The heroes could get to do some politicking (also some "war is politics carried on by other means" activity).  Leia is supposed to be a diplomat by heritage, let's see her actually negotiate.


----------



## ccs

Water Bob said:


> Ah, man, c'mon!  Star Wars isn't hard science fiction.  It's Space Opera!
> 
> Isn't large, terrible weapons built into moving rogue planets that can suck dark energy from a star and send it through hyperspace to destroy an entire solar system the definition of Space Opera?
> 
> I think so!




Even Space Opera can go too far.


----------



## Istbor

It was visually interesting, but all in all it was not incredibly important to the story.  At least so far as we know so far.  Perhaps in the next film we will see the aftermath of a Republic without its head, and the turmoil that creates.  No doubt leaving a huge power vacuum for the First Order.


----------



## Water Bob

Speaking of the hyperdrive, I wonder if the whole gravity well issue is no longer canon (which would through out a lot of Star Wars lore, including the Interdictor Cruiser).  Or, I wonder if some technological advancement has been made in the last thirty years (since Return of the Jedi) to allow entry and exit of hyperspace closer to a gravity well.  In the film, it seems like they are not as bothered by gravity wells as they used to be--especially with Han's trick to bypass the shield on Starkiller Base by going through it at light speed.


----------



## Maxperson

Water Bob said:


> Speaking of the hyperdrive, I wonder if the whole gravity well issue is no longer canon (which would through out a lot of Star Wars lore, including the Interdictor Cruiser).  Or, I wonder if some technological advancement has been made in the last thirty years (since Return of the Jedi) to allow entry and exit of hyperspace closer to a gravity well.  In the film, it seems like they are not as bothered by gravity wells as they used to be--especially with Han's trick to bypass the shield on Starkiller Base by going through it at light speed.




Perhaps it requires gravity of a certain strength or higher to pull someone out of hyperspace.


----------



## TheWriterFantastic™

Maxperson said:


> Perhaps it requires gravity of a certain strength or higher to pull someone out of hyperspace.





Gravity wells are still canon - they've been revealed as a prototype Imperial weapon on Star Wars Rebels - but the strength of such a weapon, gravitationally, might be somewhere between planetary and solar. How that works without screwing everything else up in the system is anyone's guess - but again, it's a space opera, not hard sci-fi. In the same galaxy that an all powerful Force permeates everything, perhaps a planet based space station can move the planet from system to system after draining stars and still maintain a semi-habitable atmosphere. Logic goes out the window, but I smile and nod, because "Star Wars."


----------



## Water Bob

WalkingCorpse said:


> Gravity wells are still canon - they've been revealed as a prototype Imperial weapon on Star Wars Rebels




Well, it could be a technological advancement then.


----------



## Hussar

Didn't they say that only the six movies are canon?  That was Abram's thing wasn't it?

So, no, I don't think gravity wells would be a canon issue, since there was nothing about hyperspace being affected by gravity in the earlier movies.  At least I don't remember anything.  And, we do see the ships jumping pretty much into orbit around planets.  And it's possible to come out of orbit pretty close (for a give value of pretty close) when Vader criticises the commander for bringing the ships out of hyperspace too far from the planet in Empire Strikes Back.


----------



## TheWriterFantastic™

Hussar said:


> Didn't they say that only the six movies are canon?  That was Abram's thing wasn't it?
> 
> So, no, I don't think gravity wells would be a canon issue, since there was nothing about hyperspace being affected by gravity in the earlier movies.  At least I don't remember anything.  And, we do see the ships jumping pretty much into orbit around planets.  And it's possible to come out of orbit pretty close (for a give value of pretty close) when Vader criticises the commander for bringing the ships out of hyperspace too far from the planet in Empire Strikes Back.





Actually, Disney and Lucasfilm announced that everything released prior to the acquisition, with the exception of the Saga films and the Clone Wars series (and intro film) was going to be ignored, but everything Disney released going forward would be considered canon (they've put together a storygroup to keep it all consistent), including the new comics, and Star Wars Rebels. Rebels ran a story with gravity wells, so it's canon.


----------



## Maxperson

Hussar said:


> Didn't they say that only the six movies are canon?  That was Abram's thing wasn't it?
> 
> So, no, I don't think gravity wells would be a canon issue, since there was nothing about hyperspace being affected by gravity in the earlier movies.  At least I don't remember anything.  And, we do see the ships jumping pretty much into orbit around planets.  And it's possible to come out of orbit pretty close (for a give value of pretty close) when Vader criticises the commander for bringing the ships out of hyperspace too far from the planet in Empire Strikes Back.




First, I'd have to watch them again, but I thought it was mentioned at some point in Episodes IV-VI.  Second, I really think that force choking a commander to death exceeds simple criticism by juuuuuuuuuust a bit


----------



## Water Bob

LOL! I got an itch to watch some Star Trek lately, so I've revisited Star Trek The Next Generation, Star Trek Voyager, and Star Trek Deep Space Nine.

On DS9's second episode, Odo is investigating a murder and looks at a screen in a room aboard a ship that is docked with the station. The cut to the screen was quick, so I decided to back it up and pause it.

It was kinda neat. It was an itinerary for the ship's passenger. There's an entry for each major event that the passenger experienced. They had a lifeboat drill. The passenger had a personal meeting with another character. There were a few other things.

The entry that logged the ship's previous port? It read: Departure from Alderaan.

LOL.


----------



## MarkB

Water Bob said:


> LOL! I got an itch to watch some Star Trek lately, so I've revisited Star Trek The Next Generation, Star Trek Voyager, and Star Trek Deep Space Nine.
> 
> On DS9's second episode, Odo is investigating a murder and looks at a screen in a room aboard a ship that is docked with the station. The cut to the screen was quick, so I decided to back it up and pause it.
> 
> It was kinda neat. It was an itinerary for the ship's passenger. There's an entry for each major event that the passenger experienced. They had a lifeboat drill. The passenger had a personal meeting with another character. There were a few other things.
> 
> The entry that logged the ship's previous port? It read: Departure from Alderaan.
> 
> LOL.




I remember the old Star Trek TNG Technical Manual had a sidebar about all the graphics they came up with for that show. In a lot of cases they'd bury little in-jokes in them, because they knew they weren't likely to ever be filmed in sufficient close-up to be legible (ah, those quaint old days before HD television). The example I recall is that, apparently, one of the readouts on the Enterprise-D's biobed monitors is "Percentage of medical insurance remaining".


----------



## Staffan

Hussar said:


> Didn't they say that only the six movies are canon?  That was Abram's thing wasn't it?
> 
> So, no, I don't think gravity wells would be a canon issue, since there was nothing about hyperspace being affected by gravity in the earlier movies.  At least I don't remember anything.




Not about gravity wells, no (other than the Rebels thing). Pretty much the only thing episodes 1 through 6 say about hyperspace navigation is "Traveling through hyperspace ain't like dusting crops, boy! Without precise calculations we could fly right through a star or bounce too close to a supernova and that'd end your trip real quick, wouldn't it?"


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Hussar said:


> Didn't they say that only the six movies are canon?  That was Abram's thing wasn't it?
> 
> So, no, I don't think gravity wells would be a canon issue, since there was nothing about hyperspace being affected by gravity in the earlier movies.  At least I don't remember anything.  And, we do see the ships jumping pretty much into orbit around planets.  And it's possible to come out of orbit pretty close (for a give value of pretty close) when Vader criticises the commander for bringing the ships out of hyperspace too far from the planet in Empire Strikes Back.




The movies, clone wars and rebels, and any book published after the announcement, more or less. And like, new video games will be/are, but not all of them? Anyway, gravity well weapon things are canon now, but not the idea that flyin close to any gravity well pulls you out of hyperspace, I guess.


----------



## Water Bob

This is an interesting video about details in the new Star Wars timeline--


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5oUG0Ex9s4M


----------



## Water Bob

This vid explains the First Order, successor of Palpatine's New Order, and the state of the galaxy before and after The Force Awakens.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0kXxQCVlaQ


----------



## wicked cool

anyone else catch that tom baker was in rebels this season


----------



## MarkB

wicked cool said:


> anyone else catch that tom baker was in rebels this season




Yeah, his character is pretty good. I was like "who's doing the voice for him, he sounds kind-of Tom Bakerish", and was mildly surprised to find that it actually was him.


----------



## wicked cool

Looks like Maul is going to have a reunion with Obi . This potential meeting bothers me (not sure why). Thought for sure he would have had his storyline wrapped up and would rather have a new villain introduced (When grievous was first introduced he was great until they made him cough)

Makes me wonder why they never brought back Windu (he would have been much more interesting). I would have rather had a 1 shot where vader tracked him down as he somehow survived the fall (minus 1 arm) instead of maul who got cut in 1/2 and also fell


----------



## Mallus

ccs said:


> Even Space Opera can go too far.



Are you familiar with E. E. "Doc" Smith's Lensman series? Entire  planets made of antimatter turned into superluminal missiles, see TVTropes, "Lensman Arms Race".

The Lensman series was first published in 1950. Star Wars has a _long_ way to go before they catch up to the superweapons used in a 60+ year-old space opera!


----------



## TheWriterFantastic™

wicked cool said:


> Looks like Maul is going to have a reunion with Obi . This potential meeting bothers me (not sure why). Thought for sure he would have had his storyline wrapped up and would rather have a new villain introduced (When grievous was first introduced he was great until they made him cough)
> 
> Makes me wonder why they never brought back Windu (he would have been much more interesting). I would have rather had a 1 shot where vader tracked him down as he somehow survived the fall (minus 1 arm) instead of maul who got cut in 1/2 and also fell




Maul returned later in the Clone Wars series - they're continuing that storyline into Rebels. It'd be interesting to see how this plays out, and whether or not Obi-wan interacts with any of Phoenix Squadron...


----------



## Water Bob

I often put on TFA when I'm doing other things, and just let it play in the background.  I did that today as I got ready for work this morning.  

I noticed General Hux's speech before the weapon was fired that took out the New Republic government system, and I may have caught something I didn't quite understand before.

Is the New Republic gone now?  The weapon took out one star system--the system that was serving currently as the government of the Republic (I've read that the main governmental system rotates every so often to different member worlds, not staying in one place as did Coruscant in the Empire and Old Republic).

So, when Episode VIII starts, will it be in a galaxy of independent worlds and the New Order?  No Republic?


----------



## cmad1977

Water Bob said:


> I often put on TFA when I'm doing other things, and just let it play in the background.  I did that today as I got ready for work this morning.
> 
> I noticed General Hux's speech before the weapon was fired that took out the New Republic government system, and I may have caught something I didn't quite understand before.
> 
> Is the New Republic gone now?  The weapon took out one star system--the system that was serving currently as the government of the Republic (I've read that the main governmental system rotates every so often to different member worlds, not staying in one place as did Coruscant in the Empire and Old Republic).
> 
> So, when Episode VIII starts, will it be in a galaxy of independent worlds and the New Order?  No Republic?




I kinda wondered about that some too. Seemed like some pretty populated/important worlds that went 'poof'.

I don't expect a whole lot of fallout from that in the future movies though. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------

