# Star Wars VIII: The Last Jedi argument



## Morrus (Apr 12, 2019)

This ended up being a thread about how Zaardnar hates The Last Jedi, so I've edited the title and started a new one.


----------



## Kramodlog (Apr 12, 2019)

Star Wars: Forget The Last Jedi Ever Happened.


----------



## Imaculata (Apr 13, 2019)

I've got to say, the title of this movie surprised me. I don't know quite what to make of this trailer. It will be hard to undo the damage of the Last Jedi, but involving the emperor might be a good move. They've got to have a replacement big villain after The Last Jedi so unceremoniously dispatched Snoke.


----------



## MarkB (Apr 13, 2019)

I really hope they're not backtracking from The Last Jedi and making Rey a Skywalker descendant. Let the character stand on her own merits. not just because of some shoehorned-in heritage.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Apr 13, 2019)

MarkB said:


> I really hope they're not backtracking from The Last Jedi and making Rey a Skywalker descendant. Let the character stand on her own merits. not just because of some shoehorned-in heritage.




This. If they cave to the people that hated TLJ and undo it’s legacy, I’m out. Anyone can be the hero. That’s the point of the last movie. If they reverse that, then this whole trilogy has been pointless BS.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Apr 13, 2019)

doctorbadwolf said:


> This. If they cave to the people that hated TLJ and undo it’s legacy, I’m out. Anyone can be the hero. That’s the point of the last movie. If they reverse that, then this whole trilogy has been pointless BS.



When was it ever that not anyone could become a hero in Star Wars? Han has no special connection to previous heroes. Obi Wan was just some random Jedi, not the heir to a long blood line of Jedi. (Because in the prequels, there are no blood lines of Jedi, the Jedi are against marriage and romantic relationships for Jed.)

Heck, if you just look at the original Star Wars movie, Luke is just some farmboy from a third-class world. The whole "son of Skywalker" thing and the "Anakin Skywalker a force virgin birth" was invented later. It's hardly a defining characteristic.

If they want to make the whole "anyone can be a hero" theme stronger, what they should have done is have a story about someone that wasn't born force sensitive and learns to master the force anyway. Because so far we only have people handed force powers by fate, no one worked to have them. And that is truly limits, it basically tells you: "Hey, if you weren't born special, then there is nothing you can do." (Well, at least not with the force. Obviously Han became a hero in the original trilogy without being force sensitive.)


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 14, 2019)

doctorbadwolf said:


> This. If they cave to the people that hated TLJ and undo it’s legacy, I’m out. Anyone can be the hero. That’s the point of the last movie. If they reverse that, then this whole trilogy has been pointless BS.




They lost money on Solo and took a 700 million dunking from TFA to TLJ. Rogue One overperformed expctaitions, TLJ underperformed (they didnt expect it to make TFA money but 700 million down), and Solo was a bomb.

 Like it or not the movies are about the Skywalkers, at least the 1st 6. Rey more or less has to be one or be killed off unless you render the entire plotline moot. 

 If you want new heroes that are not Skywalkers, they should have made a different movies with TFA. Even casuals I think would have had some reasonable expectations after the end of RoTJ- Luke reestablishes the Jedi, Han and Leia live happily ever after things like that. There is subverting expectations and then there blowing up the world/pissing your fans off. 

 They also did a piss poor worldbuilding, a few things male a bit more sense if you read the novels etc but they need explainations in the movies not books and comics, and those explainations also need to be logical/good. For example apparently Rey downloaded Kylos training, but this was not in the movies.

 Sure it explains it but the explaination is still crap because.

1. Why bother training younglings in previous movies when they can just force meld and share information.

2. Yodas lines about the dark side being quick and easy. Nope its a lot quicker just being Rey (who may or may not be a Skywalker).

 Note this lame explanation was not even in the movies.

 The movies don't need to make sense using RL logic but they should adhere to in universe logic. See Hans statements in ANH about plotting hyperspace routes (that Rey just does), or internal logic of the movies (TFA Poe pilots because Finn can't., a few hours/days later Finn flies to Canto Bright).

 Its why TLJ is hated/kind of regarded as one of the worst SW movies. The prequels were a god idea executed badly, Disney is no idea executed poorly. To some extent you have to give in to fan expectations/entertain them or they won't be your fans for much longer. Its fairly simple across franchises (D&D 4E, New Coke etc). Its the hardcore fans who will pay to see your movies 6 times over and buy the merchandise, the casuals will go see anything with the Star Wars name on it (or at least did until Solo). It was also the hardcore fans that resurrected Star Wars in 1991 with Heir to the Empire.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Apr 14, 2019)

[MENTION=6716779]Zardnaar[/MENTION] feel free to start more Star Wars threads, but I’m not interested in arguing with diatribes about how terrible you think TLJ is. 

Most polls and twitter threads and such I’ve seen show more people putting LTJ in their top 3 than at the bottom and the only metric by which it “underperformed” is “compared to TFA”. By every other possible metric it hit it out of the park. 

And no, they don’t have to give in to fans. Fans don’t own franchises.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Apr 14, 2019)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> When was it ever that not anyone could become a hero in Star Wars? Han has no special connection to previous heroes. Obi Wan was just some random Jedi, not the heir to a long blood line of Jedi. (Because in the prequels, there are no blood lines of Jedi, the Jedi are against marriage and romantic relationships for Jed.)
> 
> Heck, if you just look at the original Star Wars movie, Luke is just some farmboy from a third-class world. The whole "son of Skywalker" thing and the "Anakin Skywalker a force virgin birth" was invented later. It's hardly a defining characteristic.
> 
> If they want to make the whole "anyone can be a hero" theme stronger, what they should have done is have a story about someone that wasn't born force sensitive and learns to master the force anyway. Because so far we only have people handed force powers by fate, no one worked to have them. And that is truly limits, it basically tells you: "Hey, if you weren't born special, then there is nothing you can do." (Well, at least not with the force. Obviously Han became a hero in the original trilogy without being force sensitive.)




Luke is the hero of the OT.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 14, 2019)

doctorbadwolf said:


> [MENTION=6716779]Zardnaar[/MENTION] feel free to start more Star Wars threads, but I’m not interested in arguing with diatribes about how terrible you think TLJ is.
> 
> Most polls and twitter threads and such I’ve seen show more people putting LTJ in their top 3 than at the bottom and the only metric by which it “underperformed” is “compared to TFA”. By every other possible metric it hit it out of the park.
> 
> And no, they don’t have to give in to fans. Fans don’t own franchises.




Well they seem to be fixing things TLJ messed up. Some role for Palpatine, fixing the Skywalker saber, tying IX to the Skywalker's, Kylo fixing his mask etc. 44% user rating on 200 000 reviews is alot to fix lol.

Fans don't own franchises but they don't have to support them either. 

 There are literally hundreds of million reasons why they need to fix Star Wars.


----------



## hawkeyefan (Apr 14, 2019)

All anyone has to do to know if the new movies are good is bring a 4 year old.

If the kid leaves excited, jumping around and swinging an imaginary lightsaber, then the movie’s good.

It’s the same as it was for the original ones. It’s the only metric that should really matter.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 14, 2019)

hawkeyefan said:


> All anyone has to do to know if the new movies are good is bring a 4 year old.
> 
> If the kid leaves excited, jumping around and swinging an imaginary lightsaber, then the movie’s good.
> 
> It’s the same as it was for the original ones. It’s the only metric that should really matter.




Disney likes their money. Also not hard to please a 4 year old.


----------



## hawkeyefan (Apr 14, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> Disney likes their money. Also not hard to please a 4 year old.




Right. It’s impossible to please fans who are much older and who don’t even agree on what they want, but expect the movies to be written for them.

Disney is far better off focusing on winning new fans who don’t come into it with decades of expectation. People who will accept a movie for what it is rather that what it “should be”.

Sadly, such a view often seems to elude adults.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 14, 2019)

hawkeyefan said:


> Right. It’s impossible to please fans who are much older and who don’t even agree on what they want, but expect the movies to be written for them.
> 
> Disney is far better off focusing on winning new fans who don’t come into it with decades of expectation. People who will accept a movie for what it is rather that what it “should be”.
> 
> Sadly, such a view often seems to elude adults.




To many franchises assume they can get new fans and old ones don't matter.

 Who buys the toys and merch and guess what's not selling? They already have the casuals it's Star Wars they'll turn up for anything (except Solo). 

 Star Wars is alive because of the hardcore. They are the 80s and 90 kids who grew up and bought the early EU merch, Star Wars was dead. If you annoy them bad enough they won't buy your stuff and they have kids now as well. Niece's and nephews in my case. 

  The trailer was decent and raises a few questions which will be answered if you go and watch.


----------



## GreyLord (Apr 14, 2019)

doctorbadwolf said:


> [MENTION=6716779]Zardnaar[/MENTION] feel free to start more Star Wars threads, but I’m not interested in arguing with diatribes about how terrible you think TLJ is.
> 
> Most polls and twitter threads and such I’ve seen show more people putting LTJ in their top 3 than at the bottom and the only metric by which it “underperformed” is “compared to TFA”. By every other possible metric it hit it out of the park.
> 
> And no, they don’t have to give in to fans. Fans don’t own franchises.




Most of what I've seen in the past half a year is that hype for Star Wars has gone more to a meh level.

People are just not excited about Star Wars in general.  

There are the Hardcore Star Wars lovers...and then everyone else. 

the Hardcore Star Wars lovers seem to be enthralled...but everyone else...simply does not care anymore.

There's nothing left to care about.

With 4 year olds...it's not the 4 year olds...it's anyone who buys toys...and unfortunately the toy market (and probably the rest, but I just have a little idea on the toy market) is down right now in regards to Star Wars.  Disney killed it in that arena.  Luckily...Marvel is popping and makes up for it.  

Still...if you WANT a good metric...it's not the 4 year olds...look to see how something did in China.

Star Wars is sunk in China right now...and that's at least 1/4 if not 1/3 of the money already lost.

Want excitement...see how to make it succeed in China.  That can turn a movie that is just meh in the US to actually making a profit worldwide.

Let's see how the excitement gets in China over this.  Toy releases can also predict popularity.  There should be some idea of how it might do with sales in November.  If Star Wars Toy Sales appear to be doing great, that could be a good prediction of it doing well.  If it seems like the toys just aren't moving...that would probably be a bad sign.

It could do well, it could do poorly.  I don't know.  I think that something needs to be done to get people out of the 'meh' they feel now towards Star Wars or it's going to be a more meh type of showing at the theater.  The hype train has just begun for episode IX.


----------



## Mercurius (Apr 14, 2019)

I would not bring a 4-year old to a Star Wars movie - talk about over-stimulation. Maybe 7, but maybe not until 8 or 9.


----------



## Mercurius (Apr 14, 2019)

I'm starting to get the sense that Zardnaar didn't like The Last Jedi. Just a hunch, though.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 14, 2019)

Mercurius said:


> I'm starting to get the sense that Zardnaar didn't like The Last Jedi. Just a hunch, though.




"I sense a great disturbance in the force, someone made a crap Star Wars movie".

TLJ is alright as a popcorn flick movie, as a Star Wars movie its bad, doesn't pay any respect to the previous movies (including TFA) and doesn't make much sense in a lot of places.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 14, 2019)

GreyLord said:


> Most of what I've seen in the past half a year is that hype for Star Wars has gone more to a meh level.
> 
> People are just not excited about Star Wars in general.
> 
> ...




The hype was there (TFA), but I suppose killing of characters people cared about, replacing them with a selection that no one cares about that much (Rey is the best of the lot), 4 movies in 2.5 years (Dec 2015-May 2018) of which one was meh and one has annoyed a good chunk of the fanbase and yeah.

 Ladies and gentleman, Disney!


----------



## Kaodi (Apr 14, 2019)

Targetting the Chinese audience is not a silver bullet strategy for being "good" : look at Pacific Rim: Uprising. I enjoyed watching that film okay, but ultimately I decided it was not worth the time to watch it again. Whereas I have seen the original three times.


----------



## Morrus (Apr 14, 2019)

Star Wars has never been popular in China. Neither has Harry Potter. Or a bunch of other things which are popular in the west. This is not an indictment of the property.


----------



## Morrus (Apr 14, 2019)

Guys, if you want yet another “I hate TLJ” thread, please start one. Or post in one of the old ones. Let’s not threadcrap.


----------



## Umbran (Apr 14, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> To many franchises assume they can get new fans and old ones don't matter.




With respect, you missed a point.

"The fans" are not a unit.  The folks who grew up on it *DO NOT AGREE* on what a new movie should be like.  The franchise doesn't assume the old ones dont' matter.  They recognize that they are not of one single mind, and cannot be pleased all at once.  

The actors of your favorite characters age and die.  The studio cannot focus on them forever.



> Who buys the toys and merch and guess what's not selling?




With respect - you seem to forget your history.  Traditionally, "the fans" were kids, and the merch was bought by parents for children.   Having 40+ year old guys buying merch is relatively new, by comparison.  The merch fortune was originally built on parents buying for kids, long before the EU existed.



> Star Wars is alive because of the hardcore.




Nah.  Star Wars is alive due to it having a basic story that reflects pretty much all the adventure stories of old.  It was too big well before the 90s to think that it'd sleep forever after.


----------



## Umbran (Apr 14, 2019)

doctorbadwolf said:


> This. If they cave to the people that hated TLJ and undo it’s legacy, I’m out. Anyone can be the hero. That’s the point of the last movie. If they reverse that, then this whole trilogy has been pointless BS.




Yeah.  There were too many good bits of message in TLJ for throwing them out to be a good move, story wise.

I also don't think pandering to a bunch of people who can't stand a female lead is a good move.  Worldwide, TLJ grossed over $1.3 billion.  That is in no way a failure that needs to be walked back.


----------



## hawkeyefan (Apr 14, 2019)

Mercurius said:


> I would not bring a 4-year old to a Star Wars movie - talk about over-stimulation. Maybe 7, but maybe not until 8 or 9.





Nah, I took my then 4 year old daughter to the Last Jedi and she loved it. This was after having watched The Force Awakens about a hundred times at home, so there was no way she was going to wait. Same with this one...she’s 5 now and I showed her the trailer and she was immediately excited. 

But my point isn’t about the specific age...my point is that these movies are meant to capture the imaginations of kids. The same way the originals were meant to.



Zardnaar said:


> TLJ is alright as a popcorn flick movie, as a Star Wars movie its bad




Wait...aren’t Star Wars films the very definition of popcorn flicks?


----------



## Mercurius (Apr 14, 2019)

Umbran said:


> Yeah.  There were too many good bits of message in TLJ for throwing them out to be a good move, story wise.
> 
> I also don't think pandering to a bunch of people who can't stand a female lead is a good move.  Worldwide, TLJ grossed over $1.3 billion.  That is in no way a failure that needs to be walked back.




I've only been following "LastJediGate" peripherally, but I don't like or agree with the implication that those who don't like the new films can't stand a female lead. I think the criticisms are more diverse and nuanced than that. I'm not saying those folks don't exist, but there are other reasons to dislike the new films and to me it is a rather convenient way to ignore legitimate criticisms by reducing them to sexism.


----------



## Mercurius (Apr 14, 2019)

hawkeyefan said:


> Nah, I took my then 4 year old daughter to the Last Jedi and she loved it. This was after having watched The Force Awakens about a hundred times at home, so there was no way she was going to wait. Same with this one...she’s 5 now and I showed her the trailer and she was immediately excited.
> 
> But my point isn’t about the specific age...my point is that these movies are meant to capture the imaginations of kids. The same way the originals were meant to.




I will leave the age question aside and I agree with your point, and rephrase it thusly: the films are meant to capture the imaginations of people in general, but especially kids.


----------



## hawkeyefan (Apr 14, 2019)

Mercurius said:


> I will leave the age question aside and I agree with your point, and rephrase it thusly: the films are meant to capture the imaginations of people in general, but especially kids.





Yeah, I think the films can absolutely be enjoyed by adults. The only issue is that many adults who are likely to go just bring so much baggage with them as an audience. That’s by no means universal, and baggage isn’t exactly the perfect term for it...but it’s what comes to mind.

I feel like part of the issue with these movies is that they simply can’t be what many want them to be, and that’s mostly due to the viewers. They can’t be new to anyone who grew up on the originals...and that newness is what people are really looking for. 

I noticed this once my kid saw The Force Awakens and she was as amazed by it as I was by the original. Rey was her hero the same way Luke was mine.

And I think that’s what’s lost on a lot of people who complain about the movies.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 14, 2019)

hawkeyefan said:


> Yeah, I think the films can absolutely be enjoyed by adults. The only issue is that many adults who are likely to go just bring so much baggage with them as an audience. That’s by no means universal, and baggage isn’t exactly the perfect term for it...but it’s what comes to mind.
> 
> I feel like part of the issue with these movies is that they simply can’t be what many want them to be, and that’s mostly due to the viewers. They can’t be new to anyone who grew up on the originals...and that newness is what people are really looking for.
> 
> ...




TFA is a decent movie though, bit repetitive but kids would have liked anything Star Wars related. I would have used a female lead myself, mostly because its different compared to the other 6 movies. I would have paid a bit more attention to what happened in the previous movies though and tied the world to the older movies a bit better. Solo did a decent job in that regard for example;


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 14, 2019)

Umbran said:


> With respect, you missed a point.
> 
> "The fans" are not a unit.  The folks who grew up on it *DO NOT AGREE* on what a new movie should be like.  The franchise doesn't assume the old ones dont' matter.  They recognize that they are not of one single mind, and cannot be pleased all at once.
> 
> ...





 Star Wars was dead, and an author named Timothey Zahn wrote a novel called Heir to the Empire. It basically brought Star Wars back and lead to further novels, comics, video games etc and the 1st new Star Wars footage shot since the OT (an ad and video game). 

 Then Lucas rereleased the movies and did TPM. 

 The only thing Star Wars related that was still going in 1990 for example was an RPG game and the company gave the author some RPG material. Palpatines name along with Coruscant and a few other bits and pieces came from the old Legends material.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 14, 2019)

Umbran said:


> Yeah.  There were too many good bits of message in TLJ for throwing them out to be a good move, story wise.
> 
> I also don't think pandering to a bunch of people who can't stand a female lead is a good move.  Worldwide, TLJ grossed over $1.3 billion.  That is in no way a failure that needs to be walked back.




 Messaging isn't worth a crap plot, boring lead, and not paying attention to world building. From the trailer they seem to be rying to fix a few things. The trailer is decent, makes me want to see IX and that is what its job is for. TFA was a good movie and had positive messaging in it so its not hard. Daisy is the best actor they have had yet as a lead, but the material they gave here isn't great she won't be replacing Han/Luke/Leia anytime soon though in terms of popularity.


----------



## GreyLord (Apr 15, 2019)

I'm getting to see it whether I really want to or not.  One of the perks of my life I enjoy I guess.  I hope I enjoy it...but I have much lower hopes for this movie than I have for other movies, which means I can be impressed, not that I will be.

I just hope they don't have jokes that are going to be dated before the movie is even released this time around.



Mercurius said:


> I've only been following "LastJediGate" peripherally, but I don't like or agree with the implication that those who don't like the new films can't stand a female lead. I think the criticisms are more diverse and nuanced than that. I'm not saying those folks don't exist, but there are other reasons to dislike the new films and to me it is a rather convenient way to ignore legitimate criticisms by reducing them to sexism.




This was a pretty big mistake I think JJ and the rest have backed off from in recent months.  I think when you have half the comments coming from women and then telling them that they hate themselves...and it's coming from a white male telling these women this...that it didn't go over all that well with the general audiences as they slowly found out about this.  They took a cursory look at demographics that were criticizing without taking a broader look before commenting.  

Today, with the exception of one toxic individual (which, I haven't a clue why they keep him around, he's managed to insult just about EVERY demographic out there, women, minorities, etc), I don't see anyone at or connected to Lucasarts saying anything of the sort recently.  I think they've taken some of the legitimate criticisms into mind.

However, I think with the break coming, the TYPE of reset that will be done will be dependent on how IX does at the theater.  If it does well, it probably will just be a reset of time to let things settle and build off what's been created.  Probably new series on streaming to add onto the new EU along with at least a trilogy of movies if not more in the like which Netflix and other streaming services make.  A Cinematic release would come eventually as well, just not as fast as the SW movies have recently to build time and hype about it.  IF it crashes or bombs, that reset could be one that is a remake of the originals or prequels, or even a reset of the ST itself.


----------



## Umbran (Apr 15, 2019)

Mercurius said:


> I've only been following "LastJediGate" peripherally, but I don't like or agree with the implication that those who don't like the new films can't stand a female lead. I think the criticisms are more diverse and nuanced than that.




The film is not perfect, of course.  There's legitimate criticism to be had of any film.  

The implication is not about individuals.  It is that, in aggregate, misogyny drove more of the negative assessments than legitimate critique did.  Now, you *admit* that you are only "peripherally" aware of it, even years after, so I don't see as you have context to be able to judge that statement.  I, honestly, don't have the time or inclination to educate you and re-litigate how much of this was driven by men who are not so much thoughtful movie critics as they are uncomfortable with the changing social landscape around them.


----------



## Maxperson (Apr 15, 2019)

Umbran said:


> The actors of your favorite characters age and die.  The studio cannot focus on them forever.




James Bond, Ghostbusters, Batman, Spiderman, and a plethora of other movies which focus on characters, but change the actors disagree with that statement.  I'm not saying they should have replaced Luke, Leia, Han and the rest with other actors, but they could have focused on them forever if they wanted to.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 15, 2019)

Umbran said:


> The film is not perfect, of course.  There's legitimate criticism to be had of any film.
> 
> The implication is not about individuals.  It is that, in aggregate, misogyny drove more of the negative assessments than legitimate critique did.  Now, you *admit* that you are only "peripherally" aware of it, even years after, so I don't see as you have context to be able to judge that statement.  I, honestly, don't have the time or inclination to educate you and re-litigate how much of this was driven by men who are not so much thoughtful movie critics as they are uncomfortable with the changing social landscape around them.




There was an element of that sure but even the female hardcore fans dislike TLJ. They're salty to. 

 If you don't like powerful women beats me how you are a hardcore fan anyway. First two movies in the OT you may have thought Leia was the rebel leader. In the third movie it was Mon Mothma.

 In the old legends material the New Republic had back to back female leaders. They also had great female Jedi (Bastila Shan, Mara, Jaina, Leia), and female Sith (Lumiya, Zannah). Then again they had poor characters like Daala as well and Darth Talon was kinda lame as well. 

 If the movie bombs (which I doubt) I expect they will do a different era like the Knights of the Old Republic era. Next trilogy will be the Game of Thrones people and they are good at world building and interesting characters.


----------



## Umbran (Apr 15, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> There was an element of that sure but even the female hardcore fans dislike TLJ.




Citation please.

I mean, I know there are people who disliked it.  I know some of those were women.  And some of the women were "hardcore fans" (whatever that means - it is easier to make blanket statements about a group when the group isn't well defined).  But to state this as a _general_ thing?  Who the heck are you to speak for an entire demographic? 

Rottentomatoes and metacritic are, alas, gameable platforms, so their data is of questionable accuracy.

How about we look at some exit survey data?   As in, surveys of people as they left the theater at the time?  

_"...on ComScore/Screen Engine, Last Jedi earned an 89% overall positive score and a five-star rating from moviegoers. That’s in the wheelhouse of what Force Awakens earned (90% overall positive/ 4 1/2 stars) and Rogue One (91% positive, 4 1/2 stars). These are scientific, statistically accumulated audience exit polls that studios can take to the bank, and which they rely upon to deconstruct various elements of a film’s opening."
_

https://deadline.com/2017/12/star-w...c-imdb-users-cinemascore-posttrak-1202228837/

_"Interestingly, *the 89 percent figure stays the same whether respondents described themselves as a "big" Star Wars fan or a regular fan.* Even among self-described non-Star Wars fans — whom, one presumes, must have wandered into the wrong theater — 81 percent loved or liked The Last Jedi. "_

(Bolding mine - it seems to put a hole in your assertion above)

https://mashable.com/2017/12/20/last-jedi-poll/#RyT05h4uZiqF

Again, in the end, the film grossed $1.3 billion dollars.  This is not a failure by any reasonable measure.  Or do you content that folks spent over a billion dollars... hate watching?


----------



## Maxperson (Apr 15, 2019)

While it is laced with profanity, Star Wars: The Last Jedi: An Unbridled Rage does a good job at laying out the flaws and holes in the movie without any sexism.

On a personal note, I have spoken with many people, all of whom disliked the movie for the reasons in the above rant and none of whom had a problem with Rey not being Ray.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 15, 2019)

Umbran said:


> Citation please.




The ones in youtube, my Star Wars RPG group, various ones online. Not all of them of course its 50/50 or 60/40 something like that. Just an opinion and from what I have seen.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 15, 2019)

Maxperson said:


> While it is laced with profanity, Star Wars: The Last Jedi: An Unbridled Rage does a good job at laying out the flaws and holes in the movie without any sexism.
> 
> On a personal note, I have spoken with many people, all of whom disliked the movie for the reasons in the above rant and none of whom had a problem with Rey not being Ray.




 I quite liked that one, I think its the accent and "that is interesting lets follow it up- oh wait".


----------



## Umbran (Apr 15, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> The ones in youtube, my Star Wars RPG group, various ones online. Not all of them of course its 50/50 or 60/40 something like that. Just an opinion and from what I have seen.




"Anecdote" is not the singular of "data"  See above - I extended the point about citation.  Among self-avowed fans of Star Wars, 89% of them liked or loved the movie at the time.


----------



## Umbran (Apr 15, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> I quite liked that one, I think its the accent and "that is interesting lets follow it up- oh wait".




I find that most of the same sorts of issues are found in the original trilogy.  Very early on, for example, the guy is criticising the film for lack of world building, for not really laying out what the Republic and First Order were.  Not that the original films layed out what the Empire was, but hey, we'll hold this against one movie, but not the other.  Sure!

This is a thing about Space Opera - it doesn't hold up under real deep logical scrutiny.  Because Space Opera isn't about realism and relentless logic. It is a genre of melodrama - appealing more to the emotions than to the intellect.  And criticism along these lines generally amounts to arguing that the movie is flawed because it wasn't a thing it never claimed to be, largely missing the point of the piece.

Might as well criticize a lemon meringue pie for not being pizza.   I mean, sure, maybe you like pizza more, and wanted pizza when you went into the theater, but it isn't like they did a bait-and-switch on you.  And it isn't like, as a Star Wars fan, they ever gave you pizza to begin with!  But we will hold it against this lemon meringue and not the one from our youth.  That's sensible. :/


----------



## billd91 (Apr 15, 2019)

Mercurius said:


> I've only been following "LastJediGate" peripherally, but I don't like or agree with the implication that those who don't like the new films can't stand a female lead. I think the criticisms are more diverse and nuanced than that. I'm not saying those folks don't exist, but there are other reasons to dislike the new films and to me it is a rather convenient way to ignore legitimate criticisms by reducing them to sexism.




Some criticism are nuanced, yes. But there's an awful lot that circle around to Rey being a Mary Sue and holding her to a standard that they don't for either Luke or Anakin. *That's* where this boils down to sexism.


----------



## hawkeyefan (Apr 15, 2019)

Umbran said:


> I find that most of the same sorts of issues are found in the original trilogy.  Very early on, for example, the guy is criticising the film for lack of world building, for not really laying out what the Republic and First Order were.  Not that the original films layed out what the Empire was, but hey, we'll hold this against one movie, but not the other.  Sure!
> 
> This is a thing about Space Opera - it doesn't hold up under real deep logical scrutiny.  Because Space Opera isn't about realism and relentless logic. It is a genre of melodrama - appealing more to the emotions than to the intellect.  And criticism along these lines generally amounts to arguing that the movie is flawed because it wasn't a thing it never claimed to be, largely missing the point of the piece.
> 
> Might as well criticize a lemon meringue pie for not being pizza.   I mean, sure, maybe you like pizza more, and wanted pizza when you went into the theater, but it isn't like they did a bait-and-switch on you.  And it isn't like, as a Star Wars fan, they ever gave you pizza to begin with!  But we will hold it against this lemon meringue and not the one from our youth.  That's sensible. :/




Surely the difference must be in the films, yes? The original trilogy is brilliance and the new one is the worst! It's clear because someone said it on the internet!!!

It has nothing to do with the fact that most of the people in question formed their opinion of the original trilogy when they were children, and now they're applying adult level criticism to the new movies. No....that can't be it at all!


----------



## Mallus (Apr 15, 2019)

I have mixed feeling about this. 

On the one hard, it looks to be a stunning adventure, one I'm confident J.J. has filled with charm. On the other hand, I got the sinking feeling J.J. went ahead and undid most of the smart & interesting choices Rian made in TLJ, and thus will end the new trilogy not only with a weaker film than the middle one, but a film that retroactively weakens/cheapens its predecessor. Of course, ending a trilogy with a weaker film hearkens back to the original 3, so you could say it's tradition, I guess. 

I will admit Rey leaping over Kylo's speeding TIE fighter was wicked cool...


----------



## Istbor (Apr 15, 2019)

Maxperson said:


> While it is laced with profanity, Star Wars: The Last Jedi: An Unbridled Rage does a good job at laying out the flaws and holes in the movie without any sexism.
> 
> On a personal note, I have spoken with many people, all of whom disliked the movie for the reasons in the above rant and none of whom had a problem with Rey not being Ray.




*Shrug* I have spoken with many, many people, all of whom liked the movie despite the reasons in the above rant. None of whom had a problem with Rey.


----------



## Imaculata (Apr 15, 2019)

Mallus said:


> I have mixed feeling about this.
> 
> On the one hard, it looks to be a stunning adventure, one I'm confident J.J. has filled with charm. On the other hand, I got the sinking feeling J.J. went ahead and undid most of the smart & interesting choices Rian made in TLJ, and thus will end the new trilogy not only with a weaker film than the middle one, but a film that retroactively weakens/cheapens its predecessor. Of course, ending a trilogy with a weaker film hearkens back to the original 3, so you could say it's tradition, I guess.
> 
> I will admit Rey leaping over Kylo's speeding TIE fighter was wicked cool...




Personally I liked TFA a lot more than TLJ, and I am by no means a JJ Abrams fan. Undoing some of the mistakes that were made in TLJ (and I know this is a point of disagreement) could do a lot to make me like the last Star Wars film of this trilogy. I'm cautiously optimistic that JJ Abrams will at least close the trilogy with a some what coherent story that feels like Star Wars, and will not make me hate the characters like TLJ did.


----------



## Morrus (Apr 15, 2019)

I'll start a new thread then.


----------



## Umbran (Apr 15, 2019)

Fair cop, that.


----------



## Morrus (Apr 15, 2019)

Turns out there were more posts about TLJ than about the new trailer. 48 about TLJ and 32 about TROS. A most effective thread hijack, if ever I saw one.


----------



## lowkey13 (Apr 15, 2019)

*Deleted by user*


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Apr 15, 2019)

Morrus said:


> This ended up being a thread about how Zaardnar hates The Last Jedi, so I've edited the title and started a new one.



I was going to argue wiht this decision, but then I read the thread again. 



Umbran said:


> I find that most of the same sorts of issues are found in the original trilogy.  Very early on, for example, the guy is criticising the film for lack of world building, for not really laying out what the Republic and First Order were.  Not that the original films layed out what the Empire was, but hey, we'll hold this against one movie, but not the other.  Sure!
> 
> This is a thing about Space Opera - it doesn't hold up under real deep logical scrutiny.  Because Space Opera isn't about realism and relentless logic. It is a genre of melodrama - appealing more to the emotions than to the intellect.  And criticism along these lines generally amounts to arguing that the movie is flawed because it wasn't a thing it never claimed to be, largely missing the point of the piece.



The world building critique always seems egregiously foolish to me, when it comes to Star Wars. The OT didn't do much world building outside of visuals and other cues. The same sort of thing the ST does. 



Mallus said:


> Of course, ending a trilogy with a weaker film hearkens back to the original 3, so you could say it's tradition, I guess.
> 
> I will admit Rey leaping over Kylo's speeding TIE fighter was wicked cool...




Nah, RoTJ is the best OT movie.


----------



## Umbran (Apr 15, 2019)

Morrus said:


> Turns out there were more posts about TLJ than about the new trailer. 48 about TLJ and 32 about TROS. A most effective thread hijack, if ever I saw one.




Yes, well, it is a trailer, about 2 minutes long.  Not a whole lot of content there to talk about, in the end.  Holding up as high as a 3:2 ratio is pretty good given its runtime compared to entire movies.


----------



## Mercurius (Apr 15, 2019)

Umbran said:


> The implication is not about individuals.  It is that, in aggregate, misogyny drove more of the negative assessments than legitimate critique did.




Maybe - but I don't know how you'd possibly prove that. And furthermore, my point is, why bring it up? Why is it part of a conversation that is (hopefully) only about legitimate critiques, or at least ones that aren't based on misogyny? Seems like a bit of a red herring to me.



Umbran said:


> Now, you *admit* that you are only "peripherally" aware of it, even years after, so I don't see as you have context to be able to judge that statement.  I, honestly, don't have the time or inclination to educate you and re-litigate how much of this was driven by men who are not so much thoughtful movie critics as they are uncomfortable with the changing social landscape around them.




So you're saying anything you say to me is non-falsifiable because I haven't followed this closely? Hmm. But you're right in that I don't have a strong opinion either way as to how much of TLJ complaints are due to this demographic you speak of. I just don't think we should assume that is what is going on, especially when there is no evidence within a given conversation (like in this thread). Seems like a rather slippery debate tactic that is often used in discussions pertaining to identity politics in some way.


----------



## Umbran (Apr 15, 2019)

Mercurius said:


> Maybe - but I don't know how you'd possibly prove that.




Why, in fact, do I need to prove it at all?  I said I hoped that Disney did not change its direction to satisfy such people.  If, in fact, you don't believe they exist to any significant extent, you should expect my hopes are trivially fulfilled, and you can ignore my comment.

But, you want to talk about proof?  Well, before we go down that road, what you do you mean by "prove"?   In a world where Rottentomatos had to significantly change how they work with crowdsourced reviews because of misogynist sandbagging, how much proof do you need to be satisfied that I am at least justified in thinking this might be an issue?  




> And furthermore, my point is, why bring it up? Why is it part of a conversation that is (hopefully) only about legitimate critiques, or at least ones that aren't based on misogyny? Seems like a bit of a red herring to me.




Movies, and choices in production, happen in a context of the society around them.  It is so terribly odd that I have hopes regarding the movie's production relevant to that context?



> So you're saying anything you say to me is non-falsifiable because I haven't followed this closely?




Not in the slightest.  This has nothing to do with non-falsifiability.  It has to do with whether I am going to give your misgivings credence when they don't come from a place of understanding.  You don't like the implication?  You don't agree with the implication?  But, you started by admitting you don't really know what's going on.  How valid is your admittedly poorly informed opinion on the matter?



> I just don't think we should assume that is what is going on, especially when there is no evidence within a given conversation (like in this thread). Seems like a rather slippery debate tactic that is often used in discussions pertaining to identity politics in some way.




You are slipping past how my point was not based on the content of this discussion.   I am pretty sure that Disney does not have time travel.  There is no reasonable way this discussion on a tiny website would influence their plot choices on a film that's already finished principle photography.  So, evidence within the discussion is irrelevant to my point.  I was speaking to the fact, as noted above, that the movie was created in a larger context that could have had influence.  I stated a hope that, in essence, the company was strong willed enough to not give in to such.

I ask you, how is this hope problematic? Why do you feel a need to argue against such a hope?  

Those last questions are intended as rhetorical - it is perhaps important for you to consider why you really need to stand against that stated hope, before continuing.


----------



## Mercurius (Apr 15, 2019)

I'm not "standing against that stated hope," [MENTION=177]Umbran[/MENTION]. In truth, I agree with you and am not at all opposed to your hope - although would extend this to hoping that the film creators don't pander to _any_ demographic if it in any way compromises creativity and verisimilitude - whether it is pandering to misogynists and racists on one hand, or people who think that every real world demographic has to be represented on screen on the other, even if it doesn't fit in with the world-building.

I simply took issue with the implication that not liking something equates with being misogynist (or whatever). You've mostly cleared that up. I remain unclear whether we're talking about a large number of misogynists or mainly a vocal (and hacking) minority - and I'm not sure if that can be adequately proven. I take for granted (unfortunately) that such folks exist, but I do question whether they are as prevalent as the counter reaction would imply. I have watched several Youtube videos that bash TLJ, but none of them veered into blatant or even implied misogyny. Some did seem to take issue with the perception that Disney was pandering to "Woke" folks, but I don't think that that complaint is inherently sexist, racist, etc.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 16, 2019)

Umbran said:


> Why, in fact, do I need to prove it at all?  I said I hoped that Disney did not change its direction to satisfy such people.  If, in fact, you don't believe they exist to any significant extent, you should expect my hopes are trivially fulfilled, and you can ignore my comment.
> 
> But, you want to talk about proof?  Well, before we go down that road, what you do you mean by "prove"?   In a world where Rottentomatos had to significantly change how they work with crowdsourced reviews because of misogynist sandbagging, how much proof do you need to be satisfied that I am at least justified in thinking this might be an issue?
> 
> ...




 Mind me asking did you notice the plot hles and questions the Last Jedi raised? I mean in universe Star Wars lore about how the Dark side is the quick and easy path, or how using star cruisers as hyperspace weapons makes a lot of things pointless like the assualt on Star Killer Base, or the death star attacks in the OT.

 Can you understand the way Rey was booked/written that with her power levels it also makes a few things pointless since she is kinda like superman but without kryptonite. A simple question is who is you main villain there is no Tarkin/Vader/Emperor equivalent as the ones they did have got jobbed out or used as comic relief (Hux, Phasma), or they have been made to look like chumps 2 movies in a row (Kylo). 

 If Rey smacks down Kylo where is the epic story in that, its already been established that she is more powerful than him, and why do you need to bother training Jedi a'la the other 6 movies. 

 If she isn't a Skywalker whats the point of the 1st 6 movies? If she is a Skywalker why bother claiming her parents are nobodies only to retcon/swerve the audience in IX.

 Do you think its good story telling for Rian Johnson to burn down every potentially interesting plot hook JJ Abrams weaved through TFA which I rewatched recently. Where the emotion, the passion, the accomplishment that the OT had, or the world building the prequels had?

 Now do you see the potential problems or why people might be concerned? Yeah sure I might be a bit passionate but there only really 2 franchises I care about, Star Wars and D&D.New is fine (5E, Thrawn Triliogy, KoToR), but you have to pay respect to what came before and tie it togather  (see reaction to TLJ and say 4E).


----------



## Rabulias (Apr 16, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> The only thing Star Wars related that was still going in 1990 for example was an RPG game and the company gave the author some RPG material. Palpatines name along with Coruscant and a few other bits and pieces came from the old Legends material.




Palpatine's name was in the prologue in the novelization of _Star Wars_ in 1977.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 16, 2019)

Rabulias said:


> Palpatine's name was in the prologue in the novelization of _Star Wars_ in 1977.




 I own that but haven't read it for so long and only read it once. IIRC it had more detail along with the RotJ novel.


----------



## Maxperson (Apr 16, 2019)

Istbor said:


> *Shrug* I have spoken with many, many people, all of whom liked the movie despite the reasons in the above rant. None of whom had a problem with Rey.




So then we have the same experience.  Rey is not the issue.


----------



## ccs (Apr 16, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> If she isn't a Skywalker whats the point of the 1st 6 movies?




Same as it was prior to TFA.
Episodes IV-VI - space opera story of good vs evil with of course good triumphant.
Episodes I-III - the origin story of Darth Vader. 




Zardnaar said:


> If she is a Skywalker why bother claiming her parents are nobodies only to retcon/swerve the audience in IX.




Just clumsy story telling.
Sure, we the viewers (mostly) know she's a Skywalker (or whatever).  But part of the current story is watching Rey discover that.
Unfortunately it's just not being presented well.


----------



## Istbor (Apr 16, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> If Rey smacks down Kylo where is the epic story in that, its already been established that she is more powerful than him, and why do you need to bother training Jedi a'la the other 6 movies.
> 
> If she isn't a Skywalker whats the point of the 1st 6 movies? If she is a Skywalker why bother claiming her parents are nobodies only to retcon/swerve the audience in IX.




I feel like part of this new story is of the Jedi learning that their old ways of training were flawed. That this more loose form and self-discovery is a better more natural way. That is at least something I have gleaned from the movies at least. 

And also, why? Why is the audience expected to take the word of Kylo Ren as Gospel? Who cares if he said they were nobodies. Why does he have to be telling the truth there? Not even the good guys in Star Wars like to tell the naked truth, and we are expecting a villain to. One who's specific goal at the time is to try and convince Rey into joining him. 

I totally expect that Kylo could be either lying, or maybe doesn't even know the truth himself. I certainly wouldn't feel some sense of betrayal if they came out and said Rey has ties to the Skywalkers. It's pretty laughable in fact to feel hurt over something like this. 

First prove to me that Kylo knows all, and it telling the truth to Rey about her heritage. Then we can talk about Retcons, and swerves.


----------



## hawkeyefan (Apr 16, 2019)

Istbor said:


> I feel like part of this new story is of the Jedi learning that their old ways of training were flawed. That this more loose form and self-discovery is a better more natural way. That is at least something I have gleaned from the movies at least.
> 
> And also, why? Why is the audience expected to take the word of Kylo Ren as Gospel? Who cares if he said they were nobodies. Why does he have to be telling the truth there? Not even the good guys in Star Wars like to tell the naked truth, and we are expecting a villain to. One who's specific goal at the time is to try and convince Rey into joining him.
> 
> ...




My interpretation of the scene where Kylo confirms that Rey's parents were nobodies is that he was basically telling her what she already had to assume, deep down. Not so much that he knew it was the truth because he had some kind of first hand knowledge of it, but because it's the most sensible answer to the question. Only bad parents would leave their child in such a place under such conditions. He flat out says she already knows the answer. 

Why would he actually know anything about her parents when no one else seems to? The answer is he doesn't, he was just making an educated guess, one that Rey would have made if she wasn't so emotionally vested in the answer. 

Now...having said all that, I liked the idea that she's just a random girl thrown into all this. I think it works on many levels, and I think it was a brave swerve to take from a writing standpoint. Personally, I liked the Last Jedi so much because of its ability to actually surprise me. Pretty impressive for a Star Wars movie, especially when compared to The Force Awakens, which, although perfectly enjoyable, can basically be predicted beat for beat as you watch. And so can just about all the other SW movies, really. 

But if they decide to reveal that Kylo was mistaken, and Rey does have some mysterious and important heritage....I'll be okay with that, too, as long as they handle it well. Theories that she's a Palpatine or some kind of clone or whatever.....maybe they can make a cool story based on those ideas. I'd be cool with that. And I don't think it really diminishes the message of The Last Jedi if they do so.


----------



## billd91 (Apr 16, 2019)

hawkeyefan said:


> My interpretation of the scene where Kylo confirms that Rey's parents were nobodies is that he was basically telling her what she already had to assume, deep down. Not so much that he knew it was the truth because he had some kind of first hand knowledge of it, but because it's the most sensible answer to the question. Only bad parents would leave their child in such a place under such conditions. He flat out says she already knows the answer.
> 
> Why would he actually know anything about her parents when no one else seems to? The answer is he doesn't, he was just making an educated guess, one that Rey would have made if she wasn't so emotionally vested in the answer.
> 
> Now...having said all that, I liked the idea that she's just a random girl thrown into all this. I think it works on many levels, and I think it was a brave swerve to take from a writing standpoint. Personally, I liked the Last Jedi so much because of its ability to actually surprise me. Pretty impressive for a Star Wars movie, especially when compared to The Force Awakens, which, although perfectly enjoyable, can basically be predicted beat for beat as you watch. And so can just about all the other SW movies, really.




I like the idea of it too. Finding a home, a family, a purpose beyond just surviving as a scavenger is the central challenge facing her. Confronted with the likely reality that her parents were nobodies and never coming back and that the Jedi hold no easy answers (even the dark side she encounters is more a cypher than an easy path to answers), Rey is forced to define herself rather than be defined. And I hope it stays that way in the next movie.


----------



## MarkB (Apr 16, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> Mind me asking did you notice the plot hles and questions the Last Jedi raised? I mean in universe Star Wars lore about how the Dark side is the quick and easy path,



TLJ certainly supports that. Ben Solo was twisted to the dark side by Snoke's long-distance influence without ever even meeting him, his final fall was precipitated when Luke Skywalker, paragon of Jedi-ness, gave in to fear and was tempted to strike him down, and when he left to become Kylo Ren he took half of Luke's other students with him. Turning to the dark side is easy.



> or how using star cruisers as hyperspace weapons makes a lot of things pointless like the assualt on Star Killer Base, or the death star attacks in the OT.



It's one instance where that worked, using a top-of-the-line hard-as-nails Mon Calamari cruiser. We've no idea under what circumstances it could be replicated.



> Can you understand the way Rey was booked/written that with her power levels it also makes a few things pointless since she is kinda like superman but without kryptonite.



What power levels? In TLJ pretty much the only thing she does with her powers is levitate a bunch of rocks. She's shown to be on a par with Kylo Ren in combat as they battle Snoke's bodyguards, but certainly not more powerful, and she was absolutely helpless against Snoke, unable to resist him even slightly.



> A simple question is who is you main villain there is no Tarkin/Vader/Emperor equivalent as the ones they did have got jobbed out or used as comic relief (Hux, Phasma), or they have been made to look like chumps 2 movies in a row (Kylo).



Tarkin died in Episode IV. How is he any more a "main villain" than Snoke? Kylo was fooled by Luke, but he's still risen to become the supreme leader of the First Order, wiping out all but one small transport ship's worth of the Resistance in the process.



> If Rey smacks down Kylo where is the epic story in that, its already been established that she is more powerful than him, and why do you need to bother training Jedi a'la the other 6 movies.



Where has it been established that she's more powerful? Their struggle for the saber in TLJ indicates that they're pretty much perfectly evenly matched - neither can overpower the other, and in the end it's the saber that breaks.



> If she isn't a Skywalker whats the point of the 1st 6 movies?



Were they pointless before Rey existed? I thought they were the tale of the rise of a great tyranny, and its eventual defeat by a small force of heroic rebels.

How does Rey being a Skywalker make there be any more point to them? Skywalker isn't some long, noble legacy. Luke and Leia's daddy was Darth Anakin, and Anakin's daddy was the Force. If the Force needs a new Chosen One, it doesn't have to wait for another Skywalker - it can quite happily knock up some other innocent female. Heck, maybe that's what happened with Rey, except nobody noticed this time because her mother was in a sexually active relationship.


----------



## hawkeyefan (Apr 16, 2019)

billd91 said:


> I like the idea of it too. Finding a home, a family, a purpose beyond just surviving as a scavenger is the central challenge facing her. Confronted with the likely reality that her parents were nobodies and never coming back and that the Jedi hold no easy answers (even the dark side she encounters is more a cypher than an easy path to answers), Rey is forced to define herself rather than be defined. And I hope it stays that way in the next movie.




Absolutely agree. She comes right out and says to Luke "I need you to show me my place in all this" and the whole point of the movie is that no one can do that for you, you have to do it yourself. 

Given the choice, I think I'd prefer it remain that way....but I wouldn't say that it has to be so. I'm kind of hoping she takes the Skywalker name out of respect for Luke, and that's what the title of the film is referring to. We'll see.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 16, 2019)

MarkB said:


> TLJ certainly supports that. Ben Solo was twisted to the dark side by Snoke's long-distance influence without ever even meeting him, his final fall was precipitated when Luke Skywalker, paragon of Jedi-ness, gave in to fear and was tempted to strike him down, and when he left to become Kylo Ren he took half of Luke's other students with him. Turning to the dark side is easy.
> 
> 
> It's one instance where that worked, using a top-of-the-line hard-as-nails Mon Calamari cruiser. We've no idea under what circumstances it could be replicated.
> ...




Remember in ESB how Luke struggled with lifting rocks and Yoda was surprised about him being able to nudge the X-Wing. Also Yoda hmering on about control you must learn control and the dark side is quicker than easier?

 If Rey was Ray it would still be bad as they've ignoring major tropes established in the 1st 6 movies. It's why they should have made Rey a Jedi Knight as she is using Jedi Knight/Master level of powers. There's not much in the way of character development because she has been booked like super women right from the get go. Great pilot, untrained, great at plotting hyperspace 1st time despite Han slapping Luke down for the same thing. 

 If they didn't give her a desert scavenger background like say Han in ANH no problem. It's mostly comparing what came before in canon. Legends mostly respected this as well. So you have a heap of expectations and world building in regards to how the force works and they basically ignore all of it.

 I'm kinda reactionary in some ways but if you want to do something new make ur own stuff, if it's an established franchise you need to play ball with that franchises lore IMHO See 4E as an example.

Rey would also be better if she was darkside. Or she has trouble controlling her powers as it would also tie it back on Yoda's training.


----------



## MarkB (Apr 16, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> Remember in ESB how Luke struggled with lifting rocks and Yoda was surprised about him being able to nudge the X-Wing. Also Yoda hmering on about control you must learn control and the dark side is quicker than easier?




I remember Luke learning, fairly quickly, to lift multiple rocks plus R2D2, and Yoda being disappointed when he failed to do more than nudge the X-Wing. Luke's issue was that he had trouble believing in the power of the Force, and with maintaining self-discipline. Rey's issues are different - she has trouble with valuing herself and letting go of the past.



> If they didn't give her a desert scavenger background like say Han in ANH no problem. It's mostly comparing what came before in canon. Legends mostly respected this as well. So you have a heap of expectations and world building in regards to how the force works and they basically ignore all of it.



Expectations is one thing. But you seem to be piling on so many of them that you've built up a headcanon of exactly how the Star Wars universe works, and are taking offense at anything which doesn't match your specifications. I've watched the same movies, seen the same worldbuilding, yet I'm not seeing the glaring inconsistencies which seem so obvious to you.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 16, 2019)

MarkB said:


> I remember Luke learning, fairly quickly, to lift multiple rocks plus R2D2, and Yoda being disappointed when he failed to do more than nudge the X-Wing. Luke's issue was that he had trouble believing in the power of the Force, and with maintaining self-discipline. Rey's issues are different - she has trouble with valuing herself and letting go of the past.
> 
> 
> Expectations is one thing. But you seem to be piling on so many of them that you've built up a headcanon of exactly how the Star Wars universe works, and are taking offense at anything which doesn't match your specifications. I've watched the same movies, seen the same worldbuilding, yet I'm not seeing the glaring inconsistencies which seem so obvious to you.




Luke struggled to lift those rocks Rey lifted a large amount with a few hours training. Luke had 3 years of practice by the time of ESB. He didn't really use force  powers in ANH. 

 Anakin had a decades training between TPM and AotC. See a pattern emerging here. They did give an explanation (in a book not movie) but the explanation is lame. They could do small tweaks like say a Rey struggled to lift the rocks loses her temper and they all go flying. She's doing Jedi master type things with no/minimal training. Snoke even implied Kylo needs more training.  But you don't if you're Rey that's the issue she doesn't fit the established tropes of the universe.

 Do you think my she loses here temper idea would improve the scene, it plays into Yoda's warnings about the dark side being quicker and easier.  Makes her a bit more vulnerable to temptation etc.


----------



## Morrus (Apr 16, 2019)

ANH from the time Luke met Ben to the end of the film was about a day, at which point he then blew up a Death Star without a targeting computer. Anakin won a pod race and then blew up a Federation control ship as a 9 year old having had no training ever at all. But the girl's the problem, because she lifted up a rock, eh?


----------



## MarkB (Apr 16, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> Luke struggled to lift those rocks Rey lifted a large amount with a few hours training. Luke had 3 years of practice by the time of ESB. He didn't really use force  powers in ANH.



Force powers didn't really exist in ANH. The whole telekinesis thing was only introduced in ESB.



> Anakin had a decades training between TPM and AotC.



And even without those decades of training he's already an ace pod-racing pilot as a pre-teen. Wasn't that exactly the criticism you levelled at Rey regarding her piloting in TFA?



> See a pattern emerging here. They did give an explanation (in a book not movie) but the explanation is lame. They could do small tweaks like say a Rey struggled to lift the rocks loses her temper and they all go flying. She's doing Jedi master type things with no/minimal training. Snoke even implied Kylo needs more training.  But you don't if you're Rey that's the issue she doesn't fit the established tropes of the universe.
> 
> Do you think my she loses here temper idea would improve the scene, it plays into Yoda's warnings about the dark side being quicker and easier.  Makes her a bit more vulnerable to temptation etc.




Again, you don't seem to want a sequel, you want a re-make. Unless the characters have the exact same flaws and struggle with the exact same issues and overcome them in the exact same way on the exact same schedule, it's not good enough for your expectations.

Rey has issues. She has difficulties. They're just not the exact same issues and difficulties that Luke had.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 16, 2019)

Morrus said:


> ANH from the time Luke met Ben to the end of the film was about a day, at which point he then blew up a Death Star without a targeting computer. Anakin won a pod race and then blew up a Federation control ship as a 9 year old having had no training ever at all. But the girl's the problem, because she lifted up a rock, eh?




He used the force obviously but it's a lower level of force use than telekinesis or force lightning or mind trick. In RPG terms he blew a force point. 

 Kid Anakin was also stupid. Generally the OT 3 are more popular characters for some strange mysterious reason and it's due to things like this. Not to many people like kid Anakin or even adult Anakin because of those movies. I like Rey more than movie Anakin's. Daisy is a better actor than Hayden/Mark she's very good at facial expressions. Few tweaks would have made her great IMHO.


----------



## Morrus (Apr 16, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> He used the force obviously but it's a lower level of force use than telekinesis or force lightning or mind trick.




Says who?


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 16, 2019)

Morrus said:


> Says who?




Things like Clone Wars cartoon. Force sensitives have minor abilities like precognition etc but you need training to do much. The youngling that got smoked in RotS for example had lightsaber training. Han can't do much with one for example.

Or Yoda be Palpatine or Yoda cf Luke ESB. That's what I mean by tropes. Rey's using Jedi Master type powers. Mass telekinesis, force jumping TIE fighters. Luke jumped out of a trap by comparison.

If Rey was a Jedi Knight who lost her temper on occasion and was a survivor of the Jedi Academy it would give her a connection to the OT characters and Kylo explain a lot, and wouldn't run off to some dude she met that killed his dad in front of her.


----------



## ccs (Apr 17, 2019)

MarkB said:


> Force powers didn't really exist in ANH.




Yeah, except for:
* Vader force choking Admiral Motti.
* "These aren't the droids you're looking for ~"
* The speed Obi-Wan wields that lightsaber in the cantina scene.  Talk about the Quickdraw feat....
* Luke sensing the training balls shot _& being able to block it_.
* Obi-Wan sensing the death of Alderan.
*Obi-Wan being able to sense Vaders' presence.
* Vader sensing Obi-Wans' presence.
* Obi-Wans disappearing corpse trick.
* Obi-Wan talking to Luke during the trench run.
* Luke "using the Force" to guide his torpedo shot into the exhaust port.

Did I miss any?

** Oh, and the best use ever: Vader convincing you he's THE baddest ass movie villain of all time - just by stepping through that hatch on the Tantive IV.  




MarkB said:


> The whole telekinesis thing was only introduced in ESB.




* Vader force choking Admiral Motti.
* Luke "using the Force" to guide his torpedo shot into the exhaust port.
If these aren't examples of TK....


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 17, 2019)

Luke didn't use the force to move the torpedo just aim it. His powers were a lot more restrained as well.


----------



## Morrus (Apr 17, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> Things like Clone Wars cartoon. Force sensitives have minor abilities like precognition etc but you need training to do much. The youngling that got smoked in RotS for example had lightsaber training. Han can't do much with one for example.




Cite. Where does it say that moving a rock is a higher level force power than aiming a torpedo at high speed?


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 17, 2019)

Morrus said:


> Cite. Where does it say that moving a rock is a higher level force power than aiming a torpedo at high speed?




Just generally how Jedi are potrayed in Legends and Canon. Trainings a big part of it you don't see Luke in a lightsaber duel or using mind trick in ANH. You don't see Anakin busting out force lightning or telekinesis untrained in TPM.  Early on the force seems more subtle. You don't just pick up a lightsaber untrained and duel a trained whatever Kylo is. Or use telekinesis and win, Luke could barely pull his saber out of snow.

 Anakin and a Luke both lost limbs taking on trained force users, Rey kinda wins.  She's pulling stuff Anakin can't do with 10 years training. Luke had artoo plot hyperspace for him.

 And trainings a big part of the OT, prequels etc in canon and legends. 

  Rey's pulling off better than Jedi Knight and Sith apprentice type stuff and pulling Jedi master force jumps over TIE fighters. 

 Ask yourself in universe why bother being trained. They didn't provide an explanation in the movies, they did in the books but that reason contradicts Yoda's teachings on the dark side being quicker, easier. Nope just be Rey and download it. Why train when a force meld can give you Jedi Knight/Master powers.

 They could just have made Rey the galaxies youngest ever Jedi Knight/Master she's on a different level than Luke at the end of Episode VI where he becomes a Jedi Knight although I suppose he might have been one start of RotJ. She's also ahead of Anakin in power at least on screen power cartoon maybe not but 10 years training can none chosen one etc.

 The two movies are over a matter of hours, days at best there's no time jump like APM to AotC.

 It's also compelling storylines they don't have a compelling villaiain or support characters either. Phasma is a chump, Hux comic relief, Kylo is back and forth/ Darth Emo, Finn is a cowardly idiot (twice), Rose new character bad sub plot, and Pow is also an idiot. A new Vice Admiral turns up that's new, we don't care about and they kill Ackbar off screen. And they chopped Snoke in half and kill off Luke and Han. 

 Why are we supposed to care about these characters again? They're all unlikeable idiots villain, hero doesn't matter. Rey had her moments and isn't unlikeable as such more she is just there being a superhero. In Star Wars, no real dark side temptation, no loss of control, no anger etc. Luke got angry beat Vader. Anakin gave into his anger and put in a good showing vs a Jedi Knight borderline Master. These are Star Wars tropes.

 I get they need to do different stuff, but Legends had a better sexual trilogy, had a better Han origin story have they learned nothing in 25 years IRL? Legends also gave us  Dark Empire though so yeah.

 They had the ingredients band bollocked it up and wonder why no one wants to buy the toys etc.


----------



## Morrus (Apr 17, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> Just generally how Jedi are potrayed in Legends and Canon.




So no cite then. Just more vagueness.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 17, 2019)

Morrus said:


> So no cite then. Just more vagueness.




I did. Compare Rey with Luke and Anakin. She's doing Jedi Master stuff untrained/minimal training. I assume you have seen episodes I to VI.

 It's right there on film she's next level stuff.

 I'll try another approach who's more interesting Batman or Superman? And who's more popular? Superman's a bit boring yes? Batman is darker, had more flaws isn't Uber powerful?


----------



## Morrus (Apr 17, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> It's right there on film she's next level stuff.




So cite it. Where on film does it say that lifting a rock is “next level stuff” and harder than aiming a torpedo, as you claimed? Where, on screen, does it say that?

(It doesn’t, of course, which is why after asking three times, all your answers are still just vague handwavy  “oh, on the screen somewhere”).


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 17, 2019)

Morrus said:


> So cite it. Where on film does it say that lifting a rock is “next level stuff” and harder than aiming a torpedo, as you claimed? Where, on screen, does it say that?
> 
> (It doesn’t, of course, which is why after asking three times, all your answers are still just vague handwavy  “oh, on the screen somewhere”).




 Doesn't specifically say but as I said see the actual movies. 

 Lucas was also clear that Vader's potential was about the peak of a Jedis power. All those interviews over the years. An entire generation was also raised on the old legends material starting with the Marvel comics. Sure you can declear then non canon but it doesn't magically make them go away. Feeds into audiences expectations yes? Same thing with 4E they declear this is the new way people liked the old. 

 Did you ever play Knights of the Old Republic? Millions did. Had a great story and that's what Star Wars is about and they serve up bilge water. 

 New Star Wars stuff can be done well, people expected better.  Those feelings and emotions don't go away. Yoda's words don't go away he basically laid down the lore after all. Control control you must have control, and beware the darkside. They should have paid more attention to the tropes. How do you lose money in a Star Wars film, beats me but Disney did it.

 Like it or not the movies are about the Skywalker's, if you don't like them fine but it's a major part of them yes?


----------



## Morrus (Apr 17, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> Doesn't specifically say but as I said see the actual movies.




Exactly. We got there in the end. Thank you.

So now we've finally established that it *isn't* the case that lifting a rock is a higher level ability ability than aiming that torpedo, we can lay the Rey 'Mary Sue' nonsense to rest, since we've clearly and definitively now established that Luke and Anakin were just the same.


----------



## Paul Goldstone (Apr 17, 2019)

The Last Jedi was by far the worst of all the SW films.  It promised so much and delivered less than zero.  It ignored swathes of material from TWA (ANH clone).

If you can use ships with hyperspace drives to take out capital ships, why hasn't the rebellion/resistance been using that tactic since forever. Ridiculous.

Luke's "not really here" fight is straight from Snake Pliskin Escape from LA.  

As to the story or Rey and her family, one can only presume that EmoRen lied for some purpose that Rey wasn't a skywalker to get her to turn a darksider.  Though one wonders how she could be a Skywalker, she would hvae to have been abandoned by Luke or Leia.  There was no Mara Jade refernce since they binned all the good expanded universe stuff though I am sure it could retcon in for the next instalment.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 17, 2019)

Morrus said:


> So cite it. Where on film does it say that lifting a rock is “next level stuff” and harder than aiming a torpedo, as you claimed? Where, on screen, does it say that?
> 
> (It doesn’t, of course, which is why after asking three times, all your answers are still just vague handwavy  “oh, on the screen somewhere”).






Morrus said:


> Exactly. We got there in the end. Thank you.
> 
> So now we've finally established that it *isn't* the case that lifting a rock is a higher level ability ability than aiming that torpedo, we can lay the Rey 'Mary Sue' nonsense to rest, since we've clearly and definitively now established that Luke and Anakin were just the same.




Big difference in power levels used on screen is the main point. 

 Anakin was terrible, he was worse character than Rey.  Jake Loyd gets a pass he was 10, Hayden well maybe Lucas is crap at dialogue. Daisy is better than both of the. And probably Mark as well.

 Luke sucked for two movies, kid Anakin was terrible and annoying (Rey's not). Rey is Uber, Adult Anakin was a Jedi he had in universe reasons for being power still got chopped up. 

 I don't recall Luke winning a lightsaber fight until Episode VI, he wasn't using mind trick until the third movie. You don't see Vader doing Rey levels of Telekinesis until Rogue One 18 years a Sith Lord 13 years of Jedi training.

 That's the difference untrained/barely trained doing things Jedi/Sith Masters do after decades, those Masters being some of the most powerful in the Galaxy. Luke struggled to move a few stones Rey can lift a cave worth. Same force power completely different scale (Yoda levels).


----------



## Imaculata (Apr 17, 2019)

Morrus said:


> So cite it. Where on film does it say that lifting a rock is “next level stuff” and harder than aiming a torpedo, as you claimed? Where, on screen, does it say that?




"Size matters not. Judge me by your size do you?"


----------



## Morrus (Apr 17, 2019)

Eh. You can keep writing essays, but your entire point hinges on a single factual claim which has been disproved, and which you’ve finally conceded to. Feel free to write more diatribes, but my work here is done.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 17, 2019)

Morrus said:


> So cite it. Where on film does it say that lifting a rock is “next level stuff” and harder than aiming a torpedo, as you claimed? Where, on screen, does it say that?
> 
> (It doesn’t, of course, which is why after asking three times, all your answers are still just vague handwavy  “oh, on the screen somewhere”).






Morrus said:


> Eh. You can keep writing essays, but your entire point hinges on a single factual claim which has been disproved, and which you’ve finally conceded to. Feel free to write more diatribes, but my work here is done.




No you using a false equivalent asking for a citation on an opinion on something we can see clear as day on screen. It's fairly apparent who is more powerful and it's not Luke. And yet Luke's the best character of the three (Anakin's at the bottom). If Masters can use powers padawans can't it should be clear what's more powerful.

 The sky is blue (citation please). Hmmmn.


----------



## Morrus (Apr 17, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> The sky is blue (citation please).




You cite it. It’s your claim.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 17, 2019)

Morrus said:


> So cite it. Where on film does it say that lifting a rock is “next level stuff” and harder than aiming a torpedo, as you claimed? Where, on screen, does it say that?
> 
> (It doesn’t, of course, which is why after asking three times, all your answers are still just vague handwavy  “oh, on the screen somewhere”).






Morrus said:


> You cite it. It’s your claim.




You're the one trying to be clever. I answered your trap question. Here's mine.

 On screen in the movies who is better at using the force Rey or Luke? Visually and what you can see. Ignore RotJ as Rey has had 2 movies.


----------



## Morrus (Apr 17, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> On screen in the movies who is better at using the force Rey or Luke?




You’ve conceded that Rey’s abilities are not established anywhere as being more powerful abilities. That’s settled now. The reverse, of course, is also true. 

Really, we’ve settled this point, and agreed on it. I’m not going to continue repeating myself over and over.

Hey, I get it. You don't like TLJ, and that's fine. But you wanted to use the thread to lecture everybody on how much you hated TLJ, and made some bold factual claims about established canon to ‘prove’ your opinion was the correct one, and feel it’s unfair that people ask you to back them up rather than just take you at your word. It’s gotta be frustrating, and now you’re angry at me for it. But that’s how debate works. Sorry, man.


----------



## pukunui (Apr 17, 2019)

I’ve already pointed this out in   [MENTION=6716779]Zardnaar[/MENTION]’s last TLJ rant thread, but the only justification Rey needs for being “better” is that the Force is now awake. When the Force is awake, Force users don’t require as much training. Clearly the Force was asleep for a long time prior to Rey coming along. (It probably got bored watching a thousand generations of Jedi do the same stuff over and over again ...)

As for Anakin, Yoda himself said the prophecy could have been misread. Yes, his midichlorians were off the charts, but maybe Rey’s are even more so. We don’t know since Luke didn’t bother to take a blood sample while Rey was with him.


----------



## billd91 (Apr 17, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> You're the one trying to be clever. I answered your trap question. Here's mine.
> 
> On screen in the movies who is better at using the force Rey or Luke? Visually and what you can see. Ignore RotJ as Rey has had 2 movies.




Rey does move more rocks than Luke. On the other hand, she doesn't blow up a Death Star in her first flight in a sophisticated fighter-bomber either. So, with those completely different events lacking objective measurable scale, I'm going to go with any strong interpretation put on either being definitive is completely and utterly determined by the prejudices of the interpreter.


----------



## Maxperson (Apr 17, 2019)

Morrus said:


> ANH from the time Luke met Ben to the end of the film was about a day, at which point he then blew up a Death Star without a targeting computer. Anakin won a pod race and then blew up a Federation control ship as a 9 year old having had no training ever at all. But the girl's the problem, because she lifted up a rock, eh?




Anakin didn't win the pod race or blow up the ship with any use of force powers at all.  With the pod race, he had good insticts which is an indicator that the force is stronger with someone, but is not using the force, and with the ship he pressed some random buttons to see what they could do and ooops!  If they had actually had him using the force at his young age to blow up the ship, that scene wouldn't have been as lousy as it was.  Luke did a snippet at the end, with guidance from a Jedi Master.  Rey is using her powers virtually flawlessly with no aid whatsoever.  There's a huge difference between her and the other two, and it has nothing at all do with "girl."


----------



## Maxperson (Apr 17, 2019)

Morrus said:


> So now we've finally established that it *isn't* the case that lifting a rock is a higher level ability ability than aiming that torpedo, we can lay the Rey 'Mary Sue' nonsense to rest, since we've clearly and definitively now established that Luke and Anakin were just the same.




Well, no.  It isn't stated that lifting a rock is a higher level ability in the movies, but that doesn't mean that we have established that it isn't.  We've just established that the movie doesn't specify.  You're reaching a conclusion that isn't any more supported by the movies than [MENTION=6716779]Zardnaar[/MENTION]'s.  

What we do know is that Luke struggled for quite a while to learn to use his powers in Empire, and even in Return of the Jedi he wasn't able to match Vader until he also tapped the dark side.  Anakin took years to learn his.  Rey without any significant time or training is able to match a dark side user, which is far superior to Luke or Anakin.


----------



## hawkeyefan (Apr 17, 2019)

I love how folks claim that Luke got all kinds of training. 

Obi-Wan describes the Force to him and then says “let go your conscious self” and then he’s blocking blasts from the training drone while blindfolded. This is also the extent of his light saber training that we see before he faces Vader. Yes, he loses, but he puts up a good fight. He impresses Vader and even gets a good shot in.

Yes, Luke trains with Yoda for a few days. He’s immediately able to start floating rocks and make crazy leaps and so forth. Is this really all that extensive? I don’t know, really....it’s hard to say how much time passes. Really not a lot, though....somewhere between a couple of days and a couple of weeks. However long Han and the others are stuck in the asteroid field and then on Bespin. 

And one of the lessons Yoda teaches Luke, which he fails to grasp for some time, is that there is no difference between lifting a rock and lifting an x-wing. Which seems to be the only comment in the original films that compares one use of the Force with another in terms of effort. 

Luke then presumably goes on to train some more in between Empire and Return. Again, hard to say how long. Hard to imagine that they’d hold off on rescuing Han very long, but we have no indication on how long it’s been. And when he shows up, he doesn’t seem all that much more capable with the Force. But Yoda does say that his training is complete.

So....based on Yoda’s statements, it seems like complete Jedi training is somewhere between a couple weeks and maybe a couple of months? 

So then let’s look at Rey. She’s dropped off to survive on her own in a hostile environment when she’s about 5 years old. She spends the next 12 or so years crawling among the wreckage of all kinds of ships and other vehicles, scavenging for working components. We get enough of a glimpse of this life to know that it’s dangerous in all manner of ways.....she needs physical prowess to climb and maneuver through the wreckage, she needs to understand how the components function, and she also needs to contend with rivals and other opponents. And she had only herself to rely on during that time. 

And do we not have hints that both Luke and Anakin have used the Force in their youth? In Anakin’s case, it’s explicitly stated. His instincts at racing and his knack for engineering are related to the Force. In Luke’s case, there are only hints that he’s done so....describing the shot he made in Beggar’s Canyon compared to the vent on the Death Star, when trained rebel pilots imply it’s an incredibly difficult shot. 

So I’d say we have enough information to assume that Rey has been using the Force subconsciously to help survive for about 12 years, in an environment that is basically a giant obstacle course populated by hostile beings. So even if we’re generous about Luke’s training and say it was 6 months, Rey had about 24 times as much training. Yes, she lacked a teacher, but I would expect most folks would accept that she’d have some level of raw ability or affinity with the Force.

Do we really need things to be so explicitly stated? 

Let alone more real world reasons for the increase in Force abilities due to improved special effects and how other action movies have characters doing all kinds of crazy things....watching Alec Guiness do a light saber spin doesn’t really compare to Thanos throwing a moon at the Avengers.


----------



## lowkey13 (Apr 17, 2019)

*Deleted by user*


----------



## hawkeyefan (Apr 17, 2019)

If only there had been a poll created with a couple of snarky options and a post explaining the poll by conversation with one’s self....then it’d be meaningful!


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 17, 2019)

Sigh I'll explain it in different way. With Rey it's as subtle as a brick in the face. She powerful because of reasons.

 In each OT movie you have Luke grow in power slowly and each movie there is early, mid, end movie Luke. You can see his growth in the force.

 ANH 
Early. Luke is farm boy, sucks owned by Tuskans  gets trained ( minimally)

Middle. He is a hero rescues princess.

End. Blows up death Star via impossible shot using the force.

ESB.
Early. Uses telekinesis for the 1st time. We have only seen Vader do that.

Mid movie. Gets trained, lacks control lose his temper, moves rocks. Moving rocks seems harder than a lightsaber. Fails to move X Wing.
  End. Runs off, confronts Vader.

RotJ
Early. Jabbas palace. Uses force choke. Foreshadowing and Vader uses force choke. Uses mind trick, hmmn Been a Jedi Master uses mind trick. Fails to use it on Jabba, improved combat skill with lightsaber. Uses telekinesis more (like Vader) Hmmn Luke's a Jedi.

Mid movie, sees Yoda again learns the truth. Relationship established hands himself in.

End. Confronts Vader, gives in to his anger, wins (darkside warnings) becomes full Jedi roll credits.

 Lucas was subtle, Luke's powers grow and you can compare it with Ben and Vader's. It's also explained and uses foreshadowing. Follows logical path it's a clever spin on the heroes journey.

 Rey is way more in your face with her powers than Luke. Not much in the way of character development, no real discernable progress, no relationship to people she just met, and is Uber at everything relative to Luke (and Vader and maybe Yoda).

 Ones a compelling character, the others just powerful. No real explaination or personality, not much world build, can duel a darksider and deflect blaster bolts untrained about 5 minutes after picking up a lightsaber. Took Luke 3 movies vs one.

 Isn't it reasonable to infer that when Luke starts using Jedi/Sith Master powers he is getting better. The new movies are doing the same ham fisted stupid it the bad parts of the old legends material did. Bigger is better, more powerful cookie cutter characters etc. 

 There's no Lucas subtle story telling there. Or Zahns Thrawn Trilogy. It's brick in face storytelling ( done poorly). Luke touched the darkside 2 or 3 times as well.


----------



## Istbor (Apr 17, 2019)

Morrus said:


> Says who?




Says Zardnaar, holder of the only Dragon Ball Z 'Scouter' that can read Jedi Power levels.

Rey's over !#$&ing 9000!!!!!!!!

On a more serious note. How are lifting rocks an advanced skill when both Rey and Luke are shown doing it during training. Why would you teach someone a master kill, during training? You start with the easy stuff first. 

Also, if we are measuring power levels with game mechanics, none of those feats are very advanced if we take into account KoToR or just the Old Rebulic game. Abilities you leave early, or could feat/talent into as soon as you liked. (Sure in KoToR you are a master with amnesia, but its in the mechanics so... must be a valid measure of power right?


----------



## Istbor (Apr 17, 2019)

Maxperson said:


> Anakin didn't win the pod race or blow up the ship with any use of force powers at all.  With the pod race, he had good insticts which is an indicator that the force is stronger with someone, but is not using the force, and with the ship he pressed some random buttons to see what they could do and ooops!  If they had actually had him using the force at his young age to blow up the ship, that scene wouldn't have been as lousy as it was.  Luke did a snippet at the end, with guidance from a Jedi Master.  Rey is using her powers virtually flawlessly with no aid whatsoever.  There's a huge difference between her and the other two, and it has nothing at all do with "girl."




Sorry, but canon disagrees with you. 

QUI-GON: You should be proud of your son. He gives without any thought of reward.
SHMI: He knows nothing of greed. He has...
QUI-GON: He has special powers.
SHMI: Yes...
QUI-GON: He can see things before they happen. That's why he appears to have such quick reflexes. It is a Jedi trait.

Also I can't read this quotes without hearing Liam Neeson's amazing voice.


----------



## hawkeyefan (Apr 17, 2019)

Honestly, I think when it comes to the films only, very little is codified to the extent that many seem to think. Most of it is left pretty vague. We see examples of all kinds of things, but I don't know if we need or should accept these examples as being applicable in all instances. I mean, [MENTION=6716779]Zardnaar[/MENTION] says to look at what the movies show us....and I did exactly that in my breakdown above, and I came away with a very different conclusion than he does. 

And all that really means is that there's no one correct interpretation. You can mix and match different examples from the films and draw just about any conclusion you'd like. I think the only objective conclusion that we can draw is that we aren't given enough information to accurately state that the Force always works this way or that way, and there are never any exceptions. 

I do think that all the extended universe stuff is a big stumbling block for many people. All the old comics and novels and video games. They want all that stuff to "matter", and the fact that it "doesn't matter" is irksome. So they tend to be more resistant to the new material by default.


----------



## Morrus (Apr 17, 2019)

lowkey13 said:


> .....
> 
> 
> Are people really debating whether or not the amount of rocks a person moved is indicative of their power?
> ...




It's worse than you think, mate. It's not just people talking about Star Wars. If you look around there's people talking about elves and wizards and dragons all over the place.


----------



## lowkey13 (Apr 17, 2019)

*Deleted by user*


----------



## lowkey13 (Apr 17, 2019)

*Deleted by user*


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 17, 2019)

Morrus said:


> So cite it. Where on film does it say that lifting a rock is “next level stuff” and harder than aiming a torpedo, as you claimed? Where, on screen, does it say that?
> 
> (It doesn’t, of course, which is why after asking three times, all your answers are still just vague handwavy  “oh, on the screen somewhere”).






lowkey13 said:


> ....
> 
> um .....
> 
> ...




Compared to Disney Wars he was. It's more Michael Bey less Lucas. Bigger explosions, bigger ships, more force powers, less plot, less character development.


----------



## billd91 (Apr 17, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> Compared to Disney Wars he was. It's more Michael Bey less Lucas. Bigger explosions, bigger ships, more force powers, less plot, less character development.




You... did... watch the prequels, didn't you?


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 17, 2019)

Morrus said:


> So cite it. Where on film does it say that lifting a rock is “next level stuff” and harder than aiming a torpedo, as you claimed? Where, on screen, does it say that?
> 
> (It doesn’t, of course, which is why after asking three times, all your answers are still just vague handwavy  “oh, on the screen somewhere”).






hawkeyefan said:


> Honestly, I think when it comes to the films only, very little is codified to the extent that many seem to think. Most of it is left pretty vague. We see examples of all kinds of things, but I don't know if we need or should accept these examples as being applicable in all instances. I mean, [MENTION=6716779]Zardnaar[/MENTION] says to look at what the movies show us....and I did exactly that in my breakdown above, and I came away with a very different conclusion than he does.
> 
> And all that really means is that there's no one correct interpretation. You can mix and match different examples from the films and draw just about any conclusion you'd like. I think the only objective conclusion that we can draw is that we aren't given enough information to accurately state that the Force always works this way or that way, and there are never any exceptions.
> 
> I do think that all the extended universe stuff is a big stumbling block for many people. All the old comics and novels and video games. They want all that stuff to "matter", and the fact that it "doesn't matter" is irksome. So they tend to be more resistant to the new material by default.




Well the extended universe lasted 30 years and feeds into audiences expectations. Sure they decleared it non canon but it doesn't make it go away.  The best of it was also up there with ESB. 

 Disney obviously chose a different approach and hence the backlash, boycotts and financial problems (toylines, Solo). There's also an article floating around abut the typical Star Wars fan. It's a 43 year old white male and I'm younger than that so you had 30 years of experience and expectations Disney nuked. They're the ones who huy the toys, comics etc and have been doing it since the early 90s if not child hood Marvel comics. 
 And some of those stories were very good. Knights of the Old Republic, Thrawn Trilogy/Duology,  anything by Zahn/ Drew Kapeshyn, Han Solo Trilogy. They also had worse than TLJ but it's open season on that stuff as well. 

Disney can do what they want it's there franchise now. Doesn't mean you have to buy into it. Haven't bought any of the new novel or comics just read the wiki. It's just fatigue 25 years of novels don't really want to start over an do it all over again especially when the new novels aren't that well regarded even if you like the new movies.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 17, 2019)

At Billd91

 Yep and two of them are trash as well, worse than TLJ which can at least Stan on it's own as an ok movie it just doesn't play nice with the OT or TFA.

 Difference is if I insult Anakin, TPM or AotC I don't get called a sexist pig. All of them are worse than Rey/TLJ. RotS I put over TLJ.


----------



## lowkey13 (Apr 17, 2019)

*Deleted by user*


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 17, 2019)

Morrus said:


> So cite it. Where on film does it say that lifting a rock is “next level stuff” and harder than aiming a torpedo, as you claimed? Where, on screen, does it say that?
> 
> (It doesn’t, of course, which is why after asking three times, all your answers are still just vague handwavy  “oh, on the screen somewhere”).






lowkey13 said:


> So, I'm sure this has been pointed out hundreds of times before, but one more time-
> 
> How old were you when you first saw Star Wars? The original trilogy?
> 
> ...




Saw them in VHS, I did see Jedi at the theatre. I didn't have any if the merch as a child couldn't afford it. That came in 93+.


----------



## Morrus (Apr 17, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> Saw them in VHS, I did see Jedi at the theatre. I didn't have any if the merch as a child couldn't afford it. That came in 93+.




Would you stop quoting my post over and over again, please? I don’t need my phone constantly notifying me you’ve quoted my same post again.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Apr 17, 2019)

I can see why TFA went back to basically retell A New Hope - because that original story is powerful and just works. If you want to relaunch your franchise, you have to realize its strength. What captured a wide audience back then will capture a wide audience now. It is really secondary if this is particularly appealing to old fans or not. It's appealing to audiences in general. 

The key problem that I had with TLJ was actually something carried forward with TFA, but which I didn't fully understand or grasp then. TFA was mostly disappointing to me since it felt like a retelling of A New Hope, and I've seen that story already. But the new characters seemed likeable, it was a good idea to not pick Kylo Ren that the movie is trying to sell me as someone even nastier than Darth Vader, but is actually a "wannabe". That was kinda couragous, but also kinda sensible, because you can't really one-up Vader. And having a new force sensitive hero go from nothing to Jedi looked promising. And I like female protagonists. Making another protagonist an Ex-Stormtrooper was also interesting, we hadn't really seen much of that side of the world. 

The problem is that the heroes of the original trilogy are basically turning into failures. They didn't beat the Empire, it is still strong in the First ORder, and it's blowing up their world. Han and Leia didn't stay together, they split over their son turning to the Dark Side. And Luke Skywalker didn'T really embrace his Jedi heritage, he gave up on it, and he abandoned his sister and best friend and the Republic in the time of their greatest need. 
It wasn'T quite as in the face in TFA, because in TFA we could still pretend there was maybe a good reason for Luke hiding away. But TLJ's reason for it just isn't satisfying. 
I think one probably could tell a story where Luke Skywalker gives up on the force. But it would be its own movie, not a quick flashback, if you want me to believe and accept it. 

There were other problems in TLJ that really were just TLJs. 
The Momma/Telephone joke in the beginning was just too absurd, and a lot of the initial battle - and later parts of the movie - relied on the heroes and villains being incompetent. The plot on Canto relies on luck (of course, they don't find the hacker they seek, but another guy that is just as good) and incompetence (they land their shuttle in a forbidden zone), plus nonsense (animal slavery is apparently worse than child slavery, plus what is stopping anyone from capturing the animals?). The mutiny on the Resistance ships seems to only happen because the leader can't communicate with one of the more influential and respected officers. 

Maybe it is rose-colored glasses, but except for the Storm Troopers constantly missing in V and VI, the Empire and the Rebellion seemed to be fairly good at the things they are supposed to be good at. 
The troopers shooting in Episode IV is actually understandable - the Millennium Falcon got a tracker installed, so the rebels needed to escape to lead the Empire to the Rebel Base. Han or Luke not being qualified to run an extraction on the Death Star is not surprising - but they did fairly well.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 17, 2019)

Morrus said:


> Would you stop quoting my post over and over again, please? I don’t need my phone constantly notifying me you’ve quoted my same post again.




 Sorry it was my phone doing it. Hit quote button it keeps copy and pasting it for whatever reason.


----------



## Istbor (Apr 17, 2019)

Honestly. Did we ever consider that all of these cool and familiar force powers are the reason Rey can use them? Because we've seen them, we love them, they evoke Jedi to a wide array. And for younger and newer audiences, it grabs attention and sticks in the mind. 

I agree that trying to plot out some convoluted "This is the progression of a true Jedi!, is ridiculous. There is no metric, nor should there be. They are just cool space wizard powers. Why does that have to change? And, will it change back if Rey is shown to be a Skywalker. Will people still gnash their teeth as much. I am interested to see how many back off when they have that bloodline behind her. 

Who knows. I have problems with the movie too (Cantobite!), but I still overall enjoy it, and welcome it into the saga.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 17, 2019)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> I can see why TFA went back to basically retell A New Hope - because that original story is powerful and just works. If you want to relaunch your franchise, you have to realize its strength. What captured a wide audience back then will capture a wide audience now. It is really secondary if this is particularly appealing to old fans or not. It's appealing to audiences in general.
> 
> The key problem that I had with TLJ was actually something carried forward with TFA, but which I didn't fully understand or grasp then. TFA was mostly disappointing to me since it felt like a retelling of A New Hope, and I've seen that story already. But the new characters seemed likeable, it was a good idea to not pick Kylo Ren that the movie is trying to sell me as someone even nastier than Darth Vader, but is actually a "wannabe". That was kinda couragous, but also kinda sensible, because you can't really one-up Vader. And having a new force sensitive hero go from nothing to Jedi looked promising. And I like female protagonists. Making another protagonist an Ex-Stormtrooper was also interesting, we hadn't really seen much of that side of the world.
> 
> ...




 This TFA was decent enough, not very original but enjoyable. Its not as enjoyable rewatching it after TLJ. Theres a lot of "that's interesting, lets see what happens" and then you get TLJ. Abrams made a bit of effort at weaving in lots of plot threads to follow up on. In TLJ everyone's a failure, villains, new heroes, old ones etc. Well except Rey. Are they trying to make her look good by making everyone else look bad? Deliberately or not that is what they did. They didn't do that in the OP or PT. Leia, Han, Lando, Luke, all make the odd mistake, maybe not Leia so much but shes kinda the brains behind the operation.

 You have to like some of the characters at least especially in a franchise, don't have to like all of them. Anakin was crap but you had Obi Wan, Mace Windu, Jango, Palpatine etc and Anakin was fine in the cartoons.


----------



## lowkey13 (Apr 17, 2019)

*Deleted by user*


----------



## MarkB (Apr 17, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> Well the extended universe lasted 30 years and feeds into audiences expectations. Sure they decleared it non canon but it doesn't make it go away.  The best of it was also up there with ESB.
> 
> Disney obviously chose a different approach and hence the backlash, boycotts and financial problems (toylines, Solo).




The thing is, though, they really didn't. George Lucas ignored and overrode the EU just as freely, first with the prequels and then with things like the Clone Wars show. If he'd made the sequels, he'd have happily ignored the EU canon entirely.

All that Disney did was be honest and up-front about their intentions.



Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> The problem is that the heroes of the original trilogy are basically turning into failures. They didn't beat the Empire, it is still strong in the First ORder, and it's blowing up their world. Han and Leia didn't stay together, they split over their son turning to the Dark Side. And Luke Skywalker didn'T really embrace his Jedi heritage, he gave up on it, and he abandoned his sister and best friend and the Republic in the time of their greatest need.




I know the feeling, and I've had similar misgivings myself - not about the new trilogy, but about the old EU material.

As much as I understood the attraction of putting our favourite characters through all-new adventures, and new trials and tribulations, it never sat well with me, because I felt that by the end of the original trilogy they'd earned their victory and their happily-ever-after. I think that's the main reason why, although I've enjoyed some individual EU material, I've never been an enthusiast of it as a body of work.

And frankly, what the new canon put our old beloved characters through in its backstory isn't any worse than some of what they've been through in EU material.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 17, 2019)

MarkB said:


> The thing is, though, they really didn't. George Lucas ignored and overrode the EU just as freely, first with the prequels and then with things like the Clone Wars show. If he'd made the sequels, he'd have happily ignored the EU canon entirely.
> 
> All that Disney did was be honest and up-front about their intentions.
> 
> ...




 You tend to remember the good stuff though and never reread the bad. OT over PT is an example of that. The best of the old EU is up there with Empire and ANH, the worst of it is very very bad but you only read it once.


----------



## ccs (Apr 17, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> Luke didn't use the force to move the torpedo just aim it. His powers were a lot more restrained as well.




Riiiight, sure he didn't.  Those torpedoes just naturally hung that hard right angle into the vent.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 17, 2019)

ccs said:


> Riiiight, sure he didn't.  Those torpedoes just naturally hung that hard right angle into the vent.




Missiles in SW can be guided just like IRL. Hell in the 90's they could put a missile down an air vent (1991). The implication was though he turned his targeting computer off and used the force to aim it. That is pretty much the implication IMHO. In RPG terms he blew a force point.


----------



## Mercurius (Apr 17, 2019)

I think a lot of the gap in force power usage has to do with the difference between special effects in the 70s-80s and more recently, not to mention the influence of wuxia and MCU. Compare what Jedi can do in the original trilogy vs the prequels. The "wow, kewl" factor has been upped substantially so that we can no longer have Alec Guinness doing a slow whirl - everything has to be Bruce Lee with jet-powered wings. 

That said, just as _some_ of the criticisms of the new films and Rey might be tinged with sexism (although I don't see that from Zardnaar), I think it would also be willfully ignorant of us not to recognize the "Girl Power Effect" in Hollywood - where films are being made or remade with female (and/or non-white) central characters, with endless variations of "Girls can do everything dudes can do, but better." As a father of two girls I can applaud this to some degree, because I like the fact that my daughters are being raised in a context where they have no inkling of even the thought that they are intrinsically less than males. But there is a subtlety to this that is often lost and ends up feeling narratively contrived and forced at times. And I can't help but feel that Rey was at least sub-consciously created with the idea that she is slightly better than all the male Jedi, past and present, and will fix all the crap they screwed up. 

That aside, some of the "hallowed view" of the original trilogy is undoubtedly rose-tinged nostalgia, but I think there is something deeper at play. There is a magic, a mythic resonance to the original trilogy that the latter two don't capture, at least not to the same degree. The prequels were "Vader-ized"...they ironically relied too much on technology, and also lacked the chemistry of the earlier cast. The recent films lack originality and freshness, and feel more like fan fiction than authentic next chapters in an epic story by its original creator (not unlike what I imagine a hypothetical "King Aragorn" Netflix series would be like, or the season 7--and presumably 8--of Game of Thrones _is_ like).

My snapshot takes:

Originals: Mythic classics, with some flaws, albeit charming ones.
Prequels: Visually and imaginatively stunning, but fatal flaws in casting and acting.
Sequels: Unimaginative and unoriginal fan fiction, but fun and with some nice touches and a strongish cast.


----------



## lowkey13 (Apr 17, 2019)

*Deleted by user*


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 17, 2019)

Morrus said:


> So cite it. Where on film does it say that lifting a rock is “next level stuff” and harder than aiming a torpedo, as you claimed? Where, on screen, does it say that?
> 
> (It doesn’t, of course, which is why after asking three times, all your answers are still just vague handwavy  “oh, on the screen somewhere”).






lowkey13 said:


> So, I'm sure this has been pointed out hundreds of times before, but one more time-
> 
> How old were you when you first saw Star Wars? The original trilogy?
> 
> ...






Mercurius said:


> I think a lot of the gap in force power usage has to do with the difference between special effects in the 70s-80s and more recently, not to mention the influence of wuxia and MCU. Compare what Jedi can do in the original trilogy vs the prequels. The "wow, kewl" factor has been upped substantially so that we can no longer have Alec Guinness doing a slow whirl - everything has to be Bruce Lee with jet-powered wings.
> 
> That said, just as _some_ of the criticisms of the new films and Rey might be tinged with sexism (although I don't see that from Zardnaar), I think it would also be willfully ignorant of us not to recognize the "Girl Power Effect" in Hollywood - where films are being made or remade with female (and/or non-white) central characters, with endless variations of "Girls can do everything dudes can do, but better." As a father of two girls I can applaud this to some degree, because I like the fact that my daughters are being raised in a context where they have no inkling of even the thought that they are intrinsically less than males. But there is a subtlety to this that is often lost and ends up feeling narratively contrived and forced at times. And I can't help but feel that Rey was at least sub-consciously created with the idea that she is slightly better than all the male Jedi, past and present, and will fix all the crap they screwed up.
> 
> ...




You can combine the old with the new though. Kylo vs Rey TFA looked great, lacked the emotion. Then you have Jedi dancing in TLJ or AotC or TPM and it looks cheesy. Also the cgi won't age well. 

 Compelling villain Luger can't match Superman mano a mano, but he has brains. Luke can probably chop Thrawn into pieces but brains. You don't need great special effects for that. Rey's a bad character that's female Anakin's worse that's male. You can do girl power better or more compelling as well. Other shows and movies can pull it off well why can't Star Wars? Where's Joss Whedon when you need him.


----------



## Morrus (Apr 17, 2019)

[MENTION=6716779]Zardnaar[/MENTION] you’re still doing it. Please stop repeatedly quoting my post.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 17, 2019)

Stupid phone. Anyone else gonna admit to watching Buffy and Gilmore Girls? Wife's a fan so I saw it as well.


----------



## Istbor (Apr 17, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> You can combine the old with the new though. Kylo vs Rey TFA looked great, lacked the emotion. Then you have Jedi dancing in TLJ or AotC or TPM and it looks cheesy. Also the cgi won't age well.
> 
> Compelling villain Luger can't match Superman mano a mano, but he has brains. Luke can probably chop Thrawn into pieces but brains. You don't need great special effects for that. Rey's a bad character that's female Anakin's worse that's male. You can do girl power better or more compelling as well. Other shows and movies can pull it off well why can't Star Wars? Where's Joss Whedon when you need him.




Whoa. The sword play in The Last Jedi is on a totally different level than watching the benny hill swarms of Jedi from the Prequels.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Apr 17, 2019)

Morrus said:


> ANH from the time Luke met Ben to the end of the film was about a day, at which point he then blew up a Death Star without a targeting computer. Anakin won a pod race and then blew up a Federation control ship as a 9 year old having had no training ever at all. But the girl's the problem, because she lifted up a rock, eh?



When rock lifting is a training thing! That Yoda throws shade at Luke for not being able to immediately do better at, and it is clear that Luke's problem is not believing he can do it. He limits himself. 
Rey has other issues. 



Paul Goldstone said:


> The Last Jedi was by far the worst of all the SW films.  It promised so much and delivered less than zero.  It ignored swathes of material from TWA (ANH clone).



 I've see many many more people put it in their top three than put it at the bottom of their list of SW movies. 



> If you can use ships with hyperspace drives to take out capital ships, why hasn't the rebellion/resistance been using that tactic since forever. Ridiculous.



 Still having a capital ship is more valuable than destroying an enemy ship, most of the time, when you have a much smaller resource pool than the enemy. Further, there is no reason to think that this maneuver is easy to successfully pull off, or possible in a wide range of circumstances. 





> As to the story or Rey and her family, one can only presume that EmoRen lied for some purpose that Rey wasn't a skywalker to get her to turn a darksider.  Though one wonders how she could be a Skywalker, she would hvae to have been abandoned by Luke or Leia.  There was no Mara Jade refernce since they binned all the good expanded universe stuff though I am sure it could retcon in for the next instalment.



No, she just isn't a Skywalker. 



Istbor said:


> Sorry, but canon disagrees with you.
> 
> QUI-GON: You should be proud of your son. He gives without any thought of reward.
> SHMI: He knows nothing of greed. He has...
> ...




Thank you, I was gonna say this. It's explicit on screen movie canon. 



Zardnaar said:


> Stupid phone.



You need to clear your cache for this website on your browser. To do so, just close every enworld tab, then close the phone app completely. When you quote reply to someone, scroll up before starting your reply, and see if you've quoted multiple posts, or just the one you meant to.


----------



## Mercurius (Apr 17, 2019)

lowkey13 said:


> Disagree. I think that it is easy to confuse the idea of, "Girls can do anything boys can," with "Girls can do anything boys can, but better." To explain why would take more time and be more contentious than I want to be, but to nutshell it-
> 
> We are so used to the protagonist being a male, usually white, always straight (to the extent that it matters, but getting the girl), that any deviation from that will feel strange at first, and will seem like it's trying harder, even when it isn't.
> 
> So it's lose-lose for the time being; you literally cannot be "subtle" because people are so used to the "default" that the will find any nit to pick even they don't necessarily mean to. Even if it is completely and totally subtle, or even if a movie role was written to be genderless or colorless, people will complain if it varies from the (white, male, straight) default; this is changing, but slowly.




I understand all of this, but think that it is often overstated or over-done, and we _do_ end up with a lot of "but better" situations that don't come down to people feeling strange for seeing a diversity folks in starring roles. Furthermore, I dislike the implication that any questioning of this is inherently because someone feels strange about the protagonist being non-white/male/straight. And yes, I do think that film-makers often over-compensate, with awkwardly perfectly representational casts or configurations of characters; that is, there's often a quota to fulfill that may be in contrast with what makes sense in the context of the story itself. It is a noble idea but can seem a bit contrived or forced.

This is part of a larger cultural conversation around identity politics which is highly charged and, unfortunately, largely lacking in nuance.



lowkey13 said:


> This boils down to a matter of opinion, but I will note (when it comes to originality and freshness), that:
> 
> 1. TFA was pretty much ANH. "True fans" were like, "Meh, unoriginal, total rip off."
> 
> ...




Well, we can allow for more nuance and diversity of opinion, and not make assumptions about where people are coming from.


----------



## ccs (Apr 17, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> Missiles in SW can be guided just like IRL. Hell in the 90's they could put a missile down an air vent (1991). The implication was though he turned his targeting computer off and used the force to aim it. That is pretty much the implication IMHO. In RPG terms he blew a force point.




That's the key right there.  YOUR opinion.  
Conveniently the film never goes into detail as to how exactly Luke "Used the Force" to make this nigh impossible shot.  So we're both right.
You saw Luke improve his aim.  I saw him guide those torpedoes into making a hard right angle.... 

As for your game term of blowing a Force Point....  It's like the HP = Meat/Not-meat debate in D&D.  What's that to hit bonus _really_ representing story-wise?


----------



## ccs (Apr 17, 2019)

Quote Originally Posted by Zardnaar View Post 
Compared to Disney Wars he was. It's more Michael Bey less Lucas. Bigger explosions, bigger ships, more force powers, less plot, less character development.



billd91 said:


> You... did... watch the prequels, didn't you?




I did.

And then I watched Episodes VII & VIII.


----------



## hawkeyefan (Apr 17, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> Well the extended universe lasted 30 years and feeds into audiences expectations. Sure they decleared it non canon but it doesn't make it go away.  The best of it was also up there with ESB.
> 
> Disney obviously chose a different approach and hence the backlash, boycotts and financial problems (toylines, Solo). There's also an article floating around abut the typical Star Wars fan. It's a 43 year old white male and I'm younger than that so you had 30 years of experience and expectations Disney nuked. They're the ones who huy the toys, comics etc and have been doing it since the early 90s if not child hood Marvel comics.
> And some of those stories were very good. Knights of the Old Republic, Thrawn Trilogy/Duology,  anything by Zahn/ Drew Kapeshyn, Han Solo Trilogy. They also had worse than TLJ but it's open season on that stuff as well.
> ...




Yeah, man.....that very brief description fits me, and I was around for all that stuff. Star Wars was the first movie I saw in the theater. I read the Zahn books when they came out, I played the RPG of the time from West End. I had plenty of the Marvel comics, and then Dark Empire when Dark Horse picked up the license. I was the perfect age for all of that stuff. 

But that doesn't mean that they should be making movies "for me". I have no expectations for the films based on the comics or novels. In fact, I prefer they actively avoid following the paths of the books or comics. I'd prefer something new. 

They didn't "nuke" anything. The Zahn books are still on a shelf in my basement if I feel like I'd enjoy a re-read. They're not gone. They aren't considered canon...but so what? I don't think that's a factor of the quality of any of the extended universe stuff.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Apr 17, 2019)

MarkB said:


> The thing is, though, they really didn't. George Lucas ignored and overrode the EU just as freely, first with the prequels and then with things like the Clone Wars show. If he'd made the sequels, he'd have happily ignored the EU canon entirely.
> 
> All that Disney did was be honest and up-front about their intentions.
> 
> ...




I enjoyed the X-Wing series and the Zahn novels mostly, because they maintained the trajectory of the previous movies - things were still to be dealt with, but the heroes still worked to improve things. Han and Leia became parents. 
There were also other novels I enjoyed, but the whole Vong arc was problematic for similar reasons - everything turns to sh*t. But at least we got to still see it all up close, and could feel the losses and wins directly, instead of just being faced with the aftermath. 

The new movies would have probably worked a lot better for me if they didn't have to include the old cast. Just set it a century later or so, our heroes lived happily ever after, until they died natural deaths. A new threat emerges, and we need new heroes to deal with it. You can't really continue where the cast left off, and if you need to "reset" the setting to go back to where its story and appeal was the strongest, at least you won't trample on their accomplishments directly. 
Maybe the old cast could have still been around as historical records or interactive holograms and force ghosts. But would that have been enough for fans that wanted to see their heroes one last time?

I guess you can't really win.

Maybe a completely new trilogy - even by Rian Johnson could work, as long as it's removed from the original trilogy.


----

Regarding the whole training and Jedi Power Level: One thing to note is that in the prequels Jedi really seem a lot more powerful than in the OT. In the Prequels, all the Jedi we see have received Jedi training since a young age. And Yoda and Obi Wan are both really old in the OT. 
It seems really plausible that all the training counted for something and is what allowed them to do all those tricks, and that age is wearing down on Obi Wan and Yoda and maybe even Vader. 
Rey's power level is definitely not Prequel level yet, however. She seems to pick up things faster than Luke, though. 
But I can also see that "The Force Awakens" suggests more is going on.

I think the bigger problem is that it feels like Rey has things a bit too easy. Heroes need to win in the end, but they also need to fail. The second movie in the OT was the place for Luke's biggest failures, arguably - he struggled on Hoth, he finally finds his master, but proves somewhat inadequate and overworked, and then he runs off to save his friends, only to lose a hand, have his convictions shattered and need to be saved himself, and he still loses a friend. But Rey's journey in TLJ lacks that level of failure, and her struggle seems rather shallow - she might not turn Kylo Ren to her side, and find not out what she wants about her parents, but she overpowers Snoke's guards and Kylo Ren and than saves the remainder of the resistance. I don't think that makes her a Mary Sue, but it means her story is kinda bland, we can't fear as well with her and enjoy her highs and lows. (I suppose orphans might feel different.) 
Maybe that was fully intentional and for good reasons, but I think it did work to its detriment. But maybe they feared of writing too much weakness into her, because that could be seen as misogynistic. But I think one of the most important lessons to learn for men and women is that failures happen. Your strength is not in never failing, but in being able to fail and pick yourself up afterwards. 
If we portray our heroes as flawless that always succeeds, it's not just boring - it makes people question that they could be "heroes" or excel at anything because it's supposed to be easy to heroes (or geniuses) and if it's not to you, you're just not the type for it. (I feel that is particularly a problem in pop culture when it comes to "STEM" - movie and TV scientists might have asocial tendencies as flaws, but in their chosen specialties - if they aren't just omni-competent - they don't make errors. But Trial & Error is fundamental. You need the "fortitude" to accept that you'll struggle a lot until you have a solution - but that will make the solution feel more satisfying.)


----------



## Maxperson (Apr 18, 2019)

hawkeyefan said:


> Obi-Wan describes the Force to him and then says “let go your conscious self” and then he’s blocking blasts from the training drone while blindfolded. This is also the extent of his light saber training that we see before he faces Vader. Yes, he loses, but he puts up a good fight. He impresses Vader and even gets a good shot in.




That's like saying someone who learns how to screw in a screw is a trained mechanic.  



> Yes, Luke trains with Yoda for a few days. He’s immediately able to start floating rocks and make crazy leaps and so forth. Is this really all that extensive? I don’t know, really....it’s hard to say how much time passes. Really not a lot, though....somewhere between a couple of days and a couple of weeks. However long Han and the others are stuck in the asteroid field and then on Bespin.
> 
> And one of the lessons Yoda teaches Luke, which he fails to grasp for some time, is that there is no difference between lifting a rock and lifting an x-wing. Which seems to be the only comment in the original films that compares one use of the Force with another in terms of effort.
> 
> ...




We see a few days in the movie, but nothing says it was only a few days.  We do see that Anakin at about age 6 not become a Jedi Knight until he's at least 18, if not older.  That's at LEAST 12 years to become trained enough to become a Jedi.  The younglings were even younger than he was when he started.



> And do we not have hints that both Luke and Anakin have used the Force in their youth? In Anakin’s case, it’s explicitly stated. His instincts at racing and his knack for engineering are related to the Force. In Luke’s case, there are only hints that he’s done so....describing the shot he made in Beggar’s Canyon compared to the vent on the Death Star, when trained rebel pilots imply it’s an incredibly difficult shot.




I was hitting bullseyes with a rifle when I was 10.  Being a good shot doesn't in any way indicate the force was being used.  He wasn't flying an X-Wing when he shot the whomp rats.



> So I’d say we have enough information to assume that Rey has been using the Force subconsciously to help survive for about 12 years, in an environment that is basically a giant obstacle course populated by hostile beings. So even if we’re generous about Luke’s training and say it was 6 months, Rey had about 24 times as much training. Yes, she lacked a teacher, but I would expect most folks would accept that she’d have some level of raw ability or affinity with the Force.
> 
> Do we really need things to be so explicitly stated?




To achieve the level of ability that she has, yes she needs a teacher.  At least to achieve it in under a dozen years.  That goes for Ray, too.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 18, 2019)

At mustrum.

The Vong books were a problem, and the EU novels never really recovered afterwards. I did like the Legacy of the Force books and comics and having a death stick using Skywalker was interesting. 

 You can have good SW stories no Skywalker's and good Skywalker stories though. Old legends was very mixed bag.


----------



## pukunui (Apr 18, 2019)

Maxperson said:


> The younglings were even younger than he was when he started.



Yes, but how much of their training was Jedi indoctrination? Yes, they had lightsaber practice and probably telekinesis practice, but much of it would've been relatively mundane lessons on meditation, not forming attachment, etc etc. Undoubtedly also normal school stuff, like reading and writing.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 18, 2019)

Took Luke 7 years after RotJ to become a Jedi master.


----------



## Maxperson (Apr 18, 2019)

pukunui said:


> Yes, but how much of their training was Jedi indoctrination? Yes, they had lightsaber practice and probably telekinesis practice, but much of it would've been relatively mundane lessons on meditation, not forming attachment, etc etc. Undoubtedly also normal school stuff, like reading and writing.




Well, it only takes a few days to go from ignorant to a Jedi Knight according to some in this thread, so it really doesn't matter how much was other stuff.  5 minutes a day would still see them  be full fledged Jedi Knights within a year at that rate.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 18, 2019)

Morrus said:


> So cite it. Where on film does it say that lifting a rock is “next level stuff” and harder than aiming a torpedo, as you claimed? Where, on screen, does it say that?
> 
> (It doesn’t, of course, which is why after asking three times, all your answers are still just vague handwavy  “oh, on the screen somewhere”).






lowkey13 said:


> So, I'm sure this has been pointed out hundreds of times before, but one more time-
> 
> How old were you when you first saw Star Wars? The original trilogy?
> 
> ...






Maxperson said:


> Well, it only takes a few days to go from ignorant to a Jedi Knight according to some in this thread, so it really doesn't matter how much was other stuff.  5 minutes a day would still see them  be full fledged Jedi Knights within a year at that rate.




Which makes a lot of the PT and OT pointless.

Anyone know how to stop chain quoting I think fat fingers hit a forum button.


----------



## pukunui (Apr 18, 2019)

[MENTION=6716779]Zardnaar[/MENTION]: How do you feel about the inconsistent travel times in the various Star Wars movies? Are you able to handwave them away with the whole “speed of plot” thing? If so, can you not also handwave away inconsistent training times as a “speed of plot” thing? 

Audiences have shorter attention spans these days. Ain’t nobody got time for training montages anymore!

As for the chain quoting, you were advised upthread to clear your cache and close all ENWorld windows on your phone. If that doesn’t work, you’ll have to just manually edit out the extraneous quoted posts.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 18, 2019)

Morrus said:


> So cite it. Where on film does it say that lifting a rock is “next level stuff” and harder than aiming a torpedo, as you claimed? Where, on screen, does it say that?
> 
> (It doesn’t, of course, which is why after asking three times, all your answers are still just vague handwavy  “oh, on the screen somewhere”).






lowkey13 said:


> So, I'm sure this has been pointed out hundreds of times before, but one more time-
> 
> How old were you when you first saw Star Wars? The original trilogy?
> 
> ...






Zardnaar said:


> Which makes a lot of the PT and OT pointless.
> 
> Anyone know how to stop chain quoting I think fat fingers hit a forum button.






pukunui said:


> [MENTION=6716779]Zardnaar[/MENTION]: How do you feel about the inconsistent travel times in the various Star Wars movies? Are you able to handwave them away with the whole “speed of plot” thing? If so, can you not also handwave away inconsistent training times as a “speed of plot” thing?
> 
> Audiences have shorter attention spans these days. Ain’t nobody got time for training montages anymore!
> 
> As for the chain quoting, you were advised upthread to clear your cache and close all ENWorld windows on your phone. If that doesn’t work, you’ll have to just manually edit out the extraneous quoted posts.




Hand waving travel times us fine they didn't make any effort at handwaving training time.

Cleared cache etc on phone still doing it. Sigh. I can switch to PC apologies all.


----------



## pukunui (Apr 18, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> Hand waving travel times us fine they didn't make any effort at handwaving training time.



"They" don't have to make an effort. If *you* can handwave travel times, then *you* can handwave training times, too. None of the movies actually give any indication of how much time passes in between scenes. Rey could have spent months with Luke in TLJ, just like Luke could've spent just a few days with Yoda in ESB. There's really no way to tell how long either of them spent training.


You'll have to go through an edit out all the extraneous quotes from your previous posts. At the moment most of them are walls of quoted text.


----------



## Maxperson (Apr 18, 2019)

pukunui said:


> "They" don't have to make an effort. If *you* can handwave travel times, then *you* can handwave training times, too. None of the movies actually give any indication of how much time passes in between scenes. Rey could have spent months with Luke in TLJ, just like Luke could've spent just a few days with Yoda in ESB. There's really no way to tell how long either of them spent training.




But we know from Anakin that it takes several YEARS to become a Jedi Knight.  Obi-Wan was still teaching him tricks and how to do things even when he was a teenager.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Apr 18, 2019)

Maxperson said:


> But we know from Anakin that it takes several YEARS to become a Jedi Knight.  Obi-Wan was still teaching him tricks and how to do things even when he was a teenager.




He wasn’t really learning much by the start of II. It didn’t take all that time to get him to a certain power level or ability to use the Force to do neat tricks. He was already there as a Force User, he just wasn’t done with his _training as a Jedi_, which in the Old Republic was a lot more than using a lightsaber and the force. 

And he does more rad force moves in II than Rey has done on screen so far. By a very wide margin.


----------



## pukunui (Apr 18, 2019)

Maxperson said:


> But we know from Anakin that it takes several YEARS to become a Jedi Knight.  Obi-Wan was still teaching him tricks and how to do things even when he was a teenager.



I'd be willing to bet most of that did not involve learning how to use the Force so much as how to be a good Jedi and not fall to the dark side. Being a Jedi was as much about keeping the peace as it was about being a Force-wielding warrior. Anakin would've had to learn about conflict resolution and diplomacy as well as practicing lightsaber forms and the like. There would've been a lot of training on self-discipline and self-control as well - and training on when *not* to use the Force. Yoda dispensed with most of that for Luke's training. Luke dispensed with pretty much all of it for Rey's training. Most likely because they both realized it wasn't as important as the thousand generations of Jedi Knights before them thought it was.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 18, 2019)

pukunui said:


> I'd be willing to bet most of that did not involve learning how to use the Force so much as how to be a good Jedi and not fall to the dark side. Being a Jedi was as much about keeping the peace as it was about being a Force-wielding warrior. Anakin would've had to learn about conflict resolution and diplomacy as well as practicing lightsaber forms and the like. There would've been a lot of training on self-discipline and self-control as well - and training on when *not* to use the Force. Yoda dispensed with most of that for Luke's training. Luke dispensed with pretty much all of it for Rey's training. Most likely because they both realized it wasn't as important as the thousand generations of Jedi Knights before them thought it was.




 Yoda warnings quick and easy leads to the dark side.  I don't think they rush training that much even the Sith.

Seems it's still canon that Mauls training took decades as well. So did Palpatines. And Anakin's etc. And Dooku. 

 Rey's the odd one out by a lot lol. Something doesn't seem right here.


----------



## MarkB (Apr 18, 2019)

pukunui said:


> "They" don't have to make an effort. If *you* can handwave travel times, then *you* can handwave training times, too. None of the movies actually give any indication of how much time passes in between scenes. Rey could have spent months with Luke in TLJ, just like Luke could've spent just a few days with Yoda in ESB. There's really no way to tell how long either of them spent training.




That's not really true, because Rey's training is given a timeline due to her Force-visions with Kylo Ren. The first one occurs before Luke agrees to train her, and it happens just as Kylo is undergoing surgery to his facial scar, after his bombing run on the Raddus. The events of Rey's training with Luke take place over the same time period as the events of the rest of the movie, and I don't think there's any way to justify those events as having taken months to play out.


----------



## Morrus (Apr 18, 2019)

[MENTION=6716779]Zardnaar[/MENTION] you're still constantly quoting my post. Another one, and I'm going to block you just to stop the notifications. Please sort out whatever the issue is with your phone.


----------



## Imaculata (Apr 18, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> Stupid phone. Anyone else gonna admit to watching Buffy and Gilmore Girls? Wife's a fan so I saw it as well.




I'm rewatching Buffy with a friend who has never seen it before.


----------



## hawkeyefan (Apr 18, 2019)

[MENTION=6716779]Zardnaar[/MENTION] If you clicked the Multi-Quote button on any posts, they will often remain selected and then be quoted in any future replies. You may have to go to the actual post, and deselect the Multi-Quote buttons on those posts. 

No 100% sure that's what's happening for you, but I've had that issue at times in the past, so that may be it.


----------



## hawkeyefan (Apr 18, 2019)

Maxperson said:


> That's like saying someone who learns how to screw in a screw is a trained mechanic.




No, it's like saying someone is able to block laser blasts fired by a droid while blindfolded seconds after learning there's such things as the Force and Jedi and Lightsabers. 

If you want to make an analogy that fits, I'd say it's like someone finding out there are such things as screws, and then being handed a screwdriver, and then they build themselves a house.



Maxperson said:


> We see a few days in the movie, but nothing says it was only a few days.  We do see that Anakin at about age 6 not become a Jedi Knight until he's at least 18, if not older.  That's at LEAST 12 years to become trained enough to become a Jedi.  The younglings were even younger than he was when he started.




I said Luke's initial training on Dagobah is likely somewhere between a couple of days and a couple of weeks. He leaves Hoth at the same time as Han and the others, and then they are pursued by the Empire and hide in the asteroid field, and then head to Bespin. The Empire arrived just before them and sets their trap. How long do you think they're in the asteroid field? How long at Bespin? The movie doesn't offer a timeframe....but seems odd that Vader would wait more than maybe one day to reveal himself to Han, and it certainly seems like it's about that long. 

So how long would you say this all takes? 

As for Anakin, I think the fact that he was powerful with the Force and capable of things well ahead of his rank as a Jedi is clear. Their rankings are designations only....they need not be indicative of actual ability. That's the system the Jedi have in place. But if we're talking about raw ability, that system doesn't really apply. 

Also, I think that a big part of Anakin's fall is the restrictions that the system placed on him, no? The Jedi are holding him back, so to speak. So much of what they do seems to be about avoiding the dark side than it is about actual Force usage. So in The Last Jedi, when Yoda and Luke kind of address the failings of the Jedi ways, I'd think that immediately comes to mind, no? That they were too hung up on doctrine.  

In other words, we have no reason to think that training is an absolute requirement, or that the training must be of a certain duration. Luke's own training was incredibly brief compared to Anakin's, no? And he was able to avoid falling to the dark side and actually wound up redeeming Anakin by example. With maybe months of training. 



Maxperson said:


> I was hitting bullseyes with a rifle when I was 10.  Being a good shot doesn't in any way indicate the force was being used.  He wasn't flying an X-Wing when he shot the whomp rats.




During the briefing, the commander says that the vent is two meters, and everyone in the room reacts. Chewie and Han exchange a look of incredulity. One of the pilots says that the shot is impossible, even for a computer. Luke describes it as not a big deal and that he's made similar shots. 

While not definitively stated, I'd say this foreshadows that only Luke can make the shot. And what's special about Luke among them all? The Force. 



Maxperson said:


> To achieve the level of ability that she has, yes she needs a teacher.  At least to achieve it in under a dozen years.  That goes for Ray, too.




Not really. Luke achieves his Return of the Jedi level of ability in far less than 12 years. Maybe as much as 1 year, but likely less than that. 



Maxperson said:


> Well, it only takes a few days to go from ignorant to a Jedi Knight according to some in this thread, so it really doesn't matter how much was other stuff.  5 minutes a day would still see them  be full fledged Jedi Knights within a year at that rate.




Not according to some in this thread....according to what the movies show us. Luke is an incredibly fast learner, at least at first. Then he doubts himslf, and things slow down. Yoda is actually upset that he's not learning faster. And that's over a course of days. 

Also, Jedi Knight is a title. Yes, we can assume those with the title must have a certain level of ability, but there's nothing in the films that says someone without that title absolutely cannot have the same level of ability. Actually, we know for a fact that non-Jedi can indeed be just as powerful in the Force. 



Zardnaar said:


> Took Luke 7 years after RotJ to become a Jedi master.




Where do you get that from? I've no doubt it's been said somewhere, but I don't think it's ever stated in the films.


----------



## lowkey13 (Apr 18, 2019)

*Deleted by user*


----------



## Istbor (Apr 18, 2019)

hawkeyefan said:


> As for Anakin, I think the fact that he was powerful with the Force and capable of things well ahead of his rank as a Jedi is clear. Their rankings are designations only....they need not be indicative of actual ability. That's the system the Jedi have in place. But if we're talking about raw ability, that system doesn't really apply.
> 
> Also, I think that a big part of Anakin's fall is the restrictions that the system placed on him, no? The Jedi are holding him back, so to speak. So much of what they do seems to be about avoiding the dark side than it is about actual Force usage. So in The Last Jedi, when Yoda and Luke kind of address the failings of the Jedi ways, I'd think that immediately comes to mind, no? That they were too hung up on doctrine.
> 
> In other words, we have no reason to think that training is an absolute requirement, or that the training must be of a certain duration. Luke's own training was incredibly brief compared to Anakin's, no? And he was able to avoid falling to the dark side and actually wound up redeeming Anakin by example. With maybe months of training.




Here's where I wonder about confusion between Anakin, Luke, and Rey' training. 

It is kind of folly to try and compare the three against one another. We are looking at the process of a huge paradigm shift in the Jedi Order. 

What I am seeing is the 'Old Ways'. Lots of regimented training, with these constructs of rank or progress thrown in. Your ability with the force doesn't govern this, the the council or some Jedi holocron stipulates when a padawan goes knight, and a knight goes Master. (throw in other ranks or titles for flavor where needed)

We then see Luke trained outside of this more regimented way. Intimately. By his masters Obi and Yoda, who probably still have a bit of that old doctrine when they teach it. Maybe still with these constructed ranks of Jedi-ness. 

Finally we come to Luke training Rey, and it is his expression of training, even more perhaps free form than any of the other training. Where we come to this more naturalistic style. As Luke said, three lessons. Most importantly, what is the force, and the connection to it. 

I could probably go more in depth on my thoughts here, but this is the gist of it.


----------



## hopeless (Apr 18, 2019)

Would this disparity in training be resolved if Rian revealed Rey had been left in the care of a Jedi Survivor hiding on Jakku...

So she was actually a fully trained Padawan mind whammied by her mentor to keep her safely hidden due to her mentor dying.
Remember how she kept on about returning to Jakku until she learned Finn returned for her thereby ending the geas so she's slowly recovering her true memories and skills explaining how and why she defeated Kylo by the end of TFA.

Would that have worked better to resolve this issue with Rey.

I'm just saying it doesn't appear that big a problem compared to TLJ's script.


----------



## MarkB (Apr 18, 2019)

TFA introduced the idea of there being an "awakening" in the Force (it's in the title!), and while it's never clearly defined, it certainly seems to be a game-changer. It means that, whatever amount of 'rules' you think may or may not have been established in the previous movies, they may simply not apply at this point - not to Rey, and maybe not even to any Force user in the galaxy.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 18, 2019)

hawkeyefan said:


> No, it's like saying someone is able to block laser blasts fired by a droid while blindfolded seconds after learning there's such things as the Force and Jedi and Lightsabers.
> 
> If you want to make an analogy that fits, I'd say it's like someone finding out there are such things as screws, and then being handed a screwdriver, and then they build themselves a house.
> 
> ...




It was the old legends Luke, in canon it takes Luke 3.5 years to become a Jedi Knight and that is considered fast. Luke was a prodigy, child of the chosen one and he discovered a lot of things by himself and even Yoda says stuff like "I can teach you no more and "face Vader only then a Jedi will you be".  There was a 3 year break between ESB and ANH. 

Lukes at Jedi Knight level start of RotJ (6 months after ESB in old legends, 4 years form ANH-RotJ), so you could say he is either a Jedi then, after Yoda dies- when I am gone the last Jedi you be", or at the end of RotJ as he comes to the realisation that smacking Vader/Emperor down isn't the path a Jedi would take. They were foreshadowing Lukes darkside temptation a lopt since ESB as well. Anger in the cave on Dagobah, fear on cloud city, force choking the Gamorrean in RotJ, losing his temper vs Vader (and winning).

 So his journey was longer/harder than Reys and he was fighting dark side temptation along the way. Rey has never been tempted by the Darkside or lost her temper really, Kylo tried in a way but he seemed to be tempting her with himself not the darkside as such. Obviously Anakin drew on the dark side more and eventually fell in RotS.

 So Rey comes across as faster, better, more powerful, more perfect no training, and this is over 6 movies in cannon+ the cartoons let alone the 25-30 years of legends materials which are similar in most ways. Throw in them killing off Han+ Luke and Carries RL death and all the characters you care about are basically dead. Can't blame them for Carrie but they may have killed off Han and Luke to early. If I was going to kill Luke I would have done it in episode IX and even then thought long and hard about it.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 18, 2019)

MarkB said:


> TFA introduced the idea of there being an "awakening" in the Force (it's in the title!), and while it's never clearly defined, it certainly seems to be a game-changer. It means that, whatever amount of 'rules' you think may or may not have been established in the previous movies, they may simply not apply at this point - not to Rey, and maybe not even to any Force user in the galaxy.




They never really clear this up or follow it up. And even if it did awaken why? There is some random stuff in there about the light rising to face the dark but if that is the case why did it not awaken when Sidious and Vader were running riot. Why not just awaken in Luke and he could smack Kylo down in around 5 seconds. 

 They do give an explanation in the novels about Reys powers (she got them off Kylo) but its a crap explanation (why didn't Yoda download his training into Luke then?) but they need things like that ion the movies and not a novel and its still stupid. Makes a lot of things in the PT and OT pointless as well like training younglings or the darkside is quicker and easier. Its not you just download what you need Jedi Knight training in less than a minute. And she got that information from a dark sider as well which you would think should send alarm bells ringing with dark side temptation/knowledge etc. 

 If she turns out to be a Skywalker it still doesn't explain thing, th Skywalker bloodline is just force potential. If she is a force clone of Anakin it would explain things, its a bit of a stupid idea but less stupid than downloading your force training.


----------



## MarkB (Apr 19, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> It was the old legends Luke, in canon it takes Luke 3.5 years to become a Jedi Knight and that is considered fast.



Cite please? I never got the impression from either Yoda or Obi-wan that Luke was advancing faster than they expected. Rather the opposite at some points, in fact.



> Luke was a prodigy, child of the chosen one and he discovered a lot of things by himself and even Yoda says stuff like "I can teach you no more and "face Vader only then a Jedi will you be".



Exactly. His advancement in the Force was more to do with his personal growth than any formal training he received.



> Lukes at Jedi Knight level start of RotJ (6 months after ESB)



Is that timing established in new canon? There certainly weren't ever dates on screen in the movies.



> so you could say he is either a Jedi then, after Yoda dies- when I am gone the last Jedi you be", or at the end of RotJ as he comes to the realisation that smacking Vader/Emperor down isn't the path a Jedi would take. They were foreshadowing Lukes darkside temptation a lopt since ESB as well. Anger in the cave on Dagobah, fear on cloud city, force choking the Gamorrean in RotJ, losing his temper vs Vader (and winning).



Yes. Luke is different from Rey. He took a different journey, and faced different problems. Why are you so uncomfortable with Rey having anything other than a cookie-cutter duplicate of Luke's story?



> So his journey was longer/harder than Reys and he was fighting dark side temptation along the way. Rey has never been tempted by the Darkside or lost her temper really, Kylo tried in a way but he seemed to be tempting her with himself not the darkside as such. Obviously Anakin drew on the dark side more and eventually fell in RotS.



In TLJ, Rey senses the whole island and is immediately drawn to its Dark Side nexus. In her search for answers she is drawn to go there physically. The trial she undertakes is different than Luke's in ESB, but it's similarly a journey of self-discovery that feels like a defeat for her, leaving her without the answers she was looking for.



> So Rey comes across as faster, better, more powerful, more perfect no training, and this is over 6 movies in cannon+ the cartoons let alone the 25-30 years of legends materials which are similar in most ways. Throw in them killing off Han+ Luke and Carries RL death and all the characters you care about are basically dead. Can't blame them for Carrie but they may have killed off Han and Luke to early. If I was going to kill Luke I would have done it in episode IX and even then thought long and hard about it.



Luke is dead, but he's also a Jedi Master. Chances are that he's not actually gone.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 19, 2019)

MarkB said:


> Cite please? I never got the impression from either Yoda or Obi-wan that Luke was advancing faster than they expected. Rather the opposite at some points, in fact.
> 
> 
> Exactly. His advancement in the Force was more to do with his personal growth than any formal training he received.
> ...




Time timeline in the new canon is the same as the old AFAIK as they are both drawing on the same sources (the movie).

 I wouldn't have had Rey follow Lukes journey or give her Lukes background. I would have made her a Jedi Knight or Padawan from the get go, tied her to Luke and Kylo. via Lukes training thing and maybe had Kylo destroy Lukes academy on screen at the end of TFA.  I would have filled in the details a bit more, or if I had gone down TFA path, have Rey mind wiped or something and Luke or whatever owuld have removed it (restoring her full power and memories). 

 Snoke throne room scene for example, good scene but probably in the 3rd movie not the second. The mega Super Star Destoyer maybe use that as the big threat in VII not Starkiller base. Theres alos a lot of back gorund in the books that didn't make it on screen, the new TIEs and Star Detroyers are supposed to be beter, well sho us on screen have a single ISD in a First Order fleet thats smaller than the Resurgence class. Rather than blow up the New Republic fleet with Starkiller base use this new and improved tech they are supposed to have onscreen.

 Subvert audience expectations in clever ways, the new TIEs go around smoking X-Wings, Poes a great pilot he survives the rest get shot to bits a'la trench run in ANH. I probably would have used Kylos TIE silencers and the old TIE defenders in those roles. Have effective Fisrt Order officers who are not idiots (write Hux better, or use Grand Admiral Thrawn). That owuld tie things to Rebels a bit and be a nice bone for the old fans.


----------



## Ovinomancer (Apr 19, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> Time timeline in the new canon is the same as the old AFAIK as they are both drawing on the same sources (the movie).



Then you can quote the lines where this is established from the scripts, yes?  No.  Please stop insisting on old EU stuff as remotely applicable.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 19, 2019)

Ovinomancer said:


> Then you can quote the lines where this is established from the scripts, yes?  No.  Please stop insisting on old EU stuff as remotely applicable.




 I did some checking last night and in some areas they are same.

 Luke progressed faster than all the other major characters in the movies, its basically self evident onscreen. Rey progressed a lot faster than Luke. You had 6 movies+ cartoons doing it basically this way and thenm Rey comes along and does it another way, it creates a disconnect in the world building. It feeds into that whats the point of the 1st 6 movies, what did they achieve and are they all idiots" type idea. More likely people will say BS this movie sucks (TLJ).

 Things don't need to be locked in stone, but if you're doing it different you need a decent explanation IMHO. I-VI were also about Anakin, he was the chosen won and had the greatest force potential ever, only getting cut to pieces put a dampener on it. Lucas was always straight up about it. Sure they own the rights they can do whatever they like but fans can do the same thing like not go and see your movies (Solo).


----------



## Ovinomancer (Apr 19, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> I did some checking last night and in some areas they are same.
> 
> Luke progressed faster than all the other major characters in the movies, its basically self evident onscreen. Rey progressed a lot faster than Luke. You had 6 movies+ carootns doing it basically this way and thenm Rey comes along and does it another way, it creates a disconnect in the world building. It feeds into that whats the point of the 1st 6 movies, what did they achieve and are they all idiots" type idea. More likely people will say BS this movie sucks (TLJ).




Are you still using the 3.5 years that's not in canon for your assessment?  What else not in the movies are you using for your assessments?

Your assessment is bunk because it's not supported by anything other than you checked last night.  I checked just now, and you're clearly wrong.  Who wins this?

Anakin -- podracer pilot (something NO other human could do), destroys fleet control ship, 9 years old.  In less than 10 years, leads attack on Jedi temple as the only force user and slaughters everyone there.  That's his bookends -- stupid powerful to start, stupid powerful at the end, THEN becomes Darth Vader.

Luke -- in a very short time finds out the Force exists and then destroys the Peace Moon (traitorously nicknamed the Death Star) without a targeting computer.  Spends a few weeks in a swamp and credibly fights Darth Vader (see above).  Spends a bit more time (not much), and then BEATS Vader.  Yeah.  Kickass!

Rey -- grows up having to survive in a brutal climate scavenging dangerous wrecks and fending off claim-jumpers and muggers (seen onscreen, even).  Is able to fight wounded bad-guy trainee, becomes accused of being too good too fast.

Faces down Snoke, gets slapped down like a chihuahua puppy.  Only saved by power-seizing trainee (who has also gotten much stronger and capable, but this is not remarked upon).  Fights some red dudes, does well, is accused of being too power too fast.  Then, lifts some rocks.  HOLY POOP BATMAN, ROCKS HAVE BEEN LIFTED, WTF IS THIS ROCK STUFF?!!11eleven111!

I mean, really, at the end of TLJ, Rey has managed to get captured twice (TFA and TLJ), get slapped down a bunch of times, get some lessons from the BADDEST Jedi evah! (beat his own dad at, like 23!), and lifted some rocks, but, oh no, she's like way too strong way to fast this is bad we need more training montages and a guess that 3.5 years have passed!!!  I mean, Anakin blew up a Trade Federation control cruiser, flew podracers, impregnated a Queen, rode an assassin droid 1,000s of feat AGL, landed a crippled crusier after beating Dooku, killed all the padawans and the few Jedi left in his sack of the Jedi Temple, and became Darth Vader at the same age where Rey's biggest claim to fame is lifting some damn rocks.

Get a grip, already.


----------



## GreyLord (Apr 19, 2019)

Ovinomancer said:


> Are you still using the 3.5 years that's not in canon for your assessment?  What else not in the movies are you using for your assessments?
> 
> Your assessment is bunk because it's not supported by anything other than you checked last night.  I checked just now, and you're clearly wrong.  Who wins this?
> 
> ...




Really!???

Annakin used instinct to fly pod racers, but in no way was trained or as good at it as a trained jedi who also knew the controls. He flew as well as he did which was barely enough to win a race the same way other untrained force users were portrayed in movies. It's the same that's been expressed for those with the force, they instinctively can have better reflexes and abilities in flying.  This is why Luke also could bullseye womp rats which were not much bigger than the death star exhaust shaft.

This would accord with Rey (as long as she learned the controls) being great at flying.

However, no way could Luke or Annakin do a Jedi Mind trick or beat even a Padawan with a Lightsaber after less than a day.

Luke in no way even credibly fought Vader in ESB.  He confronted Vader and sure attacked Vader, but Vader was never really even worried about Luke actually being a credible threat to him.  Vader went to try to turn Luke to the Dark side.  He had no interest in hurting or killing Luke at all.  It was basically one handed parries.  He was impressed (after Luke was training on his own for THREE YEARS AND THEN ALSO had an additional bunch of training from Yoda which some say were anywhere from days to months) that Luke wasn't turned into carbonite, but really wasn't fighting Luke.  He was TOYING with Luke.

He made it obvious that he was toying with Luke when, after luring Luke down, he didn't even use a light saber at one point and simply battered Luke without even fighting!

Only when Luke finally got a shot on Vader's shoulder did Vader try.  Almost immediately Luke got his hand cut off and Vader got control of his emotions.  Luke didn't even present a valid challenge, and got lucky (when you toy with someone for that long, sometimes that happens) with one shot which upset Vader and Luke was promptly shown just how good a fighter Vader was.

Rey has had how much training?  It's questionable.  People assume it was two days or less or maybe three on the island, but just like Dagobah, it's not really all that clear how long it was.  Time distortion may have also been a thing there as well.  She may have been there days or weeks.

Less training then Luke had, but maybe not as impossible to fight Kylo as some may think (if we take that Kylo has the training level of a Padawan as well and not an actual Sith Lord or Jedi Knight).

But if he was as imposing as Vader, yeah...Rey beating him this quickly is pretty dumb even with her training that she's had thus far in relation to what was established in the rest of the other six CANON movies made by Lucas.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 19, 2019)

Ovinomancer said:


> Are you still using the 3.5 years that's not in canon for your assessment?  What else not in the movies are you using for your assessments?
> 
> Your assessment is bunk because it's not supported by anything other than you checked last night.  I checked just now, and you're clearly wrong.  Who wins this?
> 
> ...




Rey basically gets a pass by being a good pilot, and 9 year old Anakin is terrible. Force sensitives can make good pilots, that is not a big stretch. You don't see luka and Anakin throwing around force powers untrained and/or they're not very good at the minimal ones they do know (Luke in ANH vs training droids).

 Kylo also had a good introduction he freezed a blastbolt in mid air, it does kinda echo Vader using negate energy on Hans blaster. Rey also had a good introduction its the second half of TFA hings get stupid. That is where she has had no training whatsoever. You would expect her to et better after being trained by Luke.

 However that chase seen does kind of set the pacing of the movies, her training was very short or it was the longest chase scene ever. The movie starts right after TFA leaves off and she get to the resistance base at the end to save them. 

 For canon vs legends I just check the wiki they have tags there. There is new canon I have not read and its useful for that. That does cover thigns like where Rey gets her powerrs from but 

1. It happens off camera, that kinda needs to be in the movies as its the movies we have an issue with (mostly just TLJ, TFA was decent enough).
2. The explanation is still stupid and makes the PT/OT movies stupid/pointless.

 Its a very noticeable difference how Rey and Anakin/Luke is presented. Kid Anakin did some very stupid things but so was Rey piloting the falcon through a wrecked Star Destroyer. They kind of get a pass there as they're force sensitives who are special in the Star Wars universe. 

 Even ignoring the old legends material (which had a better sequel trilogy and Han backstory), it stands out a lot just using the new canon sources. Its piss poor world building and continuity in an established franchise (no big deal if you're doing your own/new thing).

 As for claims like the movies are for kids, or Star Wars fatigue etc well Marvel can pump out 3 movies a year. The average Star Wars fan is also not a kid so they messed up their target audience if thats what they were aiming at.

https://www.quantcast.com/blog/the-fans-behind-the-force/

https://digiday.com/marketing/star-wars-demographics-male/

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/oct/26/star-wars-the-force-awakens-jj-abrams-average-fan

 So yeah they may have missed the boat on their target audience and wonder why people are upset. Playing the "this is canon game" is still crap as your fanbase grew up with stuff Lucasfilm was happy to sell you which feeds into fan expectations etc. I gave them a free pass in 2014 when they nuked the old EU, it had problems especially when you want to make new movies but they haven't really replaced it with anything better. TFA plot is literally any old EU plot circa 1991-1996 and legends had better female Jedi as well the fans actually like -Mara is one of the most popular characters in Star Wars in polls, so is Thrawn (and they brought him back). 

 Its like 4E when they declared new is better, the fanbase liked the old stuff better. Up to a point you have to cater yo your fans expectations, casuals and kids you basically already have them. Being older doesn't automatically make it better either, Rogue One story was actually better than the Legends version of it. And there was plenty of trash in the old EU.


----------



## hawkeyefan (Apr 19, 2019)

[MENTION=6716779]Zardnaar[/MENTION] The data you’re citing is all about the fanbase prior to The Force Awakens being released. Based on that, it’s not surprising to find out that the “average fan” was someone who grew up on the original movies.

But that doesn’t mean that’s who the movie IS or SHOULD BE aimed at. 

The goal is to reach a new generation of fans. To get viewers interested enough that they continue to enjoy the films and merchandise for decades. 

Now, there’s no reason that the films cannot appeal to both a new audience and the traditional audience. I’d argue that these films do exactly that. But there’s a clear “passing the torch” element in these new films that seems to bother some fans. 

Imagine if the episodes had been released chronologically. I would expect many fans would have lost their minds when Obi-Wan was killed off to start the second trilogy and pass the torch to a new hero. The criticisms of Luke would have been very similar to those of Rey...with one significant difference. People would have said the only thing special about Luke is that he’s the son of Anakin.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Apr 19, 2019)

MarkB said:


> TFA introduced the idea of there being an "awakening" in the Force (it's in the title!), and while it's never clearly defined, it certainly seems to be a game-changer. It means that, whatever amount of 'rules' you think may or may not have been established in the previous movies, they may simply not apply at this point - not to Rey, and maybe not even to any Force user in the galaxy.




Supporting this is the very end of LTJ, where a kid uses the force to grab a broom.


----------



## MarkB (Apr 19, 2019)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Supporting this is the very end of LTJ, where a kid uses the force to grab a broom.




Yeah, I love that scene. It's a subtle little touch, that I completely missed when I first saw it in the cinema.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Apr 19, 2019)

MarkB said:


> Yeah, I love that scene. It's a subtle little touch, that I completely missed when I first saw it in the cinema.




It’s a perfect Star Wars moment, IMO. 

I frackin love TLJ. Seriously, it’s so good. I need to watch it again, in between End Game and December.


----------



## Istbor (Apr 19, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> They never really clear this up or follow it up. And even if it did awaken why? There is some random stuff in there about the light rising to face the dark but if that is the case why did it not awaken when Sidious and Vader were running riot. Why not just awaken in Luke and he could smack Kylo down in around 5 seconds.
> 
> They do give an explanation in the novels about Reys powers (she got them off Kylo) but its a crap explanation (why didn't Yoda download his training into Luke then?) but they need things like that ion the movies and not a novel and its still stupid. Makes a lot of things in the PT and OT pointless as well like training younglings or the darkside is quicker and easier. Its not you just download what you need Jedi Knight training in less than a minute. And she got that information from a dark sider as well which you would think should send alarm bells ringing with dark side temptation/knowledge etc.
> 
> If she turns out to be a Skywalker it still doesn't explain thing, th Skywalker bloodline is just force potential. If she is a force clone of Anakin it would explain things, its a bit of a stupid idea but less stupid than downloading your force training.




Maybe that is Rey's rare Jedi trait or ability. To learn powers as she is introduced to them, or glean them off of other force users? 

I mean, I don't recall every Jedi being able to perform Battle Meditation in KotoR. That kind of opens the door for rare gifts from the force that manifest into singular abilities. 

Or in other words... She's a space wizard, deal with it.


----------



## Mercurius (Apr 19, 2019)

@_*Zardnaar*_, I empathize with some of your issues with TLJ and don't think questioning whether Rey is a Mary Sue or not is inherently sexist, but I think you are going a bit overboard in trying to line her up with Luke and compare them in every detail. No matter what way you look at it, their "Mary Sueness" is similar. 

The only thing that bothered me about Rey's Mary Sueness in TFA was how she could hang with Kylo Ren in a lightsabre duel. I know he was injured, but  it still seemed a bit absurd and definitely damaged my suspension of disbelief. But _overall_ she wasn't really any more Mary Sueish than Luke. If she was, it wasn't by much - and not worth getting upset about.

The Mary Sue is a female version of wish fulfillment. Luke, and superheroes in general, are male versions of wish fulfillment. I don't know why female wish fulfillment would be any worse, except insofar as TFA felt like fan fiction and the Mary Sue is derived from fan fiction. The more obvious difference is that it is generally inserted into contexts that have been historically male dominant (e.g. superhero and action films).

I think we can all agree that female characters should have equal or at least simlar place in films, even historically male dominant ones. Or at least I hope we can agree on that!

That said, where I differ from the "orthodox liberal view" is in two ways. One has absolutely nothing to do with sex or gender and is more about creativity. I am all for seeing more female heroes in film, but I would like to see more new properties. Do we need an all-female Ghostbusters, Ocean's 8 or, gods forbid, a Jane Bond? Why not something new? Similarly with Rey: aside from the lightsabre duel, my main issue with her is creative: she's simply too similar to Luke in too many ways. Not exact, mind you, but it would have been nice to see them come up with something a bit different.

Secondly, I think these female heroes end up being too paper thin in terms of to what degree they are actually female; in a lot of cases we are getting female versions of male heroes, but not truly feminine heroes. What that would look like, I don't know, and could be any any number of things - but rather than saying, "Let's do a female Luke," I'd rather see "Let's see what a female force prodigy might look like." Or rather than saying, "Let's wear pant-suits so we can fit into the male work environment," why not say "Let's wear what we want to wear and define ourselves." 

Now the potential problem with taking that approach is that it implies intrinsic differences between men and women, which some take issue with (despite, well, biology). But aside from biology, let us remember that Star Wars is based on mythic archetypes; the lightsaber is a sword, which is a rather phallic representation of spiritual will and power. It even becomes "erect" when activated. What might a (non-phallic) female force weapon look like? Would it even be a weapon? There are interesting creative possibilities there that haven't been explored, at least in the films.

Regardless, I think the issue needs to mostly be taken up by women, not men. Women need to decide how the heroine looks, what a female force prodigy would be like. I just hope we see more versions of actual _heroines_, and not just "female heroes." I don't think Rey utterly fails in that regard (or Captain Marvel, Wonder Woman, etc), but I would like to see them go further. Maybe the first step is "female heroes," and then next we can see what a heroine might look like. 

But I will throw in one suggestion: how about a heroine that doesn't solve all conflicts through violence? Or at least is maybe more of an aikido master than a boxer? I remember the great Ursula Le Guin talking about this, taking issue with the notion promulgated in cinema and genre literature, that all conflicts must be solved through violence. I don't care if this hypothetical hero/ine was male or female, but all I'm saying is that if a heroine wants to pave new territory and not just remake everything in a female version of traditional male tropes, why not a heroine that says "enough of the violence - there has to be another way."


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 19, 2019)

Mercurius said:


> @_*Zardnaar*_, I empathize with some of your issues with TLJ and don't think questioning whether Rey is a Mary Sue or not is inherently sexist, but I think you are going a bit overboard in trying to line her up with Luke and compare them in every detail. No matter what way you look at it, their "Mary Sueness" is similar.
> 
> The only thing that bothered me about Rey's Mary Sueness in TFA was how she could hang with Kylo Ren in a lightsabre duel. I know he was injured, but  it still seemed a bit absurd and definitely damaged my suspension of disbelief. But _overall_ she wasn't really any more Mary Sueish than Luke. If she was, it wasn't by much - and not worth getting upset about.
> 
> ...




 No issue with female characters whatsoever. I am big on liking characters in a show even if its a villain. A good villain needs to be compelling. I like Batman, Superman is boring (he is overpowered and kryptonite comes into play yay). There were more interesting female characters in the old legends material than Rey. Your idea about the lightsaber is interesting I associate a sword with nobility more than a phallic symbol. In Star Wars Legends they had a female Sith lord Lumiya and she used a light whip, and they also had lightsaber staffs. In rebels the more interesting characters are the female ones, the 2 male Jedi are alright but they''re not overly powerful in the grand scheme of things and each character tends to be good at something not everything. Lumiya originated in the 80's Star Wars Marvel comics and I read about her in the 90's and she ended up killing Lukes wife Mara who was basically the greatest Jedi character ever in the old EU at least in that time frame. It wasn't because she was the most powerful in the force although she was good there.

 More or less agree about making a new franchise rather than gender swap characters, except in a few cases where it makes some amount of in universe sense like Doctor Who perhaps. Jane Bond would be terrible, a female 00' agent would be fine. Some characters are to difficult to recast from the same actor let alone swapping genders, imagine a new Pirates of the Caribbean with an actor who is no Johny Depp as Jack Sparrow, Solo may have had this issue (Han is Harrison Ford). 9/10 things like that suck, Battlestar Galactica Starbuck is one of the few cases I can recall it has been done well. I would have just made Rey a Jedi Knight or Master, everything she does would make perfect senses in that scenario as she isn't really doing anything you wouldn't expect from a Jedi protagonist. Alot of the problems are not even on here, they undermined every other character on the movie to make her look good (intentional or not IDK). That includes the Villains (Hux is comic relief, Kylo is weak/emo, Phasma keeps losing etc). You don't see Vader getting hurt by Hans blaster bolt for example. Vaders a badass, Kylo is my sister in laws 5 year old. Thrawns interesting and compelling and doesn't have any superpowers. 

 Change in established franchises isn't always bad, but I think you need to be respectful to the source material. 5E is is good in that regard, 4E not so much. Extreme change tends to ruin things or negate the things you like about that franchise in the 1st place and I admit to being a reactionary on this in terms of franchises I care about. For example I only really have 2 RPGS, D&D and Star Wars. The only D&D world I care about is Darksun (they blew FR up and I stopped caring). After that its story and characters, I like Stargate for example gave up on Stargate Universe. I don't like 4E Darksun for example because it came across as sandbox Arabian Nights vibe vs the brutality in the 2E version, 4E Eberron was not to bad relative to the 3.5 one. 

 Hollywood has bigger problems anyway and we're getting a few high profile bombs in the last few years (Disney outside Marvel has made a few). They somehow made the first Star Wars bomb and the movie wasn't even bad.


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 19, 2019)

hawkeyefan said:


> @_*Zardnaar*_ The data you’re citing is all about the fanbase prior to The Force Awakens being released. Based on that, it’s not surprising to find out that the “average fan” was someone who grew up on the original movies.
> 
> But that doesn’t mean that’s who the movie IS or SHOULD BE aimed at.
> 
> ...




 Trailer for IX, why does it have Lando in it and the Emperors laughing?

 TFA relied heavily on nostalgia.

 You need a certain amount of fan service in established franchises. Sure you can aim your movie at whoever you like but they took a 700 million dunking on TLJ compared with TFA.  People like saying it made 1.3 Billion, it didn't the studio only gets a % of that, TFA made 2 billion apparently the studio made 700 million. They lost money on Solo, the toys are not selling the evidence would suggest they should perhaps be aiming there movie at the fans. Its not like Star Wars was driving away female fans, and kids won't care to much about what type of space wizards they see onscreen. The hard core Star Wars fans probably would not care to much if you had a female protagonist, we've had plenty of them in the last 30 years consuming the old legends material and playing the games like KoToR. Serve up crap its gonna get dumped on (sorry Jar Jar its been 20 years though and much alcohol).

 You have to identify your target audience with products and "everyone" is a bit vague. You can also keep the fans happy and get new ones- 5E D&D for example.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Apr 20, 2019)

Rey repeating Luke's journey is probably a deliberate feature.
The idea of TFA seemed to simply retall the original Star Wars success story. Star War got as popular as it got because it had Luke's heroic journey and the underdog rebellion vs the evil overboarding Empire. If they want to recapture that success and build a new series of movies on that, they need to tell that story again to the "modern" audience. And by making the hero a female, they might also grow the audience a bit, because maybe a lot of men would already watch Star Wars just for the space fights and the "brand" image, but women might need something extra. It's basically dragging Star Wars out of a "male nerd" niche. 

But maybe really thatis part of the problem - if there is a problem with a billion dollar franchise at all - maybe it's all a bit too much formula, and not enough novelty. That was something Rian Johnson might have felt, hence "subverting all the expectations". But while Abrams might have gone overboard on the copy & paste, Rian Johnson seemed to have forgotten that the subversion needs to open interesting new story avenues. At the end of TLJ, it feels to me like we sit in front of a big nothing. There is no open question or clear direction where to, except the most generic: "Guess the Resistance has to rebuild itself _somehow_!" At the end of ESB, you could wonder about how they could get Han out of Jabba's hands, and how Luke would deal with the news about Vader. Did Vaders offer of ruling the galaxy together mean anything?


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Apr 20, 2019)

Mercurius said:


> @_*Zardnaar*_, I empathize with some of your issues with TLJ and don't think questioning whether Rey is a Mary Sue or not is inherently sexist, but I think you are going a bit overboard in trying to line her up with Luke and compare them in every detail. No matter what way you look at it, their "Mary Sueness" is similar.
> 
> The only thing that bothered me about Rey's Mary Sueness in TFA was how she could hang with Kylo Ren in a lightsabre duel. I know he was injured, but  it still seemed a bit absurd and definitely damaged my suspension of disbelief. But _overall_ she wasn't really any more Mary Sueish than Luke. If she was, it wasn't by much - and not worth getting upset about.
> 
> ...




Maybe I watch a lot more anime and cartoons than you, but from what I’ve seen, the heroine who refuses to solve a conflict with violence, and thereby does what couldn’t have been done through violence, is a very well represented trope. Almost stereotypical, I’d go so far as to say. 

Show me a male hero who does that, and I’ll be impressed and surprised. (Well, only in terms of recent works. Cap, Superman, Spider-Man, the Flash, and even Batman, have all done that many times in the comics and cartoons, it’s just more common for Wonder Woman, Magical Girl Heroes like Sailor Moon, etc). 

I think it’s more interesting to see heroes like Carol Danvers, whose story doesn’t revolve around her gender, alongside heroes like Wonder Woman, whose gender is relevant but whose story wouldn’t be completely different if she were a guy.


----------



## Mercurius (Apr 20, 2019)

[MENTION=6704184]doctorbadwolf[/MENTION], I watch absolutely zero anime or cartoons, so can't comment on that. 

And yeah, it would be nice to see a male hero that doesn't solve everything through brute force.

I don't disagree with what you said re: Carol Danvers and WW, but also think there's room for exploring gender-flavored themes and ideas (e.g. "How might a woman use the Force differently than a man?").


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 20, 2019)

The man who doesn't use violence- Doctor Who (well women now).


----------



## Morrus (Apr 20, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> The man who doesn't use violence- Doctot Who (well women now).




Dude, come on. Spend that extra second making your posts coherent.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Apr 20, 2019)

Mercurius said:


> [MENTION=6704184]doctorbadwolf[/MENTION], I watch absolutely zero anime or cartoons, so can't comment on that.
> 
> And yeah, it would be nice to see a male hero that doesn't solve everything through brute force.
> 
> I don't disagree with what you said re: Carol Danvers and WW, but also think there's room for exploring gender-flavored themes and ideas (e.g. "How might a woman use the Force differently than a man?").




My issue is, why would a woman use the force differently, in a universe or where they seem to take it for granted that female and male humans (much less other species) aren’t meaningfully different? Regardless of any “liberal orthodoxy” or whatever the phrase was in your earlier post, the SW Galaxy doesn’t pay any mind whatsoever to any meaningful difference between human sexes or genders, beyond some elements of fashion and gendered pronouns and titles. 

If you swap Han and Leia in the OT, the audience will feel differently about them, but nothing about the fictional universe actually changes, for instance.


----------



## Satyrn (Apr 20, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> The man who doesn't use violence- Doctot Who (well women now).




There's also Shorelock Holmes.


----------



## Morrus (Apr 20, 2019)

Satyrn said:


> There's also Shorelock Holmes.




Who?


----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 20, 2019)

Yeah yeah I tabbed out playing Stellaris typed fast hit post and tabbed back in.


----------



## Jester David (Apr 20, 2019)




----------



## Zardnaar (Apr 21, 2019)

Jester that's a weak excuse. I provided links above avout the typical fan. If it was aimed at kids why lean heavily on nostalgia?

 The kids grew up and have money and kids if their own.


----------



## MarkB (Apr 21, 2019)

Zardnaar said:


> Jester that's a weak excuse. I provided links above avout the typical fan. If it was aimed at kids why lean heavily on nostalgia?
> 
> The kids grew up and have money and kids if their own.




And those kids have also watched the previous trilogies and want more of the same.


----------



## Mercurius (Apr 21, 2019)

doctorbadwolf said:


> My issue is, why would a woman use the force differently, in a universe or where they seem to take it for granted that female and male humans (much less other species) aren’t meaningfully different?




I disagree with this assessment. First of all, the Star Wars universe is based upon our own in which male and females _are_ "meaningfully different," at least if you think biology and tens of thousands of years of cultural patterns matter. Secondly, even if we view SW as an entirely different universe, it is still based upon mythic ideas from our world, in which there male and female are quite archetypally different. In fact, some have criticized Joseph Campbell's Hero's Journey for being overly male-centric, that the "female journey" is or can be quite different.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Apr 21, 2019)

Mercurius said:


> I disagree with this assessment. First of all, the Star Wars universe is based upon our own in which male and females _are_ "meaningfully different," at least if you think biology and tens of thousands of years of cultural patterns matter. Secondly, even if we view SW as an entirely different universe, it is still based upon mythic ideas from our world, in which there male and female are quite archetypally different. In fact, some have criticized Joseph Campbell's Hero's Journey for being overly male-centric, that the "female journey" is or can be quite different.




There is no evidence that the SW Galaxy is as deeply gender split as our own, or that the same cultural and influences exist to push people toward the same roles and tropes such male aggression and female nurturing, etc. There is a good deal of positive evidence that the SWG does not feature those elements. 

SW shares this with much of fantasy and science fiction in general. 

Beyond that, I’m not sure what would be new at all about what you’re proposing. The heroine being a nurturer or peacemaker instead of a warrior...isn’t new. It’s the overwhelming cultural assumption of most media.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Apr 21, 2019)

Double post


----------



## Mercurius (Apr 21, 2019)

doctorbadwolf said:


> There is no evidence that the SW Galaxy is as deeply gender split as our own, or that the same cultural and influences exist to push people toward the same roles and tropes such male aggression and female nurturing, etc. There is a good deal of positive evidence that the SWG does not feature those elements.
> 
> SW shares this with much of fantasy and science fiction in general.
> 
> Beyond that, I’m not sure what would be new at all about what you’re proposing. The heroine being a nurturer or peacemaker instead of a warrior...isn’t new. It’s the overwhelming cultural assumption of most media.




You're reading too much into what I'm saying. In truth, I'm not proposing anything specific, like heroine as nurturer or peacemaker. If anything I am suggesting that what a hero/heroine is can be quite different, and that there are interesting archetypal possibilities to explore. 

Furthermore, you seem to ignore the fact that SW is based on Joseph Campbell's ideas about mythology, which very much embrace different masculine and feminine archetypes.

Look, I get what you don't like and I don't like it either: that men or women "have to" be a certain way along culturally bound stereotypes; and we both like our fantasy to be free from such notions. But I'm talking more along an _archetypal_ level, which fits in with the mythological view of Campbell and the original vision of Star Wars, and would allow for deeper differences in male and female beyond just different body shapes and cultural stereotypes. Unfortunately in today's cultural debates, the differences between a stereotype and an archetype are not well understood.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Apr 21, 2019)

Mercurius said:


> You're reading too much into what I'm saying. In truth, I'm not proposing anything specific, like heroine as nurturer or peacemaker. If anything I am suggesting that what a hero/heroine is can be quite different, and that there are interesting archetypal possibilities to explore.
> 
> Furthermore, you seem to ignore the fact that SW is based on Joseph Campbell's ideas about mythology, which very much embrace different masculine and feminine archetypes.
> 
> Look, I get what you don't like and I don't like it either: that men or women "have to" be a certain way along culturally bound stereotypes; and we both like our fantasy to be free from such notions. But I'm talking more along an _archetypal_ level, which fits in with the mythological view of Campbell and the original vision of Star Wars, and would allow for deeper differences in male and female beyond just different body shapes and cultural stereotypes. Unfortunately in today's cultural debates, the differences between a stereotype and an archetype are not well understood.




Nope. I understand you perfectly, and I disagree with you. 

Star Wars is no more bound to Campbell than it is to Taoism, and likewise not bound to IRL cultural bounds. It’s speculative fiction.


----------



## Mercurius (Apr 21, 2019)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Nope. I understand you perfectly, and I disagree with you.
> 
> Star Wars is no more bound to Campbell than it is to Taoism, and likewise not bound to IRL cultural bounds. It’s speculative fiction.




Evidently you don't understand me perfectly because I'm not saying SW is "bound" to Campbell, Taoism, or anything in particular - including whatever the latest ideological trends of Hollywood. I _am_ saying that SW is richer for being connected to deeper ideas of myth (Campbell) and spiritual wisdom (Taoism).


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Apr 21, 2019)

Mercurius said:


> Evidently you don't understand me perfectly because I'm not saying SW is "bound" to Campbell, Taoism, or anything in particular - including whatever the latest ideological trends of Hollywood. I _am_ saying that SW is richer for being connected to deeper ideas of myth (Campbell) and spiritual wisdom (Taoism).




The difference is semantic. Your posts continually push those infleunces quite strongly as things that must be contended with. Telling me that I’m “ignoring” the connection of Campbell, for instance. 

The actual point of contention is whether it’s new and interesting to make female heroes that are different from male heroes because of their gender. IMO, few things could be less new or interesting.


----------



## GreyLord (Apr 21, 2019)

Morrus said:


> Who?




Shorelock Holmes!

You know, he had a famous brother named Sherlock that everyone always woos over...but poor Shorelock is always forgotten.  Shorelock was the beach dude who was an awesome surfer.  If there was a wave, he'd surf it.  Unfortunately, he couldn't get further away than 400 meters before he'd have too much temptation and have to catch a big one.  He always was stuck somewhere close to the shore.  On waves, he'd obviously surf back to shore...and when he wanted to go inland, just missed the surf far too much.

He is famous for inventing the quotes...

Dude
Far Out
Spaced
Curl

And other such famous things.  He'd probably be better known along with his side kick Watch Her, but that Sherlock just seemed to get all the media attention back in the day instead of Shorelock.


----------



## Mercurius (Apr 21, 2019)

doctorbadwolf said:


> The difference is semantic. Your posts continually push those infleunces quite strongly as things that must be contended with. Telling me that I’m “ignoring” the connection of Campbell, for instance.
> 
> The actual point of contention is whether it’s new and interesting to make female heroes that are different from male heroes because of their gender. IMO, few things could be less new or interesting.




The difference isn't as much semantic as it is subtle. Being "bound" implies imprisonent; but being rooted in or connected with implies depth and lineage to a tradition of thinking.

Anyhow, what is your issue with recognizing that men and women are different? Do you really prefer to see female heroes that are completely interchangeable with male heroes, as if there are no differences between the two when there clearly are, if only on the biological and physical level? 

And a question: do you see a difference between stereotypes and archetypes?


----------



## Satyrn (Apr 21, 2019)

GreyLord said:


> Shorelock Holmes!
> 
> You know, he had a famous brother named Sherlock that everyone always woos over...but poor Shorelock is always forgotten.  Shorelock was the beach dude who was an awesome surfer.  If there was a wave, he'd surf it.  Unfortunately, he couldn't get further away than 400 meters before he'd have too much temptation and have to catch a big one.  He always was stuck somewhere close to the shore.  On waves, he'd obviously surf back to shore...and when he wanted to go inland, just missed the surf far too much.
> 
> ...




That's a far far better answer than I was gonna give.

Or should I say, "Far out, my dear Watch Her."


----------

