# We saw a Star War! Last Jedi spoiler thread



## Morrus

Seen it! Best of the new films yet, not as good as Empire. Some surprises. 

Luke was bad-ass. Snoke was awesome. 

A few bits were too silly/comedy for Star Wars (the bit where the top of the ATST ejects and it’s BB8, and then they do the super CGI run away on top of it stands out).

So - the First Order. It’s just a roving gang of a half dozen Star Destroyers? Now commanded by a teenager with a temper? It kinda feels like the galaxy could just ignore the handful of people fighting each other.


----------



## Morrus

Other thoughts:

- If you can take out a fleet of Star Destroyers by just flying a ship at light speed into them, why isn't that the standard tactic?
- Awesome to see Yoda! 
- Jedi are definitely getting more powerful as the films go on!
- Snoke was better than expected. No explanation who he is. Did NOT expect to see him go out like that.
- Super space flying Leia looked and felt silly to me.
- Porgs are tribbles.
- I wonder how they'll write Leia out; she doesn't die in it.
- BB8 pretending to be a mouse droid was funny. He did go over the top who the slapstick too much though.
- Chewie may as well not have been in it.
- Casino planet sequences felt very prequel-ish to me.
- Luke was seriously awesome at the end. At first I thought he was already dead and was there as a force ghost.
- So the main three are all out of the series now. That feels a bit sad. 3PO and R2 got about a minute's screen time between them.
- I love Star Destroyers and I love Imperial Architecture.

I rank it above Force Awakens, below Empire and ANH, above RotJ. I think. Not sure yet!


----------



## pukunui

I've seen it twice now. Left the theater the first time feeling somewhat dissatisfied, but some things clicked into place after mulling it over for a while. More of it came together on the second viewing, which I enjoyed a whole lot more.

- Leia in space was terrible. One of the worst things I've ever seen in a Star Wars movie, and at first I couldn't figure out why Carrie would've agreed to something so cheesy, but then I remembered that it's Carrie.

- Yoda told Luke that Rey didn't need what was in the "Jedi texts", but he neglected to mention that Rey had already absconded with them. (Took me the second viewing to be sure about that.)

- Poe's arc was confusing to me the first time, but after the second viewing, it made a lot more sense. He clearly goes from being a hot-headed, mutinous pilot to a proper leader, which is why Leia defers to him at the end.

- Part of me wanted to be offended by all the obvious torch-passing stuff that was going on in this movie, but I found I didn't really mind it so much the second time.

- The porgs are so adorable!

- I still want to know Snoke's backstory. Apparently Lucasfilm has figured it out, so hopefully they'll reveal it at some point. The only bit I've been able to learn so far is that he comes from the Unknown Regions.

- I wasn't sure if maybe the thing about Rey's parents being junk dealers was another lie/misdirect from Ben, but given that the dark side didn't show her her parents either has me thinking that he was telling the truth. She's not a Skywalker (or anyone else important).

- Phasma is a complete waste of Brienne of Tarth's Gwendoline Christie's talents. That said, whadda ya wanna bet she shows up again in IX? I mean, she somehow survived the destruction of the Starkiller Base (after being dumped in a trash compactor), so surely she can survive falling into a fireball.

- Did I mention that the porgs are awesome?

- The "caretakers" were a bit on the too silly/extraneous side for me, especially since they just seem to appear out of nowhere the first time we see them.

- I *loved* the bit where Luke tricks Rey with the leaf. And the bit at the beginning where Poe makes fun of Hux.


----------



## pukunui

Morrus said:


> So - the First Order. It’s just a roving gang of a half dozen Star Destroyers? Now commanded by a teenager with a temper? It kinda feels like the galaxy could just ignore the handful of people fighting each other.



I know Ben *acts* like a teenager, but he's meant to be around 30 years old. Also, I got the impression that that fleet was just part of the First Order, not the whole thing. The opening crawl talks about how Snoke's "legions" rule the galaxy, and Poe et al refer to taking on *a* dreadnought (implying that the one they destroyed was not the only one).

As for that last bit, it seems like the rest of the galaxy *is* ignoring the conflict (at least the parts not profiting from it). Leia's "allies" refused to come to her aid, after all.


----------



## ccs

The First Order.  

What a sad, incompetent, bunch of morons.  All of them - troops, Phasma, officers, Kylo Ren, Snoke.  
It was like watching Cobra in the old GIJoe cartoons from the 80s.


----------



## trappedslider

I don't think anything Star Wars will be able to beat ESB for some of the fans, oddly I'd like to go see it again,which hasn't happened since episode I.


----------



## Morrus

pukunui said:


> I know Ben *acts* like a teenager, but he's meant to be around 30 years old. Also, I got the impression that that fleet was just part of the First Order, not the whole thing. The opening crawl talks about how Snoke's "legions" rule the galaxy, and Poe et al refer to taking on *a* dreadnought (implying that the one they destroyed was not the only one).As for that last bit, it seems like the rest of the galaxy *is* ignoring the conflict (at least the parts not profiting from it). Leia's "allies" refused to come to her aid, after all.



I know the crawl says that, but without that you’d get no sense that the First Order was anything more than a mid-sized organised gang. They don’t show anything in the movies. 

Do they hold territory? Is there a government? All you ever see is a single army. And the entire command structure appears to be Snoke -> Kylo -> Hux -> Phasma -> Stormtroopers (and they're all on those half dozen ships). Are there others? Regional governors, other armies, more ships? Are there stormtroopers on Tattooine? Is there an actual government?

Are they actually ruling the Galaxy now like the Empire was?  It feels more like just Snoke and his handful of ships vs Leia and her handful of ships in a corner of the galaxy somewhere. More like a small gang war than galactic civil war. The Galaxy has, what, a million inhabited planets? And we have about a dozen ships fighting each other?

Starkiller Base, for all its plot issues, showed how the FO could threaten an entire galaxy. I can’t see how a dozen Star Destroyers could though. 

I get the sense there’s more info in books and comics and stuff? Is Kylo now ruling the galaxy? Nobody’s fighting the FO now, right? I guess I just want more information about the First Order!


----------



## epithet

I left the theater feeling a general unease, an unfocused anger that took me a while to understand. Now that I've slept on it, I think I have a handle on the source of my ire.

The new movies have deconstructed and destroyed the heroes of the original trilogy.

The OT heroes were Luke, Leia and Han. Luke was defined by being a jedi, and his purpose was to "pass on what [he had] learned." He failed, then gave up, then cut himself off from the force and went into hiding. Leia was defined by her belief in the Republic and her struggle to restore it. Despite the Republic prevailing over the remains of the Empire, Leia was forced out of the Republic Senate and driven into a sort of exile while the Republic disregarded the threat of the New Order to its peril. In The Force Awakens, the Republic is effectively destroyed when the Senate and the Republic fleet are blown up, and in The Last Jedi her failure becomes complete as the resistance is decimated and her allies abandon her. Han Solo was not an idealistic crusader, what mattered to him were the people in his life. Han didn't care much about the Jedi, but he cared about Luke. He didn't burn with Republic patriotism, but he loved Leia. What do they do to Han? His marriage is ruined, his only child estranged, and even his fellow scumbags seem to have all turned against him. Only Chewy and Maz seem to want to have anything to do with him, and when he tries to reach out and mend his relationships his failure becomes tragically complete, as he is contemptuously cut down by his own son.

The message is clear: the "heroes" of the Rebel Alliance are abject and complete failures, and it is up to Mary Sue and the fresh-faced millennials to clean up the mess they've made of things.

I grew up with Star Wars. I saw the original Star Wars (later "A New Hope") in 1977, at the age of 7. Han, Luke, and Leia were the heroes of my childhood, and for 30 years after The Return of the Jedi I was confident that in that galaxy far, far away, the heroes of the Rebel Alliance had restored the Republic and fulfilled their epic destinies. Now, along comes JJ Abrams and Rian Johnson and Kathleen Kennedy, and they decide that the heroes of my childhood should be rewritten as failures. Their failures don't just present challenges for Mary Sue and the millennials, they practically invalidate their triumph over the Empire. A new villain indistinguishable from a Sith Lord has created an even bigger Death Star and crushed the Republic, dominating the galaxy with his New Order which is indistinguishable from the Palpatine's Empire. It's not that new challenges have arisen, and the heroes need to rely on a new generation to face the threat together. No, its that the exact same threat has returned to invalidate whatever victories you thought the heroes had achieved, and a new generation needs to learn from the failure of the last one.

I'm also not at all enamoured by the JJ Abrams signature clumsy misdirection thing. Either Snoke is not permanently dead (perhaps because of some Plagueis thing) and we'll get some idea of who he is, where he came from, and how he brought about the resurgence of the Imperial Remnant as the New Order, or this new trilogy has made a super-powerful dark side master a generic villain. Either Rey's parents are much more than just baby-selling junk scavengers, or there is no legacy of the Skywalker lineage. In other words, either we got a load of clumsy misdirection (and outright trolling) or the whole story of the trilogy sucks.

Now, I know Rey is, on some level, supposed to be a Skywalker. Force users can come from anywhere, but the two most powerful force users we've ever seen are probably representative of the two sides of the Skywalker legacy. Also, The Force Awakens was pretty blatant about it when Kylo goes poking around in Rey's mind: he sees her driven by longing for a reunion with her family, and comments on the related dreams of the ocean, and the island. Unless Rey is related to the keepers or the porgs, she's got to be kin to Luke. Similarly, introducing Snoke as a character who has apparently survived multiple mortal wounds (including having his head cracked open at some point) makes it seem less unlikely that simply cutting him in half will keep him dead for very long. That's what I mean by clumsy misdirection--neither Snoke's abrupt bisection nor Rey's "you're not important to anyone but me" ancestry revelation are persuasive (to me,) but I also can't really claim to have much confidence, at this point, that this plot will be redeemed in the Episode 9 instead of just going all in on the "wipe out the past and start fresh" thing.

As it stands now, Han died for nothing, Luke is an emo ghost that died without having actually trained anyone, and Leia is the leader of a support group for survivors. And that's not cool.


----------



## Joker

From what I understand, they're going for a Saturday morning cartoon feel. Disney is making a streaming service and pushing for a shorter window between theatrical release and streaming availability. As short as two weeks. Coupled with the serial nature of the franchise, I wouldn't expect anything drastic to happen to any characters, either to them or their development. Like the MCU movies, by and large, there aren't going to be any real stakes in this property.


----------



## Legatus Legionis

.


----------



## Morrus

Legatus_Legionis said:


> Is anyone surprised how the SJW wants to destroy anything good from the past, including fictional heroes.




Please tell me that "SJW" doesn't stand for "Social Justice Warrior" in this sentence.


----------



## reelo

Morrus said:


> Please tell me that "SJW" doesn't stand for "Social Justice Warrior" in this sentence.



It probably does. 

Let me just add that I thoroughly enjoyed the film. My generation (I was born in 1980) had their trilogy. Two, even. It's time for our children to have theirs. My 7yo loves Kylo Ren, Poe, Finn and Rey. With Han dead, Luke a ghost, and Leia certainly absent from the next installment, the slate is clean for new adventures.
I've love Star Wars with all my heart since I was 10 or so, but I'm not angry nor salty about TLJ.

"Let the past die. Kill it, if you have to."

Sent from my Nexus 6P using EN World mobile app


----------



## pukunui

Morrus said:


> I get the sense there’s more info in books and comics and stuff? Is Kylo now ruling the galaxy? Nobody’s fighting the FO now, right? I guess I just want more information about the First Order!



Yeah. From what I've been able to glean, Snoke didn't have a permanent base. He just roamed around on that giant stealth bomber. He's an alien from the Unknown Regions that took over the remnants of the Empire that fled there after the Battle of Jakku. There are suggestions that Starkiller Base was Ilum, but Lucasfilm has provided no proof yet. I am hoping that they will reveal Snoke's backstory at some stage, whether it be in a novel or some other book or whatever.

I would also like to know what happened to the Knights of Ren. Snoke refers to them in The Force Awakens, but they don't appear in The Last Jedi. It is unclear if Ben founded the knights or if he just joined their ranks and rose to be their leader.



epithet said:


> The new movies have deconstructed and destroyed the heroes of the original trilogy.



Yes. As much as I enjoy the new films for what they are, this aspect of the stories bothers me as well. The state of the galaxy in the new trilogy renders everything everyone did in the original trilogy (and in Rogue One) more or less pointless. It's almost as bad as the Legacy Era from the EU.



> Either Rey's parents are much more than just baby-selling junk scavengers, or there is no legacy of the Skywalker lineage.



Ben Solo is the Skywalkers' legacy, and it seems to me that if he was lying to Rey about her parents, then so was the dark side itself, because when she asked to see her parents in the cave, it just showed her herself.

I think I would have preferred the new trilogy to stand more on its own merits. All the torch-passing that goes on, especially in the Last Jedi, just leaves me with a sour taste in my mouth.


EDIT: Also, when Luke tells Rey that he hid in a remote corner of the galaxy so he could die, it blows a gaping hole in the plot of TFA: if Luke didn't want to be found, why the hell is there a map leading to his location?


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Legatus_Legionis said:


> Is anyone surprised how the SJW wants to destroy anything good from the past, including fictional heroes.
> 
> They want the heroes to give in to evil, give in to their selfish side, and not care about others.  To give up the fight.  Let evil win.
> 
> This is the message I got from these last two star wars episode movies.
> 
> So I would not be surprised at all if episode IX has the evil empire/first order (new world order) take out the resistance once and for all and have whatever secret weapons Emperor Palatine had with the unknown region do the same with the republic.
> 
> 
> Tis a shame, as I expected more from Disney.




Amazing. Every single thing you just said was wrong.


----------



## Morrus

pukunui said:


> Yeah. From what I've been able to glean, Snoke didn't have a permanent base. He just roamed around on that giant stealth bomber. He's an alien from the Unknown Regions that took over the remnants of the Empire that fled there after the Battle of Jakku. There are suggestions that Starkiller Base was Ilum, but Lucasfilm has provided no proof yet. I am hoping that they will reveal Snoke's backstory at some stage, whether it be in a novel or some other book or whatever.




So he was a local warlord. The stakes are just... so much lower. The First Order isn't anything like the threat of the Empire - it's more like it's a well-trained biker gang. And they're fighting the A-Team. And the world at large doesn't really notice, except that one atrocity they managed to commit. 



> EDIT: Also, when Luke tells Rey that he hid in a remote corner of the galaxy so he could die, it blows a gaping hole in the plot of TFA: if Luke didn't want to be found, why the hell is there a map leading to his location?




That map was ridiculous even then. All you need is the coordinates. You either know them or you don't; it's a binary thing. A map doesn't help.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Morrus said:


> Other thoughts:
> 
> - If you can take out a fleet of Star Destroyers by just flying a ship at light speed into them, why isn't that the standard tactic?




Because it sacrifices a ship, which are so expensive and take so long to build that the Resistence is still relying mostly on the ships from the Rebellion, and it requires at least one person to die in the process. 

It also may just be difficult to pull off, without instead to just jumping past the other ships. 


> - Awesome to see Yoda!



 I was worried i wouldn't like it, when I saw his head, but it was great. 



> - Jedi are definitely getting more powerful as the films go on!



Not sure I agree. I don't think any of them did anything that was more powerful than what we saw in the prequels. Maybe in TFA with making the blaster bolt freeze in the air? Nothing Snoke did was more than just a strong mastery of "making things float". 



> - Snoke was better than expected. No explanation who he is. Did NOT expect to see him go out like that.



He was one of my favorite parts. He straight up dunked on himself with Kylo Ren, in the most "arrogant Dark Sider" way possible. 


> - Super space flying Leia looked and felt silly to me.



I mean, she's just pulling objects in space toward her with the force. It was cool to see her use the force, since we've known since the OT that she "has it", and it was a really simple usage. Her not dying in space fits with things we saw Jedi do in the Clone Wars, but also the whole things fits within the confines of basic physics+using theforce to move objects. If she'd flown in spite of gravity, that would have been lame. 



> - Casino planet sequences felt very prequel-ish to me.



 Same, though I suspect that you're not as happy about that as I was. It's all one universe, there definitely should be things that remind a viewer of the world painted by the prequels. [/quote]
- Luke was seriously awesome at the end. At first I thought he was already dead and was there as a force ghost.
- So the main three are all out of the series now. That feels a bit sad. 3PO and R2 got about a minute's screen time between them.
- I love Star Destroyers and I love Imperial Architecture.

I rank it above Force Awakens, below Empire and ANH, above RotJ. I think. Not sure yet![/QUOTE]

I'll never understand why people rank Empire above Jedi, but otherwise I agree. 

I'll add, that the three new main characters, and Rose, were all excellent, IMO. Even Kylo Ren was exactly what I hoped he'd be. 

I loved how badly Snoke got himself killed. And the unanswered questions were great. Who is he, what is he, how is he even alive, why is he so obsessed with the Skywalkers? I kinda hope that some of those never get answered. I don't like my movies to wrap everything up in a satisfying package. 

And the fact that Ren turned against Snoke, but not from the Dark Side, was great. 

My only real complaint was the apparent nods to the idea of the Light and Dark both being required for balance, rather than balance being a matter of the Dark Side being defeated. If they double down on that in the next one, it's gonna seriously hamper my enthusiasm for the franchise.


----------



## Morrus

doctorbadwolf said:


> Because it sacrifices a ship, which are so expensive and take so long to build that the Resistence is still relying mostly on the ships from the Rebellion, and it requires at least one person to die in the process.




One ship on autopilot vs. a fleet of star destroyers. Not doing that all the time is simple incompetence. 

I mean, star destroyers are historically easy to kill, but even so.



> I mean, she's just pulling objects in space toward her with the force. It was cool to see her use the force, since we've known since the OT that she "has it", and it was a really simple usage. Her not dying in space fits with things we saw Jedi do in the Clone Wars, but also the whole things fits within the confines of basic physics+using theforce to move objects. If she'd flown in spite of gravity, that would have been lame.




And yet it still looked stupid.



> I'll add, that the three new main characters, and Rose, were all excellent, IMO. Even Kylo Ren was exactly what I hoped he'd be.




Absolutely. Rey, Finn, Poe, Snoke, Kylo, Rey. All excellent. 



> I loved how badly Snoke got himself killed. And the unanswered questions were great. Who is he, what is he, how is he even alive, why is he so obsessed with the Skywalkers? I kinda hope that some of those never get answered. I don't like my movies to wrap everything up in a satisfying package.




I'm also happy with not everything being answered. I prefer the Clone Wars before they showed them to me. 



> My only real complaint was the apparent nods to the idea of the Light and Dark both being required for balance, rather than balance being a matter of the Dark Side being defeated. If they double down on that in the next one, it's gonna seriously hamper my enthusiasm for the franchise.




It's all just mumbo-jumbo. When it comes down to it, people do good things or bad things. Balance isn't a thing.


----------



## Mercurius

I haven't seen the film yet but from everything I've read, it just re-affirms my feeling that the new trilogy is nothing more or less than decent quality fan faction. TFA was a fun movie, but it lacked the originality and heart of the original trilogy, and even the scifi creativity of the sequel trilogy. It was like one of those reunion sitcoms where they get the gang back together again, but it doesn't feel the same. Or like watching 72-year old Mick Jagger sing "I Can't Get No Satisfaction," when we all realize the problem is that he's had far too much satisfaction.

Sort of like Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Morrus said:


> One ship on autopilot vs. a fleet of star destroyers. Not doing that all the time is simple incompetence.
> 
> I mean, star destroyers are historically easy to kill, but even so.




Do we know that it can be done on autopilot? Star Wars doesn't even seem to necessarily _have_ autopilot, and if it does, it's not good enough to obviate the need of a real pilot. Hell, the world doesn't make any sense when we start thinking about AI, because _why do they even need pilots?_

But when you have limited ships, you cannot use that tactic as a normal course of action. And again, it didn't look like she was just punching a couple buttons that then waiting for the end. She looked pretty busy, and everyone seemed surprised, including her allies. The implication seemed, to me, to be that what she was doing took both skill and timing, and knowledge of astrogation. 




> And yet it still looked stupid.



I couldn't possibly disagree more. It was fantastic, and perfect, IMO. I would have been fine with that being her end, though, floating in space, bathed in moonlight. ONly thing missing from Carry Fishers' wishes for her own death would be that she wasn't being strangled by her own bra. (seriously, she was the best human)




> Absolutely. Rey, Finn, Poe, Snoke, Kylo, Rey. All excellent.



And really, hasn't Star Wars always been about characters? The world never made sense, the plot was always kinda predictable and lame, but the characters have been awesome. 




> I'm also happy with not everything being answered. I prefer the Clone Wars before they showed them to me.



I will give the show credit for doing a better job of humanizing Anakin and showing his progression than the prequel movies did, to be fair. 



> It's all just mumbo-jumbo. When it comes down to it, people do good things or bad things. Balance isn't a thing.




Try telling that to annoying fans who insist that "grey jedi" are canon.


----------



## epithet

pukunui said:


> ...Ben Solo is the Skywalkers' legacy, and it seems to me that if he was lying to Rey about her parents, then so was the dark side itself, because when she asked to see her parents in the cave, it just showed her herself.
> 
> I think I would have preferred the new trilogy to stand more on its own merits. All the torch-passing that goes on, especially in the Last Jedi, just leaves me with a sour taste in my mouth.
> 
> 
> EDIT: Also, when Luke tells Rey that he hid in a remote corner of the galaxy so he could die, it blows a gaping hole in the plot of TFA: if Luke didn't want to be found, why the hell is there a map leading to his location?




Ben Solo is a dead end. He killed Han, there's just no coming back from that. I think the big take-away from the Rey-Kylo dynamic is that Kylo is as unredeemable as Rey is incorruptible. They seem clearly to me to represent opposite sides of the Skywalker coin, but only Rey can really have a future. As soon as Kylo killed Han Solo, it seemed to me that the only way this could all end was for Kylo to be the one to kill Snoke, knowing that it would be his end as well, because Kylo refused to allow Snoke to destroy Rey (who he would have already realized is his cousin) and thereby truly honor his grandfather's legacy which he spent so much of TFA misunderstanding.

The Force Awakens set out the paths of Kylo, Rey, and Finn. Finn rejected the New Order, and his destiny is to bring about its downfall. Rey has spent her entire life seeking her family, and her destiny is to find it and to embody the Skywalker legacy. Kylo has always sought to be as strong as Darth Vader, and we all know that the ultimate expression of Vader's strength was when he sacrificed everything to defeat the master of the dark side (Palpatine) and protect the scion of the Skywalker legacy. That's Kylo's destiny.

I am baffled by people who think that it is somehow a good thing for Rey to come from worthless parents. She's not just strong with the Force, she's operating at Luke levels. She's The Chosen One. Star Wars is an epic tale of Force and Destiny, where things unfold according to prophecy and the will of the Force guides the hand of fate. Rey's destiny is to become the next Skywalker, one way or another. If she isn't a Skywalker in name, then that only means that Lucasfilm has gone out of its way to crap on George Lucas and wreck everything he made, because the role of the Skywalker scion/Chosen One is quite obviously what Rey is filling.

With regard to the map, though, I have to defend at least the possibility of a coherent story element. Luke was searching the galaxy in his X Wing, which we saw in the water of Ah Choo. He has to have been using the Force to navigate, however, because he didn't have R2 with him. An X Wing needs an astromech because it lacks a navicomputer, but a Jedi can use the Force to navigate hyperspace. That means that there wouldn't necessarily be a known X,Y,Z coordinate of Ah Choo, but instead a series of seat-of-the-pants jumps that would originate in a known or recognizable star system and end up at Luke's final destination. Now, with that said, the only way that works is if somehow that list of directions and distance could find its way from Ah Choo to Lor San Tekka. Maybe Leia had arranged for Luke's X Wing to transmit that information after every jump, but those transmissions never made it all the way to her. Given a chance to hammer out the details, I could totally make that work, and I desperately cling to the hope that Lawrence Kasdan is better at this than I am.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

epithet said:


> I am baffled by people who think that it is somehow a good thing for Rey to come from worthless parents. She's not just strong with the Force, she's operating at Luke levels. She's The Chosen One. Star Wars is an epic tale of Force and Destiny, where things unfold according to prophecy and the will of the Force guides the hand of fate. Rey's destiny is to become the next Skywalker, one way or another. If she isn't a Skywalker in name, then that only means that Lucasfilm has gone out of its way to crap on George Lucas and wreck everything he made, because the role of the Skywalker scion/Chosen One is quite obviously what Rey is filling.




None of that stuff requires her to be a Skywalker. Ben may be the last Skywalker. Fine. As long as Luke isn't the last Jedi, his legacy continues.


----------



## Morrus

doctorbadwolf said:


> Do we know that it can be done on autopilot?




It would take quite the stretch of imagination to think that it can’t. We can fly planes in a straight line on autopilot now. And fly drones, so remote control. Or a droid. Or, yeah, one guy if necessary. War and all that. 



> I couldn't possibly disagree more. It was fantastic, and perfect, IMO.




I couldn’t possibly disagree more. It looked ridiculous. 



> Try telling that to annoying fans who insist that "grey jedi" are canon.




No, that’s OK. I won’t.


----------



## epithet

doctorbadwolf said:


> None of that stuff requires her to be a Skywalker. Ben may be the last Skywalker. Fine. As long as Luke isn't the last Jedi, his legacy continues.




I don’t see it that way at all. If Luke’s only connection to Rey is to train her as a Force ghost, that could just as easily be done Yoda. It completely removes the Skywalkers as crucial to the fate of the Galaxy.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

epithet said:


> I don’t see it that way at all. If Luke’s only connection to Rey is to train her as a Force ghost, that could just as easily be done Yoda. It completely removes the Skywalkers as crucial to the fate of the Galaxy.




Good. I don't want to watch 20 movies for the next 40 years that are just a string of the same people's kids.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Morrus said:


> It would take quite the stretch of imagination to think that it can’t. We can fly planes in a straight line on autopilot now. And fly drones, so remote control. Or a droid. Or, yeah, one guy if necessary. War and all that.
> 
> I couldn’t possibly disagree more. It looked ridiculous.




How did it look ridiculous? She pulled herself to the ship using the same power that other force users use all the time. How else could it reasonably have looked? 

ANyway, I'm not going to try to make computers in star wars make sense. They don't, and I don't think they ever will.


----------



## trappedslider

here


----------



## MarkB

Morrus said:


> - If you can take out a fleet of Star Destroyers by just flying a ship at light speed into them, why isn't that the standard tactic?



Because it usually doesn't work. Recall the scene at the end of Rogue One where the Rebel fleet are jumping out of the system, and Vader's Star Destroyer jumps in to cut off their escape route. The escaping capital ships don't rip through the Star Destroyer - they're pulverised against its hull without leaving a blemish.

The tactic used in The Last Jedi was likely just a perfect combination of circumstances - exactly the right distances, a pinpoint-accurate alignment, and a sufficiently large and powerful capital ship, the largest the Resistance had.



Morrus said:


> I know the crawl says that, but without that you’d get no sense that the First Order was anything more than a mid-sized organised gang. They don’t show anything in the movies.
> 
> Do they hold territory? Is there a government? All you ever see is a single army. And the entire command structure appears to be Snoke -> Kylo -> Hux -> Phasma -> Stormtroopers (and they're all on those half dozen ships). Are there others? Regional governors, other armies, more ships? Are there stormtroopers on Tattooine? Is there an actual government?




It does annoy me that these movies give no real sense of scale to the larger conflict, but I think we can assume that the fleet we saw was just a fraction of the First Order's strength. Rey says they control key systems across the galaxy, which has to require a large and well-organised force.


----------



## pukunui

Morrus said:


> So he was a local warlord. The stakes are just... so much lower. The First Order isn't anything like the threat of the Empire - it's more like it's a well-trained biker gang. And they're fighting the A-Team. And the world at large doesn't really notice, except that one atrocity they managed to commit.



*Wikipedia* has quite a bit of info gleaned from the Force Awakens Visual Dictionary. The First Order's origins bear more than a passing resemblance to Nazi Germany. After their defeat at Jakku, the Imperial remnants were "allowed" to have a small but heavily fortified region of space. The New Republic saddled them with crippling armistice treaties, then left them alone, thinking they wouldn't be a threat anymore.

Unbeknownst to the Republic, however, the Imperial remnants expanded into the Unknown Regions and began rebuilding their military power in secret. The First Order was formed when "centrist" worlds in the New Republic broke away and rejoined the Imperial remnants.

The First Order is described as a "rump state" and a "military junta". 

So they do have a power base, and once they destroyed the Republic Senate, they were able to blitzkrieg their way across Europe the galaxy. 

My guess is that Ben Solo is now the Supreme Leader of a good chunk of the galaxy. Perhaps not as much of it as Emperor Palpatine ruled over, but probably most of that same area, plus some of the Unknown Regions.




doctorbadwolf said:


> And really, hasn't Star Wars always been about characters? The world never made sense, the plot was always kinda predictable and lame, but the characters have been awesome.



Yes. George Lucas himself has said that it's basically a soap opera in space (hence the term "space opera"). 




doctorbadwolf said:


> My only real complaint was the apparent nods to the idea of the Light and Dark both being required for balance, rather than balance being a matter of the Dark Side being defeated. If they double down on that in the next one, it's gonna seriously hamper my enthusiasm for the franchise.



While I agree that this goes against what Lucas has said in the past ("the dark side is a cancer" and "balance = no dark side"), it does fit better with the real-world philosophies on which the Force is based.


----------



## Morrus

pukunui said:


> Wikipedia has quite a bit of info gleaned from the Force Awakens Visual Dictionary. The First Order's origins bear more than a passing resemblance to Nazi Germany. After their defeat at Jakku, the Imperial remnants were "allowed" to have a small but heavily fortified region of space. The New Republic saddled them with crippling armistice treaties, then left them alone, thinking they wouldn't be a threat anymore.
> 
> Unbeknownst to the Republic, however, the Imperial remnants expanded into the Unknown Regions and began rebuilding their military power in secret. The First Order was formed when "centrist" worlds in the New Republic broke away and rejoined the Imperial remnants.
> 
> The First Order is described as a "rump state" and a "military junta".
> 
> So they do have a power base, and once they destroyed the Republic Senate, they were able to blitzkrieg their way across Europe the galaxy.




Wow. The movies so do not portray that. They don’t even hint at it. I’d go so far as to say they portray a completely different reality. 



> My guess is that Ben Solo is now the Supreme Leader of a good chunk of the galaxy. Perhaps not as much of it as Emperor Palpatine ruled over, but probably most of that same area, plus some of the Unknown Regions.




What’s an Unknown Region? They never mentioned that in the film. 

I enjoyed the movie. But I’m not keen on having to do homework to make it make sense.


----------



## pukunui

Morrus said:


> Wow. The movies so do not portray that. They don’t even hint at it. I’d go so far as to say they portray a completely different reality.



They do not do a good job of world-building, no.



> What’s an Unknown Region? They never mentioned that in the film.



The Unknown Regions are the western part of the galaxy, mostly unexplored by the Republic/Empire. The concept originates in the EU but has been made canon through various means. 



> I enjoyed the movie. But I’m not keen on having to do homework to make it make sense.



That's understandable.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

pukunui said:


> Yes. George Lucas himself has said that it's basically a soap opera in space (hence the term "space opera").
> 
> 
> While I agree that this goes against what Lucas has said in the past ("the dark side is a cancer" and "balance = no dark side"), it does fit better with the real-world philosophies on which the Force is based.




I get that, for sure. However, Lucas resisted the notion of Dark Side as a natural part of the force, and grey Jedi, etc, so strongly, and I also just feel that it sets Star Wars apart. I’m bloody tired of shades of grey everywhere. It doesn’t need to be part of every franchise. 

Btw, I don’t think that the Unknwn Regions stuff is needed to understand the movies. It’s cool side info, but the movie tells us in the crawl that the First Order controls a large chunk of space in TFA, and that they’ve taken more systems in TLJ. I don’t want screen time dedicated to rehashing the crawl, personally.


----------



## Aexalon

Cf. the "why isn't ramming at lightspeed used more frequently in fleet engagements in SW?":

My hypothesis why it wasn't done immediately/repeatedly is because no-one expects it to work. In an (admittedly now Legends) comic from the early 1980s, the Executor gets hit by 3 Imperial-class star destroyers dropping out of hyperspace, and didn't suffer as much as a scratched paint job (its shields were heavily damaged, though):



Admiral Holdo might have only been trying to provide a bit of a distraction, not expecting the devastating effect the lightspeed ramming attempt actually had on the First Order fleet.

*Personal headcanon starts here.*

What actually happened was the result of the interaction between the Raddus trying to enter hyperspace on top of the Supremacy, and the Force-showdown between two of the most powerful (if perhaps inexperienced) Force users the galaxy had ever seen: Rey and Kylo Ren. The two actions coinciding in time and space resonated, and did not just snap Anakin/Luke's lightsaber in half, but shattered the Supremacy (and nearby Resurgent-class battle cruisers) as well.

*Personal headcanon ends here.*

But yes, that was the awesomest (inbetween a lot of other awesome) moments in the movie. Looking forward to seeing it again (for the 3rd time) tomorrow


----------



## Water Bob

No Spoilers...

My Review.

I FREAKIN' LOVED IT!!!!

It truly is the best Star Wars movie in 37 years.

The utter wonder for the universe is back, akin to the original trilogy--but more.  The Flash Gordon influence is there.  The WWII influence is there.  Supreme Leader Snoke holds his own against Emperor Palpatine.  I'd argue that Snoke may even out Emperor the Emperor.

The film is heroic.  It's funny.  It's got Jedi, with a BOOM!

It builds on the characters we were introduced to in The Force Awakens and makes them true Star Wars stars.

It's got heart felt moments.

In battle, those are real people out there dying...for a cause in which they believe with all their existence.

It's an incredible film with plot twists and turns you'll never see coming.

It's a GREAT Star Wars film.




Now...

Where would I put it in the line up?

Well, The Empire Strikes Back is just a perfect movie.  It's hard to beat that.

And...A New Hope is the one with the magic that started it all.  So, that's extremely hard to beat, too.

I place The Last Jedi third--a very close third.

In fact, I think these top three films--The Empire Strikes Back, A New Hope, and The Last Jedi are the cream of the crop.  The Best of the Best.  Better than the other films in the series.

The Empire Strikes Back
A New Hope
The Last Jedi

The Force Awakens
Rogue One
Return of the Jedi

Revenge of the Sith
Attack of the Clones
The Phantom Menace

I can see why Disney put Rian Johnson in creative control of the next trilogy.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Aexalon said:


> Cf. the "why isn't ramming at lightspeed used more frequently in fleet engagements in SW?":
> 
> My hypothesis why it wasn't done immediately/repeatedly is because no-one expects it to work. In an (admittedly now Legends) comic from the early 1980s, the Executor gets hit by 3 Imperial-class star destroyers dropping out of hyperspace, and didn't suffer as much as a scratched paint job (its shields were heavily damaged, though):
> 
> View attachment 92045
> 
> Admiral Holdo might have only been trying to provide a bit of a distraction, not expecting the devastating effect the lightspeed ramming attempt actually had on the First Order fleet.
> 
> *Personal headcanon starts here.*
> 
> What actually happened was the result of the interaction between the Raddus trying to enter hyperspace on top of the Supremacy, and the Force-showdown between two of the most powerful (if perhaps inexperienced) Force users the galaxy had ever seen: Rey and Kylo Ren. The two actions coinciding in time and space resonated, and did not just snap Anakin/Luke's lightsaber in half, but shattered the Supremacy (and nearby Resurgent-class battle cruisers) as well.
> 
> *Personal headcanon ends here.*
> 
> But yes, that was the awesomest (inbetween a lot of other awesome) moments in the movie. Looking forward to seeing it again (for the 3rd time) tomorrow




Totally possible. 

But also, shields seem to eat a decent amount of power in SW, so the dreadnaught may not have been running full shields. why would they? What possible offensive could they have used against it? 

The point is, I think the scene is pretty strongly meant to show a surprise strike that was a gamble, took skill to pull off, and wouldn’t have worked if the imperials had seen it coming. 

But lastly, it would almost never be worth it! There’s a reason that kamakazi tactics are extremely rare IRL. Many reasons, actually. It’s like suggesting that the US should have abandoned battleships with the engines at full to throw them at enemy ships in WWII. It would have been an _incredibly stupid_ tactic in 99% of scenarios.


----------



## Argyle King

My thoughts:

I enjoyed it. It's not anywhere near as good as The Force Awakens, but it was far better than Rogue One*.

I liked the movie. There were a lot of good moments. Though, I do feel like it lacked some of the OT soul; it tapped into a spirit that felt a little more like the prequels. Whether that's good or bad is going to depend upon if you preferred to original trilogy or the prequel trilogy.

Personally, despite enjoying the movie, I came away from it less enthused about where SW is going in future movies.    I feel okay about The Last Jedi, and I enjoyed seeing it in the theater, but I think it's a movie that I'm good with only seeing once.  I have no doubt that the brand name will continue to sell and continue to make money, but I cannot say that I believe in the quality of the new direction for the franchise.  


*I'm part of (what I think is) a minority who feels Rogue One was terrible.  For me, a lot of individual parts of that movie were really cool and awesome when viewed in isolation, but somehow those parts made for a jumbled messed of a lackluster movie when put together.  Visually, R1 looked awesome and (as said) I liked a lot of the individual scenes and characters when viewed in isolation, but I did not enjoy it.


----------



## Argyle King

doctorbadwolf said:


> Totally possible.
> 
> But also, shields seem to eat a decent amount of power in SW, so the dreadnaught may not have been running full shields. why would they? What possible offensive could they have used against it?
> 
> The point is, I think the scene is pretty strongly meant to show a surprise strike that was a gamble, took skill to pull off, and wouldn’t have worked if the imperials had seen it coming.
> 
> But lastly, it would almost never be worth it! There’s a reason that kamakazi tactics are extremely rare IRL. Many reasons, actually. It’s like suggesting that the US should have abandoned battleships with the engines at full to throw them at enemy ships in WWII. It would have been an _incredibly stupid_ tactic in 99% of scenarios.




I dunno... I'd categorize suicide bomber tactics as being analogous to kamikaze attacks, and they tend to be effective enough that military tactics have been adjusted to account for them as a method used by the enemy.  It's also interesting to note that Star Wars combat is heavily patterned after WWII combat and dogfights.  As such, kamikaze tactics aren't exactly alien to the tactics being used.  I'm also inclined to believe that such things would likely be attempted when faced with a no-win scenario, against a bigger and stronger ship.  If my choices are to die a certain and horrible death or to die a certain and horrible death while also possibly inflicting heavy loses on the enemy, the latter seems the far better option.

I'd agree that it's a poor tactic in the majority of scenarios, but I feel as though the scenario shown in the movie would easily fall within the 1%, and it seems that The Resistance/Rebellion often seems to be in similar scenarios.


----------



## Joker

We can't really require common sense to be a feature of Star Wars, a fantasy series. If we demand consistency from the battles, then why not just have kinetic weapons going at light speed? 
An X-Wing sized boulder going at several times the speed of light will likely do more damage than the "lasers" they use.


----------



## RangerWickett

No doubt, I loved The Last Jedi, but I think it needed some editing. Kill your darlings, authors are told, and some of the scenes were unnecessary and made the story weaker overall.

I'm an egotist, so here's my 2000-word idea to tighten it up. 

TL;DR - Phasma on Canto Bight, shuffle some scenes between the three threads, and cut out most of the action sequence on Crait so we can get from snuffing Snoke to Luke's showboating more quickly.


[sblock]The movie was fun and had a great core about the Force, but the surrounding narrative needed some work.

George Lucas’s original cut of Star Wars had numerous scenes that sapped the movie of momentum. I want to take a cue from Marcia Lucas, who reedited Star Wars into the theatrical version by tightening slack and using a few voiceovers to clarify plot points. She even added in the idea that the Death Star was approaching the rebel base on Yavin IV, which wasn’t in the original version George Lucas put together.

(Okay, I’d add some new scenes too, which Marcia Lucas didn’t have the luxury of.)

The core story of "Let the past die," and "Failure is a teacher" with Luke, Rey, and Kylo Ren was great. We keep that nearly unchanged.

I’d make three noteworthy narrative changes.


1. *Phasma pursues Finn *and Rose to the casino Canto Bight, raising the tension of that mission.

2. *Shuffle the slow-speed chase scenes.* Move the attack that nearly kills Leia to later in the ‘slow speed chase,’ and make it an act of rage by Kylo Ren after Rey tries to turn him through the psychic link.

3. The death of Snoke leads immediately to an assault on the base on the salt planet Crait, so there is *one climax, not two.*


*Slow Speed Chase, Pt. 1. *First, just for my sci-fi nerd nitpicking’s sake, I’d surround Crait with an asteroid field, to explain why the good guys didn’t come out of hyperspace right by the planet, and why the First Order can’t simply do a hyperspace jump to get ahead of them. It’s not even safe for fighters, so Kylo Ren doesn’t initially go attack.

As in the original, Rose and Finn figure out they're being tracked, and go to find a slicer who can help. We actually have Finn and Rose’s mission be condoned by Leia.

*Phasma’s Pursuit.* Poe wants to go with Finn, but Leia refuses because he disobeyed her in the opening action sequence. This forces Finn to be the lead hero, where previously he’d had Poe or Han with him. I’d make Rose slightly reluctant to go out on a mission while she's still grieving her sister's death. Finn thus has a chance to inspire Rose (who will in turn inspire others to join the resistance.) This plot thread was lacking in character growth, so let’s work some in.

Their ship departs, and is tracked by the First Order. Hux tells Phasma to pursue them, and says they know the rebels might go to ground on some nearby world, so while she's on Canto Bight, there's something he needs her to pick up. Phasma gives us an actual antagonist in this thread, raises the stakes, and makes the fight between her and Finn on the star destroyer more affecting.

Finn and Rose still see all the casino stuff that expands the Star Wars setting in a cool way, and they get accosted by a few storm troopers. Finn and BB8 take them out, while Rose initially fails to be effective. Finn gives her a pep talk afterward about how in his first firefight, he never even shot his blaster because he didn’t know what he was fighting for.

We simplify how they meet their slicer DJ (Benicio del Toro). He's gambling and seems like he might be willing to help, but they’re spotted by Phasma and have to flee. During the chase they come across the kids in the stables, and seeing their suffering galvanizes Rose. She convinces the kids to help, which leads to a quick mounted chase sequence.

The pair link back up with Benicio and force themselves into his hotel suite to hide. DJ can do his ‘arms dealer’ speech in his hotel room instead of a ship. He agrees to help them, and says to follow them to his ship, but when the hangar opens, it reveals the <del style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; color: rgb(79, 79, 79);">laser battering ram</del> Doom Cannon, which the First Order needs to crack into the bunker on Crait. And Phasma is in the hangar too.

Benicio has betrayed them, and Phasma takes them prisoner to execute back with the First Order. BB8 stows away on Phasma’s ship.

*Slow Speed Chase, Pt. 2.* Admiral Holdo (Laura Dern) gives a speech inspiring the forces to hold out hope, and then she dresses down Poe for caring more about his own glory than about the unity and morale of the movement. We don’t need Poe’s mutiny attempt, though, because we’ve shortened the casino plot, and thus don't need as many scenes for this plot.

We intercut as in the theatrical release with Rey on Ach-To. After Luke interrupts the hand-holding of Rey and Kylo, Kylo receives word that the resistance fleet is about to reach Crait. He's already angry, so he goes to board his fighter, disobeying Hux. Meanwhile Rey yells at Luke and decides to leave Ach-To.

Kylo flies through the asteroid field to try to kill Leia and free himself of his conflict. Leia orders fighters scrambled in defense, but to stay close to the ships where they have cover, but Poe still remembers being tortured by Kylo Ren, so he disobeys and gets reckless. His ship is clipped by an asteroid, and without BB8 to repair it, he can't stop Kylo.

Kylo still hesitates to kill his mother, but the TIEs attack and the lead ship’s bridge is destroyed. Leia still barely survives (but instead of flying through space, I’d have her stagger into the airlock right before the attack hits.)

Kylo withdraws, frustrated but unable to hold out any longer. Poe limps his X-Wing back onto the ship, horrified at his failure. And on Ach-To, Luke breaks down as he feels what he thinks is Leia dying. He destroys the temple and gets to see Yoda, which I thought was a great scene.

*The Climax. *A small beat I’d add early on is that when Snoke harasses Hux through his hologram, people on the bridge react to the power on their consoles flickering and the room darkening, as a sort of electronic interference due to the power of the Dark Side. Also, for narrative simplicity, I’d have Snoke on the same ship as Hux.

So, with Leia heavily injured, Rey shows up on the First Order capital ship, and Phasma brings in the Doom Cannon and her two prisoners. Hux smugly gathers his forces so they can witness the execution of the traitor FN-2187, and we have a scene on the resistance cruiser where they pick up communications chatter, of forces being ordered to attend the execution.

Laura Dern’s admiral tells Poe that Finn’s mission was a failure, but the First Order will be distracted. This will be their one chance. They’ll break out of the cover of the asteroid field and send shuttles to head for the planet’s surface. She and a skeleton crew on the cruiser will provide them cover.

Finn gives a short, defiant speech to the gathered storm troopers, with the theme that he’s been more in control of his life during his few days as a rebel than he ever was as a soldier. As they’re bringing out the axes for Finn & Rose, Phasma tells Hux that the resistance fleet is breaking from the asteroids. Hux sighs, laments he’ll miss the execution, and heads for the bridge, ordering the Doom Cannon to be readied in case any resistance ships get past them.

We play the two imminent executions in parallel - Rey in front of Snoke and Finn & Rose in front of the First Order, while the resistance shuttles are fired upon, and Poe is helpless, tending to a weak Leia. Then Kylo has his awesome execution of Snoke, except in our version he’s a sort of ‘load-bearing boss.’

His death releases a pulse of Dark Side energy that knocks out the shields to the First Order fleet. Admiral Laura Dern hears the shields are down and sees they have a momentary opening, so she sends the ship to light speed.

That shatters half the First Order fleet. We get to keep the coolest visual of the whole movie without raising the question why nobody else ever tried this in the other movies. And it creates chaos so Finn and Rose can make a break for it. Kylo Ren and Rey fight off the Praetorian Guard, and after Rey rejects Kylo and flees, she and Finn both get a signal from Chewie, who has flown in on the Falcon. She realizes where Finn is and reunites with him in the exploding hangar bay. Rose, who was excited to meet Finn, positively geeks out at meeting Rey, but only for a moment, and they escape in the knick of time as the shuttle bay explodes.

Unlike the theatrical version, we don’t slow down very long here. Hux rushes to the Supreme Leader’s chambers and gets put in his place by Kylo, who orders an immediate assault on Crait. Kylo leads the forces down, but Hux tells one of his subordinates to command the assault (mostly to trim the number of characters in our climax).

The Resistance ships skid their way into the hangar, and Poe notices the ‘snow’ is actually salt. They get a report that ships are incoming, and they start to close the door. It’s nearly shut when Leia senses Rey, and Poe recognizes the Falcon. The door shuts before they can get inside, but they call to Finn and Rey, who are pursued by TIEs.

Leia asks if Luke’s with them, but Rey says she failed. Finn says his mission was a bust too. Poe glances to Leia’s injuries and says something to the effect of yeah, this day isn’t making any of them look good.

Rose says that they’re seeing a huge First Order landing force, including the Doom Cannon, which will blast right through their door. They’ll circle and look for something that might possibly help. Leia tells them to just run, but everybody on the Falcon refuses, saying they need Leia to rally people against the First Order. Poe insists, and says that they need to follow orders before anyone else dies for no reason. Finn scoffs and says to wait a few more minutes before giving that order.

The First Order lands, has a defensive perimeter of walkers, and begins to charge their laser. The crew on the Falcon try to make an attack run (and kick up some salt revealing swaths of red crystal in the process), but they get driven off by TIEs that pursue them. The Doom Cannon fires, slags the door, and destroys a couple shuttles. Kylo orders the cannon readied for another shot.

Leia slumps, saying this must be where the light dies. And then Luke arrives.

From there, the climax plays out basically the same, which was excellent. During the distraction, Poe figures out the way out, Rey lifts rocks, and they fly off in the Falcon. Luke trolls Kylo and the First Order, apologizes for his failure, then passes on in serenity.

*The Denouement.* Our grace note is on the Falcon, safely in hyperspace. Rose tells Poe what Finn said just before his execution, and Finn is uncomfortable in the role of hero, brushing it off. He claims he was just stalling to stay alive. Rose says that still, it inspired her.

Then we cut to Maz Canata, recounting to a couple wannabe heroes in a bar the tale of a single pilot swooping over the ruins of her cantina, taking out fifty TIEs by himself; then a trio of First Order storm troopers warily loading weapons onto a transport, before taking off their helmets and hurling them off the ship in disdain before flying away to join the rebellion; and then finally the kids telling the story about Luke, ending in that shot of a kid looking to the stars.[/sblock]


----------



## Water Bob

Here's another question...

Although strongly implied, are we completely sure of the reason Luke rebelled from the Jedi? Yes, it was the fiasco with Ben that effects him, but he seemed to set blame on the entire Jedi religion as well. What, exactly, turned Luke away from the Jedi?




An another question...

Who the HELL was Snoke?  Where did come from?  How did he get so strong in the Dark Side?  What happened to him to screw him up so--the damage to his body?


----------



## Morrus

Water Bob said:


> Who the HELL was Snoke?  Where did come from?  How did he get so strong in the Dark Side?  What happened to him to screw him up so--the damage to his body?




I hope we never find out. They ruined Boba Fett and Vader when they showed their origins. Han Solo, possibly, too next year. Some characters don't need an origin story - they work better when they're mysterious.


----------



## Morrus

doctorbadwolf said:


> It’s like suggesting that the US should have abandoned battleships with the engines at full to throw them at enemy ships in WWII. It would have been an _incredibly stupid_ tactic in 99% of scenarios.




If a single, smaller ship could destroy the *entire enemy fleet* that way, I'm sure they would have done.


----------



## Water Bob

Morrus said:


> I hope we never find out. They ruined Boba Fett and Vader when they showed their origins. Han Solo, possibly, too next year. Some characters don't need an origin story - they work better when they're mysterious.




I definitely see your point, especially about Vader.

But, I think it is inevitable that there will be some explanation about Snoke somewhere.  It may not be in Episode IX.  It may be in a novel (most likely) or a comic.



Man, I do not envy J.J. Abrams.  First, he's got to follow up that great film with the final installment, and on top of this, Johnson has left Abrams little to work with.   Snoke is dead.  It looks like Phasma is dead.  All the leads from the original trilogy are either dead in the films or passed in real life.  Abrams could get creative with Leias death in the films--something nice to honor Carrie Fisher.

My guess is that we're going to get a slew of new characters.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Morrus said:


> If a single, smaller ship could destroy the *entire enemy fleet* that way, I'm sure they would have done.




It isn’t the entire enemy fleet, though. It doesn’t even destroy all of what’s there. 

And no, they wouldn’t have done. Because the ship in TLJ is their best, biggest, ship, and what we see in Rogue One tells us that such a maneuver, at the very least, doesn’t always have that result. 

So, in nearly every situation, it would be stupid to throw your biggest (most advanced, most expensive, most limited in supply, most tactically) class of ship ship at someone on the slight chance that it might blow them up, if you time it just right and catch them with their defenses down. Like, that would be extremely bad tactics.


----------



## Morrus

doctorbadwolf said:


> So, in nearly every situation, it would be stupid to throw your biggest (most advanced, most expensive, most limited in supply, most tactically) class of ship ship at someone on the slight chance that it might blow them up, if you time it just right and catch them with their defenses down. Like, that would be extremely bad tactics.




You're changing it. Nobody said that "in every situation you should throw your biggest, most advanced, most expensive, most limited in supply, most tactically class of ship".

You don't throw your biggest ship. They threw their only ship (and it worked). If it were a *standard* tactic, you'd throw a smaller, empty ship. Some cargo ship or something. If you *have* to have a pilot do it, make it a droid.



> ...what we see in Rogue One tells us that such a maneuver, at the very least, doesn’t always have that result.




Not at all. The whole point of the tactic was that it hit the target at FTL speed. The ships in R1 aren't moving at FTL speed; they're just gearing up for it. They crash into the star destroyer at regular speed. The key to the tactic is the FTL speed part.

And it's worked exactly 100% of the times they've ever tried it. So, absent evidence the contrary, it works.

But, hey. It's not something I care enough about to try to defend any more. We're both talking nonsense about whether ramming ships at hyperdrive speeds is a valid tactic, after all.


----------



## epithet

Water Bob said:


> Here's another question...
> ...
> Who the HELL was Snoke?  Where did come from?  How did he get so strong in the Dark Side?  What happened to him to screw him up so--the damage to his body?






Morrus said:


> I hope we never find out. They ruined Boba Fett and Vader when they showed their origins. Han Solo, possibly, too next year. Some characters don't need an origin story - they work better when they're mysterious.




I don't think we need to know what he was like as a child, but there really has to be some context provided for Snoke. A dark side force master of that magnitude, who takes control of an army of space nazis and controls a significant percentage of the galaxy, is *A Big Deal*. To leave his nature and origin vague, as if it doesn't matter, is to suggest that the galaxy is actually full of them--that any group of space nazis with a fleet of ships will almost inevitably find a dark side demigod to lead them.

That said, I feel pretty certain we've not seen the last of Snoke. All you have to do is to look at him to see that he's been killed before, at least once by having his head crushed. I don't know how he's going to get reanimated or reassembled, but you don't tease his ability to survive like that and then kill him off with one slice, especially considering that Darth Maul already overcame an almost identical injury. In fact, I speculate that the entire reason Snoke's background has been left so vague so far is to avoid making it too obvious that simple straightforward mortal wounds are not enough to kill him permanently. Once he comes back and his background is made somewhat more clear, we'll be shaking our heads at how stupid Kylo has to be to have not seen it coming.

Snoke was built up as The Big Bad over a movie and a half, then summarily dispatched. I don't buy it. His bodyguards were more formidable than Snoke turned out to be (that was a pretty great fight scene.) It's like Rey's parents--the search for her parents was the defining motivation for her for a movie and a half, but we're supposed to accept that plot thread wrapped up with "they're nobody?" Pull the other one, it's got bells on. If her parents were "nobody" we would have seen them by now, in her memories or her vision in the cave. You don't make a big deal out of hiding "nobody."

Besides, we are certainly going to get more backstory on Ben Solo being seduced to the dark side, and the nature of the "Knights of Ren (and Stimpy)."


----------



## epithet

Morrus said:


> ...Nobody said that "in every situation you should throw your biggest, most advanced, most expensive, most limited in supply, most tactically class of ship".
> 
> You don't throw your biggest ship. They threw their only ship (and it worked). If it were a *standard* tactic, you'd throw a smaller, empty ship. Some cargo ship or something. If you *have* to have a pilot do it, make it a droid.
> ...




Ideally, you would throw a solid tungsten slug with the mass of a heavy cruiser, or just bolt a hyperdrive onto an asteroid.


----------



## Water Bob

As to the suicide run of Vice Admiral Holdo (I keep thinking Hodo, from GoT), that's an expensive ship.  It would be an expensive way to fight a war.

And, you would need the mass.  You could develop smaller, fighter sized missiles with droid brains and hyperdrives to do what Holdo did, and there would be some damage.  But, I don't think the damage would be devastating to the target.  They might not even punch through a target vessel.  Rather impacted on the surface, as we've seen with the Death Star and other vessels, like the A-Wing that suicides into the Executor's bridge in RotJ.

I wonder what the smallest limit it on a hyperspace capable craft?  The size of a fighter?  Smaller?  Could hyperdrive missiles be used, or are missiles too small to house hyperdrives?


----------



## Water Bob

Variety is reporting a $215 million opening weekend, which puts TLJ as the fourth largest domestic opening in history behind The Force Awakens, Jurassic World, and The Avengers.


----------



## Water Bob

Early reviews by viewers are not good.  Not good at all.

Critics love it.  (I love it.)

Rotten Tomatoes has the reviews from Critics at 93%, but the reviews from viewers at 57%.

MetaCritic is similar.  Metascore for Critics is 86.  For viewers is 5!


----------



## RangerWickett

With the Emperor, the backstory we got was, "The Emperor has dissolved the Senate. The last remnant of the old republic is now gone."

Sure, with the First Order and Snoke I'd like a couple lines, something like Hux proclaiming, "Our Supreme Leader found the quivering remnants of the old empire and forged us into a sword that has cut through our enemies on a hundred worlds," but that would be enough. How big is the First Order, was Snoke part of the empire or an outsider, and maybe a few other tidbits to provide contour for the personal stories of the characters.


----------



## MarkB

Water Bob said:


> I wonder what the smallest limit it on a hyperspace capable craft?  The size of a fighter?  Smaller?  Could hyperdrive missiles be used, or are missiles too small to house hyperdrives?




Roughly fighter-size - the Empire generally doesn't find it cost-effective to fit hyperdrives to their starfighters, and during the prequel era it was more common practice to use an external hyperdrive 'sled' to take smaller craft between systems.

Probably the smallest hyperdrive-capable vehicle we see in the movies are Imperial probe droids, which are essentially missiles carrying a surveillance droid as their 'warhead'.


----------



## epithet

RangerWickett said:


> With the Emperor, the backstory we got was, "The Emperor has dissolved the Senate. The last remnant of the old republic is now gone."
> 
> Sure, with the First Order and Snoke I'd like a couple lines, something like Hux proclaiming, "Our Supreme Leader found the quivering remnants of the old empire and forged us into a sword that has cut through our enemies on a hundred worlds," but that would be enough. How big is the First Order, was Snoke part of the empire or an outsider, and maybe a few other tidbits to provide contour for the personal stories of the characters.




Not really comparable, though. When we saw Star Wars for the first time, we had no background for the GFFA, so we could easily just accept the existence of an Empire that had, a generation ago, replaced the Republic, and an Emperor that had just dissolved the Senate.

Now, we know that the Empire was defeated and the Emperor killed 30 years ago, and that the Emperor was the most powerful dark side force user around. We know about the Sith, and the "rule of two," and that both of them were killed. We know that the Empire was the culmination of generations - perhaps thousands of years' worth - of sith machinations.

So, if you open the window 30 years later to show us another super-powerful dark side force user at the head of another (or maybe the same) galaxy-dominating army of space nazis, you really have some explaining to do. We saw the rebel alliance, with our heroes Luke, Leia, and Han, solve all these problems before. Now we're being shown our three heroes as a bunch of losers (a failed teacher who quit and went to pout for the last decade; a would-be patriot that was forced out of government, get her resistance movement decimated, and whose 'allies' abandon her in her moment of need; and a hustler on the run from pretty much everyone who left his wife and gave up on his kid, who tries to reach out to that kid and gets skewered and dropped down a hole by that kid.) We're being shown that they really might as well have not bothered, because the Sith Lord and his Space Nazis seems to be stuck on repeat.

I mean, I approached Ep 7 with enthusiasm. I didn't know what to expect our heroes to be up to 30 years later, but what I did not expect was to find them miserable, wretched, and pathetic. Ok, so they killed Han. I know they were talking about that in Ep 6, so it's not a huge shock. Surely that sacrifice will motivate Luke to get off his ass and join Leia, and surely Leia will be a beacon of hope around which the galaxy can rally, right? Nope. Welcome to Ep 8, where Leia proves to be the worst military commander ever, and where Luke is a whiny, self-absorbed failure. When he does snap out of it, he manages to be a badass for a couple of minutes, which is too much for him to handle and he just dies because reasons.

I digress.

My point is that we're not starting with a blank slate. We've got a galaxy far, far away that we left with the biggest problems solved and established heroes in their prime to tidy things up. If you start the sequel trilogy with "everything has gone to hell" I think you have to really do some work to explain why and how that happened.

And to those of you who argue that we need to move on beyond the Skywalkers and not focus on that legacy, I can see the appeal of that. I used to share that idea, too. The thing is, you can't move forward if you start by crapping all over the past. If your starting point invalidates everything - literally everything - that the last generation of heroes accomplished, you have to restore that legacy before you can leave it behind. I mean, you clearly don't _have_ to, but restoring the Skywalker legacy is, I think, something that has to be done before my generation is going to be willing to leave it behind. At this point, the only way I can see that happening is Rey Skywalker.

Han, Luke, and Leia fixed the galaxy. Rather than introduce a new challenge for the next generation to overcome, JJ and Rian decided to just invalidate and erase those fixes. That has to be justified, and whatever fixes the galaxy this time needs to come from the OT heroes, even if indirectly through their inheritors in this next generation. Otherwise, you're just flinging poo at those of us who grew up with Luke, Leia, and Han, trashing our heroes just to make Mary Sue and Darth Emo seem more impressive.


----------



## Morrus

RangerWickett said:


> With the Emperor, the backstory we got was, "The Emperor has dissolved the Senate. The last remnant of the old republic is now gone."




We got in more than that. We had a whole board meeting describing the governmental structure of the galaxy. We saw stormtroopers acting as police on remote planets. It was made very clear we were dealing with a rebellion against a galaxy-wide government. 

Even just the words “Emperor” and “Senate” communicated a lot. They’re words we understand to mean things. Absent future information, “Supreme Leader” could just be like the guy who runs Scientology.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Water Bob said:


> As to the suicide run of Vice Admiral Holdo (I keep thinking Hodo, from GoT), that's an expensive ship.  It would be an expensive way to fight a war.
> 
> And, you would need the mass.  You could develop smaller, fighter sized missiles with droid brains and hyperdrives to do what Holdo did, and there would be some damage.  But, I don't think the damage would be devastating to the target.  They might not even punch through a target vessel.  Rather impacted on the surface, as we've seen with the Death Star and other vessels, like the A-Wing that suicides into the Executor's bridge in RotJ.
> 
> I wonder what the smallest limit it on a hyperspace capable craft?  The size of a fighter?  Smaller?  Could hyperdrive missiles be used, or are missiles too small to house hyperdrives?




I think the scene suggests that it’s a special circumstance, and I think mass+shields not at full on the FO ships solves any inconsistency. 

In theEU, at least, hyperdrives wont fit on an A-wing. And obj-wan’s small ship needed a special ring.


----------



## MarkB

doctorbadwolf said:


> In theEU, at least, hyperdrives wont fit on an A-wing. And obj-wan’s small ship needed a special ring.




Not sure where you got that bit about the A-Wing. They canonically have hyperdrive in RotJ, and in the EU they're one of the Rebels' primary long-range reconnaissance craft.


----------



## Eltab

In WW2, Japan DID try to use a battleship as a kamikaze or at least a mobile fort -_ IJN Yamato_, sent to Okinawa.  It was sunk by overwhelming airpower before arriving, but took a record amount of punishment before sinking.

Suicide runs, intentional or not intentional (that A-Wing was not under the control of its pilot when it made the critical hit on _Executor's_ bridge) usually involve a smaller faster more-maneuverable craft that can chase down a bigger clumsy target even if the target tries to swerve or dodge.
And do also cogitate on _Millennium Falcon_'s "suicide run" in ESB that ended with Han shutting down all electronics and the _Falcon_ clinging to the side of an Imperial Star Destroyer.  In broad daylight - apparently Imperial sensors (and lookouts) only work when allowed by the power of plot.


----------



## Gadget

I saw the movie last night, and largely liked it.  It does not quite have the broad, mythic psudo-Campbellian strokes that the original trilogy had, but that could be considered quibbling.  I'm not really trying to put to much logic into the fleet and battle tactics (that almost never works out with these type of movies), and I realize that such things always 'moved at the speed of plot', but the long, slow chase seemed particularly egregious in this case.  They couldn't vector in another part of the fleet to head them off?  Or jump a couple of star destroyers ahead of them?

The move also veered a little too much into the silly territory for me, but that is nothing new with Star Wars, going back to the Ewoks.  I thought the whole 'parking violation' thing on the casino planet was particularly contrived.  They couldn't just have an imperial, sorry, New Order agent spot them and get the authorities onto them?  I did find the humor with Luke telling Rey to 'reach out' quite good, even though the side affect is that Rey seems far more advanced with the Force than she should be given her limited knowledge and training.  I guess that's the price you pay when you have to compress such a story.  

The more I think about it, the more I like Luke's whole 'Project Image' trick at the end.  An appropriately epic thing for a jedi master to do without being totally over the top.  Though I'm a little bit confused in the fact that he clasps hands with Leia and gave her Han's "fuzzy dice" from the Falcon, so it seems he could adjust how solid the image was to a degree; whereas when he fought Kylo Ren, he was merely an image without substance.  In fact Kylo Ren finds the "dice" when he finally enters the Rebel base, and they disappear from his hand when Luke disapparates into nothingness and becomes one with the Force.  Does that mean a sufficiently powerful jedi could have projected enough of an image to actually light saber duel with someone over a distance? 

I thought Kylo Ren was not really a bad guy to match Dearth Vader in TFA, what with his indecisiveness and petty rages, but then, who is?  It seemed they were setting him up to turn back to the light, but it seems that was more of smoke screen for the viewer, to bring about the big reveal here than anything.   I'm not sure how I feel about that...Maybe he will turn about in the final movie, and Snoke will return, as with the fan-theory?


----------



## ccs

Water Bob said:


> As to the suicide run of Vice Admiral Holdo (I keep thinking Hodo, from GoT), that's an expensive ship.  It would be an expensive way to fight a war.
> 
> And, you would need the mass.  You could develop smaller, fighter sized missiles with droid brains and hyperdrives to do what Holdo did, and there would be some damage.  But, I don't think the damage would be devastating to the target.  They might not even punch through a target vessel.  Rather impacted on the surface, as we've seen with the Death Star and other vessels, like the A-Wing that suicides into the Executor's bridge in RotJ.
> 
> I wonder what the smallest limit it on a hyperspace capable craft?  The size of a fighter?  Smaller?  Could hyperdrive missiles be used, or are missiles too small to house hyperdrives?




We already know that fighters can house hyperdrives.  Refer to the X-Wings as of ESB.


----------



## ccs

Water Bob said:


> Early reviews by viewers are not good.  Not good at all.
> 
> Critics love it.  (I love it.)
> 
> Rotten Tomatoes has the reviews from Critics at 93%, but the reviews from viewers at 57%.
> 
> MetaCritic is similar.  Metascore for Critics is 86.  For viewers is 5!




Surprise, the critics once again have the opposite opinion of the actual audiance.....
Usually works the other way around concerning action/sci-fi movies though.


----------



## pukunui

One little clue that all is not as it should be with Luke at the end (that I spotted the second time through): When he faces off against his nephew, he is wielding the same lightsaber that, mere movie moments before, was split into two as Ben and Rey fought over it.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

MarkB said:


> Not sure where you got that bit about the A-Wing. They canonically have hyperdrive in RotJ, and in the EU they're one of the Rebels' primary long-range reconnaissance craft.




You’re right. It’s been too long since I played Saga...

i even have an A-wing pilot!


----------



## RangerWickett

A friend has gotten me much more bitter about how Disney has treated Luke. I fundamentally dislike having him change so much from his former character, and having that change occur in a damned flashback. 

Luke was going to murder his nephew, even for a moment? Really? You've got to earn that. 

Nah, with more thought, the whole conceit of this movie is wrong.


----------



## Water Bob

pukunui said:


> One little clue that all is not as it should be with Luke at the end (that I spotted the second time through): When he faces off against his nephew, he is wielding the same lightsaber that, mere movie moments before, was split into two as Ben and Rey fought over it.




That's because it's not really Luke facing Ben.  It's a Force Projection.  Luke never left the world where Rey found him.

Note, too, besides the light saber, that Luke's beard is trimmed and all brown--no grey like he has "in real life" back on that world.

Remember...we cut back to that world, and Luke is sitting crossed legged on the rock.  The Force Projection basically takes so much out of him that it kills him.  Luke disappears, like Yoda and Kenobi before him.


----------



## pukunui

[MENTION=92305]Water Bob[/MENTION]: Yes, I know. I was saying that the lightsaber is a clue to the fact that he is not really there. I didn't pick up on it the first time I saw the film, but I did notice the second time.


----------



## MarkB

pukunui said:


> One little clue that all is not as it should be with Luke at the end (that I spotted the second time through): When he faces off against his nephew, he is wielding the same lightsaber that, mere movie moments before, was split into two as Ben and Rey fought over it.




The neat thing about that detail is that it not only serves as a clue that Luke isn't really there, it also represents his change of heart. He could have appeared wielding his green saber, but by choosing the blue one, he's figuratively reversing his rejection of it at the start of the movie.


----------



## Morrus

pukunui said:


> [MENTION=92305]Water Bob[/MENTION]: Yes, I know. I was saying that the lightsaber is a clue to the fact that he is not really there. I didn't pick up on it the first time I saw the film, but I did notice the second time.




There’s a few clues. His feet don’t turn the ground red like Kylo’s do. The two combatants never actually touch, and Luke never attacks. Luke looks younger and tidier.


----------



## Morrus

For me the immersion broke a couple of times when modern day vernacular was used. Both as jokes, coincidentally. 

“I’ll hold for General Hux...” 

“Page-turners they are not.”

While it could certainly be argued that those expressions are perfectly valid in that setting, to me  they don’t quite fit. I think I find it more immersive when settings like that use their own colloquialisms. 

Yeah, I know. I’m sure they do that all the time. Nevertheless, those two instances threw me off a little.


----------



## Water Bob

pukunui said:


> [MENTION=92305]Water Bob[/MENTION]: Yes, I know. I was saying that the lightsaber is a clue to the fact that he is not really there. I didn't pick up on it the first time I saw the film, but I did notice the second time.




And, I was backing up what you were saying with the other stuff...not so much clueing you in as it was clear that you were already clued!


----------



## Water Bob

Morrus said:


> For me the immersion broke a couple of times when modern day vernacular was used. Both as jokes, coincidentally.
> 
> “I’ll hold for General Hux...”
> 
> “Page-turners they are not.”
> 
> While it could certainly be argued that those expressions are perfectly valid in that setting, to me  they don’t quite fit. I think I find it more immersive when settings like that use their own colloquialisms.
> 
> Yeah, I know. I’m sure they do that all the time. Nevertheless, those two instances threw me off a little.




I definitely felt that with TFA, especially with Finn.  "Droid! Please."  And with Finn and Poe, "We're going to DO THIS!"  But, I didn't get that with TLJ.  Of course, I've only seen the film once.


----------



## Water Bob

Not really a plot hole, but more of a quandary.  The Force Projection of Luke walks into the base from the "secret" rear opening, and that's what leads Poe and the rest to go searching for that other way out, unseen by the First Order.

The escaping Rebels didn't know that Luke was a Force Projection--they were  escaping, and none of them saw him disappear.

So....if he was a Force Projection, he really didn't need an opening to walk through.  He could have just appeared, walking up from the darkness of the cave.  Yet, it is a coincidence that there is a secret rear opening--that all the Rebels assume Luke used (at least until they find it closed by the rock slide)--when the Force Projection really had nothing to do with the rear entrance.

Of course, there's the crystal coyotes, too.


----------



## MarkB

Water Bob said:


> Not really a plot hole, but more of a quandary.  The Force Projection of Luke walks into the base from the "secret" rear opening, and that's what leads Poe and the rest to go searching for that other way out, unseen by the First Order.
> 
> The escaping Rebels didn't know that Luke was a Force Projection--they were  escaping, and none of them saw him disappear.
> 
> So....if he was a Force Projection, he really didn't need an opening to walk through.  He could have just appeared, walking up from the darkness of the cave.  Yet, it is a coincidence that there is a secret rear opening--that all the Rebels assume Luke used (at least until they find it closed by the rock slide)--when the Force Projection really had nothing to do with the rear entrance.
> 
> Of course, there's the crystal coyotes, too.




Or Luke knew there was another exit, and that Poe would figure it out, and that was all part of his plan.


----------



## hawkeyefan

I really enjoyed the movie a lot. I thought it was well crafted and well acted, and daring in places. Not perfect...there’s a few areas where I would have preferred things went differently. But none pf those were the central story of Rey/Luke/Ben/Snoke. That main story was great.

Honestly, for a movie like this, with so many obligations and restrictions in place, for them to surprise the audience at all is impressive. I really enjoyed how unsure I was about Rey and Ben...both seemed like they could jump sides at different points. Even Luke’s place was brought into question. 

But I love the themes of learning from failure...Yoda has another classic quite about that...and about not letting the past define you. I thought both of those themes were present throughout, and are fitting themes for a Star Wars movie.

Luke went out in style, which I was very happy to see. Saving what he loved, as Rose explained how the Resistance will win mere moments before. And his closing scene being him looking at the horizon, like the iconic shot that introduced him to us decades ago.

I love the sense if closure that this movie has, while also simultaneously seeming like the start of something new. Very happy with it.


----------



## Water Bob

hawkeyefan said:


> I really enjoyed the movie a lot. I thought it was well crafted and well acted, and daring in places. Not perfect...there’s a few areas where I would have preferred things went differently. But none pf those were the central story of Rey/Luke/Ben/Snoke. That main story was great.
> 
> Honestly, for a movie like this, with so many obligations and restrictions in place, for them to surprise the audience at all is impressive. I really enjoyed how unsure I was about Rey and Ben...both seemed like they could jump sides at different points. Even Luke’s place was brought into question.
> 
> But I love the themes of learning from failure...Yoda has another classic quite about that...and about not letting the past define you. I thought both of those themes were present throughout, and are fitting themes for a Star Wars movie.
> 
> Luke went out in style, which I was very happy to see. Saving what he loved, as Rose explained how the Resistance will win mere moments before. And his closing scene being him looking at the horizon, like the iconic shot that introduced him to us decades ago.
> 
> I love the sense if closure that this movie has, while also simultaneously seeming like the start of something new. Very happy with it.




Yes.  This.

I love how Yoda's point is also a way of the character talking to the audience, saying, "This is not your father's Star Wars anymore."  The story grows, changes, expands.

I honestly didn't know which way Ben was going to go, either.  For a moment, I was thinking that Episode IX would be about Rey and Ben, fighting side by side against Snoke's legions.

That is something that Rian was able to pull off that kind of doubt in this film.

Heck, I thought, for a moment, that Rian was going to kill off Finn, too.  Let him go down in flames as a hero--his character arc complete.



As much as I love to read a Star Wars novel or comic, too many of the stories were the same.  No matter what era.  The old Tales of the Jedi era stories could easily be set in the future.  When publishers tried to do something a little different with the universe with the Yuuzhan Vong invasion, it seemed to turn as many people off as it turned on.

I like the new direction of Star Wars.  Yes, it's sad because we've just viewed the end of an era.  Luke, Han, and Leia are a thing of the past--the past stories.

It is time for growth, time for something a little different.

I can't wait to see where this all ends up in Episode IX.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

Just got back from seeing The Last Jedi … impressions (needless to say – SPOILERS AHEAD!).

Overall, a good, solid Star Wars movie.  Not great – I’d certainly put it behind Empire Strikes Back, Star Wars, and Rogue One, perhaps on par with Return of the Jedi, slightly better than The Force Awakens.

Likes:
-	Plot mostly wasn’t derivative – I was expecting an ESB rehash. It had pieces of that (Rey training) but not in a bad way and as necessary.  Though change the opening location to Yavin and closing location to Hoth and you have a plot that shoehorns well into the original trilogy.
-	Good battle scenes as bookends (with some issues, below).
-	The Luke-Rey-Kylo dynamic was excellent; good character growth, tension, some backstory/history/ certain point of view appropriate to Star Wars.
-	Nothing wrong with the odd lightsaber fight or two in a core movie.
-	Poe’s still one hell of a pilot.
-	BB-8 still steals scenes.
-	Porgs are cute without going all Ewok. 
-	Other funky monsters & aliens, good for a Star Wars movie.
-	We now know where blue milk comes from!
-	Yoda nod.  Cheesy, but I liked it.
-	Sith apprentice nod with Kylo/Snoke. Nice to set Kylo up to be the final BBEG for the last movie.
-	Luke’s … death isn’t the right word.  I expected him to die; thought they handled it well.  
-	Rey has no special backstory. Sure, Kylo could be lying, but I hope he’s not because it’s too trite to make her a Skywalker (or Kenobi, or insert fanfic here).
-	Discussion of what the Force is … without midichlorians or Star Wars physics mumbo jumbo.

Dislikes:
-	Cell phone jokes at the opening.  Too soon, Junior.
-	The First Order is a horrible military. Like: don’t launch fighters in any of your battles (except Kylo and two wingmen) until way too late.  Don’t flank – everything’s a frontal assault. Oh, and you’re chasing an opponent who is retreating at your maximum speed? Instead of chasing for days, maybe, you know … hyperspace ahead of them and cut them off?
-	Flying ice Leia.  I mean, Star Wars physics, but c’mon.
-	Gravity bombs. In space. One baby bomber kills super-dreadnaught. Sigh … Star Wars physics getting silly.
-	“I’m too smart to tell anyone my plan” Admiral. There was a plan – why not explain? Would have been a good opportunity to fix the next issue …
-	The entire Finn-Rose subplot adds nothing to the movie.  They wander off, accomplish exactly nothing, and end up back with everyone for the finale. You could have had a subplot with them finding a spy or tracker on the cruiser (which would have fit with the tight-lipped Admiral trying not to give an advantage to the spy) and accomplished more, plus saved 30-odd minutes of movie.  Sure, you can’t introduce White Lando, but at the moment he’s pointless anyway.
-	Look, all-powerful evil dude! Poof … he’s gone! Could have worked in a little Snoke and rise of First Order backstory; opportunity wasted.
-	I expected Leia to die, too frankly – would have been better to kill her off in this movie.
-	Resuscitating Phasma for yet another dubious death scene. Now she’s 2x as useless as Boba Fett (again, delete the whole Finn arc and it really tightens up the movie).
-	Hyperwave comms mumbo-jumbo.  Feels too Star Trek.
-	 Timelines.  Seems too rushed – could have been spread out a bit more.
-	First Order is mustache-twirling evil. Sure, that’s a trope – but it could be more nuanced.
-	Chekov’s X-Wing didn’t pay off.
-	Ackbar dying off screen.

Anyway – worth seeing, and probably worth seeing twice; I’m sure my thoughts will evolve on a second viewing.


----------



## Water Bob

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> Likes:
> -	Plot mostly wasn’t derivative




Big plus for me, especially after TFA.  This one kept me guessing.





> -	Porgs are cute without going all Ewok.




I love the Porgs!  I don't really like the Ewoks!





> -	We now know where blue milk comes from!




Do we?  Is that what that was?

I'm not making the connection between the milk of a sea creature used on a desert planet.  It's a big import on Tatooine, is it?





> -	Luke’s … death isn’t the right word.  I expected him to die; thought they handled it well.




Again, unexpected (I expected him to die but I wasn't sure how--figured Ben would kill him).  But, Luke Skywalker is too much of a bad ass for Ben to kill.  Rian did it right.  That's how Luke should have gone out.  He knew his time was near, anyway.  He went to that world to die.





> -	Rey has no special backstory. Sure, Kylo could be lying, but I hope he’s not because it’s too trite to make her a Skywalker (or Kenobi, or insert fanfic here).




Yeah, that's soberingly refreshing.  And, it's part of the theme of the movie--casting off the old and accepting a new direction.  Not being latched down by the past.  It's why we saw that young boy at the end, with obvious Force power, a slave on Canto Bight, who we know will rise up one day and fight on the side of the Light.





> -	Discussion of what the Force is … without midichlorians or Star Wars physics mumbo jumbo.




Huge thumbs up.  Luke and Yoda and Rey discuss the Jedi "religion".





> -	The entire Finn-Rose subplot adds nothing to the movie.




I completely disagree.  She is the crux of his story arc.  And, Finn leaves behind his old, selfish self (escaping the fight in the escape pod) to becoming a real hero.

Not sure if Rose is dead.  I'm good either way.  It's bittersweet if she's dead.  And, if she survives, then I really enjoyed the character.  I'd like to see her again.





> -	Look, all-powerful evil dude! Poof … he’s gone! Could have worked in a little Snoke and rise of First Order backstory; opportunity wasted.




But, totally unexpected, setting up Ben as the BBG!  I think it's a great move.

You want missed opportunity?  Killing off Darth Maul in Episode I is the king of missed opportunities.





> -	I expected Leia to die, too frankly – would have been better to kill her off in this movie.




I believe she passed after production had ended on her scenes.  Fisher's passing did make the scene where Leia is blown off the bridge out into space more gripping for me, though, because I thought that she was gone right there.





> Resuscitating Phasma for yet another dubious death scene. Now she’s 2x as useless as Boba Fett (again, delete the whole Finn arc and it really tightens up the movie).




And....I suspect that she'll survive this death scene, too, and be in Episode IX.





> -	Hyperwave comms mumbo-jumbo.  Feels too Star Trek.




They did it in Rogue One, too.





> -	First Order is mustache-twirling evil. Sure, that’s a trope – but it could be more nuanced.




I'm glad we saw some older First Order soldiers and commanders.  Abrams had a bunch of kids in TFA.  Even Hux looks older in this film.





> -	Chekov’s X-Wing didn’t pay off.




???


----------



## pukunui

Morrus said:


> There’s a few clues. His feet don’t turn the ground red like Kylo’s do. The two combatants never actually touch, and Luke never attacks. Luke looks younger and tidier.



True, but Luke does touch Leia beforehand. I get the sense we're supposed to think he cleaned himself up (trimmed his beard, dyed his grey hairs, changed into his old black outfit, etc) before arriving. And he does keep Ben guessing by dodging his initial strike. But you're right, the lightsaber isn't the only clue.



Morrus said:


> For me the immersion broke a couple of times when modern day vernacular was used. Both as jokes, coincidentally.



 I didn't mind those ones as much as when Holdo says "Godspeed". There's never any mention of a god in the Star Wars universe, so that seems super out of place. It's always the Force.



Water Bob said:


> And, I was backing up what you were saying with the other stuff...not so much clueing you in as it was clear that you were already clued!



OK. It sounded like you were explaining it to me.



Water Bob said:


> Do we?  Is that what that was?
> 
> I'm not making the connection between the milk of a sea creature used on a desert planet.  It's a big import on Tatooine, is it?



It looked more like green milk to me. I think it was more just meant to be a nod to the blue milk thing than its actual origin. 



> I completely disagree.  She is the crux of his story arc.  And, Finn leaves behind his old, selfish self (escaping the fight in the escape pod) to becoming a real hero.
> 
> Not sure if Rose is dead.  I'm good either way.  It's bittersweet if she's dead.  And, if she survives, then I really enjoyed the character.  I'd like to see her again.



I don't think Rose is dead. At the end, when Finn gets the blanket, I think he would've covered her whole body if she was dead. Instead, he just puts the blanket on her like he's trying to keep her warm.

Also, I agree that while it seems like Finn's arc is pointless, that's because it's not *his* arc. It's Finn & Rose's arc, and although they don't succeed in getting Maz's codebreaker friend or in turning off the tracker, they do succeed in bonding. Rose says she'd like to put her fist through Canto Bight. That's exactly what they end up doing, and Finn points out that it was worth it. They both grow as characters by doing that together.



> You want missed opportunity?  Killing off Darth Maul in Episode I is the king of missed opportunities.



But he survived being cut in half and dropped down a reactor core! If Maul can survive that, then surely a more powerful dark side user like Snoke can too! He's clearly survived some pretty horrible injuries in the past (unless they're just meant to be the side-effects of his dark side use).



> And....I suspect that she'll survive this death scene, too, and be in Episode IX.



Me too. If she can survive being deposited in a trash compactor on a planet that blows up shortly afterwards, she can survive falling into a fireball in a shattered spaceship.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

Water Bob said:


> (Chekov's X-wing)
> 
> ???




We see Luke's X-Wing under water at Ach-to.  If he's grown from ESB, he can pull it out of the water.  Don't show it without a payoff -- because if you're just doing that, you have to answer the question of how Luke got there in the first place without an Astromech (since canonically that's how an X-wing's hyperspace calculations get done).


----------



## Eltab

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> Sith apprentice nod with Kylo/Snoke. Nice to set Kylo up to be the final BBEG for the last movie.
> 
> “I’m too smart to tell anyone my plan” Admiral. There was a plan – why not explain?



1) We've only seen one instance where a Sith apprentice attacked his Master - but not to replace him.  The changes in dynamic will be interesting to watch and cogitate over.

2) If Abrams &c. have been made aware of any future plans re: Thrawn, this 'super-smart Admiral' is stepping on the original "super-smart Admiral" 's toes.  And Thrawn rarely explains his plan because nobody else understands WHY it will work.


----------



## MarkB

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> We see Luke's X-Wing under water at Ach-to.  If he's grown from ESB, he can pull it out of the water.  Don't show it without a payoff -- because if you're just doing that, you have to answer the question of how Luke got there in the first place without an Astromech (since canonically that's how an X-wing's hyperspace calculations get done).




It's there as misdirection. For the audience not to immediately know Luke's gambit is an illusion, we have to know he has a way back.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

I be fair, Olgar, the flying Leia was just real world physics+using the force to move objects.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

MarkB said:


> It's there as misdirection. For the audience not to immediately know Luke's gambit is an illusion, we have to know he has a way back.




I think the two are far enough apart (beginning and end of the movie) that there is more to it than just this. 

Specifically, it reinforces the idea that Luke went there to die, and has no plans to return. Who knows if the ship would even fly after all that time. 

Also someone else mentioned how he got there without an astromech droid. I am 99% sure the answer is, the Force.


----------



## MarkB

doctorbadwolf said:


> I think the two are far enough apart (beginning and end of the movie) that there is more to it than just this.
> 
> Specifically, it reinforces the idea that Luke went there to die, and has no plans to return. Who knows if the ship would even fly after all that time.
> 
> Also someone else mentioned how he got there without an astromech droid. I am 99% sure the answer is, the Force.




Personally, for half the final battle I was 100% expecting Luke to come swooping in with his X-Wing. When Rey and Chewie came in with the _Falcon_, I thought it was Luke until we got a good look at the ship. When Finn was doing his suicide run at the Ram Cannon, I was expecting Luke to swoop in from behind and snipe it with proton torpedoes.


----------



## Water Bob

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> We see Luke's X-Wing under water at Ach-to.  If he's grown from ESB, he can pull it out of the water.  Don't show it without a payoff -- because if you're just doing that, you have to answer the question of how Luke got there in the first place without an Astromech (since canonically that's how an X-wing's hyperspace calculations get done).




I know in the D6 SW game, where a lot of canon originates, there is a Force Power for Hyperspace Navigation.  Not saying that's what Luke used, but maybe.


----------



## Water Bob

MarkB said:


> Personally, for half the final battle I was 100% expecting Luke to come swooping in with his X-Wing. When Rey and Chewie came in with the _Falcon_, I thought it was Luke until we got a good look at the ship. When Finn was doing his suicide run at the Ram Cannon, I was expecting Luke to swoop in from behind and snipe it with proton torpedoes.




I thought the same.


----------



## Gadget

I would like to re-iterate that Luke's force projection clasps hands with Leia and gives her the "fuzzy dice" from the Falcon (which Kylo Ren later finds, picks up, and watches disappear as Luke becomes one with the Force).  More misdirection or cheating?  You decide.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

doctorbadwolf said:


> I be fair, Olgar, the flying Leia was just real world physics+using the force to move objects.




Oh, I get it.

But staying out there at that distance for that long, then flying back, just broke my suspension of disbelief.

If instead, she'd just caught herself on the edge of the bridge, clawing her way back, then used the Force to get the rest of the way -- dramatic, you're not sure if she makes it or not -- I'd have been cheering.  But the flying nun act was just lazy and dumb.

There's a similar scene in one of the Wraith Squadron books, and it's much, much better done.


----------



## pukunui

Yeah, that whole scene *looked* terrible ... but, c'mon, this is Carrie Fisher we're talking about here. She probably thought it was hilarious. I wouldn't be at all surprised if she agreed to it (or even suggested it) as a way of giving diehard fans the middle finger or something.


----------



## trappedslider

Water Bob said:


> I know in the D6 SW game, where a lot of   canon used to originate




Fix'd for you

Remember folks, canon is now only the movies and what Disney produces via books. The only previously published material still considered canon are the six original trilogy/prequel trilogy films, the Star Wars: The Clone Wars television series and film, and the stand-alone Dark Horse Comics arc Star Wars: Darth Maul—Son of Dathomir; which was based on unproduced scripts from The Clone Wars TV series


Speaking of canon and The Last Jedi https://screenrant.com/star-wars-last-jedi-darth-revan-easter-egg/ cool little Easter egg.


----------



## Legatus Legionis

.


----------



## Water Bob

trappedslider said:


> Fix'd for you
> 
> Remember folks, canon is now only the movies and what Disney produces via books.




Look again.  Lots of stuff originated in the WEG D6 Star Wars game shows up in the new films and made cannon.  Like the Juggernaut used in Rogue One.


----------



## pukunui

trappedslider said:


> Remember folks, canon is now only the movies and what Disney produces via books. The only previously published material still considered canon are the six original trilogy/prequel trilogy films, the Star Wars: The Clone Wars television series and film, and the stand-alone Dark Horse Comics arc Star Wars: Darth Maul—Son of Dathomir; which was based on unproduced scripts from The Clone Wars TV series



You forgot Star Wars: Rebels. That's canon too.



Water Bob said:


> Look again.  Lots of stuff originated in the WEG D6 Star Wars game shows up in the new films and made cannon.  Like the Juggernaut used in Rogue One.



The WEG stuff is no longer considered canon. That doesn't mean that they can't take stuff from it and canonize it by including it in a movie or TV show or whatever. But as long as it's only in WEG, then it no longer is canon.


----------



## trappedslider

pukunui said:


> You forgot Star Wars: Rebels. That's canon too.
> .




I only copied what I needed, Rebels was done after Disney bought Lucas wasn't it?


----------



## pukunui

trappedslider said:


> I only copied what I needed, Rebels was done after Disney bought Lucas wasn't it?



Yes, but you said canon only equalled the films + Disney books + Clone Wars. That doesn't leave room for things like the Rebels TV series.

Canon is basically all films + Clone Wars TV series + anything put out since Disney bought Lucasfilm (books, comics, TV series, etc).


----------



## The_Silversword

Justed saw it. Ive heard a lot of people say it sucked hard and several say it was the most awsomest movie ever made. I am somewhere in the middle. I wish they had done more with Luke, and Rose and Finn seemed totally worthless, but all in all I had a good time watching it. Seeing it in a theater that serves beer may have helped in that regard.


----------



## Ryujin

Did anyone else want to show Poe the nearest airlock? One of my friends referred to him as "the First Order's MVP" because of the number of Rebel deaths he was personally responsible for.


----------



## The_Silversword

Yeah Poe is kinda a douche, but he means well.


----------



## Ryujin

The_Silversword said:


> Yeah Poe is kinda a douche, but he means well.




"Blow up that dreadnought, you bombers. Damn the cost, because you're not me!"


----------



## MarkB

Ryujin said:


> "Blow up that dreadnought, you bombers. Damn the cost, because you're not me!"




The thing is, he's not wrong. If the Dreadnought had still been intact when the First Order caught up with them, their handful of capital ships wouldn't even have survived long enough to get out of the fleet's optimal firing range - assuming they even made it into hyperspace in the first place.


----------



## Water Bob

pukunui said:


> The WEG stuff is no longer considered canon. That doesn't mean that they can't take stuff from it and canonize it by including it in a movie or TV show or whatever. But as long as it's only in WEG, then it no longer is canon.




Which is why I said it's where a lot of canon originates.


----------



## Ryujin

MarkB said:


> The thing is, he's not wrong. If the Dreadnought had still been intact when the First Order caught up with them, their handful of capital ships wouldn't even have survived long enough to get out of the fleet's optimal firing range - assuming they even made it into hyperspace in the first place.




Maybe, maybe not. No idea if the dreadnought had any more range on its weapons than did the destroyers. We do know, however, that he sacrificed literally every bomber they had available, while acting against orders.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Re:Astrogation in Star Wars

This actually answers both why they had to have a map in TFA (instead of just final coordinates) AND why the 'hyper ahead of the fleeing Resistance ships and pincer them" didn't work. 

So, as established in Ep 4, hyperdrive in Star Wars isn't a simple entering of coordinates.  It's not just needing to know the destination, but also the _path_, because ships in Star Wars don't go into a hyperspace dimension, but instead are just going really fast through normal space.  If there's a mass in the way, they get torn apart.  Han sets this up in Ep 4 with Luke about how hard it is to jump to lightspeed without hitting a sun.  So, to make a good jump, you have to know not only where you are and where you're going, exactingly, but also what path you're taking to get there.  The path between systems is usually well known, having been previously plotted painstakingly by scouts, often millenia ago.  The Rebellion (and, assumingly the Resistance) had 'secret' jump paths to out of the way locations that made it hard to follow them -- you might know where they went, but you also didn't know how they got there from here and you might have to go around a few jumps on pathways you knew.  It's also why the Unexplored Regions are so, well, unexplored -- safe jump lanes haven't been scouted yet.

This is what makes the hyperdrive tracker such a huge deal -- it allows a pursuit ship to not only track _where you went_, but also the _path _you took to get there.  

So, to wrap back around, this is why they needed the map in TFA -- they might know which system Skywalker was in, but they didn't know how to get there.  And, it's why it wasn't useful to attempt a blind or unscouted short jump ahead to cut off the Resistance when you could just wait out the stern chase until the inevitable happened.

Now, all of that said, it was a HUGE failing in the movie to not reinforce this -- adding a few lines of dialogue to the Finn/Rose technobabble scene discussing the tracker would have been a perfect moment to do so.

In fact, to take that last a bit further, most of the issues with this movie could have been solved by just expanding the scope of a few scenes to show that things are bigger or remind folks about how things work in Star Wars.  The issue with the 1st Order seeming to be so small could have been easily rectified by using Stormtroopers in place of the guards on the casino planet, and having the quick scenes where the guards play cards or talk to residents be a bit more fraught with tension about their presence/imposing order.  That simple switch would have set the fact that the 1st Order was running the show and not just the handful of ships onscreen soooo much better.  I understand why the scriptwriters and director missed this -- they know how big the 1st Order is -- but they should have stepped back and checked to make sure that their understanding was properly passed on in the movie.

Really, the lack of scope for so many things was the big fail for me in a movie I otherwise adored.  Even space Leia would have been helped a great deal by one of the people watching her fly back calling out 'She's doing it again! Get the door!"  That would, with very little effort, establish that Leia had been doing silly forcy survival things for awhile, and helped save that scene.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Ryujin said:


> Maybe, maybe not. No idea if the dreadnought had any more range on its weapons than did the destroyers. We do know, however, that he sacrificed literally every bomber they had available, while acting against orders.




The Destroyers weren't what was bombarding the Resistance ships -- it was the Sovereign with it's similar-to-the-dreadnought class cannon.  They were shown on-screen firing at least once, and never from the Destroyers.  I figure the Destroyers were just hanging out as escorts while the Sovereign did the work.  We already know that a Rebellion-era Cruiser could go toe to toe with a Destroyer, perhaps a Resistance-era one was even more of a match?  In which case, why engage with smaller ships when it's just a matter of time.

We keep considering that the 1st Order military is incompetent when, in reality, their tactics are very straightforward and make sense so long as the longshot risks the Resistance takes don't strangely pay off with huge dividends.  There were no fighters but the one when the dreadnought was firing on the Resistance base, and they did launch fighters as soon as the single fighter began engaging -- after using a bolted on afterburner to close from outside of engagement range to point-blank in moments.  Should they have flushed their fighters as soon as they hit system?  Probably, but we're armchair quarterbacking from the safety of our own far, far away galaxy.  The tactics on display there weren't egregious, even if not paranoid enough.

The stern chase made even more sense, tactically.  It was a done deal, and even worked exactly as intended.  Had the Sovereign not started blasting the fleeing transports and instead pounded the Cruiser first before engaging the transports, the kamikaze run wouldn't have been possible.  But, again, the astrogation invovled in setting up that jump and disengaging the mass sensors was a pretty huge undertaking -- Holdo must have been near Solo level good at by-the-seat-of-the-pants astrogation.


----------



## neobolts

I generally liked the movie. I need to view it again to really "get" it.

What I liked:
-Luke being flip and indifferent to Rey nicely mirrored his own first encounter with Yoda. 
-The Jedi teaching elements worked very well. The "failure is part of life" message worked well for the second act of the new trilogy. I liked the return of Yoda to knock Luke down a peg. I like Luke's "obtaining enlightenment" death where he became one with the force. I liked Luke explaining the force to Rey is a way that felt more akin to Ben Kenobi's ANH and Yoda's ESB explanations, and less like cold clinical science like the force is explained in the prequels.

What I did not like:
-I felt Laura Dern's character was completely unneeded and forgettable, especially since they gave her a hero's death when I did not feel at all invested in her. Meanwhile, underdeveloped fan favorite Ackbar got unceremoniously killed off. Everything Dern's character did could have been done by Ackbar and made for a much more memorable send-off with a character that audiences could have invested in. 

Stuff that I didn't mind but that could have been better:
-I felt the Finn/Rose subplot was somewhat weak. 
-I felt hyperspacing into an enemy fleet is a bit overpowered and would be a standard tactic with unmanned craft if feasible.
-Too much from TFA got set aside and forgotten. I would still like to know where Snoke came from and why he was seeking Rey. I would like to know how Luke's lightsaber from Cloud City ended up at Maz's waiting for Rey. Also, what happened to the Knights of Ren; wasn't there a whole bunch of baddies when Luke's training temple burned down?
-No amazingly memorable space battles. At least not on the level of RotS, RO, ANH, RotJ, or TFA.


----------



## Morrus

neobolts said:


> Meanwhile, underdeveloped fan favorite Ackbar got unceremoniously killed off.




Erik Bauersfeld died last year.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> Oh, I get it.
> 
> But staying out there at that distance for that long, then flying back, just broke my suspension of disbelief.
> 
> If instead, she'd just caught herself on the edge of the bridge, clawing her way back, then used the Force to get the rest of the way -- dramatic, you're not sure if she makes it or not -- I'd have been cheering.  But the flying nun act was just lazy and dumb.
> 
> There's a similar scene in one of the Wraith Squadron books, and it's much, much better done.




Re: suspension of disbelief, I’m just saying, the entire scene is realistic if you ignore the non existence of Force Powers. She wasnt out there any longer than a normal person could hold their breath, the physics checks out, etc. maybe her opening her eyes would have been a problem, but even then we know Jedi can do that from Clone Wars, first season, with PLo Koon and Ashoka. 

IMO, the scene didn’t need to be gripping. It did exactly what it meant to do, and it did it well. 



pukunui said:


> Yeah, that whole scene *looked* terrible ... but, c'mon, this is Carrie Fisher we're talking about here. She probably thought it was hilarious. I wouldn't be at all surprised if she agreed to it (or even suggested it) as a way of giving diehard fans the middle finger or something.




I’m still confused as to how or why it “looks terrible”.


----------



## Joker

I'm trying to be as gracious as I can but I was actually bored watching this movie. And this is coming from someone who really enjoyed TFA and Rogue One.

I can't be entertained by heroes who don't undergo any kind of real change or new understanding. 

There were some really cool scenes. Those shots from the suicide cruiser at the end were beautiful, but those scenes weren't enough for me to forget that this movie just throws storytelling right out the airlock and doesn't bother force-flying it back in.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> Oh, I get it.
> 
> But staying out there at that distance for that long, then flying back, just broke my suspension of disbelief.
> 
> If instead, she'd just caught herself on the edge of the bridge, clawing her way back, then used the Force to get the rest of the way -- dramatic, you're not sure if she makes it or not -- I'd have been cheering.  But the flying nun act was just lazy and dumb.
> 
> There's a similar scene in one of the Wraith Squadron books, and it's much, much better done.






pukunui said:


> Yeah, that whole scene *looked* terrible ... but, c'mon, this is Carrie Fisher we're talking about here. She probably thought it was hilarious. I wouldn't be at all surprised if she agreed to it (or even suggested it) as a way of giving diehard fans the middle finger or something.






Joker said:


> I'm trying to be as gracious as I can but I was actually bored watching this movie. And this is coming from someone who really enjoyed TFA and Rogue One.
> 
> I can't be entertained by heroes who don't undergo any kind of real change or new understanding.
> 
> There were some really cool scenes. Those shots from the suicide cruiser at the end were beautiful, but those scenes weren't enough for me to forget that this movie just throws storytelling right out the airlock and doesn't bother force-flying it back in.




I think we watched different movies. 

Every main character underwent significant character growth. 

That was like...literally most of the movie.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Joker said:


> I'm trying to be as gracious as I can but I was actually bored watching this movie. And this is coming from someone who really enjoyed TFA and Rogue One.
> 
> I can't be entertained by heroes who don't undergo any kind of real change or new understanding.
> 
> There were some really cool scenes. Those shots from the suicide cruiser at the end were beautiful, but those scenes weren't enough for me to forget that this movie just throws storytelling right out the airlock and doesn't bother force-flying it back in.




We must have seen different movies -- the character development was pretty much front and center for all the characters.  

Finn went from a selfish coward that only cared about Rey to someone filled with rage against the 1st Order to someone willing to sacrifice themselves unhesitatingly to help Luke at the end.  He learned that doing it for love was better than doing it for hate. 

Poe went from hothead pilot that only cared about blowing up the Order regardless of the casualties to a real leader that recognized keeping his people alive was part of the goal, not just blowing up the Order -- that retreat was a better tactic than Pyrrhic victories.

Rey went from someone uncertain of her place in the galaxy, someone who couldn't let her past go, to someone that embraced her own past, her own failures, her own faults, and decided to strive to be better because of it.

Kylo had the opposite journey -- from someone who knew his past and was conflicted by it to someone that decided to to burn it all down and abandon it all.  He couldn't face his failures and faults, so he burned them away.

Luke learned from his failures and re-entered the galaxy, addressed his failures, and then did something about it.

Change was the biggest part of this movie -- lots and lots of character development that was hammered on over and over.  They even brought Yoda in to put a big stamp of 'pay attention' to the central themes of that development.


----------



## Joker

No, we didn't see different movies. We just have differing opinions on what significant means. Barring some minor changes, the characters and the story are still in the same position as they were before the movie started. 
Speaking of story. I personally feel that a convoluted chase throughout the film is a poor way to create tension.


----------



## trappedslider

Ovinomancer said:


> In fact, to take that last a bit further, most of the issues with this movie could have been solved .




by better communication among everyone.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Joker said:


> No, we didn't see different movies. We just have differing opinions on what significant means. Barring some minor changes, the characters and the story are still in the same position as they were before the movie started.
> Speaking of story. I personally feel that a convoluted chase throughout the film is a poor way to create tension.




Charitably, I'm having trouble reading this as anything other than 'but they didn't WIN'.


----------



## Ryujin

Ovinomancer said:


> The Destroyers weren't what was bombarding the Resistance ships -- it was the Sovereign with it's similar-to-the-dreadnought class cannon.  They were shown on-screen firing at least once, and never from the Destroyers.  I figure the Destroyers were just hanging out as escorts while the Sovereign did the work.  We already know that a Rebellion-era Cruiser could go toe to toe with a Destroyer, perhaps a Resistance-era one was even more of a match?  In which case, why engage with smaller ships when it's just a matter of time.
> 
> We keep considering that the 1st Order military is incompetent when, in reality, their tactics are very straightforward and make sense so long as the longshot risks the Resistance takes don't strangely pay off with huge dividends.  There were no fighters but the one when the dreadnought was firing on the Resistance base, and they did launch fighters as soon as the single fighter began engaging -- after using a bolted on afterburner to close from outside of engagement range to point-blank in moments.  Should they have flushed their fighters as soon as they hit system?  Probably, but we're armchair quarterbacking from the safety of our own far, far away galaxy.  The tactics on display there weren't egregious, even if not paranoid enough.
> 
> The stern chase made even more sense, tactically.  It was a done deal, and even worked exactly as intended.  Had the Sovereign not started blasting the fleeing transports and instead pounded the Cruiser first before engaging the transports, the kamikaze run wouldn't have been possible.  But, again, the astrogation invovled in setting up that jump and disengaging the mass sensors was a pretty huge undertaking -- Holdo must have been near Solo level good at by-the-seat-of-the-pants astrogation.




So the loss of literally every one of the Rebel bombers gained them absolutely nothing in the long run. 

How many times does someone have to say, "It's only a [ insert innocuous object here ]. Ignore it" only to have things go badly sideways, before it becomes incompetence? you're fighting Guerrillas. Their business is making innocuous things dangerous.


----------



## billd91

epithet said:


> I left the theater feeling a general unease, an unfocused anger that took me a while to understand. Now that I've slept on it, I think I have a handle on the source of my ire.
> 
> The new movies have deconstructed and destroyed the heroes of the original trilogy.
> 
> The OT heroes were Luke, Leia and Han. Luke was defined by being a jedi, and his purpose was to "pass on what [he had] learned." He failed, then gave up, then cut himself off from the force and went into hiding. Leia was defined by her belief in the Republic and her struggle to restore it. Despite the Republic prevailing over the remains of the Empire, Leia was forced out of the Republic Senate and driven into a sort of exile while the Republic disregarded the threat of the New Order to its peril. In The Force Awakens, the Republic is effectively destroyed when the Senate and the Republic fleet are blown up, and in The Last Jedi her failure becomes complete as the resistance is decimated and her allies abandon her. Han Solo was not an idealistic crusader, what mattered to him were the people in his life. Han didn't care much about the Jedi, but he cared about Luke. He didn't burn with Republic patriotism, but he loved Leia. What do they do to Han? His marriage is ruined, his only child estranged, and even his fellow scumbags seem to have all turned against him. Only Chewy and Maz seem to want to have anything to do with him, and when he tries to reach out and mend his relationships his failure becomes tragically complete, as he is contemptuously cut down by his own son.
> 
> The message is clear: the "heroes" of the Rebel Alliance are abject and complete failures, and it is up to Mary Sue and the fresh-faced millennials to clean up the mess they've made of things.




Basically, all your childhood heroes became *people* with failures, setbacks, and foibles. Welcome to adulthood.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Ryujin said:


> So the loss of literally every one of the Rebel bombers gained them absolutely nothing in the long run.
> 
> How many times does someone have to say, "It's only a [ insert innocuous object here ]. Ignore it" only to have things go badly sideways, before it becomes incompetence? you're fighting Guerrillas. Their business is making innocuous things dangerous.




I think you have a strangely high assumption of what guerrilla forces success rate actually is.  We're watching the exceptions, fergoidnesssake, not the norm, else what would be the point?  The Resistance would have innocuoused the Order to death by now.


----------



## Joker

Ovinomancer said:


> Charitably, I'm having trouble reading this as anything other than 'but they didn't WIN'.




Well, that would be completely misrepresenting my position.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Joker said:


> Well, that would be completely misrepresenting my position.



I'm inviting you to expound.  As it is, it seems you only rate change as significant if the material and plot position is different.  Well, at the start of the movie, the Resistance still had 3 capital ships and allies.  At the end, everyone was fast worse off plot and materially, and all they had was the Falcon and maybe another old Rebel base.

So, if much worse off wasn't good enough for you, that left being better off, I thought.  What other position have I failed to consider?


----------



## Joker

Ovinomancer said:


> I'm inviting you to expound.  As it is, it seems you only rate change as significant if the material and plot position is different.  Well, at the start of the movie, the Resistance still had 3 capital ships and allies.  At the end, everyone was fast worse off plot and materially, and all they had was the Falcon and maybe another old Rebel base.
> 
> So, if much worse off wasn't good enough for you, that left being better off, I thought.  What other position have I failed to consider?




Characters. I was talking about characters when I said they were in the same position as they were at the start of the movie. I don't know how you're reading into what I'm saying as to mean the specifics of the rebel fleet and their materials.
I understand you disagree with me and feel that the characters have developed. I don't. 
I see that Poe is being groomed to be a leader and his is the only real change that has been expressed. Albeit in a terribly hamfisted way.
Rey is still the same Mary Sue. Kylo is still the same troubled moody teen. Even after his apparent new resolve we see him almost cry in anger when first the Millennium Falcon shows and then when Luke moves out to confront him. 
Finn's moment of change was undercut by him being saved. 

I get that you liked the film. I didn't. I expect there to be real stakes for a hero in a story. Real danger, either physical or emotional. Overcoming these challenges is what qualifies as, or better, is what is necessary for true change. I never felt there to be any danger in this film. After hearing that there was no outline for episode 8 and 9 by the TFA came out, I can understand why little of that was shown in the film. It feels like a rushed job and when you have so many resources and talent at your disposal, I think that's a shame.


----------



## epithet

The more time I have to reflect on the movie, the more it bothers me. Luke Skywalker was an iconic hero, a character that had faced temptation and rejected the dark side to remain strong with the light. Rian Johnson retconned all of that by making Luke a complete failure as a jedi and a teacher, who had an episode of utter weakness that led to the destruction of the jedi he was responsible for training. He then gave up, went into hiding, and severed his connection to  the force. Rian Johnson rewrote Luke Skywalker into the worst Jedi he possibly could. He didn't introduce new threats or challenges, he just used his episode to tear down the heroes of the previous generation and crap all over their legacy.

He did the same thing to Leia. JJ had already exiled her from the Senate and casually destroyed the Republic she had fought so hard to restore, but Rian had to go one further and show us how Leia was an ineffective commander, whose subordinates disregarded her orders and followed their own plans. We saw how Leia's resistance was utterly decimated by her failure to evacuate the base in a timely manner as well as the culture of insubordination she fostered. Then, as a last insult, we saw that the allies Leia counted on had abandoned her and left her and her resistance to be finally snuffed out by the New Order.

Luke is a bad Jedi that caused the destruction of the new Jedi Order. Leia is a bad leader who failed to motivate the Republic to oppose the New Order and failed to lead the resistance to anything but annihilation. We'd already established Han Solo as a failed husband and father, and even a failed smuggler who had lost his ship years before and had every gang of organized criminals he'd worked with hunting him down to kill him. The only reason he got his ship back was that the hero of the new generation brought it back to him.

It's not like this is part of some overall trend of making all the characters in Star Wars "nuanced." Rey, Poe, Finn, and Kylo are all super iconic archetypes. No, the objective here seems to be just to wreck the image of the heroes that George Lucas provided to my generation; to single out their iconic strength and strip it from their character. These characters who grew into heroes by developing character strengths and prevailing over adversity slipped, after the credits roll on Return of the Jedi, into a 30 year pattern of "suck, fail, die."

I'll admit that when Disney bought Lucasfilm and wiped the slate clean of all the Expanded Universe fiction, I was enthused. I thought the entire Vong story line was horrible, and even though I would have liked to keep or canonize the Knights of the Old Republic lore I agreed that it was best to just start over, picking elements of the "Legends" material to use as the new story lines called for it. Now, however, I'm looking at the Legends as being a better overall treatment of the GFFA, simply because those stories didn't undermine the iconic heroes of the original trilogy.

To be honest, one of the things that is making this more difficult for me to handle gracefully is the fact that a fair number of commenters seem to actually like the fact that the heroism of Han, Luke, and Leia has been undermined and invalidated. Kylo Ren's call to burn down the past seems to resonate with many in a way I cannot relate to. Some are crowing in exultation over the dubious, anticlimactic, and (in my opinion) misleading assertion that Rey is the offspring of morally bankrupt junk scavengers instead of (as all the hints from TFA suggested) related to Luke Skywalker. It's not enough, apparently, to move on after Ep 9 to stories beyond the Skywalker saga... for some it seems to be immensely satisfying to retroactively strip away the importance and destiny of the Skywalkers and minimize their role in shaping galactic events.

Maybe these are just the times in which we live, I don't know. Maybe JJ Abrams, who is only a few years older than I am, has an amazing plan that will restore my enthusiasm for the franchise. I am afraid, however, that I've lost something that I've managed to hold on to since childhood, and it's something I'll never be able to find again. Maybe this is what it means to get older.

I don't like it.


----------



## Gladius Legis

epithet said:


> The more time I have to reflect on the movie, the more it bothers me. Luke Skywalker was an iconic hero, a character that had faced temptation and rejected the dark side to remain strong with the light. Rian Johnson retconned all of that by making Luke a complete failure as a jedi and a teacher, who had an episode of utter weakness that led to the destruction of the jedi he was responsible for training. He then gave up, went into hiding, and severed his connection to  the force. Rian Johnson rewrote Luke Skywalker into the worst Jedi he possibly could. He didn't introduce new threats or challenges, he just used his episode to tear down the heroes of the previous generation and crap all over their legacy.
> 
> He did the same thing to Leia. JJ had already exiled her from the Senate and casually destroyed the Republic she had fought so hard to restore, but Rian had to go one further and show us how Leia was an ineffective commander, whose subordinates disregarded her orders and followed their own plans. We saw how Leia's resistance was utterly decimated by her failure to evacuate the base in a timely manner as well as the culture of insubordination she fostered. Then, as a last insult, we saw that the allies Leia counted on had abandoned her and left her and her resistance to be finally snuffed out by the New Order.
> 
> Luke is a bad Jedi that caused the destruction of the new Jedi Order. Leia is a bad leader who failed to motivate the Republic to oppose the New Order and failed to lead the resistance to anything but annihilation. We'd already established Han Solo as a failed husband and father, and even a failed smuggler who had lost his ship years before and had every gang of organized criminals he'd worked with hunting him down to kill him. The only reason he got his ship back was that the hero of the new generation brought it back to him.
> 
> It's not like this is part of some overall trend of making all the characters in Star Wars "nuanced." Rey, Poe, Finn, and Kylo are all super iconic archetypes. No, the objective here seems to be just to wreck the image of the heroes that George Lucas provided to my generation; to single out their iconic strength and strip it from their character. These characters who grew into heroes by developing character strengths and prevailing over adversity slipped, after the credits roll on Return of the Jedi, into a 30 year pattern of "suck, fail, die."
> 
> I'll admit that when Disney bought Lucasfilm and wiped the slate clean of all the Expanded Universe fiction, I was enthused. I thought the entire Vong story line was horrible, and even though I would have liked to keep or canonize the Knights of the Old Republic lore I agreed that it was best to just start over, picking elements of the "Legends" material to use as the new story lines called for it. Now, however, I'm looking at the Legends as being a better overall treatment of the GFFA, simply because those stories didn't undermine the iconic heroes of the original trilogy.
> 
> To be honest, one of the things that is making this more difficult for me to handle gracefully is the fact that a fair number of commenters seem to actually like the fact that the heroism of Han, Luke, and Leia has been undermined and invalidated. Kylo Ren's call to burn down the past seems to resonate with many in a way I cannot relate to. Some are crowing in exultation over the dubious, anticlimactic, and (in my opinion) misleading assertion that Rey is the offspring of morally bankrupt junk scavengers instead of (as all the hints from TFA suggested) related to Luke Skywalker. It's not enough, apparently, to move on after Ep 9 to stories beyond the Skywalker saga... for some it seems to be immensely satisfying to retroactively strip away the importance and destiny of the Skywalkers and minimize their role in shaping galactic events.
> 
> Maybe these are just the times in which we live, I don't know. Maybe JJ Abrams, who is only a few years older than I am, has an amazing plan that will restore my enthusiasm for the franchise. I am afraid, however, that I've lost something that I've managed to hold on to since childhood, and it's something I'll never be able to find again. Maybe this is what it means to get older.
> 
> I don't like it.




That was a whole lot of words to scream "NOOOO MY CHILDHOOD!"


----------



## Ryujin

Ovinomancer said:


> I think you have a strangely high assumption of what guerrilla forces success rate actually is.  We're watching the exceptions, fergoidnesssake, not the norm, else what would be the point?  The Resistance would have innocuoused the Order to death by now.




I'm basing my assumption of guerrilla success rates in the Star Wars universe by what we see in the Star Wars universe. We see the same guy make the same assumption, with the same predictable results. That's incompetence.


----------



## MarkB

Gladius Legis said:


> That was a whole lot of words to scream "NOOOO MY CHILDHOOD!"




With a fair helping of "NOOO MY HEADCANON!" mixed in.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Ryujin said:


> I'm basing my assumption of guerrilla success rates in the Star Wars universe by what we see in the Star Wars universe. We see the same guy make the same assumption, with the same predictable results. That's incompetence.



Which same guy and which same assumption is that?


----------



## epithet

billd91 said:


> Basically, all your childhood heroes became *people* with failures, setbacks, and foibles. Welcome to adulthood.




That's just asinine.

First, they didn't become "people with failures blah blah blah," they become failures. Their new characterizations are defined by their failures, and their past successes have been rendered inconsequential, and dismissed. Leia is a leader, and failed. Luke is a Jedi, and failed. Han is the pilot of the Millennium Falcon, who was elevated by his love for Leia. He failed. They all failed utterly at the very thing for which they became iconic. There's a huge difference between humanizing a character and destroying it.

Secondly, no one looks to Star Wars for nuanced depictions of people with complex personalities. Star Wars is an epic fight of good versus evil, just like The Lord of the Rings. I don't open a Tolkien book to explore the misery of pipeweed addiction, and I don't go to a Star Wars movie to watch a fallen hero wallow in self pity. The Star Wars story is unabashedly and unapologetically an interpretation of "the hero's journey" as an epic space fantasy. You can change that to be a dramatic exploration of human foibles, but that takes the story out of the realm of science fiction/fantasy and recommends it for a much lower budget. Besides, no one seems to feel like Rey needs to "become [a person] with failures, setbacks, and foibles," that kind of crap is reserved for the heroes introduced by George Lucas.

I've been neck-deep in adulthood long enough to appreciate my escapist treats.


----------



## epithet

Gladius Legis said:


> That was a whole lot of words to scream "NOOOO MY CHILDHOOD!"




Yeah, that probably does seem like a lot of words to you.


----------



## hawkeyefan

I totally disagree that Luke and Leia are failures, or that the aim of this film was to somehow tarnish their legacy. 

I think that they are people whose lives have been incredibly difficult, and fraught with danger. And that has continued after the original trilogy ended. 

I do think that this movie did make more of an attempt to close out those old stories, and to let the new ones emerge. And to do that, I believe that they put Luke and Leia in difficult positions. I was fine with Luke's status and actions in this movie. He's never, ever been infallible. 

But despite that moment of weakness that led to the fall of the Jedi Order, Luke rises up again, and with his final act, achieves greatness again. He saves the resistance and serves as a symbol of inspiration for a new generation. Saying that he "is a failure" fails to acknowledge the entire point of the movie. He failed once. He then had a choice....let that failure define him, and hide for the rest of his days. Or put it aside and see if he can contribute meaningfully. He chose that second option. 

It's harder to say with Leia because she should have had another movie to grow and succeed or fail. the fact that her story is seemingly going to end prematurely due to Carrie Fisher's death is really unfortunate, and I think plays a part in why some are disappointed with her story. 

But ultimately, I think a lot of it boils down to the fact that the franchise absolutely must move on from these characters. No matter what they do, some folks will be dissatisfied. So instead of worrying about appeasing fans, they had to focus on making a compelling story. 

It's more important for young viewers to like the movie than it is for the adult viewers. And I think that fact also rankles some folks a bit.


----------



## pukunui

Ryujin said:


> We do know, however, that he sacrificed literally every bomber they had available, while acting against orders.



To be fair to Poe, a lot of it was just bad luck. If that one TIE fighter hadn't crashed into the open bomb bay of that one bomber, it wouldn't have set off a chain reaction that destroyed most of the others.



Ovinomancer said:


> Re:Astrogation in Star Wars



Good points. I'd just like to add that, according to one article I found online, the Last Jedi Visual Dictionary states that Luke found his way to the first Jedi temple by following seedlings of the tree that houses the Jedi texts. Apparently it was an important tree to the Jedi religion, and there was at least one of them growing in the gardens of the Jedi Temple on Coruscant. I'm not sure how following seedlings would lead you to the original tree but undoubtedly the Force was involved.




doctorbadwolf said:


> Re: suspension of disbelief, I’m just saying, the entire scene is realistic if you ignore the non existence of Force Powers. She wasnt out there any longer than a normal person could hold their breath, the physics checks out, etc. maybe her opening her eyes would have been a problem, but even then we know Jedi can do that from Clone Wars, first season, with PLo Koon and Ashoka.



I would disagree about the physics checking out. She appears to just be floating peacefully in space, when she ought to be continuing to zoom away from the ship since there's no friction in space.

As for Plo Koon, his ability to survive in the vacuum of space was later retconned as a special racial ability. I can't recall Ahsoka ever being exposed to the vacuum, though. I'm pretty sure she had a space suit on. 





epithet said:


> The more time I have to reflect on the movie, the more it bothers me. Luke Skywalker was an iconic hero, a character that had faced temptation and rejected the dark side to remain strong with the light. Rian Johnson retconned all of that by making Luke a complete failure as a jedi and a teacher, who had an episode of utter weakness that led to the destruction of the jedi he was responsible for training. He then gave up, went into hiding, and severed his connection to  the force. Rian Johnson rewrote Luke Skywalker into the worst Jedi he possibly could. He didn't introduce new threats or challenges, he just used his episode to tear down the heroes of the previous generation and crap all over their legacy.



In fairness to Rian, much of Luke's story was established prior to this movie. In fact, it's right there in the opening crawl for TFA. So I wouldn't place the blame on Rian in this case. Place it on Kathleen Kennedy and/or JJ Abrams.



> He did the same thing to Leia. JJ had already exiled her from the Senate and casually destroyed the Republic she had fought so hard to restore, but Rian had to go one further and show us how Leia was an ineffective commander, whose subordinates disregarded her orders and followed their own plans. We saw how Leia's resistance was utterly decimated by her failure to evacuate the base in a timely manner as well as the culture of insubordination she fostered. Then, as a last insult, we saw that the allies Leia counted on had abandoned her and left her and her resistance to be finally snuffed out by the New Order.



This one you can blame on Rian (and Kathleen).



> I'll admit that when Disney bought Lucasfilm and wiped the slate clean of all the Expanded Universe fiction, I was enthused. I thought the entire Vong story line was horrible, and even though I would have liked to keep or canonize the Knights of the Old Republic lore I agreed that it was best to just start over, picking elements of the "Legends" material to use as the new story lines called for it. Now, however, I'm looking at the Legends as being a better overall treatment of the GFFA, simply because those stories didn't undermine the iconic heroes of the original trilogy.



I dunno. I feel like a huge chunk of the post-film EU invalidated a lot of what our OT heroes did. Palpatine didn't stay dead. An even bigger Death Star was created (the inspiration for Starkiller Base?). And a mere hundred years or so later, the Jedi are back to being nearly wiped out and the galaxy is crawling with Darths. All LFL has really done with this new trilogy is to bring the Legacy era forward 70-odd years. No, the galaxy isn't crawling with Sith but the Jedi are wiped out again and bad guys are in charge. There's just no Cade Skywalker to sort of but not really save the day ... unless Ben Solo ends up redeeming himself in IX.

In my opinion, this new trilogy is no worse than anything from the post-film EU. In some cases, it is better. In others, it's about the same. 



> Maybe JJ Abrams, who is only a few years older than I am, has an amazing plan that will restore my enthusiasm for the franchise.



Who knows. They apparently didn't have the whole trilogy plotted out when they made TFA, so JJ might just make it all up as he goes along with IX.

I can't help but wonder how these films would've turned out if Disney hadn't told George to get lost when he approached them with his ideas ... (Oh, George, why did you have to go and sell up to Disney?!)




epithet said:


> Secondly, no one looks to Star Wars for nuanced depictions of people with complex personalities. Star Wars is an epic fight of good versus evil, just like The Lord of the Rings.



According to George, it's not. It's just meant to be a soap opera in space. Hence the term "space opera". And in that sense, I'd say all the movies, prequels included, succeed admirably.




epithet said:


> Yeah, that probably does seem like a lot of words to you.



FWIW I read all the words.


----------



## trappedslider

epithet said:


> I'll admit that when Disney bought Lucasfilm and wiped the slate clean of all the Expanded Universe fiction, I was enthused. I thought the entire Vong story line was horrible, and even though I would have liked to keep or canonize the Knights of the Old Republic lore I agreed that it was best to just start over, picking elements of the "Legends" material to use as the new story lines called for it. Now, however, I'm looking at the Legends as being a better overall treatment of the GFFA, simply because those stories didn't undermine the iconic heroes of the original trilogy.
> 
> I don't like it.




I'm guessing you missed the last few story lines after the vong war...let's see Legacy of the Force dealt  with the fall of Jacen Solo to the dark side of the Force, mentored by the returning villain Lumiya. The backdrop to this story arc is the conflict between Corellia and the Galactic Federation of Free Alliances, which later erupts into a full-scale war. 

Then after that we had FotJ dealing with the fallout from the above,which had Luke leave the Jedi Order due in part for his failure regarding Jacen to go on a soul searching journey of the different ways of the force. While a hidden group of sith was taking advantage of the confusion to make their move in destroying the jedi.

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Sith–Imperial_War

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Second_Imperial_Civil_War

And Originally The droids were supposed to be the only common characters in a story spanning a much longer time frame, until Lucas changed his mind and claimed it was always supposed to be six movies about the rise and fall of Anakin.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Ryujin said:


> So the loss of literally every one of the Rebel bombers gained them absolutely nothing in the long run.
> 
> How many times does someone have to say, "It's only a [ insert innocuous object here ]. Ignore it" only to have things go badly sideways, before it becomes incompetence? you're fighting Guerrillas. Their business is making innocuous things dangerous.



Are they guerrillas? They don't fight like it. They fight like an organized military. Pretty sure guerrillas don't tend to engage in frontal assaults with not so much as a flanking maneuver. 
There's also only one instance in the film of ignoring an innocuous thing that ends up doing massive damage. The other big hit they take is a bomber that they are very much trying to blow up before it can deliver it's payload. 



Joker said:


> Characters. I was talking about characters when I said they were in the same position as they were at the start of the movie. I don't know how you're reading into what I'm saying as to mean the specifics of the rebel fleet and their materials.
> I understand you disagree with me and feel that the characters have developed. I don't.
> I see that Poe is being groomed to be a leader and his is the only real change that has been expressed. Albeit in a terribly hamfisted way.
> Rey is still the same Mary Sue. Kylo is still the same troubled moody teen. Even after his apparent new resolve we see him almost cry in anger when first the Millennium Falcon shows and then when Luke moves out to confront him.
> Finn's moment of change was undercut by him being saved.



 Like Luke said, everything you just said is wrong. 
Nothing about being saved undercuts a change in personal perspective. That's just nonsensical. 
Rey being a "mary sue" (she isn't) has nothing to do with character development. She comes to a greater understanding of the Force, herself, her place in the Galaxy, realizes that she needs to plot her own course, I mean I don't know what bar you're using here, but I'm pretty sure it's "I don't like her because she's too cool so I refuse to see anything positive here", from all that you've said. 




pukunui said:


> I would disagree about the physics checking out. She appears to just be floating peacefully in space, when she ought to be continuing to zoom away from the ship since there's no friction in space.
> 
> As for Plo Koon, his ability to survive in the vacuum of space was later retconned as a special racial ability. I can't recall Ahsoka ever being exposed to the vacuum, though. I'm pretty sure she had a space suit on.



I wasn't aware of that unnecessary retcon. That's too bad. 

Regardless, again, it isn't unrealistic for her to be out in open space for that long without serious injury. Her opening her eyes without deliterious effect is probably a stretch, but hardly outside the scope of things we've seen Force users do in canon material. 

The fact that she isn't hurling through space at the same speed she was thrown from the ship is just normal movie stuff, I'm not gonna nitpick that.


----------



## pukunui

Ovinomancer said:


> Should they have flushed their fighters as soon as they hit system?  Probably, but we're armchair quarterbacking from the safety of our own far, far away galaxy.



The captain of the dreadnought certainly agreed with you. Doesn't he say something about how they should have launched their fighters "five minutes ago" when he realizes what Poe is up to?


----------



## hawkeyefan

Rey's dream sequence where she tries to see her parents but instead finds only a mirror with her own face looking back.....that's like Bruce Leroy opening a fortune cookie to find no fortune!


----------



## Ovinomancer

pukunui said:


> The captain of the dreadnought certainly agreed with you. Doesn't he say something about how they should have launched their fighters "five minutes ago" when he realizes what Poe is up to.




You mean after Poe is blowing up the dorsal cannon?  Yes, which sounds like a grumpy Captain yelling at his subordinates for something he didn't do himself.  It's easy to recognize the right thing you should have done after the surprise attack happens.  Often, you realize that it shouldn't have been a surprise.


----------



## Joker

doctorbadwolf said:


> Like Luke said, everything you just said is wrong.
> Nothing about being saved undercuts a change in personal perspective. That's just nonsensical.
> Rey being a "mary sue" (she isn't) has nothing to do with character development. She comes to a greater understanding of the Force, herself, her place in the Galaxy, realizes that she needs to plot her own course, I mean I don't know what bar you're using here, but I'm pretty sure it's "I don't like her because she's too cool so I refuse to see anything positive here", from all that you've said.




Either I'm being terribly incompetent in the English language or you've completely failed to understand what I said.

But it's particularly poor form to put a sentence in quotation marks as if it's something I said. "I don't like her because she's too cool so I refuse to see anything positive here" isn't even tangentially related to anything I wrote. I actually like Rey despite her high power level. She's a hopeful character who tries to overcome the unjust injury of being abandoned. But if I'm generous, her development in this movie is lackluster. 

About Finn, saving him from sacrificing himself does actually undercut the change he was going to make. This is movie storytelling 101. The change to a character has to be seen. He can't just want it or talk about it. Now we can only talk about the change that could have come to fruition but didn't. And that scene wasn't about Finn. It was about Poe learning from his earlier "mistake" and to clumsily throw in a love-triangle story between Finn, Rose and Rey. 

I understand you really like the movie and that's cool. I'm not disparaging people who had a good time watching it. But for me, the story failed in so many fundamental ways that it was uninteresting to watch. I might say that The Force Awakens wasn't original but it had a solid structure and did a good job at exploring the hero's journey. The Last Jedi didn't.
tt


----------



## Raunalyn

I felt that there were some narrative choices that left me very disappointed, but I liked it overall. Better than all of the prequels, but not as good as A New Hope or Empire.

My issues, in no particular order:

Did anyone else feel that Snoke's death was a bit anti-climatic. I mean, they built up his mystery and suspense in the first movie, and then his death was a bit...meh.
What was the point of Finn and the new girl (can't think of her name) going to the casino planet? What was the narrative arch there? Just to introduce Benicio Del Toro?
For the second time, Phasma was under-utilized. Very disappointing.
Is it me, or did this feel like the end of a trilogy as opposed to a second movie. Makes me a little worried about the third movie.

What I liked:
Luke was well written and utilized. I liked his story arch a lot!
The last 45 minutes of the film were absolutely breath-taking.
You could see Rian Johnson's love of Anime and Samurai movies in the final fight scene between Luke and Kylo.


----------



## hawkeyefan

Raunalyn said:


> Did anyone else feel that Snoke's death was a bit anti-climatic. I mean, they built up his mystery and suspense in the first movie, and then his death was a bit...meh.




I cut your comment down to just this because I've seen this and Rey's lineage brought up in this way quite a bit, and I don't know if I agree. 

I really don't think "they" built up a lot of mystery around either topic. A little bit about Rey, yes, but not nearly enough to warrant the rampant obsessive speculation. 

For Snoke, they hinted at next to nothing. They were just like "here's the new big bad" and that was it. They didn't hint at some mysterious past or that there was something unique or important about his rise to power. 

For Rey, the definitely played that a bit....but really all it consisted of was not giving her a last name, her being abandoned, and her feeling a connection to the lightsaber. What else did they hint at? Why do these little traits imply some grand history rather than the obvious one? 

In other words, I think that the fan base hinted at these things much more than the actual writers/directors. And I think that a lot of people seem to be upset that the crazy theories that they came up with were not realized. It seems a bit unfair to judge the movie based on this.


----------



## Raunalyn

hawkeyefan said:


> For Snoke, they hinted at next to nothing. They were just like "here's the new big bad" and that was it. They didn't hint at some mysterious past or that there was something unique or important about his rise to power.




That's precisely my point. Here, they have the new big bad...he's an obvious force user. He was able to turn Ben Solo and several of his friends away from Luke's training...he was able to gather the imperial remnant and turn them into the First Order. No one knows anything about him, other than he is able to rule through his power in the Dark Side and fear...

So let's kill him halfway through the second movie. 

Yeah...the guy was a really big deal *yawn*


----------



## billd91

Raunalyn said:


> That's precisely my point. Here, they have the new big bad...he's an obvious force user. He was able to turn Ben Solo and several of his friends away from Luke's training...he was able to gather the imperial remnant and turn them into the First Order. No one knows anything about him, other than he is able to rule through his power in the Dark Side and fear...
> 
> So let's kill him halfway through the second movie.
> 
> Yeah...the guy was a really big deal *yawn*




I particularly liked that. They took a setup just like it was from Return of the Jedi and used it as massive misdirection. Suddenly, almost anything became possible! Loved it!


----------



## RangerWickett

hawkeyefan said:


> I totally disagree that Luke and Leia are failures, or that the aim of this film was to somehow tarnish their legacy.




This all would have been avoided if they'd started the movies at a different point. 

You want to get rid of the old cast and focus on new stories? That's a good idea. Set the plot somewhere outside their sphere of influence, or maybe have one old 'PC' as a side character to help guide the new generation, like they did with Han Solo in TFA. But it makes for unsatisfying storytelling to leave off-screen a bunch of tragedy that dramatically changes the personality of our main characters.

If you want to show Luke failing as a teacher, his order being destroyed, and him withdrawing from his family and friends to focus on his shame, okay, have that be one plot thread of Ep 7, which could show Ben becoming Kylo, while keeping roughly the same character beats for Rey and Finn. You can then have Ep 8 involve Han trying to save Kylo and that failing, and have the Republic destroyed by the First Order, with the focus on the new characters becoming heroes of the rebellion. Then maybe Ep 9 is the rebellion failing, but still being a spark of hope to the next generation.

But it's . . . it's bad storytelling to skip over perhaps the second most dramatic thing to ever happen to Luke Skywalker, especially if you later on want that moment to matter to the characters. As much as I complain about the plotting of this new trilogy, Kylo's course has been enthralling, and I think actually seeing his first turn to the Dark Side would have been great cinema.

Think of it like RPGs. If you roleplay through something, and the players fail, that's sad but acceptable. But if the GM says, "While you were sleeping all your gear was stolen and the bad guys rushed ahead and finished their evil plan," that's bad storytelling.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Joker said:


> But it's particularly poor form to put a sentence in quotation marks as if it's something I said. "I don't like her because she's too cool so I refuse to see anything positive here" isn't even tangentially related to anything I wrote. I actually like Rey despite her high power level. She's a hopeful character who tries to overcome the unjust injury of being abandoned. But if I'm generous, her development in this movie is lackluster.



 Dismissing her as a "Mary Sue" is a good way to get the exact opposite of any of that across. 

She still isn't, by the way. She doesn't even have a high power level. She's just a strong force user. 



> About Finn, saving him from sacrificing himself does actually undercut the change he was going to make. This is movie storytelling 101. The change to a character has to be seen. He can't just want it or talk about it. Now we can only talk about the change that could have come to fruition but didn't. And that scene wasn't about Finn.



 I'm sorry, but that is nonsense. He went from wanting to run to being willing to sacrifice, and further development in the next film is set up by Rose's action. 



> I understand you really like the movie and that's cool.



I don't need your permission, but thanks. What purpose do you think this serves, I wonder?


----------



## Ovinomancer

RangerWickett said:


> This all would have been avoided if they'd started the movies at a different point.
> 
> You want to get rid of the old cast and focus on new stories? That's a good idea. Set the plot somewhere outside their sphere of influence, or maybe have one old 'PC' as a side character to help guide the new generation, like they did with Han Solo in TFA. But it makes for unsatisfying storytelling to leave off-screen a bunch of tragedy that dramatically changes the personality of our main characters.
> 
> If you want to show Luke failing as a teacher, his order being destroyed, and him withdrawing from his family and friends to focus on his shame, okay, have that be one plot thread of Ep 7, which could show Ben becoming Kylo, while keeping roughly the same character beats for Rey and Finn. You can then have Ep 8 involve Han trying to save Kylo and that failing, and have the Republic destroyed by the First Order, with the focus on the new characters becoming heroes of the rebellion. Then maybe Ep 9 is the rebellion failing, but still being a spark of hope to the next generation.
> 
> But it's . . . it's bad storytelling to skip over perhaps the second most dramatic thing to ever happen to Luke Skywalker, especially if you later on want that moment to matter to the characters. As much as I complain about the plotting of this new trilogy, Kylo's course has been enthralling, and I think actually seeing his first turn to the Dark Side would have been great cinema.
> 
> Think of it like RPGs. If you roleplay through something, and the players fail, that's sad but acceptable. But if the GM says, "While you were sleeping all your gear was stolen and the bad guys rushed ahead and finished their evil plan," that's bad storytelling.



You should never confuse what makes good story for a game with what makes for good story pretty much anywhere else.  Very, very different things.

Further, I like that much of the background was off camera.  I don't need to see everything unfold.  In media res is a time honored storytelling tool.


----------



## RangerWickett

I . . . man, I dunno. I can't agree with the defense of the movie. In medias res gets you into the action of a story, but if you're doing it as part of an episodic format, you don't use it to conceal important character moments, unless you're doing it for comedic effect. Farscape did in medias res all the time, but it never hid swerves of character growth off screen.

Again, if the original trilogy had never existed, I'd be a lot more forgiving about TLJ. If this were a movie called Space Fight: The Final Jerdai, and Bloke VonStarsmith had rejected the ways of the Nexus because he'd failed to teach his Jerdai apprentice, I'd say, "Excellent movie. A bit derivative of Star Wars." 

But they changed Luke's character too much without earning it.


----------



## MarkB

RangerWickett said:


> This all would have been avoided if they'd started the movies at a different point.
> 
> You want to get rid of the old cast and focus on new stories? That's a good idea. Set the plot somewhere outside their sphere of influence, or maybe have one old 'PC' as a side character to help guide the new generation, like they did with Han Solo in TFA. But it makes for unsatisfying storytelling to leave off-screen a bunch of tragedy that dramatically changes the personality of our main characters.
> 
> If you want to show Luke failing as a teacher, his order being destroyed, and him withdrawing from his family and friends to focus on his shame, okay, have that be one plot thread of Ep 7, which could show Ben becoming Kylo, while keeping roughly the same character beats for Rey and Finn. You can then have Ep 8 involve Han trying to save Kylo and that failing, and have the Republic destroyed by the First Order, with the focus on the new characters becoming heroes of the rebellion. Then maybe Ep 9 is the rebellion failing, but still being a spark of hope to the next generation.
> 
> But it's . . . it's bad storytelling to skip over perhaps the second most dramatic thing to ever happen to Luke Skywalker, especially if you later on want that moment to matter to the characters. As much as I complain about the plotting of this new trilogy, Kylo's course has been enthralling, and I think actually seeing his first turn to the Dark Side would have been great cinema.
> 
> Think of it like RPGs. If you roleplay through something, and the players fail, that's sad but acceptable. But if the GM says, "While you were sleeping all your gear was stolen and the bad guys rushed ahead and finished their evil plan," that's bad storytelling.




Luke isn't one of the PCs in this one, though.

The whole point of keeping the truth of Ben's fall / Luke's failure offscreen was so that we could have the exploration that took place in this episode - the views of the same event from Ben's side and then from Luke's, with Rey having to figure out where the truth lay, and whether she could put her trust in either Ben or Luke.

That's good storytelling, and laying it all out in advance for us would have ruined it.


----------



## RangerWickett

Huh, odd. I felt like the "Who's telling the truth" thing was the weakest part of that plot line. I thought her thinking Kylo had any shred of decency left was only justifiable because she'd seen him kill Snoke, not because she sympathized with his flashback.


----------



## Joker

doctorbadwolf said:


> Dismissing her as a "Mary Sue" is a good way to get the exact opposite of any of that across.
> 
> She still isn't, by the way. She doesn't even have a high power level. She's just a strong force user.
> 
> I'm sorry, but that is nonsense. He went from wanting to run to being willing to sacrifice, and further development in the next film is set up by Rose's action.
> 
> 
> I don't need your permission, but thanks. What purpose do you think this serves, I wonder?




She really is the definition of a Mary Sue. That doesn't make her less of an interesting character. I still enjoy watching her journey but would have liked her to explore more of it than was offered.
I have to disagree with you on Finn. From everything I've learned about story telling, having a character reach a point where he's made an important character decision only for it to be taken away is cheating. Like a DM saving his NPC because he likes him so much.

That I understand that you enjoyed the film wasn't as condescending or as personal as you inferred. I genuinely understand that people enjoyed the film and that's cool. I'm not criticizing the people who liked this movie. But I look at this film and for me it glosses over important character arcs which, from a story-telling perspective, seems unforgivable.


----------



## hawkeyefan

Raunalyn said:


> That's precisely my point. Here, they have the new big bad...he's an obvious force user. He was able to turn Ben Solo and several of his friends away from Luke's training...he was able to gather the imperial remnant and turn them into the First Order. No one knows anything about him, other than he is able to rule through his power in the Dark Side and fear...
> 
> So let's kill him halfway through the second movie.
> 
> Yeah...the guy was a really big deal *yawn*




I thought Snoke...other than his name...was actually really cool. He was a larger presence in the first film than te Emperor was in Empire Strikes Back. And he was truly menacing and vile in this film. Probably on par with the Emperor in the throne room in Return, though with less time devoted to him. 

Without taking the prequel films into account, Snoke’s about as fleshed out as Palpatine was in the original trilogy. 

So I don’t really see the problem. Were viewers angry at the Emperor’s lack of backstory in the original movies? Or is such anger brought about by an elevated sense of expectation based largely on online discussion?


----------



## Morrus

hawkeyefan said:


> I thought Snoke...other than his name...was actually really cool. He was a larger presence in the first film than te Emperor was in Empire Strikes Back. And he was truly menacing and vile in this film. Probably on par with the Emperor in the throne room in Return, though with less time devoted to him.
> 
> Without taking the prequel films into account, Snoke’s about as fleshed out as Palpatine was in the original trilogy.
> 
> So I don’t really see the problem. Were viewers angry at the Emperor’s lack of backstory in the original movies? Or is such anger brought about by an elevated sense of expectation based largely on online discussion?




I'm with you. Snoke was really awesome. And I loved the way they subverted our expectations twice. We expected it to be all "I'll turn Rey to the dark side", but it more direct "You are too dangerous to be allowed to live, so I will kill you". And, of course, his death revealing he's not the big bad of the trilogy, but Kylo is. I'm glad they didn't follow the exact same script as in the previous films, and that they managed to surprise me when they didn't.


----------



## hawkeyefan

RangerWickett said:


> This all would have been avoided if they'd started the movies at a different point.
> 
> You want to get rid of the old cast and focus on new stories? That's a good idea. Set the plot somewhere outside their sphere of influence, or maybe have one old 'PC' as a side character to help guide the new generation, like they did with Han Solo in TFA. But it makes for unsatisfying storytelling to leave off-screen a bunch of tragedy that dramatically changes the personality of our main characters.
> 
> If you want to show Luke failing as a teacher, his order being destroyed, and him withdrawing from his family and friends to focus on his shame, okay, have that be one plot thread of Ep 7, which could show Ben becoming Kylo, while keeping roughly the same character beats for Rey and Finn. You can then have Ep 8 involve Han trying to save Kylo and that failing, and have the Republic destroyed by the First Order, with the focus on the new characters becoming heroes of the rebellion. Then maybe Ep 9 is the rebellion failing, but still being a spark of hope to the next generation.
> 
> But it's . . . it's bad storytelling to skip over perhaps the second most dramatic thing to ever happen to Luke Skywalker, especially if you later on want that moment to matter to the characters. As much as I complain about the plotting of this new trilogy, Kylo's course has been enthralling, and I think actually seeing his first turn to the Dark Side would have been great cinema.
> 
> Think of it like RPGs. If you roleplay through something, and the players fail, that's sad but acceptable. But if the GM says, "While you were sleeping all your gear was stolen and the bad guys rushed ahead and finished their evil plan," that's bad storytelling.




Storytelling for a game is different than storytelling for a film.

The first film was not about Luke. It was about the people searching for him.

This movie is about what happens when he’s found. 

Neither one is specifically about Luke’s time as a teacher of new Jedi. Such might be an interesting topic for a story, but instead they decided to tell another story, and used that as back story. They showed us what we needed to know in order to understand current events. 

I wouldn’t say that’s bad storytelling. Maybe if the sole story they were going to be “the life of Luke Skywalker”, but that’s not the case.


----------



## billd91

Joker said:


> She really is the definition of a Mary Sue.




She's no more a Mary Sue than any other Jedi protagonist. Yet I don't recall a lot of critics calling Luke or Anakin a Gary Stu.


----------



## Ovinomancer

billd91 said:


> She's no more a Mary Sue than any other Jedi protagonist. Yet I don't recall a lot of critics calling Luke or Anakin a Gary Stu.



This.


----------



## Raunalyn

Morrus said:


> I'm with you. Snoke was really awesome. And I loved the way they subverted our expectations twice. We expected it to be all "I'll turn Rey to the dark side", but it more direct "You are too dangerous to be allowed to live, so I will kill you". And, of course, his death revealing he's not the big bad of the trilogy, but Kylo is. I'm glad they didn't follow the exact same script as in the previous films, and that they managed to surprise me when they didn't.




Yes, I thought he was awesome, too. Which is why such an ignoble death was so anti-climatic.


----------



## epithet

Raunalyn said:


> Yes, I thought he was awesome, too. Which is why such an ignoble death was so anti-climatic.




I seriously doubt we've seen the last of Snoke. He somehow recovered from having his head crushed, I don't think this is the worst thing that's happened to him.

People seem very much ready to accept what they're shown in this movie at face value. Remember, this is a trilogy started by JJ "he's totally not Khan" Abrams. Rian is out there talking about how there was essentially no story guidance provided to him, and that he was given complete authority to do whatever he wanted with Snoke, to make Rey's parents whoever he felt like making them, so on and so forth. I'm amazed that anyone believes that. These are billion-dollar movies in the world's most valuable movie franchise. You seriously don't think there was an outline of the trilogy nailed down before Ep 7 was even begun? Who Snoke is, who Rey's parents are, and what ultimately happens to Rey, Poe, and Finn as well as Han, Luke, and (subject to tragic change) Leia was all worked out ahead of time for the trilogy... it had to have been. This is Disney, they don't just wing it.

That means, to me, that every time Rian says he was not given any guidance about a major plot point, he's lying. It means that that plot point was absolutely given to him ahead of time and he had to work around it, and that means that Snoke's death and Rey's redneck origins are very likely feints, and that there is some bigger plan yet to play out.

I still believe that once Kylo killed Han Solo, he had to die. As Leia's son and someone who aspires to emulate Vader, he has to sacrifice himself to end the larger threat, thereby achieving some level of redemption. That means Snoke probably returns with a "surprise, I'm unkillable" moment, and the only way to end him for good requires Ben Solo to go out with him. Because hey, you can't skewer Han Solo and drop his body down a bottomless shaft and get away with that... you gotta die. Even if you're his son.

This trilogy is lifting plot points from the original trilogy blatantly, and I think the misdirection about Rey's parents is one such. (Luke's father was a navigator on a spice freighter, then he was a Jedi that was betrayed and murdered by Darth Vader, then Vader was his father.) The return of Snoke, however, seems to be more of a nod to Darth Maul's "death" and return in the Clone Wars.

Unless I'm wrong, and Kathleen Kennedy is just signing off on one movie at a time with no larger plan. If you believe that, I have some beachfront property in New Mexico you should buy as an investment.


----------



## pukunui

epithet said:


> You seriously don't think there was an outline of the trilogy nailed down before Ep 7 was even begun? Who Snoke is, who Rey's parents are, and what ultimately happens to Rey, Poe, and Finn as well as Han, Luke, and (subject to tragic change) Leia was all worked out ahead of time for the trilogy... it had to have been. This is Disney, they don't just wing it.



They hadn't even figured out what Snoke looked like until a few months out from TFA's release, and Lucasfilm only recently said they'd finally figured out his backstory. So no, I don't think they had a proper outline for the whole trilogy. They might have had a rough, broad strokes idea, but I don't think they'd zoomed in on all the nitty-gritty details.

I agree, though, that Snoke may very well reappear in IX. I wouldn't be at all surprised if Phasma does too.


----------



## Joker

For what it's worth, this is what Rian Johnson had to say about the planning:

"I’m sure they talked about where it might go early on, but when they came to me there was no mapped story presented beyond TFA." and "We're not improvising it all on set. It is very carefully planned, but one piece at a time, each building off the previous movie."

This is in line with what JJ said about the trilogy that they didn't plan beyond the first movie.


----------



## Morrus

Raunalyn said:


> Yes, I thought he was awesome, too. Which is why such an ignoble death was so anti-climatic.




Deftly subverting our expectations. I found it delicious!


----------



## epithet

Morrus said:


> Deftly subverting our expectations. I found it delicious!




I don’t see inherent benefit in subverting expectations. In fact, it seems as though subverting expectation is sometimes used in lieu of a good story, and as an excuse for unsatisfying resolution or lazy plot development. 

There is an art to writing a twist or surprise into a story in a way that improves the narrative, and it involves a lot more than subverting the audience’s expectations. There are many terms I would use to describe Rian’s plot development in TLJ, but “deft” is not among them. “Daft” is more like it.


----------



## Morrus

epithet said:


> I don’t see inherent benefit in subverting expectations. In fact, it seems as though subverting expectation is sometimes used in lieu of a good story, and as an excuse for unsatisfying resolution or lazy plot development.




It's almost as if peoples' likes and dislikes were subjective!



> There is an art to writing a twist or surprise into a story in a way that improves the narrative, and it involves a lot more than subverting the audience’s expectations. There are many terms I would use to describe Rian’s plot development in TLJ, but “deft” is not among them. “Daft” is more like it.




... well, except on the internet, of course.


----------



## Ryujin

I rather like having my expectations subverted. Until it becomes an M. Night Shyamalan game of "Spot the Twist", that is, when it comes back around to being an expectation.


----------



## Joker

But Snoke coming back wouldn't really be a twist because his ability to survive grievous wounds has only been established indirectly because of his scars.
Unless it was all a big bamboozlin' and Snoke was just a force projection of Kylo and we had a sort of Fight Club-esque psychological thriller coming up. Or it was a tiny Sith in a large Snoke costume like the little aliens in Men in Black.
I can accept that.


----------



## MarkB

Joker said:


> But Snoke coming back wouldn't really be a twist because his ability to survive grievous wounds has only been established indirectly because of his scars.
> Unless it was all a big bamboozlin' and Snoke was just a force projection of Kylo and we had a sort of Fight Club-esque psychological thriller coming up. Or it was a tiny Sith in a large Snoke costume like the little aliens in Men in Black.
> I can accept that.




Snoke's dead, baby. Snoke's dead.


----------



## Joker

Whose speeder is this?

It's a shuttle, baby.

Whose shuttle is this?

Snoke's.

Who's Snoke?



MarkB said:


> Snoke's dead, baby. Snoke's dead.


----------



## trappedslider

2 Generations of Fans Debate 'The Last Jedi'


----------



## Water Bob

TLJ is the second largest domestic opening ever, just a small bit behind TFA, and TLJ did $495 worldwide.


It's a hit!


Negative, negative. It didn't go in.


No, really! It's a hit!


Oh...OK.


----------



## epithet

Water Bob said:


> TLJ is the second largest domestic opening ever, just a small bit behind TFA, and TLJ did $495 worldwide.
> 
> It's a hit!
> ...




We'll see.

Everyone will go see this movie, it's a Star Wars movie after all. The question is, how many will see it again? I've seen every Star Wars movie before this turd more than once in the cinema (thanks to the re-releases of the original trilogy.) I even saw the prequel trilogy movies several times. I've bought them all, then bought them again on blu-ray.

I have no interest in seeing this movie again.

Remember how long The Force Awakens stayed in cinemas? It was there for months and months, because people were going to see it again and again. I don't think this episode will enjoy the same longevity. People will buy a ticket to a Rick-roll if it has the Star Wars name on it... once.

That's how you kill a franchise. Look at Mass Effect 3, for example. The ending really "subverted expectations" (which is my new euphemism for "sucked") and despite excellent reviews and strong pre-order and launch sales, the fans of the Mass Effect series were not pleased. Mass Effect Andromeda tanked. EA found out they couldn't get away with that crap a second time. If Andromeda had been good, I would have bought it after I saw some positive fan reaction (I'm done paying attention to professional reviewers for movies or games.) Instead, based on what I read, I decided that if the complete game + DLC goes for less that $20 I might pick it up, if I have nothing else to play. This from a guy who was in the habit of pre-ordering the collector's edition of every BioWare game.

Disney has been talking about the Rotten Tomatoes score being the result of trolling, and pointing the CinemaScore as being a more accurate read of viewer reaction. I hope that someone at Disney is smarter than that. I hope they don't pull an EA and double down, producing another entry that... subverts expectations. Hopefully Disney and JJ are paying attention, and will put effort into wrapping the trilogy up with an episode that _exceeds _expectations.

We'll just have to wait and see.


----------



## tomBitonti

Putting on a critical hat:

Luke: “I will not be the last Jedi.”  Upending the title, which becomes a tease.

Most of the Rebels died because of a consequence of Poe bringing in the Codebreaker, who revealed the fleeing transports.

Finn and Tran hardly know each other.  How can they be in love?

The core story seems to be that Luke, in a horrible moment contemplated killing his sister’s son, unleashing dark forces which brought down the nascent New Republic.  That fits a Shakespearean tragedy, not Star Wars.

The bombing run and casino planet acts are tacked on.  They detract from the core narrative, which is the conflict between Luke, Rey, and Ren.  The collapse of the New Republic is setting.

What feels off is that the story of Luke and Ren seems to be a separate narrative from movies IV-VI.  The movies VII and VIII work better disjointed from the other movies.

Thx!
TomB


----------



## Morrus

epithet said:


> We'll see.
> 
> Everyone will go see this movie, it's a Star Wars movie after all. The question is, how many will see it again? I've seen every Star Wars movie before this turd more than once in the cinema (thanks to the re-releases of the original trilogy.) I even saw the prequel trilogy movies several times. I've bought them all, then bought them again on blu-ray.
> 
> I have no interest in seeing this movie again.
> 
> Remember how long The Force Awakens stayed in cinemas? It was there for months and months, because people were going to see it again and again. I don't think this episode will enjoy the same longevity. People will buy a ticket to a Rick-roll if it has the Star Wars name on it... once.
> 
> That's how you kill a franchise. Look at Mass Effect 3, for example. The ending really "subverted expectations" (which is my new euphemism for "sucked") and despite excellent reviews and strong pre-order and launch sales, the fans of the Mass Effect series were not pleased. Mass Effect Andromeda tanked. EA found out they couldn't get away with that crap a second time. If Andromeda had been good, I would have bought it after I saw some positive fan reaction (I'm done paying attention to professional reviewers for movies or games.) Instead, based on what I read, I decided that if the complete game + DLC goes for less that $20 I might pick it up, if I have nothing else to play. This from a guy who was in the habit of pre-ordering the collector's edition of every BioWare game.
> 
> Disney has been talking about the Rotten Tomatoes score being the result of trolling, and pointing the CinemaScore as being a more accurate read of viewer reaction. I hope that someone at Disney is smarter than that. I hope they don't pull an EA and double down, producing another entry that... subverts expectations. Hopefully Disney and JJ are paying attention, and will put effort into wrapping the trilogy up with an episode that _exceeds _expectations.
> 
> We'll just have to wait and see.




I'll go see it an extra time to compensate for you. With luck, they'll subvert some more expectations.  No, really, you're welcome; it's no bother.


----------



## Water Bob

THIS ARTICLE SAYS THAT THE LAST JEDI IS REVIEW BOMBED ON ROTTEN TOMATOES.

An excerpt:



> One Facebook group, “Down With Disney's Treatment of Franchises and its Fanboys,” which aligns itself as a pro-DCEU community, announced on Facebook that it had generated trolls to help review bomb The Last Jedi’s score on Rotten Tomatoes. (Review bombing is when a horde of negative reviews with low ratings are left on an entities page in protest.) The page defines itself by its anti-Marvel and anti-Disney stance as a pro-DCEU fan page.


----------



## Water Bob

Morrus said:


> I'll go see it an extra time to compensate for you. With luck, they'll subvert some more expectations.  No, really, you're welcome; it's no bother.




I'm going a second time.  Can't wait to buy the DVD, too.


----------



## cmad1977

Water Bob said:


> I'm going a second time.  Can't wait to buy the DVD, too.




I was surprised by how many people I know who had issue with the film, saw a second time and enjoyed it more during the 2nd viewing. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## epithet

Water Bob said:


> THIS ARTICLE SAYS THAT THE LAST JEDI IS REVIEW BOMBED ON ROTTEN TOMATOES.
> ...




It says that, sure. It's full of crap, but it does say that.

Look at the number of reviews, compare it to TFA. It doesn't seem to have as many reviews as it should if there were a bunch of bots artificially generating them. Second, look at how many of those negative reviews are multi-paragraph examinations of the reasons why the viewer didn't like the movie. Bots don't do that.

So far, they've just pointed to a Facebook post by an idiot. They haven't actually identified a significant number of botted reviews. Now, I'm sure that there are some reviews that are botted, and I'm sure those skew negative. I'm also sure that there is a significant number of long-time Star Wars fans who think this film is a damn disgrace.

I mean, just look at this thread. No way is this a meaningful sample, but opinions are completely divided and the detractors aren't just dropping an "LOL sux" into the thread and moving on. You can keep telling yourself that pretty much everyone shares your opinion, and that this movie is and will be as universally loved as the 1977 Star Wars and will have as great a place in the mythology as The Empire Strikes Back, but that's just willful ignorance.


----------



## trappedslider

Morrus said:


> I'll go see it an extra time to compensate for you. With luck, they'll subvert some more expectations.  No, really, you're welcome; it's no bother.




I didn't see it today, maybe next week and i'll see it in 3D since I didn't see it opening night in 3D.


----------



## Blue

epithet said:


> The Force Awakens set out the paths of Kylo, Rey, and Finn. Finn rejected the New Order, and his destiny is to bring about its downfall. Rey has spent her entire life seeking her family, and her destiny is to find it and to embody the Skywalker legacy. Kylo has always sought to be as strong as Darth Vader, and we all know that the ultimate expression of Vader's strength was when he sacrificed everything to defeat the master of the dark side (Palpatine) and protect the scion of the Skywalker legacy. That's Kylo's destiny.




My concern with this is if you're already determined what everyone's "destiny" is, they you'll never be satisfied except with movies that follow the same line of reasoning you are projecting.

If you follow this logic, you must have hated Empire Strikes Back because Luke puts aside his "destiny" of becoming the best with the force to go save his friends on Cloud City.  And really dissatisfied in RotJ because A New Hope never set up Luke's "destiny" to redeem Vader.  Was Leia "destined" to marry the scruffy nerf-herder that rescued her from the Death Star - would you have judged the original movies harshly if that didn't happen?

The characters in the original three movies grew and changed over the course of the movies as well as having new things revealed (like Leia being a Skywalker), and where they ended up isn't a straight line from what they wanted in the first movie.  Sure, there's a foundation there, but there's also a lot more.


----------



## hawkeyefan

The more I see of the negative reaction, the more I’m convinced that a lot of it is really due to false expectations. We fans tend to over obsess about a lot of this stuff. So for the past 2 years, everyone’s been building up certain story elements into a much bigger deal than The Force Awakens ever really justifies.

So peoples’ artificially inflated expectations were not met. So they’re mad. 

Imagine if the original trilogy faced this level of scrutiny. Especially since it’s become very clear that Lucas was changing things along the way and making stuff up on the fly. If the internet existed then, people would have likely been just as harsh on those films as they are on the new ones.

But the original trilogy escaped that nonsense. And it also benefitted from being the first....it had no legacy or expectation to live up to. The new films, though? They have an impossible task to make many of these people happy. Impossible. What movie that is escapist fantasy should have to face such insane criticism? At what point do they just accept that they cannot please the 40 year old adults who scrutinize every bit of minutiae about the films? At what point do they say “well the original films were really more for kids...so let’s worry about that demo”?

Seriously...I say that as a 43 year old dude who loves Star Wars and all this kind of stuff. But because I’ve chosen to place importance on these movies because of the sentiment they hold for me does not mean that the people who create them must be beholden to me. I would argue that they should not be. 

If you want to know if this movie, or any Star Wars movie really, is any good, then ask a 10 year old.


----------



## Joker

My criticism is leveled at the narrative failings. I'm not a fan of Star Wars who cares about the franchise. I've liked some of the Star Wars movies and didn't like others. 
But in this movie there are some choices for character and plot development that left me baffled.

A ten year old will like Transformers. That doesn't mean it's a "good" movie.


----------



## Water Bob

Blue said:


> The characters in the original three movies grew and changed over the course of the movies as well as having new things revealed (like Leia being a Skywalker), and where they ended up isn't a straight line from what they wanted in the first movie.




Or Vader being Luke's father.  We didn't have social media and the net back then, but I remember reading an article about how this disappointed some fans of the original film.


----------



## wicked cool

forget the fact that if you over 40 and you say they didn't make it for me. 

here are my rants
-some of the ship to ship dialogue seems right out of Spaceballs. Watch the scene with moranis and his commander picks up the phone to get someone to do something. I get that maybe I'm taking this movie to seriously but the dialogue/comedy in that scene plus other scenes dont fit.

-I love you. John Mayor the singer has this song (Tracing) where he talks about a person in love after about ten minutes. That scene reminded me of that song. If she had kissed him maybe it would have worked

-r2 and threepio. It truly feel like they are there just there to appease the old timers. It truly feels like they don't want to use a of the old stuff (barely recycling of old creatures as they don't fit into that part of the galaxy and yet there are humans everywhere. thank god Chewie and the falcon get love in these

It feel like the secondary storylines suck compared to the original storyline. Examples  

Han-smuggler-fight with Greedo-connected to Lando-connected to Hutt etc (maybe Lucas made some of it up but he did a much better job than these new writers) 
Luke-uncle -Obi etc 

what do you have in these first 2. we are 2 movies in and
Poe dameron-Little to nothing other than a good pilot
finn-trooper and the janitor joke
rey-Fans don't trust what we know which isn't much
Maz-more mystery
Snoke-more excuses and comparisons to emperor. Problem with that comparison was emperor was in beginning. How did this guy waltz in and take over   

I'd love someone to defend the story's of the last 2 vs episodes 4-6. The last few minutes of Rogue 1 has been the best star Wars material I've seen in the most recent 6 movies


----------



## Water Bob

When The Force Awakens came out, people groaned that it was too much of a re-hash of what has come before.

Now, Star Wars is given something fresh and new--a new direction and growth in the story line--and some fans are complaining about that.

What worries me about the negative reaction is what will J.J. Abrams do with the next film.  Will he play it safe and do what he did with TFA, giving us a re-hash of Jedi?  Or, will he continue what Rian has started and take us in a new direction, showing us a new story?

Say what you want to about TLJ, and what I'll say to you is, "Just think of what we'd have if Lucas had continued with this trilogy."

Thank the Force we didn't get more prequels-quality Star Wars.


----------



## Morrus

Water Bob said:


> What worries me about the negative reaction is what will J.J. Abrams do with the next film.  Will he play it safe and do what he did with TFA, giving us a re-hash of Jedi?  Or, will he continue what Rian has started and take us in a new direction, showing us a new story?




Since I enjoyed both TFA and TLJ, it doesn't worry me one jot which approach he takes. Either is fine with me.


----------



## hawkeyefan

Joker said:


> My criticism is leveled at the narrative failings. I'm not a fan of Star Wars who cares about the franchise. I've liked some of the Star Wars movies and didn't like others.
> But in this movie there are some choices for character and plot development that left me baffled.
> 
> A ten year old will like Transformers. That doesn't mean it's a "good" movie.




I’m not saying that the film is flawless. I have criticisms of some of the narrative choices they made. But most of them are minor compared to the things that I think they got right. But there are valid croticosms that people have mentioned. 

What I’m talking about is more the raging hate that I’ve seen online, or the crazy standards that people have for these films. 

And in regard to ten year olds...my point is that they’re going to judge the movie based mostly on itself and if it was fun or cool. They’re not going to talk about subversion of the original trilogy or whether or not the narrative choices were fitting. And while I don’t mind having such a discussion (obviously) I think there comes a point where we have to acknowledge that this is an all-ages film, and we have to keep that in mind during critical discussion. I don’t think any of the story elements are out of line with plenty of things we saw in the original trilogy.

It’s just that the original trilogy gets a pass. 



Water Bob said:


> When The Force Awakens came out, people groaned that it was too much of a re-hash of what has come before.
> 
> Now, Star Wars is given something fresh and new--a new direction and growth in the story line--and some fans are complaining about that.
> 
> What worries me about the negative reaction is what will J.J. Abrams do with the next film.  Will he play it safe and do what he did with TFA, giving us a re-hash of Jedi?  Or, will he continue what Rian has started and take us in a new direction, showing us a new story?
> 
> Say what you want to about TLJ, and what I'll say to you is, "Just think of what we'd have if Lucas had continued with this trilogy."
> 
> Thank the Force we didn't get more prequels-quality Star Wars.




I don’t think they will change direction and start pandering to the vocal minority. I think it’s clear that they recognize the need to capture a new audience, and I think it’s clear they’re succeeding.


----------



## Water Bob

One of the things Rian got very "right," imo, is the link between Luke and Ben.  Luke saw the Dark Side exploding in the young, strong Force User, and he had lived through the evil of Vader and the Galactic Civil War against the Emperor.  It makes sense to me that Luke would at least think hard about snuffing out that Darkness before it blooms.

But, Luke is Luke.  He caught himself.

And, from Ben's point of view, seeing your master--your uncle--standing over you with lightsaber drawn while you sleep.  He could probably feel Luke's intention through the Force.

Boom.  Tasty conflict that makes sense from both sides.

Very cool.


----------



## wicked cool

As much as I hate Jar Jar we got a story for him. Lucas lost his way with a bad actor for vader with a crappy backstory, reliance on blue screen etc but it had good stuff in it.  Emperors rise to power was good, Kenobi and some of the jedi backstorys was good. It felt like with some minor storyline changes, better Anakin etc it could have been much better trilogy
Last jedi-awakens and even rogue 1 have -0 character development
jedi-Plot/dialogue is just awful if you look at from say modern television such as expanse/galactics/game of thrones etc or even current scifi movies such as passengers/guardians of galaxy . As an audience we are given zilch. We know less of whats going on than the heroes. the big chase/tracking/casino/mutiny storyline is absurd. What could have happened is the ship temporaily blocks the signal/hides and they go looking but instead we probably get one of the worst plot lines. the whole superwoman in space thing was just gross. 

Defenders say we are to blame and yet critics set us up with better or as good as empire. no offense if I a critic says it as good as empire then my expectation is the critic watched both which either means they did homework and watched empire or are old enough to remember it fondly. I would like to know how its as good as empire based on what u defenders know of both. Based on basic literature/writing classes jedi fails on how to write a basic story    

My 10 year old if asked would say Thor 3 is better. I would argue that many of the marvel movies, Jurassic world, latest remake of king kong etc have
-more believable plots
-better backstorys
-better side quest storylines
-better villians
-better minor creatures from the wampas to the asteroid worm and rancor 
-Other than nostalgia if your 10 year old sees the last 2 star wars movies do they care and knew nothing about the history would they care if so and so old character died. My wife cried when Yoda died in ROTJ and she saw it as an adult when they re-released it.


----------



## Morrus

I’m surprised the novel isn’t a simultaneous release. I like to read them too. Apparently it’s still a few months away.


----------



## hawkeyefan

wicked cool said:


> My 10 year old if asked would say Thor 3 is better. I would argue that many of the marvel movies, Jurassic world, latest remake of king kong etc have
> -more believable plots
> -better backstorys
> -better side quest storylines
> -better villians
> -better minor creatures from the wampas to the asteroid worm and rancor
> -Other than nostalgia if your 10 year old sees the last 2 star wars movies do they care and knew nothing about the history would they care if so and so old character died. My wife cried when Yoda died in ROTJ and she saw it as an adult when they re-released it.




Would a ten year old feel such a strong need to compare this film to other films? Wouldn’t a ten year old just say that both movies were awesome? Maybe they’d say they liked one or the other more, but I don’t think they’d start to examine it to the extent that you’ve indicated.

My 3 year old has seen all the original movies and the Force Awakens. She’s seen some of the prequel trilogy, but for some reason they don’t engage her as much. Each of them has at least one stretch that is really boring for a kid that age. So she checks out of those. 

But she knows the other films, and understands all the relationships and importance of who’s who and all that. She gets sad everytine Yoda fades away and when Kylo Ren kills Han Solo. She really hates him because of that, but she still thought that maybe Rey could make Kylo good again (as she says it). She picked up on the subtext that was in The Force Awakens. I know The Last Jedi is going to make her sad for multiple reasons...because Kylo almost switches sides, and because Luke fades away.

So yeah, I think that plenty of new fans care about the older characters and movies. They just don’t have them on a pedestal the way many of us older fans do. To a kid, The Force Awakens or The Last Jedi is every bit a Star Wars movie as Empire Strikes Back or Phantom Menace or any of them. And why wouldn’t they be?

And that’s pretty much my point. Our own reverance for the original films can be a detriment to simply enjoying a fantasy story. Kids don’t bring that with them into these movies.


----------



## Ovinomancer

wicked cool said:


> As much as I hate Jar Jar we got a story for him. Lucas lost his way with a bad actor for vader with a crappy backstory, reliance on blue screen etc but it had good stuff in it.  Emperors rise to power was good, Kenobi and some of the jedi backstorys was good. It felt like with some minor storyline changes, better Anakin etc it could have been much better trilogy
> Last jedi-awakens and even rogue 1 have -0 character development
> jedi-Plot/dialogue is just awful if you look at from say modern television such as expanse/galactics/game of thrones etc or even current scifi movies such as passengers/guardians of galaxy . As an audience we are given zilch. We know less of whats going on than the heroes. the big chase/tracking/casino/mutiny storyline is absurd. What could have happened is the ship temporaily blocks the signal/hides and they go looking but instead we probably get one of the worst plot lines. the whole superwoman in space thing was just gross.
> 
> Defenders say we are to blame and yet critics set us up with better or as good as empire. no offense if I a critic says it as good as empire then my expectation is the critic watched both which either means they did homework and watched empire or are old enough to remember it fondly. I would like to know how its as good as empire based on what u defenders know of both. Based on basic literature/writing classes jedi fails on how to write a basic story
> 
> My 10 year old if asked would say Thor 3 is better. I would argue that many of the marvel movies, Jurassic world, latest remake of king kong etc have
> -more believable plots
> -better backstorys
> -better side quest storylines
> -better villians
> -better minor creatures from the wampas to the asteroid worm and rancor
> -Other than nostalgia if your 10 year old sees the last 2 star wars movies do they care and knew nothing about the history would they care if so and so old character died. My wife cried when Yoda died in ROTJ and she saw it as an adult when they re-released it.




The Last Jedi is pretty much ALL character development.  

Finn from selfish running away to selfless sacrifice.

Poe from hotshot 'kill the bastards no matter the cost' to an actual proto-leader who understands the value of his people vs the objective.

Rey from someone desperate to be told where she fits in the universe to someone who's charting her own path, using her own judgement.  From someone mired in the past to someone that uses her past as a lesson on how to do better.

Kylo from a conflicted and torn person, tormented by his past decisions to someone who's decided to burn the past away and seize power any way necessary.

And Luke, man, Luke, from a broken, defeated former Jedi Master through learning his failures aren't the end, but just another lesson, and back to a kick ass Jedi Master who, at the end, is finally worthy of being a teacher.

Nothing but character development.


And Rogue 1?  Seriously?  Jyn goes from running away and hiding and hating her father to reclaiming his love and sacrificing herself for a greater purpose.  Cassian defies orders because of his development, and becomes the hero instead of the villain working for the Rebellion.  

If you honestly think these movies lack character development, you must be using some definition of that term that is very, very far away from what everyone else uses.


----------



## epithet

Blue said:


> My concern with this is if you're already determined what everyone's "destiny" is, they you'll never be satisfied except with movies that follow the same line of reasoning you are projecting.
> 
> If you follow this logic, you must have hated Empire Strikes Back because Luke puts aside his "destiny" of becoming the best with the force to go save his friends on Cloud City.  And really dissatisfied in RotJ because A New Hope never set up Luke's "destiny" to redeem Vader.  Was Leia "destined" to marry the scruffy nerf-herder that rescued her from the Death Star - would you have judged the original movies harshly if that didn't happen?
> 
> The characters in the original three movies grew and changed over the course of the movies as well as having new things revealed (like Leia being a Skywalker), and where they ended up isn't a straight line from what they wanted in the first movie.  Sure, there's a foundation there, but there's also a lot more.




Not at all.

Luke's destiny was to answer Leia's call, to help in the struggle against the empire. You know this because the message she sent to Obi-wan found its way to Luke first. Leia's destiny was to restore the "rightful" democratic galactic government, the Republic. Falling in love with a scruffy looking nerf herder was something that happened along the way. Han's destiny was to find a hero within himself, to become a leader in service to others instead of pursuing his self interest above all else. Both Han and Luke were tested in ESB, and neither came through unscathed, but they both ultimately pursued their destinies.

Luke fulfilled his destiny by learning about the Force and facing Vader. The twist was that instead of defeating Vader and the Emperor, Luke used the connection he had with his father to inspire Anakin defeat the Emperor. At no point was Luke's destiny to "become the best with the force." He was never as strong as the Emperor, and without the father/son dynamic might not have been stronger than Vader. His ultimate mastery of the force was achieved by fulfilling his destiny, not as a means to that end.

Luke's path of destiny was not derailed by his choice to face Vader before his training was complete. Yoda and Obi-wan were concerned that he was not ready for the revelation about his father, and that _could _derail him, but he faced that challenge and emerged with wisdom and strength because of it, but there was a cost. That was part of his hero's journey, on his "quest" to defeat the Empire. Luke never put aside his destiny--he had a branching path, action on one side and further training on the other. He made his choice, but neither path led away from confronting Vader and defeating the Empire.

As an aside, consider the treatment of Luke in comparison to the treatment of Obi-wan. Both, in broad terms, provided the hero of the story with their first training in the ways of the Force, and both perished at the end of a confrontation with the evil henchman. The difference is that Obi-wan, despite having failed as Anakin's teacher, was not a failure. He had never given up, had never abandoned hope, and when the call finally came to action he responded because he had been waiting for it. Luke, on the other hand, had become a failure by giving up after he failed once. The man who had cast aside his lightsaber and left himself vulnerable in order to reach his father and redeem the man who had become the face of evil responded to the corruption in his young nephew by preparing to strike him down, because he was ready to just give up on the young man. Then, Luke Skywalker gave up on himself, his friends and family, the Jedi, and the galaxy. When the call to action came, he sullenly refused it before begrudgingly agreeing to give Rey "lessons" that he claimed would show her the futility of becoming a Jedi and trying to help the fight against the Empire 2.0.

A lot of people defend the treatment of Luke in this movie by insisting this movie, and this trilogy, was not about him. The assertion is that dismantling his character was a necessary part of telling Rey's story. I offer the example of Obi-wan to show that his role in Rey's story (which, like most of the movie, directly parallelled a prior movie) did not require him to be a wretched failure who had given up on himself. He could have fulfilled that role while remaining Luke Skywalker, is what I'm saying. The character we saw in The Last Jedi had luke's face and Luke's name, but was otherwise unrecognizable as the character we last saw in Return of the Jedi.

As a second aside, I see some people saying that it doesn't matter who Snoke is/was. Yes... yes, it bloody well does matter. The Emperor was killed, the Empire defeated. Now Emperor 2.0 is tearing up the galaxy at the head of Empire 2.0, and we're just supposed to say "ok, show me some spaceships?" No, you can't just invalidate everything that has happened previously in the Star Wars saga without explanation. You can't take Leia's kid, being trained by Luke, and just hand-wave his fall to the dark side, because "lol of course he did." And you can't justify an uninspired retread of the original trilogy's story elements with "o hai it subverted expectations lol."


----------



## epithet

hawkeyefan said:


> The more I see of the negative reaction, the more I’m convinced that a lot of it is really due to false expectations. ...



You're so right.

I expected a good movie.


----------



## ccs

epithet said:


> You're so right.
> 
> I expected a good movie.




Why?  All evidence would suggest that wasn't likely to occur.  Or at best had 50/50 odds.   
I can see _hoping_ for a good movie.  (I'm always in that category)  But expecting it??


----------



## epithet

ccs said:


> Why?  All evidence would suggest that wasn't likely to occur.  Or at best had 50/50 odds.
> I can see _hoping_ for a good movie.  (I'm always in that category)  But expecting it??




Because I wanted it to be true to the point of convincing myself that it would be. I was underwhelmed with The Force Awakens despite quite liking the new generation of characters, and I had let myself buy into the hype for this movie in the hope that it would elevate the trilogy.

Not gonna make the same mistake in 2 years. I still have a little hope, but no optimism and definitely _not _high expectations.


----------



## Joker

hawkeyefan said:


> And that’s pretty much my point. Our own reverance for the original films can be a detriment to simply enjoying a fantasy story. Kids don’t bring that with them into these movies.




I agree that if you go into a movie expecting it to be something you're setting yourself up for disappointment. But for someone like me who has no reverence for the old movies and just goes into it expecting nothing more than to be entertained, it wasn't enjoyable.
There were so many cool concepts and stories and characters the movie touched upon but were never really developed. 
How the Force works. That there's a military-industrial complex keeping the war going. How Snoke got to Ben. Where Snoke came from.
It's the missed opportunity with Kylo that bothers me the most. He got the most time to develop but it's missing the journey as the more I think about it, the more I think this is his trilogy and not Rey's or the rebel side. It bothers me that we don't see his developed any further. Him and his relationship with Luke and Snoke is missed.

I think the movie tries too much and the characters and story suffer for it. Finn is still an absolutely pointless character. Even if he is the cheerleader/girlfriend archetype and not a main hero, he's not around the main characters enough to fulfill his role.



 Ovinomancer said:


> If you honestly think these movies lack character development, you must be using some definition of that term that is very, very far away from what everyone else uses.




The appeal to the authority of the masses is a weak argument to dismiss any kind of criticism for this movie. There is genuine criticism of the film that doesn't come from hardcore fans or people with an agenda.


----------



## wicked cool

Not sure why we shouldn't expect a good movie. For the most part I love Disney . Problem is people are accepting bunk and calling it good

maybe my argument should be clarified-character backstory should have been used instead of advancement
I know almost zero about all the new heroes and yet in a new hope I knew a ton about almost every major character


we get nothing on any character except they fit a stereotype
as an example I got more character background on John wick then most supporting character in rogue 1 and almost every character in awakens/last jedi

Disney has put a reliance on me to read the comics on why threepio has a red hand or how phasma escape the compactor and yet for a movie like Thor etc the give me  a backstory or a flashback on lots of stuff (thor 3 and the Valkerie as an example). 

CCs-why were the odds 50/50 at best. We have a beloved franchise owned by Disney where expectations are high. they have known since at least awakens that

a)-we as fans ( I would include young fans) want answers on who snoke is, how rey is doing whats shes doing etc. There was a lot of heres a lot of middle finger at fans during this (flet like new director didn't like the old director )
b) events to make sense. I expect the mythology of the universe to be stable. I don't expect Batman to shoot lazer beams out of his eyes , harry potter to have super human strength or professor X to swing from webs. Jedi in my opinion breaks these rules 
c) I expect lighthearted laughs I just don't expect them in what should be tense circumstances
d) I expect romance/tension/love to build even in my Disney cartoons not out of the blue

I would argue that return of the jedi is far superior even with the ewoks to last jedi

from memory -all better
Plot-
space battles 
places visited
secondary characters- 
tension-better
fight scenes  
ending
acting 
bad guys
creatures-if you hate ewoks fine but the Sarlaac and rancor are better then the foxes/birds

Would love arguments to contradict me 
romance-better 
big reveals-better


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Overall I enjoyed the move better than TFA. TFA felt to me mostly like a rehash of ANH. The Last Jedi still rehashes the conceptual role of ESB (the heroes basically lose, but survive), but seems much more different in the actions and situations that happen. It helps there is no Planet-Destroying superweapon involved in either movie.

Some random thoughts:
1) A reason the casino world wasn't under obvious First Order control or the First Order wasn't the threat there might be to explain that a planet like this is as much responsible for the sorry state of the galaxy as the First Order - because people profiteer from it, and they do it because they can, not because someone is holding a gun to their head.

2) Ramming always works in Science Fiction, but for some reason it is always considered a surprising tactic. Hyperspace ramming seems to be a logical way to build weapons in the first place - build FTL capable torpedoes of whatever size is necessary to bring down your enemy ships, starbases, or planets.

3) The fundamental problem of the new movies is really that it's undoing the accomplishments of the heroes of the original trilogy, and it barely makes an effort to explain why or how. 
The best thing from the EU was probably that the heroes were in a role where they fought to keep what they achieved, and build upon it, even if there was a lot of stuff I didn't like or disagreed with. Unfortunately, the new movies picked a different path.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

I enjoyed the character arcs and I like Kylo Ren a lot more now than in the first movie, even if he's still clearly a flawed and troubled person. Duh


----------



## pukunui

This article provides some insights into the bad audience score on Rotten Tomatoes: http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2017/12...t-jedi-and-its-rotten-tomatoes-audience-score


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

hawkeyefan said:


> I thought Snoke...other than his name...was  actually really cool. He was a larger presence in the first film than te  Emperor was in Empire Strikes Back. And he was truly menacing and vile  in this film. Probably on par with the Emperor in the throne room in  Return, though with less time devoted to him.
> 
> Without taking the prequel films into account, Snoke’s about as fleshed out as Palpatine was in the original trilogy.
> 
> So I don’t really see the problem. Were viewers angry at the Emperor’s  lack of backstory in the original movies? Or is such anger brought about  by an elevated sense of expectation based largely on online  discussion?



Of course they wren't angry that the Emperor didn't have a big back story. The setting was brand new, all we needed to know at that point was: "The evil guys have an Emperor!"

But now the setting is already established, the last time we saw the setting, the empire has lost and the heroes have won. But now, the heroes are in trouble and their accomplishments are undone? What happened, how could that be?


----------



## epithet

pukunui said:


> This article provides some insights into the bad audience score on Rotten Tomatoes:



That article provides a lot of “educated” guesses. It begins with the conclusion that the negative reviews cannot be legit, and works backwards to create a theory that supports it. 

Or, I guess those of us who were not at all pleased with the film could be imaginary. That’s probably it.


----------



## pukunui

[MENTION=6796566]epithet[/MENTION]: That's hyperbole and you know it.


----------



## Ryujin

pukunui said:


> [MENTION=6796566]epithet[/MENTION]: That's hyperbole and you know it.




I'm not so sure that it completely is. The statement made at the beginning of the article is, _"As I’m sure you’re aware by now, Star Wars Episode VIII The Last Jedi has an abysmal Rotten Tomatoes audience score which is in direct conflict with its high critics score. This by itself is rather unusual, but this is also Star Wars, the most popular movie franchise in existence, so it’s a big surprise that the conversation around the film isn’t just about its merits, but why so many people strongly dislike the film."_ If you follow Rotten Tomatoes at all you will see the non sequitur; critic and audience scores often widely diverge on that site. In fact it seems to be the rule, rather than the exception.

If you start with a flawed assumption, you are unlikely to come to a plausible conclusion. It's not impossible, but let's just say it's unlikely.


----------



## Derren

It was enjoyable, but nothing special.
There were several bad things in it, all of which have been mentioned here already. Some parts I liked like how Snoke went out or that Rey is not some special secret Skywalker.
I still have absolutely no idea how the political situation looks like or why the First Order is supposed to be a threat and I agree with Morrus as for why hyperspace bombing is not a default tactic against supercapital ships. Mass Effect had the same problem once that can of worms was opened.

But my number 1 nitpick is: Why have lasers in space a ballistic trajectory? Even for star wars physics that is silly.


----------



## pukunui

[MENTION=27897]Ryujin[/MENTION]: I was referring to his conclusion that the article stated that those with negative opinions don't exist. *That* is hyperbole, especially given that the article's author states on several occasions that he is not trying to invalidate legitimately negative opinions. He is merely trying to show that the overall audience rating of the movie might actually be higher than the audience score on Rotten Tomatoes would suggest.


----------



## Ryujin

pukunui said:


> [MENTION=27897]Ryujin[/MENTION]: I was referring to his conclusion that the article stated that those with negative opinions don't exist. *That* is hyperbole, especially given that the article's author states on several occasions that he is not trying to invalidate legitimately negative opinions. He is merely trying to show that the overall audience rating of the movie might actually be higher than the audience score on Rotten Tomatoes would suggest.




Yes, that particular statement could be considered hyperbole, however, I still stand by my statement regarding the article's flawed premise


----------



## hawkeyefan

Joker said:


> I agree that if you go into a movie expecting it to be something you're setting yourself up for disappointment. But for someone like me who has no reverence for the old movies and just goes into it expecting nothing more than to be entertained, it wasn't enjoyable.
> There were so many cool concepts and stories and characters the movie touched upon but were never really developed.
> How the Force works. That there's a military-industrial complex keeping the war going. How Snoke got to Ben. Where Snoke came from.
> It's the missed opportunity with Kylo that bothers me the most. He got the most time to develop but it's missing the journey as the more I think about it, the more I think this is his trilogy and not Rey's or the rebel side. It bothers me that we don't see his developed any further. Him and his relationship with Luke and Snoke is missed.
> 
> I think the movie tries too much and the characters and story suffer for it. Finn is still an absolutely pointless character. Even if he is the cheerleader/girlfriend archetype and not a main hero, he's not around the main characters enough to fulfill his role.




Well, I disagree that it wasn’t enjoyable because I enjoyed it quite a bit. But I think the opinion that it was not enjoyable may be a valid one. As I said, the film’s not flawless, there are plenty of valid criticisms that could add up to being enough for someone not to like it.

That’s fine. 

But I think that a lot of the negativity is based on what I would say are not valid criticisms.


----------



## hawkeyefan

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> Of course they wren't angry that the Emperor didn't have a big back story. The setting was brand new, all we needed to know at that point was: "The evil guys have an Emperor!"
> 
> But now the setting is already established, the last time we saw the setting, the empire has lost and the heroes have won. But now, the heroes are in trouble and their accomplishments are undone? What happened, how could that be?




I had no problem figuring out who Snoke was. Could they have given us more? Sure. And it’s possible we may learn more. Did they need to? I don’t think they did. They gave us enough to understand the situation. 

As for the original trilogy heroes’ achievements being undone...I don’t agree. They brought down the Empire. They didn’t eradicate evil. 

If the stories are going to continue, then there are going to be bad guys. And the bad guys will threaten the good guys. 

As to why and how the First Order came to be, we have some clues. Again, they probably could have given more, but didn’t really need to. We’ll likely learn more of that backstory in the third film.


----------



## Eltab

Morrus said:


> I’m surprised the novel isn’t a simultaneous release. I like to read them too. Apparently it’s still a few months away.




"From a certain point of view" ... that may indicate just how poor the writing for this movie was - Disney / Lucasfilm's staffers aren't able to translate it into a (readable) book.


----------



## pukunui

hawkeyefan said:


> As for the original trilogy heroes’ achievements being undone...I don’t agree. They brought down the Empire. They didn’t eradicate evil.



They brought it down, but it didn't stay down. It reformed and came back. Not only that, but Ben Solo's fall to the dark side appears to have ruined their "happily ever after". 

Having seen TLJ three times now, I've more or less come to terms with things. I had no real issues with Han's story in TFA, and I think Luke redeems himself wonderfully in TLJ. It's just Leia that I'm left wondering about, and that mainly because Carrie is dead, so how they're going to wrap her story up is anyone's guess. I kinda wish they'd just let her die when she got sucked out into space (but I can see that it wasn't the right time in the story).

As for the First Order, I wonder how people would've felt if, instead of a reformed (but less powerful) Empire, the new trilogy sported a more intergalactic threat like the Yuuzhan Vong. I can't say I was a fan of them in the EU, but they did make for a (much-needed) change of pace.



That being said, I'd love it if they'd jump back in time to the Knights of the Old Republic era. They've been sprinkling little hints here and there, in the Rebels show and elsewhere. Apparently there's a necklace in Luke's hut on the island that belonged to a "Jedi Crusader" (according to the Last Jedi Visual Dictionary), which some people think means Revan.


----------



## hawkeyefan

pukunui said:


> They brought it down, but it didn't stay down. It reformed and came back. Not only that, but Ben Solo's fall to the dark side appears to have ruined their "happily ever after".
> 
> Having seen TLJ three times now, I've more or less come to terms with things. I had no real issues with Han's story in TFA, and I think Luke redeems himself wonderfully in TLJ. It's just Leia that I'm left wondering about, and that mainly because Carrie is dead, so how they're going to wrap her story up is anyone's guess. I kinda wish they'd just let her die when she got sucked out into space (but I can see that it wasn't the right time in the story).
> 
> As for the First Order, I wonder how people would've felt if, instead of a reformed (but less powerful) Empire, the new trilogy sported a more intergalactic threat like the Yuuzhan Vong. I can't say I was a fan of them in the EU, but they did make for a (much-needed) change of pace.
> 
> 
> 
> That being said, I'd love it if they'd jump back in time to the Knights of the Old Republic era. They've been sprinkling little hints here and there, in the Rebels show and elsewhere. Apparently there's a necklace in Luke's hut on the island that belonged to a "Jedi Crusader" (according to the Last Jedi Visual Dictionary), which some people think means Revan.




Yeah, they brought the Empire down, but they didn’t eradicate it. That was what I meant....they didn’t eliminate evil. The only way anyone ever gets a happily ever after is when their story is over. The fact that this trilogy was going to involve Han, Leia, and Luke meant that their stories were no longer over. So they needed to face some adversity.

The idea of a remnant of the Empire picking up the mantle of antagonist is new as far as Star Wars sequels go. Grand Admiral Thrawn in the Heir to the Empire, a resurrected Emperor in Dark Empire...and so on. But those stories, because of their medium, didn’t have to acknowledge the passing of time the way the film sequels do. So in the film, it’s many years later when things begin to get dark again. Which is kind of funny because to me that’s more natural than if there’s almost no lapse between Palpatine and Thrawn, let’s say. In the EU material, the happily ever after period is far shorter, if it even exists at all. And yet I don’t think I recall fans criticizing those stories for undoing the heroes’ achievements. 

There’s no reason to believe that some part of the Empire wouldn’t carry on and possibly morph into something else. The First Order is essentially the Empire, with some minor differences, but I don’t really mind that since it’s something that rose up over time rather than right away. 

I wouldn’t mind a threat of a different kind in future movies, I agree with you there. But for this one, the First Order seems a suitable antagonist.


----------



## Water Bob

Rey has been told twice that she needs training.  Once by Ben in TFA and then by Luke in TLJ.

But, Rey really gets no training.  She trains herself, really.


----------



## pukunui

hawkeyefan said:


> And yet I don’t think I recall fans criticizing those stories for undoing the heroes’ achievements.



I did, particularly by the time of the Legacy Era. It was one of my biggest criticisms of the post-film EU. At the same time, however, those stories didn't invalidate the OT heroes' achievements as much on a personal level. Han and Leia got married and had kids and stayed married. Leia became an actual Jedi. Luke successfully brought about a New Jedi Order. It didn't all turn to custard again until after they were dead and gone.


----------



## trappedslider

pukunui said:


> I did, particularly by the time of the Legacy Era. It was one of my biggest criticisms of the post-film EU. At the same time, however, those stories didn't invalidate the OT heroes' achievements as much on a personal level. Han and Leia got married and had kids and stayed married. Leia became an actual Jedi. Luke successfully brought about a New Jedi Order. It didn't all turn to custard again until after they were dead and gone.




It just slowly turned to custard while they were alive


----------



## pukunui

But not quite to the same extent.


----------



## tomBitonti

Is there any decent background on how the New Republic failed so spectacularly to prevent the rise of the First Order?  One expects that after the death of the emporer the Empire was shattered, and the New Republic would have asserted itself as the dominant power and would have, over several decades, overcome the bastions of the Empire.

Thx!
TomB


----------



## hawkeyefan

tomBitonti said:


> Is there any decent background on how the New Republic failed so spectacularly to prevent the rise of the First Order?  One expects that after the death of the emporer the Empire was shattered, and the New Republic would have asserted itself as the dominant power and would have, over several decades, overcome the bastions of the Empire.
> 
> Thx!
> TomB




I think that we get a hint of that in this movie...all the elite wealthy of Canto Bight or whatever the casino planet was called are said to profit from the constant state of war. 

So the implication is, to me, that enough people are profiting from war for them to want there to be a First Order. Or a Rebellion, even.


----------



## billd91

tomBitonti said:


> Is there any decent background on how the New Republic failed so spectacularly to prevent the rise of the First Order?  One expects that after the death of the emporer the Empire was shattered, and the New Republic would have asserted itself as the dominant power and would have, over several decades, overcome the bastions of the Empire.
> 
> Thx!
> TomB




Well, the Union winning the Civil War didn't stop the south from generating the Klu Klux Klan and other racist terrorist groups. They've kept resurging fading and resurging again for 150 years. And even the eradication of Jim Crow laws and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 didn't stop places from interfering with voting rights and trying to impose other versions of segregation. 

We beat the Nazis in 1945 and yet here they are demonstrating in American cities in 2017.

And those things have been occurring within far smaller spaces and societies than the events that have been transpiring in Star Wars. The Republic/Empire was made up of some fuzzy number of worlds that number at least 2000 (considering 2000 joined a petition to get Palpatine to relinquish emergency powers). That's a lot of worlds and a lot of territory for an insurgent group to try to administer even if they did manage to hack the head off the snake controlling the Empire. The Empire, by comparison, had it easier. Palpatine kept the structure of the Republic intact for a good 20 years after making the shift from Republic to Empire - by the time the Rebellion won at Endor, all of that structure's inertia would have been tilted against them - mainly local governors controlling the apparatus of fear and oppression and the Imperial military (and military industrial complex).


----------



## Water Bob

tomBitonti said:


> Is there any decent background on how the New Republic failed so spectacularly to prevent the rise of the First Order?  One expects that after the death of the emporer the Empire was shattered, and the New Republic would have asserted itself as the dominant power and would have, over several decades, overcome the bastions of the Empire.




Yes sir.  The background is quite extensive, found in the new novels and the books like the Visual Dictionaries and such.

The short version:  The war came to a head, and the last battle was fought over Jakku.  The Empire--what was left of it--retreated to the Unknown Lands after signing a strict peace treaty. The Empire was, by the treaty, no longer able to build weapons or wage war.

Still, just like in real life, there are sympathizers with the old ways.  There are Liberals and Conservatives, though they're named differently.  Some still believe in the Empire and think, with Palpatine and Vader gone, that the Empire is the best way to continue, politically, without the stink of evil and the Sith.  A "good" Empire.

Of course, those who wanted a return to the old ways won out, and the New Republic was established.  But, even amongst the New Republic, some believed (Leia) in a strong military.  Remember, in the prequels, it was established that the Old Republic did not have a standing army.  There was a small policing force, and there were the Jedi--the guardians of peace in the Galaxy.  That's what Attack of the Clones was all about--Palpatine raising an Army for the Republic.

Others went against Leia and Ackbar, wanting to go back to how it was with the Old Republic.  Mon Mothma was among these people.  These people argued that the New Republic would never truly replace the Old unless the military was disbanded.

Mon Mothma's side won out.  The large military built up by the Rebel Alliance was disbanded by 90%.  Only a small, peace keeping force was retained.

In TFA, most of this peace-keeping force was destroyed when the capital system of Hosnian Prime was destroyed.

Part of the New Republic structure was that the capital would change between worlds from time to time.  That's why the capital was no longer Coruscant.  It was thought that the Empire had infected that place, and it would be better for the New Republic to start fresh with a new, rotating, capital.



Still, the New Republic had its Empire sympathizers--those who found it was politically incorrect to announce their views.  Even New Republic senators secretly wanted a return to the Empire sans Palpatine and the Sith.  

The First Order sprang out of the desire of these people (Palpatines New Order morphed into the First Order).  Secretly, senators and influential people funneled funs to the First Order, growing out of the old Empire in the Unknown Lands.

For 30 years, the First Order grew, secretly constructing ships and building upon the old Empire.

Leia heeds the rumors she hears of the First Order (this is covered in the book, Bloodline) and goes to the New Republic to martial their forces in anticipation of this threat.  But, not everyone feels the way Leia does, and the New Republic does not officially take a stand against the First Order.

Instead, some in the New Republic secretly aid Leia in forming a political faction, the Resistance Against The First Order.  Leia contacts those she has known through the years from the Rebellion, and the Reistance is provided with older, Rebel surplus gear.

The Resistance is in the open and is a greatly inferior force than is the First Order.  The First Order has been quite secretive, but recently, especially in TFA and TLJ (which takes place immediately after Episode VII), is beginning to reveal itself more and more--especially now that the New Republic capital and fleet had been destroyed by the super-weapon from Starkiller base.

Of course, at the end of TLJ, the Reistance is just a few dozen people and a handful of ships.


----------



## tomBitonti

billd91 said:


> Well, the Union winning the Civil War didn't stop the south from generating the Klu Klux Klan and other racist terrorist groups. They've kept resurging fading and resurging again for 150 years. And even the eradication of Jim Crow laws and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 didn't stop places from interfering with voting rights and trying to impose other versions of segregation.
> 
> We beat the Nazis in 1945 and yet here they are demonstrating in American cities in 2017.
> 
> And those things have been occurring within far smaller spaces and societies than the events that have been transpiring in Star Wars. The Republic/Empire was made up of some fuzzy number of worlds that number at least 2000 (considering 2000 joined a petition to get Palpatine to relinquish emergency powers). That's a lot of worlds and a lot of territory for an insurgent group to try to administer even if they did manage to hack the head off the snake controlling the Empire. The Empire, by comparison, had it easier. Palpatine kept the structure of the Republic intact for a good 20 years after making the shift from Republic to Empire - by the time the Rebellion won at Endor, all of that structure's inertia would have been tilted against them - mainly local governors controlling the apparatus of fear and oppression and the Imperial military (and military industrial complex).




In none of the historical cases does the losing side ever challenge the winners.  I can see pockets of resistance, sure, but for the Rebellion to stall out then fall backwards?

The example that seems to fit is the resurgence of Germany between WWI and WWII, but using that as a model would imply serious inattention by the New Republic.

Besides the Starkiller Attack, The other major event of significance, perhaps, is the failure of the New Jedi Order.  I can weave a failure story out of that, but it really paints Luke Skywalker and the other leadership in a bad way.

What is striking to me how much the New Republic survivors seem to be portrayed as underdogs, and almost as a new rebellion.  Which, even with a few First Order victories, ought not to be.

Thx!
TomB


----------



## Derren

billd91 said:


> We beat the Nazis in 1945 and yet here they are demonstrating in American cities in 2017.




Yet we do not have Nazis driving around with several aircraft carriers.
The entire idea that the First Order poses a legitimate military threat to the Republic is silly. Even when you follow the reasoning that the republic only had a small police force which all got wiped out in EP7 (because a police force does not have to actively police anything apparently), the First Order does not have a economy to speak off while the Republic could simply rebuild ships. A planet could easily field enough fighters and bombers that the First Order could not approach it, or would suffer devastating losses.

But instead we somehow are to believe that the FO has a huge military force out of nowhere and the entire Republic is defenceless because one system blew up.


----------



## billd91

Derren said:


> Yet we do not have Nazis driving around with several aircraft carriers.




It’s not like the Nazis had whole other worlds to fall back on for supply, manpower, massive industrial capacity. The remnants of the Empire, realistically, did. 



Derren said:


> But instead we somehow are to believe that the FO has a huge military force out of nowhere and the entire Republic is defenceless because one system blew up.




Why would you think the FO’s military is out of nowhere? I’m assuming there are parts of the Empire, loyal worlds, that probably never gave up and are the core of the FO and have been for 30 years.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Joker said:


> The appeal to the authority of the masses is a weak argument to dismiss any kind of criticism for this movie. There is genuine criticism of the film that doesn't come from hardcore fans or people with an agenda.




1) it wasn't an appeal to popularity nor an appeal to authority.  Citing the definition of a well known term (character development) is neither.  Mixing and matching words from informal fallacies doesn't actually make the argument you're commenting on a fallacy.

2) I wasn't commenting on genuine criticism.  You can not like those character arcs all you want, what you cannot do is deny they exist.  My post wasn't addressing a criticism, it was correcting a statement that those character development arcs didn't exist.  And, given the poster I responded to redirected from no character development to an argument that he felt he didn't get enough backstory, it seems entirely appropriate for me to have done so.

3)  I'm fine that you didn't like the movie; there's less competition for the good seats when I go back for another viewing.


----------



## Morrus

Derren said:


> Yet we do not have Nazis driving around with several aircraft carriers.




We don't have *any* of the things in Star Wars.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Derren said:


> Yet we do not have Nazis driving around with several aircraft carriers.
> The entire idea that the First Order poses a legitimate military threat to the Republic is silly. Even when you follow the reasoning that the republic only had a small police force which all got wiped out in EP7 (because a police force does not have to actively police anything apparently), the First Order does not have a economy to speak off while the Republic could simply rebuild ships. A planet could easily field enough fighters and bombers that the First Order could not approach it, or would suffer devastating losses.
> 
> But instead we somehow are to believe that the FO has a huge military force out of nowhere and the entire Republic is defenceless because one system blew up.




The Republic had _demilitarized_.  They maintained only a peace-keeping force (which is very different from a police force), and that was of sufficient size and power to check the 1st Order.  Probably not because it could face the 1st Order, but because it could delay then and slow them sufficiently to allow for the rest of the Republic to gear up on a war footing.  Much like the US Pacific forces during WWII -- a conventional attack wouldn't be decisive, and the size discrepancy meant that a conventional attack would be eventual suicide.  

So, instead, the 1st Order initiated an overwhelming surprise attack and destroyed both the core Republic government and the Republic fleet.  This removed all obstacles to their immediate military plans, and they were able to initiate a widespread attack to seize critical planets and prevent any kind of organized resistance (small r).  Their hate on for the Resistance (big R) is likely due to the fact that the Resistance had been effectively running operations against them for years in a low intensity war, slowing their efforts and stoking political resistance to their plans.


----------



## Ovinomancer

billd91 said:


> It’s not like the Nazis had whole other worlds to fall back on for supply, manpower, massive industrial capacity. The remnants of the Empire, realistically, did.



Which would be why your example is just so terribly bad, yeah?  Doesn't fit at all.

The clear example their following from history for the 1st Order is the nazis, though, from Snoke as Furher to the iconography to the plot, but it's the rise of the Nazis from WWI Germany, not post WWII.

Of course, that breaks down as a broader comparison because  WWI Germany was nothing like the Empire, which was itself more or less 'what would have happened if the Nazis had won WWII, but also with magic and laser swords?"


----------



## tomBitonti

Ovinomancer said:


> The Republic had _demilitarized_.  They maintained only a peace-keeping force (which is very different from a police force), and that was of sufficient size and power to check the 1st Order.  Probably not because it could face the 1st Order, but because it could delay then and slow them sufficiently to allow for the rest of the Republic to gear up on a war footing.  Much like the US Pacific forces during WWII -- a conventional attack wouldn't be decisive, and the size discrepancy meant that a conventional attack would be eventual suicide.
> 
> So, instead, the 1st Order initiated an overwhelming surprise attack and destroyed both the core Republic government and the Republic fleet.  This removed all obstacles to their immediate military plans, and they were able to initiate a widespread attack to seize critical planets and prevent any kind of organized resistance (small r).  Their hate on for the Resistance (big R) is likely due to the fact that the Resistance had been effectively running operations against them for years in a low intensity war, slowing their efforts and stoking political resistance to their plans.




A part of all of this which is silly is keeping the fleet all in one place.  Regardless, that makes the destruction of SKB not a victory at all.  Locally it was a win, but overall it was a loss as SKB had achieved one of it’s primary objectives.

I’m thinking the failure to present the scope of the loss in FA is a reason for discontent with the new movie.  I myself have a problem with the New Republic demilitarizing so quickly, given the amount of Empire which would have remained after RotJ.

A consistence problem: A demilitarized New Republic wouldn’t be a strong driver of military sales as presented in LJ.

Thx!
TomB


----------



## Joker

Ovinomancer said:


> 1) it wasn't an appeal to popularity nor an appeal to authority.  Citing the definition of a well known term (character development) is neither.  Mixing and matching words from informal fallacies doesn't actually make the argument you're commenting on a fallacy.
> 
> 2) I wasn't commenting on genuine criticism.  You can not like those character arcs all you want, what you cannot do is deny they exist.  My post wasn't addressing a criticism, it was correcting a statement that those character development arcs didn't exist.  And, given the poster I responded to redirected from no character development to an argument that he felt he didn't get enough backstory, it seems entirely appropriate for me to have done so.
> 
> 3)  I'm fine that you didn't like the movie; there's less competition for the good seats when I go back for another viewing.




You said that his definition of character development is different than what most people think it is. Which is not only wrong but an appeal to a majority opinion.

We actually can deny their arcs exist because we are asked in this movie to follow the Hero's Journey of Rey, Ben and Luke but without the middle part of the adventure. Simply touching on or glossing over important events in a character's experience is not real development. All good stories have at their core heroes which undergo real transformation because of real life-threatening (this can be emotionally or psychologically life-threatening) events.
This just does not happen in The Last Jedi. The only event which comes close is Snoke's confrontation with Rey and Ben. And even then the movie just speeds past it like it wasn't important.
The amount and quality of character development in this movie is on par with the development of Optimus Prime in the Transformers movies. Yeah, he changes a bit and is roughed up here and there but there's no great transformation in his character. No pun intended. 

I'll allow your appeal to the masses if I'm allowed an appeal to authority. I've read close to two dozen of the positive critiques from the top critics compiled on Rottentomatoes. Those critics, when illuminating the cons of the movie, cite the lack of character development and pacing problems as their biggest dislikes. While it's unfair to say that there's no character development, you really have to go looking for it like people went looking for plot and meaning in Prometheus.

Enjoy the extra armrest.


----------



## Ovinomancer

tomBitonti said:


> A part of all of this which is silly is keeping the fleet all in one place.  Regardless, that makes the destruction of SKB not a victory at all.  Locally it was a win, but overall it was a failure as SKB had achieved one of it’s primary objectives.




Sure, we can debate the merits of keeping your main deterrent force in one place -- recalling that up until SKB fired, there was no threat that could possibly overwhelm that concentrated fleet, and it was it's existence and ability to respond that was the threat, a threat that would be blunted if it were dispersed.  But, sure, that can be debated.

Secondly, any time you consider removing the enemy's ability to obliterate entire systems a 'local' victory, I'm not sure we're having the same discussion.  So long as SKB existed, fleets were meaningless, resistance was meaningless.  Any troublesome spot could be destroyed without notice or ability to resist.  The removal of SKB is exactly what _allows _any attempted resistance to exist.



> I’m thinking the failure to present the scope of the failure is a reason for discontent with the new movie.



There we agree.  My primary issue with the new movies is the lack of a sense of _scale_.



> Also, a consistence problem: A demilitarized New Republic wouldn’t be a driver of military sales as presented in LJ.
> 
> Thx!
> TomB



You've almost grasped it:  if the current customer base isn't paying the bills, what is a purveyor of goods to do?  Find new customers!  They go and encourage the old customers that your goods are needed (gotta keep up with the [-]Nazis[/-] Joneses), and business booms!  Literally.


----------



## tomBitonti

Ovinomancer said:


> Sure, we can debate the merits of keeping your main deterrent force in one place -- recalling that up until SKB fired, there was no threat that could possibly overwhelm that concentrated fleet, and it was it's existence and ability to respond that was the threat, a threat that would be blunted if it were dispersed.  But, sure, that can be debated.
> 
> Secondly, any time you consider removing the enemy's ability to obliterate entire systems a 'local' victory, I'm not sure we're having the same discussion.  So long as SKB existed, fleets were meaningless, resistance was meaningless.  Any troublesome spot could be destroyed without notice or ability to resist.  The removal of SKB is exactly what _allows _any attempted resistance to exist.
> 
> 
> There we agree.  My primary issue with the new movies is the lack of a sense of _scale_.
> 
> 
> You've almost grasped it:  if the current customer base isn't paying the bills, what is a purveyor of goods to do?  Find new customers!  They go and encourage the old customers that your goods are needed (gotta keep up with the [-]Nazis[/-] Joneses), and business booms!  Literally.




That SKB can be re-used is a niceness, but unnecessary to the First Order.  That is shown by the events of LJ.  Only the first salvo needed to work.

Thx!
TomB


----------



## Ovinomancer

Joker said:


> You said that his definition of character development is different than what most people think it is. Which is not only wrong but an appeal to a majority opinion.



Nope.  I said that the definition being used by the poster is vastly different from what everyone else uses.  The gist of that statement was that character development has an established definition, and that the poster wasn't using it.



> We actually can deny their arcs exist because we are asked in this movie to follow the Hero's Journey of Rey, Ben and Luke but without the middle part of the adventure. Simply touching on or glossing over important events in a character's experience is not real development. All good stories have at their core heroes which undergo real transformation because of real life-threatening (this can be emotionally or psychologically life-threatening) events.




Strong quibbles about your dismissing entire parts of the movie as not existing, yes, you can ignore lots of parts and still meet the definition of character development.  Again, you may not like that development, but denying that things happened is just sillytimes.



> This just does not happen in The Last Jedi. The only event which comes close is Snoke's confrontation with Rey and Ben. And even then the movie just speeds past it like it wasn't important.



Let's point out an undeniable moment of character development:  at the beginning of the movie, Luke had cut himself off from the force and hidden away from the galaxy.  At the end of the movie, Luke is no longer cut off from the force and has reintroduced himself to the galaxy.  That's character development right there.  It's even further reinforced by WHY Luke does these things, and the fact that he apologized to Kylo for failing Kylo, but still stands against him.  It's a massive character arc, and they even brought in Yoda to punch you in the face with it.

Denying it exists, or just denying that it was character development, just shows that you don't have any idea what character development actually means.  Disliking it, as many posters have eloquently done is perfectly fine, denying it is ridiculous (Ranger Wickets does a great job of criticizing this arc without denying it, even though I disagree with his criticism it's at least well founded).



> The amount and quality of character development in this movie is on par with the development of Optimus Prime in the Transformers movies. Yeah, he changes a bit and is roughed up here and there but there's no great transformation in his character. No pun intended.



You have a valid point of criticism in the quality department, but not in the quantity one.

And, if you equate character development with having to have a massive transformation, then apparently only Vader in the original trilogy qualifies?  Let's explore a moment, pick a movie of the original 3, pick a main character in that movie that isn't Vader in RotJ, and tell me what you think their development is in that movie.  Whatever you pick, it's at least as great a development as what happens in this movie.  And my favorite would be Han in ANH - from selfish scumbag to selfless hero.  Rey, Luke, and Finn all move as much.  Luke gets a even more awesome payoff scene, Rey gets a few pretty awesome payoff scenes, and, sadly, Finn doesn't get as awesome a payoff scene.



> I'll allow your appeal to the masses if I'm allowed an appeal to authority.



Well, there was no appeal to the masses, but go ahead, I'm interested.



> I've read close to two dozen of the positive critiques from the top critics compiled on Rottentomatoes. Those critics, when illuminating the cons of the movie, cite the lack of character development and pacing problems as their biggest dislikes. While it's unfair to say that there's no character development, you really have to go looking for it like people went looking for plot and meaning in Prometheus.



Okay, I just read six, and all of them praised the characters as the high point of the movie.  You're going to have to provide some evidence to back up your claims, because I'm not seeing it and I'm not going to go digging through a bunch of reviews to find the nuggets you've seized upon.  Like, in the six reviews I read, every one of them mentioned the characters journeys and that the depth of the realization of the characters was one of the strongest parts of the film.

Most of them did list the diversion to Canto Bight as a weak point, _however_, and I can't really disagree, even though in the full context of the movie it's much more understandable, Rian doesn't give you any of those indications during the excursion, so at the time it feels disconnected. 

Enjoy the extra armrest.[/QUOTE]


----------



## Water Bob

I wonder why Luke didn't feel through the Force the way Kenobi did when Alderaan was destroyed.

...Han's death.

...the destruction of the Hosnian system, capital of the New Republic.

...the destruction of an entire planet in the form of Starkiller base.

...Leia's near-death.


----------



## Ovinomancer

tomBitonti said:


> That SKB can be re-used is a niceness, but unnecessary to the First Order.  That is shown by the events of LJ.  Only the first salvo needed to work.
> 
> Thx!
> TomB




So, when Corellia spins up building warships, and it a tough nut to crack, causing the 1st Order to divert lots of resources to it, you're saying that having the ability to just threaten to end Corellia is somehow unimportant?

Dude, we really need to have a talk about how the Cold War developed based on the existence of world ending weapons, and how it would have been a drastically different world if only the US (or Russia) had nukes.  SKB is the ultimate nuke, solely owned by the 1st Order, and they've shown the willingness to use it.  It's existence would massively distort the political picture of the galaxy, much less the military one.

Example:
The Resistance thwarts the 1st Order in, let's say, Duro.  The 1st Order obliterates Duro with SKB for daring to support Resistance operations (regardless of whether or not they did -- that point is irrelevant).  Who, now, it ever going to support any resistance to the 1st Order when the result is immediate retaliation by destroying the entire system.  You'd need to do that once, or really just threaten to do it once after the destruction of the New Republic, and the systems themselves would strangle any resistance or Resistance.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Water Bob said:


> I wonder why Luke didn't feel through the Force the way Kenobi did when Alderaan was destroyed.
> 
> ...Han's death.



He cut himself off from the Force.



> ...the destruction of the Hosnian system, capital of the New Republic.



He cut himself off from the Force.


> ...the destruction of an entire planet in the form of Starkiller base.



He cut himself off from the Force.


> ...Leia's near-death.



He cut himself off from the Force.


----------



## Water Bob

Of course!  (Slaps head).

Makes sense.


----------



## tomBitonti

Ovinomancer said:


> So, when Corellia spins up building warships, and it a tough nut to crack, causing the 1st Order to divert lots of resources to it, you're saying that having the ability to just threaten to end Corellia is somehow unimportant?
> 
> Dude, we really need to have a talk about how the Cold War developed based on the existence of world ending weapons, and how it would have been a drastically different world if only the US (or Russia) had nukes.  SKB is the ultimate nuke, solely owned by the 1st Order, and they've shown the willingness to use it.  It's existence would massively distort the political picture of the galaxy, much less the military one.
> 
> Example:
> The Resistance thwarts the 1st Order in, let's say, Duro.  The 1st Order obliterates Duro with SKB for daring to support Resistance operations (regardless of whether or not they did -- that point is irrelevant).  Who, now, it ever going to support any resistance to the 1st Order when the result is immediate retaliation by destroying the entire system.  You'd need to do that once, or really just threaten to do it once after the destruction of the New Republic, and the systems themselves would strangle any resistance or Resistance.




Sure, the destruction of SKB was important, just not enough for the New Republic to call the outcome a victory.  The New Republic was still crippled.

What was left was mopping up the remaining NR leadership and forces.  In the end of LJ the NR makes off with less than they might have if they had just scattered in the beginning.  Which makes the NR loss in LJ almost complete.  The only saving grace is that they are re-united with the Force.  The attack by SKB effectuated the result of LJ.

Thx!
TomB


----------



## Ovinomancer

tomBitonti said:


> Sure, the destruction of SKB was important, just not enough for the New Republic to call the outcome a victory.  The New Republic was still crippled.



You're confusing a victory with winning the war.  The New Republic was crippled by the initial SKB attack, yes, and they are clearly losing (if not outright lost) the war at this point, but the destruction of SKB was a clear and definitive victory.



> What was left was mopping up the remaining NR leadership and forces.  In the end of LJ the NR makes off with less than they might have if they had just scattered in the beginning.  Which makes the NR loss in LJ almost complete.  The only saving grace is that they are re-united with the Force.  The attack by SKB effectuated the result of LJ.
> 
> Thx!
> TomB



Yes, clearly the Resistance is crippled and the New Republic is nearly lost.  That doesn't change the fact that the removal of SKB was a major victory.  History is full of major victories in battles where the war is still being lost.  Had the Resistance NOT destroyed SKB, there wouldn't even be a shred of hope, regardless of the Force.  One side had nukes and the other doesn't.  There's only one winner there.  Now, neither side has nukes, but one side still has the bigger army.  There's at least a chance there.


----------



## tomBitonti

Ovinomancer said:


> You're confusing a victory with winning the war.  The New Republic was crippled by the initial SKB attack, yes, and they are clearly losing (if not outright lost) the war at this point, but the destruction of SKB was a clear and definitive victory.
> 
> Yes, clearly the Resistance is crippled and the New Republic is nearly lost.  That doesn't change the fact that the removal of SKB was a major victory.  History is full of major victories in battles where the war is still being lost.  Had the Resistance NOT destroyed SKB, there wouldn't even be a shred of hope, regardless of the Force.  One side had nukes and the other doesn't.  There's only one winner there.  Now, neither side has nukes, but one side still has the bigger army.  There's at least a chance there.




I’ll agree to all of that.  I still think it all just confuses the narrative, in that even thought it is a substantial victory (and we feel that NR “won” at the end of FA), the NR really had only changed an overwhelming defeat to a defeat.  Then in LJ, the NR situation doesn’t convey well.  But I thing we agree there.

Pulling together the overall arc, it rather seems that either the NR was negligent, or the galaxy as a whole didn’t sufficiently care.  The first undercuts the heroic arcs of the major characters of movies IV-VI, while the second makes for a meh story: why should I care about a galaxy that ignores a clear threat?

Thx!
TomB


----------



## Ovinomancer

tomBitonti said:


> I’ll agree to all of that.  I still think it all just confuses the narrative, in that even thought it is a substantial victory (and we feel that NR “won” at the end of FA), the NR really had only changed an overwhelming defeat to a defeat.  Then in LJ, the NR situation doesn’t convey well.  But I thing we agree there.
> 
> Pulling together the overall arc, it rather seems that either the NR was negligent, or the galaxy as a whole didn’t sufficiently care.  The first undercuts the heroic arcs of the major characters of movies IV-VI, while the second makes for a meh story: why should I care about a galaxy that ignores a clear threat?
> 
> Thx!
> TomB




Okay, let's put this in film perspective.  The Rebels blow up the Death Star.  This is a major accomplishment.  But they then start ESB in hiding and having to run from the Empire again, so it's about the same level of victory with the winners of that battle still desperately clinging onto a losing war.  Heck, even when they blow up the 2nd Death Star in RotJ, there's still a major confrontation at Jakku to finally end the Galactic Civil War.

So, it's not really something new to the franchise, is it?

The OT gets so much of a pass on these same issues because we're all so steeped in the massive amount of backstory that's seeped out over the year, especially in our RPG playing and novel reading.  But, based on the films alone, the same sins that are being hammered on for TLJ and TFA were also all over the OT.  That doesn't mean there isn't a lot of room for criticism, but let's all step back a moment and consider that we don't currently have nearly the depth of additional materials and decades to absorb them into our mental pictures with the new films as we did with the OT.  I recall taking a huge amount on faith when watching the OT - those things just were, and I was excited when I found out even more from sources outside the films.  But, since we don't have the cultural depth of information accumulated over decades of fandom, we're holding the same things up to scrutiny in the new films that we adore (because of the cultural depth) in the OT.  That's not exactly being fair.


----------



## Water Bob

I love the porgs!







They crack me up.  Especially that scene with Chewie.

I'll admit, going into the movie, I thought, from the previews, that the porgs were going to be intelligent.  Kinda a nod to Hoojibs from the Marvel Star Wars comics of the 1980's.


----------



## hawkeyefan

So I did not read any of the new novels or comics that coincide with the new films. This thread made me look into a few things out of curiosity. 

All I'll say is that the entire situation of how the First Order rose to prominence is pretty clearly described. Both within the fiction and also what inspired the writers. It's pretty well developed. 

Now, I don't feel I needed to absolutely know any of this material in order to enjoy the films (because most of it seems along the lines of what I would have expected), but it's all there for those who care enough to know about these things. I certainly wouldn't have minded if a little bit more of this stuff made it into the films (apparently some of this stuff was in, but got cut for time and pacing), but again, I don't know if it would have been necessary. 

So the material is out there for those that want it. Even just the Wikipedia page on the New Order explains things pretty clearly.


----------



## Water Bob

Yeah, I'm reading the third Poe Dameron book (Marvel), and in the first story, the First Order is regarded as nothing more than another militant group, not unlike a mercenary outfit or a criminal organization.  Of course, this story is set early, before Starkiller base was revealed.


----------



## Ovinomancer

hawkeyefan said:


> So I did not read any of the new novels or comics that coincide with the new films. This thread made me look into a few things out of curiosity.
> 
> All I'll say is that the entire situation of how the First Order rose to prominence is pretty clearly described. Both within the fiction and also what inspired the writers. It's pretty well developed.
> 
> Now, I don't feel I needed to absolutely know any of this material in order to enjoy the films (because most of it seems along the lines of what I would have expected), but it's all there for those who care enough to know about these things. I certainly wouldn't have minded if a little bit more of this stuff made it into the films (apparently some of this stuff was in, but got cut for time and pacing), but again, I don't know if it would have been necessary.
> 
> So the material is out there for those that want it. Even just the Wikipedia page on the New Order explains things pretty clearly.




Heh, just read that wiki article.  Nice to know that I picked up on all of the intentional references to the rise of Nazi Germany in the story.  The ODESSA bit fits as well (duh, it being clearly cited as inspiration), but I'll admit to not catching that bit.


----------



## wicked cool

Simple observation. Seems that merchandise sales are down compared to Awakens and tickets sales have also slowed. For the defenders of this movie is that a bad sign

Id like to make a observation of fan backlash
Mass effect Andomeda-video game produced by EA. Poor player ratings killed this beloved and money making franchise(I would argue one of the reasons EA bought Bioware). Ton of money sunk into this and yet fans complained so much that no DLC was made for this game. If which yes I believe is a stretch this movie doesn't make as much money as expected could this hurt the 3 movie spinoff that Johnson was rumored to helm.


----------



## tomBitonti

Ovinomancer said:


> Okay, let's put this in film perspective.  The Rebels blow up the Death Star.  This is a major accomplishment.  But they then start ESB in hiding and having to run from the Empire again, so it's about the same level of victory with the winners of that battle still desperately clinging onto a losing war.  Heck, even when they blow up the 2nd Death Star in RotJ, there's still a major confrontation at Jakku to finally end the Galactic Civil War.
> 
> So, it's not really something new to the franchise, is it?
> 
> The OT gets so much of a pass on these same issues because we're all so steeped in the massive amount of backstory that's seeped out over the year, especially in our RPG playing and novel reading.  But, based on the films alone, the same sins that are being hammered on for TLJ and TFA were also all over the OT.  That doesn't mean there isn't a lot of room for criticism, but let's all step back a moment and consider that we don't currently have nearly the depth of additional materials and decades to absorb them into our mental pictures with the new films as we did with the OT.  I recall taking a huge amount on faith when watching the OT - those things just were, and I was excited when I found out even more from sources outside the films.  But, since we don't have the cultural depth of information accumulated over decades of fandom, we're holding the same things up to scrutiny in the new films that we adore (because of the cultural depth) in the OT.  That's not exactly being fair.




Sure.  To me, the difference is that in episode IV, the rebels are a rag-tag group, clearly fighting with limited resources against a dominant opponent.

In episodes VII-VIII, the New Republic is dominant, and ought not to have quite as limited resources as in episode IV.

At the end of episode VIII, the NR has morphed back into the Rebellion.  That feels very very odd to me.  I can see that it fits the original Rebellion against Power theme of the initial movies, but it seems lame that that the only theme that can be used.  In a way, it contradicts the theme of "Businesses Enriching Themselves on Conflict", which is present at the Casino, in that the NR only has a niche as rebels against oppression -- they can only achieve their best form after allowing an oppressive power to gain hold.  That problem maps to the movies themselves, as they give folks a good feeling -- heroism by fighting oppression -- only by putting the First Order back in charge.

Thx!
TomB


----------



## Water Bob

And....when are we going to see anything about the Knights of Ren?

In that same vein, what happened to Black Squadron from TFA?  TLJ picks up immediately after TFA.  Where is Temmin Wexley and the others?


----------



## hawkeyefan

Ovinomancer said:


> Heh, just read that wiki article.  Nice to know that I picked up on all of the intentional references to the rise of Nazi Germany in the story.  The ODESSA bit fits as well (duh, it being clearly cited as inspiration), but I'll admit to not catching that bit.




Yeah, the parallels there were pretty clear, and I thought that was interesting. I had no idea really about the "in world" history of the First Order. But it seems that their slow and steady rise to prominence is pretty clearly explained. 

EDITED TO ADD: Apparently there was a smear campaign against Leia, labeling her the "daughter of Darth Vader" which damages her credibility, and which shifts some people away from teh Republic. That is a great concept and I wish that had made it into the film. Even if it was only one line of dialogue near the end to explain why no one answered the cal for help. Something like "It seems that there aren't many people out there willing to risk obliteration by the First Order to try and help Darth Vader's daughter."

That would have been cool. 



wicked cool said:


> Simple observation. Seems that merchandise sales are down compared to Awakens and tickets sales have also slowed. For the defenders of this movie is that a bad sign
> 
> Id like to make a observation of fan backlash
> Mass effect Andomeda-video game produced by EA. Poor player ratings killed this beloved and money making franchise(I would argue one of the reasons EA bought Bioware). Ton of money sunk into this and yet fans complained so much that no DLC was made for this game. If which yes I believe is a stretch this movie doesn't make as much money as expected could this hurt the 3 movie spinoff that Johnson was rumored to helm.




Meh it's not a bad sign for me. The sales could tank or multiply, my feelings about the movie will remain the same. I don't feel like I am a "defender of this movie" but I suppose lots of folks would label me such. 

As for the potential effect of bad word of mouth....sure, that can always affect a movie. I don't know if it would be enough to really impact this one, though, even though it seems to be artificially elevated by certain segments of the fanbase. And I don't know if a video game is the best comparison to a film.


----------



## Ovinomancer

wicked cool said:


> Simple observation. Seems that merchandise sales are down compared to Awakens and tickets sales have also slowed. For the defenders of this movie is that a bad sign



You misread.  Toy shipments are down, not toy sales.  Jus a supply side issue, largely influenced by the Toys'r'us bankruptcy.

And ticket sales were gangbusters Monday, despite so many students still being in school.


> Id like to make a observation of fan backlash
> Mass effect Andomeda-video game produced by EA. Poor player ratings killed this beloved and money making franchise(I would argue one of the reasons EA bought Bioware). Ton of money sunk into this and yet fans complained so much that no DLC was made for this game. If which yes I believe is a stretch this movie doesn't make as much money as expected could this hurt the 3 movie spinoff that Johnson was rumored to helm.




That's a fair comparison, except that TLJ complaints seem to be from a very vocal minority.  Exit polling at theaters shows it trending right alongside TFA and R1.  IMBD had a good fan score until news of such hit the wires and then it was bombarded by negative, mostly 1 star, reviews.  Outside of Rotten Tomatoes and IMDB, the film seems to be doing very well.  Disney is taking in big bucks so far and it's hewing closely to anticipations, so I figure they'll keep making money by making more.

EA, however, can't stand a product that doesn't more and will kill a line or even a studio that's otherwise successful over a single mediocre performance.  And Andromeda didn't bomb, it just didn't do as well as the previous titles.  For a different distributor, it would have gone in the win column.


----------



## Water Bob

tomBitonti said:


> Sure.  To me, the difference is that in episode IV, the rebels are a rag-tag group, clearly fighting with limited resources against a dominant opponent.
> 
> In episodes VII-VIII, the New Republic is dominant, and ought not to have quite as limited resources as in episode IV.




Actually, the we've seen very little about the New Republic.  We've only seen the capital system being destroyed.  The films has focused on General Leia and her Resistance group, which is not a New Republic force (though she does get some support from allies in the New Republic).

The Resistance Against the First Order is an independent group, created by Leia because she saw that the New Republic was doing little to face the growing threat of the First Order.  The group is underfunded and is supported, mainly, with out-of-date tech and Civil War era craft.

I imagine, had we seen more of the New Republic, before the fleet was taken out by Starkiller base, that we'd have seen ultra-modern, high tech vessels and soldiers with top grade tech.


----------



## reelo

This.
	

	
	
		
		

		
			











Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app


----------



## Ovinomancer

tomBitonti said:


> Sure.  To me, the difference is that in episode IV, the rebels are a rag-tag group, clearly fighting with limited resources against a dominant opponent.
> 
> In episodes VII-VIII, the New Republic is dominant, and ought not to have quite as limited resources as in episode IV.
> 
> At the end of episode VIII, the NR has morphed back into the Rebellion.  That feels very very odd to me.  I can see that it fits the original Rebellion against Power theme of the initial movies, but it seems lame that that the only theme that can be used.  In a way, it contradicts the theme of "Businesses Enriching Themselves on Conflict", which is present at the Casino, in that the NR only has a niche as rebels against oppression -- they can only achieve their best form after allowing an oppressive power to gain hold.  That problem maps to the movies themselves, as they give folks a good feeling -- heroism by fighting oppression -- only by putting the First Order back in charge.
> 
> Thx!
> TomB




Okay, you missed some things set up in TFA.  The Resistance isn't the New Republic, for one.  It's a separate thing formed by Leia to fight against the 1st Order.  The New Republic doesn't condone this effort, but there are enough supporters that secretly fund it.

Pretty sure all of that is set up in TFA.  So, yeah, if you conflate the two I'm sure you're confused.


----------



## Ovinomancer

hawkeyefan said:


> Yeah, the parallels there were pretty clear, and I thought that was interesting. I had no idea really about the "in world" history of the First Order. But it seems that their slow and steady rise to prominence is pretty clearly explained.
> 
> EDITED TO ADD: Apparently there was a smear campaign against Leia, labeling her the "daughter of Darth Vader" which damages her credibility, and which shifts some people away from teh Republic. That is a great concept and I wish that had made it into the film. Even if it was only one line of dialogue near the end to explain why no one answered the cal for help. Something like "It seems that there aren't many people out there willing to risk obliteration by the First Order to try and help Darth Vader's daughter."
> 
> That would have been cool.



My biggest set of criticisms of the film I put in the 'needs just one line' category.

Flying Leia:  "She doing it again, get the door!"  Establishes that Leia use of the force, and in particular that use, has precedent and also instead treated as 'whatever' by everyone.

The Knights of Ren:  a line of dialogue establishing that Snoke's guards are some of the Knights.  This adds a lot of extra weight to Ren fighting, and killing, his former disciples and friends.

The line you have above, that ties in that fact with the lack of allies.

In Canto Bight's jail:  "I informed the 1st Order about that deserter we just picked up."  Establishes that the 1st Order has scope and reach in the galaxy at large.

During the chase, on the Supremacy: "Sir, should we vector in reinforcements from blahblah System?" Hux: "There's no need for fancy maneuvers here, the prey caught tightly in our trap.  It's just a matter of time."  Establishes scope again, and also obviates the questions about doing a short hop to head off the Resistance.  Also, two lines.

There was one I had for Rey/Luke, but damned if I can remember it right now.


----------



## wicked cool

Reelo-Just curious since this is your trilogy. Is it better? What makes it better?

My trilogy had an impact for 40 years. Realistically is Rey the next Vader? Vader is considered one of the top10 most iconic villians of all time. Is there anything iconic in this movie or the previous movie

In empire when vader says hes lukes father the star wars community went crazy (well as a younger kid I felt it did). so far what was your crazy moment

My expectation were
Luke would die-based on age of actor. 
other major actors would die also due to age or basically unwilling to do more (Ford)
to be honest i'm pleasantly surprised chewie has big role in movies but I'm now very worried about the fate of 2 droids
I expected new heroes to rise and to have new love for these. I've done these for new books where the author killed of hero and replaced with a new 1

I do feel like sequels/remakes like jaws +1, terminator 3+, Alien 3+ seem to be chasing the magic of what made the first 2 good but maybe that's me. I feel like Post empire has been doing the same thing. However the formula seemed to have worked for other franchises  such as Toy Story


----------



## Water Bob

I don't think I'm buying the part where Ben tells Rey that her parents were nobodies.  If its true, I'm way cool with that.  It goes with the theme of the movie--that of letting go of the past, embracing the new, as the story continues, evolves.

But, Ben said that her parents sold her into slavery, didn't he?

Rey wasn't a slave.  She was alone, with a lot of freedom, and sold her salvage to Unkar Plutt (who she was supposedly sold to).  It's clear in TFA that Plutt is not Rey's master.

I wouldn't be surprised if Abrams, in Episode IX, doesn't flip it again in a big reveal where we learn something BIG about Rey's parents.





Some other notes....

I've read that Rian Johnson has been put in creative charge of the next trilogy, Episodes X, Xl, and XII.  I've also read that Rian wants to stop numbering the episodes, so that Abram's Episode IX will be the last numbered one.  From then on out, the films will just have titles, like Rogue One.

My other guess about Abram's next film is that we'll see a lot of the Knights of Ren.

I kinda wish Finn had died in TLJ.  That scene where Rose saves him would have been perfect.  I did like it the way it was, and I did like the Rose character.  In fact, I liked her a lot.  

Of all the new characters, though, Finn is the one that I have no real connection.  I wouldn't mind him gone.

I was wishy washy about Poe, at first, but through his comic, and now through his scenes in TLJ, I really like that character.

I love Rey.  She's awesome.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Water Bob said:


> I don't think I'm buying the part where Ben tells Rey that her parents were nobodies.  If its true, I'm way cool with that.  It goes with the theme of the movie--that of letting go of the past, embracing the new, as the story continues, evolves.
> 
> But, Ben said that her parents sold her into slavery, didn't he?
> 
> Rey wasn't a slave.  She was alone, with a lot of freedom, and sold her salvage to Unkar Plutt (who she was supposedly sold to).  It's clear in TFA that Plutt is not Rey's master.
> 
> I wouldn't be surprised if Abrams, in Episode IX, doesn't flip it again in a big reveal where we learn something BIG about Rey's parents.



Um, she turned in salvage for _food_.  Work for food is pretty much slavery. 





> Some other notes....
> 
> I've read that Rian Johnson has been put in creative charge of the next trilogy, Episodes X, Xl, and XII.  I've also read that Rian wants to stop numbering the episodes, so that Abram's Episode IX will be the last numbered one.  From then on out, the films will just have titles, like Rogue One.
> 
> My other guess about Abram's next film is that we'll see a lot of the Knights of Ren.
> 
> I kinda wish Finn had died in TLJ.  That scene where Rose saves him would have been perfect.  I did like it the way it was, and I did like the Rose character.  In fact, I liked her a lot.
> 
> Of all the new characters, though, Finn is the one that I have no real connection.  I wouldn't mind him gone.
> 
> I was wishy washy about Poe, at first, but through his comic, and now through his scenes in TLJ, I really like that character.
> 
> I love Rey.  She's awesome.




I gotta disagree, I really like Finn.  I understand your point, though -- after TFA, Finn mostly lost his purpose.  In TFA, he sparked Rey and was the reason the Resistance had a chance to destroy SKB.  But that was because he was a (recently) ex-Stormtrooper.  In TLJ, his major contribution to the plot was -- being an ex-stormtrooper who knew where on the Sovereign the hyperspace tracker would be.  I hope they find a better motivation/use for the character other than 'he's an ex-stormtrooper' in Ep IX.  His semi-rivalry with Phasma isn't strong enough, mostly because Phasma isn't well used.  And what a shame that is.


----------



## Water Bob

Two other points.  

If they're not going to use C-3PO and R2-D2, then maybe they should die a hero's death.  Blasted into nothingness, or left floating out into space, after saving the day.  I could see R2, on the hull of a ship, during a battle, then BOOM!  There goes R2, and the audience cries.

And 3PO, overcoming his cowardice, helping R2 save the day, and the explosion that utterly destroys R2 sends the protocal droid spinning out into space, talking to himself, lost, forever.

Or...something like that.



And...I sure would like to see Chewie used like never before!  We saw a lot of him in TFA.  Let's see more!  Let's see the wookiee be a true hero and kick some ass!


----------



## hawkeyefan

Ovinomancer said:


> My biggest set of criticisms of the film I put in the 'needs just one line' category.
> 
> Flying Leia:  "She doing it again, get the door!"  Establishes that Leia use of the force, and in particular that use, has precedent and also instead treated as 'whatever' by everyone.
> 
> The Knights of Ren:  a line of dialogue establishing that Snoke's guards are some of the Knights.  This adds a lot of extra weight to Ren fighting, and killing, his former disciples and friends.
> 
> The line you have above, that ties in that fact with the lack of allies.
> 
> In Canto Bight's jail:  "I informed the 1st Order about that deserter we just picked up."  Establishes that the 1st Order has scope and reach in the galaxy at large.
> 
> During the chase, on the Supremacy: "Sir, should we vector in reinforcements from blahblah System?" Hux: "There's no need for fancy maneuvers here, the prey caught tightly in our trap.  It's just a matter of time."  Establishes scope again, and also obviates the questions about doing a short hop to head off the Resistance.  Also, two lines.
> 
> There was one I had for Rey/Luke, but damned if I can remember it right now.




Yeah, most of my concerns could have been addressed by a little extra dialogue like you describe. It's why I don't consider them major flaws. Well, that, and being rational.


----------



## Water Bob

Alt-Right Group takes credit for Rotten Tomatoes score.

Click to read article.


----------



## reelo

wicked cool said:


> Reelo-Just curious since this is your trilogy. Is it better? What makes it better?
> 
> My trilogy had an impact for 40 years. Realistically is Rey the next Vader? Vader is considered one of the top10 most iconic villians of all time. Is there anything iconic in this movie or the previous movie
> 
> In empire when vader says hes lukes father the star wars community went crazy (well as a younger kid I felt it did). so far what was your crazy moment
> 
> My expectation were
> Luke would die-based on age of actor.
> other major actors would die also due to age or basically unwilling to do more (Ford)
> to be honest i'm pleasantly surprised chewie has big role in movies but I'm now very worried about the fate of 2 droids
> I expected new heroes to rise and to have new love for these. I've done these for new books where the author killed of hero and replaced with a new 1
> 
> I do feel like sequels/remakes like jaws +1, terminator 3+, Alien 3+ seem to be chasing the magic of what made the first 2 good but maybe that's me. I feel like Post empire has been doing the same thing. However the formula seemed to have worked for other franchises  such as Toy Story



Ah, but don't get me wrong: I'm nearing 40, I grew up with the OT, I've seen the PT on opening day each time, I've read my share of EU before it became Legends...

It's just that now, being a dad of 2 boys, I've made peace with the fact that the late-70, early-80s charm of the OT will never be recaptured. Make it too similar visually, like R1, and some people will complain. Make it different, like the PT, some people will complain. Make it similar story-wise, like TFA, some people will complain. There's no pleasing everybody.

Had Luke been any different than what he was in TLJ, coming in guns blazing, he would have outshined the new cast. Don't deny it, we all wanted it. But we didn't need it. RJ wiped the slate clean for things to come.

As I said, the OT will continue to be what it is, the films to come will (have to) be their own thing.
I've made peace with that fact.

Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app


----------



## hawkeyefan

Water Bob said:


> I don't think I'm buying the part where Ben tells Rey that her parents were nobodies.  If its true, I'm way cool with that.  It goes with the theme of the movie--that of letting go of the past, embracing the new, as the story continues, evolves.
> 
> But, Ben said that her parents sold her into slavery, didn't he?
> 
> Rey wasn't a slave.  She was alone, with a lot of freedom, and sold her salvage to Unkar Plutt (who she was supposedly sold to).  It's clear in TFA that Plutt is not Rey's master.
> 
> I wouldn't be surprised if Abrams, in Episode IX, doesn't flip it again in a big reveal where we learn something BIG about Rey's parents.




I was very happy with the reveal that they were nobody special. I thought that was great. If it turns out, however, that there is more to it and Kylo Ren was lying, I'd probably be fine with that, too, depending on what they decide to do with her lineage. I would prefer they not somehow tie her to the Skywalkers because it just seems like a stretch. But I'm open to the idea, despite liking this film's take on it.

If I recall correctly, the guy who was originally going to direct episode IX before Abrams returned commented about her lineage as having a huge impact on the story. But who knows? 



Water Bob said:


> I've read that Rian Johnson has been put in creative charge of the next trilogy, Episodes X, Xl, and XII.  I've also read that Rian wants to stop numbering the episodes, so that Abram's Episode IX will be the last numbered one.  From then on out, the films will just have titles, like Rogue One.




I believe that he's been given a separate trilogy of films....not necessarily the following episodes in the ongoing saga. So whatever he comes up with will be its own thing. HOwever, I don't know if they will continue with the ongoing saga in the form of episodes X, XI, and XII. We'll see.



reelo said:


> Ah, but don't get me wrong: I'm nearing 40, I grew up with the OT, I've seen the PT on opening day each time, I've read my share of EU before it became Legends...
> 
> It's just that now, being a dad of 2 boys, I've made peace with the fact that the late-70, early-80s charm of the OT will never be recaptured. Make it too similar visually, like R1, and some people will complain. Make it different, like the PT, some people will complain. Make it similar story-wise, like TFA, some people will complain. There's no pleasing everybody.
> 
> Had Luke been any different than what he was in TLJ, coming in guns blazing, he would have outshined the new cast. Don't deny it, we all wanted it. But we didn't need it. RJ wiped the slate clean for things to come.
> 
> As I said, the OT will continue to be what it is, the films to come will (have to) be their own thing.
> I've made peace with that fact.
> 
> Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app




I think that having kids certainly drives home the fact that these movies are for them, rather than for us. At least that's the way I look at it. How can I not like these movies when my 3 year old daughter loves Rey to death the same way I did Luke at her age?

To me, that's more Star Wars than anything.


----------



## pukunui

hawkeyefan said:


> I think that having kids certainly drives home the fact that these movies are for them, rather than for us. At least that's the way I look at it. How can I not like these movies when my 3 year old daughter loves Rey to death the same way I did Luke at her age?



This. I have three daughters, and for them, Rey is just the best. They also appreciated how TLJ has so many more women in it: Paige and Rose Tico, Tallie (the a-wing pilot), Lt Connix (Carrie's daughter's character), Admiral Holdo, and so on.

Of course, they also love Leia, Padmé, Ahsoka, Sabine Wren, etc etc.


----------



## pukunui

[MENTION=6796566]epithet[/MENTION]: You might want to sign this petition, if you haven't done so already: *Have Disney strike Star Wars Episode VIII from the official canon*.


----------



## tomBitonti

Ovinomancer said:


> Okay, you missed some things set up in TFA.  The Resistance isn't the New Republic, for one.  It's a separate thing formed by Leia to fight against the 1st Order.  The New Republic doesn't condone this effort, but there are enough supporters that secretly fund it.
> 
> Pretty sure all of that is set up in TFA.  So, yeah, if you conflate the two I'm sure you're confused.




I just went and read up on the details and yeah, I was very off on what I thought the Resistance was all about.  I presume that was all provided by TFA, but the details had completely fallen away since I saw it.

Narratively, then, why should we care so much about the Resistance?  It seems quite a contrivance that the old players end up still being at the center of things.

Thx!
TomB


----------



## hawkeyefan

pukunui said:


> [MENTION=6796566]epithet[/MENTION]: You might want to sign this petition, if you haven't done so already: *Have Disney strike Star Wars Episode VIII from the official canon*.




This kind of stuff boggles my mind.


----------



## Eltab

reelo said:


> Had Luke been any different than what he was in TLJ, coming in guns blazing, he would have outshined the new cast. Don't deny it, we all wanted it. But we didn't need it.



Luke was well-positioned to be in these movies what Yoda was in _Empire_: the guy who is going to prepare the new hero to do all the hard work.
The currently-inexplicable implosion of his original training effort (the members seem to have become the Knights of Ren - or dead - instead of Jedi) would have given him also a strong sympathy with ghost-Obi-wan's statement "I thought I could be just as good as Yoda.  I was wrong."

Luke already has shown that he can come up with clever and subtle plans, for instance getting all his allies - who are being pursued by Darth Vader at the time - into Jabba's palace without alerting Jabba that anything might be wrong.  He also came up with a plan to turn Vader instead of fighting him.  (Execution of which was more yank-your-chains than pull-his-heartstrings, admittedly.)

Luke is tough and determined, too.  He makes an instant decision to abandon Tattooine, and sticks with it even when his path is hard - he loses his mentor and has to figure out this Force thing by himself.  He gets his hand cut off but is back up like nothing happened within days (yes, miracles of modern medicine, too) - and he is willing to fight again the guy who did it to him.  He lets himself get captured by a ruthless and remorseless enemy on the vague notion that One Certain Important Figure will hear of it and personally intervene.

It would be reasonable that Luke, after the destruction of his Jedi Academy, would go to ground for a while.  Then let the Force draw him to a prospective student, and effectively adopt the Sith Rule of Two.  Yoda trained him without drawing Dark Side users down on both of them, so the possibilities for success look better.  And, given enough time, Luke could send out a steady trickle of capable Jedi, each of whom can train their own apprentices, &c.

In short, Luke should have been working quietly and behind the scenes to set the stage to protect the New Republic he helped found, and towards the First Order's demise - likely in cooperation with Leia's public efforts.

I find it VERY hard to accept that the same guy who showed determination and increasing depth of thought through three movies would just decide to give up, crawl into a hole, and pull the entrance down on himself, when something went REALLY wrong.


----------



## epithet

pukunui said:


> [MENTION=6796566]epithet[/MENTION]: You might want to sign this petition, if you haven't done so already: *Have Disney strike Star Wars Episode VIII from the official canon*.




At what point did I give you the impression that I'm an idiot?


----------



## epithet

Eltab said:


> ...
> I find it VERY hard to accept that the same guy who showed determination and depth of thought through three movies would just decide to give up, crawl into a hole, and pull the entrance down on himself, when something went REALLY wrong.




You and me both, amigo.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Eltab said:


> Luke should have been what Yoda was in _Empire_: the guy who is going to prepare the new hero to do all the hard work.
> The currently-inexplicable implosion of his original training effort (the members seem to have become the Knights of Ren - or dead - instead of Jedi) would have given him also a strong sympathy with ghost-Obi-wan's statement "I thought I could be just as good as Yoda.  I was wrong."
> 
> Luke already has shown that he can come up with clever and subtle plans, for instance getting all his allies into Jabba's palace without alerting Jabba that anything might be wrong.  He also came up with a plan to turn Vader instead of fighting him.  (Execution of which was more yank-your-chains than pull-his-heartstrings, admittedly.)
> 
> Luke is tough and determined, too.  He makes an instant decision to abandon Tattooine, and sticks with it even when his path is hard - he loses his mentor and has to figure out this Force thing by himself.  He gets his hand cut off but is back up like nothing happened within days (yes, miracles of modern medicine, too) - and he is willing to fight again the guy who did it to him.  He is willing to get captured by a ruthless and remorseless enemy on the vague notion that one certain Important Figure will hear of it and personally intervene.
> 
> It would be reasonable that Luke, after the destruction of his Jedi Academy, would go to ground for a while.  Then let the Force draw him to a prospective student, and effectively adopt the Sith Rule of Two.  Yoda trained him without drawing Dark Side users down on both of them, so the possibilities for success look better.  And, given enough time, Luke could send out a steady trickle of capable Jedi, each of whom can train their own apprentices, &c.
> 
> In short, Luke should have been working quietly and behind the scenes to set the stage to protect the New Republic he helped found, and towards the First Order's demise - likely in cooperation with Leia's public efforts.
> 
> I find it VERY hard to accept that the same guy who showed determination and depth of thought through three movies would just decide to give up, crawl into a hole, and pull the entrance down on himself, when something went REALLY wrong.




Wow.  You brought all of THAT into TLJ?  I can see why you hated it -- it clearly wasn't the movie you imagined.


----------



## Ovinomancer

epithet said:


> You and me both, amigo.




You guys must have Luke confused with someone that wasn't a petulant whiner while being trained by Yoda, that failed to lift the X-Wing, and who was successfully goaded into attacking by the Emperor in RotJ.  Luke was _always_ a hothead that thought better of it a moment later.  This calm, collected, super-awesome Luke isn't someone I recognize from the OT at all.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

hawkeyefan said:


> Yeah, they brought the Empire down, but they didn’t eradicate it. That was what I meant....they didn’t eliminate evil. The only way anyone ever gets a happily ever after is when their story is over. The fact that this trilogy was going to involve Han, Leia, and Luke meant that their stories were no longer over. So they needed to face some adversity.
> 
> The idea of a remnant of the Empire picking up the mantle of antagonist is new as far as Star Wars sequels go. Grand Admiral Thrawn in the Heir to the Empire, a resurrected Emperor in Dark Empire...and so on. But those stories, because of their medium, didn’t have to acknowledge the passing of time the way the film sequels do. So in the film, it’s many years later when things begin to get dark again. Which is kind of funny because to me that’s more natural than if there’s almost no lapse between Palpatine and Thrawn, let’s say. In the EU material, the happily ever after period is far shorter, if it even exists at all. And yet I don’t think I recall fans criticizing those stories for undoing the heroes’ achievements.
> 
> There’s no reason to believe that some part of the Empire wouldn’t carry on and possibly morph into something else. The First Order is essentially the Empire, with some minor differences, but I don’t really mind that since it’s something that rose up over time rather than right away.
> 
> I wouldn’t mind a threat of a different kind in future movies, I agree with you there. But for this one, the First Order seems a suitable antagonist.



The advantage the EU has here is that it's actually telling the story of how the Republic builds and has to fight off the remains of the Empire. The writers are basicaly showing their work. The Happy Everafter is not quite that everafter, but they are showing us that their victory actually had consequences and they achieved something - but they have to keep fighting for it.

In TFA, we're just seeing it all dismantled already. They didn't show their work.
Why wouldn't the story about how Kylo Ren turns and destroys the young new Jedi Order worth showing? Why isn't the story about how the First Order builts itself on the remains of the Empire worth showing? Because they couldn't figure out how to convincingly tell that story?


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Ovinomancer said:


> My biggest set of criticisms of the film I put in the 'needs just one line' category.
> 
> Flying Leia:  "She doing it again, get the door!"  Establishes that Leia use of the force, and in particular that use, has precedent and also instead treated as 'whatever' by everyone.
> 
> The Knights of Ren:  a line of dialogue establishing that Snoke's guards are some of the Knights.  This adds a lot of extra weight to Ren fighting, and killing, his former disciples and friends.
> 
> The line you have above, that ties in that fact with the lack of allies.
> 
> In Canto Bight's jail:  "I informed the 1st Order about that deserter we just picked up."  Establishes that the 1st Order has scope and reach in the galaxy at large.
> 
> During the chase, on the Supremacy: "Sir, should we vector in reinforcements from blahblah System?" Hux: "There's no need for fancy maneuvers here, the prey caught tightly in our trap.  It's just a matter of time."  Establishes scope again, and also obviates the questions about doing a short hop to head off the Resistance.  Also, two lines.
> 
> There was one I had for Rey/Luke, but damned if I can remember it right now.




"This is the 3rd lesson". I may have miscounted, but I think there were supposed to be 3 lessons! I hate when heroes don't follow through with their promises! (Admittedly, there might have been a 3rd lesson, just not labeled as such, or the 3rd lesson could be force-ghosted in later. Or I just wasn't attentive enough.)


----------



## Ovinomancer

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> "This is the 3rd lesson". I may have miscounted, but I think there were supposed to be 3 lessons! I hate when heroes don't follow through with their promises! (Admittedly, there might have been a 3rd lesson, just not labeled as such, or the 3rd lesson could be force-ghosted in later. Or I just wasn't attentive enough.)



The callback to Luke not finishing his training so he could go help his friends didn't click with you?


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> "This is the 3rd lesson". I may have miscounted, but I think there were supposed to be 3 lessons! I hate when heroes don't follow through with their promises! (Admittedly, there might have been a 3rd lesson, just not labeled as such, or the 3rd lesson could be force-ghosted in later. Or I just wasn't attentive enough.)




Seen Yoda count to five, you have?


----------



## wicked cool

Watched a Kevin Smith review last night of last jedi. Hes less angry than Angry Joe but he di bring up the fact that Luke calls his lightsaber a lazer sword

I get the fact that hey Luke cant outshine the new hero and its time to move on blah blah blah. 

However was this movie really marketed to 3 year olds? No in fact it was marketed as an Empire Strikes back killer or as good as. Star wars was huge in the 70's and 80's. I asked my kids and its not even a blip in the schools. You could say well old timer kids are different today and my kids schools are talking about it. That is total crap. Avengers, Wonderwoman, Stranger things, Riverdale etc were/are hot topics. Star Wars has lost some of its luster basically due to the fact that theres crappy directing and crappy storyline with shallow/awful characters such as jar jar, Poe etc. Disney basically poured a ton of love into a so/so comic hero Iron Man with a washed up older actor (he was in his 40's with an old guy as the villain) and then built it into a giant franchise. I would bet that if John Favreau had directed Star wars that it would be doing much better.   

forget the 70-80's nostalgia. If this movie got released against avengers it would get destroyed. Heck I bet the greatest showman and Jumanji could really hurt ticket sales


----------



## Ovinomancer

wicked cool said:


> Watched a Kevin Smith review last night of last jedi. Hes less angry than Angry Joe but he di bring up the fact that Luke calls his lightsaber a lazer sword
> 
> I get the fact that hey Luke cant outshine the new hero and its time to move on blah blah blah.
> 
> However was this movie really marketed to 3 year olds? No in fact it was marketed as an Empire Strikes back killer or as good as.



I saw no marketing to this effect.  I saw some reviewers say it was the best since Empire, but no marketing.  Your really need to refine your understanding of the vast difference between marketing and reviewer opinions.

ETA: You also failed to mention that Kevin Smith loved TLJ.



> Star wars was huge in the 70's and 80's. I asked my kids and its not even a blip in the schools. You could say well old timer kids are different today and my kids schools are talking about it. That is total crap. Avengers, Wonderwoman, Stranger things, Riverdale etc were/are hot topics. Star Wars has lost some of its luster basically due to the fact that theres crappy directing and crappy storyline with shallow/awful characters such as jar jar, Poe etc. Disney basically poured a ton of love into a so/so comic hero Iron Man with a washed up older actor (he was in his 40's with an old guy as the villain) and then built it into a giant franchise. I would bet that if John Favreau had directed Star wars that it would be doing much better.



My son, on the other hand, was really excited to be able to see it opening weekend because he wanted to talk to all of his friends about it at school on Monday.  He's come home a few times excited about what a friend said about the movie and this theory or that.  I had to tell him to not get attached to any theories -- they rarely pan out.  He's excited because his best friend is finally going to see it this weekend so they can talk about it next week over break.

So, yeah, my anecdote counters yours.



> forget the 70-80's nostalgia. If this movie got released against avengers it would get destroyed. Heck I bet the greatest showman and Jumanji could really hurt ticket sales



I doubt it, but, hey, we don't have to guess, we can just wait.  You can hope it bombs, and I can not care much because I liked it anyway and don't need the validation, but we can both see what happened next week when the data comes out.  I'm certain there will be enough for you to interpret it negatively and as a sign that the franchise is doomed.


----------



## epithet

Ovinomancer said:


> You guys must have Luke confused with someone that wasn't a petulant whiner while being trained by Yoda, that failed to lift the X-Wing, and who was successfully goaded into attacking by the Emperor in RotJ.  Luke was _always_ a hothead that thought better of it a moment later.  This calm, collected, super-awesome Luke isn't someone I recognize from the OT at all.




Super-awesome Luke wasn’t a character we were introduced to in 1977 Star Wars, that was the kid. Over three movies and “the hero’s journey,” the kid _becomes_ super-awesome. It was earned, and grown into. 

Don’t get me wrong, I really love Rey as a character. It is difficult to develop her, though, when she starts as a virtuous champion and goes from zero to Force Goddess the moment she grabs dad’s lightsaber.

I have to say, the casting of Ridley and Driver was inspired. Rey and Kylo are both characters that would be insufferable with lesser actors in those roles. Just imagine how much more enjoyable the prequel trilogy would have been if Anakin had that much charisma.


----------



## Wystan

My one comment is Luke directly maps to Ben Kenobi - Failed his Apprentice, exiled himself to a planet, hid himself... only to be found and turn around a pivotal moment with the training of a new Jedi....


----------



## Ovinomancer

epithet said:


> Super-awesome Luke wasn’t a character we were introduced to in 1977 Star Wars, that was the kid. Over three movies and “the hero’s journey,” the kid _becomes_ super-awesome. It was earned, and grown into.



ESB:  Luke whines constantly about his training.  Can't focus.  Fails to lift the X-wing and gives up.  Runs off from his training to help his friends, ends up in failed confrontation with Vader.  Loses badly.

RotJ:  Luke sets up a plan to rescue Han that involves him showing up and demanding Han and trying to use the Force to get his way.  It fails, badly (and predictably).  He only manages to escape his failed plan with his friends due to a series of narrow victories and dumb luck (Boba had him dead to rights before Han accidentally hits his jetpack and causes a lucky malfunction).  Dumb luck saves the day, not super-awesome and wise Luke.  Later in the film, Luke realizes that his very presence on the Endor raid has caused Vader to sense him -- something fairly easily predicted.  So, because of this Luke again wanders off from his friends on a wild hunch that he has to face Vader.  Is brought before the Emperor, who easily goads him into attacking out of anger and fear.  Only barely halts himself from destroying his father and then is about to be completely destroyed by the Emperor when _Vader _makes a choice to save him. 

At no point in the OT is Luke ever super-awesome or show any real gift at making wise choices.  I have no idea how you could possibly form this opinion of him from the OT.  This idea about Luke is a fantasy, or entirely based on the not-canon EU post trilogy books.



> Don’t get me wrong, I really love Rey as a character. It is difficult to develop her, though, when she starts as a virtuous champion and goes from zero to Force Goddess the moment she grabs dad’s lightsaber.



We saw she was a skilled fighter before that, though, in multiple scenes.  Is it so egregious that when the force finally blooms in her, one of the most powerful users ever known, that it would show itself in such a way?  Let's be honest, Luke had never flown an X-wing, had never fired a photon torpedo, and yet hit the exhaust vent with and unfamiliar weapon while flying an unfamiliar fighter down a narrow trench he'd never seen before all while his eyes were closed.  And you want to quibble about some lightsaber fight being unrealistic for a force user?  I, again, have no idea what kind of myths you've built up in your head about the OT characters, but they were as super- and suddenly competent as the new cast.



> I have to say, the casting of Ridley and Driver was inspired. Rey and Kylo are both characters that would be insufferable with lesser actors in those roles. Just imagine how much more enjoyable the prequel trilogy would have been if Anakin had that much charisma.



The actor wasn't the problem in the prequels -- his dialog is pretty horrid by itself.  Sure, the actor didn't make it sing, like Ewan did with Kenobi, but he had much, much less to work with and Lucas as a director.  Lucas really, really needs someone at his shoulder at all times willing to say, "no, George, just no."  ESB is the finest Star Wars movie, and, coincidentally, the one that Lucas had the _least _direct control over.


----------



## wicked cool

I don't hope it fails, will never argue it be stricken from canon, glad you liked it and happy kids are talking about it. I wanted Phantom Menace to succeed but at the time Austin Powers kicked the crap out of it. If I'm wrong that it loses possibly its top spot this weekend then I will apologize. I think second viewings will be down (it appears I could be wrong as Disney has made it lucrative for many theaters to show it with 4 week guarantee or face penalties which is different from even force awakens)

the argument that Disney didn't market it that way is somewhat misleading. Commercials with reviews attached is marketing and those reviews (google) constantly refer it it as the best star wars since Empire. 

The Kevin Smith youtube review  is over and hour long and he saw it twice. After the first viewing he doesn't actually love it. he is super critical of it but u can tell he couches it do to director respect. He basically backs almost every bad point made about the movie and added ones I didn't catch such as lazer sword (basically goes into the origins of the lazer sword). he actually cries several times during the video so he takes this stuff very seriously.


----------



## billd91

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> The advantage the EU has here is that it's actually telling the story of how the Republic builds and has to fight off the remains of the Empire. The writers are basicaly showing their work. The Happy Everafter is not quite that everafter, but they are showing us that their victory actually had consequences and they achieved something - but they have to keep fighting for it.
> 
> In TFA, we're just seeing it all dismantled already. They didn't show their work.
> Why wouldn't the story about how Kylo Ren turns and destroys the young new Jedi Order worth showing? Why isn't the story about how the First Order builts itself on the remains of the Empire worth showing? Because they couldn't figure out how to convincingly tell that story?




Because the moviemakers started too late to do that if they wanted to use Ford, Fisher, and Hamill. Given the 40-years of aging since the first movie, they had to start along a pretty advanced timeline and tell the backstory of how Kylo Ren turns via flashback and reminiscence. Kind of like how the original trilogy starts late in Darth Vader's and the Empire's story. In that case, they *did* go back in time to show their work... and we all know how that turned out.


----------



## billd91

Ovinomancer said:


> RotJ:  Luke sets up a plan to rescue Han that involves him showing up and demanding Han and trying to use the Force to get his way.  It fails, badly (and predictably).  He only manages to escape his failed plan with his friends due to a series of narrow victories and dumb luck (Boba had him dead to rights before Han accidentally hits his jetpack and causes a lucky malfunction).  Dumb luck saves the day, not super-awesome and wise Luke.  Later in the film, Luke realizes that his very presence on the Endor raid has caused Vader to sense him -- something fairly easily predicted.  So, because of this Luke again wanders off from his friends on a wild hunch that he has to face Vader.  Is brought before the Emperor, who easily goads him into attacking out of anger and fear.  Only barely halts himself from destroying his father and then is about to be completely destroyed by the Emperor when _Vader _makes a choice to save him.
> 
> At no point in the OT is Luke ever super-awesome or show any real gift at making wise choices.  I have no idea how you could possibly form this opinion of him from the OT.  This idea about Luke is a fantasy, or entirely based on the not-canon EU post trilogy books.




I'd agree that in the original trilogy, there's no point where Luke is super-awesome with a preternatural gift for making wise choices. However, I'd give him a lot more credit with Han's rescue. The plan has layers of contingencies at work for when one gambit or another fails and almost all of the players in the game are competent at making adhoc decisions to take advantage of opportunities (Threepio probably being the only exception, and probably because he was kept out of the planning because he's a blabbermouth). There are moments when events are out of Luke's control, but the contingencies allow him and his friends to retake the initiative, assassinate Jabba, and rescue Han. It's not just dumb luck, much of it is making opportunities happen.


----------



## billd91

wicked cool said:


> Watched a Kevin Smith review last night of last jedi. Hes less angry than Angry Joe but he di bring up the fact that Luke calls his lightsaber a lazer sword




A totally appropriate comment from a bitter Luke Skywalker given its context. Loved it.



wicked cool said:


> I get the fact that hey Luke cant outshine the new hero and its time to move on blah blah blah.




Outshine? That's not the point. But it's a story in which he's a supporting character, not the hero. His fight was a generation ago, same as with Ben Kenobi.



wicked cool said:


> However was this movie really marketed to 3 year olds? No in fact it was marketed as an Empire Strikes back killer or as good as. Star wars was huge in the 70's and 80's. I asked my kids and its not even a blip in the schools. You could say well old timer kids are different today and my kids schools are talking about it. That is total crap. Avengers, Wonderwoman, Stranger things, Riverdale etc were/are hot topics. Star Wars has lost some of its luster basically due to the fact that theres crappy directing and crappy storyline with shallow/awful characters such as jar jar, Poe etc. Disney basically poured a ton of love into a so/so comic hero Iron Man with a washed up older actor (he was in his 40's with an old guy as the villain) and then built it into a giant franchise. I would bet that if John Favreau had directed Star wars that it would be doing much better.




That's garbage. Star Wars has a *LOT* more competition now just because there are a lot more offerings out there of a similar level - something that was lacking in 1977 until Star Wars opened the door to it even being possible. It has little to do with what you consider crappy direction and weak characters, particularly when you compare with the original trilogy. As Harrison Ford said at the time, "Relax, kid. It ain't that kind of movie." The original trilogy isn't exactly The Godfather or Citizen Kane. The characters are templates right out of second rate sci-fi serials and Joseph Campbell theories. Much of the impression they are deeper or more significant is bolted on by years of post hoc add-ons and tortured fanboy analysis.


----------



## billd91

wicked cool said:


> The Kevin Smith youtube review  is over and hour long and he saw it twice. After the first viewing he doesn't actually love it. he is super critical of it but u can tell he couches it do to director respect. He basically backs almost every bad point made about the movie and added ones I didn't catch such as lazer sword (basically goes into the origins of the lazer sword). he actually cries several times during the video so he takes this stuff very seriously.




Given what Kevin Smith says he would have had Luke do in the final confrontation on Crait, I'm glad they're *not* giving Star Wars direction projects to him. Ugh.


----------



## wicked cool

It has little to do with what you consider crappy direction and weak characters, particularly when you compare with the original trilogy. As Harrison Ford said at the time, "Relax, kid. It ain't that kind of movie." The original trilogy isn't exactly The Godfather or Citizen Kane. The characters are templates right out of second rate sci-fi serials and Joseph Campbell theories. Much of the impression they are deeper or more significant is bolted on by years of post hoc add-ons and tortured fanboy analysis."

and yet compared to the 70's characters, the Stranger things characters, the harry potter characters, the characters from most decent movies they are paper thin. I'm not asking for citizen Kane.  I'm not even asking for adult movie characters. I'm asking for depth-backstory etc. They don't have to even be likeable. Kylo is a crappy villain compared to say  Joffrey from Game of Thrones. Joffrey is a better written and better acted character. Milly bobby Brown as Eleven has more care given to her and a side by side comparison the acting of Finn/Poe.


Stranger things is a tv show with a lot more competition and yet right now I would argue kids-young adults are more excited for Stranger Things season 3 then the next Star Wars movie.  I would argue right now the adults in my office are more excited for Game of Thrones in 2019.  Most wished for Amazon toys partially validates my argument. Top 50 rey isnt mentioned. we have 1 bird,droid and 2 Kylos. Stranger things dominates and its well deserved.


----------



## Flexor the Mighty!

reelo said:


> Ah, but don't get me wrong: I'm nearing 40, I grew up with the OT, I've seen the PT on opening day each time, I've read my share of EU before it became Legends...
> 
> It's just that now, being a dad of 2 boys, I've made peace with the fact that the late-70, early-80s charm of the OT will never be recaptured. Make it too similar visually, like R1, and some people will complain. Make it different, like the PT, some people will complain. Make it similar story-wise, like TFA, some people will complain. There's no pleasing everybody.
> 
> Had Luke been any different than what he was in TLJ, coming in guns blazing, he would have outshined the new cast. Don't deny it, we all wanted it. But we didn't need it. RJ wiped the slate clean for things to come.
> 
> As I said, the OT will continue to be what it is, the films to come will (have to) be their own thing.
> I've made peace with that fact.
> 
> Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app




Yeah I have pretty much let Star Wars go at this point.  The first Trilogy was such a defining event in my childhood and I even loved the prequals.   But the half-reboot that is TFA and this one...yeah I think my 40 year affair with SW is over.  Just  kind of sucks that now when I rewatch the originals the impact is lessened since I'm thinking "well this doesn't stick at all, Luke is a joke of a Jedi who blows it all, and the Empire is back in a couple decades.  Leia never explores her connection to the Force and Han is a more sad than anything in the end.."  I just wish they had made a new trilogy with new heroes that didn't pretty much invalidate the originals for me.  YMMV and all.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart

hawkeyefan said:


> But despite that moment of weakness that led to the fall of the Jedi Order, Luke rises up again, and with his final act, achieves greatness again. He saves the resistance and serves as a symbol of inspiration for a new generation. Saying that he "is a failure" fails to acknowledge the entire point of the movie. He failed once. He then had a choice....let that failure define him, and hide for the rest of his days. Or put it aside and see if he can contribute meaningfully. He chose that second option.




I would believe that if when was told the galaxy was in trouble that his sister was in trouble, that Han died, that he immediately said "You know what, I've been letting my mistake consume me for too long. I will come help you. I made one mistake and I will not let it define me."

Then I would have been ok with the situation. Instead, what we got was him saying "You don't understand, the Jedi were horrible people, *I* was a horrible person and the galaxy, my sister, they can go to hell as far as I'm concerned. I'm here to die and don't care about all of you at all."

Even if that was his initial response and he slowly grew over the movie to go help Rey, I likely still would have been ok with it.

But instead, Rey kept believing in him while he repeatedly told her "I'm no hero. I never was a hero. My deeds weren't that important. Instead, people tell stories about how great I was. They were wrong. In fact, let me tell you why there is NO hope and you shouldn't try."

That's not the same character I remember at all. It isn't just that he has flaws now, it's that every single trait that defined him in the other movies was gone. He failed, then he repeated his failure over and over again during this movie by rejecting Rey and the rest of the galaxy and feeling sorry for himself.

The fact that he shows up at the very end feels hollow because of how long it took for him to get to that point, and the fact that his decision really doesn't end up making much of a difference at all. Sure, he let them escape, but he could have saved everyone and stopped this years ago if he hadn't given up.


----------



## Water Bob

Flexor the Mighty! said:


> Yeah I have pretty much let Star Wars go at this point.  The first Trilogy was such a defining event in my childhood and I even loved the prequals.   But the half-reboot that is TFA and this one...yeah I think my 40 year affair with SW is over.




Not me.  I just turned 52 yesterday, and I still LOVE Star Wars.

The new trilogy is going in an unexpected direction, but I've embraced it.

Bring on the next film!


----------



## Majoru Oakheart

Water Bob said:


> I imagine, had we seen more of the New Republic, before the fleet was taken out by Starkiller base, that we'd have seen ultra-modern, high tech vessels and soldiers with top grade tech.




This, more than anything was my problem with TFA. They literally mention that the Republic exists and that it was in charge of the galaxy and that it was destroyed in lines of dialog without ever seeing it...as if the entire thing was an afterthought.

It was mentioned so quickly that most people I know didn't realize what they were saying in the movie. I talked to one of my friends who asked "Why isn't the Republic in TLJ? What happened to them? Shouldn't their ships come and help The Resistance?"

But that's because in TFA, they literally fired one beam that destroyed the Hosnian System and everything in those systems including all of the ships and 5 planets.

The movie never said, but I got the impression from it that the beam destroyed other systems two. The beam splits into many pieces and seems to hit multiple systems. They seem to mention the Hosnian system in particular because that's where the Senate and the entire Republic fleet was, but the movie gave me the impression that they also destroyed multiple other systems that were loyal to the Republic.

TLJ reiterates (again, in one line of dialog) that the blast destroyed every last remnant of The Republic.

I think because they didn't show it on screen, they didn't set up how big the Republic was and how thoroughly they were destroyed with that one shot that most people didn't get it. Heck, some people have seen both movies and STILL don't get it. 

I think, to me, part of my problem is that we never got to see the achievements of the heroes of the old movies before they were torn now. We never saw the Republic being a force for good, the galaxy being in piece and Leia's dream coming true before it was destroyed, seeing the destruction only from a distance and described only in a line of dialog.

We didn't see Luke's temple working the way it was supposed to, a new promising group of students learning from their wise master and hero before we find out that it was destroyed and everyone killed.

We didn't see Han and Leia happy and the good times before their son went to the dark side and Han ran away and gave up on the Resistance.

So, as fans of the original movies we only see everything they've done being torn down. The good they've accomplished was downplayed or ignored and it certainly wasn't shown to us.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart

Ovinomancer said:


> You guys must have Luke confused with someone that wasn't a petulant whiner while being trained by Yoda, that failed to lift the X-Wing, and who was successfully goaded into attacking by the Emperor in RotJ.  Luke was _always_ a hothead that thought better of it a moment later.  This calm, collected, super-awesome Luke isn't someone I recognize from the OT at all.



He's the one who plans the entire rescue of Han in RotJ. I believe Chewy tells Han that he planned everything and Han acts completely surprised because Luke is just a whiny kid who couldn't plan anything.

But then Luke shows up in RotJ and he's calm, collected and thoughtful. Not at all the character he was in ESB. It's obvious that a bunch of time has passed between the two movies because all of his friends are treating him with a lot more respect and he seems to be almost a completely different person.

When he faces the Emperor and Vader, he does so calmly. Though the Emperor tries to make him lose his cool and he eventually picks up his lightsaber after quite a long time of the Emperor goading him. However, once he realizes that he's let his anger get the better of him, he refuses to kill Vader and drops his lightsaber.

We're led to believe that Luke has finally had his breakthrough. He has been grappling with his anger and aggression for the last 2 movies, but as he drops his lightsaber and says "You've failed. I am a Jedi like my father before me." we are led to believe that this is the last time he'll let his anger get in the way. He has finally learned to "let go". He faced his anger and came out the other side, completely getting rid of it.

Which is what makes RotJ my favorite Star Wars movie. It's the culmination of the Hero's Journey. It's the point where the Hero steps up, having finally found his path.

Which is why Luke forgetting all of that and becoming broken hurts me so much and why it colors the rest of the movie for me, even though large parts of the rest of the movie are actually very good.


----------



## Eltab

Ovinomancer said:


> Wow.  You brought all of THAT into TLJ?  I can see why you hated it -- it clearly wasn't the movie you imagined.




re: "hated".
Your shallowness beggars description.  Where have I shown hate - by any definition (I prefer Webster's) - for the movie?  Feel free to be specific.
What you are mischaracterizing minimizing and dismissing is thoughtful analysis and speculations built thereon, over 40 years.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart

Ovinomancer said:


> ESB:  Luke whines constantly about his training.  Can't focus.  Fails to lift the X-wing and gives up.  Runs off from his training to help his friends, ends up in failed confrontation with Vader.  Loses badly.



Yes, he makes mistakes in ESB. That's kind of the point. He needs to learn from them.



Ovinomancer said:


> RotJ:  Luke sets up a plan to rescue Han that involves him showing up and demanding Han and trying to use the Force to get his way.  It fails, badly (and predictably).  He only manages to escape his failed plan with his friends due to a series of narrow victories and dumb luck (Boba had him dead to rights before Han accidentally hits his jetpack and causes a lucky malfunction).  Dumb luck saves the day, not super-awesome and wise Luke.  Later in the film, Luke realizes that his very presence on the Endor raid has caused Vader to sense him -- something fairly easily predicted.  So, because of this Luke again wanders off from his friends on a wild hunch that he has to face Vader.  Is brought before the Emperor, who easily goads him into attacking out of anger and fear.  Only barely halts himself from destroying his father and then is about to be completely destroyed by the Emperor when _Vader _makes a choice to save him.




I got a very different vibe from this movie than you did.

I saw a Luke who had thought everything through in his plan to save Han. He sent the droids in first with his lightsaber both to give Jabba a chance to let Han go willingly and avoid killing but also to set up the second layer of his plan: Get Lando and Leia to infiltrate the palace and free him in the middle of the night. As a backup plan to that, just in case it didn't work, he showed up himself and tried to persuade Jabba to hand him over. Even if all of that failed, we go back to giving R2 his lightsaber so they can kill Jabba and make their retreat. They win mostly because of his planning 3 or 4 levels deep but also because of luck...but there's no such thing as luck, only the Force. He relied on the Force and it helped them. It helped them mostly because Luke was there and was a Jedi.

Later, he does make a mistake by going with them and risking the mission...but he does it because he trusts his feelings that his father will turn. Obi-Wan and Yoda have both told him over and over that he needs to let go. He needs to stop THINKING so much and instead do what FEELS right, because that's the way the Force works.

So, he feels it is right to go with them...and he's correct. Vader lets them through because he wants to confront his son. Without him there, he might have detected them anyways and NOT let them through because he had no reason to.

When he gets there, his feeling about his father is correct. He trusted in the Force and was right. As for him "easily" being goaded. He stands there for a while being constantly goaded and refuses to take the bait like 8 or 9 times before watching all of his friends die out the window finally breaks him and he thinks he needs to do something about the situation. That's not exactly "easily".

The point is that he DOES stop himself. He doesn't give in to anger in the end. He is wise enough to realize that's not how he's going to win. The only way he'll win is by trusting in his father. Trusting in the Light side of the Force. It's a huge gamble. But the Force rewards him by taking the high road by having his father save him.


----------



## Morrus

Majoru Oakheart said:


> This, more than anything was my problem with TFA. They literally mention that the Republic exists and that it was in charge of the galaxy and that it was destroyed in lines of dialog without ever seeing it...as if the entire thing was an afterthought.
> 
> It was mentioned so quickly that most people I know didn't realize what they were saying in the movie. I talked to one of my friends who asked "Why isn't the Republic in TLJ? What happened to them? Shouldn't their ships come and help The Resistance?"
> 
> But that's because in TFA, they literally fired one beam that destroyed the Hosnian System and everything in those systems including all of the ships and 5 planets.
> 
> The movie never said, but I got the impression from it that the beam destroyed other systems two. The beam splits into many pieces and seems to hit multiple systems. They seem to mention the Hosnian system in particular because that's where the Senate and the entire Republic fleet was, but the movie gave me the impression that they also destroyed multiple other systems that were loyal to the Republic.




We see it from Maz’s castle, which places that in the Hosnian system.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart

Morrus said:


> We see it from Maz’s castle, which places that in the Hosnian system.




Maz's castle is not in the Hosnian system. It is on Takodana in the Takodana system. Everyone in the galaxy can see the beam and they show it in multiple systems. 

The novels explain that the beam is fired in hyperspace so the light from it can be seen at faster than light speeds. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Mercurius

[MENTION=5143]Majoru Oakheart[/MENTION], nice heart-felt description of RotJ. While I feel that it is, overall, an inferior film to the first two, the sequence with Luke, the Emperor and Darth Vader is the very pinnacle of Star Wars to me. Best scenes in all of the movies.


----------



## Flexor the Mighty!

Majoru Oakheart said:


> This, more than anything was my problem with TFA. They literally mention that the Republic exists and that it was in charge of the galaxy and that it was destroyed in lines of dialog without ever seeing it...as if the entire thing was an afterthought.
> 
> It was mentioned so quickly that most people I know didn't realize what they were saying in the movie. I talked to one of my friends who asked "Why isn't the Republic in TLJ? What happened to them? Shouldn't their ships come and help The Resistance?"
> 
> But that's because in TFA, they literally fired one beam that destroyed the Hosnian System and everything in those systems including all of the ships and 5 planets.
> 
> The movie never said, but I got the impression from it that the beam destroyed other systems two. The beam splits into many pieces and seems to hit multiple systems. They seem to mention the Hosnian system in particular because that's where the Senate and the entire Republic fleet was, but the movie gave me the impression that they also destroyed multiple other systems that were loyal to the Republic.
> 
> TLJ reiterates (again, in one line of dialog) that the blast destroyed every last remnant of The Republic.
> 
> I think because they didn't show it on screen, they didn't set up how big the Republic was and how thoroughly they were destroyed with that one shot that most people didn't get it. Heck, some people have seen both movies and STILL don't get it.
> 
> I think, to me, part of my problem is that we never got to see the achievements of the heroes of the old movies before they were torn now. We never saw the Republic being a force for good, the galaxy being in piece and Leia's dream coming true before it was destroyed, seeing the destruction only from a distance and described only in a line of dialog.
> 
> We didn't see Luke's temple working the way it was supposed to, a new promising group of students learning from their wise master and hero before we find out that it was destroyed and everyone killed.
> 
> We didn't see Han and Leia happy and the good times before their son went to the dark side and Han ran away and gave up on the Resistance.
> 
> So, as fans of the original movies we only see everything they've done being torn down. The good they've accomplished was downplayed or ignored and it certainly wasn't shown to us.




That is pretty much it for me.  I kind of understand the desire to put the franchise pretty much right were it was in 1977 when SW came out since its a proven formula. I'm sure if they wouldn't have made the Force cry out with the rage of a million fanboys they would have just rebooted it.  But to avoid that they kind of rebooted it by just retelling the first movie while keeping the original trilogy in cannon.   But by doing that they really undercut the heroes and movies a lot of people grew up loving.  In hindsight Luke is a crap Jedi* and Return of the Jedi was a bad title since they never really did return just one sad old joke and a new group of "Sith". Leia was a bad leader since her New Republic really lead to nothing, Han was just kind of pathetic. Not much of a father, apparently not much of a partner to Leia, and even lost his ship.  Nothing they did was much good since a new breed of heroes ended up in the exact same place fighting a new Empire with a new Rebellion what 20 years later?  And they made the new Vader stand in emo and kind of a mewling mess, I get the impression he cries a lot. 

I understand that not everyone has that level of attachment to the old characters, or do and still like where this is going.

*Mark Hammil is calling this character Jake Skywalker in recent interviews since he doesn't think Luke would do any of this.


----------



## Flexor the Mighty!

Majoru Oakheart said:


> Yes, he makes mistakes in ESB. That's kind of the point. He needs to learn from them.
> 
> 
> 
> I got a very different vibe from this movie than you did.
> 
> I saw a Luke who had thought everything through in his plan to save Han. He sent the droids in first with his lightsaber both to give Jabba a chance to let Han go willingly and avoid killing but also to set up the second layer of his plan: Get Lando and Leia to infiltrate the palace and free him in the middle of the night. As a backup plan to that, just in case it didn't work, he showed up himself and tried to persuade Jabba to hand him over. Even if all of that failed, we go back to giving R2 his lightsaber so they can kill Jabba and make their retreat. They win mostly because of his planning 3 or 4 levels deep but also because of luck...but there's no such thing as luck, only the Force. He relied on the Force and it helped them. It helped them mostly because Luke was there and was a Jedi.
> 
> Later, he does make a mistake by going with them and risking the mission...but he does it because he trusts his feelings that his father will turn. Obi-Wan and Yoda have both told him over and over that he needs to let go. He needs to stop THINKING so much and instead do what FEELS right, because that's the way the Force works.
> 
> So, he feels it is right to go with them...and he's correct. Vader lets them through because he wants to confront his son. Without him there, he might have detected them anyways and NOT let them through because he had no reason to.
> 
> When he gets there, his feeling about his father is correct. He trusted in the Force and was right. As for him "easily" being goaded. He stands there for a while being constantly goaded and refuses to take the bait like 8 or 9 times before watching all of his friends die out the window finally breaks him and he thinks he needs to do something about the situation. That's not exactly "easily".
> 
> The point is that he DOES stop himself. He doesn't give in to anger in the end. He is wise enough to realize that's not how he's going to win. The only way he'll win is by trusting in his father. Trusting in the Light side of the Force. It's a huge gamble. But the Force rewards him by taking the high road by having his father save him.




I love you.


----------



## Morrus

Majoru Oakheart said:


> Maz's castle is not in the Hosnian system. It is on Takodana in the Takodana system. Everyone in the galaxy can see the beam and they show it in multiple systems.




Han sees Hosnia (whatever it’s called) from outside the castle. You can’t see planets in other systems.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart

Morrus said:


> Han sees Hosnia (whatever it’s called) from outside the castle. You can’t see planets in other systems.




You'd think so. But JJ Abrams doesn't much care about physics:

https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/111528/is-takodana-in-the-hosnian-system


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Flexor the Mighty!

Mercurius said:


> [MENTION=5143]Majoru Oakheart[/MENTION], nice heart-felt description of RotJ. While I feel that it is, overall, an inferior film to the first two, the sequence with Luke, the Emperor and Darth Vader is the very pinnacle of Star Wars to me. Best scenes in all of the movies.




When Luke and Vader start really going at it and Luke is starting to overpower him and the music is playing and the tension is rising and then he realizes he is a hair away from becoming his father all over again and he throws down his anger and rage and trusts in the Force...damn that is by miles and miles my favorite lightsaber fight, and probably moment in the entire franchise. So much emotion, so much build up.  

But now I know it really didn't add up to much in the end. 

Yeah I should probably approach the movies as their own thing, but I can't due to the emotional baggage and how they made it impossible by pretty much resetting everything to A Newer Hope.  The entire "restore balance to the Force" thing lasted a couple decades.  Apparently the Rebellion losing the first time would not have made a lot of difference.


----------



## Morrus

Majoru Oakheart said:


> You'd think so. But JJ Abrams doesn't much care about physics:
> 
> https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/111528/is-takodana-in-the-hosnian-system




I take what we see on screen over what a related map says. So the map is wrong. They’re in the same system: we saw it in the film.  No book changes what was right there on screen, and if it does, the book is wrong. 

They need better quality control or oversight over their licensed products!


----------



## Flexor the Mighty!

Scale and physics have never been a strong point of Star Wars plots.  Ship scale sure, but star systems and whatnot no.


----------



## Morrus

Flexor the Mighty! said:


> Scale and physics have never been a strong point of Star Wars plots.  Ship scale sure, but star systems and whatnot no.




By that logic we can’t believe anything we see on screen in case the back of some licensed toy packet contradicts it. 

I think we have to just believe what’s in the film. If we see Hosnia from outside Maz’s castle on screen, they’re in the same system. Licensed products which contradict what’s on screen are wrong.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart

Morrus said:


> I take what we see on screen over what a related map says. So the map is wrong. They’re in the same system: we saw it in the film.  No book changes what was right there on screen, and if it does, the book is wrong.
> 
> They need better quality control or oversight over their licensed products!




Heh. I get what you're saying. But in the movie they actually say that everything in the Hosnian system is destroyed. But they didn't blow up. Also, they watch the destruction from the Resistance base on D'Qar as well, which is also not in the Hosnian system. 

The novelization of the book makes it more clear that everything in the Hosnian system was destroyed and gives a line of dialogue to someone (Finn, I think) where they ask if it's that far away, how can they see it since it should take years for the light to reach them and they are told that the beam fired through Hyperspace, which is why it could reach the Hosnian system in so little time, even though Starkiller Base was across the galaxy. As a side effect, everyone could see the beam everywhere. 

JJ just used artistic licence to show a close up of the Hosnian system being destroyed even though no one was there to give the audience a sense of the destruction. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Morrus

Majoru Oakheart said:


> Heh. I get what you're saying. But in the movie they actually say that everything in the Hosnian system is destroyed. But they didn't blow up. Also, they watch the destruction from the Resistance base on D'Qar as well, which is also not in the Hosnian system.




Did they? Oh, well in that case the base is that system too. They need to really revise a lot of third party licensed products!


----------



## billd91

Morrus said:


> Did they? Oh, well in that case the base is that system too. They need to really revise a lot of third party licensed products!




Or we need to take Harrison Ford's advice. "Relax, kid. It ain't that kind of movie."


----------



## Morrus

billd91 said:


> Or we need to take Harrison Ford's advice. "Relax, kid. It ain't that kind of movie."




The kind of movie where you see something clearly on screen and some licensed product contradicts it?

I mean, I’m making the official Judge Dredd RPG. If I mistakenly say his first name is Boris in it, does that override what was seen in the actual comics?

I don’t think it’s unreasonable to take the position that what we saw in the film is what happened. Otherwise things just get silly.


----------



## billd91

Morrus said:


> The kind of movie where you see something clearly on screen and some licensed product contradicts it?
> 
> I mean, I’m making the official Judge Dredd RPG. If I mistakenly say his first name is Boris in it, does that override what was seen in the actual comics?
> 
> I don’t think it’s unreasonable to take the position that what we saw in the film is what happened. Otherwise things just get silly.




It's also not unreasonable to realize that JJ Abrams has no functional concept of astronomical distances*. We learned that with Star Trek: Into Darkness. We can choose, instead, to appreciate the movie for its visuals and style without assuming that the ability to see things in the sky means something about how far away they really are.


----------



## Morrus

billd91 said:


> It's also not unreasonable to realize that JJ Abrams has no functional concept of astronomical distances*. We learned that with Star Trek: Into Darkness. We can choose, instead, to appreciate the movie for its visuals and style without assuming that the ability to see things in the sky means something about how far away they really are.




But that’s far less fun!


----------



## Majoru Oakheart

Morrus said:


> The kind of movie where you see something clearly on screen and some licensed product contradicts it?
> 
> I mean, I’m making the official Judge Dredd RPG. If I mistakenly say his first name is Boris in it, does that override what was seen in the actual comics?
> 
> I don’t think it’s unreasonable to take the position that what we saw in the film is what happened. Otherwise things just get silly.




The movie literally contradicts itself. While looking up at the sky and seeing things blow up on two different planets someone says "The Hosnian system is completely destroyed. There's nothing left." That couldn't be true in they were IN the Hosnian system, they'd all be dead. Plus, one of those planets was the Resistance base they were trying to get to and the other one was the planet Han stopped at in order to switch ships before heading to the other one. 

It's not that the licensed products and the movie disagree. It's that what happens in the movie doesn't make any sense and isn't explained and you need the licensed products to even make sense of it. It is all explained so that it makes (some) sense in the books. It makes zero sense without them. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Flexor the Mighty!

billd91 said:


> It's also not unreasonable to realize that JJ Abrams has no functional concept of astronomical distances*. We learned that with Star Trek: Into Darkness. We can choose, instead, to appreciate the movie for its visuals and style without assuming that the ability to see things in the sky means something about how far away they really are.




That is along with what I was implying earlier,  GL had the same issue.  Scale of the galaxy was not his strong point.


----------



## Morrus

Majoru Oakheart said:


> T
> It's not that the licensed products and the movie disagree. It's that what happens in the movie doesn't make any sense and isn't explained and you need the licensed products to even make sense of it. It is all explained so that it makes (some) sense in the books. It makes zero sense without them.




But it does make sense. If those books weren’t around to confuse matters, the movie, by itself, makes perfect sense: they’re in the same system. No question. 

If those licensed products didn’t exist, we wouldn’t even be having this conversation; we’d all agree we’d clearly seen several planets in the same system. 

Those books don’t clear anything up - they confuse the matter by claiming they’re not in the same system, contrary to what we saw on screen, and justifying their dubious claim with some new technobabble.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart

Morrus said:


> But it does make sense. If those books weren’t around to confuse matters, the movie, by itself, makes perfect sense: they’re in the same system. No question.




No they don't, like I said, in the movie they are staring up in the sky saying "The Hosnian system is completely destroyed". If they were in that system, that would include them, so it means even the movie said they weren't in the Hosnian system. But they shouldn't be able to see the explosion if they aren't in the Hosnian system. The two things disagree with each other and just don't make sense.

The people I was with all walked out of the theater specifically discussing the fact that it didn't make sense. We talked about it on Facebook afterwards and none of us could come up with a reason for it. It wasn't until a friend of mine found people talking on a forum where someone posted an excerpt from the novelization that said that you could see the explosion at faster than light because...technobabble, that we all jointly agreed that the explanation was stupid, but at least we HAD an explanation.

As a side note, this issue about not explaining anything is my major beef with both the new movies. JJ Abrams likes to build his "mystery box". His philosophy on all his movies is to NOT explain anything on purpose.

For those people who haven't heard his theory: https://www.ted.com/talks/j_j_abrams_mystery_box

But basically, his idea is that if you set up the frame of a mystery but then never reveal the answer, the "inside" of the mystery box, then the audience will fill in the box with whatever they think the "best" answer is. If you give them an answer, there's a chance they won't like it. If you let them figure the answer out on their own, however, whatever they came up with is "right". As long as you never contradict them, they'll be happy that the movie gave them the answer they wanted...all the while not realizing that the answer was never given.

I really hate it as a movie making philosophy. It shows repeatedly in TFA.

For instance, somewhere(I think it was at a panel), JJ Abrams mentioned that it was their idea that the "map" to Skywalker was a map of Jedi temples that the Emperor had in the Imperial archives and that R2 had the map because he downloaded the entire Imperial archive when he interfaced with the Death Star. The Emperor either didn't have part of the map or purposefully removed part of it, which is why it was missing a piece.

Skywalker found the piece, didn't give it to anyone and then left to find The First Jedi Temple.

Someone asked him why they didn't put that information into the movie since a lot of people were confused as to where the map came from and exactly why there was a "map to Skywalker" in R2. He said that they didn't want to "get into it" in the movie since it wasn't really important and they wanted to keep the movie moving.

Of course, the article where that was located was the same place I learned that the entire plot of the first movie was written because they didn't want the movie to be about Luke.

They said that they had written 5 more drafts of the movie before the one that became TFA. One of JJ's primary goals was to give each and every old character a "proper entrance" since fans were going to want each one showing up to be a big deal. That's why R2 was "asleep". The original idea was the have C3-P0 and R2 show up simultaneously but they felt that was shortchanging R2 since he didn't get his own "awesome introduction".

However, the problem is that they wanted the movie to firmly focus on Rey and Finn and Kylo. They didn't want any of the old characters to "take over" the movie. It wasn't about them. They got awesome introductions, but then they needed to leave and get off the screen. In the other 5 drafts, they found that after Luke's introduction he would immediately take over the movie. He was the hero, not this Rey woman. So, no one would care about anything going on except what Luke was doing.

After 5 rewrites and trying to lessen the effect Luke had on the movie, they decided to scrap every last idea they had for the movie and instead get rid of Luke. They rewrote the plot so that Luke was missing and no one had any idea where he was...but there was a map to him. That's what everyone was after. That way Luke could have his "awesome introduction" but it would happen at the very end of the movie where it wouldn't overshadow anything else going on.

And I really get the impression that since this idea was added at the last minute...no one stopped to think about what to do with Luke after that.

I really do get the impression that they just gave RJ no information at all and said "Just write what you think happens next".


----------



## Morrus

Majoru Oakheart said:


> No they don't, like I said, in the movie they are staring up in the sky saying "The Hosnian system is completely destroyed". If they were in that system, that would include them, so it means even the movie said they weren't in the Hosnian system. But they shouldn't be able to see the explosion if they aren't in the Hosnian system. The two things disagree with each other and just don't make sense.




As I recall, you see the beam split and destroy a handful of moons of a gas giant, one of which is presumably Hosnia Prime; a Jovian system, rather than a solar system. Totally works without any need for any arcane inventions by licensed products. You don’t need to resort to that to make the movie work. What’s on screen is perfectly cromulent, and shows a single solar system. It’s right there! 

I mean, should I doubt that Han died? I mean, I saw it on screen, but I haven’t read every book, comic, or toy packaging. Does Vader wear black, or is there a book out there which says he really wears pink? 

I have to take what I see on screen at face value. Otherwise the act of film-watching becomes a homework chore. 

In the long run, I doubt Abrahms cares. But I’m happy to accept what I saw on screen.


----------



## pukunui

The thing about them watching the destruction of the Hosnian system from Takodana is one of the few things that irks me about TFA. The whole truncating of space seems to be a signature of JJ's, as he did it in the first Star Trek reboot too, where we see a flashback of old Spock watching Vulcan implode from that ice planet. Even if the ice planet had been in the Vulcan system, it wouldn't have loomed that large in the sky unless the ice planet was actually one of its moons, in which case it probably would've been sucked into the singularity created at the heart of Vulcan.

Going back to the TFA, if you look at the official Star Wars galaxy map, not only is Takodana halfway across the galaxy from the Hosnian system, in which case they shouldn't be able to see anything, it's also on the wrong side of the trajectory from SKB to Hosnian Prime (that is, the beam should've been going across the sky on Takodana in the other direction).


EDIT: This map hasn't got the Starkiller Base's final location on it (I can't seem to find the one I was thinking of), but it has got some interesting extras in the sidebars.






/rant


----------



## Morrus

Here’s Starkiller firing. This is what’s in the movie. A single beam fires, splits, and destroys a number of bodies in very close proximity to each other. The guys outside Maz’s castle see this in the sky. They’re very clearly in the same solar system, and Starkiller destroyed a bunch of moons around a gas giant.  It doesn’t need any weird hyperspace technobabble to explain it.

https://youtu.be/-HmWDdmTAE8


----------



## Morrus

pukunui said:


> Going back to the TFA, if you look at the official Star Wars galaxy map, not only is Takodana halfway across the galaxy from the Hosnian system, in which case they shouldn't be able to see anything, it's also on the wrong side of the trajectory from SKB to Hosnian Prime (that is, the beam should've been going across the sky on Takodana in the other direction).




Exactly. The map is clearly nonsense. The Lucasfilm licensing department is clearly not doing its oversight role properly.


----------



## pukunui

Morrus said:


> Exactly. The map is clearly nonsense. The Lucasfilm licensing department is clearly not doing its oversight role properly.



I think it's more that JJ Abrams doesn't care about how big space is, because he did a similar thing in Star Trek, as I pointed out.


----------



## Morrus

pukunui said:


> I think it's more that JJ Abrams doesn't care about how big space is, because he did a similar thing in Star Trek, as I pointed out.




He didn’t make that map. I doubt he ever saw it. He made his film; if the map contradicts it, the map is wrong, not the film.


----------



## pukunui

That's not the point. Even ignoring the map, it's ridiculous to think you can watch stuff happening elsewhere in space with your naked eyes. It's a signature JJ film-making technique that I find irksome and distracting.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart

Morrus said:


> As I recall, you see the beam split and destroy a handful of moons of a gas giant, one of which is presumably Hosnia Prime; a Jovian system, rather than a solar system. Totally works without any need for any arcane inventions by licensed products. You don’t need to resort to that to make the movie work. What’s on screen is perfectly cromulent, and shows a single solar system. It’s right there!




Wait...so your explanation is that Han decided to take the Falcon to visit his old friend, Maz in order to get a new ship so he could throw the First Order off his trail by getting a new ship. Maz's castle is apparently, located in the same solar system as the HQ of the Republic (the Hosnian system), but the Hosnian system isn't a solar system, it's a gas giant and its moons that everyone refers to as the "Hosnian System" even though every mention of a system until now has been about solar systems?

So, let's assume this is correct. Han went to this planet so that he wouldn't lead the First Order to the Resistance base they were heading to on D'Qar. However, your theory is that D'Qar is ALSO located in the same solar system as Hosnian Prime, the capital of the Republic. Wouldn't going to Takodana just lead them directly to the base since they've shown that scanners tend to be able to see everything within about a system before?

Then, when the First Order was bragging about how one shot from the Starkiller could destroy an entire system, they were just joking and it only destroys one gas giant an its moons, leaving both Takodana and D'Qar intact, since they were both in the same system? They didn't even experience debris or anything falling?

Shortly after, they start powering up Starkiller Base to take another shot, but this time at the "hidden Resistance base" on D'Qar. The Resistance has to move into action quickly to blow it up before it fires and kills them all. But why would this have to be a SECOND shot. It blows up system and it apparently fired at the Hosnian system, which D'Qar is in according to your theory.

That makes no sense at all. It seems like I'd have to jump through more hoops to accept that interpretation of the movie than just accepting the the information in Star Wars Battlefront 2, the Visual Guide to The Force Awakens, the official wiki, the official novelization of The Force Awakens, and everything else ever printed about it.

I think it's much simpler to think that Disney wouldn't put out a bunch of false information about their universe and that a movie maker decided to misunderstand physics for a better visual than it is to assume there's a grand conspiracy to cover up all of the planets being in the same system.


----------



## hawkeyefan

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> The advantage the EU has here is that it's actually telling the story of how the Republic builds and has to fight off the remains of the Empire. The writers are basicaly showing their work. The Happy Everafter is not quite that everafter, but they are showing us that their victory actually had consequences and they achieved something - but they have to keep fighting for it.
> 
> In TFA, we're just seeing it all dismantled already. They didn't show their work.
> Why wouldn't the story about how Kylo Ren turns and destroys the young new Jedi Order worth showing? Why isn't the story about how the First Order builts itself on the remains of the Empire worth showing? Because they couldn't figure out how to convincingly tell that story?




Or because those aren’t the stories they wanted to tell? Instead, those are parts of the backstory to the story they did want to tell.

Much like we didn’t know what the Clone Wars were, or what Obi Wan and Anakin had been up to prior to A New Hope. Every Star Wars movie starts in media res. They give you enough to tell the story. 

The EU kind of stuff is fine for fleshing things out or for expanding on things or telling ancillary stories. Some fans will want that stuff. But for others, they’re satisfied with the movie.


----------



## Morrus

Majoru Oakheart said:


> Wait...so your explanation is that Han decided to take the Falcon to visit his old friend, Maz in order to get a new ship so he could throw the First Order off his trail by getting a new ship. Maz's castle is apparently, located in the same solar system as the HQ of the Republic (the Hosnian system), but the Hosnian system isn't a solar system, it's a gas giant and its moons that everyone refers to as the "Hosnian System" even though every mention of a system until now has been about solar systems?




I won't quote your entire post, but that's a remarkably ineloquent way of making something incredibly simple sound complicated. Almost like you tried to! But yes, that is what was shown on screen. You might not *like* what they showed on screen, or prefer what some licensed products say instead, but there it is. I mean, watch that clip I posted above; it's right there.



> I think it's much simpler to think that Disney wouldn't put out a bunch of false information about their universe and that a movie maker decided to misunderstand physics for a better visual than it is to assume there's a grand conspiracy to cover up all of the planets being in the same system




"Grand conspiracy"? OK, the sarcasm is getting a little overbearing, don't you think? 

If you prefer the version in the licensed poducts to the one on screen, more power to you. Go for it! I honestly don't mind. I've made my thoughts clear, I think. I'm not going to just keep repeating them over and over. Nobody wants that.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart

hawkeyefan said:


> Or because those aren’t the stories they wanted to tell? Instead, those are parts of the backstory to the story they did want to tell.
> 
> Much like we didn’t know what the Clone Wars were, or what Obi Wan and Anakin had been up to prior to A New Hope. Every Star Wars movie starts in media res. They give you enough to tell the story.




To be fair, the reason they started with "Episode 4" wasn't because that was Lucas' vision. He said that it was because the stuff he wanted to do with Episodes 1-3 required special effects that weren't quite able to be performed yet. So he started with Episode 4 since he felt those movies would be easier to do, with the intention of doing 1-3 later in order to fill in the details.

He didn't start in media res just because.


----------



## hawkeyefan

wicked cool said:


> Watched a Kevin Smith review last night of last jedi. Hes less angry than Angry Joe but he di bring up the fact that Luke calls his lightsaber a lazer sword
> 
> I get the fact that hey Luke cant outshine the new hero and its time to move on blah blah blah.
> 
> However was this movie really marketed to 3 year olds? No in fact it was marketed as an Empire Strikes back killer or as good as. Star wars was huge in the 70's and 80's. I asked my kids and its not even a blip in the schools. You could say well old timer kids are different today and my kids schools are talking about it. That is total crap. Avengers, Wonderwoman, Stranger things, Riverdale etc were/are hot topics. Star Wars has lost some of its luster basically due to the fact that theres crappy directing and crappy storyline with shallow/awful characters such as jar jar, Poe etc. Disney basically poured a ton of love into a so/so comic hero Iron Man with a washed up older actor (he was in his 40's with an old guy as the villain) and then built it into a giant franchise. I would bet that if John Favreau had directed Star wars that it would be doing much better.
> 
> forget the 70-80's nostalgia. If this movie got released against avengers it would get destroyed. Heck I bet the greatest showman and Jumanji could really hurt ticket sales




I don’t know if that’s true or not. And we’ll never find out since Disney wouldn’t have Avengers and Star Wars compete. But even if they did....so what? What’s with this competition angle you’re bringing up?

That the new Star Wars isn’t the best movie franchise in the modern era? It’s subjective. And the market is different today than it was in the late 70s early 80s. Just the fact that TV can compete with movies is a pretty recent phenomenon. And Netflix is a game changer.

We could just as easily say that if the original trilogy came out today, they wouldn’t perform as well as they had.

It’s an apples to oranges kind of comparison.


----------



## Morrus

pukunui said:


> That's not the point. Even ignoring the map, it's ridiculous to think you can watch stuff happening elsewhere in space with your naked eyes. It's a signature JJ film-making technique that I find irksome and distracting.




I can see Mars, Jupiter, and Venus easily with my naked eye. If one of them were to violently explode, I'm pretty sure we'd all be able to see it, as long as it was in the sky at the time.


----------



## hawkeyefan

Majoru Oakheart said:


> That's not the same character I remember at all. It isn't just that he has flaws now, it's that every single trait that defined him in the other movies was gone. He failed, then he repeated his failure over and over again during this movie by rejecting Rey and the rest of the galaxy and feeling sorry for himself.
> 
> The fact that he shows up at the very end feels hollow because of how long it took for him to get to that point, and the fact that his decision really doesn't end up making much of a difference at all. Sure, he let them escape, but he could have saved everyone and stopped this years ago if he hadn't given up.




I would agree that he is not the same character we remember. A lot has happened to him in the time between Return of the Jedi and now. And that’s just what we know. What we’re shown is a loss of devastating scope. I think anyone who chooses not to acknowledge how that would affect a person and instead expected them to be who they were before the event...I don’t know. It’s much easier to do that with fictional characters. It’s also much easier of saying that they are acting out of character. 

So I can understand that someone may not like the route they chose to go with him. But I think they established what they needed to for that route.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart

Morrus said:


> I won't quote your entire post, but that's a remarkably ineloquent way of making something incredibly simple sound complicated. Almost like you tried to! But yes, that is what was shown on screen. You might not *like* what they showed on screen, or prefer what some licensed products say instead, but there it is. I mean, watch that clip I posted above; it's right there.




I saw it blow up a bunch of planets. How does that prove they are in the same system? They looked up and saw the beam but there could be one of a thousand explanations for them seeing it that doesn't involve them being in the same system. Like the explanation they give in the novel. You've latched on to one theory (one that is never stated in the movie) and decided it is true.

I pointed out about 10 logical inconsistencies in your theory. Your response to that is "*shrug*"?

Here's what I know from the movie:
-Starkiller base destroys star systems
-Starkiller base fires and they show multiple planets blowing up
-People on Takodana look up and see the beam
-People on D'Qar look up and see the beam
-General Hux says that they've successfully destroyed the Republic capital system, the Hosnian system and wiped out its fleet
-Someone tells Leia that they can't get a hold of the Hosnian System(which makes no sense if they are IN the Hosnian system), that it's wiped out. It's all gone. The Republic is gone.
-The people on D'Qar and Takodana are perfectly safe.

All of that makes perfect sense if neither D'Qar or Takodana is in the Hosnian system. It make no sense at all if they are in the same system. The ONLY thing that points to them being in the same system is that they saw the beam in the sky.


----------



## hawkeyefan

Majoru Oakheart said:


> To be fair, the reason they started with "Episode 4" wasn't because that was Lucas' vision. He said that it was because the stuff he wanted to do with Episodes 1-3 required special effects that weren't quite able to be performed yet. So he started with Episode 4 since he felt those movies would be easier to do, with the intention of doing 1-3 later in order to fill in the details.
> 
> He didn't start in media res just because.




Putting aside the fact that I’ve heard varying reasons on why he started with part 4, the fact remains that every episode begins in media res. Each of them have a scroll in the beginning that explains recent events, even Episode I. It’s a good chunk of the backstory given out up front. 

And that’s what Luke’s Jedi academy and Kylo’s fall is....backstory. It helps define and shape the events in this movie, but is not the focus of the story.


----------



## pukunui

Morrus said:


> I can see Mars, Jupiter, and Venus easily with my naked eye. If one of them were to violently explode, I'm pretty sure we'd all be able to see it, as long as it was in the sky at the time.



Not with this much detail:







If Delta Vega really was that close to Vulcan, then it would've suffered some serious consequences. This scene would've been fine if they'd given Spock a telescope or other form of viewing screen.


----------



## billd91

Majoru Oakheart said:


> To be fair, the reason they started with "Episode 4" wasn't because that was Lucas' vision. He said that it was because the stuff he wanted to do with Episodes 1-3 required special effects that weren't quite able to be performed yet. So he started with Episode 4 since he felt those movies would be easier to do, with the intention of doing 1-3 later in order to fill in the details.
> 
> He didn't start in media res just because.




If that's coming from George Lucas, it's BS. He has a bad habit of revising and revising and revising his own history with respect to his intentions with Star Wars and padding it with significance as if it were all planned. Based on some of his earliest discussions, he *did* start in media res intentionally because he wanted to do an homage to the serial movies of Flash Gordon and others like that. He wanted it to feel like it was part of an ongoing story and we were just seeing a portion of it. What he didn't have was a story arc telling us the saga of Anakin Skywalker or any plan for special effects for Episodes 1-3 that he couldn't accomplish with the technology of the time so he started with Episode 4. That's pure Lucas revisionism BS.


----------



## Water Bob

Majoru Oakheart said:


> The movie never said, but I got the impression from it that the beam destroyed other systems two. The beam splits into many pieces and seems to hit multiple systems.




Actually, it hit just one system, the Hosnian Prime system, but it hits multiple targets within that one system--Hosnian Prime and its moons, mostly.


----------



## Water Bob

Does anyone have TLJ Visual Dictionary?  I've just heard that there's info in it about Snoke....that would lead you to believe that he will be in Episode IX.

Hm....


----------



## pukunui

Water Bob said:


> Actually, it hit just one system, the Hosnian Prime system, but it hits multiple targets within that one system--Hosnian Prime and its moons, mostly.



I believe they are meant to be all the different planets in the Hosnian system, but you'd be forgiven for thinking they were one planet plus a bunch of moons, given their visual proximity.



Water Bob said:


> Does anyone have TLJ Visual Dictionary?  I've just heard that there's info in it about Snoke....that would lead you to believe that he will be in Episode IX.



Interesting. I haven't got it myself, but I've read about some things that are in it.


----------



## Morrus

Majoru Oakheart said:


> You've latched on to one theory (one that is never stated in the movie) and decided it is true.




Wait, we're now saying that things we know to be true in real life only apply in Star Wars if stated in the movie? Our inability to see planets in other star systems isn't valid because it isn't stated in the movie?



> I pointed out about 10 logical inconsistencies in your theory. Your response to that is "*shrug*"?




Because your "10 logical inconsistencies" are one thing, phrased 10 different ways, and I've answered it over and over and over again.  You keep writing essays saying the exact same thing.

But hey, you drew me back in. Like I said, you can think what you want. It's fine. I know what I think.


----------



## Water Bob

Let's not forget that Star Wars is Space Opera, not hard science fiction.  It has the hard science respect of Flash Gordon.  Boom, Boom!  Bam, Bam!  Zip-zip!  Zoom-Zoom!

We're talking giant space slugs that live on airless asteroids, inside asteroid belts that are impossibly crowded.

We're talking starships that are as big as cities in space, or even small moons, or even, entire rogue planets that are weaponized and can suck the power away from a star.

This is a world of BIG DAMN HEROES with laser swords, and MEAN, MERCILESS BAD GUYS with fanatical armies.  Light vs. Dark.  Good vs. Bad.

All told in a swashbuckling, rip-roaring, hold-on-to-the-seat-of-your-pants-Fred style!

STAR WARS!


----------



## Maxperson

So I finally saw the movie yesterday.  My major complaint is that other than killing off more main characters to make room for the new generation of heroes and villains, the plot was in almost the same spot at the end of the movie as it was at the beginning of the movie.  We still have big bad evil guys chasing small remnants of the rebels.  It was an entertaining movie, but nothing much happened.

The plot holes were pretty sizable, but I really didn't mind them so much.  I did wonder why Rey didn't just let go of the light saber and flip it on.  Sure it would have gone 4 more inches to Kylo's hand, but all that would have done was move the blade that went through his heart another 4 inches out of his back.  Ah, well.  Opportunity lost.


----------



## Maxperson

Water Bob said:


> Not really a plot hole, but more of a quandary.  The Force Projection of Luke walks into the base from the "secret" rear opening, and that's what leads Poe and the rest to go searching for that other way out, unseen by the First Order.
> 
> The escaping Rebels didn't know that Luke was a Force Projection--they were  escaping, and none of them saw him disappear.
> 
> So....if he was a Force Projection, he really didn't need an opening to walk through.  He could have just appeared, walking up from the darkness of the cave.  Yet, it is a coincidence that there is a secret rear opening--that all the Rebels assume Luke used (at least until they find it closed by the rock slide)--when the Force Projection really had nothing to do with the rear entrance.
> 
> Of course, there's the crystal coyotes, too.




Or else he did come of the darkness of the cave and they just assumed he had to have come in another way.  It's a good assumption with the rebels not being aware of Luke being a projection.


----------



## Maxperson

pukunui said:


> I didn't mind those ones as much as when Holdo says "Godspeed". There's never any mention of a god in the Star Wars universe, so that seems super out of place. It's always the Force.




Sure there is.  C3PO was mistake by the Ewoks as their god, so we know they exist in the galaxy.



> I don't think Rose is dead. At the end, when Finn gets the blanket, I think he would've covered her whole body if she was dead. Instead, he just puts the blanket on her like he's trying to keep her warm.




He also calls for a medic.



> But he survived being cut in half and dropped down a reactor core! If Maul can survive that, then surely a more powerful dark side user like Snoke can too! He's clearly survived some pretty horrible injuries in the past (unless they're just meant to be the side-effects of his dark side use).




I agree.  Looking a Snoke during the movie, he looks burned and scarred.  He also has mannerisms and uses phrases very similar to one Palpatine, so I thought perhaps he could be the Emperor who survived his fall into the reactor.  He may even have gone to the far regions to recover.


----------



## Maxperson

epithet said:


> That's just asinine.
> 
> First, they didn't become "people with failures blah blah blah," they become failures. Their new characterizations are defined by their failures, and their past successes have been rendered inconsequential, and dismissed. Leia is a leader, and failed. Luke is a Jedi, and failed. Han is the pilot of the Millennium Falcon, who was elevated by his love for Leia. He failed. They all failed utterly at the very thing for which they became iconic. There's a huge difference between humanizing a character and destroying it.
> 
> Secondly, no one looks to Star Wars for nuanced depictions of people with complex personalities. Star Wars is an epic fight of good versus evil, just like The Lord of the Rings. I don't open a Tolkien book to explore the misery of pipeweed addiction, and I don't go to a Star Wars movie to watch a fallen hero wallow in self pity. The Star Wars story is unabashedly and unapologetically an interpretation of "the hero's journey" as an epic space fantasy. You can change that to be a dramatic exploration of human foibles, but that takes the story out of the realm of science fiction/fantasy and recommends it for a much lower budget. Besides, no one seems to feel like Rey needs to "become [a person] with failures, setbacks, and foibles," that kind of crap is reserved for the heroes introduced by George Lucas.
> 
> I've been neck-deep in adulthood long enough to appreciate my escapist treats.




As much as I agree with you about the destruction of the old generation of heroes, Rey does suffer failures and setbacks.  She suffers a setback when she fails to convince Luke to train her and has to steal the books in order to learn, and she suffers another setback when she fails to bring Kylo back to the light side.  

If she was this Mary Sue people keep talking about, she would have succeeded in having Luke train her, and then brought Kylo to the light side, which actually would have been cool.  The two of them could have faced off against Snoke in the third movie.


----------



## Maxperson

MarkB said:


> Snoke's dead, baby. Snoke's dead.




Whatever your Snoking man, I want some.


----------



## Water Bob

As much as I like TLJ, there is a big part of me who wanted to see the original Trilogy characters win.  What Disney did was reboot the main conflict from the original trilogy.  Instead of Rebels vs. Empire, we've got Resistance vs. First Order.  Mainly the same, with a few chrome changes, like next year's model of car.

I would have liked to have seen Leia as a head of state.  Han, her husband, running something underground intelligence through his old smuggler contacts.  Luke, a Jedi Master shepherding other Jedi.  And Lando, rich, owning something or other just outside of New Republic space.  Then, the First Order raises its ugly head and proves that it is more than just one of the thousands of small militant political groups that abound in the galaxy.  

Instead, we see Leia, back with a Rebellion type organization--still and underdog because the New Republic does not formally recognize the Resistance.  Han and Chewie go back to their smuggling roots, just like in the original trilogy.  And, Luke, after a failed attempt, goes off to die, hiding on some forgotten world.

I can see why Disney went the way it did.  First, the prequels were about the Emperor, the heads of state, the creme of the Jedi Order.  So, we'd had a decade of those films.

And, then, there's the EU...decades of comics and novels, the majority of which is focused on Leia as head of state, Han, her husband, doing Republic business.  Luke, the Jedi Master and head of the New Order of Jedi Knights.  And, Lando, rich and owning something just outside of New Republic space.

It has been a long time since the films reflected the feeling of the original trilogy.  And, after all, the conflict--thus, the drama--resides with the battle, not the aftermath.

So, now, we have First Order vs. Resistance.



One thing I will say, though, about the new direction of the Star Wars stories.  *I really have no idea of what to expect about the next movie.  I'm totally clueless.

That's probably the highest compliment I can give a Rian, because he got us there.*


----------



## Maxperson

Water Bob said:


> As much as I like TLJ, there is a big part of me who wanted to see the original Trilogy characters win.  What Disney did was reboot the main conflict from the original trilogy.  Instead of Rebels vs. Empire, we've got Resistance vs. First Order.  Mainly the same, with a few chrome changes, like next year's model of car.




They didn't even have to win.  Luke could have died fighting and killing Snoke, or any number of other ways to heroically sacrifice himself.  Having a heart attack or whatever after a force projection was a disappointment.  Pass the torch off, don't incinerate the torch.


----------



## Water Bob

The Fuel Thing


I'm reading the third Marvel Poe Dameron Volume, and Fuel, and the Resistance's lack there of it, is central to the plot.

It's interesting how they worked into the last story the way the First Order found to limit the Resistance's supply.

For those that game in the Star Wars universe, or for those that just like to know details:  Fuel comes in more than one type.  There's Tibanna Gas (not sure if this is to "fuel" turbo lasers or another use for the gas, as we already know it is used for plasma ammo for blasters and turbo lasers), Rydonium, and Hypermatter.

It doesn't say, but that seems like Tibanna Gas (Fuel for turbo lasers), Rydonium (Fuel for sub-light drives), and Hypermatter (Fuel for the Hyperdrive).  Just a guess by yours truly.   :wink2:


----------



## Water Bob

Maxperson said:


> They didn't even have to win.  Luke could have died fighting and killing Snoke, or any number of other ways to heroically sacrifice himself.  Having a heart attack or whatever after a force projection was a disappointment.  Pass the torch off, don't incinerate the torch.




Hollywood is having a hard time killng off our heroes.  I always think an icon should go out, well, heroically.  

Captain Kirk, in Generations....Kirk should have died in the Captain's seat, commanding a ship, sacrificing himself for the greater good.

Han Solo should have gone out...better.  Maybe if they'd done it in the second movie, after we've had time to get to know and digest Ben/Kylo Ren.  Then, he killing his own father would have more resonance.

And, Luke...while I'm OK with it, I think it could have been a lot more heroic.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart

Water Bob said:


> Actually, it hit just one system, the Hosnian Prime system, but it hits multiple targets within that one system--Hosnian Prime and its moons, mostly.




According to the official information, it destroyed 5 planets in the Hosnian system (all 5 that were in the system) as well as all of the ships in the entire system. The novelization explains that there were Republic bases on 2 of the other planets in the system and they (along with the ships in orbit there) were destroyed as well.

Inside the movie it's difficult to tell exactly what is destroyed since they only show a quick shot of a couple planets being hit but don't show the whole thing. In the novelization, it is explained that when the planets exploded large pieces of the scatter throughout the system, smashing through the fleet and the other planets, destroying them all.

I recognize that all the official information says they only destroyed one system. The reason I thought they killed more than one was because I figured with the distance they were away from the beam, they still saw it split into pieces and blow up at different times. I figured even with the conceit that they could somehow see the beams from lightyears away, that means each beam stopped at a different system. Now I know that the beam splitting was just another side effect of "They can see the beam"

Pablo Hidalgo, the Star Wars canon guy at Disney tweeted out an explanation for it, but then he deleted his tweet later. It has some bad language but the explanation is given here: https://scifi.stackexchange.com/que...am-visible-from-takodana-in-the-force-awakens


----------



## Majoru Oakheart

billd91 said:


> If that's coming from George Lucas, it's BS. He has a bad habit of revising and revising and revising his own history with respect to his intentions with Star Wars and padding it with significance as if it were all planned. Based on some of his earliest discussions, he *did* start in media res intentionally because he wanted to do an homage to the serial movies of Flash Gordon and others like that. He wanted it to feel like it was part of an ongoing story and we were just seeing a portion of it. What he didn't have was a story arc telling us the saga of Anakin Skywalker or any plan for special effects for Episodes 1-3 that he couldn't accomplish with the technology of the time so he started with Episode 4. That's pure Lucas revisionism BS.



It came from a speech given to us by Pablo Hidalgo, the current canon/lore guy for Star Wars at Disney. He worked for Lucasfilm for many, many years.

He was at a convention around 1997-1998. It was just before Episode 1 had come out. One of the people in the crowd asked about why they started with episode 4 and what he told us was that what George had told him was that he had a basic outline of episodes 1-3 and 4-6 and that he felt the story of 4-6 was smaller and easier to film since it would require less special effects and that 1-3 was written in a way that it could act as a background for the other movies after they were released so he made the decision to start with those first. Since episode 1 was already announced and coming out soon, Pablo also said that the reason they were making the other movies now and the reason it took 20 years was that he felt technology had finally caught up with his vision and he could finally make what he saw in his head.

I asked him, since I had heard at the time that Lucas had written an outline for 9 movies, not 6, what about the other 3 movies? Pablo told us that Lucas had originally written an outline for 1-9 but that over the filming of 4-6 and due to thinking for a long time about it, he had decided that the theme of Star Wars wasn't Good vs Evil like he originally thought it was but was instead about the rise and fall of Anakin Skywalker. So his ideas for 7-9 no longer fit the theme he was going for and therefore didn't need to be made any longer. Though he said that George had an idea that COULD be made into a new 7-9 that fit his new theme but that he wasn't thinking about it right now since they still had 1-3 to make.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart

Morrus said:


> Wait, we're now saying that things we know to be true in real life only apply in Star Wars if stated in the movie? Our inability to see planets in other star systems isn't valid because it isn't stated in the movie?




Yes. I'm saying a large number of things in the movie don't follow real world logic. A lightsaber can't work the way it is described, hyperspace isn't really a thing, there is no sound in space, and so on. Most of the physics in the movie are just nonsense. It's been like that for a while. Lucas even used parsec as a measurement for speed and an explanation had to be given in books for that to make any sense...but it was just covering up for poor understanding of physics and artistic license by the filmmakers.

I wish it wasn't like that, but we kind of have to go in with a healthy sense of "Did that really happen exactly that way or the the filmmakers really want to show us a cool explosion so even though an explosion shouldn't be able to happen...it does anyways?"

Pretty much if we look at something and think "Huh...that doesn't make much sense the way it is explained to us" then we have to assume there is another explanation they just haven't given us or the movie is just wrong.

3 of us walked out of the theatre saying "They were on a planet too far away to see the beam. That doesn't make any sense. How did they see that beam?" and no one could come up with an answer for it. The 3 of us were positive that the planet they were on was very far away since they had established that through a lot of other dialog (everyone died in the Hosnian system, they didn't die...they weren't in the Hosnian system). So, we were left with 2 conflicting things the movie told us: They were super far away and yet they saw the beam in the sky which physics tells us is impossible. So, we just walked out confused and frustrated that the movie told us 2 different things. However, most of us were willing to bet that given Star Wars' (and especially JJ Abrams') history with fudging physics for storytelling, that it's likely they just wanted our heroes to see the explosion in the sky and react to it, physics be damned.

When we found out later that the novel and the official lorekeeper, Pablo Hidalgo had both answered the question with "weird hyperspace rip" that could be seen everywhere in the galaxy, we shrugged and figured it was a retroactive attempt to explain poor filmmaking.



Morrus said:


> Because your "10 logical inconsistencies" are one thing, phrased 10 different ways, and I've answered it over and over and over again.  You keep writing essays saying the exact same thing.
> 
> But hey, you drew me back in. Like I said, you can think what you want. It's fine. I know what I think.



That's because you never responded to any of them at all. You didn't explain why all the logical inconsistencies don't matter.

This conversation could be summarized as:
You: "They have to be in the same system, you couldn't see it in the sky otherwise"
Me: "But the lore people at Lucasfilm say that the planets are super far apart and even give an explanation as to why you can see the beam so far away."
You: "None of that matters since it isn't in the movie. They have to be in the same system, you couldn't see it in the sky otherwise."
Me: "Fine. But the movie pretty much says they aren't in the same system. Multiple times. Plus if they were in the same system, the entire plot wouldn't make sense. How do you respond to that?"
You: "But they have to be in the same system, you couldn't see it in the sky otherwise."

There's one piece of evidence that says they are in the same system and about 20 pieces that they aren't.


----------



## Morrus

Majoru Oakheart said:


> Yes. I'm saying a large number of things in the movie don't follow real world logic. A lightsaber can't work the way it is described, hyperspace isn't really a thing, there is no sound in space, and so on. Most of the physics in the movie are just nonsense. It's been like that for a while. Lucas even used parsec as a measurement for speed and an explanation had to be given in books for that to make any sense...but it was just covering up for poor understanding of physics and artistic license by the filmmakers.
> 
> I wish it wasn't like that, but we kind of have to go in with a healthy sense of "Did that really happen exactly that way or the the filmmakers really want to show us a cool explosion so even though an explosion shouldn't be able to happen...it does anyways?"
> 
> Pretty much if we look at something and think "Huh...that doesn't make much sense the way it is explained to us" then we have to assume there is another explanation they just haven't given us or the movie is just wrong.
> 
> 3 of us walked out of the theatre saying "They were on a planet too far away to see the beam. That doesn't make any sense. How did they see that beam?" and no one could come up with an answer for it. The 3 of us were positive that the planet they were on was very far away since they had established that through a lot of other dialog (everyone died in the Hosnian system, they didn't die...they weren't in the Hosnian system). So, we were left with 2 conflicting things the movie told us: They were super far away and yet they saw the beam in the sky which physics tells us is impossible. So, we just walked out confused and frustrated that the movie told us 2 different things. However, most of us were willing to bet that given Star Wars' (and especially JJ Abrams') history with fudging physics for storytelling, that it's likely they just wanted our heroes to see the explosion in the sky and react to it, physics be damned.
> 
> When we found out later that the novel and the official lorekeeper, Pablo Hidalgo had both answered the question with "weird hyperspace rip" that could be seen everywhere in the galaxy, we shrugged and figured it was a retroactive attempt to explain poor filmmaking.
> 
> 
> That's because you never responded to any of them at all. You didn't explain why all the logical inconsistencies don't matter.
> 
> This conversation could be summarized as:
> You: "They have to be in the same system, you couldn't see it in the sky otherwise"
> Me: "But the lore people at Lucasfilm say that the planets are super far apart and even give an explanation as to why you can see the beam so far away."
> You: "None of that matters since it isn't in the movie. They have to be in the same system, you couldn't see it in the sky otherwise."
> Me: "Fine. But the movie pretty much says they aren't in the same system. Multiple times. Plus if they were in the same system, the entire plot wouldn't make sense. How do you respond to that?"
> You: "But they have to be in the same system, you couldn't see it in the sky otherwise."
> 
> There's one piece of evidence that says they are in the same system and about 20 pieces that they aren't.




I don’t know whether you’re unable to understand my point or you’re being deliberately obtuse, but I’m done.


----------



## Morrus

Majoru Oakheart said:


> Yes. I'm saying a large number of things in the movie don't follow real world logic. A lightsaber can't work the way it is described, hyperspace isn't really a thing, there is no sound in space, and so on. Most of the physics in the movie are just nonsense. It's been like that for a while. Lucas even used parsec as a measurement for speed and an explanation had to be given in books for that to make any sense...but it was just covering up for poor understanding of physics and artistic license by the filmmakers.
> 
> I wish it wasn't like that, but we kind of have to go in with a healthy sense of "Did that really happen exactly that way or the the filmmakers really want to show us a cool explosion so even though an explosion shouldn't be able to happen...it does anyways?"
> 
> Pretty much if we look at something and think "Huh...that doesn't make much sense the way it is explained to us" then we have to assume there is another explanation they just haven't given us or the movie is just wrong.
> 
> 3 of us walked out of the theatre saying "They were on a planet too far away to see the beam. That doesn't make any sense. How did they see that beam?" and no one could come up with an answer for it. The 3 of us were positive that the planet they were on was very far away since they had established that through a lot of other dialog (everyone died in the Hosnian system, they didn't die...they weren't in the Hosnian system). So, we were left with 2 conflicting things the movie told us: They were super far away and yet they saw the beam in the sky which physics tells us is impossible. So, we just walked out confused and frustrated that the movie told us 2 different things. However, most of us were willing to bet that given Star Wars' (and especially JJ Abrams') history with fudging physics for storytelling, that it's likely they just wanted our heroes to see the explosion in the sky and react to it, physics be damned.
> 
> When we found out later that the novel and the official lorekeeper, Pablo Hidalgo had both answered the question with "weird hyperspace rip" that could be seen everywhere in the galaxy, we shrugged and figured it was a retroactive attempt to explain poor filmmaking.
> 
> 
> That's because you never responded to any of them at all. You didn't explain why all the logical inconsistencies don't matter.
> 
> This conversation could be summarized as:
> You: "They have to be in the same system, you couldn't see it in the sky otherwise"
> Me: "But the lore people at Lucasfilm say that the planets are super far apart and even give an explanation as to why you can see the beam so far away."
> You: "None of that matters since it isn't in the movie. They have to be in the same system, you couldn't see it in the sky otherwise."
> Me: "Fine. But the movie pretty much says they aren't in the same system. Multiple times. Plus if they were in the same system, the entire plot wouldn't make sense. How do you respond to that?"
> You: "But they have to be in the same system, you couldn't see it in the sky otherwise."
> 
> There's one piece of evidence that says they are in the same system and about 20 pieces that they aren't.




I don’t know whether you’re unable to understand my point or you’re being deliberately obtuse, and you’re completely mischaracterising the conversation. You’re not debating in good faith. I’m done.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart

Morrus said:


> I don’t know whether you’re unable to understand my point or you’re being deliberately obtuse, and you’re completely mischaracterising the conversation. You’re not debating in good faith. I’m done.




I apologize if I mischaracterized your argument. I really thought that's what you were saying. It was good talking with you, however.


----------



## hopeless

My head canon is that Starkiller Base is so called because when it draws power from the system's sun it devastates anything passing between it and the sun it's drawing power from.
They used the Holo Network to advertise their horrifying act but Finn did hear those screams before they were able to watch the devastation.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

So ... like it or not, we have The Last Jedi. Where to from here for Episode IX?

I have this sense that the series has written itself into a box at this point that it will be hard to get out of (or ... gasp ... requires more than one movie).


So the state of the universe appears to be:

(1) There are about 20 people left in the Resistance, all loaded on the Millennium Falcon. Fleet, fighters, transports ... gone.

(2) The Republic's capital is dead, and their entire military is destroyed.

(3) The First Order is taking over, though we don't actually see it, and it doesn't seem like they have that much with which to take over the galaxy.

(4) The Resistance's allies have not come to their aid.

(5) We have one untrained Force User against a trained-but-unstable Kylo (and presumably the Knights of Ren).

Goal: Rebuild the Resistance/Republic, beat back the First Order, restore peace and justice to the Old New Republic (tm).

How do you do it?


----------



## hopeless

The Doctor turns up witnesses that travesty of a movie travels back and slaps Luke before he enters Ben's bedroom telling him to grow up!

Then for good measure he visits whoever wrote that script and rewrites it before asking UNIT to tell Disney to cut the crap!


----------



## pukunui

Maxperson said:


> Sure there is.  C3PO was mistake by the Ewoks as their god, so we know they exist in the galaxy.



I'd forgotten that it is against C3-PO's programming to impersonate a deity. Thanks for reminding me. That said, the term "Godspeed" still rubs me the wrong way. It just doesn't feel like something someone in the GFFA would say.



> He also calls for a medic.



That too. [Although I thought he was calling for a medpack the first time I saw it.]



> I agree.  Looking a Snoke during the movie, he looks burned and scarred.  He also has mannerisms and uses phrases very similar to one Palpatine, so I thought perhaps he could be the Emperor who survived his fall into the reactor.  He may even have gone to the far regions to recover.



I don't think Snoke is Palpatine. For one thing, Snoke is taller, and he is described in multiple places as being an alien, meaning he's not human. Yes, that could be obfuscation, but still ... I'm fairly certain he is someone different. I also am not convinced that his "injuries" are wound scars. They could just be a side effect from his over-reliance on the dark side of the Force. We'll have to wait and see if LucasFilm ever actually reveals the backstory they've finally developed for him.



hopeless said:


> My head canon is that Starkiller Base is so called because when it draws power from the system's sun it devastates anything passing between it and the sun it's drawing power from.



I thought it was called "Starkiller" because it kills stars in order to power its weapon. [As an aside, another of my pet peeves is when Finn says it "uses the power of the sun". It would be more appropriate to say it draws its power from "a star".]



Olgar Shiverstone said:


> Goal: Rebuild the Resistance/Republic, beat back the First Order, restore peace and justice to the Old New Republic (tm).
> 
> How do you do it?



Well, according to Leia, they have everything they need right there. One can only presume she is referring to: a rust-bucket of a ship infested with porgs, a handful of gung-ho rebels, a fledgling Jedi with a broken lightsaber, and plenty of hope. 

Of course, there's also that Force-wielding slave kid on Cantonica who has Rose's Rebel Alliance ring. Maybe he's the next Anakin ...




On a different note: one implication of Rey's backstory being that she was "sold for drinking money" is that she was, at some point, Unkar Plutt's slave. But she doesn't appear to be his slave when we meet her in TFA. Sure, she's beholden to him for food, but there's no indication that he owns her or that she owes him anything. She just appears to be someone who sells him scavenged starship parts in order to survive (and who dreads the thought of still living that way when she's old and wrinkled ...).


----------



## hopeless

Or it turns out Kylo has a twin sister whose not force sensitive but more than capable of kicking Kylo's backside.

Her name?

Ania Solo!


----------



## Derren

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> So ... like it or not, we have The Last Jedi. Where to from here for Episode IX?
> 
> I have this sense that the series has written itself into a box at this point that it will be hard to get out of (or ... gasp ... requires more than one movie).
> 
> 
> So the state of the universe appears to be:
> 
> (1) There are about 20 people left in the Resistance, all loaded on the Millennium Falcon. Fleet, fighters, transports ... gone.
> 
> (2) The Republic's capital is dead, and their entire military is destroyed.
> 
> (3) The First Order is taking over, though we don't actually see it, and it doesn't seem like they have that much with which to take over the galaxy.
> 
> (4) The Resistance's allies have not come to their aid.
> 
> (5) We have one untrained Force User against a trained-but-unstable Kylo (and presumably the Knights of Ren).
> 
> Goal: Rebuild the Resistance/Republic, beat back the First Order, restore peace and justice to the Old New Republic (tm).
> 
> How do you do it?




As force ghosts can still use lightning Ghostluke simply fries Kylo.
Or the first order wants to conquer the first planet with their few ships but gets soundly beaten by a few hundered hastily build starfighters and whatever the planet bought from all the weapon traders in the casino.

Or Episode 9 plays 20 years later with the stableboy becoming the protagonist and we basically have another remake from episode 4.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> Goal: Rebuild the Resistance/Republic, beat back the First Order, restore peace and justice to the Old New Republic (tm).
> 
> How do you do it?




This could be a fun exercise. My first thought is that if you want me to predict what is going to happen in the next movie I just need to imagine where it LOOKS like it is going and just assume it'll do the opposite of that, given the history in this movie.

What it looks like it going to happen is that the movie picks up years later. During that time, Rey has been reading her stolen Jedi books and is now much more powerful in the Force and has found a small group of Jedi to train. She has built herself a lightsaber staff of some sort. The Resistance has been making guerrilla style hit and run attacks on the First Order, each attack they've made has grown their legend. They've convinced hundreds of new people to join their cause. They are just about ready to make a final strike against the First Order. They have to worry about Kylo Red, however, who has also grown in power. But Rey is ready to face him. They lure out Kylo's flagship into a trap and attack. While the ships are distracted, Rey sneaks aboard and takes care of Kylo while her apprentices deal with the Knights of Ren. They win the battle and the rest of the First Order retreats back into the Unknown Region with Snoke's OTHER apprentice so they can become the Second Order for episodes 10-12.

Since that's what I now expect to happen, I can assume that what will happen is instead that the movie picks back up 30 seconds after the last movie. Rey hasn't had time to read any books but she's suddenly become a lot more powerful in the Force anyways. Snoke stands up immediately and says "Very good apprentice, you killed me, just like I wanted you to. Now you have given yourself fully to the Dark Side." Kylo says "Well, if I can't kill you, I'm giving up on this Dark Side thing. I only wanted to be in charge. If you can't kill the past, then what's the point?" He then joins the Resistance who immediately attack the First Order and blow up their fleet using just the Millenium Falcon. Snoke then remotely grabs everyone inside the Falcon and slams them against the ceiling and floor repeatedly until they are jelly. End of Star Wars.


----------



## billd91

Water Bob said:


> And, Luke...while I'm OK with it, I think it could have been a lot more heroic.




He bamboozled Kylo Ren and the attacking First Order force long thoroughly enough and long enough for the last remnants of the Resistance to get away so they could rebuild and fight another day. That's pretty effing heroic.


----------



## billd91

pukunui said:


> I'd forgotten that it is against C3-PO's programming to impersonate a deity. Thanks for reminding me. That said, the term "Godspeed" still rubs me the wrong way. It just doesn't feel like something someone in the GFFA would say.




I don't think it's any weirder than Han telling a rebel officer he'll see him in Hell just before he rides out on a tauntaun.


----------



## billd91

Majoru Oakheart said:


> It came from a speech given to us by Pablo Hidalgo, the current canon/lore guy for Star Wars at Disney. He worked for Lucasfilm for many, many years.
> 
> He was at a convention around 1997-1998. It was just before Episode 1 had come out. One of the people in the crowd asked about why they started with episode 4 and what he told us was that what George had told him was that he had a basic outline of episodes 1-3 and 4-6 and that he felt the story of 4-6 was smaller and easier to film since it would require less special effects and that 1-3 was written in a way that it could act as a background for the other movies after they were released so he made the decision to start with those first. Since episode 1 was already announced and coming out soon, Pablo also said that the reason they were making the other movies now and the reason it took 20 years was that he felt technology had finally caught up with his vision and he could finally make what he saw in his head.
> 
> I asked him, since I had heard at the time that Lucas had written an outline for 9 movies, not 6, what about the other 3 movies? Pablo told us that Lucas had originally written an outline for 1-9 but that over the filming of 4-6 and due to thinking for a long time about it, he had decided that the theme of Star Wars wasn't Good vs Evil like he originally thought it was but was instead about the rise and fall of Anakin Skywalker. So his ideas for 7-9 no longer fit the theme he was going for and therefore didn't need to be made any longer. Though he said that George had an idea that COULD be made into a new 7-9 that fit his new theme but that he wasn't thinking about it right now since they still had 1-3 to make.




I don't doubt that Pablo Hidalgo gave you the company line, perhaps he even believed it. But knowing the literature that was coming out at the time of A New Hope and that an earlier set of proposed prequels involved one detailing the slide of Obi-Wan's apprentice to the Dark Side culminating in the duel that leaves Vader scarred and another detailing Han's pre-Star Wars life, I'm pretty certain that any story Lucas tells about how the whole 9 episodes would be any form of contiguous story arc including the prequels he actually produced is a such a whopper that a 50 lb salt lick isn't a big enough grain of salt to take with it.


----------



## Water Bob

billd91 said:


> I don't think it's any weirder than Han telling a rebel officer he'll see him in Hell just before he rides out on a tauntaun.




Maybe the General believes in a different religion other than The Force, one where there is a deity.


----------



## billd91

Morrus said:


> But it does make sense. If those books weren’t around to confuse matters, the movie, by itself, makes perfect sense: they’re in the same system. No question.
> 
> If those licensed products didn’t exist, we wouldn’t even be having this conversation; we’d all agree we’d clearly seen several planets in the same system.




No, I don't think we would. I still think a lot of us would be shaking our heads and saying "JJ Abrams doesn't know anything about astronomy. The visuals are cool, though."


----------



## pukunui

billd91 said:


> I don't think it's any weirder than Han telling a rebel officer he'll see him in Hell just before he rides out on a tauntaun.



True. I forgot about that line too. 



billd91 said:


> ... I'm pretty certain that any story Lucas tells about how the whole 9 episodes would be any form of contiguous story arc including the prequels he actually produced is a such a whopper that a 50 lb salt lick isn't a big enough grain of salt to take with it.



Indeed. GL and LucasFilm are hardly paragons of consistency.



Water Bob said:


> Maybe the General believes in a different religion other than The Force, one where there is a deity.



Maybe, but she could also just be repeating what the captain of the medical frigate said as his ship was blowing up. Maybe it's just the way Laura Dern says the line that rubs me the wrong way.



billd91 said:


> No, I don't think we would. I still think a lot of us would be shaking our heads and saying "JJ Abrams doesn't know anything about astronomy. The visuals are cool, though."



Exactly. I wasn't aware of any of the licensed products when I went to see TFA for the first time, and my first thought was definitely *not* "Oh, the planet Han et al are on must be in the same system as the Republic". It was "Oh dear, JJ Abrams is at it again, just like with Star Trek. He really doesn't care about how big space is, does he?"

Later on, when I saw the extra licensed products, like the official map, my thought was, "That makes it even worse!"


----------



## Majoru Oakheart

billd91 said:


> He bamboozled Kylo Ren and the attacking First Order force long thoroughly enough and long enough for the last remnants of the Resistance to get away so they could rebuild and fight another day. That's pretty effing heroic.



I think he took too long to be heroic. He could have left with Rey and actually faced them in person. But he had to be smacked in the head by Yoda and have his tree burnt before he changed his mind and actually decided to help.

If he had went in person, he might have been able to save more people than he did. But he waited to the very last second and then showed up only in a form where he couldn't be hurt. He had already resigned himself to dying, so it wasn't really a sacrifice. The movie isn't even really clear as to whether the strain was so much on him that he was already dying and decided to vanish or if he helped them and was going to live, but then chose to die anyways just so he wouldn't be around anymore to mess up any more movies.

It is said that sometimes it takes more courage to live than to kill yourself. Luke shows he is a coward.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart

billd91 said:


> I don't doubt that Pablo Hidalgo gave you the company line, perhaps he even believed it. But knowing the literature that was coming out at the time of A New Hope and that an earlier set of proposed prequels involved one detailing the slide of Obi-Wan's apprentice to the Dark Side culminating in the duel that leaves Vader scarred and another detailing Han's pre-Star Wars life, I'm pretty certain that any story Lucas tells about how the whole 9 episodes would be any form of contiguous story arc including the prequels he actually produced is a such a whopper that a 50 lb salt lick isn't a big enough grain of salt to take with it.




Well, I did get the impression that he was trying not to say some things he wasn't allowed to. I came away thinking that what he actually MEANT was that George Lucas had a VERY loose outline for 1-3 that pretty much just said "Clone Wars, Anakin Skywalker falls to the dark side. Then he fights with Obi-Wan over lava and falls in." (that last part I saw on Usenet threads as early as 1994 due to an article published back in 1977 (https://www.rollingstone.com/movies/news/the-wizard-of-star-wars-20120504?page=9) where Lucas said: 

"Vader kills Luke's father, then Ben and Vader have a confrontation, just like they have in Star Wars, and Ben almost kills Vader. As a matter of fact, he falls into a volcanic pit and gets fried and is one destroyed being. That's why he has to wear the suit with a mask, because it's a breathing mask. It's like a walking iron lung. His face is all horrible inside. I was going to shoot a close-up of Vader where you could see the inside of his face, but then we said, no, no, it would destroy the mystique of the whole thing."

I don't think he had much more planned than those events. At that time, Vader and Luke's Father were different people and Lucas only changed his mind between ANH and ESB. Still, I think it shows that the idea that there was a plan for a basic outline of what happened even that far back.

Though I really did get the impression that the outline was changed heavily in order to agree with Lucas' new thinking on the themes.


----------



## trappedslider

I bet the whole parsec line also rubs some of you the wrong way......god i swear sometimes i'm ashamed to be part of this fandom.


----------



## Maxperson

Water Bob said:


> Maybe the General believes in a different religion other than The Force, one where there is a deity.




The more I think about it, the more references I see.  Moff Tarkin tells Vader that he's the last of his religion, strongly implying that there are others out there.


----------



## pukunui

Majoru Oakheart said:


> "... I was going to shoot a close-up of Vader where you could see the inside of his face, but then we said, no, no, it would destroy the mystique of the whole thing."



That's how I felt about the prequels when they first came out. I remember thinking at the time that I would've preferred to leave Vader's backstory to the imagination. I've gotten used to the prequels now, though, and I find myself wanting to know Snoke's backstory, so ... take from that what you will, I guess.


On a side note, I've thought about the way Luke is portrayed in TLJ, and as someone who has suffered from depression, I can only say that, given the circumstances, I don't think Luke's behavior is really that incomprehensible (or out of character). For one thing, he's no longer the spunky youngster he was in the OT. For another, he'd allowed himself to believe he was as infallible as the stories made him out to be, so when his world literally came crashing down around him, it would've been devastating. And because he not only cut himself off from the Force but also from everyone who cared about him by running away and hiding, he had no one to bring him out of that depressing sphere he'd put himself in. No Han to talk him out of it, no Leia to kick some sense into him, no Yoda to make fun of him ... I know what it's like to be all alone with just the thoughts in your own head.

It's not at all surprising to me that when Rey finds Luke, he's a defeated man who just wants to die. I've been there. And I don't think it takes him "too long" to claw his way out of that pit. 

Also, once he reconnects with the Force again, he can see into the future. How do we know he didn't see that appearing on Crait would be the most efficient way to help the Resistance? What difference could he have made by appearing as a Force projection in Snoke's throne room? How could he have saved more people when the Resistance was still out in space?

Honestly, having seen this movie three times now, I would have to say that it's biggest flaw is not the way it portrays Luke. It's the way it portrays Leia, and I'm not just talking about the ridiculous flying through space bit.* She's fought the good fight all her life, without ever giving up hope, and where does it get her? Instead of going out with a bang like Luke, she's just going to fade away, her star dimming as Poe's rises to take its place.



*The more I think about it, the more ridiculous it gets. Despite being blown out of the bridge, she appears to be floating without moving when she revives ... yet, if that were to be the case, then the _Raddus_ would've had to have come to a complete stop as well, otherwise it would've left her far, far behind since it's supposedly traveling at full sub-light throttle. Yes, she was moving along with the _Raddus_ when she got sucked out, so perhaps she was just continuing to move at the same speed as her ship? But then the explosive decompression had to have accelerated her movement, so shouldn't she be moving *faster* than the _Raddus_? I dunno. It does my head in ...




Maxperson said:


> The more I think about it, the more references I see.  Moff Tarkin tells Vader that he's the last of his religion, strongly implying that there are others out there.



There are plenty of references to other religions and spiritual philosophies in the EU, and Disney's been sneaking a few into the movies and cartoons, but the vast majority still seem to be centered around the Force in some form or another (eg. the Dathomiri witches' magic is just a weird way of using the Force). There's very little mention of deities in Star Wars lore.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart

pukunui said:


> On a side note, I've thought about the way Luke is portrayed in TLJ, and as someone who has suffered from depression, I can only say that, given the circumstances, I don't think Luke's behavior is really that incomprehensible (or out of character). For one thing, he's no longer the spunky youngster he was in the OT. For another, he'd allowed himself to believe he was as infallible as the stories made him out to be, so when his world literally came crashing down around him, it would've been devastating. And because he not only cut himself off from the Force but also from everyone who cared about him by running away and hiding, he had no one to bring him out of that depressing sphere he'd put himself in. No Han to talk him out of it, no Leia to kick some sense into him, no Yoda to make fun of him ... I know what it's like to be all alone with just the thoughts in your own head.
> 
> It's not at all surprising to me that when Rey finds Luke, he's a defeated man who just wants to die. I've been there. And I don't think it takes him "too long" to claw his way out of that pit.




The problem is that I don't want Luke to be just another person who gets caught up in depression. I want the Jedi to be larger than life heroes. I think of them as the Holy Paladins. The ones chosen by the Force to be better than everyone else. They stand up for right. I think of them the same way I do Superman.

No one worries about Superman succumbing to depression and taking a day off. Part of his character is that he is above that, he's dependable. He's stronger than normal people.

That's how I view Luke. As a larger than life figure who doesn't have to worry about the problems of normal people. He's above that. He sees the future, he knows the will of the Force, which is destiny and luck itself. I could see him temporarily falling into a bit of a funk. But the full blown depression we got just seemed like the sort of thing that shouldn't affect Luke. As Luke himself said, he had become a Legend. To me and to a lot of other people. Legends don't get brought down by mundane things.

Of course, that's the point this movie is trying to make. People made him out to be a Legend. But he wasn't one, he was just a normal person who happened to have the Force. The movie was a message directly to people like me that said "You take this too seriously. We don't. Get used to it."



pukunui said:


> Also, once he reconnects with the Force again, he can see into the future. How do we know he didn't see that appearing on Crait would be the most efficient way to help the Resistance? What difference could he have made by appearing as a Force projection in Snoke's throne room? How could he have saved more people when the Resistance was still out in space?



I didn't want him to become a Force projection. I wanted him to get into his X-Wing and blow up a bunch of ships, then to face Kylo in real life and beat him back so he was forced to retreat. I then wanted Luke to survive until the next movie so that he could finally teach Rey properly and actually pass on what he had learned, like Yoda told him to.

I wanted the story that started in the previous movies to find an actual ending.


----------



## pukunui

Majoru Oakheart said:


> Of course, that's the point this movie is trying to make. People made him out to be a Legend. But he wasn't one, he was just a normal person who happened to have the Force. The movie was a message directly to people like me that said "You take this too seriously. We don't. Get used to it."



Exactly.



> I wanted the story that started in the previous movies to find an actual ending.



I'm sorry the movie didn't live up to your expectations. It didn't live up to mine either, but upon repeat viewings, I found myself liking it anyway (except for that one bit, but I shall refrain from continuing to harp on it ...).

I still think I like TFA and Rogue One better than TLJ, but TLJ is certainly better than TPM or AotC. I'd probably rank it equal with RotS. But I honestly haven't figured out an exact ranking for each of the movies. ESB is up there at the top, but so is TFA and Rogue One. AotC is at the bottom, with TPM just above it. And the others are all sort of mixed up in the middle. ESB has always been my personal favourite, although Rogue One is now giving it a good run for its money, but I couldn't tell you whether I like ANH or RotJ better. They're probably above RotS, which is the best of a bad bunch.

But I'm going to go out on a limb and say that it's entirely possible I like TFA more than ANH. I *know* the former is very obviously a rehash of the latter, but that has never bothered me. TFA is fresh, whereas ANH is starting to look more than a little dated these days. (ESB and RotJ hold up better to my eyes.)


----------



## cbwjm

I saw TFA the other week and I loved it. I'm a huge star wars fan but I don't myself get stuck in the nostalgia of the original trilogy. That's not to say that I thought the movie was perfect but I still thought it was a good addition to the series.

Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app


----------



## hawkeyefan

Majoru Oakheart said:


> That's how I view Luke. As a larger than life figure who doesn't have to worry about the problems of normal people. He's above that. He sees the future, he knows the will of the Force, which is destiny and luck itself. I could see him temporarily falling into a bit of a funk. But the full blown depression we got just seemed like the sort of thing that shouldn't affect Luke. As Luke himself said, he had become a Legend. To me and to a lot of other people. Legends don't get brought down by mundane things.
> 
> Of course, that's the point this movie is trying to make. People made him out to be a Legend. But he wasn't one, he was just a normal person who happened to have the Force. The movie was a message directly to people like me that said "You take this too seriously. We don't. Get used to it."




That’s an incredibly specific message. It’s also a pessimistic and slightly entitled view. 

I took it as far more general. There are no such people as you describe. There are no people beyond the worries of man. There are those that when faced with such worries, rise above and achieve. And the great thing is that this is within all of us. We can all do it. We don’t need the Force or Invulnerability in order to overcome. No matter how dark things get...no matter how much we might fail...we can still achieve greatness. 

Kind of fits in line with a lot of the rest of the movie. I can see how you didn’t like it...you don’t seem to accept the message.


----------



## MoonSong

*I knew long ago that there was no way I was going to be able to watch it on the opening weekend, so I did the best thing for myself under the circumstance. I refused to watch the trailers, stopped using facebook and would only watch youtube channels that I was certain would never ever mention the movie. That way I had no preconceptions, no hype and no spoilers, only so I could watch it with truly fresh eyes. 

I've got to say, I like it. It is entertaining, fun and has a deep message that resonates with me. I can't believe people actually hate this movie. I mean there is a couple of obvious issues:
1) This one completely runs over the OT, it throws a lot of things people loved about it under the bus. In a way it renders the victories of the previous movies moot.
2) Luke looks and acts on a strange way, slightly out of character from what we last saw him. 

Of course, both those issues have been there since the Force Awakens, they were so obvious from day one. And I enjoyed the Force Awakens despite these problems -and on top of it throwing all prequels under the bus-. The movies still work and are fun to watch. There is so much sense in the way they work. And porgs, porgs are super cute, I love porgs, I want one for Christmas! *


----------



## trappedslider

MoonSong said:


> * I want one for Christmas! *





Who doesn't?


----------



## Maxperson

trappedslider said:


> Who doesn't?




Chewbacca.


----------



## Raith5

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> So ... like it or not, we have The Last Jedi. Where to from here for Episode IX?
> 
> I have this sense that the series has written itself into a box at this point that it will be hard to get out of (or ... gasp ... requires more than one movie).
> 
> 
> So the state of the universe appears to be:
> 
> (1) There are about 20 people left in the Resistance, all loaded on the Millennium Falcon. Fleet, fighters, transports ... gone.
> 
> (2) The Republic's capital is dead, and their entire military is destroyed.
> 
> (3) The First Order is taking over, though we don't actually see it, and it doesn't seem like they have that much with which to take over the galaxy.
> 
> (4) The Resistance's allies have not come to their aid.
> 
> (5) We have one untrained Force User against a trained-but-unstable Kylo (and presumably the Knights of Ren).
> 
> Goal: Rebuild the Resistance/Republic, beat back the First Order, restore peace and justice to the Old New Republic (tm).
> 
> How do you do it?








This is an option -  (I saw this image on twitter).


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Luke's force projection was a nice way of him remaining true to what he said about not going to leave the planet. He technically didn't.
I did not expect him to die from it, but it was kinda hinted at by Kylo saying that the projection that connected him and Rey would kill Rey if she had done it herself.

One of my expectations however was that Poe would end up on Luke's planet, and after having lost his own X-Wing, he would take Luke's. Of course, that might still happen in some way.


----------



## hopeless

Makes me wonder what if Ackbar persuaded Leia to don a Vacc Suit and when the bridge was hit her helmet was ruptured forcing Ackbar to swap hers for his own sacrificing himself rather than that idiotic sequence they showed?

A suitable heroic ending for a character and given they're in the middle of a space battle why wouldn't they be using Vacc suits?!


----------



## Raith5

I thought that the Last Jedi was a mess. I knew the end of luke skywalker's story was coming - and I wanted it to come to end - but it was done in such clumsy, wishy washy fashion which contradicted the original stories. That is Luke is now a coward who finally decides to skype in, Leia who starts out with republic but two films later can fit the whole resistance in the Millennium Falcon, chewy/R2D2/C3PO did less to push the story along than the Porgs (which were great btw). Surely you can build a new series without hollowing out this legacy?

Aside from the lack of engagement with this legacy, and the lack of continuity with the Force Awakens (so many dropped story lines), I just didnt enjoy it as film. Sure, it had great moments and great ideas but then it had moments I found really distracting (suddenly space fuel is a thing, bombs in space, space Leia doing the mary poppins thing, the whole casino story line, hyperdrives as a weapon, etc). How did a film with this budget get beyond the story board phase?  

It is the only SW film where I regularly check my watch and I wondered if Star Trek fan club is still taking applicants.


----------



## Imaculata

Nothing brings me more joy than seeing people on the internet complain about social justice warriors after seeing a movie. And it truly was a joy to see such varied representation in this movie, with a lot of female pilots too. 

But after seeing the movie, I still have mixed feelings about it. Surprisingly, the deconstruction of the Force and iconic characters from the original trilogy, is what I take the least issue with. These were actually welcome additions to the movie. Its good that they shake things up, and I was genuinly intrigued by the movie's take on the Force. They gave us something new, and constantly defy audience expectation.

But the story was uneven, lots of scenes ultimately don't go anywhere (no pay off), several jokes fall flat, and the editing is occasionally a bit jarring. Some scenes go on too long, or they cut back to something we've already seen, with no real progression of the story. And then some other scenes end too abruptly, and do not allow the scene to settle with the audience (which you need).

This movie has a lot of pacing and editing problems. Plus this not only is a long movie, but it FEELS long. After the whole casino and space race bit, I remembered from the trailer that surely there's still an entire battle on the planet krait with AT-AT's that is supposed to happen. And I honestly thought to myself, how much longer is this going to be? I'm fine with movies that are a bit longer. Sometimes you are so drawn into a movie, that time flies by, and you don't even notice the length. But due to some serious pacing problems during the second act, you really notice that it drags on.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

trappedslider said:


> I bet the whole parsec line also rubs some of you the wrong way......god i swear sometimes i'm ashamed to be part of this fandom.




Well, you see, there are these black holes near Kessel, and ...


----------



## hawkeyefan

So I’m not sure why Rian Johnson gets the blame for “destroying Luke” or whatever...it was very clearly established in The Force Awakens that Luke had a rogue student who destroyed his academy and then he quit...just walked away from it all. Han explains this to Finn and Rey in the Falcon in the Force Awakens.

So The Last Jedi was just going with what had been established. Not sure why people angry about this take on Luke are directing it at Johnson amd The Last Jedi.

Why did people seemingly go into this movie expecting something other than what Han explained?


----------



## hopeless

The more I hear about this the more I'm left wondering if Disney had Rian increase the amount of time involving Luke and Rey at the cost of ruining his actual planned storyline?

The Resistance are on the run, Finn is sent to infiltrate a First Order base to locate and disable whatever the FO are using to track them.

So they hide within say an asteroid belt waiting out the FO fleet forcing them to send in fighters almost killing Leia in a surprise attack.

We see glimpses of Rey's training they reveal Rey was clearly raised by a Jedi survivor explaining her prodigious abilities making it clear it was Finn who awakened in TFA not Rey!

Finn accompanied by a group of 2-4 specforces operatives making it clear he's their to advise not take centre stage.
The whole thing however is a trap set for Finn, the whole DJ betraying them is actually to help smuggle in Rose & BB-8 so they can complete the mission and hopefully rescue Finn.

They use Finn to draw out Rey ala ESB, but Finn escapes on his own.

Rose secures the ship they need to escape on, BB-8 sabotages the Supremacy whilst Finn helps rescue Rey demonstrating his fight with Kylo wasn't a one off.

Kylo kills Snoke caught unawares by the realisation that Finn was the one he felt awaken.

Can't help wondering what his original story would have been?


----------



## Maxperson

hawkeyefan said:


> So I’m not sure why Rian Johnson gets the blame for “destroying Luke” or whatever...it was very clearly established in The Force Awakens that Luke had a rogue student who destroyed his academy and then he quit...just walked away from it all. Han explains this to Finn and Rey in the Falcon in the Force Awakens.
> 
> So The Last Jedi was just going with what had been established. Not sure why people angry about this take on Luke are directing it at Johnson amd The Last Jedi.
> 
> Why did people seemingly go into this movie expecting something other than what Han explained?




It's pretty easy to see why Johnson is getting the blame.  While it was established in The Force Awakens, it wasn't really visible until The Last Jedi.  Humanity tends to be near sighted and blames what it can see, not necessarily the cause of what it can see.


----------



## hawkeyefan

Maxperson said:


> It's pretty easy to see why Johnson is getting the blame.  While it was established in The Force Awakens, it wasn't really visible until The Last Jedi.  Humanity tends to be near sighted and blames what it can see, not necessarily the cause of what it can see.




Just seems very odd to me. Folks seem mad at this movie for using what TFA established, and for NOT using things that fans speculated about after TFA. 

I would have expected anyone that had such strong expectations about this movie wouldn’t ignore what had actually been established.


----------



## Joker

Some things may have been established in TFA but there was no plan or outline for what was going to happen after. This comes from JJ Abrahms and Rian Johnson themselves. It seems to me JJ wanted to make a good intro movie for the trilogy with enough plothooks for the next director to work with. He came from making Lost with Lindenhoff so he knows how to throw a lot of interesting things in the mix which may or may not lead to anything.
I don't really remember the original trilogy so I could care less about Luke. But I can understand people getting mad at Rian for writing Luke the way he did in The Last Jedi.


----------



## Thomas Bowman

Raith5 said:


> I thought that the Last Jedi was a mess. I knew the end of luke skywalker's story was coming - and I wanted it to come to end - but it was done in such clumsy, wishy washy fashion which contradicted the original stories. That is Luke is now a coward who finally decides to skype in, Leia who starts out with republic but two films later can fit the whole resistance in the Millennium Falcon, chewy/R2D2/C3PO did less to push the story along than the Porgs (which were great btw). Surely you can build a new series without hollowing out this legacy?
> 
> Aside from the lack of engagement with this legacy, and the lack of continuity with the Force Awakens (so many dropped story lines), I just didnt enjoy it as film. Sure, it had great moments and great ideas but then it had moments I found really distracting (suddenly space fuel is a thing, bombs in space, space Leia doing the mary poppins thing, the whole casino story line, hyperdrives as a weapon, etc). How did a film with this budget get beyond the story board phase?
> 
> It is the only SW film where I regularly check my watch and I wondered if Star Trek fan club is still taking applicants.




They should have brought in Thrawn!







You tell me, who is the better villain? Thrawn would never have relied on some silly think like the Starkiller Base. I hear is still part of the movie continuity, he might show up for Episode IX.


----------



## MoonSong

Imaculata said:


> Nothing brings me more joy than seeing people on the internet complain about social justice warriors after seeing a movie. And it truly was a joy to see such varied representation in this movie, with a lot of female pilots too.



*I think some people just project at each and every chance they get. None of the female characters felt gratuitous, their presence made sense and made the world more organic.
*


> But after seeing the movie, I still have mixed feelings about it. Surprisingly, the deconstruction of the Force and iconic characters from the original trilogy, is what I take the least issue with. These were actually welcome additions to the movie. Its good that they shake things up, and I was genuinly intrigued by the movie's take on the Force. They gave us something new, and constantly defy audience expectation.



*
Yes the deconstruction was welcome and the best part of the movie.*


> But the story was uneven, lots of scenes ultimately don't go anywhere (no pay off), several jokes fall flat, and the editing is occasionally a bit jarring. Some scenes go on too long, or they cut back to something we've already seen, with no real progression of the story. And then some other scenes end too abruptly, and do not allow the scene to settle with the audience (which you need).



*
Lots of minor problems with edition. I was anxious half the time. Though I disagree on the humor, a lot of the jokes are way funnier in the dub or are erased if not needed. VAs in my country do magic. *


> This movie has a lot of pacing and editing problems. Plus this not only is a long movie, but it FEELS long. After the whole casino and space race bit, I remembered from the trailer that surely there's still an entire battle on the planet krait with AT-AT's that is supposed to happen. And I honestly thought to myself, how much longer is this going to be? I'm fine with movies that are a bit longer. Sometimes you are so drawn into a movie, that time flies by, and you don't even notice the length. But due to some serious pacing problems during the second act, you really notice that it drags on.




*One of the benefits of avoiding trailers, I didn't know what expect and I just allowed myself to follow the flow of the movie. Only by the last act I got to think back and notice "wow, this feels like a miniseries and I'm watching the season end". 
*


Water Bob said:


> I'm going a second time.  Can't wait to buy the DVD, too.




*I don't think I'd go twice to the theater to see the same movie. But I'm eager to get the Blueray as soon as it's out.*


----------



## Mallus

I’m still processing TLJ after seeing it on Friday afternoon. Right now my reaction is this:

Mark Hamill should get an Oscar nomination for playing Luke Skywalker - a sentence I never thought I would write, except maybe in jest. Best Picture & Best Director nods would not be out of the question.

TFA is the more enjoyable film, TLJ is the better one. Best since the original.


----------



## cbwjm

Imaculata said:


> Nothing brings me more joy than seeing people on the internet complain about social justice warriors after seeing a movie. And it truly was a joy to see such varied representation in this movie, with a lot of female pilots too.
> 
> But after seeing the movie, I still have mixed feelings about it. Surprisingly, the deconstruction of the Force and iconic characters from the original trilogy, is what I take the least issue with. These were actually welcome additions to the movie. Its good that they shake things up, and I was genuinly intrigued by the movie's take on the Force. They gave us something new, and constantly defy audience expectation.
> 
> But the story was uneven, lots of scenes ultimately don't go anywhere (no pay off), several jokes fall flat, and the editing is occasionally a bit jarring. Some scenes go on too long, or they cut back to something we've already seen, with no real progression of the story. And then some other scenes end too abruptly, and do not allow the scene to settle with the audience (which you need).
> 
> This movie has a lot of pacing and editing problems. Plus this not only is a long movie, but it FEELS long. After the whole casino and space race bit, I remembered from the trailer that surely there's still an entire battle on the planet krait with AT-AT's that is supposed to happen. And I honestly thought to myself, how much longer is this going to be? I'm fine with movies that are a bit longer. Sometimes you are so drawn into a movie, that time flies by, and you don't even notice the length. But due to some serious pacing problems during the second act, you really notice that it drags on.



I had a different feeling when watching. I didn't notice how long the movie was at all. At no point when watching did I wonder when the movie was going to finish because I was just so caught up in it.

Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app


----------



## Raith5

hawkeyefan said:


> So I’m not sure why Rian Johnson gets the blame for “destroying Luke” or whatever...it was very clearly established in The Force Awakens that Luke had a rogue student who destroyed his academy and then he quit...just walked away from it all. Han explains this to Finn and Rey in the Falcon in the Force Awakens.
> 
> So The Last Jedi was just going with what had been established. Not sure why people angry about this take on Luke are directing it at Johnson amd The Last Jedi.
> 
> Why did people seemingly go into this movie expecting something other than what Han explained?




Because Hero's come back? Luke cut himself off from the force, he had no idea what was happening but after Rey came to him and even after using the hologram he still moaned. And aside from the deviations from his character in the original series,  it set up a problem for most of the Last Jedi (and probably the next film): if Luke doesnt care about the resistance, why should we?

From a storyline point of view he was always going to die in this film, I just found the whole last minute illusion thing it to be too little too late and therefore an unsatisfying end.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Raith5 said:


> Because Hero's come back? Luke cut himself off from the force, he had no idea what was happening but after Rey came to him and even after using the hologram he still moaned. And aside from the deviations from his character in the original series,  it set up a problem for most of the Last Jedi (and probably the next film): if Luke doesnt care about the resistance, why should we?
> 
> From a storyline point of view he was always going to die in this film, I just found the whole last minute illusion thing it to be too little too late and therefore an unsatisfying end.



Deviations... from his character?

You mean the one who whined all the time, so much it was a oft commented on at the time?  Or the one who quit trying after he failed to lift the X-wing?  Or the one that gave into the dark side and maimed his father, the one he was trying to save, before pulling back at the end, you know, _after_ the moment of weaknes? 

Goodness, I have no idea where this concept of Luke you guys seem to have came from (maybe the books?), but the actions Luke takes in the OT are not those of the hero you seem to idolize.


----------



## reelo

Ovinomancer said:


> Deviations... from his character?
> 
> You mean the one who whined all the time, so much it was a oft commented on at the time?  Or the one who quit trying after he failed to lift the X-wing?  Or the one that gave into the dark side and maimed his father, the one he was trying to save, before pulling back at the end, you know, _after_ the moment of weaknes?
> 
> Goodness, I have no idea where this concept of Luke you guys seem to have came from (maybe the books?), but the actions Luke takes in the OT are not those of the hero you seem to idolize.



Yup, I have a feeling that Luke, infaillible hero, is mainly a trope in the old books.

Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app


----------



## hopeless

The problem is that without revealing Luke had re-established his academy thereby insuring Rey has someone to complete her training and help her counter Kylo all of this is for nothing!

Just revealing Luke wasn't dying for nothing, would that have hurt the movie?

As it stands is there anything that indicates Luke's force ghost can complete her training even after supposedly killing himself pulling off that stunt?

Sometimes less is more, but seriously why demonstrate super Leia when you could have her rescued by say Admiral Ackbar who sacrifices himself in the process?

Luke wasn't the only one they didn't treat properly so let's not forget that in our haste to claim this is all about Luke ok?


----------



## JoeElf

One thing I don't get is how Holdo goes out in a blaze of glory of self-sacrifice to let the Resistance escape, yet Finn's attempt to take down the big blaster at the end had to be aborted, less he do something somehow immoral, like sacrifice oneself for the greater good?  At the time, no one had any idea Luke's image would come and save them all.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

hawkeyefan said:


> So I’m not sure why Rian Johnson gets the blame for “destroying Luke” or whatever...it was very clearly established in The Force Awakens that Luke had a rogue student who destroyed his academy and then he quit...just walked away from it all. Han explains this to Finn and Rey in the Falcon in the Force Awakens.
> 
> So The Last Jedi was just going with what had been established. Not sure why people angry about this take on Luke are directing it at Johnson amd The Last Jedi.
> 
> Why did people seemingly go into this movie expecting something other than what Han explained?




True, I think a lot of issues brought up here are not about this movie, but actually what TFA already established. I some areas, one might have hoped or expected that the next movie might "fix" things, or give more satisfying explanations, where it seems mostly to gloss over questions raised by TFA.


----------



## billd91

JoeElf said:


> One thing I don't get is how Holdo goes out in a blaze of glory of self-sacrifice to let the Resistance escape, yet Finn's attempt to take down the big blaster at the end had to be aborted, less he do something somehow immoral, like sacrifice oneself for the greater good?  At the time, no one had any idea Luke's image would come and save them all.




It wasn’t a question of morality. But Finn’s story isn’t Holdo’s story. Nor was it anyone’s story to be what Rose is to Finn.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Majoru Oakheart said:


> You'd think so. But JJ Abrams doesn't much care about physics:
> 
> https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/111528/is-takodana-in-the-hosnian-system
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk




To be fair, neither did/does Lucas.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Morrus said:


> But it does make sense. If those books weren’t around to confuse matters, the movie, by itself, makes perfect sense: they’re in the same system. No question.
> 
> If those licensed products didn’t exist, we wouldn’t even be having this conversation; we’d all agree we’d clearly seen several planets in the same system.
> 
> Those books don’t clear anything up - they confuse the matter by claiming they’re not in the same system, contrary to what we saw on screen, and justifying their dubious claim with some new technobabble.




Nah, the movie clearly shows one or more neighboring systems getting blown up. If not for the books, we’d clearly know that each beam hit a system, not a planet. 

Also, in TLJ, doesn’t the crawl say that the New Order has swept in after the destruction of the main Republic fleet and taken over? 

I feel like these debates always forget stuff that’s in the crawl.


----------



## Morrus

doctorbadwolf said:


> Nah, the movie clearly shows one or more neighboring systems getting blown up. If not for the books, we’d clearly know that each beam hit a system, not a planet.




Nah, if you watch the clip again (I posted it above) you can see exactly what it shows. It’s only a few seconds of footage. You see the beam split, then in the same shot hits a handful of planets, all of which are in the frame at the same time, next to each other. They’re not just in the same system, they’re so close that they can only be moons of the same planet.


----------



## Eltab

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> Goal: Rebuild the Resistance/Republic, beat back the First Order, restore peace and justice to the Old New Republic (tm).
> 
> How do you do it?



The decapitation strike against the Republic's current-capital planet sets off a squabble for power among everybody who was on the other rotating-capital planets.
This however is overwhelmed by the fact that individuals from all across the Galaxy are volunteering their services.  The rise of this wave of volunteers tracks nicely with spread of news of SK Base's destruction.
The First Order cannot believe what is happening; they think the Republic "called out the National Guard."  (But this is so slow and cumbersome it looks more like rallying a feudal militia.)

Smart strategy for FO would be to pick a fight with the first volunteers who arrive nearby - so as not to get overwhelmed by a tsunami - and broadcast widely the fate they met at FO's hands.  Ideally, most of the enthusiastic volunteers will just give up and go home; the ones who don't can be dealt with in penny packets.

Our Heroes can figure this out, too.  Their job is to keep FO busy, buying time, and send somebody (Leia?) to organize the reinforcements.  Alas that Leia has a heart attack _en route_.  Her state funeral is impressive, a centerpiece for the mourning ceremonies over the destroyed Capital system.

At this point all the new heroes realize they need to work together better, and deal with the root of the problem: FO's general and Kylo Ren.  Using a big noisy group of enthusiastic volunteers (maybe with Chewbacca in charge?) as bait, they can set up the Climactic Confrontation between the Good Guys and the Bad Guys.

If Disney promises JJ Abrams enough budget, he can do this in Movie IX, then try to emulate Helm's Deep and make the multi-faceted final fight, full of special effects, take the whole of Movie X.


----------



## hawkeyefan

Raith5 said:


> Because Hero's come back? Luke cut himself off from the force, he had no idea what was happening but after Rey came to him and even after using the hologram he still moaned. And aside from the deviations from his character in the original series,  it set up a problem for most of the Last Jedi (and probably the next film): if Luke doesnt care about the resistance, why should we?




I don’t think that he deviates from his character from the old films. At least not in the sense that you mean. I think he deviates from his younger self in the sense that a person would likely do after 30 years and some crazy trauma. Who is the same at 55 that they were at 25? 

And I don’t think Luke doesn’t care about the Resistance so much as he thinks they’re better off without him. Without the Jedi, in fact. He obviously comes around, but I can understand why he might think that. 



hopeless said:


> The problem is that without revealing Luke had re-established his academy thereby insuring Rey has someone to complete her training and help her counter Kylo all of this is for nothing!
> 
> Just revealing Luke wasn't dying for nothing, would that have hurt the movie?




Not at all. That’s why they went out of their way to show that Luke isn’t dying for nothing. I mean, they really drill that home at the end in a few ways.

They also make it clear that a Jedi Academy is not needed. Yoda says that Rey possesses all she needs in order to continue down the path of the Jedi. And then we see she has the sacred texts. 



hopeless said:


> As it stands is there anything that indicates Luke's force ghost can complete her training even after supposedly killing himself pulling off that stunt?




Although I wouldn’t be surprised to see Luke return in Force Ghost mode in the next movie, they’ve established that it may not be necessary. 



hopeless said:


> Sometimes less is more, but seriously why demonstrate super Leia when you could have her rescued by say Admiral Ackbar who sacrifices himself in the process?




I’d guess two reasons. 

First, they wanted Leia to save herself, not be rescued. The movies have moved strongly away from damsels in distress, so they likely wanted Leia to solve her own problem. I actually didn’t really like that scene all that much,  but I understand why they had it play out that way.

Second, the actir who played Admiral Ackbar died after making The Force Awakens, so they likely felt it was best not to have the character do too much, but at the same time wanted to acknowledge his passing.


----------



## Morrus

Luke was always a whiny hothead who made the wrong choice. Anybody who thinks he was something else really needs to watch the movies again. Luke’s depiction here is perfectly in character.


----------



## Morrus

hopeless said:


> Sometimes less is more, but seriously why demonstrate super Leia when you could have her rescued by say Admiral Ackbar who sacrifices himself in the process?




As I posted earlier, Erik Bauersfeld died last year. That’s why.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

Eltab said:


> If Disney promises JJ Abrams enough budget, he can do this in Movie IX, then try to emulate Helm's Deep and make the multi-faceted final fight, full of special effects, take the whole of Movie X.




Yes, I see it ...

The Resistance rescues the hobbits from Isengard, then throws the ring into the fire, finally defeating the First Order!


----------



## ccs

hawkeyefan said:


> Second, the actir who played Admiral Ackbar died after making The Force Awakens, so they likely felt it was best not to have the character do too much, but at the same time wanted to acknowledge his passing.




So what?  At the end of the day SW wise all he was a guy in a (expensive) rubber mask.  Hire a new actor, put the mask on & continue to use the character.  Or CGI them.  Same goes for R2, 3PO, Chewbacca, Darth Vader, etc.  Pretty much any character that you never see their human face.


----------



## Morrus

ccs said:


> So what?  At the end of the day SW wise all he was a guy in a (expensive) rubber mask.  Hire a new actor, put the mask on & continue to use the character.  Or CGI them.  Same goes for R2, 3PO, Chewbacca, Darth Vader, etc.  Pretty much any character that you never see their human face.




Replacing the recently dead bothers some people. Not you, apparently, but many of us find that disrespectful. Referring to recently deceased professional actors as “just a guy in a rubber mask” is pretty obnoxious, too. That’s why.


----------



## billd91

And even more to the point, Erik Bauersfeld wasn't the puppeteer *in* the mask. He was the voice. The puppeteer... he *was* the same guy as in Return of the Jedi.


----------



## Raith5

Ovinomancer said:


> Deviations... from his character?
> 
> You mean the one who whined all the time, so much it was a oft commented on at the time?  Or the one who quit trying after he failed to lift the X-wing?  Or the one that gave into the dark side and maimed his father, the one he was trying to save, before pulling back at the end, you know, _after_ the moment of weaknes?
> 
> Goodness, I have no idea where this concept of Luke you guys seem to have came from (maybe the books?), but the actions Luke takes in the OT are not those of the hero you seem to idolize.




My take on Luke is that his whole character arc of the the original series is from hot headed whiny farm boy to jedi knight. That is the whole point/core of that series for me. So I see some tension between The Return if the Jedi Luke and the Last Jedi Luke that needed far more explanation. 

I think that is why so many people are up in arms (but I also think the dropped story lines from the Force Awakens is another whole suite of problems). 

It seems to me that there is so much interesting stuff here happening off screen/between the films with Luke's dissolution as a Jedi/ Knights of Rhen/the rise of the First order visa vi the republic, and what we do see in the Last Jedi is just not a tedious side note to this interesting stuff.


----------



## Morrus

Raith5 said:


> My take on Luke is that his whole character arc of the the original series is from hot headed whiny farm boy to jedi knight. That is the whole point/core of that series for me. So I see some tension between The Return if the Jedi Luke and the Last Jedi Luke that needed far more explanation.




He was weak to the very end. The Emperor said “give in to your hate!” and Luke was all “OK, duh”. He only survived because Vader had some remaining paternal instinct and saved him. Luke was never strong.


----------



## cbwjm

Morrus said:


> He was weak to the very end. The Emperor said “give in to your hate!” and Luke was all “OK, duh”. He only survived because Vader had some remaining paternal instinct and saved him. Luke was never strong.



He successfully resisted after the initial fall. Rather than succumb to the darkside and kill his father, Luke turned off his lightsaber and spared him. I think he was stronger than you give him credit for.

Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app


----------



## Morrus

cbwjm said:


> He successfully resisted after the initial fall. Rather than succumb to the darkside and kill his father, Luke turned off his lightsaber and spared him. I think he was stronger than you give him credit for.




Not executing your helpless dad isn’t strong. It’s the normal human condition. How many people do you know who have not executed  their dads? I’m at a 100%:0% ratio myself! 

Beating him to a pulp before deciding not to execute him? That’s pretty dark side.


----------



## cbwjm

Morrus said:


> Not executing your helpless dad isn’t strong. It’s the normal human condition. How many people do you know who have not executed  their dads? I’m at a 100%:0% ratio myself!
> 
> Beating him to a pulp before deciding not to execute him? That’s pretty dark side.



How many people have a dad who is one of the top two in an empire of evil? And from memory, Luke only went off after his sister was threatened. Can't have Luke, maybe Leia would suffice.

Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app


----------



## billd91

Morrus said:


> Not executing your helpless dad isn’t strong. It’s the normal human condition. How many people do you know who have not executed  their dads? I’m at a 100%:0% ratio myself!
> 
> Beating him to a pulp before deciding not to execute him? That’s pretty dark side.




And yet, he did what his father "the chosen one" couldn't do - he had his epiphany and stepped back from the precipice before he was lost to it. Luke *achieved* his heroism in Return of the Jedi. You're not giving the character anywhere near enough credit.

That said, I have absolutely no problem with his idealism and drive crashing when his hopes for a New Jedi Order failed because he failed to protect his own nephew, his twin sister's boy, his best friend's son, his mentor's namesake, (how much more powerful emotional baggage can I pile on?) from a manipulative agent of the Dark Side and being witness the awful carnage he unleashed on other innocent people. That's far more information and justification than we got for Anakin going from a cheerful, helpful kid at the end of Phantom Menace to a whiney douche at the beginning of Attack of the Clones.


----------



## Morrus

billd91 said:


> And yet, he did what his father "the chosen one" couldn't do - he had his epiphany and stepped back from the precipice before he was lost to it.




He didn't do the one thing that one person had done. Sure, his father was weak.



> You're not giving the character anywhere near enough credit.




How much credit should I give him? I mean, all anybody is offering is "he didn't kill his dad".


----------



## RotGrub

Morrus said:


> He was weak to the very end. The Emperor said “give in to your hate!” and Luke was all “OK, duh”. He only survived because Vader had some remaining paternal instinct and saved him. Luke was never strong.




I was hoping The Last Jedi would use the fact that he actually did give in the dark side during that encounter.     
Perhaps fear of the dark side within would be a reason for his self isolation.   

Of course Luke was strong enough to kick Vader in,  he just didn't expect to be on the receiving end of the old mans on-going chain lighting.    So to say he was never strong isn't true.  Especially in Return of the Jedi.

Then again, Rey was probably soloing Rancors and Vader clones when she was 4 years old.  To her, the dark side is really just a pointless machination of a toddler


----------



## billd91

Morrus said:


> How much credit should I give him? I mean, all anybody is offering is "he didn't kill his dad".




Between movies he went from just being impulsive, rushing off to help his friends (if only Lucas had looked at that behavior as more of a template for Anakin's descent) and getting smacked around for it to being a better planner (his layered contingency plans for rescuing Han) and being someone who walks into the effing lion's den in an attempt to do the impossible - redeem his old man - one of the galaxy's most notorious killers. He resists the temptation again and again, briefly embraces it, realizes what he's doing, and regains control, throwing away his weapon and leaving himself defenseless before his enemy. *DAMN!* That's some big deal heroic behavior right there. *THAT'S* why the theater erupted in cheers when I went to see it when it opened. Nobody ever erupted in cheers in other showings of the other  movies I had been to before then - not when Luke blew up the Death Star, not when Wedge and Lando blew up Death Star 2, not when Han and company brought down the shield - but when Luke threw away his lightsaber and refused the final temptation.

So I can kind of see complaints about Luke's fall from grace. But I also see the tremendous emotional weight of failing Ben Solo and seeing him turn into Kylo Ren, so I can accept the change even though Luke achieved his hero's journey 30 years prior.


----------



## Morrus

billd91 said:


> He resists the temptation again and again, briefly embraces it, realizes what he's doing, and regains control, throwing away his weapon and leaving himself defenseless before his enemy.




That's an interesting way to view the same set of events. My version is -- he *immediately* gave into temptation and attacked the Emperor after, like, two sentences, was stopped by his dad, beat his dad to a pulp as a consequence, finally managing to resist executing his beaten dad lying helpless before him, before getting his ass totally kicked with trivial effort by the Emperor. Then his dad suddenly changed sides and saved his ass, otherwise he'd be dead.


----------



## Morrus

RotGrub said:


> Of course Luke was strong enough to kick Vader in,  he just didn't expect to be on the receiving end of the old mans on-going chain lighting.    So to say he was never strong isn't true.




Huh? No, that's what made him weak. You're, like, reading the exact opposite of the conversation we're having.

Strong in this conversation isn't "good at lightsaber fighting", it's "good at resisting the dark side". He beat Vader with anger. The dark side. He's weak.


----------



## RotGrub

I think I can live with Luke's fate in this movie.  Of course, there are were far too many other problems.    

When the purple haired aposematic from the Hunger Games made an entrance and unloaded several plot hole turds,  I lost interest rather quickly.   It was at that point that I realized I wouldn't return to see the Last Jedi as I had intended.


----------



## RotGrub

Morrus said:


> Huh? No, that's what made him weak. You're, like, reading the exact opposite of the conversation we're having.
> 
> Strong in this conversation isn't "good at lightsaber fighting", it's "good at resisting the dark side". He beat Vader with anger. The dark side. He's weak.




I disagree

When it came time to jump off the cliff into the dark side, he resisted by not killing his farther. He lowered his weapon, and that's why the emperor had to kill him.   He rested being turned to the dark side.  Which is a very different thing than giving in to its temptations.


----------



## RotGrub

Morrus said:


> Not executing your helpless dad isn’t strong. It’s the normal human condition. How many people do you know who have not executed  their dads? I’m at a 100%:0% ratio myself!
> 
> Beating him to a pulp before deciding not to execute him? That’s pretty dark side.




It's like, not killing Hitler, who is your father.


----------



## Maxperson

Morrus said:


> That's an interesting way to view the same set of events. My version is -- he *immediately* gave into temptation and attacked the Emperor after, like, two sentences, was stopped by his dad, beat his dad to a pulp as a consequence, finally managing to resist executing his beaten dad lying helpless before him, before getting his ass totally kicked with trivial effort by the Emperor. Then his dad suddenly changed sides and saved his ass, otherwise he'd be dead.




The throwing away of the light saber was NOT about executing his dad or not, but rather it was to symbolize that the dark side had failed to consume him.  Luke had been in the grip of the dark side right before that moment, but had the strength that both Palpatine and Vader did not, and threw off the dark side yoke and proceeded down the path of light.  That heroic victory is not lessened by the fact that a fledgling Jedi wasn't as strong in the force or as skilled as as two dark side masters.  It's actually enhanced by that.


----------



## Morrus

Maxperson said:


> The throwing away of the light saber was NOT about executing his dad or not, but rather it was to symbolize that the dark side had failed to consume him.  Luke had been in the grip of the dark side right before that moment, but had the strength that both Palpatine and Vader did not, and threw off the dark side yoke and proceeded down the path of light.  That heroic victory is not lessened by the fact that a fledgling Jedi wasn't as strong in the force or as skilled as as two dark side masters.  It's actually enhanced by that.




Oh, don’t get me wrong. My ‘version’ was unduly hard on him — it was an attempt to illustrate how the same set of events can be spun completely differently.

While I still maintain he wasn’t nearly as heroic as often claimed, he certainly isn’t as weak as that narrative suggests.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Morrus said:


> Oh, don’t get me wrong. My ‘version’ was unduly hard on him — it was an attempt to illustrate how the same set of events can be spun completely differently.
> 
> While I still maintain he wasn’t nearly as heroic as often claimed, he certainly isn’t as weak as that narrative suggests.




Absolutely.  The "strength" Luke found at the end of RotJ was that he first failed and then turned away.  He succumbed to the Dark Side before having his epiphany and rejecting it.

Which is good storytelling, and a good character.

What's confusing to me is the number of people that then think that Luke's moment of weakness that he then rejects with Ben Solo is so abhorrently out of character.  It's the same folly he's always shown -- jump, then regret -- only this time it went rather badly for him.  This time, the other didn't recant the Dark Side, and instead defeated Luke.  Like so many things in TLJ, it takes the events of the OT and spins them around to present essentially the same thing with one crucial difference.  Luke has a momentary flirtation with the Dark Side with Vader, but manages to pull back.  This act of mercy redeems Vader.  With Ben Solo, though, Luke's flirtation with the Dark Side in his immediate rage to strike down his failure doesn't get a happy ending like it did with Vader.  It's the same tale, only with a change in the outcome.

Luke survives this, but does so broken.  His failure, and it is his failure with him reacting with rage and fear and Dark for a moment, is what so scares him that he runs away and cuts himself off from the force.  It why he's so aghast at Rey peering into the Dark Side so readily -- he sees the same power he had so easily tempted by the Dark Side.  It all fits into a circle, and none of it is "out of character" for Luke.  Unless, of course, you've built up your own set of myths surrounding Luke.

And, as an aside, the "plan" to rescue Han is a travesty of really horrible ideas.  That it works can only be laid at the feet of moviemaking and not any genius on Luke's part.  He has an inside man, but his plan is to get Leia also inside by imprisoning Chewbacca. Then he gives the droids to Jabba, for reasons, hoping that turns out okay in the end.  He can't even tell 3PO the plan at all, so he's of zero help in the plan, yet he's sent.  At this point, with Chewie in jail, Lando as a guard, and Leia hidden in the retinue and the droids in service to a powerful underworld figure they can't attack outright, the plan becomes have Leia, by herself, release Han from the carbonite and sneak him out?  Where do that leave Chewie and the droids?  That failed, Luke marches in and starts a fight.  Sure, it all works out in the end, and Luke plays a good part, but no part of that plan, given the skills and resources at play, works out as remotely good.  It was a classic 'Jedi walks into a fight and miraculously lucky things happen' plan, which isn't a good one.


----------



## Flexor the Mighty!

Morrus said:


> Luke was always a whiny hothead who made the wrong choice. Anybody who thinks he was something else really needs to watch the movies again. Luke’s depiction here is perfectly in character.




Luke was a "whiny" hot head until he finally put it all together in Return of the Jedi, which by the way worst title ever?  The Jedi didn't even return long enough to make it in the next movie.  If you think E4, E5, and E6 Luke are the same I must have been watching different movies. 

That is my biggest issue, I can't see how the original 6 movies meant anything at this point since they have torn it all down.  All the "heroes" that I cheered for ended up being kind of lame and failures. More sad than anything.  Just wish they could have created a new Star Wars saga without needing to burn the old one down.  But this is JJ Abrams.


----------



## billd91

Flexor the Mighty! said:


> But this is JJ Abrams.




Nope. This is continuing to use and reuse characters and settings beyond when their original stories were wrapped up. It was ultimately true of the EU stuff as well in which the characters barely got a chance to reap the benefits of their heroism, just the details were different.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Flexor the Mighty! said:


> Luke was a "whiny" hot head until he finally put it all together in Return of the Jedi, which by the way worst title ever?  The Jedi didn't even return long enough to make it in the next movie.  If you think E4, E5, and E6 Luke are the same I must have been watching different movies.



Of course he grew, no one's claiming otherwise, but he didn't become a wise Jedi on-screen in any of them.  He was still a hot-headed risk taker in RotJ, as evidenced by the continual set of risks he ran from Jabba's Palace through Endor to the confrontation with Vader and the Emperor.  None of that was what a calm, collected, and centered Jedi Master would choose to do.  

The argument you're making here doesn't deflect from the fact that Luke of teh OT isn't how you (and others) keep trying to portray him: as someone who would never have a moment of weakness.



> That is my biggest issue, I can't see how the original 6 movies meant anything at this point since they have torn it all down.  All the "heroes" that I cheered for ended up being kind of lame and failures. More sad than anything.  Just wish they could have created a new Star Wars saga without needing to burn the old one down.  But this is JJ Abrams.




Torn down?

How so?  The Jedi Order is still going on, the New Republic still exists, if badly hurt, and there's still a chance that the son of Han and Leia will turn back to the light (I'm not sure what I hope about this, honestly).  Did you really want a trilogy where everything was as awesome as you imagined it, with Han and Leia being happily-ever-aftering and Luke being a kick-ass Jedi Master at the head of a new Jedi Order?  What, praytell, do you think would the conflict be?  With all of the superheroes around, what could possibly function as a suitable crisis?  Invasion from outside the galaxy (obviously EU sarcasm is obvious)?

To tell a hero's story, the hero has to fail at some point.  They have to face that failure and overcome.  We can't have the cast of the OT be perfect from the get go, they needed to be in crisis to tell a compelling story.  Anything else leaves them as utterly fake.  So, Han's crisis is his son.  He rises to the occasion by reaching out to Ben, and dies for it (and I'm pretty sure he knew that was a likely outcome, so double points).  Leia's crisis is the Republic.  It has to be in jeopardy for her to have something to fight for.  She rises to the occasion and doesn't back down.  Luke's crisis is himself, as it's always been.  And he rises to that occasion and shows that he's truly earned the title Jedi Master only at the end of TLJ, where he accepts himself finally.

So, no, the OT isn't burned down, because what was built in the OT wasn't those institutions, but rather characters -- characters who were and are flawed, and yet still show up for the job.  I love Luke far more now than I ever did, because he was flawed but still showed up.  Han, too.  His death coming from walking towards pain and danger instead of running away was awesome -- a really summation of the movement he started in E4.  And Leia, Leia is the least changing of all of them.  She always fought, and she's still fighting, and I am deeply saddened that we'll never see the culmination of her arc the way it should have been.  I have a feeling it was moving towards her giving the fight to others to carry, to finally resting.  Also, I really, really hate that Google thinks Leia is misspelled.   Everything the OT built is here, and these characters cannot breathe the honest and painful way they do without it.  Don't think that the OT is some institution of victory or happily-ever-after because it's not.  It's about characters and their journey, not their destination.  This new trilogy is closing the journeys of those characters, and providing endings they _earned _along the way.


----------



## OB1

So I was one of the people who really didn't like TLJ when I saw it on opening night.  After thinking about it for a while and then watching it again, I did almost a complete 180 with it.  I think the film does have some really bad pacing issues and tends to tell instead of show in a few important instances that muddies the stakes and contradicts some of the themes Rian is working with.  I'm still back and forth about whether it is too smart for its own good, but now that I've started peeling away its layers and seeing how well it fits in with the Saga as a whole, I'm more than willing to overlook its issues in favor of its strengths.

Quick aside, thanks to someone in the thread for reminding me that using hyperspace to take out opponents doesn't work is because it's ineffective if the opponent's shields are up.  While I would have liked a simple line from the First Order to "Shields Up!" to make that explicit, it is ultimately unnecessary due to the established rules of the Universe.

Most importantly to me, what TLJ does so well is make clear the overall arc of the Saga and what the central conflict of it is.  Luke almost understood, and may have at the end.  It's not the Jedi that need to end, it's the Skywalkers.  *They* are the imbalance in the force.

Both Snoke and Luke refer to the mighty Skywalker bloodline in the film.  We know from TPM and RotS that Anakin, like a Greek Hero, is basically a demigod, with a mortal mother and an god (The Force) for a father.  It's given the bloodline a tremendous amount of power, and that power corrupts.  It corrupted Anakin, it almost corrupted Luke twice, and it has corrupted Kylo Ren.  Kathleen Kennedy has stated that the Skywalker saga will come to an end with episode IX, and the clearest way to do that is to end the bloodline.  TLJ prepares us for that by smartly getting rid of Snoke and leaving Kylo and Leia as the last Skywalkers.  That's why it was important that Rey not be connected to the bloodline.  The story of the Force in a Galaxy Far, Far Away will continue, but not of the Skywalkers.

Even on my first viewing, I was thrilled with Luke's arc and thought made complete sense for the character.  Sure, the 12 year old boy in me wanted to see Luke thrash the First Order, using the force to knock over AT-ATs, but that isn't Luke.  He learned in RotJ the futility of using the Force to violently impose your will, choosing to not succumb to the Dark Side and trust in the Force to bring about an end to the Emperor.  

His failure with Kylo years later makes perfect sense as to why he would send himself into exile as Yoda and Ben did before him as well as the corrupting power of the Skywalker bloodline.  Luke's ability to see so much of Kylo's future began to consume and corrupt him, and for a moment he forgot to keep his "Focus here and now where it belongs, to be mindful of the Living Force," as Qui-Non might have instructed him.  Seeing things before they happen is central to what makes a Jedi a Jedi, and what makes powerful users powerful is the ability to see further than others.  But it's a paradox, since if you see something bad happening, you naturally want to keep it from happening.  

The old Jedi Order had similar issues.  Rather than using the Force only for "Knowledge and Defense" they were using it to impose the will, not of the Force, but of people, through "aggressive negotiations".  That was corrupting both them and the Republic, to the point that they could not see the Darkness rising within.

Which brings me to an important point about Rey.  I think it's wrong to think of her as a powerful Force "user".  It's the Force that is using her.  That's why she doesn't need training.  It's why Luke didn't need training to destroy the Death Star.  He didn't take control of his Proton Torpedo and guide it into the exhaust port, he "let go" and trusted that the Force would do what was necessary to keep balance.  The Force would not allow such a monstrous weapon to exist (see also the blind monk in Rogue One).  The true path to the light is by allowing the Force to control your actions, not to make it obey your commands.

One final note.  I'm glad they didn't change the events of the film due to Carrie Fisher's untimely passing.  Rian Johnson said he considered it, but wanted to be able to give Carrie her full last performance.  So how do they deal with her absence in IX?

I think it would be brilliant to start that film with Kylo's Star Destroyer chasing Leia on her blockade runner on some mission ten years or so after TLJ.  Mirroring ANH, they capture Leia's ship and board it, wiping out Rebels as Kylo makes his way to the bridge, where they use a bit of stock footage to insert Leia.  Kylo is obsessed with finding and destroying Rey, and demands Leia tell him where Rey and her Jedi in training are located (since he killed Snoke before he got that piece of info).  His lightsaber is out and ignited.  We hear Leia say (using a snip of her dialogue from ANH) "Dantoine, they're on Dantoine".  Kylo goes to strike Leia down with his saber, but Leia disappears into the Force before the blow lands, her dress falling to the ground...


----------



## smbakeresq

I particularly liked the final battle lead up scene where resistance officer steps out to see and leaves a red foot footprint and the soldier tests that it’s a plain of salt.   The whole planet is crystalline, mostly salt it appears.

It could mean and probably does that the resistance is the salt of the earth, as a base is there and it is their final stand.

The red footprint also foreshadowed that beneath the salt of the earth was a red hellish landscape, that someone was about to enter their own personal hell.  There are many examples throughout mythology of Hell being described as “rust colored fields of salt wherein nothing will grow.”  Hindu myth has a specific plane in Hell with salt to punish those guilty of false pride.  In addition there is another Hell in Hinduism:

“Lavana (salt): One who vilifies his guru, people superior to them or the Vedas go to this hell.”

Later Luke indicates the Kylo will see him forever indicating Kylo has entered his own personal hell wherein Luke will constantly “torture”him through the force.

I thought it a wonderful addition to the movie.


Sent from my iPhone using EN World


----------



## Flexor the Mighty!

I'm trying to see where I posted that Luke and the other were perfect?  I'm just not very happy with the idea that the reward for the "victory" in E6 is that E7 starts exactly where E4 did for the most part.  To you Luke was a bigger hero after his failure as a Jedi Master, can't say it feels that way to me.  Same for Han, Leia, etc. I was hoping for new story that wasn't just going back over old ground and would have new conflicts, not a quasi reboot of E4 kind of setting the table back where it was for the most part.  Was just hoping for something else.  Better story, better transition from the old to the new, better new heroes, better foes, etc. Obviously YMV.


----------



## OB1

Flexor the Mighty! said:


> I'm just not very happy with the idea that the reward for the "victory" in E6 is that E7 starts exactly where E4 did for the most part.  To you Luke was a bigger hero after his failure as a Jedi Master, can't say it feels that way to me.  Same for Han, Leia, etc. I was hoping for new story that wasn't just going back over old ground and would have new conflicts, not a quasi reboot of E4 kind of setting the table back where it was for the most part.  Was just hoping for something else.  Better story, better transition from the old to the new, better new heroes, better foes, etc. Obviously YMV.




I had some of the same thoughts, but as this is the Skywalker Saga, the focus continues to be on that.  The big difference between where we are now and where we were in E4 is that for the first time, a Skywalker is now the big bad of the story, setting up the Saga to finish in E9 with the end of the Skywalker bloodline and balance being restored to the Force and for future stories to explore other things.


----------



## hopeless

A much better explanation regarding tlj.
I think I might be ready to go watch it, if only to be able to finally say my goodbyes to something I consider very important and only now am I willing to let go.
A merry Christmas to you all!


----------



## Flexor the Mighty!

OB1 said:


> I had some of the same thoughts, but as this is the Skywalker Saga, the focus continues to be on that.  The big difference between where we are now and where we were in E4 is that for the first time, a Skywalker is now the big bad of the story, setting up the Saga to finish in E9 with the end of the Skywalker bloodline and balance being restored to the Force and for future stories to explore other things.




I got you. Just not what I was looking for I guess. 

I think all three of my main Sci-Fi franchises all veered off in directions I didn't like that much in the past couple years.  With luck some new blood will take the place of the classics and give me something to watch.  Hard times for this old Sci-fi fan.  Thankfully I still have the Expanse.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Weird.  I know you know how the quote button works.  I assume you're addressing my post?



Flexor the Mighty! said:


> I'm trying to see where I posted that Luke and the other were perfect?



The same place I said that you did -- nowhere?



> I'm just not very happy with the idea that the reward for the "victory" in E6 is that E7 starts exactly where E4 did for the most part.



E7 starts with the Republic in power and full of hope, with Luke having started a Jedi Academy before Ben Solo turned to the Dark side and destroyed it, with Han running scams.  Okay, so that last one's the same, but the nothing else is in 'the same place' as E4.  If I stretch, I assume you mean that the galaxy is in bad shape overall?  I do put that down as a failure of storytelling, in that the state of the galaxy is often told but not shown (h/t [MENTION=6796241]OB1[/MENTION]) in the new movies, but nothing is further from the truth.  The new series are about how evil returns, but there were many good years in between and the Republic remains.



> To you Luke was a bigger hero after his failure as a Jedi Master, can't say it feels that way to me.  Same for Han, Leia, etc. I was hoping for new story that wasn't just going back over old ground and would have new conflicts, not a quasi reboot of E4 kind of setting the table back where it was for the most part.  Was just hoping for something else.  Better story, better transition from the old to the new, better new heroes, better foes, etc. Obviously YMV.



So, is it that you didn't like the choices for crisis these characters were put in, and would have preferred an equally bad but different state, or that you would have preferred they not be put into crisis at all?  Because the latter is a non-starter for a movie about heroes.  To be true to the characters as built in the OT, they _had _to be put into crisis because that's what Star Wars is all about.


----------



## Flexor the Mighty!

Ovinomancer said:


> Weird.  I know you know how the quote button works.  I assume you're addressing my post?
> 
> 
> The same place I said that you did -- nowhere?
> 
> 
> E7 starts with the Republic in power and full of hope, with Luke having started a Jedi Academy before Ben Solo turned to the Dark side and destroyed it, with Han running scams.  Okay, so that last one's the same, but the nothing else is in 'the same place' as E4.  If I stretch, I assume you mean that the galaxy is in bad shape overall?  I do put that down as a failure of storytelling, in that the state of the galaxy is often told but not shown (h/t [MENTION=6796241]OB1[/MENTION]) in the new movies, but nothing is further from the truth.  The new series are about how evil returns, but there were many good years in between and the Republic remains.
> 
> 
> So, is it that you didn't like the choices for crisis these characters were put in, and would have preferred an equally bad but different state, or that you would have preferred they not be put into crisis at all?  Because the latter is a non-starter for a movie about heroes.  To be true to the characters as built in the OT, they _had _to be put into crisis because that's what Star Wars is all about.




Yeah no crisis, that would be an amazing story off them standing round and looking at each other going "yeah we did it!".  Exactly what I wanted.  Or I just was hoping for a better written story with better characters that used the older flicks as a different launch point rather that grafting this onto the bones of EP4 with a new Empire, new Rebellion, new Death Star to destroy, etc.  You can have all kinds of great conflict and not do that or have the old characters where they were in the new flicks. Obviously you like where its going and that's fine, I obviously didn't.


----------



## OB1

Flexor the Mighty! said:


> I got you. Just not what I was looking for I guess.
> 
> I think all three of my main Sci-Fi franchises all veered off in directions I didn't like that much in the past couple years.  With luck some new blood will take the place of the classics and give me something to watch.  Hard times for this old Sci-fi fan.  Thankfully I still have the Expanse.




I hear you, and after my first viewing of TLJ I felt much the same way.  It was only after thinking about it a while and seeing it again that I realized RJ has really set things up for an epic and very satisfying end to the whole 9 film cycle with a coherent single story being told.  I'm now very excited to see what RJ may do with his own trilogy outside the Skywalker storyline.

The Expanse is awesome!  Just started the newest book.

Though I would call Star Wars a fantasy franchise, not a Sci-Fi one, I'm curious as to hat were your other two Sci-Fi franchises that have disappointed?


----------



## Flexor the Mighty!

OB1 said:


> I hear you, and after my first viewing of TLJ I felt much the same way.  It was only after thinking about it a while and seeing it again that I realized RJ has really set things up for an epic and very satisfying end to the whole 9 film cycle with a coherent single story being told.  I'm now very excited to see what RJ may do with his own trilogy outside the Skywalker storyline.
> 
> The Expanse is awesome!  Just started the newest book.
> 
> Though I would call Star Wars a fantasy franchise, not a Sci-Fi one, I'm curious as to hat were your other two Sci-Fi franchises that have disappointed?




Yeah SW is much more space fantasy with wizards, sword fights, and in the past Princesses to be saved.  And my other two were Star Trek and Doctor Who. But that conversation is for a different thread.


----------



## trappedslider

hopeless said:


> A much better explanation regarding tlj.
> I think I might be ready to go watch it, if only to be able to finally say my goodbyes to something I consider very important and only now am I willing to let go.
> A merry Christmas to you all!



[sblock]

[/sblock]


----------



## Majoru Oakheart

hawkeyefan said:


> Just seems very odd to me. Folks seem mad at this movie for using what TFA established, and for NOT using things that fans speculated about after TFA.
> 
> I would have expected anyone that had such strong expectations about this movie wouldn’t ignore what had actually been established.




Here's what we knew from TFA:

Luke had a student destroy his Academy and then left, presumably to find the First Jedi Temple, like Han said. That's all we really knew.

So that has us asking: "Why did Luke leave?" "Why go to the First Jedi Temple?" "What can be found there that he's rush off to find it without really letting his friends and family know where he went?" "Why didn't he come back?"

My answer to all that was that he just had a student betray him...Maybe he wasn't a good enough teacher. Maybe he went to learn in order to find a way to train students better in the future or maybe there is some hidden wisdom that the first Jedi had that would allow him to bring Kylo back from the Dark Side.

If he didn't find any wisdom, maybe he is deep in meditation looking for answers within the Force itself or maybe he got confused by the lack of answers and was despondent. He wants to help, but he doesn't know HOW anymore. He could just need someone to come along and give him a pep talk so that he can pull himself together enough to help.

Maybe the Force told him that he'd need to train a new student but he would need to wait for the right moment, after the Awakening, before that was possible.

Maybe he found what he was looking for but somehow lost his ship and couldn't get back. 

The trailer said "The Jedi have to end" so my pet theory was that he found some information in the First Jedi Temple that made him lose faith in the Jedi philosophy. My reigning theory was that the Jedi originally used both the Light and the Dark equally by learning to accept their emotions rather than get rid of them but that an apprentice nearly destroyed the Jedi a thousand years ago and the Jedi became fearful of tapping into the Dark Side. So fearful that they started teaching that you could never feel fear or anger so as to never even slightly tap into the Dark Side, since it consumed one person and that nearly destroyed them all. Luke discovered this and realized that everything that Yoda taught him was wrong. That it was nearly impossible to get rid of fear or anger entirely and that if you learned to accept those emotions you were stronger. That's what he did wrong...but it was too late to save Kylo. So Luke blamed himself and was wallowing in pity over it. But at the same time he was wallowing, he was learning about the original Jedi ways and needed to find a new student to teach...and the Force delivers one to him.

All of those things were possibilities. The one where he had actually given up entirely on Jedi, on helping, and on life entirely was one that NEVER occurred to me. That was too obvious after seeing the trailer. It had to be tricking us into something else.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart

Ovinomancer said:


> Goodness, I have no idea where this concept of Luke you guys seem to have came from (maybe the books?), but the actions Luke takes in the OT are not those of the hero you seem to idolize.




I've explained this in previous posts, but to summarize. That was the Luke from the first 2 movies. In Return of the Jedi he shows up and his calm, confident, intelligent. He plans the entire rescue of Han multiple layers deep. Han comments how Luke has changed so much, he couldn't imagine the old Luke planning that. It's been 3 years since the previous movie and fandom has tried to figure out exactly what happened to Luke in that time but it seems VERY important, since he is still pretty much a whiny farmboy at the end of ESB but his Force power, his maturity and his mentality have changed entirely in RotJ.

He realizes he needs to face Vader and the Emperor calmly. He allows himself to be captured because he's now trusting the Force. He believes that it won't let him come to harm. He also believes his father can be turned.

The Emperor is very good at saying the right things to get under people's skin so he taunt him repeatedly. Luke doesn't fall for it over and over again until he realizes that his friends all might die. That's his one weakness. He cares about them too much. That drives him over the edge and he attacks. Because of his fear for his friends he ALMOST goes too far. He gets angry. But before he can cross the threshold, he realizes what he's done and he pulls back.

I've always gotten from that moment that he finally faced his weakness, his anger and his fear and finally beaten it. That's why he declares himself a Jedi on the spot. He's had the breakthrough he needs to officially decide that he is a full fledged Jedi, no longer swayed by fear and anger.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart

Ovinomancer said:


> Of course he grew, no one's claiming otherwise, but he didn't become a wise Jedi on-screen in any of them.  He was still a hot-headed risk taker in RotJ, as evidenced by the continual set of risks he ran from Jabba's Palace through Endor to the confrontation with Vader and the Emperor.  None of that was what a calm, collected, and centered Jedi Master would choose to do.
> 
> The argument you're making here doesn't deflect from the fact that Luke of teh OT isn't how you (and others) keep trying to portray him: as someone who would never have a moment of weakness.



From what I got in the movie was that between ESB and RotJ, Luke basically got 95% of the way to being a Jedi. He learned to be at peace, to plan instead of being reckless, and he realized that winning meant converting his father, not killing him. So most of his growth was completed. He went on the mission knowing he would be captured and that he would be brought before Vader. He wanted to in order to convince him to come back to the Light Side.

This was a complete turn around from his failure in the cave where he saw Vader and pulled out his lightsaber immediately to kill him. We see Luke in that movie not acting out of hatred or fear. He literally walks into the place he fears the most in order to save someone, not kill them.

As I said in the previous post, he lets his anger take over briefly...but it passes. He has won and become a Jedi. He is strong enough to not have moments of weakness in the future now. He got the last 5% of the way to becoming a full Jedi.



Ovinomancer said:


> Torn down?
> 
> How so?  The Jedi Order is still going on, the New Republic still exists, if badly hurt, and there's still a chance that the son of Han and Leia will turn back to the light (I'm not sure what I hope about this, honestly).  Did you really want a trilogy where everything was as awesome as you imagined it, with Han and Leia being happily-ever-aftering and Luke being a kick-ass Jedi Master at the head of a new Jedi Order?  What, praytell, do you think would the conflict be?  With all of the superheroes around, what could possibly function as a suitable crisis?  Invasion from outside the galaxy (obviously EU sarcasm is obvious)?



There's no Republic anymore. The Senate and all their ships were destroyed. There are individual planets left who used to belong to the Republic, but it's gone. They make that clear in TLJ. The First Order will take over the entire galaxy in a matter of weeks according to the movie, since there's no one left to resist them.

The Jedi Order doesn't really exist. The Jedi Order implies rules, a power structure...and more than one Jedi. There's one person out there who can use the Force who has a bunch of books on the Jedi philosophy. The Jedi Order is destroyed. But she isn't even a Jedi yet.

As for problems. Lots of problems can show up even with the Republic intact. There are like 100 books each with problems in them while the New Republic exists. You could have an attack from another Galaxy, yep. You could have part of the Republic breaking away and doing a civil war...though that's likely too much like the prequels. You could have some hidden dark side users becoming essentially terrorists and they have to stop them. You could have the First Order show up, but rather than have the ability to destroy the entire Republic in one shot, you could have had a huge war between large fleets.

You could have Kylo run off with his Knights of Ren and have a cool battle between them and all of the Jedi Luke trained. There's lots of stories that can be told.



Ovinomancer said:


> To tell a hero's story, the hero has to fail at some point.  They have to face that failure and overcome.  We can't have the cast of the OT be perfect from the get go, they needed to be in crisis to tell a compelling story.  Anything else leaves them as utterly fake.



They don't HAVE to face inner conflict. Writing theory tells us that there are 3 types of conflict: Man against Man, Man against Nature, and Man against Himself. You can have a compelling story where all of the growth comes from the conflict between someone and their enemies. A large number of movies do it all the time where the main character doesn't really "grow", they just survive and win against whatever is against them.

These characters already finished their three part journey in order to find their flaws, stumble because of them and then finally overcome them. You are suggesting that they need to give them back the same flaws they learned to overcome just so that they can overcome them a second time. We've seen that already. Let's do something else.



Ovinomancer said:


> So, Han's crisis is his son.  He rises to the occasion by reaching out to Ben, and dies for it (and I'm pretty sure he knew that was a likely outcome, so double points).  Leia's crisis is the Republic.  It has to be in jeopardy for her to have something to fight for.  She rises to the occasion and doesn't back down.  Luke's crisis is himself, as it's always been.  And he rises to that occasion and shows that he's truly earned the title Jedi Master only at the end of TLJ, where he accepts himself finally.



Han's crisis was that he didn't care about anyone other than himself. He treated everyone like pawns, he only cared about money. He learns to care about the galaxy, about the Rebellion and about Leia. He learns people and connections are important. That's his story arc. That's how he grew in the 3 movies.

So, the new movie picks up with Han having given up on his family. His son betrayed everyone and ran off and he left, breaking their family even more. He no longer helps with the cause and has gone back to just making money for himself. Literally everything he learned in the old movies was brought back to the starting point. His character growth was reversed...just so we could see him do it again.

Leia fought to destroy the Empire so she could establish a new Republic. Her growth was mostly external but her defeat of the Empire IS one of her moments of growth. The other ones were learning to care about Han and her brother and learning that working together was the best idea. So where are we left? The Republic she worked to create is destroyed and she no longer has Luke or Han. Her moments of triumph are still fighting for the Republic, looking for Han, trying to reunite her family and seeing Luke again. Those are only triumphs because they ripped them away so they could reestablish them again.

Luke is the same way, he goes from being impulsive, reckless, quick to anger, and naive to calm, collected, thoughtful and mature Jedi. Where are we in TLJ? He's gone back to being whiny, quick to anger and is quick to decide to kill Ben and quick to decide to run off and die by himself. He doesn't even consider himself a Jedi any longer. 30 years later he's forgotten everything he learned and has gone back to being the Luke with all the flaws we saw in the first movie.



Ovinomancer said:


> So, no, the OT isn't burned down, because what was built in the OT wasn't those institutions, but rather characters -- characters who were and are flawed, and yet still show up for the job.  I love Luke far more now than I ever did, because he was flawed but still showed up.  Han, too.  His death coming from walking towards pain and danger instead of running away was awesome -- a really summation of the movement he started in E4.  And Leia, Leia is the least changing of all of them.  She always fought, and she's still fighting, and I am deeply saddened that we'll never see the culmination of her arc the way it should have been.  I have a feeling it was moving towards her giving the fight to others to carry, to finally resting.




Luke was flawed before...but he showed up on Cloud city when his friends needed him. He was flawed before but showed up to confront the Emperor in RotJ. He's done that. Watching him do it again is pointless. Han learned to show up when he returned to help them at the end of ANH and joined the Rebellion full time instead of running away, which is what he was doing before and during ANH. He shouldn't have to prove that he can show up. He already did that. Leia was always fighting. True. She WON, however. That's was the culmination of her storyline. Now she had to lose so she could fight all over again. But we've done that already.

The characters were flawed and they grew past those flaws. That was kind of the point of the first 3 Star Wars movies.


----------



## smbakeresq

I see it as Luke became as Jedi in V and VI, just like in the movies.  In this movie he transcends even being a Jedi, he gets the big picture, which very few do otherwise we would see force ghosts everywhere.  

Its sort of the like the 36th Chamber of Shaolin, the martial arts movie.  Most of the chambers are about honing your body, but San-Te (and no one else it seems) can to the top until he wanders the world to find himself.  You can't get passed your limitations until they are shown through failure.

This is also the central idea of the Matrix, the Architect has reached the limit of his evolution since he can't understand why his decisions fail, and never will.  Since he cant understand his failures, he cant fix the problems in the Matrix.  In programing terms the Architect is a essentially an expert system, with a series of preprogrammed responses. Neo, being of both worlds, can see his failure and correct them.  His is the role of a programmer as he can actually alter the base coding.


----------



## hawkeyefan

Majoru Oakheart said:


> All of those things were possibilities. The one where he had actually given up entirely on Jedi, on helping, and on life entirely was one that NEVER occurred to me. That was too obvious after seeing the trailer. It had to be tricking us into something else.




All of those were possible, sure. So is what we were shown. 

It’s interesting that you’re willing to come up with explanations for why the movie is “wrong”. Why not try to imagine why it’s “right”?

Maybe Luke had a vision that if he stayed around after the destruction of the temple and faced Kylo again, that it would result in Kylo’s death, and in Luke turning to the Dark Side. 

Or maybe Luke is able to stop Kylo Ren, but must kill him in order to do so...and this loss drives Leia over the edge, and she turns to the Dark Side. The Resistance doesn't last long after this, and is extinguished once and for all.

We can come up with scenarios all day long. But I think what we actually saw in the film showed us what we needed. Luke was doing what he thought was best. And perhaps it was best. Perhaps had he done anything else, things would have went very differently, and much worse, and then he would have actually been the ladt Jedi.


----------



## pukunui

Majoru Oakheart said:


> As I said in the previous post, he lets his anger take over briefly...but it passes. He has won and become a Jedi. He is strong enough to not have moments of weakness in the future now. He got the last 5% of the way to becoming a full Jedi.



Right. Because once you've earned your Jedi stripes, you don't have to worry about having moments of weakness ever again. You're set for life.


----------



## hopeless

Doesn't explain the Anti-Christ which was how they explained why Luke reacted like he did!
Now had Snoke been communicating with Ben in his sleep that combination when detected would explain Luke come running expecting an intruder finding himself facing Ben.
Stunned it's all he can do to shield himself as Snoke provokes Ben into collapsing the ceiling atop of Luke making Ben think Luke was about to attack him rather than reacting to an intruder.
THAT would make sense not what I've read!


----------



## Imaculata

*If I were asked to fix the problems with The Last Jedi (note that I am no script writer), here is what I would have changed:*

Reveal Rey's link to the force and to Luke's lightsaber. Have a point to her entering the dark hole, leading to either a wise lesson about the Force, or some dark revelation about herself.

Remove the entire fake out with Holdo. Let the rebels be up front about their plan to escape to the planet Crait, so that Poe and Finn don't not mount some unnecessary suicide plan that ultimately doesn't go anywhere. Let the First Order be aware that they are fleeing to Crait, and be confident that they can crush them on that planet. There's really no way for them to escape from it, so the place is a death trap.

Holdo still crashes her ship into the First Order, but she does it as soon as possible, so the rest can escape to the planet. This way she doesn't look incompetent.

Leia should have died in outer space. I have no issue with her using her Force powers to float to safety. But with the recent death of Carrie Fisher, they had an easy out here. Why didn't they take it? Why have the character whose actress died, survive, and the character whose actor is still alive and well, die?

Instead of having Finn and Rose go to the Casino planet to find some hacker, and then also try and board the Dreadnought unnoticed, have them travel to the Casino planet to activate a distress beacon. It would be easy to set it up in such a way that the First Order is blocking rebel communication, so they can't call for help. Finn and Rose need to get down to the planet to remotely activate a distress beacon that will hopefully get reinforcements to Crait in time. Why over complicate things? The First Order however has a heavy presence on the Casino planet, thus adding extra tension to Finn's adventures on the planet. Throw in a battle with some AT ST walkers while you're at it, and you have everything for an exciting finale.

Rey and Kylo still team up against snoke, but snoke regenerates instantly. Thus his menace is not diminished (plus you can still have him show up in the third movie), and his guards actually have a reason to fight Rey and Kylo. Rather than Kylo immediately turning back to the dark side again, have them both become renegade Jedi. Snoke then sends in the Knights of Ren to kill them, which leaves both Rey and Kylo critically injured, until they are rescued by Luke with his astral projection thingy. Luke then fights the Knights of Ren, giving Rey and Kylo a chance to escape. Although Luke tells Rey to leave Kylo behind, she refuses, and the two escape together on the Falcon, before Luke's clever trick is revealed. Luke then does NOT die after the astral projection, so he can still show up in the next movie. The Knights of Ren will hunt Rey and Kylo in the next movie, and we can now probably squeeze a cool lightsaber fight with Luke and Rey versus the Knights of Ren into movie 3.

The rebels escape to Crait, where an actual battle with the First Order takes place. Because why have these awesome looking AT-AT's in your movie if you're not going to use them? The rebels try and hold back the invasion with their inferior vehicles, but they are getting crushed. That is until Finn manages to call in reinforcements just in time, only to get captured himself together with Rose (which leaves Finn and Rose captured at the start of the next movie). Neither Finn or Rose take part in the battle on Crait, and Rose does not crash her ship into that of Finn. That was dumb. 

The rebels take out some of the AT-AT's during the battle, and are eventually able to escape the First Order, thanks to a hidden weapon on the planet that the First Order does not know about (maybe they have one of those hammerhead ships from Rogue One?). Big explosion, they plow through Snoke's command ship right as Rey and Kylo escape, end of movie.


----------



## OB1

pukunui said:


> Right. Because once you've earned your Jedi stripes, you don't have to worry about having moments of weakness ever again. You're set for life.




So much this.

Power corrupts.  

The old Jedi Order knew this, and put an elaborate system in place to try and mitigate the effects of that corrupting influence, identifying and indoctrinating young force sensitives in a rigid training structure to try and ensure they wouldn't fall to the dark side.  That is why it took so long to train Jedi in the old way and why Luke and Rey were able to become so powerful so quick.  

It worked for a thousand years, but eventually, that power began to corrupt even the Jedi Order when they began fighting in the Clone War, leading to it's demise.  Note that this structure wasn't nearly as old as the Jedi themselves, who have been around for 1,000 generations.

It corrupted Anakin, whose strength in the Force was unnaturally strong due to his father being The Force itself.  The training of the Jedi wasn't strong enough to overcome that level of power.  It wasn't designed to be.  Anakin saw the future to clearly, and drew on his power to try and force change.
 [MENTION=427]Mojo[/MENTION]ru oakheart It nearly corrupted Luke, who at the beginning of Return of the Jedi had begun to truly tap into the power provided by his bloodline, allowing him to see and prepare for multiple outcomes in Jabba's palace and later confront Vader.  Only by the rejection of the power the Force gave him was he able to live.  Had he turned, he would have been killed along with Vader and the Emperor when the Death Star was destroyed.

It began corrupting Kylo, who wasn't receiving training and was further influenced by a dark power.

Luke goes on to train Kylo and another generation, but Luke's strong power with the Force and his ability to see the future led him to see the fall of Kylo, and he was so afraid of that outcome it nearly corrupted Luke again.  His solution to that was to cut himself off from the Force, to prevent him from being tempted ever again.

But hope still exists, and because of Luke's decision to go into exile, it eventually leads Rey to him, allowing her to leave with the texts of the original Jedi order.  And she rekindles hope in Luke, allowing him to use the Force for "Knowledge and Defense" to aid in the escape of Resistance.  Rey now has the chance to rebuild, hopefully learning from the mistakes of the Old Jedi Order once the One Ring of the Skywalker bloodline is destroyed.


----------



## Ryujin

pukunui said:


> Right. Because once you've earned your Jedi stripes, you don't have to worry about having moments of weakness ever again. You're set for life.




This was handled very well in the old West End Games Star Wars RPG. You always had the option of doing something evil or ambiguous in that game. They even made it easy to do so using The Force. If you did, however, you earned "Dark Side Points." Too many of those and you lost the character to the GM. I generally played Jedi in that game and was always careful not to kill indiscriminately. In fact due to the nature of how a Lightsaber worked in that game, the majority of one of my characters kills came from purely defending himself.


----------



## Jester David

Late to the conversation. 
Read the thread after posting bout Doctor Who. And caught this post. Rattled in my head for a bit and I can't resist replying...



Imaculata said:


> Reveal Rey's link to the force and to Luke's lightsaber. Have a point to her entering the dark hole, leading to either a wise lesson about the Force, or some dark revelation about herself.



That was just more Abrams mysteriousness for the sake of mysteriousness. Like 90% of _Lost_ the mystery is far more interesting than the answer. If you go with the reasonable answer, this falls flat as it doesn't live up to the hype. Or you build things up to make the answer feel appropriately dramatic, and artificially construct a convoluted answer that just adds complexity for the sake of complexity. And also has the possibility of more plot holes.

I.e. why did the lightsaber call to her? 
It was the Living Force moving her in the direction she needed to go. Or because she was there when it was destroyed, which connected her to it beyond time. Or it just called to the first person with enough Force power, and that happened to be her.  All of which are solid and valid reasons that would work just fine, but aren't satisfying enough for a mystery that has been on the minds of some fans for two years. 
Really, it called to her because she needed to find it, and they never thought of a better way to work it into the plot.



Imaculata said:


> Remove the entire fake out with Holdo. Let the rebels be up front about their plan to escape to the planet Crait,



Poe wasn't up front with his boss. So why did his boss need to be up front with him? 
Really, why would a general and leader of the entire Resistance need to justify herself to a punk pilot without a plane who had already been demoted. Poe comes up to someone he knows is an experienced general with more battles under her belt than him and mansplains the situation to her. Really, Poe's lucky she didn't dump him in the detention block for the rest of the trip... 



Imaculata said:


> so that Poe and Finn don't not mount some unnecessary suicide plan that ultimately doesn't go anywhere. Let the First Order be aware that they are fleeing to Crait, and be confident that they can crush them on that planet. There's really no way for them to escape from it, so the place is a death trap.



The HUGE problem with that change is it means the First Order is aware they're fleeing to Crait. This means that Holdo's plan is inherently flawed and suicide. (Why is it okay her plan won't work but Finn & Poe's plan failing has to be removed from the movie?) Instead of one sideplot, it makes the entire movie pointless. 

See, I love the Poe/ Finn plan failing. How many times have we seen a million-to-one suicide mission succeed in _Star Wars_? They're going on their mission and you just expect it will succeed. You don't even question. Even if they get captured it will just be a set-back before they save the Resistance fleet. And the codebreaker with them who seems out for the money will of course have a heart of gold and come back for them when things seem dire.
_The Last Jedi_ was all about flipping tropes. It was a movie about subverting expectations and pulling the rug out from people just when they're comfortable. 
Finn and Poe's plan doesn't just fail... it makes things worse. The slicer doesn't have a heart of gold: he's exactly what he appears to be. So he sells out the Resistance. Finn and Poe's plan gets people killed. It almost destroys the entire Resistance. That's the point.

Well... that and it gets Rose and Finn onto the planet to introduce the kids we'll see later. So it's not just nameless kids we don't care about talking about how Luke Skywalker appeared in front of a legion of Stormtroopers and AT-ATs and avoided blaster fire. How he saved the Resistance single-handedly before teleporting away. We see how 



Imaculata said:


> Holdo still crashes her ship into the First Order, but she does it as soon as possible, so the rest can escape to the planet. This way she doesn't look incompetent.



That was an editing thing. Movie time doesn't pass the same as real time. It feels longer because there's shots between her deciding and acting. Things are going on simultaneously, but seem sequential because that's how they're shown.
If you just watch her scenes and the related shots, it doesn't feel as long. 
Plus, y'know. Drama and suspense. 



Imaculata said:


> Leia should have died in outer space. I have no issue with her using her Force powers to float to safety. But with the recent death of Carrie Fisher, they had an easy out here. Why didn't they take it? Why have the character whose actress died, survive, and the character whose actor is still alive and well, die?



I don't see why Hamill being alive should have any bearing on the survival of Luke anymore than Ford being alive has a bearing on Solo remaining dead. 

Why did Leia not stay dead? So she could have the reunion scene with Luke. So her final performance and scenes wouldn't be forgotten. (That and they'd have to digitally remove her from the background shots of the last chunk of the movie...) This was Carrie's final performance. We should be able to see it.

Yes, it's sad we don't get the "ending" for Leia. Oh well. I'm sure there'll be a comic or novel. Maybe they can work her into IX with some deleted scenes. 



Imaculata said:


> Instead of having Finn and Rose go to the Casino planet to find some hacker, and then also try and board the Dreadnought unnoticed, have them travel to the Casino planet to activate a distress beacon. It would be easy to set it up in such a way that the First Order is blocking rebel communication, so they can't call for help. Finn and Rose need to get down to the planet to remotely activate a distress beacon that will hopefully get reinforcements to Crait in time. Why over complicate things? The First Order however has a heavy presence on the Casino planet, thus adding extra tension to Finn's adventures on the planet. Throw in a battle with some AT ST walkers while you're at it, and you have everything for an exciting finale.



So... the First Order is blocking communications. Why are Finn and Rose going to a planet to call for help rather than just open space. And activating a distress beacon that tells _everyone_ where you are when the point is to hide. And they're going to a planet with a heavy First Order presence rather than a Resistance allied one... why?
How is that remotely less complicated? 



Imaculata said:


> Rey and Kylo still team up against snoke, but snoke regenerates instantly. Thus his menace is not diminished (plus you can still have him show up in the third movie), and his guards actually have a reason to fight Rey and Kylo.



Why? Just so we can have the menacing Emperor figure in the series again? 
Snoke was never really interesting. Neither was Sidious really. Both were just bland evil for the sake of evil. Snoke was only fascinating because he was mysterious. He was an unknown. But reveal who he was and then that mystique goes away. We have two trilogies based around the master puppeteer evil Force user who sits in a chair and schemes. This one is going in a different direction. This means Snoke isn't the focus: he's the MacGuffin. The hand the magician is waving to distract you from the sleight of hand. 



Imaculata said:


> Rather than Kylo immediately turning back to the dark side again, have them both become renegade Jedi.



Kylo Ren never turned away in the first place. He just killed his master like all Dark Side users tend to do.



Imaculata said:


> Snoke then sends in the Knights of Ren to kill them, which leaves both Rey and Kylo critically injured, until they are rescued by Luke with his astral projection thingy. Luke then fights the Knights of Ren, giving Rey and Kylo a chance to escape. Although Luke tells Rey to leave Kylo behind, she refuses, and the two escape together on the Falcon, before Luke's clever trick is revealed. Luke then does NOT die after the astral projection, so he can still show up in the next movie.



Luke doesn't get to save Rey. Luke isn't the hero of the film or this trilogy. Rey is. She saves herself. And then she saves Luke, by pushing him back into the fight, allowing him to redeem himself and find peace. 
(And Luke can still show up in the next movie as a force ghost. )

Just like how Obi Wan, the hero of the first trilogy, is quickly killed in Episode IV to make room for the new hero. Like how Yoda can fight in the prequels but is just the adviser in the original trilogy who passes on the Legacy before dying. 

A new trilogy was _always_ going to wreck the original cast. It had to because, to tell the story, they had to have lost after _Return of the Jedi_. If they won and everything worked out, there'd be no more stories to tell. So the Empire had to continue and the heroes' victory had to be diminished. The only alternative is a new threat that is unrelated to the old, which feels tacked-on and risks not feeling thematically appropriate, like what they EU did with the Yuuzhan Vong. 
(This is probably why Lucas' planned episode VII to IX were smaller and more personal. So the happy ending could be maintained.)
While I would have enjoyed the fanservice of having Luke be the all powerful Jedi Master and striding into battle, the EU showed how boring that is. The perfect Luke that survives and can kick anyone's ass isn't interesting. They're a static character that is hard to write stories for. (Just like how the writers of the _Clone Wars_ series commented on how they struggled to write Yoda-centric stories.) And the above isn't true to Luke's character who spends all his time screwing up and making the wrong decisions. Luke was always the bad pupil who never did what he was told. Why would he be a better teacher? Similarly, the later EU novels really suffered by having Han, Leia, and Luke be irreplaceable and unkillable, and just ended up repeatedly doing horrible things to the second generation as a result. If Disney hadn't wiped out the EU when it did, the novels were approaching an awkward position of having all the new characters dead or evil while having all the original characters too old to reasonably contribute. 
The story needs to move forward.



Imaculata said:


> The Knights of Ren will hunt Rey and Kylo in the next movie, and we can now probably squeeze a cool lightsaber fight with Luke and Rey versus the Knights of Ren into movie 3.



And instead we get Rey alone against Ren _and_ his knights. 

But, really, "squeezing a cool lightsaber fight" into a film isn't a good reason to alter a plot. Cool lightsaber fights are a dime a dozen. There's sooooo many on YouTube. They've been done. The fight against the Praetorian Guard with their funky weapons added a new spin to the fight that a generic lightsaber battle with the Knights of Ren would lack. 



Imaculata said:


> The rebels escape to Crait, where an actual battle with the First Order takes place. Because why have these awesome looking AT-AT's in your movie if you're not going to use them?



_Empire Strikes Back_ established that AT-ATs were basically mobile siege weapons/ troop carriers that weren't good at shooting down small Rebel fighters. Really, in terms of plot, they're there to blast Luke. And sell Lego...



Imaculata said:


> The rebels try and hold back the invasion with their inferior vehicles, but they are getting crushed. That is until Finn manages to call in reinforcements just in time,



Yay! Deus ex machina to the rescue!
Plus, the whole damn point is that the Resistance is on their own. They need to save themselves. There's no help coming. No reinforcements. No Republic. If they want help... they need to inspire the next generation. They have to do more than blow up First Order Stormtroopers.



Imaculata said:


> only to get captured himself together with Rose (which leaves Finn and Rose captured at the start of the next movie).



Why? 
So we can keep Finn and Rey apart even more? So they can continue to have this weird relationship despite having known each other for an afternoon and not having a single conversation about themselves...



Imaculata said:


> Neither Finn or Rose take part in the battle on Crait, and Rose does not crash her ship into that of Finn. That was dumb.



Wasn't a fan of that... But it was an important lesson for Finn. He hates the First Order, and this was his opportunity to be a more rounded individual. To be more than someone who hates. 
Plus, again, the hero sacrificing themselves to crash into the vulnerable superweapon is a pretty known trope. And _The Last Jedi_ is all about reversing expectations... That's the _The Last Jedi_ drinking game: drink every time a trope is subverted or lamp shaded.



Imaculata said:


> thanks to a hidden weapon on the planet that the First Order does not know about (maybe they have one of those hammerhead ships from Rogue One?).



Yay! More deus ex machina!
And a good thing the Rebels never used that giant planetary superweapon in any of the fights they really needed it during the original trilogy...


----------



## Flexor the Mighty!

Majoru Oakheart said:


> From what I got in the movie was that between ESB and RotJ, Luke basically got 95% of the way to being a Jedi. He learned to be at peace, to plan instead of being reckless, and he realized that winning meant converting his father, not killing him. So most of his growth was completed. He went on the mission knowing he would be captured and that he would be brought before Vader. He wanted to in order to convince him to come back to the Light Side.
> 
> This was a complete turn around from his failure in the cave where he saw Vader and pulled out his lightsaber immediately to kill him. We see Luke in that movie not acting out of hatred or fear. He literally walks into the place he fears the most in order to save someone, not kill them.
> 
> As I said in the previous post, he lets his anger take over briefly...but it passes. He has won and become a Jedi. He is strong enough to not have moments of weakness in the future now. He got the last 5% of the way to becoming a full Jedi.
> 
> 
> There's no Republic anymore. The Senate and all their ships were destroyed. There are individual planets left who used to belong to the Republic, but it's gone. They make that clear in TLJ. The First Order will take over the entire galaxy in a matter of weeks according to the movie, since there's no one left to resist them.
> 
> The Jedi Order doesn't really exist. The Jedi Order implies rules, a power structure...and more than one Jedi. There's one person out there who can use the Force who has a bunch of books on the Jedi philosophy. The Jedi Order is destroyed. But she isn't even a Jedi yet.
> 
> As for problems. Lots of problems can show up even with the Republic intact. There are like 100 books each with problems in them while the New Republic exists. You could have an attack from another Galaxy, yep. You could have part of the Republic breaking away and doing a civil war...though that's likely too much like the prequels. You could have some hidden dark side users becoming essentially terrorists and they have to stop them. You could have the First Order show up, but rather than have the ability to destroy the entire Republic in one shot, you could have had a huge war between large fleets.
> 
> You could have Kylo run off with his Knights of Ren and have a cool battle between them and all of the Jedi Luke trained. There's lots of stories that can be told.
> 
> 
> They don't HAVE to face inner conflict. Writing theory tells us that there are 3 types of conflict: Man against Man, Man against Nature, and Man against Himself. You can have a compelling story where all of the growth comes from the conflict between someone and their enemies. A large number of movies do it all the time where the main character doesn't really "grow", they just survive and win against whatever is against them.
> 
> These characters already finished their three part journey in order to find their flaws, stumble because of them and then finally overcome them. You are suggesting that they need to give them back the same flaws they learned to overcome just so that they can overcome them a second time. We've seen that already. Let's do something else.
> 
> 
> Han's crisis was that he didn't care about anyone other than himself. He treated everyone like pawns, he only cared about money. He learns to care about the galaxy, about the Rebellion and about Leia. He learns people and connections are important. That's his story arc. That's how he grew in the 3 movies.
> 
> So, the new movie picks up with Han having given up on his family. His son betrayed everyone and ran off and he left, breaking their family even more. He no longer helps with the cause and has gone back to just making money for himself. Literally everything he learned in the old movies was brought back to the starting point. His character growth was reversed...just so we could see him do it again.
> 
> Leia fought to destroy the Empire so she could establish a new Republic. Her growth was mostly external but her defeat of the Empire IS one of her moments of growth. The other ones were learning to care about Han and her brother and learning that working together was the best idea. So where are we left? The Republic she worked to create is destroyed and she no longer has Luke or Han. Her moments of triumph are still fighting for the Republic, looking for Han, trying to reunite her family and seeing Luke again. Those are only triumphs because they ripped them away so they could reestablish them again.
> 
> Luke is the same way, he goes from being impulsive, reckless, quick to anger, and naive to calm, collected, thoughtful and mature Jedi. Where are we in TLJ? He's gone back to being whiny, quick to anger and is quick to decide to kill Ben and quick to decide to run off and die by himself. He doesn't even consider himself a Jedi any longer. 30 years later he's forgotten everything he learned and has gone back to being the Luke with all the flaws we saw in the first movie.
> 
> 
> 
> Luke was flawed before...but he showed up on Cloud city when his friends needed him. He was flawed before but showed up to confront the Emperor in RotJ. He's done that. Watching him do it again is pointless. Han learned to show up when he returned to help them at the end of ANH and joined the Rebellion full time instead of running away, which is what he was doing before and during ANH. He shouldn't have to prove that he can show up. He already did that. Leia was always fighting. True. She WON, however. That's was the culmination of her storyline. Now she had to lose so she could fight all over again. But we've done that already.
> 
> The characters were flawed and they grew past those flaws. That was kind of the point of the first 3 Star Wars movies.




You are on fire!!!!   Amazing analysis.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Ovinomancer said:


> Of course he grew, no one's claiming otherwise, but he didn't become a wise Jedi on-screen in any of them.  He was still a hot-headed risk taker in RotJ, as evidenced by the continual set of risks he ran from Jabba's Palace through Endor to the confrontation with Vader and the Emperor.  None of that was what a calm, collected, and centered Jedi Master would choose to do.
> 
> The argument you're making here doesn't deflect from the fact that Luke of teh OT isn't how you (and others) keep trying to portray him: as someone who would never have a moment of weakness.




My problem isn't that he has moments of weakness. My problem is that his moment of weakness is pretty much the opposite of his moments of growth. He faced Darth Vader and turned him to the Light Side. Darth Vader wasn't just some hypothetical bad guy. He was a bad guy. He had killed the entire Jedi Order (many of the Jedi personally), and was indirectly responsible for the death of billions. That is the kind of guy he faced, the kind of guy he turned.

But his nephew, who he only sees a great potential for a future on the Dark Side, he contemplates to kill for a moment. I already have a rpoblem with that, but let's give him that. But once he gets to his better self, but has to face Kylo and he loses his trainees, he gives up on the Jedi idea completely? He completley gives up helping his friends and everything he has worked for? That he rushes to help others against the better judgement of his masters, yes, I could see that might still be in him. But it being turned around into running off, leaving his sister and his best friend and their son hanging?

If he had to deal with a long line of pupils that turned to the dark side that he all had to fight and kill (or at least imprison), maybe I could see him turning bitter and finally giving him up when even his nephew turns.


> Torn down?
> 
> How so?  The Jedi Order is still going on, the New Republic still exists, if badly hurt, and there's still a chance that the son of Han and Leia will turn back to the light (I'm not sure what I hope about this, honestly).  Did you really want a trilogy where everything was as awesome as you imagined it, with Han and Leia being happily-ever-aftering and Luke being a kick-ass Jedi Master at the head of a new Jedi Order?  What, praytell, do you think would the conflict be?  With all of the superheroes around, what could possibly function as a suitable crisis?  Invasion from outside the galaxy (obviously EU sarcasm is obvious)?
> 
> To tell a hero's story, the hero has to fail at some point.  They have to face that failure and overcome.  We can't have the cast of the OT be perfect from the get go, they needed to be in crisis to tell a compelling story.  Anything else leaves them as utterly fake.  So, Han's crisis is his son.  He rises to the occasion by reaching out to Ben, and dies for it (and I'm pretty sure he knew that was a likely outcome, so double points).  Leia's crisis is the Republic.  It has to be in jeopardy for her to have something to fight for.  She rises to the occasion and doesn't back down.  Luke's crisis is himself, as it's always been.  And he rises to that occasion and shows that he's truly earned the title Jedi Master only at the end of TLJ, where he accepts himself finally.
> 
> So, no, the OT isn't burned down, because what was built in the OT wasn't those institutions, but rather characters -- characters who were and are flawed, and yet still show up for the job.  I love Luke far more now than I ever did, because he was flawed but still showed up.  Han, too.  His death coming from walking towards pain and danger instead of running away was awesome -- a really summation of the movement he started in E4.  And Leia, Leia is the least changing of all of them.  She always fought, and she's still fighting, and I am deeply saddened that we'll never see the culmination of her arc the way it should have been.  I have a feeling it was moving towards her giving the fight to others to carry, to finally resting.  Also, I really, really hate that Google thinks Leia is misspelled.   Everything the OT built is here, and these characters cannot breathe the honest and painful way they do without it.  Don't think that the OT is some institution of victory or happily-ever-after because it's not.  It's about characters and their journey, not their destination.  This new trilogy is closing the journeys of those characters, and providing endings they _earned _along the way.




3 Options I would have preferred probably:

1) The characters are recast. (Give the old actors camoes in other roles). The story continues and we are now about rebuilding the Republic in some way, and new threats on the horizon.

2) We're so much later that the original characters are really gone. A new threat is emerging, but there really was a restored Republic that worked succesfully for a long time and our heroes got to enjoy "basking in their success".

3) The heroes are as old as now, a new threat emerges, and the heroes give the heft of saving the galaxy to a new generation of heroes.

Or maybe 
4) Reimagination of Star Wars. 

But having all the hero efforts to be wasted and undone, and seeing them all in sad to bitter positions with little hope for them to see success in their lifetime again... No, that doesn't really feel like a choice I would make.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> My problem isn't that he has moments of weakness. My problem is that his moment of weakness is pretty much the opposite of his moments of growth. He faced Darth Vader and turned him to the Light Side. Darth Vader wasn't just some hypothetical bad guy. He was a bad guy. He had killed the entire Jedi Order (many of the Jedi personally), and was indirectly responsible for the death of billions. That is the kind of guy he faced, the kind of guy he turned.
> 
> But his nephew, who he only sees a great potential for a future on the Dark Side, he contemplates to kill for a moment. I already have a rpoblem with that, but let's give him that. But once he gets to his better self, but has to face Kylo and he loses his trainees, he gives up on the Jedi idea completely? He completley gives up helping his friends and everything he has worked for? That he rushes to help others against the better judgement of his masters, yes, I could see that might still be in him. But it being turned around into running off, leaving his sister and his best friend and their son hanging?
> 
> If he had to deal with a long line of pupils that turned to the dark side that he all had to fight and kill (or at least imprison), maybe I could see him turning bitter and finally giving him up when even his nephew turns.



Vader was Luke's _father_.  This bit is the crux of their relationship and what actually turns Vader, not Luke's daring heroism.  That's just a catalyst, but the functional relationship is father/son.  That's what was so powerful and resonated.

And, yes, Luke felt he was past all such things, but suddenly, in the moment of crisis when he faced the darkness inside Ben Solo, he still reached out to pain and anger and fear -- he wasn't the person he though he was, hoped he was, he was a person still capable of error.  And the result of that error was catastrophic -- his nephew murdering the other students, destroying Luke's temple, and setting out to join the powerful Darkside Force user among the 1st Order.  All because Luke had a moment of weakness and failed to keep Ben Solo from the Dark side.  That utterly shook his faith, both in himself, because he failed himself there in addition to Ben, and in the Force, because he faith in it didn't save him this time.  So he quits, totally in character as established in the OT.

But, eventually, he learns a harsh lesson -- that failure isn't the end or the beginning, but a step along the way, and so faces his failure and it's costs, accepts them, and moves forward.  It's a moment that sums up Luke's entire journey - he moves from faith in the Force to faith in himself, something he's always lacked - and culminates in his greatest success.



> 3 Options I would have preferred probably:
> 
> 1) The characters are recast. (Give the old actors camoes in other roles). The story continues and we are now about rebuilding the Republic in some way, and new threats on the horizon.
> 
> 2) We're so much later that the original characters are really gone. A new threat is emerging, but there really was a restored Republic that worked succesfully for a long time and our heroes got to enjoy "basking in their success".
> 
> 3) The heroes are as old as now, a new threat emerges, and the heroes give the heft of saving the galaxy to a new generation of heroes.
> 
> Or maybe
> 4) Reimagination of Star Wars.
> 
> But having all the hero efforts to be wasted and undone, and seeing them all in sad to bitter positions with little hope for them to see success in their lifetime again... No, that doesn't really feel like a choice I would make.




Again with this wasted effort.  Luke turned Vader.  Still happened?  Instead, you seem to be upset because you were told as part of the new backstory that he started a Jedi Temple (where did he strive for this in the OT?) and that failed.  Which part of the OT does this invalidate?

Leia wanted to beat the Empire.  Done, and still done.  Now, we're upset that a completely new threat, which superficially resembles the old Empire but is something different, has arisen to threaten the 30 year span of the New Republic?

Han wanted to be a hero.  He was.  Not invalidated.  And he got to finish his story going out a hero again.  In the meantime, we're told as part of the new backstory that he married Leia and had a kid and lived happily until the kid went nuts and killed a bunch of people.  But this doesn't invalidate anything in the OT for Han, and he gets to close out his story by returning, making up with Leia and being a father to Ben.  Ben, of course, is a bad guy, so it goes badly.

Nothing in the new films invalidates anything in the OT that _you didn't invent yourself and bring into the movie_.


----------



## hopeless

Sometimes tearing down everything that came before isn't such a great idea!
In TFA it was about finding Luke if that was true why reveal SKB?
Once they knew where he was they could use that abomination to insure he would never be a problem, but instead they blew up the New Republic capital apparently demolishing that entire organisation and fleet.
Unlikely but we've yet to discover what happened to them.
Battlefront 2 apparently reveals oh right spoilers!

Anyway they have a fleet and apparently can man them ignoring the fact kidnapping entire families doesn't make them loyal so maybe that's how the Resistance finds it backup?
Biggs Darklighter of the future and his friends hmm I wonder how secure those new imperial ships are?


----------



## Morrus

I think “burned it all down” is the new “raped my childhood”. It’s hard to take such hyperbole seriously. Sometimes the internet isn’t a good thing.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Ovinomancer said:


> Vader was Luke's _father_.  This bit is the crux of their relationship and what actually turns Vader, not Luke's daring heroism.  That's just a catalyst, but the functional relationship is father/son.  That's what was so powerful and resonated.



Ben is his nephew, the child of his twin sister and his best friend. Luke is the guy that abandons the Jedi training he so desperately wanted to save them. 



> And, yes, Luke felt he was past all such things, but suddenly, in the moment of crisis when he faced the darkness inside Ben Solo, he still reached out to pain and anger and fear -- he wasn't the person he though he was, hoped he was, he was a person still capable of error.  And the result of that error was catastrophic -- his nephew murdering the other students, destroying Luke's temple, and setting out to join the powerful Darkside Force user among the 1st Order.  All because Luke had a moment of weakness and failed to keep Ben Solo from the Dark side.  That utterly shook his faith, both in himself, because he failed himself there in addition to Ben, and in the Force, because he faith in it didn't save him this time.  So he quits, totally in character as established in the OT.
> 
> But, eventually, he learns a harsh lesson -- that failure isn't the end or the beginning, but a step along the way, and so faces his failure and it's costs, accepts them, and moves forward.  It's a moment that sums up Luke's entire journey - he moves from faith in the Force to faith in himself, something he's always lacked - and culminates in his greatest success.



But "quitting" and "giving up" doesn't really seem to do what Luke do. His faith was already utterly shattered in Empire Strikes Back. Everything he believed about himself was put into question. And to make things worse - his best friend was just frozen in carbonite. But he didn't stop there and ran away for a few decades. He worked with his friends to get Han out.

---

Yesterday I watched the movie again with my sisters and some friends (this time in German). There are still a lot of scenes that I like. I really wasn't convinced by Kylo Ren in TFA, but I think Driver really performed well here, and so did most of the cast. Mark Hamill was definitely very enjoyable. On that level quite enjoyable IMO and Star Wars could use more of that. 

Also, it's definitely possible to see some hints that something is up with Luke in his confrontation with Kylo Ren (but on the level that I am clueless about when I watch the scene uninformed.)

I don't really like t he scene where Rose is stopping Finn from his suicide attack, but I think it's reasonable to see it as being a pointless attempt at the time. The mini-superlaser is already heating up considerable at the time, I could easily see that Finn would never arrive it in time to do any damage.

However I am a bit confused on when the Hacker figured out about those cloaked escape ships, since there really doesn't seem to be any clear dialog about it between Finn's team and the Command Ship.


I am stil a bit surprised that a person that apparently lived on one of those mono-climatic desert planets can swim. Maybe that is really a force thing? It's not training or experience, just... The Force? Kinda like Anakin was such an accomplished pod racer despite humans normally being "too slow" for the pod races compared to other species?


----------



## pukunui

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> However I am a bit confused on when the Hacker figured out about those cloaked escape ships, since there really doesn't seem to be any clear dialog about it between Finn's team and the Command Ship.



I was a bit confused about that too, but on subsequent viewings it became more clear. I don't think Poe/Finn/Rose ever use the term "cloaked" in front of DJ, but Poe does tell them that Holdo is fueling up the transports and abandoning ship. I suppose DJ just put two and two together and figured that the transports would have to be cloaked in order to have any chance of escaping.

As an aside, this is an interesting example of the advancement of technology in the GFFA, since the transports can be cloaked, whereas just 30 years before, we are told that ships the size of the Millennium Falcon can't have cloaking devices.


----------



## Jester David

Majoru Oakheart said:


> There's no Republic anymore. The Senate and all their ships were destroyed. There are individual planets left who used to belong to the Republic, but it's gone. They make that clear in TLJ. The First Order will take over the entire galaxy in a matter of weeks according to the movie, since there's no one left to resist them.




That bugged the crap out of me.
They blew up one system. Out of _thousands_. (Even in TLJ it just says "the Republic is decimated" meaning 90% is still around.)

That's like blowing up Washington and declaring that the USA is gone. And if the Washington DC was just nuked, it wouldn't be easy for, say, the Taliban to just take over the States. 

The worldbuilding in _The Force Awakens_ was super lazy, and TLJ didn't try to fix anything or explain.


----------



## Morrus

Jester David said:


> And if the Washington DC was just nuked, it wouldn't be easy for, say, the Taliban to just take over the States.




I guess it's not quite the same, in that there are no borders in space, unless people are building vast 3D spheres hundreds of light years across.

That always bugs me, those star maps of sci-fi universes with wavy lines of territory. The only territory is the systems themselves, and they are pinpricks in an ocean; the stuff in between doesn't matter, and you can't block that space. At least, not with the sort of tech in Star Wars. You need Q-level tech for that. Even if you have line of space stations between systems, you'd need millions of them to connect just two systems in 2D. Trillions in 3D.


----------



## Jester David

Morrus said:


> I guess it's not quite the same, in that there are no borders in space, unless people are building vast 3D spheres hundreds of light years across.
> 
> That always bugs me, those star maps of sci-fi universes with wavy lines of territory. The only territory is the systems themselves, and they are pinpricks in an ocean; the stuff in between doesn't matter, and you can't block that space. At least, not with the sort of tech in Star Wars. You need Q-level tech for that. Even if you have line of space stations between systems, you'd need millions of them to connect just two systems in 2D. Trillions in 3D.



There's precious few borders in real life. There's a small wire fence dividing the USA from Canada from kilometres and kilometres that you can just hop over. But I agree with space maps being weird. I was looking at _Star Trek_ maps recently and it occurred to me that the Federation must be filled with holes, as there are planets inhabited by less advanced people in the middle of their territory. Or people who just don't want to join the Federation. 

I'm more thinking of actually taking control of said pinpricks in the ocean. Which is implied to be the First Order now that the New Republic has been blown away. 

They dance around that works in _A New Hope_ with Tarkin's "the Galactic Senate has been dissolved" bit where they talk about how to keep control over their systems. With the local governors in charge and presumably reporting to the Emperor rather than their senator. So the governors likely had their own police and security forces to maintain order. 
(Almost a feudal type system.)

If you blow up the heart of the Republic, you don't take control. That's dissolving the senate... with lasers. But the people in charge locally are still in charge and aren't going to automatically bow down to the First Order, whom even a coalition of one or two local forces will presumably outnumber. 
Again, without a Death Star, fear of which would keep the smaller systems in line, there's nothing stopping the former Republican worlds from flipping the First Order the bird or quickly uniting to re-reestablish the Republic. We've never seen a First Order world or what territory they have. It's likely not that much compared to the sheer size of the former Republic (after all... if they had more ships, wouldn't they have called reinforcements in to cut off the Resistance?).

And, for that matter, what happened to the Republic fleet? Was it really all parked around the single system?


----------



## pukunui

Jester David said:


> And, for that matter, what happened to the Republic fleet? Was it really all parked around the single system?



That was the "home fleet" - the bulk of their forces but not all of them. Presumably there are other, smaller fleets around the galaxy.


----------



## Morrus

Jester David said:


> There's precious few borders in real life. There's a small wire fence dividing the USA from Canada from kilometres and kilometres that you can just hop over.




Exactly. And then compound the difficulty with it being:

a) billions and billions of times larger

and

b) in 3D

The whole border in space concept just doesn't work. You can control a system, but not the space between them.


----------



## Mercurius

I finally saw the movie. I was underwhelmed and to be honest it was worse than I thought it would be. I liked it less than TFA, which at least had the novelty of the "we're back!" effect. This just took the fan-fictiony feel further and I didn't get any of the originality that some have talked about. 

My biggest problem with Disney Star Wars is that it just feels like they're trying too hard - on so many levels - to re-create some semblance of the magic of the original series, and the more they try the farther they fall away from being something new and interesting in its own right. They just don't have the magic and drama of the original series, or even the Lucas knack with imaginative visuals that the prequel trilogy had which, in hindsight, would have been fairly decent films with different Anakin Skywalker actors (especially one with better chemistry with Natalie Portman than Hayden Christensen...ugh). 

I am reminded of the impact that the third X-Men movie had on the first trilogy...it just kind of killed it. X2 was such a good movie and set up Dark Phoenix perfectly, and then the Last Stand was an utter train wreck.

Disney Star Wars isn't quite that bad, but it has a similar impact, imo. It really diminishes the original series in a way that the prequel trilogy--by virtue of being a prequel--didn't and couldn't. 

I have the distinct desire to want to say, "None of this is really what happened after Return of the Jedi - it is just one possible version of what could have happened."

You can pretty much run through the characters and see how most of them are lesser versions of original series characters. I mean, none of the villains have any real gravitas. As with Adam Driver, I like Domhnall Gleeson as an actor (he was great in _About Time_ and _Ex Machina_), but he's just horrible as Hux. Snoke was utterly worthless, a total mockery of the Emperor. And don't get me started on Darth Emo or Boba Phasma.

I'm still wondering what Finn adds to the story. I guess Poe Dameron finally came alive in this one, but even Rey seemed to lose a step from TFA. She kind of felt like a cypher in this one, without any real personality. And Luke? It felt a bit like Mark Hammill was being held at gun-point to play a role in a way he didn't really want to play it.

Yeah, the more I think about it, the more I feel _The Last Jedi_ was just not very good. The bottom line (for me) is that it fulfilled little or none of the promise of TFA, and just magnified its mediocre and poor elements. I'd rank it well below the original series and definitely lower than TFA and Rogue One, battling it out with Revenge of the Sith for 6th place.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

pukunui said:


> I was a bit confused about that too, but on subsequent viewings it became more clear. I don't think Poe/Finn/Rose ever use the term "cloaked" in front of DJ, but Poe does tell them that Holdo is fueling up the transports and abandoning ship. I suppose DJ just put two and two together and figured that the transports would have to be cloaked in order to have any chance of escaping.
> 
> As an aside, this is an interesting example of the advancement of technology in the GFFA, since the transports can be cloaked, whereas just 30 years before, we are told that ships the size of the Millennium Falcon can't have cloaking devices.




In fact, the new sequels definitely suggest that technological advancement in Star Wars is still happening a lot, and it kinda makes KOTOR and the like look less believable IMO, since they clearly suggest a very slow technological advancement. And of course, KOTOR's ideas were based on the claim of the age of the old republic and the many generations of Jedi that served it. KOTOR I can take or leave, it's not part of the (new) canon, of course, but it makes me wonder how the Jedi Order or the republic really looked 200 or 500 or 1,000 years ago.

I could explain away the Death Star with not being a major technological, but more a major logistical advancement - only the Empire had the resources and the _will_ to build a planet-destroying moon-sized starbase (and also do it in a manner that kept it out of the public's spotlight for a long time.) But things like cloaked transports or hyperspace tracking seem a bit different.


----------



## PunsAndDragons

When a destroyer is 'destroyed' why does it  'fall' from the edge of the film. There is no gravity. Yes, the explosion would produce a force - but it seems funny that the ships always 'fall down' when destroyed - when there is no 'down' in space.
Other than that, a good film!


----------



## Morrus

Puns_n_Dragons said:


> When a destroyer is 'destroyed' why does it  'fall' from the edge of the film. There is no gravity. Yes, the explosion would produce a force - but it seems funny that the ships always 'fall down' when destroyed - when there is no 'down' in space.
> Other than that, a good film!




Star Wars Space combat has always been WWII dogfight physics. Well, up until Poe did some new maneuvers in TLJ.


----------



## Joshua Randall

I've seen the movie twice now and, what can I say: I felt the need to post about it on the Internet because [-]I have learned nothing since the Usenet days[/-] I am sure you will all find my unique perspective enlightening and life changing.

And that? That snarky sentence I just wrote up there? That's everything wrong with The Last Jedi: too much Internet style snark. Coupled with some unbelievably bad writing which is honestly shocking for a major studio production.

Consider the ending of The Force Awakens. Rey spends about half an hour climbing a mountain and then the camera swirls around her and Luke for another ten minutes while she holds out the lightsaber. OK, it's only a few minutes, but still: precious MINUTES of running time. You don't squander that on a nothing scene, right?

We get a compressed version of that scene in TLJ to remind us where we left off, Luke takes the saber, and... tosses it over his shoulder?

NO! No, no, no. This is HORRIBLE. This is like someone being a deliberate dick during an improv routine and deliberately nullifying something that a previous performer established. You wouldn't do this in Second City, you wouldn't do it in in a role-playing game, and you sure as hell shouldn't do it in a major motion picture.

Do you want Luke to refuse to teach Rey (at first) for reasons? Sure, that's fine. He can refuse the lightsaber, with words, or by reluctantly taking it and then giving it back, or something. Anything other than the petulant Internet snark.gif style way of throwing it over his shoulder like it doesn't matter. Remember, this was the saber that Mazz had in a mysterious box in the previous film, the saber that Kylo Ren demanded from Finn, the saber that Rey used to defeat Kylo after Finn failed to do so. THIS IS AN IMPORTANT SABER.

It's not a joke prop that Luke can just toss over his shoulder. (The only thing missing from this scene to make it a perfect 4chan meme is the 'whoops' sound effect from a Benny Hill skit.)

But let's back up to the actual first scene of the movie, the incredibly gripping... two unnamed Rebel flunkies discussing munitions during the evacuation. Are you FREAKING kidding me? You could have opened with anything you wanted to, and you chose THIS? My goodness. Please find a better opening scene than this first draft nonsense.

Also, in your next draft, please cut this entire terrible waste of a casino planet section. It's a fractal of bad writing. You waste a scene with Mazz telling you only one hacker can do the job, you waste a scene with that hacker at a craps table, and then another hacker who can also do the job just happens to be in the next cell? Oh, and he also kept his hacking gear when he escaped? I mean, what the HELL? This is awful, introducing extraneous new characters for no reason, on an extraneous side-quest that accomplishes nothing other than to pad the already bloated running time.

Others have already picked on the bad jokey lines like 'holding for Hux' or 'page turners'. I'll pile on -- that scene with Poe and Hux is going to age terribly. Again, this isn't an Internet skit about bad cell phone reception, this is STAR WARS! Poe could've found any way to stall Hux. He could've used a Star Wars-y insult like 'nerf herder', he could have pretended to negotiate surrender, he could have given a rousing Rebel speech. Instead we get conference call jokes and at the end, a 'yo momma' joke. Really? REALLY?! Who wrote this, a 16-year-old?

Allow me to offer up another line that, to me, proves we're looking at a first draft.

Snoke welcomes Kylo Ren and Rey to the throne room.

Snoke: "My *faith* in you in restored, my good and *faithful* apprentice."

See those bolded words? (faith / faithful) Repeating the same word in different forms is a common 'rough draft' thing that you fix when editing. You don't leave those words repeated like that; it weakens the setence. (OK, yes, in rare cases you can repeat words for poetic effect but this random Snoke line is not at that level.)

How about this one when Rose meets Finn.

Rose: "I'm *doing talking* to a Rebellion hero! Ugh, '*doing talking*', what am I saying?" (paraphrased)

This is another classic sign of 'rough draft' writing: when a character calls out the bad writing directly! This is the writer's unconscious telling him, 'Hey, this sentence sucks. Please fix it so you don't sound stupid.' But he LEFT IT IN! This is terrible. This line wouldn't have made it out of the slush pile at Isaac Asimov's Science Fiction Magazine and it should NEVER have made it into the production script of a movie.

I'm going to stop here because this is making me depressed. I wanted to like this movie, and I did like parts of it, but geez. Please hire a good writer. Please.


----------



## MoonSong

Nostalgia Critic on The Last Jedi

[video=youtube;J3gciAsltCw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3gciAsltCw[/video]

In short, the movie was a disjointed mess with editing problems an plot points that went nowhere. And it was awesome...


----------



## wicked cool

Can someone explain the quest for the map/R2 shuts down tie in to this movie. I'm going to assume that Luke leaves shortly after Kylo kills everyone at the academy?

timeline
luke trys to kill Kylo-Kylo feels betrayed but wasn't 100% bad right before that -but then kills everyone at the temple with some other students (the vision we have of the knights is the night of the temple killing?)-Luke decides to leave but creates a cryptic map which both parties have figured out except the last part?-r2 awakens (still not sure why R2 shuts down?)-Mazz has his old lightsaber (did Luke know where it was). 

Based on above feels to me like there are 2 scripts for this overall story and parts of awakens have been rewritten to fit Johnsons vision. Now if Abrams goes back and writes back in Mazz, Snoke , knights of Ren etc will the defenders of 2 be upset? I personally don't believe there was an rough drafts/outline of the trilogy other than we have to move on from older actors (it was very clear that Ford only wanted to be in 1 movie so he had to die) and start with a new vision. 

I think the force is becoming something that is just known and no longer needs to be taught or refined (the boy in the stable) and star wars becomes the next divergent  where young teens battle each other


----------



## hopeless

As it stands Rey needs a living tutor to be taught properly, a Force Ghost will not cut it!
Sadly it's clear they will make whatever they want especially messing up the script for reasons that I seriously don't understand and if I could it doesn't feel like something worth watching!
What is going on?
Even Star Wars Rebels respected canon, this... well it would be nice to understand their thinking!


----------



## Mallus

hopeless said:


> As it stands Rey needs a living tutor to be taught properly, a Force Ghost will not cut it!



Does she?

Luke teaches Rey the true nature of the Force, watches her impulsively jump into the Dark Side Hole, then wisely, reject its lure and climb back out, and then zoom off to save her friends and save Kylo's soul. I'd say she's good to go. She's as ready as Luke was in Empire. More so, even. 

What a Jedi needs is an understanding of the Force and to decide their relationship to it. Everything else is dogma & baggage. Recall that the whole prequel trilogy raised the question of the value late Republic Jedi teachings. 



> ... well it would be nice to understand their thinking!



I think I can explain it.

Rian Johnson took Star Wars seriously. He thought a lot about it. Then he made _The Last Jedi_. To immense credit, he even put some jokes in, despite thinking seriously a lot about Star Wars . 

(obviously this wasn't going to work for for some people)


----------



## billd91

hopeless said:


> As it stands Rey needs a living tutor to be taught properly, a Force Ghost will not cut it!




Do we know this for a fact? Living tutors didn't seem to stop the Jedi Order from becoming sclerotic and producing the weapon that would ultimately bring them down. A living tutor didn't prevent Ben Solo from being corrupted by a Dark Force outsider. Maybe it's time for a completely different approach.




hopeless said:


> Sadly it's clear they will make whatever they want especially messing up the script for reasons that I seriously don't understand and if I could it doesn't feel like something worth watching!
> What is going on?
> Even Star Wars Rebels respected canon, this... well it would be nice to understand their thinking!




Of course they'll make whatever they want. They're the ones who own and control the material. And since the box office is pretty decent and fan reactions as surveyed coming out of the theaters is high, it seems more people are onboard with their direction than are not.

If you want to understand their thinking, you might find it easier if you approach the subject with fewer preconceived assumptions and expectations. The internet peanut gallery makes it pretty clear that many people can't get over their attachment to their own preconceptions.


----------



## Mallus

I don't mean to nitpick your fixes, you you did get a few things wrong about TLJ... 



Imaculata said:


> Reveal Rey's link to the force and to Luke's lightsaber.



They did. Rey's link is she's a Force-sensitive with enormous latent abilities (from a family of no-good junk dealers). 



> Have a point to her entering the dark hole, leading to either a wise lesson about the Force, or some dark revelation about herself.



Rey absolutely learned a valuable lesson in the Dark Side Hole. She learned the Dark Side has *nothing to offer her*. So she rejects it and climbs back out.   

We also get a lovely visualization of how the Dark Side works; it's selfishness rather than connection. Note how the film ends with Kylo surrounded by people who fear and despise him, effectively alone, while Rey's flying away surrounded by adoptive family. 



> I have no issue with her using her Force powers to float to safety. But with the recent death of Carrie Fisher, they had an easy out here. Why didn't they take it?



Probably to avoid the appearance they were exploiting the death of a beloved actress. Instead of mirroring Fisher's death in Leia's arc, they gave us an image of her character at her most powerful, most magnificent. Reminding the audience Leia isn't just competent leader, she's a space-magical princess capable of rescuing herself even after being blasted into the vacuum of space.   



> The First Order however has a heavy presence on the Casino planet, thus adding extra tension to Finn's adventures on the planet. Throw in a battle with some AT ST walkers while you're at it, and you have everything for an exciting finale.



The point of Canto Bight is to give the audience a glimpse of the wider Star Wars universe where the First Order isn't the only evil. 



> Because why have these awesome looking AT-AT's in your movie if you're not going to use them?



Point of order: that awesome-looking line of AT-ATs *were* used. To fire an even-awesomer barrage into the lone man with a laser sword who walked out of the (not-so hinden) fortress to challenge them, i.e. legendary Jedi Master Luke Skywalker. 

Who legendarily walked out of said barrage unscathed. Tell me that wasn't epic. If even the truth of it was Jedi Mind-tricky. 



> Neither Finn or Rose take part in the battle on Crait, and Rose does not crash her ship into that of Finn. That was dumb.



Fighting to save the people you love by crashing a speeder into them while in close proximity to a beam super-weapon might be a little dumb, but it's totally Star Wars.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Joshua Randall said:


> I've seen the movie twice now and, what can I say: I felt the need to post about it on the Internet because [-]I have learned nothing since the Usenet days[/-] I am sure you will all find my unique perspective enlightening and life changing.
> 
> And that? That snarky sentence I just wrote up there? That's everything wrong with The Last Jedi: too much Internet style snark. Coupled with some unbelievably bad writing which is honestly shocking for a major studio production.
> 
> Consider the ending of The Force Awakens. Rey spends about half an hour climbing a mountain and then the camera swirls around her and Luke for another ten minutes while she holds out the lightsaber. OK, it's only a few minutes, but still: precious MINUTES of running time. You don't squander that on a nothing scene, right?
> 
> We get a compressed version of that scene in TLJ to remind us where we left off, Luke takes the saber, and... tosses it over his shoulder?
> 
> NO! No, no, no. This is HORRIBLE. This is like someone being a deliberate dick during an improv routine and deliberately nullifying something that a previous performer established. You wouldn't do this in Second City, you wouldn't do it in in a role-playing game, and you sure as hell shouldn't do it in a major motion picture.
> 
> Do you want Luke to refuse to teach Rey (at first) for reasons? Sure, that's fine. He can refuse the lightsaber, with words, or by reluctantly taking it and then giving it back, or something. Anything other than the petulant Internet snark.gif style way of throwing it over his shoulder like it doesn't matter. Remember, this was the saber that Mazz had in a mysterious box in the previous film, the saber that Kylo Ren demanded from Finn, the saber that Rey used to defeat Kylo after Finn failed to do so. THIS IS AN IMPORTANT SABER.
> 
> It's not a joke prop that Luke can just toss over his shoulder. (The only thing missing from this scene to make it a perfect 4chan meme is the 'whoops' sound effect from a Benny Hill skit.)



In less than a second, it establishes that Luke wants nothing to do with the lightsaber, nothing to do with Rey, and that something is deeply and badly wrong with him.  That scene wasn't bad writing, it was the opposite.  It was a shocking distillation of what would take a few minutes of dialog to establish, and not as strongly.

Yes, it would be a dick move in improv, because the rules of improv are to not invalidate what someone else has introduced, but this isn't improv, and instead of invalidating (the lightsaber is still an important character after all), it uses a shock move to introduce an entire theme without taking lots of time to explain it.  It was instantly understandable and sets the stage nicely for the antagonistic behavior of Luke in the following scenes.



> But let's back up to the actual first scene of the movie, the incredibly gripping... two unnamed Rebel flunkies discussing munitions during the evacuation. Are you FREAKING kidding me? You could have opened with anything you wanted to, and you chose THIS? My goodness. Please find a better opening scene than this first draft nonsense.
> 
> Also, in your next draft, please cut this entire terrible waste of a casino planet section. It's a fractal of bad writing. You waste a scene with Mazz telling you only one hacker can do the job, you waste a scene with that hacker at a craps table, and then another hacker who can also do the job just happens to be in the next cell? Oh, and he also kept his hacking gear when he escaped? I mean, what the HELL? This is awful, introducing extraneous new characters for no reason, on an extraneous side-quest that accomplishes nothing other than to pad the already bloated running time.



The Canto Bight scenes are critical for Finn's character arc -- they're where he learns a number of important lessons:  winging it doesn't work and there's more out there to fight for. It also introduces the very interesting plot twist about war racketeers being behind everything for profit, which I hope they pay off in IX.

I agree it's the weakest part of the movie, but it's still important and totally not a waste of time.  It pays off at the end of the movie.  And the 'pick up the guy you just found' puts paid to a decided trope when that goes about as horribly wrong as it can.

You seem to confuse the deliberate trope flipping as bad writing because it doesn't adhere to the tropes.



> Others have already picked on the bad jokey lines like 'holding for Hux' or 'page turners'. I'll pile on -- that scene with Poe and Hux is going to age terribly. Again, this isn't an Internet skit about bad cell phone reception, this is STAR WARS! Poe could've found any way to stall Hux. He could've used a Star Wars-y insult like 'nerf herder', he could have pretended to negotiate surrender, he could have given a rousing Rebel speech. Instead we get conference call jokes and at the end, a 'yo momma' joke. Really? REALLY?! Who wrote this, a 16-year-old?



Valid.  They didn't bother me, but I can see how others might not like the style.



> Allow me to offer up another line that, to me, proves we're looking at a first draft.
> 
> Snoke welcomes Kylo Ren and Rey to the throne room.
> 
> Snoke: "My *faith* in you in restored, my good and *faithful* apprentice."
> 
> See those bolded words? (faith / faithful) Repeating the same word in different forms is a common 'rough draft' thing that you fix when editing. You don't leave those words repeated like that; it weakens the setence. (OK, yes, in rare cases you can repeat words for poetic effect but this random Snoke line is not at that level.)



Psychological reinforcement.  This is moments before Ren betrays Snoke, so the hamfisted double reinforcement is there for a reason -- not because it's a 1st draft.  They're selling the point that Snoke now has faith in his apprentice.  It could have been less in your face, sure, but that's a stylistic quibble, not a failure of writing.  Audiences today seem to need to be punched in the face to get the point.  

Although, it's interesting that your complaints are about the punches to the face to reinforce a point because they were punches lacking artistry, but you still seem to have missed the point.


> How about this one when Rose meets Finn.
> 
> Rose: "I'm *doing talking* to a Rebellion hero! Ugh, '*doing talking*', what am I saying?" (paraphrased)
> 
> This is another classic sign of 'rough draft' writing: when a character calls out the bad writing directly! This is the writer's unconscious telling him, 'Hey, this sentence sucks. Please fix it so you don't sound stupid.' But he LEFT IT IN! This is terrible. This line wouldn't have made it out of the slush pile at Isaac Asimov's Science Fiction Magazine and it should NEVER have made it into the production script of a movie.
> 
> I'm going to stop here because this is making me depressed. I wanted to like this movie, and I did like parts of it, but geez. Please hire a good writer. Please.



Or, it's how real people really speak when suddenly confronted with their heroes after a tragedy.  Good grief, do you really want the character crying over her recently dead sister, being chased by the Order, and who just meets unexpectedly one of her heroes to have perfect diction?  That was an awesome humanizing point for Rose.

You seem to be heavily hung up on the basic style of writing, like someone that's taken some courses and been taught the "right" way to do a thing that you can't see that real writers pay lip service to those things but do their best work when they change it up, like writing characters with understandably bad diction or upending expected tropes to set scenes.  The things you're complaining about are like the Pirate Code -- more like guidelines than rules.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Mallus said:


> Rey absolutely learned a valuable lesson in the Dark Side Hole. She learned the Dark Side has *nothing to offer her*. So she rejects it and climbs back out.
> 
> We also get a lovely visualization of how the Dark Side works; it's selfishness rather than connection. Note how the film ends with Kylo surrounded by people who fear and despise him, effectively alone, while Rey's flying away surrounded by adoptive family.




This.  This, this, this.  So much this.


----------



## tomBitonti

wicked cool said:


> Can someone explain the quest for the map/R2 shuts down tie in to this movie. I'm going to assume that Luke leaves shortly after Kylo kills everyone at the academy?




I don’t have an answer.  But, your question brings up a point?  What’s up with droids in the movie?  BB8 does some repairs, but then gives away the intrusion on the star destroyer.  And, Luke dying at the end leaves behind the connection to R2, who is absent the scene.

Thx!
TomB


----------



## Ovinomancer

wicked cool said:


> Can someone explain the quest for the map/R2 shuts down tie in to this movie. I'm going to assume that Luke leaves shortly after Kylo kills everyone at the academy?
> 
> timeline
> luke trys to kill Kylo-Kylo feels betrayed but wasn't 100% bad right before that -but then kills everyone at the temple with some other students (the vision we have of the knights is the night of the temple killing?)-Luke decides to leave but creates a cryptic map which both parties have figured out except the last part?-r2 awakens (still not sure why R2 shuts down?)-Mazz has his old lightsaber (did Luke know where it was).
> 
> Based on above feels to me like there are 2 scripts for this overall story and parts of awakens have been rewritten to fit Johnsons vision. Now if Abrams goes back and writes back in Mazz, Snoke , knights of Ren etc will the defenders of 2 be upset? I personally don't believe there was an rough drafts/outline of the trilogy other than we have to move on from older actors (it was very clear that Ford only wanted to be in 1 movie so he had to die) and start with a new vision.
> 
> I think the force is becoming something that is just known and no longer needs to be taught or refined (the boy in the stable) and star wars becomes the next divergent  where young teens battle each other




Again, astrogation in Star Wars is as much about the path as the destination.  That a Jedi Temple planet exists, everyone knows.  What they don't know is how to get there.  The route is something that would take decades of dedicated work to find again.  But there was a partial map recovered from Imperial records.  Then there was an additional map that covered the gaps in those records, and showed the full route to the Jedi Temple planet (I forget it's name).

Luke didn't know where the old lightsaber was -- he dropped it over Bespin and never recovered it.  How Maz has it is a mystery.

R2 shut down because he's a fickle old bot and without his friend (Luke) he figured it was a better was to wait.

I agree that the arc of this trilogy was roughed out at best with lots and lots of room for each movie team (director/writers) to work.  

As for the force, okay, I disagree.


----------



## Flexor the Mighty!

Jester David said:


> That bugged the crap out of me.
> They blew up one system. Out of _thousands_. (Even in TLJ it just says "the Republic is decimated" meaning 90% is still around.)




Nobody uses decimated properly as it tends to be used as an annhilated variant.


----------



## Flexor the Mighty!

Morrus said:


> I think “burned it all down” is the new “raped my childhood”. It’s hard to take such hyperbole seriously. Sometimes the internet isn’t a good thing.




Well one is saying that the new stories have negatively impacted ones view of the old stories.  The other is saying that something in a piece of fiction ruined your memories of your real life as a kid.  Noticeable difference in levels of hyperbole.


----------



## Joshua Randall

Ovinomancer said:


> In less than a second, it establishes that Luke wants nothing to do with the lightsaber, nothing to do with Rey



Then Rey should've hopped on the Falcon with Chewie and gone off to an actually fun movie.

Luke being a dick is not something I needed to see on film. But apparently Rian Johnson confused his evil *character's* most quoted phrase from this movie (kill the past / burn the past) with a writing credo.



> The Canto Bight scenes are critical for Finn's character arc -- they're where he learns a number of important lessons:  winging it doesn't work



lol WHUT

Star Wars has always been about winging it. Always.



> there's more out there to fight for



He already learned that lesson in the previous movie. He only needed to re-learn it because of bad writing.



> It also introduces the very interesting plot twist about *war racketeers being behind everything for profit*, which I hope they pay off in IX.



Oh please, Ovi. Out of all the people on the 'net I never thought you would fall for this bleeding-heart-liberal pablum. This is a cliche so old it's not even remotely interesting any more. It is not interesting in the least. It the kind of thing I would expect in a student film.



> I agree it's the weakest part of the movie, but it's still important and totally not a waste of time.



It inexplicably sends two characters away in the most contrived way possible, it gives us the runaround with the hacker for no apparent reason (either the star destroyer is so hard to hack that only Mazz's friend can do it, or it's so easy that any dude in jail can do it), it advances a lame boring and trite social commentary message, it features a way drawn out chase scene complete with property destruction for no reason (you're going to tell me every single car on the street was owned by an evil war profiteer?), and it bogs down the film just as we are getting some interesting Rashomon style depictions of what actually happened between Luke and Ben. All this in a movie that destroys any semblance of character consistency *and* is 30 minutes too long, *at least*.



> And the 'pick up the guy you just found' puts paid to a decided trope when that goes about as horribly wrong as it can.



I... guess? So how does that bode for part 9 when they will presumably have to 'pick up the guy(s) you just found' to rebuild the Rebellion which is down to like 20 people? 'Wait, we'd better not trust these new guys we just picked up, they could betray us like DJ.'

Also... DJ? Seriously? I mean Snoke was a dumb name but at least sort of Star Wars-y.



> You seem to confuse the deliberate trope flipping as bad writing because it doesn't adhere to the tropes.



Deliberate trope flipping just because you *can*, *is* bad writing.



> Psychological reinforcement.  This is moments before Ren betrays Snoke, so the hamfisted double reinforcement is there for a reason



Hamfisted is never a good technique unless you want to mock a character.



> Audiences today seem to need to be punched in the face to get the point.



Again, I wouldn't expect you, Ovi, to indulge in this kind of 'audiences are stupid' mentality.



> your complaints are about the punches to the face to reinforce a point because they were punches lacking artistry, but you still seem to have missed the point



I didn't miss the points. I just thought they weren't worth making.



> Or, it's how real people really speak when suddenly confronted with their heroes after a tragedy.  Good grief, do you really want the character crying over her recently dead sister, being chased by the Order, and who just meets unexpectedly one of her heroes to have perfect diction?



People have perfect diction in movies all the time. It's an acceptable break from reality. When people do not have perfect diction, it must be for some reason.

Rose could've been humanized without bad writing.

(P.S. Yeah yeah some films deliberately have more true-to-life diction. This isn't that kind of film.)



> The things you're complaining about are like the Pirate Code -- more like guidelines than rules.



When you violate the guidelines in the service of a great reveal or a great scene or a great character, that's fine. When you do it out of laziness, incompetence, or just to be a snarky jerk, that's not fine.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Joshua Randall said:


> Then Rey should've hopped on the Falcon with Chewie and gone off to an actually fun movie.
> 
> Luke being a dick is not something I needed to see on film. But apparently Rian Johnson confused his evil *character's* most quoted phrase from this movie (kill the past / burn the past) with a writing credo.



You not liking it doesn't make it bad writing or a bad choice, though.  If it's the story you dislike, address that instead of making up things about bad writing to justify your dislike.  I've no problem with you disliking it.



> lol WHUT
> 
> Star Wars has always been about winging it. Always.



You're almost there....



> He already learned that lesson in the previous movie. He only needed to re-learn it because of bad writing.



No, he didn't.  He ran, selfishly.  The only thing he cares about it Rey, and only turned around when Rey was threatened.  In the beginning of this movie, he's running away again, with Rey being the only thing he cares about (he only says this a few times, so surely you didn't miss it).  It's only when his ability to get to Rey is threatened by being thrown in the brig that he consents to a path that keeps him out of the brig.



> Oh please, Ovi. Out of all the people on the 'net I never thought you would fall for this bleeding-heart-liberal pablum. This is a cliche so old it's not even remotely interesting any more. It is not interesting in the least. It the kind of thing I would expect in a student film.



It's very interesting because it's something not seen ever before in the Star Wars Universe.  It's always been 'big bad evil empire vs plucky heroes, where beating the big bads means everything is okay!'  This is actually a major departure from the usual, and that makes it not student film worthy (which is an interesting choice of criticism).

Also, you clearly pay as much attention to my posts of CM as you did to this movie.  Concern about the military-industrial complex isn't a liberal/conservative breakpoint.  But let's leave your interpretation of my politics, and politics in general, aside.



> It inexplicably sends two characters away in the most contrived way possible, it gives us the runaround with the hacker for no apparent reason (either the star destroyer is so hard to hack that only Mazz's friend can do it, or it's so easy that any dude in jail can do it), it advances a lame boring and trite social commentary message, it features a way drawn out chase scene complete with property destruction for no reason (you're going to tell me every single car on the street was owned by an evil war profiteer?), and it bogs down the film just as we are getting some interesting Rashomon style depictions of what actually happened between Luke and Ben. All this in a movie that destroys any semblance of character consistency *and* is 30 minutes too long, *at least*.



A lot to unpack here.  I've said this is the weakest part of the movie narratively, so, no I don't defend everything it does.  However, the 'chance' finding of another hacker in jail is classic tropes-ville.  That he doesn't work out upends that trope of the scruffy scoundrel with a heart of gold (Han Solo, anyone?).  When he gives the medallion back, it's clear this is the trope their setting up, only to subvert.  The 'social commentary' isn't that trite.  And, yes, they established that Canto Bight is the resort for all the war profiteers, so it is set up that all of the nice things are owned by war profiteers on-screen.  While I feel that's part of the weakness of this narrative, it's hard to argue that the movie didn't make that exact point.

You last is a very weird non sequitur -- where in any of that did you discuss character consistency?  And, that established, what's the inconsistency?



> I... guess? So how does that bode for part 9 when they will presumably have to 'pick up the guy(s) you just found' to rebuild the Rebellion which is down to like 20 people? 'Wait, we'd better not trust these new guys we just picked up, they could betray us like DJ.'
> 
> Also... DJ? Seriously? I mean Snoke was a dumb name but at least sort of Star Wars-y.



Hopefully, they'll come a bit more vetted than 'guy we met in jail.'  If that's the best argument 'but this trope reversal means they can't trust anyone again because they'll all be picked up exactly the same way - strangers found in jail,' well, then, I have news -- that's silly.

And DJ isn't any more silly than any other name in Star Wars.



> Deliberate trope flipping just because you *can*, *is* bad writing.



Yes, but this is not that.  It's playing with some established tropes in the setting and uses those reversals to propel the story.  It's not reversal for the sake of reversal.

Again, you're reading like someone with 'Writing 101' under their belt that's upset because some media doesn't follow the rules.



> Hamfisted is never a good technique unless you want to mock a character.



You don't read much Shakespeare, do you?  



> Again, I wouldn't expect you, Ovi, to indulge in this kind of 'audiences are stupid' mentality.



Really?  It's like you've never talked to me once over the last 12 years.  People being stupid is a core belief of mine.  People are dumb.  Persons may be smart.  When I talk to someone, I give them the benefit of the doubt that they may be a not-dumb person, but, on average, people are dumb.  

Movies almost always have to punch their points into faces.  I don't have a problem with that.



> I didn't miss the points. I just thought they weren't worth making.



Huh, talk about bad writing, then.  If you didn't miss the points the things you are criticizing were making, why, praytell, did you present them as making different points?



> People have perfect diction in movies all the time. It's an acceptable break from reality. When people do not have perfect diction, it must be for some reason.
> 
> Rose could've been humanized without bad writing.
> 
> (P.S. Yeah yeah some films deliberately have more true-to-life diction. This isn't that kind of film.)



Incorrect you are.  Limited, your vision is.  Meesa think that you didn't really think-a this-a through.  How many parsecs in the Kessel run?

Do I even need to step outside of Star Wars to show what a pointless argument this is?  No, no, I don't.



> When you violate the guidelines in the service of a great reveal or a great scene or a great character, that's fine. When you do it out of laziness, incompetence, or just to be a snarky jerk, that's not fine.



Luke being in an identity crisis is key to his character in this movie, so the lightsaber scene services that directly.  Rose is unpolished and from simple stock, so not using perfect diction humanizes and sets her backstory without explaining why she's secretly a Liza clone (that's a My Fair Lady reference).  DJ's betrayal certainly shocks some sense into Finn, as he realizes that just doing the minimum to get away gets people killed.  Although, narratively, he was shoehorned into that badly, as DJ did rescue them and show he was somewhat trustable.  Again, Canto Bight is the least narratively successful bit in the movie, no arguments, but it's not universally bad or a disaster -- it serves some very important functions to both the overall plot and the development of Rose and Finn.  

So, yeah, if you missed the point behind the subversions -- that they propel the story Rian wanted to tell -- then you'll think they're pointless.  But that's part of being to blind to the story told, whether that's because you missed it among your nitpicking or if you brought too much baggage into the film and it let you down by not meeting it (looking at the EU readers out there).  There's a reason the critics loved this movie -- it's well made and uses some very nice techniques to subvert expectations in a way that propels the story.  That's hard.  The hate for this movie isn't because it's badly done, but because it's not what some fans with lots of preconceptions wanted.


----------



## Morrus

Ovinomancer said:


> You not liking it doesn't make it bad writing or a bad choice, though.




You fail to understand the internet, sir.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Morrus said:


> You fail to understand the internet, sir.



No, I'm just unhealthily optimistic about some posters.  Again, people: dumb, persons: benefit of the doubt.


----------



## fjw70

I enjoyed TLJ. I do however put it at the bottom of my SW movie rankings. Here is my trilogy ranking

OT
PT
ST

Not that that the ST is bad. There are some really good parts to them and I really enjoy the movies. They just can’t compete with the strong action/adventure of the OT and the epic feel of PT for me. 

On the TLJ. I really enjoyed the Rey/Kylo/Luke story.  The chase story was just okay.


----------



## Raith5

fjw70 said:


> Not that that the ST is bad. There are some really good parts to them and I really enjoy the movies. They just can’t compete with the strong action/adventure of the OT and the epic feel of PT for me..




Yeah. I am struck by the contrast of the prequels and sequels. They prequels were defined by very poor acting but excellent world/universe building but the sequels (for me) where defined by great acting but a really unclear universe.  I didn't like the TLJ at all but I couldnt miss the charisma of Kylo and Rey. For me though, I have a really hard time situating them in the universe, with the First Order (which seem pretty inept and comical) the resistance (which are being humiliated in the TLJ),and Canto Blight being somewhat hamfisted in its depiction. I am not sure why I should care for the resistance or the force kids even though Rey is amazing.


----------



## Kaodi

So I finally saw The Last Jedi today and I enjoyed it. There were things about it that were a bit disappointing. Then I came Home and started reading about how actually there are a [l]lot[/i] of things that are kinda disappointing. And, for the most part, agree those things could have been way better though maybe were not completely game-breaking. My overall feeling right now though is: wrap it up in Episode IX; proceed to never making anything that could be described as "Episode X". Like, yes, the movie was good enough watching. But it does not make me want to see more and more of the same forever in quite the same way the MCU managed to (forever still probably being a bit too strong there). 

I think the biggest thing that instinctively rubbed me the wrong way _while I was watching the film_ was the way Yoda was handled. Having a Force ghost appear and use the biggest blast of Force Lightning we have ever seen to practically vapourize a tree kind of beggars belief in why we would even need living Force wielders at all. I also kind of think having him appear hologram style to Luke is a bit on the nose. He could have been more obviously just in Luke's head.

Second, and this is not a complaint per se, but at the end I was actually expected Leia to disappear then and there right after Luke did. They were twins. They came into the world together. Having them go out of the world together would by acceptable mysterious in a way that nobody telling us anything about Snoke in a whole 'nother film kinda is not. If having her just die because he did would not be good enough, then maybe she could have been part of the final act. They already showed that she can use the Force. Maybe she could have acted as a conduit for Luke to achieve that incredible feat of Force projection _across the span of half a galaxy_ and that the effort killed them both instead of just him.

Finally, I really think more could have gone into the Finn v Phasma fight. Finn is an important character, as important as Han Solo or maybe even moreso. He is the first one who takes up the Lightsaber against Kylo Ren, an incredible act of courage. And in TFA it is teased that he might be Force sensitive: he hears the screams when the Hosnian system is about to be vapourized. And while that _might_ have come from people from the cantina, I do not think that is the most congruent explanation. I was really hoping that the Finn v Phasma duel would be worthy of being called one of the Top 5 Star Wars duels of all time, yet it clearly was not. In this movie Phasma says he is "just a bug in the system" . The "system" in Star Wars is first and foremost the conflict between the Dark and the Light. Ordinarily I would expect that to be picked up on to great effect in the final film, but as we just saw, TLJ seems to have trashed a lot of the setup from TFA.


----------



## Kaodi

I knew I forgot something important in that post above. Maybe I am alone in this opinion, but Rogue One did something amazing that did not involve tearing down anyone else: it made it seem like there was another family other than the Skywalkers whose story was immensely important to the overthrow of the Empire. Without them the Death Star annihilates the Rebellion, Force or no Force.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

The CAnto/casino storyline is definitely the weakest part of the series. I wonder if they just forget about it, or will actually make something about it. Instead of just rebuilding a new rebellion and a new army, will they go after the profiteers?

But I am having trouble building this into a trilogy-finishing Star Wars movie.

Well, it's not my challenge to solve, it's up to Abrams and his team.


----------



## Maxperson

billd91 said:


> Do we know this for a fact? Living tutors didn't seem to stop the Jedi Order from becoming sclerotic and producing the weapon that would ultimately bring them down. A living tutor didn't prevent Ben Solo from being corrupted by a Dark Force outsider. Maybe it's time for a completely different approach.




Look at what Yoda did in training Luke.  Nothing that we saw him do needed him to be there in person.  He could have guided Luke, demonstrated forms, etc. as a force ghost.  He did sit on Luke's back as  he ran, but he could just as easily told Luke to tie a log onto his shoulders and proceeded through that portion as a force ghost as well.


----------



## hopeless

Maybe episode 9 is set from the view of the Imperials?
Snoke is dead maybe his rule like Palpatine was based around him so they might seek help from Leia after learning of the battle of Crait?


----------



## OB1

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> The CAnto/casino storyline is definitely the weakest part of the series. I wonder if they just forget about it, or will actually make something about it. Instead of just rebuilding a new rebellion and a new army, will they go after the profiteers?
> 
> But I am having trouble building this into a trilogy-finishing Star Wars movie.
> 
> Well, it's not my challenge to solve, it's up to Abrams and his team.




Shouldn't be too hard.  There are really only two things that need to happen.

1.  End the Skywalker bloodline
2.  Establish the rebirth of the Jedi

Assuming we are at least 5-6 years past the end of TLJ, the plot of IX could be told from the POV of Kylo searching for Rey, obsessed with ending the Jedi forever.  The First Order, under his command, has failed to hold much, if any, of the galaxy, but their overwhelming power means that they can lay waste to anyone who directly confronts them.  Kylo forces Leia out of hiding, boards her ship, kills the rebels, and then kills her when she silently refuses to tell him where the Rey and the New Jedi are.  The map was on her ship anyhow.

Rey has been busy synthesizing what she learns in the Jedi texts, and a new order of Jedi have emerged, not with a top down structure like the old order, but a diverse one with masters training students in the way they feel is right.  They are attacked by the First Order but escape.  Kylo continues to chase Rey.

Eventually, Kylo and Rey come into direct conflict.  Rey takes a stand, fights him (probably against the advice of Luke) and is victorious.  

With no Supreme Leader, General Hux requests an end to hostilities, ending the war.  Hux may even be secretly working behind Kylo's back to bring this about.


----------



## hopeless

Not bad


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

So far, Kylo seems to have lost every fight against Rey... Her winning again seems like a foregone conclusion. 

So maybe he beats her? Or they fall in love.


----------



## hopeless

Please God no!
That idea needs to be shoved into whatever hole the Twilight Saga currently dwells!
As for the first part, didn't he use her to usurp Snoke's throne?
He technically won that didn't he?


----------



## Warmaster Horus

Saw it last night.  What a disappointment.  Just an incoherent mess made for global audience distribution - lots of explosions, cuteness and posing - and utterly bereft of storytelling.  If failure is a great lesson, this movie has a PhD.  It had the dramatic tension of an overcooked noodle, with many characters literally accomplishing nothing for the entirety of the film and major revelations that were passing puffs of smoke, hard to fathom and very unsatisfying.

And at the end the Rebel Alliance, or whatever their service organization is called now, is small enough to fit into the Millenium Falcon and kid force-users can use their gift to sweep the stables of the one percent.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

I think the ultimate problem I have with the sequels is that it feels like someone added a new epilogue to the Star Wars fairy tale at Episode VI, crawling over the screen after the final scene:

"The *Republic *is restored with the death of the *Emperor *and *Darth Vader*. *Leia *and *Han *marry and have a son *Ben*, and he is powerful in the Force. *Luke *begins training Ben in the way of the *Jedi*, but Ben is corrupted by the Dark Force User *Snoke*. In a crisis of faith, Luke decides against killing his nephew, but this sends Ben over the edge to the Dark Side. Luke runs away, giving up on the Jedi and the Force, hoping to die on a remote planet. Han and Leia separate over their despair over their son. Meanwhile, the Republic refuses to organize to defend the against the newly forming *First Order* controlled by Snoke, and Leia is forced out of her position in the Republic, joining a *Resistance *that hopes to stop the First Order. In secret, the First Order is building a new superweapon, even more powerful than the dreaded Death Star, plotting to destroy the Republic once again."

And that is just not something I like. It's as if Disney would suddenly decide to go for the Hans Christian Andersen version of the Little Mermaid in the end (you know, the one where is turned into foam after she doesn't marry the Prince she fell in love with).

---

But ignoring this, I like Luke's final actions in the movie. It mirrors Obi Wan - Obi Wan wasn't simply killed in a duel by Darth Vader. He had put Luke on a good path and secured his escape, and he stopped fighting and let Vader take the final blow - allowing him to become one with the Force. Whether Force Ghosts are "more powerful than you can ever imagine" in the traditional meaning of powerful (like calling lightning) or the spiritual or not, it is certainly a noteworthy achievement. Luke scenes with Kylo is also is another reminder that The Force is not about swinging light sabers and levitating rocks - Ken might be good with the light saber, but he didn't see what was really going on, and that shows Luke's (and maybe with that, also the Jedi/Light Side) superiority over him.


----------



## hopeless

What if they reveal Snoke was the reason the Emperor was so overconfident in ROTJ?
Snoke was the power behind the throne who had more respect for Vader over the Emperor so was genuinely shaken by Vader returning to the light?
Still doesn't explain everything but it might resolve that problem at least?


----------



## Manbearcat

Raith5 said:


> I thought that the Last Jedi was a mess. I knew the end of luke skywalker's story was coming - and I wanted it to come to end - but it was done in such clumsy, wishy washy fashion which contradicted the original stories. That is Luke is now a coward who finally decides to skype in, Leia who starts out with republic but two films later can fit the whole resistance in the Millennium Falcon, chewy/R2D2/C3PO did less to push the story along than the Porgs (which were great btw). Surely you can build a new series without hollowing out this legacy?
> 
> Aside from the lack of engagement with this legacy, and the lack of continuity with the Force Awakens (so many dropped story lines), I just didnt enjoy it as film. Sure, it had great moments and great ideas but then it had moments I found really distracting (suddenly space fuel is a thing, bombs in space, space Leia doing the mary poppins thing, the whole casino story line, hyperdrives as a weapon, etc). How did a film with this budget get beyond the story board phase?
> 
> It is the only SW film where I regularly check my watch and I wondered if Star Trek fan club is still taking applicants.






Imaculata said:


> But the story was uneven, lots of scenes ultimately don't go anywhere (no pay off), several jokes fall flat, and the editing is occasionally a bit jarring. Some scenes go on too long, or they cut back to something we've already seen, with no real progression of the story. And then some other scenes end too abruptly, and do not allow the scene to settle with the audience (which you need).
> 
> This movie has a lot of pacing and editing problems. Plus this not only is a long movie, but it FEELS long. After the whole casino and space race bit, I remembered from the trailer that surely there's still an entire battle on the planet krait with AT-AT's that is supposed to happen. And I honestly thought to myself, how much longer is this going to be? I'm fine with movies that are a bit longer. Sometimes you are so drawn into a movie, that time flies by, and you don't even notice the length. But due to some serious pacing problems during the second act, you really notice that it drags on.




Ending a long posting hiatus to not talk about RPG theory!

I loved the Force Awakens and obviously the original trilogy (with Empire being one of my favorite movies of all time).  I think I'll take the lazy way out and just mash together these two posts to do the heavy lifting because they do a great job of abridging my thoughts on the movie.  The only thing I'll add is "this trilogy has a villain problem."

I thought the first 10 minutes or so was classic Star Wars swashbuckling fun and X-Wing action.  After that it was jarring and tedious and annoying in a dozen ways (captured well above and in other posts in the thread which cite issues with Luke's characterization and arc) and I just wanted it over with.  I was bored and annoyed while watching it (we - humans - won't get a second chance to make this movie), left the theater dissatisfied from both a classic Star Wars tropes perspective and from a general moviegoer perspective, and my dissatisfaction has only grown upon introspection.

I went from satisfied and excitedly drawn in after TFA for this whole trilogy to completely mentally checked out after TLJ.  Assuming I'm alive for its release, odds or slim I go to the theater for the 3rd movie (which is extraordinary for someone like me to say).


----------



## Jester David

The next few years of Star Wars are going to be interesting given Disney seems set on giving us more Star Wars on an annual basis. 
We have _Solo_ in five months, and then nineteen months after that we have _Episode IX_ in 2019. And Johnson's new trilogy is likely going for 2021, 2023, and 2025 (given they have nothing and would need to start filming shortly to be ready for 2020). 
That leaves a gap between trilogy films. A still unknown. But a lot of Star War fans don't want prequels (like _Rogue One_ or _Solo_). And the reaction to _The Last Jedi_ shows that a lot of fans don't want anything new/ different. 

It's going to be interesting to see where they go with that. Something super familiar as fan service before the all new all different Johnson trilogy? Something that explores a different era or part of the galaxy? Something in the past? Something in the future? Something set during the events of _Episode VII_ to _IX_? 



Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> The CAnto/casino storyline is definitely the weakest part of the series. I wonder if they just forget about it, or will actually make something about it. Instead of just rebuilding a new rebellion and a new army, will they go after the profiteers?
> 
> But I am having trouble building this into a trilogy-finishing Star Wars movie.
> 
> Well, it's not my challenge to solve, it's up to Abrams and his team.





OB1 said:


> Shouldn't be too hard.  There are really only two things that need to happen.
> 
> 1.  End the Skywalker bloodline
> 2.  Establish the rebirth of the Jedi
> 
> Assuming we are at least 5-6 years past the end of TLJ, the plot of IX could be told from the POV of Kylo searching for Rey, obsessed with ending the Jedi forever.  The First Order, under his command, has failed to hold much, if any, of the galaxy, but their overwhelming power means that they can lay waste to anyone who directly confronts them.  Kylo forces Leia out of hiding, boards her ship, kills the rebels, and then kills her when she silently refuses to tell him where the Rey and the New Jedi are.  The map was on her ship anyhow.
> 
> Rey has been busy synthesizing what she learns in the Jedi texts, and a new order of Jedi have emerged, not with a top down structure like the old order, but a diverse one with masters training students in the way they feel is right.  They are attacked by the First Order but escape.  Kylo continues to chase Rey.
> 
> Eventually, Kylo and Rey come into direct conflict.  Rey takes a stand, fights him (probably against the advice of Luke) and is victorious.
> 
> With no Supreme Leader, General Hux requests an end to hostilities, ending the war.  Hux may even be secretly working behind Kylo's back to bring this about.



There's quite a few directions they could go for _Episode IX_ of the "Skywalker Saga". Really, the only thing that _needs_ to happen is for Kylo Ren to die and bring the bloodline to an end. So the series/ franchise can move forward without the "episode" baggage. (Or... for him to live and marry, so they can do an _Episode X_ through _XII_...)

However, Abrams is a much more conservative storyteller than Johnson. I expect the conclusion to be very safe, hewing close to the formula, for good or ill. As unhappy as some people are with how Johnson failed to use the threads and seeds Abrams left, I suspect just as many people will be unhappy with Abrams ignoring Johnson's seeds and themes. 


I imagine it will tell the story of the Resistance crippling the First Order. The push to break their growing hold on the galaxy. In theory, it should end with the First Order destroyed, but that just resets things to how they were at the end of _Return of the Jedi_, with the heroes winning and no way to continue without negating the success. So, very likely, the movie will end in a stalemate situation. An armistice that keeps the First Order around but has them opposed by an equal force or two. 
(Not that I don't put it beyond Abrams to just retell _Return of the Jedi_.)

I imagine it start with a reinvigorated Resistance that has more ships and rebels. The First Order will likely have some scheme to destroy the Resistance and thus take control of the galaxy. And the Resistance has to launch a mission to stop it. But, really, the First Order should just be taking control of the Republic and ignoring the Resistance whom they believe have been routed: reduced to a handful of people on a single modified freighter.  

If I were writing the movie, I'd focus on the tensions between Kylo Ren and Hux. The conflict between the Force (the supernatural) and the military (the scientific), which was a theme hinted at in _A New Hope_ that was never really addressed. Before, Emperor and Snoke were both unassailablely powerful, so the military unquestioningly obeyed the follower of the "ancient religion". But Kylo Ren has significantly less support. 
Honestly, that should be the real conflict of the movie: the growing schism between Kylo Ren and Hux as they both try to maintain control of the First Order. That should be the Act II twist, with the Resistance bloodying the nose of one (likely Kylo Ren) leading to the other's betrayal as they try and seize power. It'd be neat to have the reversal of _Return of the Jedi_ and having Kylo Ren come to Rey for help against Hux. Neither trying to corrupt or redeem, because they both know that time has passed, and just reluctantly working together to end Hux. 

Again, were I writing it, I'd have the opening tension be the Knights of Ren hunting down Rey. The fan service of a lightsaber fight. 
Meanwhile the Resistance struggles to train new pilots and get the funds for more ships. For a few years, the Resistance was being forced to act less like a military force attacking well armed targets and more an underground rebellion that blows up what they can. Full circle to the pre-Alliance days. Trying to fight the good fight despite now being below underdog status. And they've only just recovered enough to resume old operations. And then they're pushed into mission before they're ready, because Kylo Ren might have left himself vulnerable. 
I think at the end it's important to have the Jedi Order reestablished. To have begun to grow. It might be nice to even give Rey some apprentices. So you can have stories with new Jedi at some point. 

But there's so many directions it could go. The film could start with Kylo Ren just killing Hux and seizing control. There could be another planet destroying super weapon. Likely spherical in nature. Heck, it could be a chase across the galaxy for the last component of the superweapon. It could go dark and gritty with the Resistance being forced to use suicide bombings to destroy First Order facilities and ships and acting more like the French Resistance in WW2.


----------



## Derren

Jester David said:


> The next few years of Star Wars are going to be interesting given Disney seems set on giving us more Star Wars on an annual basis.
> We have _Solo_ in five months, and then nineteen months after that we have _Episode IX_ in 2019. And Johnson's new trilogy is likely going for 2021, 2023, and 2025 (given they have nothing and would need to start filming shortly to be ready for 2020).



Dont expect much from Solo. Rumors are that the film is a mess compared to which the filming of the DC movies went on without problems.
It even goes so far as they had to give the main actor additional lessons in acting because how bad he played his role.


----------



## Eltab

For a better dramatic story, Episode IX should show a functioning New Republic plus the Resistance (or what's left of them) that both occupy the First Order's time.  

Kylo and Hux do not agree which enemy to take down first so the FO fritters away what should be strong advantages against each into a grinding near-stalemate against both.  Chasing down and trying to destroy Resistance members causes collateral damage that turns the local system to join the Republic; attacking and conquering a system opens up new targets (the garrisons) for the Resistance to strike.  Somewhere in there have an SD Captain and his XO briefly argue / discuss which part of their orders should take precedence, or can the other part be accomplished in the given situation.
(The IRL model is the Bosnian Civil War: the Bosnian Serbs tried to attack everybody else at once, got only half-way to any goal, and were eventually ganged up on by everybody they had just ticked off at 'em.)

The Climactic Fight Of The Trilogy could be a THREE-way battle between Kylo, Hux, and Rey-and-friends.


----------



## Eltab

Maybe a better use of the Finn character and his background:

Write him as if his personal anthem was Bob Segar's _I'm Not a Number_.
"I feel like a number. / But I'm not a number, / D*****t I'm a man. / I said I'm a man!"


----------



## Jester David

Derren said:


> Dont expect much from Solo. Rumors are that the film is a mess compared to which the filming of the DC movies went on without problems.
> It even goes so far as they had to give the main actor additional lessons in acting because how bad he played his role.



Yeah... but it's being handled now by Ron Howard: an Oscar winning director behind 40+ films who knows his stuff. So it has a decent chance of being good. And _Rogue One_ featured a lot of negative rumours over its intensive reshoots.
People just want there to be (another) terrible _Star Wars_ film to see the franchise stumble (forgetting all the abjectly awful ones already out there...)


----------



## Jhaelen

Morrus said:


> One ship on autopilot vs. a fleet of star destroyers. Not doing that all the time is simple incompetence.



Well, it was a Mon Calamari Star Cruiser, after all, not just any ship. IIRC, these things are more expensive and take much longer to build than star destroyers.

What did surprise me, though, was that it's apparently possible for a single person to maneuver it. What do they need the dozens or hundreds of crew personal for that are required according to the ship's spec?

Imho, the movie's worst scene is right at the beginning: The Resistance's bomber squadron. I mean really?! That must be the most idiotic space ship war design I've ever seen: actually having to drop bombs on an enemy ship?! Dudes, this is supposed to be a space battle!

The 'Leia in Space' was completely sensible by comparison, 'cause she totally digs the Force, mkay?!

I also felt many of the dialogues were groanworthy reminding me rather painfully of Episode 1-3. Just because almost all Star Wars movies feature bad dialogue doesn't mean it's required, right?

All in the all, I don't think it was a bad movie. Not really. But it still left a bad aftertaste for some reason. Probably for the reasons epithet mentioned. I'm not really looking forward to episode IX, now. I have higher hopes for the spin-offs.


----------



## billd91

Jhaelen said:


> What did surprise me, though, was that it's apparently possible for a single person to maneuver it. What do they need the dozens or hundreds of crew personal for that are required according to the ship's spec?




Most of them wouldn't be involved in steering the ship anyway. There'd be dozens of positions just for maintenance of the ship and its complex systems, then many more for operational control including gunnery, navigation, communication, damage control, flight control and tending of fighters and transports, fleet coordination, and then maintenance of the ship's personnel including food service and medical. Just look up the kind of crew positions exist on an aircraft carrier and you'll have an idea - most of them aren't involved in maneuvering the ship either.


----------



## MoonSong

Jhaelen said:


> Imho, the movie's worst scene is right at the beginning: The Resistance's bomber squadron. I mean really?! That must be the most idiotic space ship war design I've ever seen: actually having to drop bombs on an enemy ship?! Dudes, this is supposed to be a space battle!



*
That is actually something that makes sense. Gravity is universal and weak over long distances. Bombs would drop to the closest biggest item around, like the dreadnought. Only thing is the bombs would also keep moving forward by inertia, but dropping bombs on a target with hundred's of times the mass of the bomber should work.*


----------



## Mallus

Jhaelen said:


> That must be the most idiotic space ship war design I've ever seen: actually having to drop bombs on an enemy ship?! Dudes, this is supposed to be a space battle!



It's supposed to be a space battle... from a certain point of view. 

From another point of view, it's a Star Wars movie. So the fighters and bombers behave like aircraft in a WWII-era movie, with the backdrop of clouds replaced by a star field, and the capital ships are like aircraft carriers that go broadsides like they're in a movie set during the Age of Sail. 

It all makes (a kind of) sense if you think about it terms of a director combining different cinematic representations of air- and naval combat from several different time periods, except now in space, without a science fiction writers regard for extrapolating what space warfare might actually look like. 

I mean, it's the same approach Lucas used in the original trilogy. 

Personally, I loved the New B-Wings. And the brave little A-Wing that tried to provide cover for their pokey sitting-duck butts. It made me wonder how much X-Wing Rian Johnson played on his parents PC when he was a kid!


----------



## Morrus

MoonSong said:


> *
> That is actually something that makes sense. Gravity is universal and weak over long distances. Bombs would drop to the closest biggest item around, like the dreadnought. Only thing is the bombs would also keep moving forward by inertia, but dropping bombs on a target with hundred's of times the mass of the bomber should work.*




The explanation is more simple than that and works perfectly. 

The bomber has artificial gravity inside it (as is made clear from the pilots’ movement within). When you drop something inside it, and then remove the floor, it will keep going ‘down’ in a straight line because there’s nothing to stop it.


----------



## MoonSong

Morrus said:


> The explanation is more simple than that and works perfectly.
> 
> The bomber has artificial gravity inside it (as is made clear from the pilots’ movement within). When you drop something inside it, and then remove the floor, it will keep going ‘down’ in a straight line because there’s nothing to stop it.



*
Yeah I guess that works too...*


----------



## Ryujin

Any way that you loo at it, it's a very ineffective way to deliver ordinance in space as evidenced by the total loss of that bomber fleet.


----------



## Morrus

Ryujin said:


> Any way that you loo at it, it's a very ineffective way to deliver ordinance in space as evidenced by the total loss of that bomber fleet.




I think it was all they had left. Pretty sure they called out the fact that they were kinda crappy.


----------



## billd91

Ryujin said:


> Any way that you loo at it, it's a very ineffective way to deliver ordinance in space as evidenced by the total loss of that bomber fleet.




Honestly, this has never really been a concern in Star Wars. "Relax, kid. It ain't that kind of movie."


----------



## Mallus

billd91 said:


> Honestly, this has never really been a concern in Star Wars. "Relax, kid. It ain't that kind of movie."



Yeah, if those bombers showed up on The Expanse I'd have a problem. But in Star Wars they're par for the course.


----------



## MoonSong

Ryujin said:


> Any way that you loo at it, it's a very ineffective way to deliver ordinance in space as evidenced by the total loss of that bomber fleet.



*
Weren't those lost by shoddy reckless tactics?*


----------



## Ryujin

Morrus said:


> I think it was all they had left. Pretty sure they called out the fact that they were kinda crappy.




Were they all that they had left? I didn't get that impression. I thought that they were just recalled because they were dropping like flies.



billd91 said:


> Honestly, this has never really been a concern in Star Wars. "Relax, kid. It ain't that kind of movie."




Even in the Cowboys and Indians universe of Star Wars, some things can be just too silly.



MoonSong said:


> *
> Weren't those lost by shoddy reckless tactics?*




They were lost by recklessness while being used as intended, it would seem. The idea of 'bombing' something other than a stationary target just seems silly to me. Even unguided rockets make more sense.


----------



## billd91

Ryujin said:


> Even in the Cowboys and Indians universe of Star Wars, some things can be just too sully.




Indeed. But everyone's got a different profile for too silly. Is this to the level of *All Terrain*-Armored Transports that can probably not handle more than a featureless plain silliness? Or seedy bar denizens named Elan Sleazebaggano selling "deathsticks" silliness? Maybe it's a ships executing banking turns in space level of silliness? Or a giant space slug having sufficient atmosphere in its mouth that someone can engage in EVA without a spacesuit silliness?

There's a whole lot of silliness in Star Wars if you poke at it a bit, just like there is in the movies and serials that inspired it from Tarzan, to Hidden Fortress, to Buck Rogers and all points in between.


----------



## Eltab

Ryujin said:


> Any way that you loo at it, it's a very ineffective way to deliver ordinance in space as evidenced by the total loss of that bomber fleet.




...throwing antique equipment against an enemy who is already at Battle Stations usually goes badly...
(The SW staff clearly does not have a student of History among them, but this discussion sounds like a description of the Vindicator glide-bomber squadron at the Battle of Midway, 1942: 100% casualties, 0 damage to enemy.)


----------



## Eltab

billd91 said:


> Or seedy bar denizens named Elan Sleazebaggano selling "deathsticks" silliness?



Lucas is the only director I can think of who tried to preach at the audience but wound up making them laugh instead.


----------



## ccs

billd91 said:


> Indeed. But everyone's got a different profile for too silly. Is this to the level of *All Terrain*-Armored Transports that can probably not handle more than a featureless plain silliness? Or seedy bar denizens named Elan Sleazebaggano selling "deathsticks" silliness? Maybe it's a ships executing banking turns in space level of silliness? Or a giant space slug having sufficient atmosphere in its mouth that someone can engage in EVA without a spacesuit silliness?
> 
> There's a whole lot of silliness in Star Wars if you poke at it a bit, just like there is in the movies and serials that inspired it from Tarzan, to Hidden Fortress, to Buck Rogers and all points in between.




"Space Bombers" didn't trigger my "That's too silly/stupid" reflex.    
No, that happened concerning the architecture of their target.


----------



## trappedslider

speaking of space bombers what was up with those Tie fighters doing dropping bombs on that asteroid back in ESB?


----------



## Hussar

I’m firmly convinced that the biggest enemy of Star Wars is the fans. Sigh. 

Let’s not forget that we’re not the only audience. There’s a whole lot of people who didn’t grow up with the OT. I know we all want to believe that Star Wars is for us but it’s not. It’s for people like my tween daughters who think it’s fuggin fantastic. 


Sent from my iPhone using EN World


----------



## Morrus

Hussar said:


> I know we all want to believe that Star Wars is for us but it’s not. It’s for people like my tween daughters who think it’s fuggin fantastic.




It's for both. I think Disney would be most concerned to hear that we think Star Wars isn't for us!


----------



## Ovinomancer

Hussar said:


> I’m firmly convinced that the biggest enemy of Star Wars is the fans. Sigh.
> 
> Let’s not forget that we’re not the only audience. There’s a whole lot of people who didn’t grow up with the OT. I know we all want to believe that Star Wars is for us but it’s not. It’s for people like my tween daughters who think it’s fuggin fantastic.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using EN World



I think it's less those fans that grew up with the OT than those fans that extensively read the EU books.  Of those I've discussed the movie with, that really seems to be a dividing line.


----------



## Warmaster Horus

Ovinomancer said:


> I think it's less those fans that grew up with the OT than those fans that extensively read the EU books.  Of those I've discussed the movie with, that really seems to be a dividing line.




This fan saw the OT in the theaters and only marginally engaged with the EU.  But that has nothing to do with my distaste for this movie.  I want a movie with a coherent story with characters I care about doing meaningful things.  

Instead we get a Mulligan stew of "wouldn't it be cool if"s.  Why is Laura Dern even in the movie?  Who is her character and why does she matter?  Instead of blowing Admiral Akbar into smithereens just 'cause, why couldn't he be the one to sacrifice the cruiser?  We get a lot of who are they and why do they matter in this movie - Rey and Snoke come immediately to mind.

Rey's proficiency with the Force remains a complete enigma.  She gets a short intro to the Force by Luke, like I spend more time talking to my coworkers about this week's episode of _Agents of Shield_ than she does speaking with Luke about the Force.  Then she tries her hand at using a light saber again, with no tutelage, and does just fine (wouldn't it would be nice to see her fail just a little bit?).  Then she fights Kylo Ren and hands him his butt, again.  

Do you notice Rey fights with a lot of anger?  That should signify a strong presence of the Dark Side in her.  Interesting angle, maybe?  The movie never lingers on it for a moment, though.  We see her do her 'trip to the Dark Side Cave' thing but it has no warning for her, just a riddle of her parentage.  Perhaps the film makers want to stretch out her mystery, but in the end it just makes her less interesting.  She has nearly no inner conflict or identity as to what her purpose is other than Force-Skyping with Kylo.  Luke asks her, "Who are you?"  A question I continue to ask after this movie.


----------



## Staffan

Ryujin said:


> Were they all that they had left? I didn't get that impression. I thought that they were just recalled because they were dropping like flies.



At a later point in the movie, either Leia or Holdo tells Poe something like "Now would be a good time to use our bombers. Oh right, we can't, because you got them all killed."


----------



## Ryujin

Staffan said:


> At a later point in the movie, either Leia or Holdo tells Poe something like "Now would be a good time to use our bombers. Oh right, we can't, because you got them all killed."




Yes, all of their bombers were lost, but they had other craft as indicated by Poe's fighter. That's what I'm talking about.


----------



## Morrus

Warmaster Horus said:


> Instead of blowing Admiral Akbar into smithereens just 'cause, why couldn't he be the one to sacrifice the cruiser?




Because, as people keep saying, the actor died in 2016, and it would be creepy and weird to replace a dead actor with another just so you can kill him off. It would be highly distasteful. 



> Why is Laura Dern even in the movie? Who is her character and why does she matter?




If Laura Dern was too underdeveloped for you, why on earth do you like Admiral Ackbar? She's about ten times as developed as he ever was.


----------



## Warmaster Horus

Morrus said:


> Because, as people keep saying, the actor died in 2016, and it would be creepy and weird to replace a dead actor with another just so you can kill him off. It would be highly distasteful.




You mean like Tarkin in _Rogue One_?  They've already crossed that threshold and it would be less uncanny-valley for them to CGI or whatever with Akbar.  As for killing him being distasteful, they killed him anyway.



Morrus said:


> If Laura Dern was too underdeveloped for you, why on earth do you like Admiral Ackbar? She's about ten times as developed as he ever was.




The difference being that Akbar is ICONIC.  Akbar wanted to take the rebel cruisers out of combat with the Imperial fleet during the Battle of Endor because they wouldn't last long against the firepower of the fleet and Death Star.  He discussed it with Lando and stayed because he was convinced they wouldn't have another chance and Han would succeed, which took about 10 seconds of screen time but gave the audience everything they needed to know.  Laura Dern was an obfuscating purple-haired who-is-that? who can't communicate a simple plan at a time of crisis, resulting in a mutiny for goodness sake!

As I read reviews and see responses to viewer dissatisfaction to the movie, I'm seeing the argument being put forward that the message is - the past does not matter.  That's why the film doesn't care about a Snoke backstory or where Rey comes from or how she got to be superpowerful.  Stuff happened, yo.  But given that _The Force Awakens_ set up these questions to be answered, this approach is very unsatisfying.

More importantly the past _does_ matter!  We seem to live in a world where retrospection and learning from history has become extinct as attention spans shrink to the latest celebrity Tweet.  So asking for a film series to consider story continuity and plot payoff is pretty minor but also emblematic of how hungry people are for meaningful content over empty pantomime.


----------



## Morrus

Warmaster Horus said:


> You mean like Tarkin in _Rogue One_?  They've already crossed that threshold and it would be less uncanny-valley for them to CGI or whatever with Akbar.  As for killing him being distasteful, they killed him anyway.




Not recently dead. Got a mixed reception. Decided not to do it again. It’s the answer to your question whether you like it or not. They chose not to do so out of respect for the actor. 



> The difference being that Akbar is ICONIC.




And so will she be in time. As most all Star Wars characters become. 



> As I read reviews and see responses to viewer dissatisfaction to the movie, I'm seeing the argument being put forward that the message is - the past does not matter.  That's why the film doesn't care about a Snoke backstory or where Rey comes from or how she got to be superpowerful.  Stuff happened, yo.  But given that _The Force Awakens_ set up these questions to be answered, this approach is very unsatisfying.More importantly the past _does_ matter!  We seem to live in a world where retrospection and learning from history has become extinct as attention spans shrink to the latest celebrity Tweet.  So asking for a film series to consider story continuity and plot payoff is pretty minor but also emblematic of how hungry people are for meaningful content over empty pantomime.




I don’t know why you’re ranting about this at me. I answered your Ackbar question for you. I’ll leave your general frustration with the world around you to you.


----------



## Warmaster Horus

Morrus said:


> I don’t know why you’re ranting about this at me. I answered your Ackbar question for you. I’ll leave your general frustration with the world around you to you.




Good point.  Just trying to reconcile some of life's hows/whys...


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Ovinomancer said:


> I think it's less those fans that grew up with the OT than those fans that extensively read the EU books.  Of those I've discussed the movie with, that really seems to be a dividing line.



Maybe that is the dividing line.

In my memory of RotJ, Luke just rejected the dark side and converted Darth Vader (a mass murdering guy) back to the light side. He basically embraced his Jedi heritage fully. He's on a trajectory that suggests he will become a great Jedi and (as suggested by the title of the movie) the Jedi Order will return with him.

In TLJ, we learn that after that, we get a brief flashback and a talk about how he abandoned the force and briefly considered murdering his nephew, who was swaying toward the Dark Side (but as far as we know, did he murder anyone till then?). 
The problem is that's plenty of character development that we don't actually get to see. We're just being told that major character changes occurred while we weren't looking. 

Of course, they can't use Mark Hamill as Luke Skywalker to show us the movie we would need to make this character arc believable, because he's too old. And unfortunately, TFA already established that Luke was gone and Ben fell to the Dark Side as his pupil. Maybe TLJ's solution was really one of the best possible ideas to come up with under these circumstances. But sometimes, "best" doesn't actually mean good. 

I guess that was one of the biggest challenges of TLJ - how do we deal with the open questions of TFA? It decided to focus on Skywalker's story, and shortcut most of the rest. Snoke, well, he's dead now (and had a silly name anyway), who cares how he got where he was? Rey's parents? Well, just some nameless scumbags that sold their daughter off. (Which while a bit disappointing as an answer, I think it's not that terrible - not everyone needs to have impressive or complex parents.)

But TFA obviously also made other big leaps in the story - like turning from a Rebellion that just won a big (and possibly final) victory over the Empire to an off-screen reinstatement of the Republic to a quick mention that the Republic is now gone again thanks to the Starkiller base. 


I guess the fanservice is ultimately to blame for this - for the sake of the fans alone, they wanted to bring in the old actors in their old roles. But they needed a new conflict and new heroes to rise to the occasion, and that requires such big leaps in character and world development - but it comes at a price.



> That should signify a strong presence of the Dark Side in her. Interesting angle, maybe? The movie never lingers on it for a moment, though. We see her do her 'trip to the Dark Side Cave' thing but it has no warning for her, just a riddle of her parentage.



I think the scene in the cave shows that the Dark Side can't offer her anything. She basically goes for the Dark Side (Cave) because it promises an answer. But instead, it gives her just a reflection of herself. Nothing that solves her questions. The Dark Side is just making empty promises to her. That might be what makes her "immune" to the temptations of the Dark Side.

Maybe. Maybe in the 3rd movie, things will change again. 

I am afraid that the whole new Star Wars trilogy suffers also a bit from them not having a big game plan for the story of the 3 movies.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> Maybe that is the dividing line.
> 
> In my memory of RotJ, Luke just rejected the dark side and converted Darth Vader (a mass murdering guy) back to the light side. He basically embraced his Jedi heritage fully. He's on a trajectory that suggests he will become a great Jedi and (as suggested by the title of the movie) the Jedi Order will return with him.
> 
> In TLJ, we learn that after that, we get a brief flashback and a talk about how he abandoned the force and briefly considered murdering his nephew, who was swaying toward the Dark Side (but as far as we know, did he murder anyone till then?).
> The problem is that's plenty of character development that we don't actually get to see. We're just being told that major character changes occurred while we weren't looking.
> 
> Of course, they can't use Mark Hamill as Luke Skywalker to show us the movie we would need to make this character arc believable, because he's too old. And unfortunately, TFA already established that Luke was gone and Ben fell to the Dark Side as his pupil. Maybe TLJ's solution was really one of the best possible ideas to come up with under these circumstances. But sometimes, "best" doesn't actually mean good.
> 
> I guess that was one of the biggest challenges of TLJ - how do we deal with the open questions of TFA? It decided to focus on Skywalker's story, and shortcut most of the rest. Snoke, well, he's dead now (and had a silly name anyway), who cares how he got where he was? Rey's parents? Well, just some nameless scumbags that sold their daughter off. (Which while a bit disappointing as an answer, I think it's not that terrible - not everyone needs to have impressive or complex parents.)
> 
> But TFA obviously also made other big leaps in the story - like turning from a Rebellion that just won a big (and possibly final) victory over the Empire to an off-screen reinstatement of the Republic to a quick mention that the Republic is now gone again thanks to the Starkiller base.
> 
> 
> I guess the fanservice is ultimately to blame for this - for the sake of the fans alone, they wanted to bring in the old actors in their old roles. But they needed a new conflict and new heroes to rise to the occasion, and that requires such big leaps in character and world development - but it comes at a price.
> 
> 
> I think the scene in the cave shows that the Dark Side can't offer her anything. She basically goes for the Dark Side (Cave) because it promises an answer. But instead, it gives her just a reflection of herself. Nothing that solves her questions. The Dark Side is just making empty promises to her. That might be what makes her "immune" to the temptations of the Dark Side.
> 
> Maybe. Maybe in the 3rd movie, things will change again.
> 
> I am afraid that the whole new Star Wars trilogy suffers also a bit from them not having a big game plan for the story of the 3 movies.




Hmm, this makes me think there's another dividing line as well:  those that wanted a continuation of the story of the characters in the PT and OT.  I'm personally happy to not see another movie about a Skywalker, so I don't need to see all the off camera action about Luke -- the story presented is consistent with the character in the OT, so that's enough for me.  What I want is the handoff from the old characters to the new, and for the story to be about the new characters as much as possible.  This means that Luke is a tool of the plot in TLJ, not the focus of it, and I like that.  If, instead, you want the see the continuation of the story of the OT characters, I can easily see how this movie disappoints by skipping over a detailed telling of the events in their lives up to this point.  

I got the point in TFA that these weren't stories about the OT characters anymore.  So, I wasn't disappointed when TLJ didn't spend a lot of time on Luke's story.


----------



## robus

pukunui said:


> I didn't mind those ones as much as when Holdo says "Godspeed". There's never any mention of a god in the Star Wars universe, so that seems super out of place. It's always the Force.




That was a very bad moment. That's when I decided that the TLJ makers really don't care about Star Wars. No one raised a red flag on that bit of the script? That and the "Holding for General Hux..." bs. Jeez that was so cringeworthy.

I entered the theater full of anticipation and left feeling like that was 2.5 hours I won't get back. It left me completely cold.

Sidenote: The audience cheered and clapped at the end of TFA, despite its obvious derivative nature, it felt like Star Wars. The audience was silent at the end of TLJ and we all headed for the exits as quickly as possible.


----------



## billd91

robus said:


> That was a very bad moment. That's when I decided that the TLJ makers really don't care about Star Wars. No one raised a red flag on that bit of the script?




It's no more out of place than Han saying "Then I'll see you in Hell," in Empire Strikes Back. I guess George Lucas didn't really care about Star Wars.


----------



## robus

billd91 said:


> It's no more out of place than Han saying "Then I'll see you in Hell," in Empire Strikes Back. I guess George Lucas didn't really care about Star Wars.




Perhaps - but I think "hell" (without a capital letter) is a metaphor for "terrible place". And yes George Lucas royally f'd up Star Wars too when he got too free a hand to do whatever he wanted!


----------



## billd91

robus said:


> Perhaps - but I think "hell" (without a capital letter) is a metaphor for "terrible place".




If that's your rationalization, then why isn't "Godspeed" a metaphor for "good wishes" or "good luck"? 
Embrace it, then I can lower the cherry picker for you.


----------



## pukunui

Indeed. If it weren't for the fact that it has to be capitalized since it's at the start of the sentence, for all we know she's saying "godspeed" rather than "Godspeed".

As for holding for Hux, I enjoyed that bit, but I can see how some people might not like it.


----------



## robus

Ovinomancer said:


> Charitably, I'm having trouble reading this as anything other than 'but they didn't WIN'.




I don't think it's that at all. For me at least the problem is "I didn't care." By the end I was bored by the plot and annoyed at all the flat "jokes".


----------



## robus

billd91 said:


> If that's your rationalization, then why isn't "Godspeed" a metaphor for "good wishes" or "good luck"?
> Embrace it, then I can lower the cherry picker for you.




Because to say "good luck" or "best wishes" (especially in a critical moment) in Star Wars, you say "May the force be with you".


----------



## Mallus

robus said:


> Because to say "good luck" or "best wishes" (especially in a critical moment) in Star Wars, you say "May the force be with you".



So they don't have more than one expression in their galaxy-spanning culture/amalgamation of cultures? Something that translates, roughly, as "godspeed"? Fascinating. Is that explained somewhere in the EU, because I admit I'm not familiar with much of it.

Seriously, though, Holdo says "May the Force be with you always" when it counted, so no worries there.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

pukunui said:


> Indeed. If it weren't for the fact that it has to be capitalized since it's at the start of the sentence, for all we know she's saying "godspeed" rather than "Godspeed".




It's one step below "ludicrous speed."


----------



## OB1

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> I think the scene in the cave shows that the Dark Side can't offer her anything. She basically goes for the Dark Side (Cave) because it promises an answer. But instead, it gives her just a reflection of herself. Nothing that solves her questions. The Dark Side is just making empty promises to her. That might be what makes her "immune" to the temptations of the Dark Side.
> 
> 
> 
> I am afraid that the whole new Star Wars trilogy suffers also a bit from them not having a big game plan for the story of the 3 movies.




Re: the cave - isn’t the dark side all about selfishness? What’s more selfish than seeing yourself as the only thing that exists. The only thing you need?  The only thing that matters?

Re: the plan. Each trilogy follows a different Skywalker. This one follows Kylo’s rise to Supreme Leader of the Galaxy. He just did what Vader never could, defeat and take power from his master. His downfall, and the end of the demigod Skywalker bloodline, will be the focus of the third movie, finally allowing the galaxy to truly rebalance itself for the first time since the Skywalkers were created by Plagieus. 


Sent from my iPhone using EN World mobile app


----------



## robus

Mallus said:


> So they don't have more than one expression in their galaxy-spanning culture/amalgamation of cultures? Something that translates, roughly, as "godspeed"? Fascinating. Is that explained somewhere in the EU, because I admit I'm not familiar with much of it.
> 
> Seriously, though, Holdo says "May the Force be with you always" when it counted, so no worries there.




Who knows? I’m just saying that when i heard it, it was shocking - it seemed so out of place. Something that Han’s “hell” reference didn’t do. I guess it’s just me


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Ovinomancer said:


> Hmm, this makes me think there's another dividing line as well:  those that wanted a continuation of the story of the characters in the PT and OT.  I'm personally happy to not see another movie about a Skywalker, so I don't need to see all the off camera action about Luke -- the story presented is consistent with the character in the OT, so that's enough for me.  What I want is the handoff from the old characters to the new, and for the story to be about the new characters as much as possible.  This means that Luke is a tool of the plot in TLJ, not the focus of it, and I like that.  If, instead, you want the see the continuation of the story of the OT characters, I can easily see how this movie disappoints by skipping over a detailed telling of the events in their lives up to this point.
> 
> I got the point in TFA that these weren't stories about the OT characters anymore.  So, I wasn't disappointed when TLJ didn't spend a lot of time on Luke's story.



I would be really fine if they hadn't put them in the new movies at all,  or only as, say holographic recordings. But that isn't what they went  for.

But it did spend a lot of time on Luke. He's a major figure in TLJ, and even undergoes his own character development in the movie, from grumpy ex-Jedi that never wants to use the Force again and the Jedi religion to die, to someone that is willing to use his to save the Resistance and teach Kylo Ren a final lesson. He's considerably more effective than most protagonists.
But we don't actually get to see how Luke even got the grumpy ex-Jedi, we're just giving a weak flashback to a single scene in his past that is trying to sell us all this character change since RotJ.

Realistically, Luke's story is probably done at the end of RotJ. Afterwards, it's just an Happily Everafter for him and we don't really need to see his specifics. 

If you want to "restart" Star Wars because the original actors are too old, you best start way after the original characters have left the stage and don't drag them out again.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> I would be really fine if they hadn't put them in the new movies at all,  or only as, say holographic recordings. But that isn't what they went  for.
> 
> But it did spend a lot of time on Luke. He's a major figure in TLJ, and even undergoes his own character development in the movie, from grumpy ex-Jedi that never wants to use the Force again and the Jedi religion to die, to someone that is willing to use his to save the Resistance and teach Kylo Ren a final lesson. He's considerably more effective than most protagonists.
> But we don't actually get to see how Luke even got the grumpy ex-Jedi, we're just giving a weak flashback to a single scene in his past that is trying to sell us all this character change since RotJ.
> 
> Realistically, Luke's story is probably done at the end of RotJ. Afterwards, it's just an Happily Everafter for him and we don't really need to see his specifics.
> 
> If you want to "restart" Star Wars because the original actors are too old, you best start way after the original characters have left the stage and don't drag them out again.



Really?  You think that a new Start Wars trilogy could fly with no reference to the characters of the previous trilogies? I don't think so; there really needed to be a handoff.

As for Luke's contribution, it was entirely a handoff to Rey.  While he was effective to the plot, yes, it was entirely in service to the  new characters.  He also wrapped up his arc by definitively becoming the Jedi Master you imagined at the end of RotJ, but that we never saw.  Yoda himself showed up to say that failure is a crucial lesson for Jedi.  Luke had to have a failure for that to hold, and I don't think a full rendition of that failure on screen is necessary.  They showed the crucial bits necessary to the story, and necessary for Luke's closure.  I really don't understand the need to see a full accounting of all that led up to that failure.

Also, as a practical point, how do you imagine they could show that story between RotJ and now only with the older cast of the actors available?  They had old actors to work with, and thus had to skip a detailed retelling of the story in between.  Unless you have a fountain of youth tucked away?


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

> Also, as a practical point, how do you imagine they could show that story between RotJ and now only with the older cast of the actors available? They had old actors to work with, and thus had to skip a detailed retelling of the story in between. Unless you have a fountain of youth tucked away?



Well, if you can't tell that story, you probably should just say that the more or less boring expected stuff happens. Luke builds a Jedi Order, Han and Leia have a family, the Republic was built up, they are now old enough to basically retire and so they are happy to provide advice or lend the new heroes that come along a cool ship, but they have reason to believe that others can take care of their problems.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> Well, if you can't tell that story, you probably should just say that the more or less boring expected stuff happens. Luke builds a Jedi Order, Han and Leia have a family, the Republic was built up, they are now old enough to basically retire and so they are happy to provide advice or lend the new heroes that come along a cool ship, but they have reason to believe that others can take care of their problems.




I feel their eradication of the remnants of the Empire is unearned, and we need to see that story.  I also think that Luke building a Jedi temple and teaching a new crop of students feels unearned -- that's not a trivial undertaking, especially given his limited training in the Jedi arts.  They should show this as well.

See how this works?  This isn't a valid complaint about storytelling processes, otherwise you're rendering unusable the use of in media res.  This, instead, reads like a complaint about the story they chose, rather than the methods they used to tell it.

And that's valid -- not liking the story told is perfectly valid.  But you should ask yourself if you didn't like it because it was a bad story or because it conflicts with your preconceptions for the characters.


----------



## hopeless

So far Battlefront 2 has done the better job of being a sequel and prologue to TFA!

TLJ just seems to deal with clearing the board with little or no story to function as a sequel.

Apparently they think Twilight would be a good inspiration for a Stat Wars movie but either ignoring what happened to the other characters in the previous movie or actually thinks the villain is the lead protagonist instead of antagonist?


----------



## OB1

hopeless said:


> TLJ just seems to deal with clearing the board with little or no story to function as a sequel.




A Skywalker’s rise to Supreme Leader of the Galaxy sounds like a lot of story and a clear sequel to me. It’s the culmination of 8 movies worth of events.


Sent from my iPhone using EN World mobile app


----------



## Ovinomancer

OB1 said:


> A Skywalker’s rise to Supreme Leader of the Galaxy sounds like a lot of story and a clear sequel to me. It’s the culmination of 8 movies worth of events.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using EN World mobile app




Further, what exactly where the plot notes in ESB?

The rebels are chased off of their remote base.
Luke goes for training on Dagobah.
His friends are pursued relentlessly by the Empire until they try a bit of trickery that appears to work at first, but ultimately doesn't.
Vader springs his trap on Luke's friends, capturing them and encasing Solo in carbonite.
Luke shows up, and R2 helps his friends escape minus Solo.
Luke gets his butt handed (heh) to him by Vader, finds out secret of his parentage.
Movie ends with Luke maimed but healing, Solo captured, and Rebels still on the run.

Um, maybe it's me, or ESB didn't exactly move the plot forward much, either -- it was a movie about the characters facing adversity.  And don't many of those same notes echo in TLJ?


----------



## hopeless

Point taken regarding the resemblance to ESB but that movie didn't end with almost a tpk?


----------



## OB1

To be fair, the threads of ESB were much more tightly wound than those of TLJ. The whole movie is about Luke, with the Han/Leia storyline there to creat tension for him. TLJ has some of the same elements, but they don’t reinforce each other as well, and that’s one of the reasons it’s more difficult to engage with. 
TLJ should have been much more tightly wound around Kylo. The Resistance storyline reinforces the need to get Luke back, but it needs to be a foil for Kylo. 
But that’s tough because we are rooting against Kylo, even though he is the Protagonist of this trilogy. A tragic/anti Protagonist, for sure, but the Protagonist none the less. 


Sent from my iPhone using EN World


----------



## Hussar

As far as Rey using a lightsaber go s, who trained Luke to the point where he could go toe to toe with Vader?  Other than a brief scene with Obi-Wan in ANH, when does Luke actually train?

So why is it so unbelievable that Rey can too?


Sent from my iPhone using EN World


----------



## Anakzar

pukunui said:


> One little clue that all is not as it should be with Luke at the end (that I spotted the second time through): When he faces off against his nephew, he is wielding the same lightsaber that, mere movie moments before, was split into two as Ben and Rey fought over it.




I only saw it once but another give away is Luke looks a decade younger, beard is not grey etc.


----------



## pukunui

Anakzar said:


> I only saw it once but another give away is Luke looks a decade younger, beard is not grey etc.



You didn't think he'd just gotten a hair cut and dyed his beard?


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Ovinomancer said:


> I feel their eradication of the remnants of the Empire is unearned, and we need to see that story.  I also think that Luke building a Jedi temple and teaching a new crop of students feels unearned -- that's not a trivial undertaking, especially given his limited training in the Jedi arts.  They should show this as well.
> 
> See how this works?  This isn't a valid complaint about storytelling processes, otherwise you're rendering unusable the use of in media res.  This, instead, reads like a complaint about the story they chose, rather than the methods they used to tell it.



Star Wars is basically a fairy tale. When the Evil Queen is defeated and Snow White gets her Prince, of course they live happily everafter. We don't expect the prince to get estranged from her, their child turning out to become a mass-murderer. Of course, you could deliberately write a story doing exactly that - but since Snow White is public domain, there can be many stories about the aftermath, be it the one where she is long estranged from her prince or one where she has to defend the Dwarves against the Troll invasion army or where she is sucked into the real world or whatever. So there are many alternative futures, and it doesn't really matter much.

Star Wars is a Disney property. Only they get to tell stories about Luke Skywalker. So if the one they tell just doesn't quite gel because critical pieces of his character development are never really shown and earned, it will remain a broken part of franchise.



> And that's valid -- not liking the story told is perfectly valid.  But you should ask yourself if you didn't like it because it was a bad story or because it conflicts with your preconceptions for the characters.



I don't have to ask myself that - I know it doesn't fit my preconceptions for the characters. The preconceptions are the result of me remembering the original trilogy and the themes layed out there. A writer has every right to subvert them - but then he better show and not just tell.


----------



## hopeless

Regarding ESB, Vader wasn't trying to kill Luke he was testing him.
What I wanted to see revealed was that Rey was raised by a Jedi Survivor on Jakku, that would explain her skills and place special emphasis on why she was so keen on returning until Finn broke the geas she was under that was intended to keep her safe.
That doesn't deal with her parents but that revelation makes her being Rey Nobody less of a problem as it would deal with that TFA subplot alot better than what I'm hearing!


----------



## Morrus

Hussar said:


> So why is it so unbelievable that Rey can too?




I think we all know what the ugly answer to that question is.


----------



## billd91

Morrus said:


> I think we all know what the ugly answer to that question is.




Too right we do, and it really pisses me off.


----------



## Maxperson

Hussar said:


> As far as Rey using a lightsaber go s, who trained Luke to the point where he could go toe to toe with Vader?  Other than a brief scene with Obi-Wan in ANH, when does Luke actually train?




There are these movies called Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi where Luke begins and completes his training with a Jedi master who also happens to have been one of the best light saber fighters in the Jedi order.  You should probably watch them.  They were pretty good.



> So why is it so unbelievable that Rey can too?




Because zero training is not even remotely the same as intense training under a Jedi combat master.


----------



## Maxperson

billd91 said:


> Too right we do, and it really pisses me off.




No kidding.  Luke should have given her intense training as a Jedi, including combat, just the way he got it from Yoda.


----------



## Morrus

Maxperson said:


> No kidding.  Luke should have given her intense training as a Jedi, including combat, just the way he got it from Yoda.




When did Luke get this intense combat training you speak of?


----------



## Maxperson

Morrus said:


> When did Luke get this intense combat training you speak of?




We see him go from just meeting Yoda to doing flips with Yoda on his back.  There was a lot of off air time where he got training, which would have included light sabers.  Then in Return of the Jedi, he has completed his training before showing up to rescue Han.  It's implied by his new competence(since he exhibited none of Reys "I intuitively know it all and need no training" behaviors) that he has been back and completed his training.  Lucas spared us the boring training scenes.


----------



## Morrus

Maxperson said:


> We see him go from just meeting Yoda to doing flips with Yoda on his back.




Ha ha ha! My goodness, that’s irony for you! That *actually* made me laugh out loud. 



> There was a lot of off air time where he got training, which would have included light sabers.  Then in Return of the Jedi, he has completed his training before showing up to rescue Han.  It's implied by his new competence(since he exhibited none of Reys "I intuitively know it all and need no training" behaviors) that he has been back and completed his training.  Lucas spared us the boring training scenes.




Oh, it happened offscreen, did it? It’s “implied”? 

Yeah, Rey had extensive implied lightsaber training offscreen too. 

Johnston spared us the boring training scenes.

(Well except for the bit where you actually *do* see her training with a lightsaber, unlike Luke’s “implied” training which Lucas “spares us from seeing”). 

Look. They both get about the same training. In fact Rey gets actual on-screen non-implied lightsaber training where Luke does not, and already knows how to use a staff. Anything else, “implied” or not, comes from you, not the movie.


----------



## Mallus

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> Star Wars is basically a fairy tale. When the Evil Queen is defeated and Snow White gets her Prince, of course they live happily everafter. We don't expect the prince to get estranged from her, their child turning out to become a mass-murderer.



On the other hand, the side-prequel to the original Star Wars is Rogue One. 

A war movie similar to The Dirty Dozen which introduces one of its protagonists by having him murdering a fellow resistance asset to prevent him from being captured by the Imperials. This is literally how we meet Cassian Andor. That's not a fairy tale... it's Army of Shadows in space (with snarky robots). Then at the end, everyone dies.   

The Star Wars universe is vast. It contains multitudes. Sometimes within the same movie.


----------



## Mallus

Morrus said:


> In fact Rey gets actual on-screen non-implied lightsaber training where Luke does not, and already knows how to use a staff. Anything else, “implied” or not, comes from you, not the movie.



On top of that, the duel at the end of TFA strongly suggests that lightsaber training -- which Rey's had _none_ of at that point -- is far less important than connection to Force, which Rey has in abundance. 

She beats Kylo in lightsaber combat by using the Force (and not by mind-tricking or zapping him - with the laser blade).


----------



## Maxperson

Morrus said:


> Ha ha ha! My goodness, that’s irony for you! That *actually* made me laugh out loud.
> 
> Oh, it happened offscreen, did it? It’s “implied”?



Yes, it is with the scenes that we see.



> Yeah, Rey had extensive implied lightsaber training offscreen too.
> 
> Johnston spared us the boring training scenes.




Which scenes imply that?  I must have missed them.  I saw her pick up a light saber and go toe to toe with a trained dark side user with no training.



> (Well except for the bit where you actually *do* see her training with a lightsaber, unlike Luke’s “implied” training which Lucas “spares us from seeing”).




You mean up on the rock going through forms she was never trained at, unlike Luke?  People without training by competent others don't pick up a sword and know how to use it like she did.  They kinda swing it around lamely trying to look cool.



> Look. They both get about the same training. In fact Rey gets actual on-screen non-implied lightsaber training where Luke does not, and already knows how to use a staff. Anything else, “implied” or not, comes from you, not the movie.



The movies do imply Luke's training.  He doesn't walk in on Yoda, ask for training, walk into the cave and then leave without getting any.  The training is not only implied, it's intensely implied by the scenes we get.


----------



## Morrus

Maxperson said:


> Yes, it is with the scenes that we see.




Luke is such a Mary Sue.



> Which scenes imply that?  I must have missed them.  I saw her pick up a light saber and go toe to toe with a trained dark side user with no training.




They're off-screen. Implied.


----------



## billd91

Maxperson said:


> No kidding.  Luke should have given her intense training as a Jedi, including combat, just the way he got it from Yoda.




Clearly, you’re not grokking my meaning.


----------



## billd91

Mallus said:


> On top of that, the duel at the end of TFA strongly suggests that lightsaber training -- which Rey's had _none_ of at that point -- is far less important than connection to Force, which Rey has in abundance.
> 
> She beats Kylo in lightsaber combat by using the Force (and not by mind-tricking or zapping him - with the laser blade).




Best part of that scene is we see her connection with the Force click when she goes from being scared and emotional to calm. She has the epiphany that lets her use the Force as a Jedi would, for defense, without passion but calmness. 

There’s a big gulf between the first trilogy and the prequels. Luke was able to perform great feats with little formal training. Using the Force was more a state of mind. He didn’t need years of Jedi order training to do the things he did. He didn’t need intense lightsaber training, letting the Force flow through him was sufficient in the main. The third trilogy is getting us back there, away from the prequels.


----------



## Morrus

My favourite bits of _Empire Strikes Back_ are Luke's implied off-screen training scenes that aren't in the film.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> Star Wars is basically a fairy tale. When the Evil Queen is defeated and Snow White gets her Prince, of course they live happily everafter. We don't expect the prince to get estranged from her, their child turning out to become a mass-murderer. Of course, you could deliberately write a story doing exactly that - but since Snow White is public domain, there can be many stories about the aftermath, be it the one where she is long estranged from her prince or one where she has to defend the Dwarves against the Troll invasion army or where she is sucked into the real world or whatever. So there are many alternative futures, and it doesn't really matter much.
> 
> Star Wars is a Disney property. Only they get to tell stories about Luke Skywalker. So if the one they tell just doesn't quite gel because critical pieces of his character development are never really shown and earned, it will remain a broken part of franchise.
> 
> 
> I don't have to ask myself that - I know it doesn't fit my preconceptions for the characters. The preconceptions are the result of me remembering the original trilogy and the themes layed out there. A writer has every right to subvert them - but then he better show and not just tell.




Star Wars has been compared to opera and soaps.  The comparison to fairy tales is a poor choice on your part.  Yes, some fairy tales end with happily ever after, some have no future presented (Hansel and Gretel, who are still lost in the woods, or the Little Mermaid, which ends in tragedy for the titular character).  Operas and soaps very rarely have happily ever after endings.

You apparently sold yourself a bill of goods that the OT ended in 'happily ever after' and are disappointed your assumption wasn't shared by the writers of the new movies.  This, again, isn't a complaint about bad storytelling -- you've yet to make a case for that which withstands it's own scrutiny in the hands of a different perspective -- but, again, a complaint that the story told was not to your personal liking.  And that's fine, but let's get down to that being the problem rather than the special pleadings that the NT somehow tells stories badly and that's the reason you don't like them.  In other words, your subjective opinion is perfectly valid, and I certainly don't begrudge you disliking the TLJ.  However, this attempt to cast Star Wars as one type of story that aligns with your preconceptions when it's not clearly that kind of story (Star Wars borrows from many genres) seems a strange way to try to lend unneeded legitimacy to your opinion.  It doesn't lend legitimacy -- your opinion is valid as is -- it lends a strange timidity from boldly stating that you just didn't like it because it didn't treat the characters how you wanted them to be treated.


----------



## OB1

billd91 said:


> There’s a big gulf between the first trilogy and the prequels. Luke was able to perform great feats with little formal training. Using the Force was more a state of mind. He didn’t need years of Jedi order training to do the things he did. He didn’t need intense lightsaber training, letting the Force flow through him was sufficient in the main. The third trilogy is getting us back there, away from the prequels.




Or maybe all that PT training to make the force obey your will was part of the problem that led to the Order’s downfall and why Luke’s new academy was doomed from the start?

I always go back to Luke and Obi-wan’s discussion in the Falcon when Luke learns in 2 minutes how to deflect blaster bolts blind. 

“You mean it controls your actions?”

“Partially, but it also obeys your commands.”

Seems that letting the Force control your actions is fairly easy. Getting it to obey your commands is more difficult and also dangerous.  Luke blew up the Death Star not by controlling the torpedo with his mind, but by letting go and trusting in the force.  




Sent from my iPhone using EN World mobile app


----------



## cmad1977

Hussar said:


> As far as Rey using a lightsaber go s, who trained Luke to the point where he could go toe to toe with Vader?  Other than a brief scene with Obi-Wan in ANH, when does Luke actually train?
> 
> So why is it so unbelievable that Rey can too?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using EN World




Because girls have cooties. Duh!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## hawkeyefan

The only way that make believe magic can work is if there is make believe training!!


----------



## pukunui

Ovinomancer said:


> Star Wars has been compared to opera and soaps.  The comparison to fairy tales is a poor choice on your part.  Yes, some fairy tales end with happily ever after, some have no future presented (Hansel and Gretel, who ae still lost in the woods, or the Little Mermaid, which ends in tragedy for the titular character).  Operas and soaps very rarely have happily ever after endings.



Yes, this. As I have pointed out already in this thread, George Lucas himself has called Star Wars a soap opera.


----------



## hawkeyefan

In fairness, there is no reason that Star Wars cannot be considered an example of all kinds of fiction. Soap opera, fantasy, adventure, or fairy tale. I think it’s all of these things. 

I mean....a young farm boy becomes a hero with the help of an old wizard by saving a princess from a dark lord. It really doesn't get much more fairy tale than that. 

Except maybe if Vader had been a wicked step mother.


----------



## Istbor

Read a lot of posts that involve painful contortions of the OT to justify why this movie is bad. I grew up with the OT and I am for one happy to see the story finally moving along. 

I saw it, and I like it a lot.  It turned a lot of stuff on its ear, which is really fun to me at least.  I hope, that Snoke dies without a backstory.  I hope Rey's parents really were just some junkers who sold her to get offworld and away from Jakku.   Those are some of the things I REALLY enjoyed about the movie.  All the machinations of uber nerds for two years obliterated in about two hours. 

The characters were great, and their development felt real to me. 

That suicide Hyperspace jump scene.  The theater where I saw if fell silent, and we all just sat in awe of what just happened. 

Luke went out like a true Master.  "You'll never strike me down in anger" is right. I get that some people would want to see Luke back at the lightsaber fighting, but man.  Pulling the wool over his old pupils eyes and demonstrating just how much Kylo doesn't understand, and isn't yet a master of the Force (also how blind the rage of the Darkside makes you) was amazing.  I had a stupid smile on my face the whole time. 

Getting to see Yoda with Luke as well was great.  I love that little guy, and their interactions. 

I may or may not get to see it in theaters again, but I would if the chance arose. 

Bring on the next.


----------



## hopeless

I assumed Kylo studied force powers more intensively but had little training with the lightsaber such that when badly wounded he was first hit again by someone that was implied to be force sensitive before having his arse handed to him by someone I figured had at least Padawan training enough that even no prior use of the lightsaber didn't matter given she had demonstrated considerable melee combat training to counter multiple foes something I doubt Kylo had given his obvious reliance on force powers.

I actually thought Leia taught him and it was only when she realised someone was trying to corrupt him that she sent him to Luke for his own safety.


----------



## Maxperson

Morrus said:


> Luke is such a Mary Sue.
> 
> They're off-screen. Implied.




You could have just told me no you didn't have anything to back up your statements. 

This seems like what you did earlier in the thread where you argued a position you later admitted you didn't really believe.


----------



## Maxperson

billd91 said:


> Clearly, you’re not grokking my meaning.




So explain.


----------



## hawkeyefan

The only training scene that I can recall (and I’ll admit to only being passing familiar with te prequels) makes it incredibly clear that wielding a lightsaber is actually about using the Force and not about using the lightsaber.

Then, we have Luke in Last Jedi explain that the two most powerful Force users he’s ever sensed (meaning more powerful than Vader, Yoda, and Palpatine) are Kylo Ren and Rey. 

Luke seemed to intuitively understand how to wield his lightsaber because he is using the Force. Yoda does not have a lightsaber on Dagobah....so whatever offscreen training that may have taken place MUST be about using the Force, not any kind of Lightsaber 101. Which matches the training sessions that we do see. 

I would say that it stands to reason that someone who is inherently more powerful with the Force very well may be better with applications of the Force, which would include using a lightsaber.


----------



## Maxperson

I don't see Yoda going to Dagobah and just not bringing or destroying his lightsaber.  We don't see it, but that doesn't mean that it wasn't there.


----------



## OB1

What we have been shown in the films is that having the Force is like having a blaster, it makes you powerful immediately... and without training you are dangerous to yourself and others.  


Sent from my iPhone using EN World


----------



## hawkeyefan

Maxperson said:


> I don't see Yoda going to Dagobah and just not bringing or destroying his lightsaber.  We don't see it, but that doesn't mean that it wasn't there.




Well it depends on how you look at it. 

Prior to the prequels, I don’t think Yoda was intended to even have a lightsaber. I think the character was originally envisioned as not having a lightsaber. I think there was intended to be a difference between a Jedi Knight and a Jedi Master. Or something along thise lines. 

Looking at it after the prequels, I’d say it could go either way. We’ve no reason to think he left his saber, but we also have no evidence that he does have it. 

We’ve no reason to imagine lightsaber training to have taken place on Dagobah. Not of the kind you’re taking about, anyway. More the “open yourself up to the Force....let it guide you...” type lessons, sure.

I think Rey’s lightsaber practice alone in a place that has been established to have a powerful connection to the Force, after she has been established as an incredibly powerful Force user is probably the most sognificant lightsaber training sequence we’ve ever been shown.


----------



## Eltab

Ovinomancer said:


> But you should ask yourself if you didn't like it because it was a bad story or because it conflicts with your preconceptions for the characters.



Both are true, and there are more reasons (which I've described up-thread) to think this a _poorly-done_ Star Wars movie.


----------



## Morrus

Maxperson said:


> I don't see Yoda going to Dagobah and just not bringing or destroying his lightsaber.  We don't see it, but that doesn't mean that it wasn't there.




You don't see Rey having extensive lightsaber training. We don't see it, but that doesn't mean that it wasn't there. That's me using your exact words to show you how untenable they are; or how you apply differing standards to two identical instances.

The weird thing is that you're willing to invent scenes that didn't exist to create a fictional Luke narrative in your mind, and refuse to acknowledge scenes that *do* exist which contradict the Rey narrative in your mind. 

We can all just invent stuff not in the movie to suit our narratives. It feels like you're trying *really* hard to invent things which aren't in either movie to portray Luke's story as unfolding differently to Rey's, when in reality they're pretty much exactly the same; but you are adamantly refusing to accept that to the point where you're creating your own movie scripts to back it up.

When you can't accept that Luke being able to blow up the Death Star without a targeting computer is the exact same character arc as Rey being able to fight with a lightsaber, you've got some kind of blockage going on. When you take that so far as to actually invent off-screen implied scenes for one character and not the other, it just gets all kind of weird.

And I'm still chuckling over your classic "One moment Luke meets Yoda, in the next scene he's doing backflips!" howler. Literally your exact criticism of Rey.


----------



## Maxperson

hawkeyefan said:


> Well it depends on how you look at it.
> 
> Prior to the prequels, I don’t think Yoda was intended to even have a lightsaber. I think the character was originally envisioned as not having a lightsaber. I think there was intended to be a difference between a Jedi Knight and a Jedi Master. Or something along thise lines.
> 
> Looking at it after the prequels, I’d say it could go either way. We’ve no reason to think he left his saber, but we also have no evidence that he does have it.
> 
> We’ve no reason to imagine lightsaber training to have taken place on Dagobah. Not of the kind you’re taking about, anyway. More the “open yourself up to the Force....let it guide you...” type lessons, sure.
> 
> I think Rey’s lightsaber practice alone in a place that has been established to have a powerful connection to the Force, after she has been established as an incredibly powerful Force user is probably the most sognificant lightsaber training sequence we’ve ever been shown.




Doesn't that sort of make lightsaber duels pointless, though?  The strongest one is almost always going to win if strength with the force = skill with the blade.  Might as well just concede or run whenever someone stronger than you shows up.  I always envisioned it as skill modified by the force, so both mattered.


----------



## Maxperson

Morrus said:


> The weird thing is that you're willing to invent scenes that didn't exist to create a fictional Luke narrative in your mind, and refuse to acknowledge scenes that *do* exist which contradict the Rey narrative in your mind.



I'm not refusing to acknowledge it, since I have acknowledged it in this discussion.  I'm saying that it's not training, since she shouldn't know those moves yet.  In fact, if the force is what gives a force user skill with the blade, that scene is a pointless waste of time since training doesn't matter. 



> When you can't accept that Luke being able to blow up the Death Star without a targeting computer is the exact same character arc as Rey being able to fight with a lightsaber, you've got some kind of blockage going on. When you take that so far as to actually invent off-screen implied scenes for one character and not the other, it just gets all kind of weird.




The force didn't fly his x-wing or point it very close to where he needed to drop the proton torpedo.  Luke's skill did that.  The force aided his skill better than the computer could and he successfully blew up the Death Star.  Lightsabers shouldn't be any different.  The force would aid the skill of the combatant, but it should not be all there is to the skill.


----------



## hawkeyefan

Maxperson said:


> Doesn't that sort of make lightsaber duels pointless, though?  The strongest one is almost always going to win if strength with the force = skill with the blade.  Might as well just concede or run whenever someone stronger than you shows up.  I always envisioned it as skill modified by the force, so both mattered.




No, I’m not saying that power with the Force is exactly equal to skill with the lightsaber. I am simply saying that skill with the lightsaber...in the one scene we get of a Jedi instructing a pupil...was more about the Force than about learning how to wield a blade.

So, since that is the case, I’ll take Rey’s scene of quiet practice with the saber as being more meaningful than the offscreen training scenes you’re suggesting Luke must have had.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Maxperson said:


> I'm not refusing to acknowledge it, since I have acknowledged it in this discussion.  I'm saying that it's not training, since she shouldn't know those moves yet.  In fact, if the force is what gives a force user skill with the blade, that scene is a pointless waste of time since training doesn't matter.
> 
> 
> 
> The force didn't fly his x-wing or point it very close to where he needed to drop the proton torpedo.  Luke's skill did that.  The force aided his skill better than the computer could and he successfully blew up the Death Star.  Lightsabers shouldn't be any different.  The force would aid the skill of the combatant, but it should not be all there is to the skill.



Then you're entirely ignoring the lightsaber training scene in TLJ, where Rey first allows she has skill with her staff and then shows her translating that skill almost move for move with the lightsaber.  We literally see a scene explicitly explaining her skill with the lightsaber as related to her already demonstrated skill with her staff.

It doesn't get clearer than that.


----------



## OB1

Maxperson said:


> Doesn't that sort of make lightsaber duels pointless, though?  The strongest one is almost always going to win if strength with the force = skill with the blade.  Might as well just concede or run whenever someone stronger than you shows up.  I always envisioned it as skill modified by the force, so both mattered.




This is what we are shown in the films. If two force sensitives are of equal power in the Force, it’s skill with a lightsaber that is the deciding factor. But if one person is far more powerful than the other it’s not a contest. See Sidious vs the Jedi in his office. It’s a classic case of bringing a rifle when your opponent brought a tank. 

In the OT, Vader was NEVER attempting to cut down Luke. That’s the only reason Luke survived. He was being tested for his power. 

Kylo is weakened by both the shot he took from chewie and the “splitting of his soul” from killing his father, hence Finn and Rey’s ability not to be instantly struck down by him. Both Finn and Rey also had melee combat training to fall back on. It’s also unclear whether Kylo was trying to kill Rey or test her. 

He got more than he bargained for once she gave herself over to the Force. Again, there is a huge difference in ability shown when you want to control the Force vs allowing the Force to control you. 


Sent from my iPhone using EN World mobile app


----------



## Maxperson

OB1 said:


> This is what we are shown in the films. If two force sensitives are of equal power in the Force, it’s skill with a lightsaber that is the deciding factor. But if one person is far more powerful than the other it’s not a contest. See Sidious vs the Jedi in his office. It’s a classic case of bringing a rifle when your opponent brought a tank.




No.  They died(and very stupidly in the movie) because Sidius had plot armor.  Nothing about that scene implied he was stronger than they were, only that those 5(?) masters were the "three stooges" of the Jedi.  That's the same reason he survived when Mace had his saber a fraction of an inch from his neck.  Only a plot victim of a master would be so stupid as to pull back for a swing when all he had to do was move the saber forward an inch.


----------



## Maxperson

Ovinomancer said:


> Then you're entirely ignoring the lightsaber training scene in TLJ, where Rey first allows she has skill with her staff and then shows her translating that skill almost move for move with the lightsaber.  We literally see a scene explicitly explaining her skill with the lightsaber as related to her already demonstrated skill with her staff.
> 
> It doesn't get clearer than that.




Riiiiiiight, because staff skill is the same as sword skill.  I guess I'm great at flying airplanes all because I'm good at driving a car.


----------



## Maxperson

hawkeyefan said:


> No, I’m not saying that power with the Force is exactly equal to skill with the lightsaber. I am simply saying that skill with the lightsaber...in the one scene we get of a Jedi instructing a pupil...was more about the Force than about learning how to wield a blade.
> 
> So, since that is the case, I’ll take Rey’s scene of quiet practice with the saber as being more meaningful than the offscreen training scenes you’re suggesting Luke must have had.




There was no force use in her "training" scene.  At least Luke had something he needed to defend against and needed the force to guide him.  She was using pure sword skill, which she had none of.


----------



## Ryujin

Maxperson said:


> Riiiiiiight, because staff skill is the same as sword skill.  I guess I'm great at flying airplanes all because I'm good at driving a car.




In the real world, unlike in role playing games, certain concepts in armed combat transfer rather well as shown by various martial treatise. In fact since a lightsaber doesn't have a defined edge anymore than a staff does, even more would translate.


----------



## hawkeyefan

Maxperson said:


> There was no force use in her "training" scene.  At least Luke had something he needed to defend against and needed the force to guide him.  She was using pure sword skill, which she had none of.




How do you know that she was not using the Force?

I think perhaps this is part of the problem with the discussion....if there’s any doubt, Luke gets a pass (training happened off screen, Yoda must have had his lightsaber with him, etc.) but Rey does not (she’s not using the Force while practicing, her skill with a staff can’t possibly help her, etc.).

Why is that?


----------



## billd91

Maxperson said:


> Riiiiiiight, because staff skill is the same as sword skill.  I guess I'm great at flying airplanes all because I'm good at driving a car.




Well, Luke was great at flying sophisticated, cutting edge military hardware all because he had a souped up T-16 hot rod back home. So... yeah. The narratives are *very* similar yet it’s Luke who gets the pass but not Rey. Too right we know why...


----------



## Maxperson

Ryujin said:


> In the real world, unlike in role playing games, certain concepts in armed combat transfer rather well as shown by various martial treatise. In fact since a lightsaber doesn't have a defined edge anymore than a staff does, even more would translate.




Sure, but then she'd have to hold it like a staff and that would cost her fingers.  She isn't using staff styles with her fighting.  She's using sword styles, which she has no training in.


----------



## Maxperson

hawkeyefan said:


> How do you know that she was not using the Force?



There was nothing for the force to guide her against.  She was using sword forms which is skill based.  Skill she didn't have.



> I think perhaps this is part of the problem with the discussion....if there’s any doubt, Luke gets a pass (training happened off screen, Yoda must have had his lightsaber with him, etc.) but Rey does not (she’s not using the Force while practicing, her skill with a staff can’t possibly help her, etc.).




She gets the exact same pass that he does.  If you can show that she has been trained for the same amount of time(or near to it), I'll give her the same benefit of the doubt. 



> Why is that?



Why are you giving her more than you gave him?  You're giving her the same credit with much less to work with.


----------



## Maxperson

billd91 said:


> Well, Luke was great at flying sophisticated, cutting edge military hardware all because he had a souped up T-16 hot rod back home. So... yeah.




So... no.  He tells Han that he could buy a space ship and fly it because he's a pilot.  That means he's been trained to fly space ships.



> The narratives are *very* similar yet it’s Luke who gets the pass but not Rey. Too right we know why...



No they aren't, and I really doubt you know why.  You're having enough trouble with this discussion.  You certainly don't know my motives.


----------



## billd91

Y, Y does Luke get a pass but Rey doesn’t? It’s inXplicable.


----------



## hawkeyefan

Maxperson said:


> There was nothing for the force to guide her against.  She was using sword forms which is skill based.  Skill she didn't have.




Against? Weak your grasp of the Force is. 

Seriously, she doesn’t need an enemy or an obstacle to use the Force. 



Maxperson said:


> She gets the exact same pass that he does.  If you can show that she has been trained for the same amount of time(or near to it), I'll give her the same benefit of the doubt.




I’m not sure if training is as required as you are making it. It plays a part in things, absolutely...Obi-Wan tells Luke to train with Yoda....but that doesn’t mean Luke wasn’t already using the Force. He used it to help destroy the Death Star, and he used it again on Hoth. All before he received any actual training. 

Unless we consider Obi-Wan’s very basic instruction on the Falcon as training. But even if we do, that’s pretty scant. 

We have no evidence from any of the films that an individual could not learn to use the Force to some extent on their own. On fact, I think there is ample evidence to suggest that many in fact do, even if they are not aware of it. 



Maxperson said:


> Why are you giving her more than you gave him?  You're giving her the same credit with much less to work with.




I’m not giving her more. I am fine with Luke doing what he did in the original trilogy. I’m fine with what Rey does in this one, although for different reasons.

 The Force Awakens showed us that Rey has an incredibly strong connection to the Force. She was already feeling it before she ever even met anyone that could use it. She had visions and felt the call of Anakin’s and Luke’s old lightsaber. 

This is more than we ever saw of any connection Luke may have had with the Force until Obi-Wan shows up. 

Then in The Last Jedi, Luke confirms that Rey is potentially stronger in the Force than anyone he’s ever met, except perhaps for Kylo Ren. Snoke then reinforces this and says that Rey’s ascension is the Light Side responding to the Dark.

So yeah...I think that there’s plenty shown in the movie to justify Rey’s ability. I think that to deny that means that you’ve either missed or flat out reject what the movies show us.


----------



## pukunui

Maxperson said:


> Sure, but then she'd have to hold it like a staff and that would cost her fingers.  She isn't using staff styles with her fighting.  She's using sword styles, which she has no training in.



There's a behind the scenes video in which Daisy Ridley's sword fighting instructor says he had expected their training to take three days but she picked it all up in just a few hours. Maybe Rey is just a natural.


----------



## Joker

pukunui said:


> There's a behind the scenes video in which Daisy Ridley's sword fighting instructor says he had expected their training to take three days but she picked it all up in just a few hours. Maybe Rey is just a natural.




Sith Lords usually are.


----------



## trappedslider

Hux: "Hello, this is General Hux of the First Order."

Poe: "New phone who dis?"

Hux: "you called ME!"


----------



## Joker

Poe: "Please hold sir. We are currently experiencing high traffic. A representative will be with you shortly."

Hux: "But you called...*lounge music plays*


----------



## Erekose

Not to derail the current conversation but, if this trilogy is to wipe the slate clean (or more generously complete) the Skywalker saga presumably because Skywalkers are uber powerful with the force, then isn’t that to a degree derailed if Rey is stronger with the force than Luke? And so equal to the strongest Skywalker (Ben). Having written that down I can see that I’ve made a couple of assumptions that might not be true 

I think one of the challenges that I have with where Star Wars is heading is that the “Episodes” are intrinsically linked with the Skywalker family. But that may just mean that there are just not going to be any more Episodes in the future ...


----------



## Ryujin

Maxperson said:


> Sure, but then she'd have to hold it like a staff and that would cost her fingers.  She isn't using staff styles with her fighting.  She's using sword styles, which she has no training in.




A staff is not always held in the middle.


----------



## Water Bob

Something to ponder....

Have you guys noticed, in both TLJ and TFA, that the large capital ships don't seem to have near as many turbo laser batteries as listed in the various specs provided about Star Wars capital ships in the past?  This Wookiepedia Page on the Imperial Star Destroyer shows it having 60 Heavy Turbo Lasers among other weaponry.

Is this new era of ship design, or maybe the First Order only, using a doctrine of fewer, but more powerful turret weapons?

Look at Poe's escape in TFA.  We've discussed this before, but I've never been convinced because the movie tends to indicate that Poe blew out all of the ships turbo lasers on its ventral side.

Now, again, in TLJ, he does the same, this time on the dorsal side, to protect the bombers.

One X-Wing destroying all gun turrets, pretty quickly, on a firing arc of a Star Destroyer and another capital ship?

It's hard to believe, but that's what the films tend to show.


----------



## OB1

Maxperson said:


> No.  They died(and very stupidly in the movie) because Sidius had plot armor.




So did Anakin, Ben and Yoda.  It's a prequel so we know they lived.  Why then would the author make the choice to have Palpatine go up against 4 Masters?  Perhaps to show how powerful Siddious was?  You seem to be throwing out what the text of the film is telling you because it conflicts with your ideas for how things should work.  



Maxperson said:


> Nothing about that scene implied he was stronger than they were...




You mean besides the fact that he slaughtered them without breaking a sweat?  (Was there any sign of violence at all doctor?  You mean besides the dead body?)



Maxperson said:


> That's the same reason he survived when Mace had his saber a fraction of an inch from his neck.  Only a plot victim of a master would be so stupid as to pull back for a swing when all he had to do was move the saber forward an inch.




Mace was about to break the code he had dedicated his entire life to.  Maybe he was stealing himself to the task, or maybe he was giving Siddius the chance to defend himself with force lightening so that it wouldn't be straight up killing an unarmed opponent.  I can think of a thousand reasons why Mace pulled back his sword first.  Again, why not engage with the film by assuming that the choices made were done so deliberately by the author instead of assuming they are mistakes?

Also, you keep comparing Jedi training to a martial art, but please tell me the form I can study so that I can deflect bullets with a sword while blindfolded 30 seconds after being instructed to "let go your conscious self and act on instinct.", "You're eyes can deceive you, don't trust them," and "Stretch out with your _feelings_"  None of that will work for me because I don't have the Force.  Luke and Rey do, so they can perform that superhuman ability with nothing more than the instruction to reach out and trust the force, which they both had.

The Jedi Order spent decades training pupils not to make them powerful, but to keep them under control.  To indoctrinate them into a rigid control structure, inoculate them from the dark side and to ensure the supremacy of the Republic.  That's why there was a program to identify and indoctrinate all force sensitives from an early age.  The Jedi Order was the Avengers and the X-Men and the Superhero Registration Act and the Mutant Registry and the Sakovia Accords all wrapped into one to serve the Republic.  And for 1,000 years, with the Republic in full control of them, they were the only super power.  Bring a Nuke, I mean Jedi, to a negotiation and the opposing side has no choice but to capitulate.  Unless they have a Nuke, I mean Sith, of their own.


----------



## Maxperson

billd91 said:


> Y, Y does Luke get a pass but Rey doesn’t? It’s inXplicable.




People tend to accuse others of their own faults, so you need to look to yourself for that answer.


----------



## Maxperson

Ryujin said:


> A staff is not always held in the middle.




Yep.  Sometimes it's held a quarter of the way down, which would still cost fingers on a lightsaber.


----------



## Maxperson

OB1 said:


> So did Anakin, Ben and Yoda.  It's a prequel so we know they lived.  Why then would the author make the choice to have Palpatine go up against 4 Masters?  Perhaps to show how powerful Siddious was?  You seem to be throwing out what the text of the film is telling you because it conflicts with your ideas for how things should work.



If he was trying to show how powerful Sidious was, he failed abysmally.  Having him cut down Larry, Curly, Moe and Shemp doesn't show those things.  Now, had those masters fought competently and he beat them, THEN he'd look powerful.



> You mean besides the fact that he slaughtered them without breaking a sweat?  (Was there any sign of violence at all doctor?  You mean besides the dead body?)



I can slaughter a bunch of ants without breaking a swear, too.  That doesn't make me look like world class body builder.



> Mace was about to break the code he had dedicated his entire life to.  Maybe he was stealing himself to the task, or maybe he was giving Siddius the chance to defend himself with force lightening so that it wouldn't be straight up killing an unarmed opponent.  I can think of a thousand reasons why Mace pulled back his sword first.  Again, why not engage with the film by assuming that the choices made were done so deliberately by the author instead of assuming they are mistakes?




If you have to stretch this far to find an excuse for Mace's stupidity, the movie has failed.  Besides, the Jedi were out to exterminate the Sith for centuries.  There was no conflict of the sorts you mentioning.  No code he was breaking.  He looked steeled as hell.  And they don't give Sith the chance to defend themselves.  If you can think of a thousand reasons, come up with one that makes sense so I can see it.



> Also, you keep comparing Jedi training to a martial art, but please tell me the form I can study so that I can deflect bullets with a sword while blindfolded 30 seconds after being instructed to "let go your conscious self and act on instinct.", "You're eyes can deceive you, don't trust them," and "Stretch out with your _feelings_"  None of that will work for me because I don't have the Force.  Luke and Rey do, so they can perform that superhuman ability with nothing more than the instruction to reach out and trust the force, which they both had.
> 
> The Jedi Order spent decades training pupils not to make them powerful, but to keep them under control.  To indoctrinate them into a rigid control structure, inoculate them from the dark side and to ensure the supremacy of the Republic.  That's why there was a program to identify and indoctrinate all force sensitives from an early age.  The Jedi Order was the Avengers and the X-Men and the Superhero Registration Act and the Mutant Registry and the Sakovia Accords all wrapped into one to serve the Republic.  And for 1,000 years, with the Republic in full control of them, they were the only super power.  Bring a Nuke, I mean Jedi, to a negotiation and the opposing side has no choice but to capitulate.  Unless they have a Nuke, I mean Sith, of their own.



This is a Strawman, since I've not once compared Jedi training to a martial art.  I have said that there would be some skill training for the force to augment, though.


----------



## Ryujin

Maxperson said:


> Yep.  Sometimes it's held a quarter of the way down, which would still cost fingers on a lightsaber.




That's a balance thing, which isn't an issue for a lightsaber


----------



## Maxperson

Ryujin said:


> That's a balance thing, which isn't an issue for a lightsaber




At which point you are using it like a sword! 

Let's face it.  When she was practicing out there, she wasn't using it like a staff.  She was going through sword forms.


----------



## Ovinomancer

Maxperson said:


> At which point you are using it like a sword!
> 
> Let's face it.  When she was practicing out there, she wasn't using it like a staff.  She was going through sword forms.



I've decided to read your posts on this matter in the voice of the comic book guy.


----------



## OB1

Maxperson said:


> If he was trying to show how powerful Sidious was, he failed abysmally.  Having him cut down Larry, Curly, Moe and Shemp doesn't show those things.  Now, had those masters fought competently and he beat them, THEN he'd look powerful.




I'm not saying there weren't better ways to show this, but the intent was clear.  There is no reason to believe that Lucas intended the scene to show how weak three Masters who we barely knew were.  The only fair read of the scene is that it was meant to show that Sidious was powerful.



Maxperson said:


> I can slaughter a bunch of ants without breaking a swear, too.  That doesn't make me look like world class body builder.




No, but it does make it clear that you are far more powerful than the ants.



Maxperson said:


> If you have to stretch this far to find an excuse for Mace's stupidity, the movie has failed.  Besides, the Jedi were out to exterminate the Sith for centuries.  There was no conflict of the sorts you mentioning.  No code he was breaking.  He looked steeled as hell.  And they don't give Sith the chance to defend themselves.  If you can think of a thousand reasons, come up with one that makes sense so I can see it.




Anakin makes this explicit in his dialogue in the scene.  Mace says he's too dangerous to be left alive, Anakin says it's not the Jedi way to kill an defenseless person.  Again, I agree that Lucas failed in execution, but that doesn't mean we can't understand what the intent was.  In this case, that Anakin attacked Mace to prevent him from killing Sidious.



Maxperson said:


> This is a Strawman, since I've not once compared Jedi training to a martial art.  I have said that there would be some skill training for the force to augment, though.




Fair enough, I missatributed that to you or overstated your position.  Allow me to restate.  I'd be interested in hearing your counter argument to the point I intended to make rather than make semantic arguments that don't push the discussion forward.

Luke is able to deflect blaster bolts 30 seconds after being instructed to "let go your conscious self and act on instinct.", "You're eyes can deceive you, don't trust them," and "Stretch out with your feelings".  The Force guided his hands to accomplish something that even someone with great skill in melee combat couldn't accomplish (see Grevious in RotS).  Why is it a stretch that when Rey "let go her conscious self and acted on instinct" that the force couldn't have helped her to parry Kylo's light saber strikes?  She is instructed earlier in the film to let the force guide her, and then in the fight she does exactly that.  Prior to that moment, it isn't clear if Kylo is trying to defeat her or is merely testing her to see if she is worthy of becoming his pupil.  She is acting on the instinct of her staff training.  He knows the Force is strong in her.  He tells her explicitly that she needs a teacher.  She then remembers what she was taught, same as Luke did when making his trench run against the Death Star.

In ESB, Yoda admonishes Luke that he must learn control.  The Jedi Order spent decades training pupils not to make them powerful, but to teach them control of the power that had been given them. To indoctrinate them into a rigid structure for using that power, inoculate them from the dark side and to ensure the supremacy of the Republic. That's why there was a program to identify and indoctrinate all force sensitives from an early age. The Jedi Order was the Avengers and the X-Men and the Superhero Registration Act and the Mutant Registry and the Sakovia Accords all wrapped into one to serve the Republic. And for 1,000 years, with the Republic in full control of them, they were the only super power. Bring a Nuke, I mean Jedi, to a negotiation and the opposing side has no choice but to capitulate. Unless they have a Nuke, I mean Sith, of their own.  Obi-Wan and Luke both learn that the only true way to serve the force is through self sacrifice, not through trying to control the outcome of things.  That's what being a true Jedi Master is, and what the Jedi Order of the Prequels had forgotten.


----------



## Ryujin

Maxperson said:


> At which point you are using it like a sword!
> 
> Let's face it.  When she was practicing out there, she wasn't using it like a staff.  She was going through sword forms.




No, at which point you're using the staff forms that use its reach advantage. Just as you do with spear. Just as you do with pole weapons. Check out some of the Medieval treatise


----------



## Joker

Ovinomancer said:


> I've decided to read your posts on this matter in the voice of the comic book guy.




You have a particularly obnoxious way of talking to detractors of this movie, you know?


----------



## Maxperson

Ovinomancer said:


> I've decided to read your posts on this matter in the voice of the comic book guy.




I don't even know who that is.


----------



## Ryujin

Maxperson said:


> I don't even know who that is.




This:


----------



## Maxperson

OB1 said:


> I'm not saying there weren't better ways to show this, but the intent was clear.  There is no reason to believe that Lucas intended the scene to show how weak three Masters who we barely knew were.  The only fair read of the scene is that it was meant to show that Sidious was powerful.




Are we counting down to 0 on the masters?  I started by guessing 5,  and you responded with 4.  I went with 4, and now you're at 3.  Any Sith Lord worth a grain of salt can take two Jedi masters.  He didn't need to be strong for that! 



> No, but it does make it clear that you are far more powerful than the ants.



 Sure, but unlike a single Jedi master, ants aren't supposed to be a threat. 



> Anakin makes this explicit in his dialogue in the scene.  Mace says he's too dangerous to be left alive, Anakin says it's not the Jedi way to kill an defenseless person.  Again, I agree that Lucas failed in execution, but that doesn't mean we can't understand what the intent was.  In this case, that Anakin attacked Mace to prevent him from killing Sidious.



Sidious wasn't defenseless, though.  No Sith is.



> Fair enough, I missatributed that to you or overstated your position.  Allow me to restate.  I'd be interested in hearing your counter argument to the point I intended to make rather than make semantic arguments that don't push the discussion forward.



The force guides Jedi in being able to interpose their weapon or get out of the way of things.  It doesn't give technical skill.  When you see Jedi, or Sith for that matter, using technical sword skill, it's because they were trained in it.



> Luke is able to deflect blaster bolts 30 seconds after being instructed to "let go your conscious self and act on instinct.", "You're eyes can deceive you, don't trust them," and "Stretch out with your feelings".  The Force guided his hands to accomplish something that even someone with great skill in melee combat couldn't accomplish (see Grevious in RotS).  Why is it a stretch that when Rey "let go her conscious self and acted on instinct" that the force couldn't have helped her to parry Kylo's light saber strikes?  She is instructed earlier in the film to let the force guide her, and then in the fight she does exactly that.  Prior to that moment, it isn't clear if Kylo is trying to defeat her or is merely testing her to see if she is worthy of becoming his pupil.  She is acting on the instinct of her staff training.  He knows the Force is strong in her.  He tells her explicitly that she needs a teacher.  She then remembers what she was taught, same as Luke did when making his trench run against the Death Star.



When Luke blocked those bolts, he didn't do it with technical sword skill.  He just threw the saber into the way.  Rey isn't doing that.  She's using sword skill that she wasn't trained with.  Those were sword moves, not staff moves being used to help her with her lightsaber.  The moves for a staff look different than ones for a sword.



> In ESB, Yoda admonishes Luke that he must learn control.  The Jedi Order spent decades training pupils not to make them powerful, but to teach them control of the power that had been given them. To indoctrinate them into a rigid structure for using that power, inoculate them from the dark side and to ensure the supremacy of the Republic. That's why there was a program to identify and indoctrinate all force sensitives from an early age. The Jedi Order was the Avengers and the X-Men and the Superhero Registration Act and the Mutant Registry and the Sakovia Accords all wrapped into one to serve the Republic. And for 1,000 years, with the Republic in full control of them, they were the only super power. Bring a Nuke, I mean Jedi, to a negotiation and the opposing side has no choice but to capitulate. Unless they have a Nuke, I mean Sith, of their own.  Obi-Wan and Luke both learn that the only true way to serve the force is through self sacrifice, not through trying to control the outcome of things.  That's what being a true Jedi Master is, and what the Jedi Order of the Prequels had forgotten.



There were dark force users that were not Sith, though.  We saw at least one of those in movies.  Count Dooku wasn't Sith.  The Mandalorians were also adept at killing Jedi and had metal that could resist a lightsaber.  Others could kill them as well.  While Jedi were big fish(probably the biggest fish), they weren't the only big fish, nor were they the only ones with nukes.


----------



## Maxperson

Ryujin said:


> No, at which point you're using the staff forms that use its reach advantage. Just as you do with spear. Just as you do with pole weapons. Check out some of the Medieval treatise




She wasn't using staff forms, though.  That was sword work.  If she was using it like a staff, that would actually make sense.


----------



## Ryujin

Maxperson said:


> She wasn't using staff forms, though.  That was sword work.  If she was using it like a staff, that would actually make sense.




This video has a rather good explanation of what I'm saying, if you watch it through:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLdfk7apE_A

And Wushu staff work looks rather lightsabery:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=foaUrqvOTpw


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

billd91 said:


> Well, Luke was great at flying sophisticated, cutting edge military hardware all because he had a souped up T-16 hot rod back home. So... yeah. The narratives are *very* similar yet it’s Luke who gets the pass but not Rey. Too right we know why...



Well, it seems Luke was already trained as a Pilot when we met him. I figure in Star Wars it might be almost as common as a driver's license, though. 


I think one of the big differences is that Luke that when Luke uses the Force or the Light Saber, he seems to be actually struggling. Luke's first attempt at force-grabbing his light saber fails. When he trains with Yoda, he fails to lift the X-Wing up, and gets his concentration broken during other tasks and drops everything he's levitating. 
When he first has a real light saber fight... He's not horrible at it, but clearly outmatched by Vader, who easily swings his light saber and utilizes the force to overwhelm him. But Vader at this point doesn't even want to kill him. And Luke still loses a hand...
His second fight against Vader doesn't go well at first - only once he taps in to the Dark Side does he start overwhelming Vader, which obviously plays more into the theme that the Dark Side is a seductive short cut, and doesn't mean he suddenly is more skillful. 

Rey so far somehow lacked scenes where she really had to struggle hard and outright lose. And that is what is creating the impression that she's basically overpowered or a Mary Sue. Her first fight with Kylo Ren seems to go a bit too easy for her - even though that might just because he's wounder. But it still leads to the feeling that she never haves a hard time and a great challenge she has to overcome. That makes her less ... exciting.




Erekose said:


> Not to derail the current conversation but, if  this trilogy is to wipe the slate clean (or more generously complete)  the Skywalker saga presumably because Skywalkers are uber powerful with  the force, then isn’t that to a degree derailed if Rey is stronger with  the force than Luke? And so equal to the strongest Skywalker (Ben).  Having written that down I can see that I’ve made a couple of  assumptions that might not be true
> 
> I think one of the challenges that I have with where Star Wars is  heading is that the “Episodes” are intrinsically linked with the  Skywalker family. But that may just mean that there are just not going  to be any more Episodes in the future ...



Will Daisy Ridley also be available for movies after the first trilogy? Because it will be kinda awkward to not have her available when she is the new Jedi Star at the horizon. Unless she dies in the last part?

I am not sure if it was Abrams or Johnson that really made Rey another "special chosen with even more exceptional Jedi powers than who came before". But it seems it could become a bit ridiculous if they don't get rid of this concept. Otherwise it will be turtles all the way down, and chosen of the force all the way up. 

A reason why I would have thought that just going with Luke successfully establishing a new, young Jedi Order between RotJ and TFA would have been better. No need for super-Jedi, just regular ones, but they are still much rarer than in the old Republic, so we can focus on the journey of a newly discovered Force Sensitive (and I very much like the idea of a female Jedi) on his way to become a Jedi, that might be getting in over his head at first but manages to save the day and find his path.


----------



## billd91

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> Well, it seems Luke was already trained as a Pilot when we met him. I figure in Star Wars it might be almost as common as a driver's license, though.
> 
> 
> I think one of the big differences is that Luke that when Luke uses the Force or the Light Saber, he seems to be actually struggling. Luke's first attempt at force-grabbing his light saber fails. When he trains with Yoda, he fails to lift the X-Wing up, and gets his concentration broken during other tasks and drops everything he's levitating.
> When he first has a real light saber fight... He's not horrible at it, but clearly outmatched by Vader, who easily swings his light saber and utilizes the force to overwhelm him. But Vader at this point doesn't even want to kill him. And Luke still loses a hand...
> His second fight against Vader doesn't go well at first - only once he taps in to the Dark Side does he start overwhelming Vader, which obviously plays more into the theme that the Dark Side is a seductive short cut, and doesn't mean he suddenly is more skillful.
> 
> Rey so far somehow lacked scenes where she really had to struggle hard and outright lose. And that is what is creating the impression that she's basically overpowered or a Mary Sue. Her first fight with Kylo Ren seems to go a bit too easy for her - even though that might just because he's wounder. But it still leads to the feeling that she never haves a hard time and a great challenge she has to overcome. That makes her less ... exciting.
> .




There’s a lot of selective memory going on here, though. Her first attempt to use the Force takes multiple attempts like Luke’s attempt to move his lightsaber. And she does struggle in the fight with Kylo Ren in TFA. She never competes with anyone as overpowered as Vader, but that hardly makes her a Mary Sue. 

Ultimately, all Jedi protagonists are somewhat akin to Mary Sue characters, but it only gets saddled on Rey when Anakin was multiple times worse in his trilogy.


----------



## Maxperson

Ryujin said:


> This video has a rather good explanation of what I'm saying, if you watch it through:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLdfk7apE_A
> 
> And Wushu staff work looks rather lightsabery:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=foaUrqvOTpw




The Wushu stuff looked pretty good, but was different from what she was doing which were sword techniques.


----------



## Maxperson

billd91 said:


> There’s a lot of selective memory going on here, though. Her first attempt to use the Force takes multiple attempts like Luke’s attempt to move his lightsaber. And she does struggle in the fight with Kylo Ren in TFA. She never competes with anyone as overpowered as Vader, but that hardly makes her a Mary Sue.
> 
> Ultimately, all Jedi protagonists are somewhat akin to Mary Sue characters, but it only gets saddled on Rey when Anakin was multiple times worse in his trilogy.




He got slammed hard for being a whiny brat all the time.  The movies got slammed hard for sucking so badly.  He got tons of training starting from when he was like 6.  How was he worse than Rey again?


----------



## Ryujin

Maxperson said:


> The Wushu stuff looked pretty good, but was different from what she was doing which were sword techniques.




You're missing the point. After a certain point fighting is fighting and only the weapon's parameters differ. Some techniques are almost universal. Others translate. Some you can't use. Look at that Wushu demonstration and you'll see many moves that are "lightsaber-like" or "sword-like." The same applies to Rey's staff use in Episode 7.


----------



## Maxperson

Ryujin said:


> You're missing the point. After a certain point fighting is fighting and only the weapon's parameters differ. Some techniques are almost universal. Others translate. Some you can't use. Look at that Wushu demonstration and you'll see many moves that are "lightsaber-like" or "sword-like." The same applies to Rey's staff use in Episode 7.




I get the point.  My point is that she wasn't using those.  She was using sword techniques.  The actress even had a sword instructor on set to help her learn those moves.


----------



## Erekose

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> A reason why I would have thought that just going with Luke successfully establishing a new, young Jedi Order between RotJ and TFA would have been better. No need for super-Jedi, just regular ones, but they are still much rarer than in the old Republic, so we can focus on the journey of a newly discovered Force Sensitive (and I very much like the idea of a female Jedi) on his way to become a Jedi, that might be getting in over his head at first but manages to save the day and find his path.




I wonder if this is a problem some people have with Luke in TLJ? We see Luke grow as a Jedi in the original trilogy to where, after facing Darth Vader again, he is a Jedi Knight. But being a Jedi Knight is still quite a step away from being a Jedi Master. And I’m not sure TLJ really showed us how whoop ass Luke is as a Jedi Master ... I suppose given the film’s back story may be he never progressed much beyong RotJ? But again I can see why that’s less than satisfying for some fans of the original trilogy. 

I agree that if Star Wars is to progress beyond the “best ever” Jedi stories to include more typical jedis, establishing Luke’s school would’ve been the most efficient way to go. Feels a much bigger leap for Ray to do it - if for no other reason that presumably they’ll not be such a big jump in time between the next film and the next trilogy.


----------



## pukunui

Maxperson said:


> I get the point.  My point is that she wasn't using those.  She was using sword techniques.  The actress even had a sword instructor on set to help her learn those moves.



Yes, but as I pointed out above, he states on camera that she picked up the techniques in hours instead of days. If Daisy Ridley can learn fake swordfighting that quickly, why can't Rey, who has the ability to tap into a magical power, do so as well?


----------



## Maxperson

pukunui said:


> Yes, but as I pointed out above, he states on camera that she picked up the techniques in hours instead of days. If Daisy Ridley can learn fake swordfighting that quickly, why can't Rey, who has the ability to tap into a magical power, do so as well?




Sure.  So where's the sword trainer that trained Rey?  Luke didn't do it.


----------



## hawkeyefan

Maxperson said:


> Sure.  So where's the sword trainer that trained Rey?  Luke didn't do it.




Rey’s sword trainer is in that same scene as Luke’s.


----------



## Maxperson

hawkeyefan said:


> Rey’s sword trainer is in that same scene as Luke’s.




I didn't see her with Ob-Wan and Yoda.


----------



## hawkeyefan

Maxperson said:


> I didn't see her with Ob-Wan and Yoda.




That’s because neither of those guys taught Luke how to use a sword.

Or you could look at it as the Force is guiding each of them.

Or, if you prefer, the Force Ghosts of Obi-Wan, Yoda, and other fallen Jedi trained Rey off screen.

Or Rey’s ability with a staff translated to grasping the lightsaber more quickly. I suppose this would only work if you were willing to accept the idea that skill with one weapon might inform skill with another. But no, you seem to have dug your heels in that someone skilled with one weapon has as much chance of learning a second as a person unskilled with any weapons. 

Or any other rationalization you want to make. Ultimately though, I don’t think anything will counter your determination to not accept the new films, when really what’s happening is that your opinion of the Original Trilogy was formed by a younger, less critical and more open version of yourself, so its flaws don’t matter as much. 

Your adult mind accepts your younger self’s appraisal of the earlier films, and actively works to support that opinion. The new films don’t have such a powerful hook, and so they don’t get a pass. They are subjected to the full criticism of your adult mind. 

Under any serious critical evaluation, all of these films can be picked apart and torn down. But the original trilogy doesn’t often face that because at the time we first saw them, all we expected from them was fun.


----------



## Water Bob

Maxperson said:


> Sure.  So where's the sword trainer that trained Rey?  Luke didn't do it.




It's simple.  Rey went up a level.  She picked up the Lightsaber Feat.


----------



## Maxperson

hawkeyefan said:


> That’s because neither of those guys taught Luke how to use a sword.




True.  They taught him how to use a lightsaber.



> Or Rey’s ability with a staff translated to grasping the lightsaber more quickly. I suppose this would only work if you were willing to accept the idea that skill with one weapon might inform skill with another. But no, you seem to have dug your heels in that someone skilled with one weapon has as much chance of learning a second as a person unskilled with any weapons.




I could accept that idea if she were actually using staff forms to use her saber and progressing.  She isn't, though.  She is only using sword skill.  You aren't going to learn how to use a sword just because you could use a staff. 



> Or any other rationalization you want to make. Ultimately though, I don’t think anything will counter your determination to not accept the new films, when really what’s happening is that your opinion of the Original Trilogy was formed by a younger, less critical and more open version of yourself, so its flaws don’t matter as much.




Nah.  I re-watch them as an adult.  



> Your adult mind accepts your younger self’s appraisal of the earlier films, and actively works to support that opinion. The new films don’t have such a powerful hook, and so they don’t get a pass. They are subjected to the full criticism of your adult mind.



No.  I examine the scenes fairly objectively.  Luke doesn't get as much training as he should have to support his Return of the Jedi skill level, but he does get training where Rey does not.  I'd be willing to grant her the same "pass" as Luke, except she doesn't get the same justifications as Luke.  She gets......nothing.


----------



## Kail11

I still don't get the light speed scene....


----------



## Morrus

Maxperson said:


> I didn't see her with Ob-Wan and Yoda.




Implied. Off-screen.


----------



## hawkeyefan

Maxperson said:


> True.  They taught him how to use a lightsaber.




No, they didn’t. Yoda certainly is not shown doing so. Obi-Wan’s scene is more about basic Force use than anything else.

They taught him how to use the Force. And if you wanted to say that Force use is what is needed to use a lightsaber....which is supported by the films...then I’d agree. 

But you inserting training that we are bot shown and adamantly insisiting it must be the case proves nothing. 




Maxperson said:


> I could accept that idea if she were actually using staff forms to use her saber and progressing.  She isn't, though.  She is only using sword skill.  You aren't going to learn how to use a sword just because you could use a staff.




Ugh “forms”. She’s usung magic powers to hone her skill. The same way as all Jedi that we know of. She’s letting go of her conscious self...she’s sensing how the Force flows through all things...her, the rock, her saber....

As for the staff and sword but, please just tell me if you think someone whose good at one may also be good at the other? It’s really simple. I had a buddy growing up who was great at lacrosse and hockey and golf but terrible at baseball. 



Maxperson said:


> Nah.  I re-watch them as an adult.




I’m sure. When you do, maybe reexamine them and be as critical of them as you are of the new ones. 

Tell me who was the genius that thought hiding Luke on the planet where his dad grew up with the only remaining family he had left was a good hiding place. Oh and let’s not bother changing his name, either. No one would ever think of looking for him there!!!

All this training that Luke gets is over the course of how long? Maybe a week? Probably less. How long is the gang in the Falcon fleeing Hoth before they get to Bespin? 

So if that’s enough training for Luke, are we splitting hairs to say Rey’s not had enough training? I mean, I get that she’s had no formal training, but she’s also shown to have a much stronger connection to the Force, and she doesn’t really start using it until she’s exposed to it first hand. 



Maxperson said:


> No.  I examine the scenes fairly objectively.  Luke doesn't get as much training as he should have to support his Return of the Jedi skill level, but he does get training where Rey does not.  I'd be willing to grant her the same "pass" as Luke, except she doesn't get the same justifications as Luke.  She gets......nothing.




Except a connection to the Force that’s incredibly strong and exposure to advanced Force techniques. I think it’s also implied that the Force is working through her more than the other way around, but that’s not specifically stated, so I’m sure that can’t count qhere as non-specifically stated training scenes for Luke are just fine.


----------



## JacktheRabbit

This movie was a train wreck in every possible way. The only true saving grace was Luke casually dusting off his shoulder.

1. How did the expert hacker who was never on the rebel cruiser know the plan to use cloaked transports to escape (a plane our idiot XWing pilot didnt know until the very end) and also happen to know how to see through the cloaks?

2. When did the Resistance become a Leia dictatorship? Im sorry, leader or not you cannot demote someone in military rank just by saying so in any sort of real modern military unless that military is run by Hiter, Stalin, etc.

3. Why create a new big baddie like Snokes only to kill him like a punk? Sure it was clever but this guy was tough enough to consider only Luke to be a worthy foe.

4. An entire fleet of imperial ships have insufficient firepower to kill one cruiser that is close enough to be in visual range? That is illogical and impossible. It implies that their weapons lose power over range but your firing in a vacuum, where is all that energy going that is radiating away between firing the shot and it getting to the cruisers shields?

On the plus side I did enjoy the fact that anyone else that opposed the First Order basically told Leia and company to go blow by not bothering to show up. Reinforces that she had become an overbearing with with "her" resistance.


----------



## Mallus

DocMoriartty said:


> 1. How did the expert hacker who was never on the rebel cruiser know the plan to use cloaked transports to escape (a plane our idiot XWing pilot didnt know until the very end) and also happen to know how to see through the cloaks?



DJ overhears Finn talking with Poe via communicator, who explains the transport escape plan, just prior to their capture. As for how the FO figure out the cloaks, presumably the just *do*, once alerted to the plan. It's not the transport cloaks are presented as revolutionary new technology, more like a desperate trick. Note this is a sensor cloak only - the transports are visible to the naked eye - they could have used optical telescopes. 



> 2. When did the Resistance become a Leia dictatorship? Im sorry, leader or not you cannot demote someone in military rank just by saying so in any sort of real modern military unless that military is run by Hiter, Stalin, etc.



Why do you assume the Resistance operates like a professional modern military? It might bear a passing resemblance to one, but it seems safer to say it's really driven by the legendary figure Princess/General Leia, hero of the Galactic Civil War. Also, note that Holdo commanded her ship in evening wear. The Resistance is prolly not all that hung up on protocol - except when you disobey direct orders.



> 3. Why create a new big baddie like Snokes only to kill him like a punk? Sure it was clever but this guy was tough enough to consider only Luke to be a worthy foe.



Because the real big baddie isn't Snoke. It's Kylo Ren (for now - I wouldn't bet against his redemption in Episode IX). 



> 4. An entire fleet of imperial ships have insufficient firepower to kill one cruiser that is close enough to be in visual range? That is illogical and impossible.



Ever notice how space combat in the Star Wars universe all takes place within the frame? Within visual range. The smaller craft behave like WW2 planes and the bigger craft like ocean-going frigates in a pirate movie. These depictions are governed by visual -- cinematic -- logic, not physics. 

Ever single space battle shown in the films is nonsensical from a physics perspective. Ever single one. Search your feelings; you know it to be true. 



> Reinforces that she had become an overbearing with with "her" resistance.



I think it reinforces the fact there need to be a plot in Ep 9. And rallying the allies who didn't show at the end of TLJ is going to be it.


----------



## Kaodi

One thing we have not really seen about Kylo Ren yet is why he wanted to be like his grandfather in the first place. We only saw his breaking point, when he thought Luke was trying to kill him. Anakin Skywalker fell to the Dark Side in part because he lost one of the people he loved and was afraid of losing the other. But there has to be more to it than that. Snoke had to be tempting him with something more than naked power. And I wonder if how Snoke "got to him" will be a major reveal in the last film.


----------



## Mallus

Water Bob said:


> It's simple.  Rey went up a level.  She picked up the Lightsaber Feat.



The way I figure it, the rule is a PC can choose to add their Force bonus, instead of their Lightsaber skill ranks, to their attack roll, if their Force bonus is higher. 

You can see the exact point when Rey's player remembers this rule at the end The Force Awakens!


----------



## JacktheRabbit

Mallus said:


> DJ overhears Finn talking with Poe via communicator, who explains the transport escape plan, just prior to their capture. As for how the FO figure out the cloaks, presumably the just *do*, once alerted to the plan. It's not the transport cloaks are presented as revolutionary new technology, more like a desperate trick. Note this is a sensor cloak only - the transports are visible to the naked eye - they could have used optical telescopes.
> 
> 
> Why do you assume the Resistance operates like a professional modern military? It might bear a passing resemblance to one, but it seems safer to say it's really driven by the legendary figure Princess/General Leia, hero of the Galactic Civil War. Also, note that Holdo commanded her ship in evening wear. The Resistance is prolly not all that hung up on protocol - except when you disobey direct orders.
> 
> 
> Because the real big baddie isn't Snoke. It's Kylo Ren (for now - I wouldn't bet against his redemption in Episode IX).
> 
> 
> Ever notice how space combat in the Star Wars universe all takes place within the frame? Within visual range. The smaller craft behave like WW2 planes and the bigger craft like ocean-going frigates in a pirate movie. These depictions are governed by visual -- cinematic -- logic, not physics.
> 
> Ever single space battle shown in the films is nonsensical from a physics perspective. Ever single one. Search your feelings; you know it to be true.
> 
> 
> I think it reinforces the fact there need to be a plot in Ep 9. And rallying the allies who didn't show at the end of TLJ is going to be it.





I would have to rewatch the scene, which I have no interest in doing but Poe learned very last minute after being stunned about the cloak plan. At that point disabling the active sensor would be pointless and needlessly risky. It would also suggest that Poe is a complete and utter moron and the biggest asset for the FO in the whole movie. The Resistance had a plan and kept it secret from everyone. Poe is finally told this plan and he immediately tells someone that is sneaking onto an enemy warship and thus the most likely to be captured?

True, the Resistance could be Leia's personal fan club. But then why bother with ranks and organization if it does not mean anything.

Feels more like they decided that Snokes felt too much like the Emperor so they found a quick way to write him out.

Visual range exists to make things fit on a movie screen, they are poor explanation for how a single cruiser can survive the fire of multiple larger more powerful ships.

Very true on last point, there was very little in this movie that really fit as a nice well organized plot. The biggest feeling I got from the movie is that the average person could care less who is in charge, the Galactic level leadership does nothing to affect the life of every day citizens.


One other thought comes to mind. This whole movies was a huge win for the FO. The Resistance flees, has all their cap ships destroyed, escapes on shuttles, a large number of which are destroyed, then they hide in a base and what appears to be hundreds of soldiers are deployed in trenches, all of these soldiers are killed or captured and in the end Leia and a command staff small enough to fit on the Falcon is all that escapes.

So the FO wiped out what? 99.95% of the Resistance AND Luke Skywalker had to sacrifice his life so that few could escape.


----------



## Hussar

Stumbled across this.  Thought I'd share:







Made me giggle.


----------



## Maxperson

Mallus said:


> DJ overhears Finn talking with Poe via communicator, who explains the transport escape plan, just prior to their capture. As for how the FO figure out the cloaks, presumably the just *do*, once alerted to the plan. It's not the transport cloaks are presented as revolutionary new technology, more like a desperate trick. Note this is a sensor cloak only - the transports are visible to the naked eye - they could have used optical telescopes.




If it were visual only, the First Order would not have been able to hit the transports as reliably as they were.  It's not as if their canons had scopes on them.  Somehow they were able to target the fleeing rebels with sensors.



> Ever notice how space combat in the Star Wars universe all takes place within the frame? Within visual range. The smaller craft behave like WW2 planes and the bigger craft like ocean-going frigates in a pirate movie. These depictions are governed by visual -- cinematic -- logic, not physics.
> 
> Ever single space battle shown in the films is nonsensical from a physics perspective. Ever single one. Search your feelings; you know it to be true.




Not necessarily.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2056018/Laws-physics-change-depending-universe.html


----------



## Ovinomancer

Maxperson said:


> If it were visual only, the First Order would not have been able to hit the transports as reliably as they were.  It's not as if their canons had scopes on them.  Somehow they were able to target the fleeing rebels with sensors.
> 
> 
> 
> Not necessarily.
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2056018/Laws-physics-change-depending-universe.html




Bah, the space battles in Star Wars are clearly using turbolaser forms.  Linking to stories about electromagnetic forms is silly.  Clearly, Star Wars had implied off-screen training with George Lucas in turbolaser forms.  Those scientists don't.


----------



## tomBitonti

Something I was just considering ...

While the rebellion took very large losses (three capital ships, most of the escaping rebels), the First Order took much more losses (at least two very large capital ships; an indeterminate number of Star Destroyers).  Locally, this looks like a loss for the First Order.  (But, I'm not sure how to measure up the loss of leaders.)

That seems to take us to a question of Rebellion losses caused by the Star Killer attack to understand the overall balance of losses.

Also, if the transports weren't attacked, would it have made a difference?  In the end, only the Falcon is available as a transport.  Anyone above the Falcon's capacity would be left behind and presumably captured or killed by the First Order.

I'm getting annoyed at finding so many things that, ultimately, were irrelevant to the story outcome.

Thx!
TomB


----------



## JacktheRabbit

tomBitonti said:


> Something I was just considering ...
> 
> While the rebellion took very large losses (three capital ships, most of the escaping rebels), the First Order took much more losses (at least two very large capital ships; an indeterminate number of Star Destroyers).  Locally, this looks like a loss for the First Order.  (But, I'm not sure how to measure up the loss of leaders.)
> 
> That seems to take us to a question of Rebellion losses caused by the Star Killer attack to understand the overall balance of losses.
> 
> Also, if the transports weren't attacked, would it have made a difference?  In the end, only the Falcon is available as a transport.  Anyone above the Falcon's capacity would be left behind and presumably captured or killed by the First Order.
> 
> I'm getting annoyed at finding so many things that, ultimately, were irrelevant to the story outcome.
> 
> Thx!
> TomB




Yes it would have made a difference. The Resistance plan was to stealth to the planet and when the cruiser was destroyed the FO would think the resistance was all dead and not go checking that random planet nearby because they did not see any ships go to it.

Eventually the FO leaves and the Resistance uses their unarmored shuttles to go elsewhere.


----------



## tomBitonti

DocMoriartty said:


> Yes it would have made a difference. The Resistance plan was to stealth to the planet and when the cruiser was destroyed the FO would think the resistance was all dead and not go checking that random planet nearby because they did not see any ships go to it.
> 
> Eventually the FO leaves and the Resistance uses their unarmored shuttles to go elsewhere.




Which brings up a question ... how is the planet which is not reached by jump not apparent to the First Order?  There is a whole star system which they were apparently driving past, which no-one was noticing.  Wouldn't the First Order, as a matter of course, make sure none of the Rebels escaped to the system, regardless of what they saw on their sensors in regards to departing ships?  My brain hurts ...

Thx!
TomB


----------



## JacktheRabbit

tomBitonti said:


> Which brings up a question ... how is the planet which is not reached by jump not apparent to the First Order?  There is a whole star system which they were apparently driving past, which no-one was noticing.  Wouldn't the First Order, as a matter of course, make sure none of the Rebels escaped to the system, regardless of what they saw on their sensors in regards to departing ships?  My brain hurts ...
> 
> Thx!
> TomB




Sure there is a chance they would check the planets, but planets are big things and they might not bother or they might miss the base. Its not the best plan but it was better than what they felt their alternatives were. Poe's plan was better and would have probably worked if leadership had agreed to it and qualified people had been sent to carry it out.


----------



## tomBitonti

DocMoriartty said:


> Sure there is a chance they would check the planets, but planets are big things and they might not bother or they might miss the base. Its not the best plan but it was better than what they felt their alternatives were. Poe's plan was better and would have probably worked if leadership had agreed to it and qualified people had been sent to carry it out.




Eh, you are chasing a rebel fleet through mostly empty space, except for an upcoming system which has a number of planets.  You have a reserve of a dozen Star Destroyers.  Wouldn't you send a couple to the system to make sure none of the rebels gave you the slip?

Thx!
TomB


----------



## Ovinomancer

tomBitonti said:


> Eh, you are chasing a rebel fleet through mostly empty space, except for an upcoming system which has a number of planets.  You have a reserve of a dozen Star Destroyers.  Wouldn't you send a couple to the system to make sure none of the rebels gave you the slip?
> 
> Thx!
> TomB




Why?  All the rebels are on THAT ship.  They don't leave THAT ship.  You blow up THAT ship.  Done.


----------



## tomBitonti

Ovinomancer said:


> Why?  All the rebels are on THAT ship.  They don't leave THAT ship.  You blow up THAT ship.  Done.




Because rebels are sneaky sorts who might have tricks that they try to use.

(Now, I can see the First Order blokes, being the arrogant sods that they are, might make that assumption.  But, absent critical concerns elsewhere that require the resources, it seems awfully negligent to not take safeguards.)

(On the other hand yet again, both militaries seem rather quite terrible at being military organizations.  This would not be out of place for Star Wars.)

Thx!
TomB


----------



## Ovinomancer

tomBitonti said:


> Because rebels are sneaky sorts who might have tricks that they try to use.
> 
> (Now, I can see the First Order blokes, being the arrogant sods that they are, might make that assumption.  But, absent critical concerns elsewhere that require the resources, it seems awfully negligent to not take safeguards.)
> 
> (On the other hand yet again, both militaries seem rather quite terrible at being military organizations.  This would not be out of place for Star Wars.)
> 
> Thx!
> TomB




Here's a relevant comparison:

You're in a battleship, chasing an enemy frigate, which is faster than you, but low on fuel.  It's only a matter of time before the frigate's fuel reserves deplete and they fall within range of your guns.  In addition, you pass by a number of small islands during the chase.  

Do you send some of your escorting destroyers to search each island on the chance that the crew of the frigate used camouflaged dingies to sneak off the frigate and might have made it to one of the islands?  

We watch the movies where the plucky heroes get away with ludicrous plans against all odds.  Most of the time, those don't work at all.


----------



## Mallus

DocMoriartty said:


> It would also suggest that Poe is a complete and utter moron and the biggest asset for the FO in the whole movie. The Resistance had a plan and kept it secret from everyone. Poe is finally told this plan and he immediately tells someone that is sneaking onto an enemy warship and thus the most likely to be captured?



Well, yes. That's the whole point. Poe's _wrong_. His half-baked plan goes sideways. In Poe's defense, his plan is probably no worse than the plan to rescue of Leia in Star Wars. But Poe's storyline in TLJ is how a hotshot pilot becomes a smarter _leader_, so things don't go as well for his merry band i.e. Finn & Rose. There are vital life lessons to be learned! 



> True, the Resistance could be Leia's personal fan club. But then why bother with ranks and organization if it does not mean anything.



It's not that 'ranks and organization' mean nothing. There's a huge excluded middle between 'anarchy' and 'legendary General Leia Organa can field-demote Poe'. But seriously, did you think The Last Jedi was suddenly going to become a military legal procedural, with appointed counsel, hearings, and a trial? Jedi Advocate General?? It's not that kind of show. 



> Feels more like they decided that Snokes felt too much like the Emperor so they found a quick way to write him out.



Could be? Regardless, I think it was a great decision. 



> Visual range exists to make things fit on a movie screen, they are poor explanation for how a single cruiser can survive the fire of multiple larger more powerful ships.



The Resistance ships are beyond the effective range of the First Order ship's weapons, and the FO can't close. Pretty sure this is explicitly stated. As the Resistance ships run out of fuel, they fall into effective range and get blown up.  

The reason why the weapons effective ranges are so short, and not, say in the tens of thousands of kilometers, is so the ships all fit in the same shot - because this is a Star Wars movie!

TBH, I'm not exactly sure why Johnson went with the slow-speed space chase. All I can think of is it's an inversion of the middle of ESB; instead the Rebel fleet jumping away and the Millennium Falcon limping to Bespin at sublight, we have the opposite. The Resistance fleet crawls away from the FO pursuers while a brave subplot flits off to another location at hyper-speed. This is probably some sort of commentary on distance & time in the Star Wars movies.  



> The biggest feeling I got from the movie is that the average person could care less who is in charge, the Galactic level leadership does nothing to affect the life of every day citizens.



Honestly, I don't think we get good picture of life under Imperial occupation until Star Wars Rebels.



> So the FO wiped out what? 99.95% of the Resistance AND Luke Skywalker had to sacrifice his life so that few could escape.



The FO lost their Supreme Leader, his immense flagship, and some (most?) of that fleet after Holdo's hyper-jump kamikaze. So... not bad? Especially when you consider the allies the Resistance called out to from Krait are still out there. 

Which brings up my biggest issue with the next movie. I don't want it to be a movie. I want it to be a Bioware game. I want 40 to 50 hours (single play-through) of the PCs in the Falcon uniting factions in a reluctant galaxy to battle the First Order. Plus romances!


----------



## JacktheRabbit

Mallus said:


> The FO lost their Supreme Leader, his immense flagship, and some (most?) of that fleet after Holdo's hyper-jump kamikaze. So... not bad? Especially when you consider the allies the Resistance called out to from Krait are still out there.
> 
> Which brings up my biggest issue with the next movie. I don't want it to be a movie. I want it to be a Bioware game. I want 40 to 50 hours (single play-through) of the PCs in the Falcon uniting factions in a reluctant galaxy to battle the First Order. Plus romances!




The lost the planet bombardment ship at the beginning of the movie which one would think is a huge loss but Leia still felt that the lost of the dozen or so bombers sent in to do the job was too high a cost. So that tells you she is either a fool or the scale of armaments between the FO and the Resistance is so unbalanced that 12 oversized fighters has more value to the Resistance that a Dreadnought has to the FO.

The kamikazee destroyed the flagship and several ships around it but there was enough left over to launch a planetary assault that included a planetary siege cannon.

So the FO had a portion of its fleet destroyed and its flagship but the Resistance was reduced to a dozen? two dozen? people who have to run off to the Outer Rim in hopes that the allies that ignored them before will help a group of people who themselves have no assets at all.


----------



## Mallus

DocMoriartty said:


> So that tells you she is either a fool or the scale of armaments between the FO and the Resistance is so unbalanced that 12 oversized fighters has more value to the Resistance that a Dreadnought has to the FO.



If I'm remembering this right, by the time Poe clears the dreadnought's AA (AS?) cannons the last surface transports are away. So it's no longer necessary to bomb the dreadnaught as part of their retreat. So Leia opts not to commit more forces against what is now a target of opportunity. To save the bomber wing for some future _strategic_ operation. Seems legit - for military thinking in a Star Wars movie, at least.  



> The kamikazee destroyed the flagship and several ships around it but there was enough left over to launch a planetary assault that included a planetary siege cannon.



Sounds about right. 



> So the FO had a portion of its fleet destroyed and its flagship but the Resistance was reduced to a dozen? two dozen?...



Yes, but their leadership is all jacked up. Snoke's dead, presumably leaving Red and Hux in charge. And they hate each other. That should count for something. Cue the internecine plotting and requisite Force-choking of lackeys and apparatchiks... 



> ...people who have to run off to the Outer Rim in hopes that the allies that ignored them before will help a group of people who themselves have no assets at all.



No assets? They have General Leia Organa, dashing space pilot Poe, who just learned a valuable life lesson about leadership, Finn and Rose, who learned their own important lessons about a) when to fight and b) what to fight _for_, an adorable robot (or two or three), and Rey the last living Jedi Knight -- whose frighteningly strong in the Force. And they've got the now even-bigger myth of Luke Skywalker on their side. Perhaps literally, because the odds he pops up as a Force ghost capable of affecting the material world are pretty good. 

They'll do fine. I mean, the film does tell us "(They) are the spark, that will light the fire that will burn the First Order down.”. Using those exact words. 

Besides, it's not like things were looking good at the end of ESB...


----------



## JacktheRabbit

At the end of ESB they had an entire fleet secure in hiding. Now you have one barely trained Jedi, an old woman, a pilot without a ship, and a coward former Storm Trooper.

Yoda showed up once to affect the real wold to burn down a tree. Luke is not coming back. Luckily Leia is not either.


----------



## hopeless

All we need is for Leia to keep over when Luke turns up as a Force Ghost or been teleported by the Force Ghosts who had enough of him refusing to leave that world... without his clothes...


----------



## Mallus

DocMoriartty said:


> At the end of ESB they had an entire fleet secure in hiding. Now you have one barely trained Jedi, an old woman, a pilot without a ship, and a coward former Storm Trooper.



Sure, they had a fleet hidden in extra-galatic space. And it looked great at the Battle of Endor. But what did it actually _do_?

All the heavy lifting was done by a barely-trained Jedi, a young woman, a smuggler/pilot who for some reason was leading the ground assault, a Bigfoot, a former smuggler/city administrator who was piloting the smuggler/pilot's ship, and a pair of robots. 

The Rebel fleet gave an assist, as did a bunch of carnivorous Teddy Bears. 

i.e. the keys to the Rebel victory in RotJ were _people_, exactly the same kind of people fleeing Krait in the Falcon at the end of TLJ. It's almost as if this were by design!

Also, Finn is no more of a coward than Han was. 

What do you think the odds are that in Episode IX Poe won't get another ship, the Resistance won't rally up a new fleet, Finn and Rose won't do something rally heroic and important, and generally-speaking, good won't triumph over evil?

Don't tell me the odds. I'll tell you. They're zero! 



> Yoda showed up once to affect the real wold to burn down a tree. Luke is not coming back. Luckily Leia is not either.



I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest the scene with Yoda & the tree was foreshadowing. 

BTW, what do you have against Leia?


----------



## Ovinomancer

Mallus said:


> Sure, they had a fleet hidden in extra-galatic space. And it looked great at the Battle of Endor. But what did it actually _do_?
> 
> All the heavy lifting was done by a barely-trained Jedi, a young woman, a smuggler/pilot who for some reason was leading the ground assault, a Bigfoot, a former smuggler/city administrator who was piloting the smuggler/pilot's ship, and a pair of robots.
> 
> The Rebel fleet gave an assist, as did a bunch of carnivorous Teddy Bears.
> 
> i.e. the keys to the Rebel victory in RotJ were _people_, exactly the same kind of people fleeing Krait in the Falcon at the end of TLJ. It's almost as if this were by design!
> 
> Also, Finn is no more of a coward than Han was.
> 
> What do you think the odds are that in Episode IX *Poe won't get another ship*, the Resistance won't rally up a new fleet, Finn and Rose won't do something rally heroic and important, and generally-speaking, good won't triumph over evil?
> 
> Don't tell me the odds. I'll tell you. They're zero!
> 
> 
> I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest the scene with Yoda & the tree was foreshadowing.
> 
> BTW, what do you have against Leia?




You know, I don't go much in for speculation, but the scenes with the arms dealers makes me think that maybe, just maybe, we've seen the last of the X-wing as a staple of the good guys.  1) they were all blown up, 2) it's now known that the profiteers that support the 1O are also providing the Resistance, 3) Poe needs a new ship.

Of course, there's still [-]Chekov's[/-] Luke's X-wing, so maybe not.


----------



## JacktheRabbit

Mallus said:


> Sure, they had a fleet hidden in extra-galatic space. And it looked great at the Battle of Endor. But what did it actually _do_?
> 
> All the heavy lifting was done by a barely-trained Jedi, a young woman, a smuggler/pilot who for some reason was leading the ground assault, a Bigfoot, a former smuggler/city administrator who was piloting the smuggler/pilot's ship, and a pair of robots.
> 
> The Rebel fleet gave an assist, as did a bunch of carnivorous Teddy Bears.
> 
> i.e. the keys to the Rebel victory in RotJ were _people_, exactly the same kind of people fleeing Krait in the Falcon at the end of TLJ. It's almost as if this were by design!
> 
> Also, Finn is no more of a coward than Han was.
> 
> What do you think the odds are that in Episode IX Poe won't get another ship, the Resistance won't rally up a new fleet, Finn and Rose won't do something rally heroic and important, and generally-speaking, good won't triumph over evil?
> 
> Don't tell me the odds. I'll tell you. They're zero!
> 
> 
> I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest the scene with Yoda & the tree was foreshadowing.
> 
> BTW, what do you have against Leia?



I'm not a Leia fan, she is arrogant and the actress is dead. They killed the good original cast so be done with her too. 

Well the fleet and it's fighters you know kind if blew up the DS. I know it's a minor thing but Luke didn't and the ground forces didn't. 

Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app


----------



## Ovinomancer

DocMoriartty said:


> I'm not a Leia fan, she is arrogant and the actress is dead. They killed the good original cast so be done with her too.
> 
> Well the fleet and it's fighters you know kind if blew up the DS. I know it's a minor thing but Luke didn't and the ground forces didn't.
> 
> Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app



The fighters needed the ground forces to disable the shield so they could do their thing.  The ground forces needed Luke to pull Vader away so they could do their thing.

Any one of those doesn't happen, no Death Star going boom.  Your argument is akin to saying it's only the last soldier that shoots a bullet that wins the war.


----------



## Mallus

DocMoriartty said:


> I'm not a Leia fan, she is arrogant and the actress is dead.



Harsh. In space, no one can hear your _feel_. 

(whoops, wrong franchise)



> They killed the good original cast so be done with her too.



It's a safe bet Leia will not be making a CGI'd appearance in Episode IX. Too soon, and too ghoulish.  



> Well the fleet and it's fighters you know kind if blew up the DS. I know it's a minor thing but Luke didn't and the ground forces didn't.



The *fleet* didn't do much at all, other than explode. Isn't it Lando and Nien Nub (did I get that right?) in the Falcon that shoot out the 2nd Death Star's reactor? With one or two surviving escort fighters. 

And that feat was possible because of Han, Leia, Chewie, R2D2, and C3PO disabling the shield generator on the forrest moon, which in turn was made possible by Luke turning himself in to Vader. 

The point is Star Wars takes a heroic view of history. The Rebel victory at Endor depended entirely on the actions of small number of individuals, just like the victory at Yavin. A small group of _heroes_, who, coincidentally enough, would all fit in comfortable in the Millennium Falcon, end up saving the day. 

Fleet's come and go. Protagonists, on the other hand... 

Contrast this with something like Nolan's Dunkirk movie last year. While Dunkirk does highlight the heroic actions of individuals, those actions take place within the context of a massive collective effort to evacuate the Allied forces.


----------



## billd91

Mallus said:


> The *fleet* didn't do much at all, other than explode. Isn't it Lando and Nien Nub (did I get that right?) in the Falcon that shoot out the 2nd Death Star's reactor? With one or two surviving escort fighters.




Don't forget Wedge. He's more than just an escort fighter - he's a named support character who survives the whole trilogy!



> And that feat was possible because of Han, Leia, Chewie, R2D2, and C3PO disabling the shield generator on the forrest moon, which in turn was made possible by Luke turning himself in to Vader.
> 
> The point is Star Wars takes a heroic view of history. The Rebel victory at Endor depended entirely on the actions of small number of individuals, just like the victory at Yavin. A small group of _heroes_, who, coincidentally enough, would all fit in comfortable in the Millennium Falcon, end up saving the day.
> 
> Fleet's come and go. Protagonists, on the other hand...




Star Wars really is the silver screen equivalent of an RPG campaign in which the actions of the PCs are most important.


----------



## trappedslider

One thing thast I think we're all fogetting and forgive me if some one else pointed it out but iirc, the ships were all basically "we can either jump and  end up with no shields and dead in space or we keep powering the shields and go at slow to this hideout and hope for backup."


----------



## Ovinomancer

trappedslider said:


> One thing thast I think we're all fogetting and forgive me if some one else pointed it out but iirc, the ships were all basically "we can either jump and  end up with no shields and dead in space or we keep powering the shields and go at slow to this hideout and hope for backup."



It was more, "jump and be out if fuel while the 1O can track us (somehow) through a jump", or, "dying jump and stay just outside of range to conserve grill and stay alive as long as possible.  Maybe something will turn up."

Shields weren't mentioned.


----------



## delericho

Mallus said:


> What do you think the odds are that in Episode IX Poe won't get another ship, the Resistance won't rally up a new fleet, Finn and Rose won't do something rally heroic and important, and generally-speaking, good won't triumph over evil?




I'd rather expecting that at the end of the third film the First Order will remain in control of most of the galaxy, with a New Rebellion opposing them.

Not sure how that ties in to our protagonists - they'll no doubt do something heroic, quite possibly including bringing down Kylo Ren and ending the Skywalker line, but I can't see them leaving it with "job done". After all, Disney want to make more films, and that's best done if the Galaxy is as close to the way it was at the start of IV as possible.



Ovinomancer said:


> Of course, there's still [-]Chekov's[/-] Luke's X-wing, so maybe not.




Surely Luke's X-Wing was paid off - in the "he's a Force projection" misdirection?

(Which isn't to say that Poe isn't going to end up in the cockpit, of course.)


----------



## Maxperson

Mallus said:


> The *fleet* didn't do much at all, other than explode. Isn't it Lando and Nien Nub (did I get that right?) in the Falcon that shoot out the 2nd Death Star's reactor? With one or two surviving escort fighters.
> 
> And that feat was possible because of Han, Leia, Chewie, R2D2, and C3PO disabling the shield generator on the forrest moon, which in turn was made possible by Luke turning himself in to Vader.
> 
> The point is Star Wars takes a heroic view of history. The Rebel victory at Endor depended entirely on the actions of small number of individuals, just like the victory at Yavin. A small group of _heroes_, who, coincidentally enough, would all fit in comfortable in the Millennium Falcon, end up saving the day.
> 
> Fleet's come and go. Protagonists, on the other hand...
> 
> Contrast this with something like Nolan's Dunkirk movie last year. While Dunkirk does highlight the heroic actions of individuals, those actions take place within the context of a massive collective effort to evacuate the Allied forces.



It seems exactly like Dunkirk to me.  Take away the fleet entirely and just send a handful of people to the planet to get rid of the shield and send only the Falcon and two escorts against the imperial fleet and death star, and the result changes dramatically.  Falcon goes up in a ball of fire along with the escorts and the Empire marches on.  The entire massive rebel fleet is what allows those heroic individuals their chance to succeed.


----------



## Mallus

Ovinomancer said:


> You know, I don't go much in for speculation, but the scenes with the arms dealers makes me think that maybe, just maybe, we've seen the last of the X-wing as a staple of the good guys.  1) they were all blown up, 2) it's now known that the profiteers that support the 1O are also providing the Resistance, 3) Poe needs a new ship.



I hope you're right about this. I'd love to see the new movies stake out their own design language, and as you point out, the design change could be a plot point. 

The X-Wings are a classic, but 40+ years old. So far the most successful new design on the Rebel/Resistance side have been Vice-Admiral Holdo's hair & outfit. I'd say the Empire/First Order is doing a bit better, but mainly on the interior decorating side. Snoke's throne room killed it!


----------



## Mallus

billd91 said:


> Don't forget Wedge. He's more than just an escort fighter - he's a named support character who survives the whole trilogy!



OMG I forgot Wedge Antilles! This is the point in the conversation where I should mention I'm really more of a Trekkie. 



> Star Wars really is the silver screen equivalent of an RPG campaign in which the actions of the PCs are most important.



Truth. A single PC with a lot of Force Points is worth more than a moon-sized battle station. More than a planet-sized battle station, even.


----------



## Mallus

Maxperson said:


> It seems exactly like Dunkirk to me.



In Nolan's Dunkirk, the success of the entire evacuation doesn't hinge on the actions of Mark Rylance in the boat and Tom Hardy in the plane. Their actions are heroic & impactful, but *do not* dictate the overall success of the mission.  

The same cannot be said of the protagonists in Return of the Jedi. 

Which was my original point: individuals play an outsize role in the Star Wars franchise. The fate of the galaxy is in their hands. Therefore, the Resistance being reduced to a handful of _heroes_ chilling in the Falcon is sad and certainly a set-back, but nothing the good guys can't come back from. 



> The entire massive rebel fleet is what allows those heroic individuals their chance to succeed.



Given the "established facts" (note the scare quotes) of the Star Wars universe at the time of RotJ, you could easily write the Battle of Endor without the fleet. 

Rebel Alliance fighters & bombers have hyperdrives. They're not carrier-based. Instead of the whole Rebel fleet, you could just as easily have had the Falcon and a handful of escorts fighters jump in really, really close to the 2nd Death Star, then do their 'inside-the-superstructure' bombing run. 

I think the reasons it wasn't written that way was obvious. It would have been too directly similar to the end of Star Wars, and the creative team wanted to show a full-fledged fleet battle between the Empire & the Rebels. Which looked terrific! But in terms of the what we saw on the screen, the Rebel fleet didn't accomplish much. They basically acted as a tension-raising element; each capital ship getting picked off by the 2nd Death Star was like the tick of a countdown clock.


----------



## Ryujin

Mallus said:


> In Nolan's Dunkirk, the success of the entire evacuation doesn't hinge on the actions of Mark Rylance in the boat and Tom Hardy in the plane. Their actions are heroic & impactful, but *do not* dictate the overall success of the mission.
> 
> The same cannot be said of the protagonists in Return of the Jedi.
> 
> Which was my original point: individuals play an outsize role in the Star Wars franchise. The fate of the galaxy is in their hands. Therefore, the Resistance being reduced to a handful of _heroes_ chilling in the Falcon is sad and certainly a set-back, but nothing the good guys can't come back from.
> 
> 
> Given the "established facts" (note the scare quotes) of the Star Wars universe at the time of RotJ, you could easily write the Battle of Endor without the fleet.
> 
> Rebel Alliance fighters & bombers have hyperdrives. They're not carrier-based. Instead of the whole Rebel fleet, you could just as easily have had the Falcon and a handful of escorts fighters jump in really, really close to the 2nd Death Star, then do their 'inside-the-superstructure' bombing run.
> 
> I think the reasons it wasn't written that way was obvious. It would have been too directly similar to the end of Star Wars, and the creative team wanted to show a full-fledged fleet battle between the Empire & the Rebels. Which looked terrific! But in terms of the what we saw on the screen, the Rebel fleet didn't accomplish much. They basically acted as a tension-raising element; each capital ship getting picked off by the 2nd Death Star was like the tick of a countdown clock.




Given the way that TLJ went the rebels could either start doing Kamikaze runs with fighters, or just automate a straight line jump sequence on unmanned fighters (after all, you don't need to make a SUCCESSFUL jump), and blow the best warships that the FO has out of space.


----------



## Jester David

Ryujin said:


> Given the way that TLJ went the rebels could either start doing Kamikaze runs with fighters, or just automate a straight line jump sequence on unmanned fighters (after all, you don't need to make a SUCCESSFUL jump), and blow the best warships that the FO has out of space.



I don't see that being very viable. 

Hyperspace isn't regular space. It's another dimension. You're not really there. So if you time the jump wrong (too far away) you just fly through the enemy ship. And if you're too close, you don't fully accelerate and just ram the enemy ship, and likely splatter over their deflector shields. If you make it that far...
So you have to be exactly the right distance. In the sweet spot for a hyperspace ramming. Which is apparently *just* within the enemy's weapon range. Really, as presented by the movie, several seconds to almost a minute of travel inside their weapon range. And then you need to sit perfectly still as the ship accelerates to lightspeed. No evasive actions or fancy flying. You just go straight as the hyperdrive powers up. Aka a sitting duck. 

So that trick wouldn't work with small craft. Larger ones would just blow them out of the sky in the seconds they're sitting, spooling up the hyperdrive. 
Assuming they have enough mass at all. Smaller fighters might just splatter off the shields, even almost at lightspeed. I doubt it'd be nearly as devastating. 

Very likely to repeat the tactic, you'd need a larger capital ship. The kind of ship you don't want to throw away to take out one of the enemy's ships.


----------



## Mallus

Ryujin said:


> Given the way that TLJ went the rebels could either start doing Kamikaze runs with fighters, or just automate a straight line jump sequence on unmanned fighters (after all, you don't need to make a SUCCESSFUL jump), and blow the best warships that the FO has out of space.



Heh, given the way RotJ went, kamikaze runs with fighters proved to be an effective tactic. Wasn't the Stardestroyer that shivved into the 2nd Death Star crippled by the damaged X-Wing that the pilot deliberately crashed into the bridge? 

"Why don't they used fighter-sized torpedoes?" has been an open question since the original trilogy.

And of course the answer to it involves the cinematic logic that governs the Star Wars universe.


----------



## Ryujin

Mallus said:


> Heh, given the way RotJ went, kamikaze runs with fighters proved to be an effective tactic. Wasn't the Stardestroyer that shivved into the 2nd Death Star crippled by the damaged X-Wing that the pilot deliberately crashed into the bridge?
> 
> "Why don't they used fighter-sized torpedoes?" has been an open question since the original trilogy.
> 
> And of course the answer to it involves the cinematic logic that governs the Star Wars universe.




Just the same way that 50% of Star Trek episodes, in anything but Enterprise, would end in 10 minutes if they realized that the transporter fixes everything.

In RotJ the A-Wing(?) was hit by Imperial fire, went out of control, and took out the destroyer's bridge. Good memory 

Anyone remember the RPG "Space Opera"? Torpedoes virtually ignored shields IIRC.


----------



## Hussar

Star Wars has always operated on the "Rule of Cool" rather than anything remotely approaching realism.  From the basic "How does a Light Saber actually stop?" all the way on up.  It's all technobabble and bafflegab.  

What I don't understand is the rather selective application of this to different episodes.  It's almost like people have a pathological need to "prove" that the movie they didn't like is somehow "bad" and justify their personal tastes.  I will never, ever understand this need.


----------



## Istbor

Hussar said:


> Star Wars has always operated on the "Rule of Cool" rather than anything remotely approaching realism.  From the basic "How does a Light Saber actually stop?" all the way on up.  It's all technobabble and bafflegab.
> 
> What I don't understand is the rather selective application of this to different episodes.  It's almost like people have a pathological need to "prove" that the movie they didn't like is somehow "bad" and justify their personal tastes.  I will never, ever understand this need.




I agree with you there. 

+1 for teaching me the word Bafflegab.


----------



## Manbearcat

Something ironic and amusing has occurred to me regarding the prevailing winds of this thread.

It has an eerie similarity, though something of an inversion, of the edition war against 4e.

As the angry revolt unfolded, it was all about how 4e was the worst thing ever because it didn't hew to ye olden days enough and pay proper tribute to tradition, thereby alienating the faithful.  D&D is for people who have been playing since the 70s up through 3.x.  Its about recapturing that zeitgeist through fealty to most all of its sacred cows and intricacies and removal of any play paradigm, tropes, language, or design implementation that ruffles the feathers of the old guard.  Most importantly it needs to be deliberately designed with the specific outcome of "feeling like D&D" and be recognizable/aesthetically pleasing for those specific people who felt alienated and responded with wrath.  That was the message then.

The message here is_not_quite_that.  Just an observation (that will surely be agreed with by people in this thread!).


----------



## delericho

Manbearcat said:


> It has an eerie similarity, though something of an inversion, of the edition war against 4e.




See also: Star Wars vs Star Trek, Coke vs Pepsi, Windows vs Mac, etc. It's a tribal thing - people tie up elements of their identity in things they probably shouldn't, and then any criticism of the thing becomes criticism of the tribe, becomes an attack on _them_.

Which sucks, especially if you're the guy in the middle (who sees benefits and flaws in both sides, and as a consequence is hated by everyone), but that's the world we live in, now more than ever.


----------



## Ryujin

delericho said:


> See also: Star Wars vs Star Trek, Coke vs Pepsi, Windows vs Mac, etc. It's a tribal thing - people tie up elements of their identity in things they probably shouldn't, and then any criticism of the thing becomes criticism of the tribe, becomes an attack on _them_.
> 
> Which sucks, especially if you're the guy in the middle (who sees benefits and flaws in both sides, and as a consequence is hated by everyone), but that's the world we live in, now more than ever.




Not necessarily "tribal." I enjoyed the new Star Wars movies precisely because they're based on 'space magic' and are essentially space Westerns, with an almost Buck Rogers esthetic. For that reason I cut them more slack than the new Star Trek movies, which are based in a universe that tries at least to hand-wave science (REVERSE THE POLARITY!!). That's a personal taste thing. 

Coke vs. Pepsi? I just don't like the taste of Pepsi. I also don't like the taste of the various Diet Coke options. Even tried the latest "Coke Life" ("Sweetened with cane sugar and stevia, with only 60% of the calories!) and almost spat it out. Again, a (literal) taste thing.

Are there people who tribalize over things? Sure, but I think they're in the minority and relegated to trolling social media for attention. Most people like what they like. They may defend their likes perhaps a bit too vehemently. When they tell you why you shouldn't like a thing rather than just sticking to why THEY don't like it, that's tribalism.


----------



## delericho

Ryujin said:


> Are there people who tribalize over things? Sure, but I think they're in the minority...




Sure, but we're talking about people who are posting about Star Wars on an RPG forum. We're very much a vocal minority ourselves.


----------



## Jester David

Manbearcat said:


> Something ironic and amusing has occurred to me regarding the prevailing winds of this thread.
> 
> It has an eerie similarity, though something of an inversion, of the edition war against 4e.
> 
> As the angry revolt unfolded, it was all about how 4e was the worst thing ever because it didn't hew to ye olden days enough and pay proper tribute to tradition, thereby alienating the faithful.  D&D is for people who have been playing since the 70s up through 3.x.  Its about recapturing that zeitgeist through fealty to most all of its sacred cows and intricacies and removal of any play paradigm, tropes, language, or design implementation that ruffles the feathers of the old guard.  Most importantly it needs to be deliberately designed with the specific outcome of "feeling like D&D" and be recognizable/aesthetically pleasing for those specific people who felt alienated and responded with wrath.  That was the message then.
> 
> The message here is_not_quite_that.  Just an observation (that will surely be agreed with by people in this thread!).




I have had that same thought. That many criticism of _The Last Jedi_ are similar to ones levelled at 4th Edition. "It just doesn't _feel_ like _Star Wars_" or "it disrespects the past."



delericho said:


> See also: Star Wars vs Star Trek, Coke vs Pepsi, Windows vs Mac, etc. It's a tribal thing - people tie up elements of their identity in things they probably shouldn't, and then any criticism of the thing becomes criticism of the tribe, becomes an attack on _them_.
> 
> Which sucks, especially if you're the guy in the middle (who sees benefits and flaws in both sides, and as a consequence is hated by everyone), but that's the world we live in, now more than ever.



Kinda...
I agree that people get defensive of their hobby tribe. And are quick to call out things they believe disrespects their tribe or threatens it. Hence why "ruined forever" is a teasing line in multiple fanbases: http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Ruined_FOREVER
(Here's the Star Wars equivalent: http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Wookieepedia:Ruined_FOREVER)

When you wrap up your identity in an external thing ("I'm a Star Wars fan.") then it's hard to reconcile the disconnect when you don't like something. It's like not liking yourself. There's probably a very interesting psychological paper in there somewhere...



Ryujin said:


> Not necessarily "tribal." I enjoyed the new Star Wars movies precisely because they're based on 'space magic' and are essentially space Westerns, with an almost Buck Rogers esthetic. For that reason I cut them more slack than the new Star Trek movies, which are based in a universe that tries at least to hand-wave science (REVERSE THE POLARITY!!). That's a personal taste thing.



Which is funny since I've spent so much time defending _The Last Jedi_ while criticising _Discovery_ and some of the newer Trek films (like _Star Trek_ and _Into Darkness_) for what could be very similar reasons...


----------



## JacktheRabbit

Mallus said:


> Given the "established facts" (note the scare quotes) of the Star Wars universe at the time of RotJ, you could easily write the Battle of Endor without the fleet.
> 
> Rebel Alliance fighters & bombers have hyperdrives. They're not carrier-based. Instead of the whole Rebel fleet, you could just as easily have had the Falcon and a handful of escorts fighters jump in really, really close to the 2nd Death Star, then do their 'inside-the-superstructure' bombing run.
> 
> I think the reasons it wasn't written that way was obvious. It would have been too directly similar to the end of Star Wars, and the creative team wanted to show a full-fledged fleet battle between the Empire & the Rebels. Which looked terrific! But in terms of the what we saw on the screen, the Rebel fleet didn't accomplish much. They basically acted as a tension-raising element; each capital ship getting picked off by the 2nd Death Star was like the tick of a countdown clock.




The battle in ROTJ does not make a whole lot of sense for the reason you mention. The only thoughts that come to mind are that the location of the DS was not known well enough for fighters to jump in close. They would have been out a ways and that would make them targets for Cap Ships anti-fighter weaponry. Second the Emperor is reported to be in the DS so it makes sense to throw everything in because killing the Emperor is basically worth any material cost. Finally, sending in only fighters means you are sending anyone whose ship is damaged in the fight on a suicide run. There would be no cap ships to retreat to.

Does the Rebellion really know what level of completion the DS2 is? They "know" its non-functional, but the fact that it has holes in it large enough for fighters might have been a huge break. They may have expected to have to blast away at it endlessly with their cap ships until such time that fighters could make it to the core.


One could argue that all the Rebellion really needed to do was send Luke. He surrendered was brought before the Empire and the end result was a dead Vader and Emperor. Did we need the surface fight and fleet battle to encourage Luke to defeat Vader? Once both of them are dead Luke either leaves or he sabotages the DS2 from the inside. 

To me the oddest part of all is the Rebellion planned the entire assault on the DS2 with no specific plan on how to use the only living Jedi in existence.


----------



## JacktheRabbit

tomBitonti said:


> Because rebels are sneaky sorts who might have tricks that they try to use.
> 
> (Now, I can see the First Order blokes, being the arrogant sods that they are, might make that assumption.  But, absent critical concerns elsewhere that require the resources, it seems awfully negligent to not take safeguards.)
> 
> (On the other hand yet again, both militaries seem rather quite terrible at being military organizations.  This would not be out of place for Star Wars.)
> 
> Thx!
> TomB




At the very least you would expect the FO to ask themselves "Why did the Resistance run here? Maybe they have allies on those planets, lets go check them out" and then at the very least do flyovers of them all.

But yes, both sides are in a race to the bottom of the barrel of incompetence.


----------



## JacktheRabbit

Mallus said:


> Sure, they had a fleet hidden in extra-galatic space. And it looked great at the Battle of Endor. But what did it actually _do_?
> 
> All the heavy lifting was done by a barely-trained Jedi, a young woman, a smuggler/pilot who for some reason was leading the ground assault, a Bigfoot, a former smuggler/city administrator who was piloting the smuggler/pilot's ship, and a pair of robots.
> 
> The Rebel fleet gave an assist, as did a bunch of carnivorous Teddy Bears.
> 
> i.e. the keys to the Rebel victory in RotJ were _people_, exactly the same kind of people fleeing Krait in the Falcon at the end of TLJ. It's almost as if this were by design!
> 
> Also, Finn is no more of a coward than Han was.
> 
> What do you think the odds are that in Episode IX Poe won't get another ship, the Resistance won't rally up a new fleet, Finn and Rose won't do something rally heroic and important, and generally-speaking, good won't triumph over evil?
> 
> Don't tell me the odds. I'll tell you. They're zero!
> 
> 
> I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest the scene with Yoda & the tree was foreshadowing.
> 
> BTW, what do you have against Leia?




What did the fleet do? It stuck around as a viable target. Otherwise the DS2 with Luke on-board would have hyperspaced away to avoid being damaged for no good reason. 

Of course Poe will get another ship, its a flipping movie, they will all get new ships and new everything, but it wont be there. It will be allies giving them handouts because they lost EVERYTHING they had before.

Leia has shown no competence since the start of the new series. Heck they started with her sending a Fight Jock on a covert mission. You mean the resistance doesnt have any covert agents to you know, send on a covert mission? As we saw in Rogue One the Rebellion understood well the need for covert forces, why all of a sudden are there none here? Instead you send a fighter jock, a profession not known for humility on a covert mission, which would only feed his "think on his feet" and "fly by the seat of his pants" pilot personality. Of course he is going to continue acting that way and the result she gets miffed and demotes him for losing lives destroying a FO Super Cap ship.


----------



## Morrus

delericho said:


> See also: Star Wars vs Star Trek, Coke vs Pepsi, Windows vs Mac, etc. It's a tribal thing - people tie up elements of their identity in things they probably shouldn't, and then any criticism of the thing becomes criticism of the tribe, becomes an attack on _them_.
> 
> Which sucks, especially if you're the guy in the middle (who sees benefits and flaws in both sides, and as a consequence is hated by everyone), but that's the world we live in, now more than ever.




I don’t think you got the memo. Everything is black and white, the best or the worst, good or evil. There is no nuance permitted on the internet.


----------



## OB1

DocMoriartty said:


> ... Heck they started with her sending a Fight Jock on a covert mission. You mean the resistance doesnt have any covert agents to you know, send on a covert mission? As we saw in Rogue One the Rebellion understood well the need for covert forces, why all of a sudden are there none here? Instead you send a fighter jock, a profession not known for humility on a covert mission, which would only feed his "think on his feet" and "fly by the seat of his pants" pilot personality. Of course he is going to continue acting that way and the result she gets miffed and demotes him for losing lives destroying a FO Super Cap ship.




She sent Poe because she trusted him and she trusts him because they’re lovers. 

That’s right, Poe and Leia are a couple. He’s another dangerous flyboy just like she fell for before and just like her mother fell for in the PT. 

Don’t believe me?  Look at the way she slaps him and the way he later holds her hand when she’s in a coma.  There is more than friendship there. 

And before anyone complains about the age difference, ask yourself if that would be a question if it were a 65 year old man with a 39 year old woman. 


Sent from my iPhone using EN World mobile app


----------



## billd91

DocMoriartty said:


> One could argue that all the Rebellion really needed to do was send Luke. He surrendered was brought before the Empire and the end result was a dead Vader and Emperor. Did we need the surface fight and fleet battle to encourage Luke to defeat Vader? Once both of them are dead Luke either leaves or he sabotages the DS2 from the inside.
> 
> To me the oddest part of all is the Rebellion planned the entire assault on the DS2 with no specific plan on how to use the only living Jedi in existence.




Yeah, a Jedi who they didn't realize was available... or probably even realize was completing his training, or even that he was actually training as a Jedi since his running off to Dagobah was pretty secretive. In any event, his presence was  unreliable at best from their perspective, so they had to make their plans without him as a factor. Notice they did so without specifically planning for either Chewie or Leia either. They had to volunteer.

So no, they couldn't rely on sending Luke into the Death Star 2 and hope for the best.


----------



## ccs

DocMoriartty said:


> What did the fleet do? It stuck around as a viable target. Otherwise the DS2 with Luke on-board would have hyperspaced away to avoid being damaged for no good reason.




I doubt it.  The Emperor was the one who intentionally laid & baited a trap that the Alliance couldn't pass up.  He WANTED his new DS to be sitting there shooting at Rebel capitol ships.


----------



## Kaodi

I would love to see Wedge Antilles back in the series, but apparently the actor is not interested. 

Anyway, the idea of ditching the X-Wing for something new is not a bad idea. Wonder what letter they could turn into a design. I hope the design would have a bit more longevity that the Naboo fighters...


----------



## Hussar

DocMoriartty said:


> /snip
> 
> 
> 
> Leia has shown no competence since the start of the new series. Heck they started with her sending a Fight Jock on a covert mission. You mean the resistance doesnt have any covert agents to you know, send on a covert mission? As we saw in Rogue One the Rebellion understood well the need for covert forces, why all of a sudden are there none here? Instead you send a fighter jock, a profession not known for humility on a covert mission, which would only feed his "think on his feet" and "fly by the seat of his pants" pilot personality. Of course he is going to continue acting that way and the result she gets miffed and demotes him for losing lives destroying a FO Super Cap ship.




You mean like how they send Han Solo in to blow up the shield base on Endor?  I mean, doesn't the Rebellion have ANY covert ops specialists?  No, instead we're going to send in a completely untrained civilian. 

Again, this is the point I made earlier.  The convenient "forgetting" of the sins of the earlier movies in order to "prove" how the new movies are so bad.  

I'd also point out that she demotes Poe for disobeying direct orders.  Y'know, that pesky thing that trained military people ALWAYS get demoted for?   I know, it's totally unbelievable that Leia would demote someone for something so trivial, but, hey, why be reasonable?  Much more fun to try to prove how bad something is by playing very fast and loose with facts.


----------



## Sadras

Hussar said:


> You mean like how they send Han Solo in to blow up the shield base on Endor?  I mean, doesn't the Rebellion have ANY covert ops specialists?  No, instead we're going to send in a completely untrained civilian.
> 
> Again, this is the point I made earlier.  The convenient "forgetting" of the sins of the earlier movies in order to "prove" how the new movies are so bad.




According to http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Endor_strike_team
Han Solo signed up with the Alliance permanently and had been given the commission to act as a General. Not exactly a completely untrained civilian or considered as such. 

Han Solo was a smuggler as is the Onion Knight in GoT both considered far more valuable and skilled (despite their lack of training) than a regular civilian.

That is not to say that I disagree with your overall position, but perhaps that is not case in this instance.


----------



## JacktheRabbit

billd91 said:


> Yeah, a Jedi who they didn't realize was available... or probably even realize was completing his training, or even that he was actually training as a Jedi since his running off to Dagobah was pretty secretive. In any event, his presence was  unreliable at best from their perspective, so they had to make their plans without him as a factor. Notice they did so without specifically planning for either Chewie or Leia either. They had to volunteer.
> 
> So no, they couldn't rely on sending Luke into the Death Star 2 and hope for the best.



Not true. When they parted ways in tatooine Leia tells luke to hurry because the fleet is likely to have finished gathering. 

Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app


----------



## JacktheRabbit

ccs said:


> I doubt it.  The Emperor was the one who intentionally laid & baited a trap that the Alliance couldn't pass up.  He WANTED his new DS to be sitting there shooting at Rebel capitol ships.



If there was no rebel fleet then the DS2 assuming it can would hyperspace out the instant the shield drops. Though honestly they should have left even with the fleet there when the shield dropped. So maybe the hyperdrive was not functional. 

Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app


----------



## JacktheRabbit

Hussar said:


> You mean like how they send Han Solo in to blow up the shield base on Endor?  I mean, doesn't the Rebellion have ANY covert ops specialists?  No, instead we're going to send in a completely untrained civilian.
> 
> Again, this is the point I made earlier.  The convenient "forgetting" of the sins of the earlier movies in order to "prove" how the new movies are so bad.
> 
> I'd also point out that she demotes Poe for disobeying direct orders.  Y'know, that pesky thing that trained military people ALWAYS get demoted for?   I know, it's totally unbelievable that Leia would demote someone for something so trivial, but, hey, why be reasonable?  Much more fun to try to prove how bad something is by playing very fast and loose with facts.



No. In real militaries people are demoted after elaborate hearings where all evidence is considered. Not as part of a 2 minute conversation. 

Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app


----------



## JacktheRabbit

Sadras said:


> According to http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Endor_strike_team
> Han Solo signed up with the Alliance permanently and had been given the commission to act as a General. Not exactly a completely untrained civilian or considered as such.
> 
> Han Solo was a smuggler as is the Onion Knight in GoT both considered far more valuable and skilled (despite their lack of training) than a regular civilian.
> 
> That is not to say that I disagree with your overall position, but perhaps that is not case in this instance.



Smuggler, trained in the imperial military depending on which history is the real one AND he was leading an entire team of commandos. 

Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app


----------



## Maxperson

DocMoriartty said:


> Smuggler, trained in the imperial military depending on which history is the real one AND he was leading an entire team of commandos.



We'll find out if he was trained in the imperial military in about May of this year.


----------



## Jester David

DocMoriartty said:


> The battle in ROTJ does not make a whole lot of sense for the reason you mention. The only thoughts that come to mind are that the location of the DS was not known well enough for fighters to jump in close. They would have been out a ways and that would make them targets for Cap Ships anti-fighter weaponry. Second the Emperor is reported to be in the DS so it makes sense to throw everything in because killing the Emperor is basically worth any material cost. Finally, sending in only fighters means you are sending anyone whose ship is damaged in the fight on a suicide run. There would be no cap ships to retreat to.



I imagine the capital ships were there to take on the Star Destroyers guarding the incomplete Death Star to leave the fighters free to attack the station. 



DocMoriartty said:


> Leia has shown no competence since the start of the new series. Heck they started with her sending a Fight Jock on a covert mission. You mean the resistance doesnt have any covert agents to you know, send on a covert mission? As we saw in Rogue One the Rebellion understood well the need for covert forces, why all of a sudden are there none here? Instead you send a fighter jock, a profession not known for humility on a covert mission, which would only feed his "think on his feet" and "fly by the seat of his pants" pilot personality. Of course he is going to continue acting that way and the result she gets miffed and demotes him for losing lives destroying a FO Super Cap ship.



Was it a covert mission? Really, it was a fetch quest: fly into enemy space, pick up the data, and fly out. A pilot who can run a blockade is probably more useful in that mission than a spy.


----------



## Kaodi

I am not really hung up on the training time like some people (protagonists becoming skilled super fast is par for the course for ALL movies), but I can point out, having just watched ESB a few days ago, that Yoda says he has been training Jedi for _eight hundred years_. Any student under his tutelage could reasonable be expected to progress more quickly than one under Lukes, all other things being equal.


----------



## Mallus

DocMoriartty said:


> In real militaries people are demoted after elaborate hearings where all evidence is considered. Not as part of a 2 minute conversation.



On the other hand, in real militaries civilian farm boys with magical powers aren't immediately given flight clearance --and a fighter-- to attack enemy targets the size of the Moon. 

You may have noticed the Star Wars films are somewhat unrealistic. 

Or not, as the case may be!


----------



## Mallus

DocMoriartty said:


> Of course Poe will get another ship, its a flipping movie, they will all get new ships and new everything, but it wont be there.



Is this a typo? I can't parse your meaning. 



> It will be allies giving them handouts because they lost EVERYTHING they had before.



As opposed to the original Rebellion, who bought their military hardware after a tremendously successful IPO?

Can you clarify? I feel like your trying to say something by describing the rallying of allies against the First Order as getting "handouts", but I can't quite understand what. 



> As we saw in Rogue One the Rebellion understood well the need for covert forces, why all of a sudden are there none here?



Rogue One is the only Star Wars film that actually seemed like a war movie, where the Rebellion really came off as a desperate resistance movement. 

There's a good reason for this. Rogue One was assembled from a smaller number of cinematic influences. It's more _The Dirty Dozen_ and other assorted WW2-era movies than _Flash Gordon_ - plus it leaves out the Campbell, the Kurosawa, the fairytale princesses, the overt Western references, etc.

For example, Cassian Andor is a straight-up resistance fighter that wouldn't be out of place in Vichy France. He's not a samurai-wizard-gunslinger-cop.


----------



## JacktheRabbit

Mallus said:


> Is this a typo? I can't parse your meaning.
> 
> 
> As opposed to the original Rebellion, who bought their military hardware after a tremendously successful IPO?
> 
> Can you clarify? I feel like your trying to say something by describing the rallying of allies against the First Order as getting "handouts", but I can't quite understand what.
> 
> 
> Rogue One is the only Star Wars film that actually seemed like a war movie, where the Rebellion really came off as a desperate resistance movement.
> 
> There's a good reason for this. Rogue One was assembled from a smaller number of cinematic influences. It's more _The Dirty Dozen_ and other assorted WW2-era movies than _Flash Gordon_ - plus it leaves out the Campbell, the Kurosawa, the fairytale princesses, the overt Western references, etc.
> 
> For example, Cassian Andor is a straight-up resistance fighter that wouldn't be out of place in Vichy France. He's not a samurai-wizard-gunslinger-cop.




Yes there was a typo. My point is that of course they will get more equipment but it will be as handouts from allies because it is a movie and they are the main characters. It is not because they proved to everyone that they deserve free gear.

The original rebellion had a fleet that was made up of loyal and sympathetic planetary fleet ships, the Mon Cal fleet that as a race joined the rebellion, and things like X-Wings from a company who key people defected to the rebellion and brought the equipment with them. Beyond that they acquired what they could purchase on the black market or steal. So they were assets they possessed when the rebellion started or directly acquired during the rebellion.

Now we have a dozen or so people sitting on a ship that is Chewbacca's private property with no resources at all and hoping someone on the Outer Rim will give them what they need. Heck, they are so poorly equipped and organized that they thought the planet they were retreating to was well stocked and armed only to get there and find dusty computers and barely function land skimmers.

You are right in regards to Rogue One and it makes it the best Star Wars movie out of the 9 we have to date. I only hope Han Solo is as good.


----------



## billd91

DocMoriartty said:


> Yes there was a typo. My point is that of course they will get more equipment but it will be as handouts from allies because it is a movie and they are the main characters. It is not because they proved to everyone that they deserve free gear.
> 
> The original rebellion had a fleet that was made up of loyal and sympathetic planetary fleet ships, the Mon Cal fleet that as a race joined the rebellion, and things like X-Wings from a company who key people defected to the rebellion and brought the equipment with them. Beyond that they acquired what they could purchase on the black market or steal. So they were assets they possessed when the rebellion started or directly acquired during the rebellion.
> 
> Now we have a dozen or so people sitting on a ship that is Chewbacca's private property with no resources at all and hoping someone on the Outer Rim will give them what they need. Heck, they are so poorly equipped and organized that they thought the planet they were retreating to was well stocked and armed only to get there and find dusty computers and barely function land skimmers.




Sure, the Rebellion had some pretty sweet resources...a good (and undefined) span of time into its existence. It certainly wouldn't have started like that and, based on what we've seen in Rogue One, it almost didn't hold together on news of the Death Star's existence in spite of its X-wings, Mon Calamari ships, and numbers. But then a plucky mission by the protagonists and their support brought everyone back around in time to win their first major engagement in A New Hope.

I don't know what's in store for Episode 9. But it'll probably follow a similar pattern - their allies may not have rallied in time for the fight on Crait, but with Snoke dead, several star destroyers wrecked, and Luke Skywalker sacrificing himself to cover an escape, I expect people will rally to the Resistance's flag in some way.


----------



## JacktheRabbit

billd91 said:


> Sure, the Rebellion had some pretty sweet resources...a good (and undefined) span of time into its existence. It certainly wouldn't have started like that and, based on what we've seen in Rogue One, it almost didn't hold together on news of the Death Star's existence in spite of its X-wings, Mon Calamari ships, and numbers. But then a plucky mission by the protagonists and their support brought everyone back around in time to win their first major engagement in A New Hope.
> 
> I don't know what's in store for Episode 9. But it'll probably follow a similar pattern - their allies may not have rallied in time for the fight on Crait, but with Snoke dead, several star destroyers wrecked, and Luke Skywalker sacrificing himself to cover an escape, I expect people will rally to the Resistance's flag in some way.




Even if they broke up the assets were still there. Worst case the biggest cowards would have run and the Rebellion at the time of Rogue One would have been smaller but had more backbone. What Rogue One really told us was that in the beginning it was a very loose coalition. Mon Mothma stated that no action could be taken without unanimous consent of the council. There is no way that the rebellion would effectively do anything under a structure like that.

Total side point, but really, who knows that Luke is dead? He died on a rock on the other side of the galaxy from the strain of being so badass in the final scene. Also does anyone really care? Leia was the only one that ever went looking for Luke for his help.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

DocMoriartty said:


> Total side point, but really, who knows that Luke is dead? He died on a rock on the other side of the galaxy from the strain of being so badass in the final scene. Also does anyone really care? Leia was the only one that ever went looking for Luke for his help.




Episode 9 opening crawl:

_Luke Skywalker is dead. Han Solo is dead. Princess Leia is dead. Chewbacca's still around, sure, but since when did he have any useful dialog ..._


----------



## Jester David

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> Episode 9 opening crawl:
> 
> _Luke Skywalker is dead. Han Solo is dead. Princess Leia is dead. Chewbacca's still around, sure, but since when did he have any useful dialog ..._




Well... Episode VI's alternate crawl could be:
Obi-Wan and Amidala are dead. Yoda is dying. Anakin is evil. All your heroes from the original trilogy and _Clone Wars_ are gone. Here's a whiny farmboy, a con artist, and a princess in denial of her potential as a Jedi...


----------



## Hussar

Sadras said:


> According to http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Endor_strike_team
> Han Solo signed up with the Alliance permanently and had been given the commission to act as a General. Not exactly a completely untrained civilian or considered as such.
> 
> Han Solo was a smuggler as is the Onion Knight in GoT both considered far more valuable and skilled (despite their lack of training) than a regular civilian.
> 
> That is not to say that I disagree with your overall position, but perhaps that is not case in this instance.




Heh, yeah, because you want your commanding officer buggering off to hunt for his girlfriend ten minutes after landing.    But, the point is still made - if we're going to promote civilians to generals as soon as they sign up, arguing for expectations of proper military actions pretty much goes out the window.


----------



## Hussar

DocMoriartty said:


> No. In real militaries people are demoted after elaborate hearings where all evidence is considered. Not as part of a 2 minute conversation.
> 
> Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app




In war time, soldiers are executed for less in many real world militaries.  Elaborate hearings are what happens in peace time.  Someone who disobeys direct orders and gets multiple people killed in the middle of a war zone gets hung from the nearest tree.  

Trying to play the "real world military" card when talking about Star Wars is ridiculous.  



DocMoriartty said:


> Smuggler, trained in the imperial military depending on which history is the real one AND he was leading an entire team of commandos.
> 
> Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app




So, a criminal defector from the enemy is being given command of one of the most important missions in the entire war because... he's cute?  Again, this is a really, really odd hill to die on.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Jester David said:


> Well... Episode VI's alternate crawl could be:
> Obi-Wan and Amidala are dead. Yoda is dying. Anakin is evil. All your heroes from the original trilogy and _Clone Wars_ are gone. Here's a whiny farmboy, a con artist, and a princess in denial of her potential as a Jedi...



Wouldn't the alternate crawl be:
"Amidala is dead, Anakin is evil. See how their children try to suceed where they failed."


----------



## Maxperson

Mallus said:


> On the other hand, in real militaries civilian farm boys with magical powers aren't immediately given flight clearance --and a fighter-- to attack enemy targets the size of the Moon.
> 
> You may have noticed the Star Wars films are somewhat unrealistic.
> 
> Or not, as the case may be!




Desperation makes strange bed fellows.  Independence Day saw anyone who could fly be given a fighter.  No point in not doing that when the existence of humanity was on the line.  I imagine the Rebellion felt similar.


----------



## delericho

Maxperson said:


> Desperation makes strange bed fellows.  Independence Day saw anyone who could fly be given a fighter.  No point in not doing that when the existence of humanity was on the line.  I imagine the Rebellion felt similar.




Well... except that an untrained pilot in control of a fighter like that would almost certainly be more danger to his allies than his enemies. You'd almost certainly be better going in with a much smaller, but actually trained force.

That said, the end of Star Wars does make a little more sense if Red Leader is absolutely desperate - it may be a mistake, but at least then it's an understandable one.


----------



## Maxperson

delericho said:


> Well... except that an untrained pilot in control of a fighter like that would almost certainly be more danger to his allies than his enemies. You'd almost certainly be better going in with a much smaller, but actually trained force.
> 
> That said, the end of Star Wars does make a little more sense if Red Leader is absolutely desperate - it may be a mistake, but at least then it's an understandable one.




Yeah.  I imagine flying a fighter is a bit more complicated than flying a crop duster.  In Star Wars at least technology has advanced to the point where flying one space ship would be very close to flying another.


----------



## Jester David

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> Wouldn't the alternate crawl be:
> "Amidala is dead, Anakin is evil. See how their children try to suceed where they failed."



I was responding to a post about how all the main characters were now dead. Which is also true of the original trilogy. Everyone is killed or does nothing of note in favour of the "new" characters. For anyone born after 1990, the prequels are as nostalgic as the original trilogy. I imagine lots of kids watching the series I to VIII in chronological order. 

I tried to watch _A New Hope_ with my son, but things were too slow and there was too much talking. I went to _Phantom Menace_ and _Attack of the Clones_ to introduce him to _Star Wars_. Especially with the _Clone Wars_ TV show. Anakin and Obi-Wan have a ridiculous amount of hours devoted to them. And they'e just seemingly killed unceremoniously. To say nothing of Ahsoka Tano, whose fate is only implied.


----------



## JacktheRabbit

Olgar Shiverstone said:


> Episode 9 opening crawl:
> 
> _Luke Skywalker is dead. Han Solo is dead. Princess Leia is dead. Chewbacca's still around, sure, but since when did he have any useful dialog ..._




WWWRRAAAAGGGHHHH!!!!!


----------



## JacktheRabbit

Hussar said:


> In war time, soldiers are executed for less in many real world militaries.  Elaborate hearings are what happens in peace time.  Someone who disobeys direct orders and gets multiple people killed in the middle of a war zone gets hung from the nearest tree.
> 
> Trying to play the "real world military" card when talking about Star Wars is ridiculous.
> 
> 
> 
> So, a criminal defector from the enemy is being given command of one of the most important missions in the entire war because... he's cute?  Again, this is a really, really odd hill to die on.




Please point out the last time a real world military not located in some third world crapfest decided to hang someone from a tree.

Also EVERYONE in the Rebellion is guilty of High Treason since the Empire was technically formed legally. I believe one of the dozens of novels even states that Mon Mothma voted in favor so as to not stand out in opposition. So using the fact that Han is a defector and a smuggler as marks against him makes little sense and neglects to note that his skills/knowledge from each background could be quite useful in sneaking an entire ship onto a Imperial controlled planet.


----------



## Hussar

DocMoriartty said:


> Please point out the last time a real world military not located in some third world crapfest decided to hang someone from a tree.
> 
> Also EVERYONE in the Rebellion is guilty of High Treason since the Empire was technically formed legally. I believe one of the dozens of novels even states that Mon Mothma voted in favor so as to not stand out in opposition. So using the fact that Han is a defector and a smuggler as marks against him makes little sense and neglects to note that his skills/knowledge from each background could be quite useful in sneaking an entire ship onto a Imperial controlled planet.




Ummm, the entire rebel army doesn't have one infiltration specialist?  Not one?  Instead they have to choose a criminal with no military experience, give him the highest rank possible because... why again? and send him to lead (since when do generals lead infiltration missions?) the assault on the most important mission of the war.

And five minutes into the mission, he goes off mission, abandons his men, all to go chasing after his girlfriend.

Yeah, not really seeing it.

Oh, yeah, it's like the farm boy who, like our general, ignores direct orders to rejoin the fleet after Hoth in order to chase after a personal mission that he received from a dead dude while he was freezing to death.  Yeah, that wouldn't get someone pulled off the line at all.  Nope.  No problems here.

Personally, I thought it was a refreshing change to see a character actually have to suffer any consequences for completely and utterly failing their command.


----------



## Mallus

Maxperson said:


> Independence Day saw anyone who could fly be given a fighter.



This is true, and while I love Independence Day, it wouldn't be my go-to example in a discussion of realism in film. Unless, of course, the point I was making was: "Realism doesn't matter one whit in some movies".


----------



## Mallus

DocMoriartty said:


> My point is that of course they will get more equipment but it will be as handouts from allies because it is a movie and they are the main characters. It is not because they proved to everyone that they deserve free gear.



OK. So your point is that the remnant of the Resistance forces rallying support won't be justified, or presented in a dramatically satisfying way. Am I getting that right? 

I concede this may come to pass. But I'd be remiss if I didn't point out you're judging a film that hasn't been made yet. We'll see in 2019 if the survivors from Krait "prove to everyone they deserve free gear".



> The original rebellion had a fleet that was made up of loyal and sympathetic planetary fleet ships, the Mon Cal fleet that as a race joined the rebellion, and things like X-Wings from a company who key people defected to the rebellion and brought the equipment with them. Beyond that they acquired what they could purchase on the black market or steal. So they were assets they possessed when the rebellion started or directly acquired during the rebellion.



How much of this do we see in the actual films? 



> You are right in regards to Rogue One and it makes it the best Star Wars movie out of the 9 we have to date. I only hope Han Solo is as good.



What I really liked about Rogue One was how tonally different it was from every other Star Wars movie. It was an honest-to-god war movie that still managed to feel like Star Wars. I hope Disney keeps broadening the franchise in a similar way; like the way the MCU works, with films as dissimilar as Winter Soldier and Guardians of the Galaxy. 

I had hopes for Solo when it was Miller and Lord's baby. I thought it was genius to hand a Star Wars project to the LEGO Movie team. Now that's Ron Howard... I have concerns.

edit: why couldn't Disney get Edgar Wright for Solo?! Why?!!


----------



## Ryujin

I can't recall seeing anyone post a link to this interesting examination of the movie, from a rather interesting source; Joseph Gordon-Levitt. It covers a lot of what has been said here in a single blog post.

https://medium.com/@hitRECordJoe/a-new-old-skywalker-253efda3809c


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone

DocMoriartty said:


> WWWRRAAAAGGGHHHH!!!!!




Point. Game, set, match.


----------



## Quickleaf

Ryujin said:


> I can't recall seeing anyone post a link to this interesting examination of the movie, from a rather interesting source; Joseph Gordon-Levitt. It covers a lot of what has been said here in a single blog post.
> 
> https://medium.com/@hitRECordJoe/a-new-old-skywalker-253efda3809c




I respect the heck out of Joseph Gordon-Levitt as an actor, but this should perhaps be taken with a grain of salt as (he admits) is a personal friend of writer/director Rian Johnson. Justifying Luke turning into a bitter defeated old man, he claims "No one is a perfect hero or a perfect villain, we’re more complicated than that, every one of us." Sure! But that doesn't mean taking the character in an uncharacteristic unsympathetic direction that undermines the virtues that Jedi are about! 

I would not recommend _The Last Jedi_ at all, and would rank it marginally above the prequel trilogy and definitely below The Force Awakens & RotJ. Overall, it felt horribly amoral & unsatisfying to me.

*Wasted potential.* There are so many storybeats that feel undeveloped and confused. Most of all Gwendoline Christie's acting talent is horribly wasted on Captain Phasma. I get that trans-media marketing is in these days, but whoever wrote Phasma's role in this film (and TFA for that matter) ...well, I have no idea what they were thinking.

*Erratic pacing.* Throughout the film I had trouble following what was going on and even more trouble getting invested in the story. Why? Most of all because TLJ never hits its stride with pacing. Scenes cut abruptly. The point behind going to the casino is quickly lost. Maybe it was an editing problem?

*Too many characters.* Too many characters with not enough time to get to know & care about them. Was her name Mae, the one who fell for Finn? I wanted to get into her character arc, thinking that at some point it would tie back to the death of her sister...but the film never gets there. 

*Over-reliance on CGI & special effects & explosions.* I get it, Star Wars has all this stuff. But that's not what makes the movies great; it's the myths and characters. The film opens with a space battle where it's hard to care what's going on – there is a reason A New Hope builds up to the big space battle at the end. The Poggs (? whatever those little things were) seemed straight out of an anime. The casino scene reminded me of shades of the prequel trilogy with its egregious CGI.

*Accents & breaking the Star Wars milieu.* That "Texan" in the casino? WTF? That's the sort of thing we saw already in the prequels and don't need to see again. And what about the Code Breaker's mannerisms, saying "yeah man" and "cracking"? That felt completely out of place! 

*Forced and sometimes formulaic dialogue.* Especially the lines given to the new actors...those often felt awkward, like I was watching a sitcom or some other genre. Even the screenwriting of Luke Skywalker didn't feel at all like his character & was only saved by Mark Hamill's great performance.

*Luke Skywalker deconstructed.* Why? Why treat the character with such disrespect? I fully agree with Mark Hamill’s thoughts about Luke Skywalker’s character. Rian Johnson’s vision was completely at odds with that, and I felt the story suffered because of Rian Johnson’s writing (it was *not* Star Wars) and direction (the pacing was erratic and never hit its stride). Jedi don't give up, period.

*Strange cinematography choices that felt un-Star Wars.* The most egregious of these were the "National Geographic" cutscenes during Rey's training...cool in another sci-fi or sci-fantasy film, but not Star Wars-y at all. And the silence with – purple-hair lady? what was her name? – sacrificing herself by warping into th First Order? Fell totally flat for me because the film hadn't spent the time to get me invested in her character. Pretty graphics though.

*Storytelling that was just a mess.* "Sacred Jedi texts"? where did those come from? why should I care? Who was Snoke? Oh wait, it doesn't actually matter. Who were Rey's parents? Oh wait, it actually doesn't matter. How does Leia do the spacewalk thing? We don't need to explain that, look how cool the CGI on her face looks! Ooo, aaah. The whole film builds up the mystical bond between Rey and Kylo...building up the chance for his redemption (or her fall to the dark side)...and instead they are right back where they started with little change to their characters. What was the point of what we just watched then?

On the surface it *looked* like "Star Wars", but the nihilistic and cynical themes did not feel like Star Wars to me. I didn't leave the theater uplifted like after watching Empire Strikes Back or even Rogue One, for example. Everything felt muddled and grey and gloomy - and that's not the Star Wars I know and love. Is this really what a new generation wants? I sincerely hope not.


----------



## Mercurius

[MENTION=20323]Quickleaf[/MENTION] (Hi Aaron!), very well put. The more I look back on TLJ, the more off-putting and frankly unmemorable I find it to be. I saw it less than a month ago and can't remember the plot thread, start to finish. In fact, as problematic as the first two prequels were due to the usual and well-earned complaints--bad acting, Jar-Jar Binks, no romantic chemistry, etc--I think as a technical movie, TLJ is the worst of the franchise. It took the pleasantly nostalgic fan-fic of TFA and tried to grow up, but failed both at pleasantly nostalgic fan-fic and as a uniquely dramatic entry into the franchise.

#notmystarwars


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

#notmystarwars is a bit overly melodramatic for me, and reeks of the "not Trek" movement for the JJ.Abrams movies or Discovery.

But I guess #absolutelynotwhatIwouldhavedoneorwanted would fit. 

But if we want to be melodramatic about it:

The Last Jedi - The Highlander 2 of Star Wars?
(a movie people pretend doesn't even exist)

A bit less perhaps:

The Last Jedi - The Terminator 3 or 4 of the Terminator franchise? 
The Last Jedi - The Alien 3 or 4 of the Alien franchise?
(aka continuations/sequels most likely ignored in futured installments).

But Star Wars might be a bit too big for that to happen.


----------



## Mercurius

Haha, that's why I did the tongue emoticon - I was being silly.

Any of those comparisons works. For me the bottom line is that it feels like fan fiction, but where the TFA was a bit of a "lovesong" homage to the original trilogy, TLJ tried too hard and missed the mark. IMO. 

(Funny thing is that I didn't love TFA, but like it now more in hindsight).


----------



## Mallus

Quickleaf said:


> *Accents & breaking the Star Wars milieu.* That "Texan" in the casino? WTF?



I get what you're saying. It seemed odd to me, but it does raise the question: why are certain regional English accents (British, Californian) appropriate for Star Wars, but not others?



> Jedi don't give up, period.



But, admittedly, they do less-than-admirable things from time to time. Like fall to the Dark Side and lop off their son's hand. 



> The most egregious of these were the "National Geographic" cutscenes during Rey's training...



"National Geographic" is a great way to describe those scenes, but I think it also explains why they're in the film. In TLJ the Force is depicted as the sum of forces of nature, all that energy and tension in a state of balance, the cycle of life and death, etc. So we get Rey, often seen as a small figure practicing lightsaber forms surrounding by the force and grandeur and natural beauty of that island. The cinematography serves those scenes well -- emphasizing the relationship between the Force and the Jedi.

Compare them to Luke's training scenes on Dagobah. I _think_ the idea is somewhat similar; Yoda is hiding out a swamp planet, in a place surrounded by life, by the Force. Except it's shot on an obvious soundstage, all (almost?) inert material. TLJ's swooping on-location nature porn does a better job.



> On the surface it *looked* like "Star Wars", but the nihilistic and cynical themes did not feel like Star Wars to me.



Aside from all the stuff that didn't work for you, what seemed "nihilistic and cynical" about it? It's clearly -- i.e. stated directly in-movie by a character message is "Choose to fight when you must. Don't fight to destroy your enemies. Fight to save the ones you love". 

Even Luke's arc is uplifting. After years of self-imposed exile spent in despair and self-doubt -- though to his credit never falling to the Dark Side -- he gives Rey a masterclass lesson in the Force, then goes out in a franchise-best Crowning Moment of Awesome to aid his sister and her Resistance. Then, finally at peace, he evaporates into the Force, having not actually broken his vow to never leave Ahch-To. 

Mind you, I'm not trying to argue you into liking the film. But where's the nihilism?


----------



## Quickleaf

Mallus said:


> I get what you're saying. It seemed odd to me, but it does raise the question: why are certain regional English accents (British, Californian) appropriate for Star Wars, but not others?




I don't recall a Californian accent, but a form of British has been the accent of the Empire since ANH. I don't know how British folks feel, but as an American I was willing to suspend my disbelief because it was pervasive without being over-done; because it was pervasive it blended into the background, and became part of the Star Wars milieu.

The "Texan" alien was momentary (isolated to one scene) and the voice acting was quite over-done. 



> But, admitted, they do less-than-admirable things from time to time. Like fall to the Dark Side and lop off their son's hand.




I never saw Vader as a Jedi. He was always a bad guy. I'd say he was actually a better character with how he fell from Jedi-hood being left a mystery, because the prequels did a poor job of depicting that fall.

It was especially egregious with Luke "giving up" because (a) that was part of his immature character he grew out of during the original trilogy, and (b) the radical change to his character – a character some of us already care about – is made off-camera.



> "National Geographic" is a great way to describe those scenes, but I think it also explains why they're in the film. In TLJ the Force is depicted as the sum of forces of nature, all that energy and tension in a state of balance, the cycle of life and death, etc. So we get Rey, often seen as a small figure practicing lightsaber forms surrounding by the force and grandeur and natural beauty of that island. The cinematography serves those scenes well -- emphasizing the relationship between the Force and the Jedi.




I had no problem with the cinematography itself. It is beautiful, if cut together a bit too fast. I like "National Geographic." 

However, it felt _entirely_ off-theme, it felt like something from _another_ movie inserted into a supposedly Star Wars movie. The result was jarring rather than – what I assume was intended – revelatory/inspiring. "National Geographic" felt too much like a hammer banging me over the head with the theme of balance/Tao. What would have worked instead? A quiet longer cut to Rey's face, maybe a hint of nature sounds emerging along with change in music, the expression on her face gradually changes.  Star Wars has always been more subtle about Force mysticism, and that subtlety actually makes for more poignant scenes.



> Compare them to Luke's training scenes on Dagobah. I _think_ the idea is somewhat similar; Yoda is hiding out a swamp planet, in a place surrounded by life, by the Force. Except it's shot on an obvious soundstage, all (almost?) inert material. TLJ's swooping on-location nature porn does a better job.




Well, comparing them, Luke's training scenes on Dagobah had Yoda providing far more interesting teaching moments. Whereas Rey's were far less teaching and more communing telepathically with Kylo Ren.

In Empire Strikes Back, Yoda didn't seem to be in hiding, but rather meditating on the Force. A stark contrast to Luke having severed himself from the Force. Yoda exudes wisdom. Luke displays bitterness and regret. Very different.

And I'll agree to disagree with you on which training montage was more effective. The "nature porn" (as you call it, I prefer "National Geographic" sequence) of TLJ seemed like a blunt narrative instrument compared to the sequences with Yoda in ESB.



> Aside from all the stuff that didn't work for you, what seemed "nihilistic and cynical" about it? It's clearly -- i.e. stated directly in-movie by a character message is "Choose to fight when you must. Don't fight to destroy your enemies. Fight to save the ones you love".
> 
> Even Luke's arc is uplifting. After years of self-imposed exile spent in despair and self-doubt -- though to his credit never falling to the Dark Side -- he gives Rey a masterclass lesson in the Force, then goes out in a franchise-best Crowning Moment of Awesome to aid his sister and her Resistance. Then, finally at peace, he evaporates into the Force, having not actually broken his vow to never leave Ahch-To.
> 
> Mind you, I'm not trying to argue you into liking the film. But where's the nihilism?




No worries, I get that The Last Jedi was polarizing. 

"Choose to fight when you must. Don't fight to destroy your enemies. Fight to save the ones you love". That was a line in the movie, yes, but rest of the movie didn't really support that. 

Luke's cynicism for one – raising his lightsaber with the thought of striking a sleeping studen? tossing the lightsaber? saying "it's time for the Jedi to end"? WHOA. And Rey trying to save Kylo only for him to double down on the Dark Side? Kylo explicitly saying "kill the past"? Codebreaker's line about "good guys, bad guys, it's all the same when you look at who makes the weapons"? Poe being misguided, rebelling against purple-hair lady, and ultimately getting stun-blasted by Leia? 

All of that left me with the feeling that the movie had no real message, that it rejected the moral principles of the Jedi entirely. It was special effects, some scarce bits of pithy dialogue, jokes a plenty, cameos, obligatory chase/lightsaber scenes, but no real substance.


----------



## Hussar

Saw this and thought it was appropriate:


----------



## trappedslider

using the doll show me where the movie hurt you


----------



## Ovinomancer

Quickleaf said:


> Star Wars has always been more subtle about Force mysticism, and that subtlety actually makes for more poignant scenes.




I'm so glad I wasn't drinking coffee, or I'd be out a keyboard, at least.

You mean more subtle with the midiclorians, prophecies, disembodied voices, force ghosts, dark side and light side, and all of that?  Sure, sure, let's go with that.  Heh, more _subtle_.


----------



## Mallus

Ovinomancer said:


> You mean more subtle with the midiclorians, prophecies, disembodied voices, force ghosts, dark side and light side, and all of that?



Don't forget wizened hideous people shooting evil lightning out of their hands.


----------



## Eltab

trappedslider said:


> using the doll show me where the movie hurt you



Which part are the midiclorians at?  They're too small to see.


----------

