We saw a Star War! Last Jedi spoiler thread

[Morrus]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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".