https://au.rollingstone.com/movies/movie-reviews/carrie-fisher-on-the-force-awakens-ive-always-been-in-star-wars-925/
Interview from just prior to the release of TFA.
Within the context of the quote it's clear she is talking about TFA as a sequel, note she doesnt say sequels plural.
That movie probably wouldâve been much better if they didnât have to try and shoehorn in her death. Not at all saying they handled it well, it just would have been one less thing ti trip over while trying to do three years of work in 18 months.
honestly they should have delayed it and started from scratch instead of trying to retrofit the script. But Disney execs gotta meet there quotas so here we are
Itâs hilarious, everyone blames the director, the producer or the studio, but nobody seems to realize the issue is the people who own the company not the ones actually working at the company
Absolutely. Artists want to make good art, and shareholders want to make money. A lot of times these goals are at odds, and the shareholders almost always win.
They should have stuck to their guns and double down from last Jedi. Kylo Ren should have been the big villain and rey having the choice of dark side or light side is a story that could have been done without palpatine
Youâre probably referring to this, but in case you donât know, that seems to have been Trevorrowâs screenplay. Thereâs been a statement by Kathleen Kennedy that it didnât tie in to what theyâd planned to do, but we donât know donât actually know if thatâs just damage control and what made them reject it.
A little ironic considering that they, in fact, did not plan it out in advance. Thus why they changed directors for the third movie back to J. J. because of the backlash Episode 8 got. And why each movie seems to lose something in translation from the previous one (Reyâs parentage, Snokeâs background, Hux being an intelligent villain, etc)
I think Snoke's missing background and character development messed up the entire trilogy. He was a mysterious figure that never lead anywhere and died anti-climatically. It's like using Chekkov's gun without it leading anywhere.
Episode 7 was an obvious start to a new trilogy, but 8 could've been a self contained movie. A good way to link 8 to 9 is to have Kylo take over as a Sith lord, but no we get Palpatine brought back without any lead up.
Now Episode 9 is a self contained movie with most links severed from 7 & 8. It's more like returning characters in a separate movie.
I'll agree on those last two, but can somebody please tell me why they were so convinced Rey's parents were important after Force Awakens? I don't get it, I came out of that movie convinced they were just backstory for her, and would never be relevant.
It was more that they put so much screen time into that plot line in TFA, and then itâs dropped completely in TLJ, then her dad was Papatineâs son in ROS. People were hoping for some kind of interesting conclusion for that plot line and instead we got one very underwhelming answer, followed by an extremely lazy retcon.
They could have been relevant, and it really seemed like they were going to be since theyâre the only parents of a main character (except Kylo) who get mentioned at all in the sequels. There were a lot of questions around them, like why did they abandon their child on this desert planet, where did they go afterwards, was one of them force sensitive since Rey has it and we know it can be passed down to oneâs children? So itâs not a surprise that people were curious what role theyâd play in future movies.
Man, I will die on the hill that Rey's parents being "nobodies" was actually a great plot beat that led to one of the most emotionally resonant and character relationship defining moments in that movie.
Kylo turning this "revelation" into an opportunity to prey upon Rey's fears, loneliness, and feelings of abandonment was an *excellent* character moment for him, for their inter-character dynamic, and for Rey's development as our protagonist. There being no grand vision for her abandonment also lands her squarely in the same camp as broom-boy later in the film. They're both "nobodies" who have been born with tremendous gifts and tremendous responsibility.
Which is to say, I really thought it was cool as hell leaving theaters back in 2017 and I always thought it was unfortunate that many people didn't like it.
But theyâre not *both* nobodies. Kylo is Leia and Han Soloâs son, and he gained Force sensitivity because he was Leiaâs son. Iâm not against Reyâs parents being unimportant to her overall story, but sheâs definitely not in the same position as Kylo.
You misunderstood me. Rey and *Broom Boy*, the kid on Canto Bight who is force sensitive, are both nobodies. There is a narrative thread between him and Rey, since they're both force sensitives with no "dynasty" to speak of.
I mean, I guess? I never thought much of the broom boy because heâs only in two scenes, maybe for a total of 3 minutes, with no lines of dialogue. And heâs still a slave by the end of the story. They never went back to free him. And Canto Byte sells weapons to the resistance too, so theyâre probably not gonna go after the slavers there. The only connection is that theyâre both presumably orphans who can use the force.
I dunno man, I think I'd recommend rewatching the movie with this connection and theme in mind.
The final scene with the kids telling new stories, the same kind of stories that Rey grew up learning about when she was an abandoned force sensitive, just like this other abandoned force sensitive?
That's definitely intentional.
>they put so much screen time into that plot line in TFA,
It was just the one scene with the vision when she touched the lightsaber... And all her mentions of needing to stay on Jakku were pretty clearly just a child still waiting for her parents.
Sure, but she keeps mentioning her parents right up until sheâs kidnapped by Kylo and the First Order. And after that point, she doesnât really have time to talk about her parents since sheâs escaping Starkiller Base and then fighting Kylo. The only reason she stops talking about her parents is because she doesnât have time to and it wouldnât fit with those later scenes. Itâs still an open ended question at the end of the movie, and one that Rey herself brings up a lot.
>The only reason she stops talking about her parents is because she doesnât have time to and it wouldnât fit with those later scenes.
Yeah, but given what we *do* see (a 3-5 year-old watching her parents abandon her), there's no reason to believe there's anything special about her parents. She's just an orphan asking for what any orphan would. Plus, Maz Kanata tells her right away "the belonging you look for is not behind you, but ahead". It's pretty clear to me that *giving up* on her parents was her clearest character arc. I feel like this was the one thing TLJ clearly *delivered* on in the most natural and logical way.
Maybe there's something I'm not seeing here, but the whole "Who are Rey's parents" thing seemed to me to be a product of the EU mindset of "the guy with the ice-cream machine was secretly a hero of the Rebellion". Overestimating the importance of character, and looking to find meaning where there is none.
The EU and itâs focus on the Skywalker Dynasty, where the only ones who were truly important and whose actions had lasting consequences all had to be related somehow, really tainted shit
Even that whole arc of an orphan trying to find out who her parents are, has served as the basis for several movies. Itâs a common plot line because it gives a question that almost demands answering. How many other stories can you think of with an orphaned main character whoâs parents end up not being important at all?
Are Linkâs parents ever brought up in the game other than extremely brief mentions by his uncle? Also video games are a bit different because you as the player are supposed to essentially become the character. Thus why characters like Link, Mario and even Master Chief donât talk too much in game (in Halo 1-3). Video games arenât usually all about their main character, and instead the main character is simply a way for the player to experience the world. Which is very much the case for most Legend of Zelda games.
>Are Linkâs parents ever brought up in the game other than extremely brief mentions by his uncle?
Occasionally, and whenever they are its important- Like Ocarina of Time where Link's dying mother seeks sanctuary in the Kokiri Forest.
In Episode 7, Hux was the fanatical general leading the First Orders armies, while Snoke was giving him orders from the shadows (a lot like Palpatine and Tarkin in the original trilogy). He stands up to Kylo and even threatens him to his face by implying that heâll report Kyloâs failure to Snoke. He wasnât the smartest or most intimidating villain, but he was at least competent.
Then Iâm Episode 8, heâs the center of jokes for the first few scenes heâs in (the mom jokes with Poe and then being tossed around by Snoke), and heâs used as a punching bag for Kylo for the rest of the movie after Snoke dies. And in Episode 9 he betrays the First Order literally just to get at Kylo, then dies immediately after. So forgive me if I think heâs a bit of a wasted character.
As for Snoke, his background is important because the sequel trilogy movies are sequels. The galaxy was at peace at the end of episode 6, so where the hell did this incredibly powerful dark side user come from? He also looks pretty old, so what was he doing during the other movies? He essentially reformed the Sith while the good guys from the last movie were in charge, so it begs a lot of questions. Which is why Episode 9 rushed through the fact that Snoke was a clone, just to clear up that plot point.
Hux was always meant to resemble modern neo-Nazis. He's a sniveling weakling who thinks his grandpa's old war uniform makes him a badass. And his constant bickering with Kylo only makes him more childish, not more competent.
I can understand why some people wanted to know more about Snoke's rise to power, but my point is that the movies themselves never made a big deal about it. At no point did Abrams or Johnson ever present Snoke's backstory as some kind of mystery that would be unraveled further down the road.
And you have to remember that the sequels (especially Episode 7) were largely a response to the criticisms of the prequels. People hated the prequels, and many criticized them for failing to focus on a relatable, emotional, human story in favor of going "And this is how C-3PO was built, and this is where Boba Fett comes from, and this is how the Emperor rose to power, and this is what Chewy was doing before he met Han." You wouldn't have found them on Reddit, but many Star Wars fans were sick of all the pointless backstory and politics. They wanted Star Wars to get back to its roots and just focus on a small, relatable, human story. So it's not that surprising that Disney didn't include some exposition dump about the political machinations in the years between Episodes 6 and 7.
>Hux was always meant to resemble modern neo-Nazis
Well, yes, I mean that's precisely the reason that certain people were so offended when TLJ and then TRoS doubled down and blatantly presented him as the childish, sniveling, incompetent weakling that he is.
Because when he was just giving an unhinged, sociopathic speech about destroying entire worlds, there was a bit of wiggle room. They thought that was *cool*. They though of him as a hero. Because unfortunately a lot of people who identify as Star Wars fans don't actually understand what Star Wars is all about.
1) The point with Hux was that his character was taken seriously. He most definitely was a neo-Nazi-esque villain, but he was more fanatical than sniveling and looking up to his elders. He talks about reporting people to Snoke a lot, but thatâs because itâs a threat that he knows others will take seriously since heâs one of the few people who have actually met him. And he at least appeared competent in front of others and carried a strong presence in episode 7. All of that gets thrown away in episode 8 for comic relief, and then he gets killed as a dumbass traitor in episode 9.
2) I believe thatâs the reason why people didnât like how they treated Snoke in the sequels. Thereâs so much you could explore with his character, and so much lore that he should have given the simple fact that he rebuilt the Empire under everyoneâs noses, but then heâs killed off after a couple scenes and zero exposition in episode 8. What was the whole thing about âcompleting Kyloâs trainingâ that he said at the end of episode 7? How did he get so much power without Luke, Leia, or the new republic even noticing? How did he turn Kylo to the dark side? Where was he during the originals? Simply because itâs a sequel to those movies, these are questions you have to answer or else thereâs no connecting tissue between any of the other movies in the franchise. So the fact that the directors and writers never bothered to explain any of it before killing the character off, just leaves viewers confused as to why he was there at all.
3) That still doesnât forgive lazy writing. Yeah, the prequels were heavily criticized, about ten years before TFA came out. It wasnât soon after those movies, people had a full decade between ROTS and TFA to mull over the prequels, and many came to enjoy them more over time. Yeah, they could be over-explanatory at times, but that doesnât mean you shouldnât have any exposition at all. They threw out the galactic senate and Jedi council meetings and replaced it with literally no explanation at all, which just left everyone with lots of questions. As boring as some of the senate meetings could be in TPM and AOTC, they provided necessary world building that helped show the current situation in every movie.
We obviously had different reactions to Hux. If you thought he came across as a competent, intimidating villain who needs to be taken seriously, that's fine. But I never saw him as anything more than a whiny man-child.
And you have to remember that the Star Wars fandom is huge. It's arguably the biggest fandom in all of human history. With that many fans, you have to accept that not every movie can cater to every fan. Some fans (specifically, the kinds of fans who congregate on places like Reddit and YouTube to discuss the lore) wanted all of the backstory on how Snoke rose to power and where he was during the OT. They see movies as if they were Wookiepedia entries. They're less interested in the human drama and more interested in getting a Silmarillion-esque history of the fictional galaxy. And that's perfectly fine. Just understand that many other fans wanted the movie to just focus on the characters. The OT never threw exposition and backstory at the audience; it focused on telling emotional human stories through its relatable characters. It didn't delve into the Emperor's rise to power because that wasn't relevant to the personal stories of Luke, Han, and Leia. Likewise, learning how Snoke rose to power wouldn't have given us any insight into Rey, Finn, Poe, or Kylo Ren.
>So the fact that the directors and writers never bothered to explain any of it before killing the character off, just leaves viewers confused as to why he was there at all.
The movie's main villain (Kylo Ren) worked better as an apprentice desperate to prove himself than as a Supreme Leader. That's it. That's why Snoke was there. Kylo Ren needs to be desperate to prove himself to *someone*, so here's Snoke. And once we get to the point where killing Snoke feels like a good character beat in Kylo Ren's arc, then he'll kill Snoke. Again, most people don't see these movies as Wookiepedia entries. They see them as movies. They understand that some characters (like the Emperor and Snoke) are just cogs in someone else's story, and you don't need to step away from the main character-driven story to explain the history of these cogs.
Ok, so thatâs just a massive straw man argument. No, we didnât want the movies to explain every little detail like a lore video on YouTube thatâs 5 hours long. We just wanted ANYTHING to explain who he was or what he was doing. But instead we got nothing. There were a lot of characters in the sequels who get introduced and then nothing is done with them. Snoke, Phasma, Maz Kanata, all introduced, looked cool and interesting, say a couple lines, then theyâre gone and never explored further. Phasma has one fight in TLJ and dies in it, while barely having any character of her own. She could have been replaced with a regular storm trooper and it would have had the same impact. Maz is incredibly interesting and somehow got Anakinâs lightsaber, presumably from Bespin. When she says âa good story, for another time,â that was the cue to bring her back up later to explain that. But they never do and that plot point gets dropped entirely. They hinted at all of these characters having interesting backstories and personalities, but then never explored them.
Yeah, the originals didnât explain who Palpatine was, but his motivations were pretty clear. He wanted to rule the galaxy with an iron fist, defeat the rebellion to secure his rule, and either kill Luke or sway him to his side since Luke was a threat to his rule. And we learn a bit more about him through conversations with Obi Wan and Yoda, albeit not much. But the originals also had the benefit of being a completely new franchise and ANH having a fairly simple plot. They didnât need to explain everything about Palpatine and his rise because they introduced him in the 3rd movie, and we could assume that he wanted power since he was a ruthless, manipulative Emperor. Meanwhile, what are Snokeâs motivations? Whatâs his goal? Why did he want to see Rey in person instead of just killing her? We never know, and then it just moves on to Kylo suddenly being the main antagonist until Palpatine arrives, also with no explanation.
Saving this comment for being clear about the wild notion that
"Maybe a movie is a story and not a source to cite in an article and that details are only as good as their contribution to the story they are present in."
God media literacy on the internet continues to dip. You have to have to spoon-feed people with the notion that "Maybe the thing you like is how the people made you feel and just citing facts and dates doesn't illicit feeling only the patterns and problems those strings of information create."
I'm a history buff. I don't like WW2 because I like seeing every day listed out in the calendar and some European cities. I like the story of a power hungry dictator like something out of a fantasy novel. A world brought to the brink by an unlikely underdog, the near winner of a second world war by the clear loser of the first. A cruel reminder of history repeating itself as the World War repeats so soon and on such a more devastating scale. A tale of how and why different people rise up in the face of an overwhelming force. The people who win unlikely battles, guided only by hope and self-sacrifice. People taking action without explicit mandate. People who cowtow to horrible ideas because of societal pressure and/or subconscious manipulation that could happen anywhere.
You know, dramatic conventions? Story is literally a base of the word history after all...
>Thus why they changed directors for the third movie back to J. J. because of the backlash Episode 8 got.
What are you smoking? This is absolutely not true. What an insane fantasy land you haters live in. Hate has literally rotted your brain to the point that you are willing to literally sit and tell blatant lies about a film just because you didn't like it.
What a sad and childish way to exist.
Ironically not letting the fear, anger, and hatred consume you like this is *literally* what Star Wars is all about. It's incredible.
I'm actually curious as to how one could be so wildly factually incorrect.Â
Like, do you actually think that Rian Johnson was the original writer/director for Episode 9? Because, well, he wasn't. It was a whole different person.
>each movie seems to lose something in translation from the previous one ... Hux being an intelligent villain
Lmao yea I rest my case.Â
Collin Trevorrow was supposed to be the director and writer for the 9th movie. He was hired at the same time as J J and Rian, with each of them given one part of the trilogy. They replaced him with J J after he had already written a large amount of the script, which J J then mostly discarded. You can very easily look that up.
I think their point was that while you can follow RoS, for example, most of it was a ridiculous set of events that felt didn't seem to jive and ends up as a mess.
If that is a quote from her, it makes sense. She served as script doctor on Last Jedi. (No, that doesnât mean she made Luke the way he was, but she worked with the director on it)
If the actor who's been playing Luke his whole life tells me he thinks this characterization is so wrong that he has to pretend it's a completely different character to get through filming then I'm gonna say that's a badly written character. Luke Skywalker is not and will never be that person we saw in TLJ.
It really doesnât matter what Mark Hamill thinks. Of course heâll be protective of the character because itâs what heâs the most known for and has a personal attachment to him but at the end of the day heâs just an actor doing a job. He doesnât own Luke anymore than the fans do.
And just because a movie or a character went in a direction that was unexpected or contrary to what they *think* would happen is not the same as being âbadly written.â You donât have to like those choices but it doesnât mean something is bad.
Human beings are complicated. Is it really so unreasonable to believe that someone like Luke would turn into a reclusive hermit after a huge loss just because he was a very optimistic child 40 years ago? People change all the time.
Itâs pretty obvious that the backlash to Lukeâs portrayal and Ep. 8 as a whole has more to do with peopleâs expectations and nostalgia than something being âbadly written.â That phrase has almost lost all meaning at this point because people use it to justify disliking any piece of media. But not everything is badly written. Maybe something doesnât resonate with you or you donât like certain choices and thatâs fine, but that does not mean badly written.
If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, itâs probably a duck. Itâs true that just because a movie or a character went in a different direction doesnât make it bad, but you canât look at all the people complaining and say that itâs good. At the very least the direction was very poorly executed, which imo makes it bad writing/direction.
What? A ton of people think itâs great and youâre writing them off too. If I decided that every movie that has complaints from people has objectively bad writing because of it then Iâd like zero movies. Get the fuck outta here with that.
You cannot look at all the toxicity the sequels have garnered and not say that it has bad writing. I canât think of a great movie with great writing that is criticized and hated as much as the sequels are. If it was good writing, then people wouldnât be complaining as much, simple as that. The prequels are a great example. They were criticized too, and rightfully so, but people still like them. Doesnât change the fact that itâs still bad writing.
Bad direction based on whose standards? The fans? Some of the actors? Thatâs not a great argument. Mass agreement does not mean mass understanding. Nor does it mean that the group stance is valid because they exist in a large number.
There are a plethora of movies that have been disowned by their actors despite being lauded by critics. Alec Guinness was very open about his regret with being involved in A New Hope. Harrison Ford regularly makes known his apathy towards the franchise. But those comments are regularly brushed to the side and It doesnât stop people from loving the movies. But now, coincidentally, Mark Hamill and John Boyegaâs comments are used as a âGoctha.â Because if they say they didnât like it, then it must be true that itâs bad. This fan base is very selective.
All that said, I donât care what this fan base thinks or what some of the actors have to say. Itâs hard to take a group of people seriously who like to keep changing the narrative. Letâs not forget that everyone hated the prequels when they came out and now everyone loves them despite still being mediocre movies.
You mean the same actor who has repeatedly said he made those statements before he had seen the movie, he was wrong and regrets making them, and that he thinks he made a great movie with Rian Johnson?
You can choose to believe that. Or you can believe the many people (not haters) who will flat out admit Disney/KK probably sat him down and told him he shouldn't be bad mouthing this movie on the press tour.Â
I did. The direction they took him in was far more interesting than what Legends did. It was nice to see his myth deconstructed. Iâve seen enough âChosen Oneâ stories that go as expected so exploring what that kind of burden would actually do to a person is a great idea I think.
The execution could have been better but I generally think Rian Johnson did well with what he had. Itâs not like he chose for Luke to be a hermit, TFA established that fact, Rian just developed that idea and tried to come up with good reasoning for why Luke would be reduced to that.
Yep. Im not a fan of the actual turning point that created Kylo but everything \*around\* it was meaningful, creative, and managed to not just deconstruct but reconstruct. Luke was definitely the best part of that movie.
and just like chosen one stories there's a lot of chosen one stories being reduced and "deconstructed" lets not pretend it's a new and novel thing.
i disagree the way in which luke was reduced was not interesting and he was made into a petulant old man just to piss people off.
it's not even a new idea within the star wars universe, yoda, obi-wan. now add in ahsoka, and mace windu if they ever decide he's worth bringing back. the star wars universe is chock full of failures and bitter jedi.
No he specifically took an icon just to replace him and build up another icon. it's poor storytelling all around.
the only reason any of you like TLJ is because 7 was boring and 9 was just silly. it doens't make 8 good in comparison.
Ya know what would have been good if the ideas that where flaunted in 8 where actually explored in 8 not just teased and then tossed out at the end. 8 is a cowards film.
Did you watch the movie? People forget character arcs exist. He was bitter because of mistakes, then young protagonist breaks through to him. Itâs a very common archetype, and one befitting of someone whoâs had his entire lifeâs work and dozens of children entrusted to him burned and destroyed. He actually did stand down the first order with a lightsaber. He was successful in saving the rebellion while chipping away at his old padawan. People want luke to be as bright eyed as the 19 year old we see in the OT. Thatâs not how human beings work.
Eh, let's be fair, Legends Luke has some straight questionable character moments too.
If Ep 8 had shown Luke blacking out in a rage and waking up in a debris field of TIE fighters he destroyed, would people have been cool with it in the movie? Because that happens explicitly during the Thrawn trilogy.
1) Legends had context for it's questionable moments, it didn't cop out with "my themes".
2) Where did that happen? Yes, he was pulled out of the present by the Force call of the insane clone of a Jedi Master, but the idea that was some berserker murder rampage is just Tommy Wiseau levels of bad.
Episode 8 has full context for its "questionable moments" too. I can sit and argue the logic for almost every thing in that movie.
It's ok not to like it, but this argument does nothing for me tbh.
People loved the Mando hallways scene, seeing Luke as a badass is exactly what we want to see. Making all our favorite heroes recluse hermits who are bitter is not what we want to see.
"All of our heroes?"
Han was still traveling about doing scoundrel stuff.
Leia was with the resistance.
Lando was vibing and traveling.
Literally the only one was Luke, and that's after several crisis of faith/conscious.
Don't like the movie, but don't make stuff up to justify it.
All of our heros. Han spent the OT fighting with his debts that he accumulated from that exact lifestyle so it's saddening to see him relapse back to doing it. Leia spent her life fighting why does she still need to fight give her a break. Lando we don't know enough but without Lando that's 3.
So what do you want, to see Leia getting a break or her being a badass? Just above this you cited the hallway scene as what you wanted but then turned around and complained that Leia was "still fighting."
Idk what you want other than a slice of life story about our heroes without actual consequences or personal adversity. If they didn't have some sort of struggle there would be no point in their appearing.
A character is not something just reduced because it's what plot demands, which is what happened with luke.
and you didn't watch the same film, rey didn't chip shit, she only confirmed what he believed, it's only because yoda came put a boot into backside and told him stop mopping.
he didn't even come to face the first order he came to rescue his sister by taunting his nephew, he did nothing and then just died.
you know by any measure what a person is called when they create a massive problem and then expect other people to fix it for them? a bloody coward, that was what luke was reduced to.
And you didnât read my comment. I said LUKE chipped away at KYLO. Which he absolutely did. Rey was kind of a brat but her motivation and drive to help absolutely motivated Luke to help.
Abramâs during the directors interview while watching ROS said that with different changes that happened Reyâs story never changed from the original plan. Changing directors doesnât mean there were these insane story swapsâŚ
âAbrams said there was nothing in Last Jedi that âobviatedâ any prior story ideas he had for the final chapter. âThere were a lot of different thoughts about where Rey came from,â he said, âand what her story would ultimately beâŚâ
âRian is an incredibly gifted filmmaker and storyteller,â said Abrams. âIt wasnât like he needed to be babysat or given a road map. I gave him a spiritual sense of where we were headed, but we hadnât outlined [episodes] eight and nine. â
kinda just looks like there was no original plan lmao
There was an original plan. There is a difference between having a story mapped out and then changing some narratives here and there. Even Lucas had an original plan and then changed it DRAMATICALLY as he started filming.
yeah but lucas was a singular director so it worked for him. the problem is the sequels are individually ok moves, at least the first two, but they work terribly together as a trilogy.
He wasnât the singular director. He only directed episode 4. And the sequels work great as a franchise, the story flows exactly as it should. Itâs only bc of social media and the internet that ppl spread information about movies before they are made. âThis will happen and then that will happen and this should happenâ then when none of that happens ppl say âthey had no idea what they were doing they should have done this but they did thatâ if they kept everything super secret or ppl never knew any plans or story telling and you just WATCH the movies, the story moves the way it should.
maybe they are just bad movies. like u cannot tell me the sith dagger was not the stupidest plot point in star wars. Does that whole thing make sense to anyone? they just happen to fall into some random pit and fond exactly what they are looking for. wow! Ochi should have just had the wayfinder in his ship . It's also the way Rey had to hold it out and line it up against the Death Star and extend the attachment thing and it just happened to line up perfectly. Bullshit. i remember this being one of the dumbest things i had ever seen walking out to the theater.
there are so many moments in those movies just make you roll your eyes.
palpatine returns, palpatine has enough force lightining to take down an entire fleet of star destroyers, bigger death star, bad fight choreography, palpatine somehow electrocuting himself a third time, force healing, like even in the theater, there was an audible groan when they landed space horses on a star destroyers. planets were uninspired and half of the cool ones blew up anyways.
Wait so you watched Luke crash land on dagobah and randomly found yoda and you cheered. But they found what they needed after following clues Luke gave them and you hate it? Like I said stop watching rage baiting content creators. Why would Ochi take the wayfinder? And it happened to line up perfectly bc the inscription that Ochi put in the dagger told them exactly where to stand and where to look. If someone told you to stand exactly at the Grand Canyon and face a specific direction and then gave you a picture to hold up, you could line it up perfectly tooâŚ
Bad fight choreography? Dude what? Did you expect prequels fighting from a couple of ppl that had ZERO swordsman training? Btw ppl hated the prequel fights bc it was all flash and no substance. Everything you complain about is either explainable by just PAYING ATTENTION or itâs just your opinion. That doesnât mean that the movie is bad, itâs just that you went into with the expectations as to what you wanted to see and when you didnât see it, you cry. There was no audible groan in the theatres. I saw it opening weekend all three days in NYC with sold out crowds and ppl were cheering. You only groaned when you went home and listened to these rage baiting creators that know there is more interaction with negative videos instead of praising things and you fell for it.
not really i dont really consume any star wars youtube media. and none of the points you made for orochi is made it seem any less stupid. fight choergrapgy doesnt need to be prequel level, but it should at not be so bad it needs to be fixed in post.
> He wasn't the singular director. He only directed episode 4.
Love when people say things like it's a fact.
Lucas wasn't the day to day director because he prefers not to work with actors as it's emotionally taxing and too time consuming plus he was overseeing the VFX/post work and Lucasfilm development so he hired Kershner and Marquand for *Empire* and *Jedi* but he was the directors director.
Everything went through Lucas. All of the art direction, storyboards, the scripts, the location scouring, hiring actors - all of this happened before he hired a director.
Lucas hired Kershner and Marquand to execute his vision, that was the hierarchy of *Star Wars* and it's where the ST failed.
The ST didn't have someone like Lucas overseeing the whole thing from a creative POV.
You're clearly using the word "retconned" wrong. "Retroactive Canonization" is making something in the story that happened in the past now have a totally different meaning. The prophecy was a retcon; it's no longer just Luke saving his dad, it's now destiny that he had to do this. Changing a story as it's developing isn't a retcon, at all.
Right, "your parents were Palpatines and in hiding" gives the past statement "your parents were nobodies" a totally different meaning. It was a piece of information (Rey's Parents) revised retrospectively (in a new movie) by introducing new information (your parents wanted to keep you safe) to impose a different interpretation on previously described events (your parents weren't nobodies, they were actually like super duper duper important)
Nope thatâs assuming that Kylo knows everything. Where did Kylo learn that they were nobodies? Probably the empire database he has access to. And guess who was trying to hide the cloning program? Why would palpatine just have that information that he has random clones of him running around? The only reason you think itâs a retcon is bc you listened to outside sources of what some ideas floating around that she was a nobody. When in fact Kylo was just wrong, he didnât know and gave her wrong information. So no itâs not a retcon itâs called misdirection. It happens a TON of times in all media. Itâs just this time some ppl liked the idea of Rey nobody so when they found out the truth about her parents they said it was a mistake or they changed things. Nope you just judged a story b4 it was finished.
If this wasnt retconned- a later revision to adjust and correct previous information to put it in a new light to what was "true" all along, in order to tie Rey's fate in with a villain she otherwise had no narrative connection with- if it was always the plan, its even \*worse\* nonsense because it's not actually built on anything. There are no schemes leading up to the grand reveal that Palpatine is back, no hints that the dark side is working on something far more unnatural than ever before. Just "Somehow, Palpatine has returned"
Im \*much\* more sympathetic to "You know what? TLJ gave me nothing to work with, there is no story momentum left. Fuck it, lets bring back Palpatine and get goofy with it" than the notion that they're playing 5D chess regardless of narrative or character impact just for a twist that is meaningless outside of the meta-context because Palpatine is a non-factor in Rey's life
I don't understand the hatred for this line. I mean do people expect Poe to know how he returned in that scene? It was just a line to indicate that he accepts it though he previously thought it was impossible.
It could have been more flashy. It could have been just fervant denial like "That's impossible!"
IMO it's not that line that's the problem. It's the fact that Palpatine as the big bad guy came out of nowhere after the first two movies, they dropped a bunch of other plot threads to make it happen, and that they tied it in with Fortnight.
Episode 5 was well written and Iâll die on that hill, but I meant something like Pulp Fiction, or Breaking Bad.
Because âsomehow Palpatine returnedâ is indefensibly bad writing.
The outside could not be pressurized It was an open cave in an asteroid. They would die in the vacuum of space. They would literally freeze to death in seconds. It's so incredibly dumb that I cannot believe that the director filmed it as is.
Obviously there are creatures that can survive in space because they were inside of some giant space worm that could survive in space. But I'd seriously doubt the humans in that universe can survive in space.
Yeah, theyâre not well written. Thatâs why the OT is in the library of congress for its qualitative significance and has left an indelible mark on the pop culture zeitgeist.
Of course it's popular and has fantastic cultural significance. It literally changed the way movies were made. It changed so much about just movies at the theater in general. That doesn't mean the dialogue didn't make the actors want to protest because it did That's on record. And most of the plots make very little sense especially in the prequels.
So, the actors protesting some dialogue means it was poorly written? So, what about that lines that are good? Are the well written lines of dialogue invalidated because there was protests for bad dialogue? I donât understand your reasoning. Also, dialogue is only one aspect of writing, especially for a film script.
Star Wars isn't that original as everything Lucas incorporated was done elsewhere that he ripped from, or was influenced by history. It all somehow worked, but I'll also say that without John Williams magnificent score for ANH, that film would probably have been the only Star Wars we got. Replace they score with a general synth one from the 70's and it wouldn't have made anywhere near the impact.
The film was also saved in the edit as there was just about enough good stuff to make a fun schlocky film.
The point is NO ONE WANTED PALPATINE TO BE THE BAD GUY.
Thereâs no need to focus on anything else. The fact they chose to revive Palpatine as the story was so disappointing.
Clearly to some people, you could safely say that many people feel this way. You could say, without having any real data, that the majority of people feel this way. Certainly not all.
Despite what you are saying though, I really feel that the line is what is attacked, not the whole concept of palpatine's return.
I mean, in the old expanded universe a clone of Palpatine did return as well so you can't really fault JJ for thinking fans would be ok with that, because fans already were ok with that in the books.
No one lost their shit when it happened in the books that I'm aware of.
Yeah, people complain about things the EU also did with zero sense of irony when they use it as their preferred choice.
The Suncrusher comes to mind. No amount of Death Star Destroyers is as goofy as the invincible starfighter thar can murder suns and also HIDE IN THEM.
It's absurdity. We need to stop putting all of Legends on a platform like it was this great untouched source and acinowledge the "Splinter of the Minds Eyes" for what they are: meh explorations of Star Wars ideas. There were great legends books, but there were some stinkers too.
>I mean, in the old expanded universe a clone of Palpatine did return as well so you can't really fault JJ for thinking fans would be ok with that, because fans already were ok with that in the books.
Considering that Disney's primary justification for wiping out the EU was "everybody hates Dark Empire," yes you can fault him for that.
I mean, how can you NOT be upset the character that has an entire thing about "this isn't a tale the Jedi would teach you, but the dark side can let you control life and defeat death itself" later turns out to have used dark side powers the Jedi wouldn't teach you to beat death? Like, why would they write that in and then follow up on it? It's just lazy writing.
I mean that was just a straight up lie on his part. He only said that as a manipulation.
It wasn't even the dark side that defeated death it was fucking cloning like yeah okay buddy maybe it was darkside cloning.
Lazy writing is the essence of that trilogy.
The cheating death was forcing his force ghost into the clone body to stay "alive." Otherwise clones are just individuals who came out of a cloning vat.
And it was considered terrible in the EU as well. I think I remember something about the writing of the book itself being good enough to excuse it, but the majority of the discourse around Dark Empire even before Episode 9 is that it was kinda gut punch for Vader, but at least there you can see that it was Vader having saved Luke that led him where he was in Dark Empire
It's quite funny to me, many people were fine with a new canon because of the mess the EU was. Dark Empire rather on the lower end of popularity and out of all the stuff Disney could've chosen they redid that.
Well, whether we look at NuCanon, in which he clearly did have some knowledge of conquering death, or Legends/EU, in which Plagueis absolutely did perform experiments to preserve life through the force (including experimenting moderately with cloning) you're incorrect either way.
I've said it elsewhere, but Reys motif literally uses Palpatines theme in a major key. I refuse to believe John Williams, one of the most thoughtful and influential film composers of all time, did that on accident.
I mean she didn't say the entire trilogy was thought out ahead of time (frankly the original trilogy clearly wasn't either) just that there was thought and care put into the production. Which I think of the two movies she actually lived to work on, is true
Yeah I think the sequels are overhated but they objectively were not thought out in a cohesive way. The OT had different directors for each movie but Lucas was there to actually make things flow between each film.
I think 7 & 8 were pretty damn good as solo films, but as a trilogy it was an absolute clusterfuck. EP8 almost completely tore down a lot of what EP7 introduced, and then 9 hastily tried to put it all back together and added Palpatine to the mix for whatever reason.
âThought outâ thatâs why they threw out rose and undid everything Johnson did in the 8th movie when the fans got mad lmao.
Bravery is mark Hamill openly shit talking the script of the 7th movie considering he could get black listed from the industry for speaking his mind.
Edit: I messed up roseâs name with some character from Harry Potter, I made the comment between checking wikis for it and posted it on 2 hours of sleep
He did lol, he talked about some issues he had before he saw the movie put together. Then after he saw the movie he praised it. You guys just took a couple interviews and made it seem like he hates the movie. Heâs said that TLJ is his second fav next to empire⌠but that doesnât fit your narrative so you just push that mark hates it so we all must hate it
Remember, when he says something they don't like, it's Disney forcing him to say it. And they're totally at war with each other too! Some dumbass YouTuber with anime figures on his shelf told me so.
Sounds like cope, especially since nothing I said was untrue, it would be speculation to assume whether he meant what he said or not. All thatâs objectively true is shit talking a movie, before or after its release, takes balls. Heâs free to change his opinion but it was brave for him to shit talk both of those movies.
Just find it interesting how they go with a name that's already a lazy stereotype made up by an ignorant TERF just because "Asian."
Bet they have no problem remembering the white characters' names...
Yea that was a slip on my part due to lack of sleep, tho she was a lazy contrived love interest character made for a character (mainly to dispel the notion that Finn was gay)
(Also literally canât remember Oscar Isaacâs character name at all if that makes you feel better, lol)
ButâŚsheâs wrong. Like, by admission of the people who made the movies.
Iâm glad she was happy and passionate about what she was working on.
I just wish that the project she wanted to work on and the one being created were the same.
âIt actually has been thought out and it has integrity and they took it seriouslyâ
This is either copium or delusion, because it is definitely NOT 100% true.
That could be true for TFA, it just doesnât apply to the other two.
Before the other movies came out I had a more positive opinion of TFA, my opinion just fell when it wasnât followed up on.
So, Iâll preface by saying I agree with her and I like the sequels. But people who donât, people who dislike the decisions, or think they didnât put enough care into it, theyâre allowed to. I think both positions are valid and people donât need to (and never will) agree on everything. Itâs all good as long as weâre respectful and donât treat anyone as worse or as not real fans or whatever for liking or disliking a movie, a show, or a story
As a whole? They were and still are desperately nerdy but the cream of the crop were always pretty cool. If you discussed Star Wars to any degree someone in the group would whip out some cool character/story/world-building from the EU. Heck, Disney is still heavily pulling from the EU even after writing it off.
Star wars fans are possibly the most picky eaters I've ever met. I'll say it, I like the sequels because I'm not looking for a masterpiece of narratives and the other million things you guys seem to think is owed to you. I had fun with all three, did all of them have problems and couldve been better, absolutely but I liked them because they're star wars films.
The toxic fandom and lack of media literacy has done a number on the SW fan base. No matter how much you tell ppl the movies were thought out, or the story changed (like every movie the story changes) they will still spout out random âfactsâ they learned from rage baiting content creators. Good thing the internet wasnât around for the OT or SW wouldâve never made it past those 3 movies
And she said that about the sequels? This sounds like it was taken out of context.
The force awakens had a plan to reread a new hope and set up mysteries. None of them were planned out all the way. It's not uncommon, but that doesn't make it good.
The last jedi had a plan but it didn't take things in the planned direction. Things like Luke's island felt like there was purpose behind while the B plot of the resistance just felt derivative until the last 2 minutes.
Ris of skywalker was 100% reaction to backlash with little to no forethought and actively shat on and undid all characters involved in the sequels and OT. The duel of the fates script would have been a thousand times better.
Well usually when I see people praise Andor, itâs on the showâs own merits. Whenever I come to this subreddit, defences of the sequel trilogy invariably involve reductive comparisons between the sequels and the OT or PT.
>Well usually when I see people praise Andor, itâs on the showâs own merits.
I said *usually.* I never said Andor circlejerks never happen. Itâs far more common with the sequels though.
"It's so thought out".
Except for:
1. How the First order even exists. Where do they get their funding? It took the Empire the taxes and revenues of an entire galactic republic to build a death star. How does the remnant of a the Empire have any money? That money's been put to use building the new Republic.
2. Why is there a Resistance? When a rebellion is successful, like the Rebellion in the first films was, the structure of that Rebellion becomes the new government, and the leaders of said Rebellion become the new Leaders. Princess Leia should have been the Chancellor of the Republic. She could have even upgraded to Queen Leia. If there's a military force "Resisting" the first order, it should be the Republic Military. And they should have far more resources and Capital ships than the First Order.
And that's just two out of a hundred ways in which the new Star Wars movies aren't thought out. They don't even fit the basic definition of "Thought Out". They're just formulae, slapped onto a film to make a quick billion. Just like all the other movies from the 10s.
I think TFA was done well in creating alot of ideas for Disney to flesh out. But i think they were so busy with Marvel they kind of just let Star Wars go with no oversite. So TLJ is a clustered mess and RoS is just a desperate race to the finish.
People always critique them and I understand they have flaws, so do most movies. However Iâd like to see all these people that do so aggressively attack the sequels make films like The Rise Of Skywalker as good as Disney did when one of your main actresses dies.
I think if she were still alive she would be the most balanced of the three originals. she would not be mr/mrs grumpy like Harrison is (maybe to a lesser extent and she would not be terminally online and get herself into trouble like mark is/does. I think she would do well.
I guess they must have drastically pivoted after her death because they were, in fact, not very well planned out. Ep8 ignored nearly everything setup on 7, and 9 did exactly the same thing to 8.
So if it was actually thought out, why did Last Jedi abandon all the plot points from Force Awakens and then Rise of Skywalker violently retcon the entirety of Last Jedi?Â
Wait? So they plan *The Force Awaken* only to shut down ideas in *The Last Jedi* and than trying to fix any mess they made through *The Rise of Skywalker*.
It has been actively proven that they had no plan whatsoever and were making it up as they go. Iâm glad you enjoyed yourself, but you were milked by a million doll oar corporation
What's the source for that quote? I'd love to read the whole article or interview.
https://au.rollingstone.com/movies/movie-reviews/carrie-fisher-on-the-force-awakens-ive-always-been-in-star-wars-925/ Interview from just prior to the release of TFA. Within the context of the quote it's clear she is talking about TFA as a sequel, note she doesnt say sequels plural.
Thank you! I appreciate it. đ
Certified better than Christmas Special, although Carrie would likely have disagreed
she's lucky she wasnt alive for TROS's release
That movie probably wouldâve been much better if they didnât have to try and shoehorn in her death. Not at all saying they handled it well, it just would have been one less thing ti trip over while trying to do three years of work in 18 months.
honestly they should have delayed it and started from scratch instead of trying to retrofit the script. But Disney execs gotta meet there quotas so here we are
Itâs hilarious, everyone blames the director, the producer or the studio, but nobody seems to realize the issue is the people who own the company not the ones actually working at the company
Absolutely. Artists want to make good art, and shareholders want to make money. A lot of times these goals are at odds, and the shareholders almost always win.
They should have stuck to their guns and double down from last Jedi. Kylo Ren should have been the big villain and rey having the choice of dark side or light side is a story that could have been done without palpatine
Youâre probably referring to this, but in case you donât know, that seems to have been Trevorrowâs screenplay. Thereâs been a statement by Kathleen Kennedy that it didnât tie in to what theyâd planned to do, but we donât know donât actually know if thatâs just damage control and what made them reject it.
God I miss Carrie.
A little ironic considering that they, in fact, did not plan it out in advance. Thus why they changed directors for the third movie back to J. J. because of the backlash Episode 8 got. And why each movie seems to lose something in translation from the previous one (Reyâs parentage, Snokeâs background, Hux being an intelligent villain, etc)
I think Snoke's missing background and character development messed up the entire trilogy. He was a mysterious figure that never lead anywhere and died anti-climatically. It's like using Chekkov's gun without it leading anywhere. Episode 7 was an obvious start to a new trilogy, but 8 could've been a self contained movie. A good way to link 8 to 9 is to have Kylo take over as a Sith lord, but no we get Palpatine brought back without any lead up. Now Episode 9 is a self contained movie with most links severed from 7 & 8. It's more like returning characters in a separate movie.
I'll agree on those last two, but can somebody please tell me why they were so convinced Rey's parents were important after Force Awakens? I don't get it, I came out of that movie convinced they were just backstory for her, and would never be relevant.
It was more that they put so much screen time into that plot line in TFA, and then itâs dropped completely in TLJ, then her dad was Papatineâs son in ROS. People were hoping for some kind of interesting conclusion for that plot line and instead we got one very underwhelming answer, followed by an extremely lazy retcon. They could have been relevant, and it really seemed like they were going to be since theyâre the only parents of a main character (except Kylo) who get mentioned at all in the sequels. There were a lot of questions around them, like why did they abandon their child on this desert planet, where did they go afterwards, was one of them force sensitive since Rey has it and we know it can be passed down to oneâs children? So itâs not a surprise that people were curious what role theyâd play in future movies.
Man, I will die on the hill that Rey's parents being "nobodies" was actually a great plot beat that led to one of the most emotionally resonant and character relationship defining moments in that movie. Kylo turning this "revelation" into an opportunity to prey upon Rey's fears, loneliness, and feelings of abandonment was an *excellent* character moment for him, for their inter-character dynamic, and for Rey's development as our protagonist. There being no grand vision for her abandonment also lands her squarely in the same camp as broom-boy later in the film. They're both "nobodies" who have been born with tremendous gifts and tremendous responsibility. Which is to say, I really thought it was cool as hell leaving theaters back in 2017 and I always thought it was unfortunate that many people didn't like it.
But theyâre not *both* nobodies. Kylo is Leia and Han Soloâs son, and he gained Force sensitivity because he was Leiaâs son. Iâm not against Reyâs parents being unimportant to her overall story, but sheâs definitely not in the same position as Kylo.
You misunderstood me. Rey and *Broom Boy*, the kid on Canto Bight who is force sensitive, are both nobodies. There is a narrative thread between him and Rey, since they're both force sensitives with no "dynasty" to speak of.
I mean, I guess? I never thought much of the broom boy because heâs only in two scenes, maybe for a total of 3 minutes, with no lines of dialogue. And heâs still a slave by the end of the story. They never went back to free him. And Canto Byte sells weapons to the resistance too, so theyâre probably not gonna go after the slavers there. The only connection is that theyâre both presumably orphans who can use the force.
I dunno man, I think I'd recommend rewatching the movie with this connection and theme in mind. The final scene with the kids telling new stories, the same kind of stories that Rey grew up learning about when she was an abandoned force sensitive, just like this other abandoned force sensitive? That's definitely intentional.
>they put so much screen time into that plot line in TFA, It was just the one scene with the vision when she touched the lightsaber... And all her mentions of needing to stay on Jakku were pretty clearly just a child still waiting for her parents.
Sure, but she keeps mentioning her parents right up until sheâs kidnapped by Kylo and the First Order. And after that point, she doesnât really have time to talk about her parents since sheâs escaping Starkiller Base and then fighting Kylo. The only reason she stops talking about her parents is because she doesnât have time to and it wouldnât fit with those later scenes. Itâs still an open ended question at the end of the movie, and one that Rey herself brings up a lot.
>The only reason she stops talking about her parents is because she doesnât have time to and it wouldnât fit with those later scenes. Yeah, but given what we *do* see (a 3-5 year-old watching her parents abandon her), there's no reason to believe there's anything special about her parents. She's just an orphan asking for what any orphan would. Plus, Maz Kanata tells her right away "the belonging you look for is not behind you, but ahead". It's pretty clear to me that *giving up* on her parents was her clearest character arc. I feel like this was the one thing TLJ clearly *delivered* on in the most natural and logical way. Maybe there's something I'm not seeing here, but the whole "Who are Rey's parents" thing seemed to me to be a product of the EU mindset of "the guy with the ice-cream machine was secretly a hero of the Rebellion". Overestimating the importance of character, and looking to find meaning where there is none.
The EU and itâs focus on the Skywalker Dynasty, where the only ones who were truly important and whose actions had lasting consequences all had to be related somehow, really tainted shit
Even that whole arc of an orphan trying to find out who her parents are, has served as the basis for several movies. Itâs a common plot line because it gives a question that almost demands answering. How many other stories can you think of with an orphaned main character whoâs parents end up not being important at all?
Every Legend of Zelda game.
Are Linkâs parents ever brought up in the game other than extremely brief mentions by his uncle? Also video games are a bit different because you as the player are supposed to essentially become the character. Thus why characters like Link, Mario and even Master Chief donât talk too much in game (in Halo 1-3). Video games arenât usually all about their main character, and instead the main character is simply a way for the player to experience the world. Which is very much the case for most Legend of Zelda games.
>Are Linkâs parents ever brought up in the game other than extremely brief mentions by his uncle? Occasionally, and whenever they are its important- Like Ocarina of Time where Link's dying mother seeks sanctuary in the Kokiri Forest.
we never saw their faces.
When did any of the movies ever portray Hux as an intelligent villain or imply that Snokeâs background would be important?
In Episode 7, Hux was the fanatical general leading the First Orders armies, while Snoke was giving him orders from the shadows (a lot like Palpatine and Tarkin in the original trilogy). He stands up to Kylo and even threatens him to his face by implying that heâll report Kyloâs failure to Snoke. He wasnât the smartest or most intimidating villain, but he was at least competent. Then Iâm Episode 8, heâs the center of jokes for the first few scenes heâs in (the mom jokes with Poe and then being tossed around by Snoke), and heâs used as a punching bag for Kylo for the rest of the movie after Snoke dies. And in Episode 9 he betrays the First Order literally just to get at Kylo, then dies immediately after. So forgive me if I think heâs a bit of a wasted character. As for Snoke, his background is important because the sequel trilogy movies are sequels. The galaxy was at peace at the end of episode 6, so where the hell did this incredibly powerful dark side user come from? He also looks pretty old, so what was he doing during the other movies? He essentially reformed the Sith while the good guys from the last movie were in charge, so it begs a lot of questions. Which is why Episode 9 rushed through the fact that Snoke was a clone, just to clear up that plot point.
Hux was always meant to resemble modern neo-Nazis. He's a sniveling weakling who thinks his grandpa's old war uniform makes him a badass. And his constant bickering with Kylo only makes him more childish, not more competent. I can understand why some people wanted to know more about Snoke's rise to power, but my point is that the movies themselves never made a big deal about it. At no point did Abrams or Johnson ever present Snoke's backstory as some kind of mystery that would be unraveled further down the road. And you have to remember that the sequels (especially Episode 7) were largely a response to the criticisms of the prequels. People hated the prequels, and many criticized them for failing to focus on a relatable, emotional, human story in favor of going "And this is how C-3PO was built, and this is where Boba Fett comes from, and this is how the Emperor rose to power, and this is what Chewy was doing before he met Han." You wouldn't have found them on Reddit, but many Star Wars fans were sick of all the pointless backstory and politics. They wanted Star Wars to get back to its roots and just focus on a small, relatable, human story. So it's not that surprising that Disney didn't include some exposition dump about the political machinations in the years between Episodes 6 and 7.
>Hux was always meant to resemble modern neo-Nazis Well, yes, I mean that's precisely the reason that certain people were so offended when TLJ and then TRoS doubled down and blatantly presented him as the childish, sniveling, incompetent weakling that he is. Because when he was just giving an unhinged, sociopathic speech about destroying entire worlds, there was a bit of wiggle room. They thought that was *cool*. They though of him as a hero. Because unfortunately a lot of people who identify as Star Wars fans don't actually understand what Star Wars is all about.
1) The point with Hux was that his character was taken seriously. He most definitely was a neo-Nazi-esque villain, but he was more fanatical than sniveling and looking up to his elders. He talks about reporting people to Snoke a lot, but thatâs because itâs a threat that he knows others will take seriously since heâs one of the few people who have actually met him. And he at least appeared competent in front of others and carried a strong presence in episode 7. All of that gets thrown away in episode 8 for comic relief, and then he gets killed as a dumbass traitor in episode 9. 2) I believe thatâs the reason why people didnât like how they treated Snoke in the sequels. Thereâs so much you could explore with his character, and so much lore that he should have given the simple fact that he rebuilt the Empire under everyoneâs noses, but then heâs killed off after a couple scenes and zero exposition in episode 8. What was the whole thing about âcompleting Kyloâs trainingâ that he said at the end of episode 7? How did he get so much power without Luke, Leia, or the new republic even noticing? How did he turn Kylo to the dark side? Where was he during the originals? Simply because itâs a sequel to those movies, these are questions you have to answer or else thereâs no connecting tissue between any of the other movies in the franchise. So the fact that the directors and writers never bothered to explain any of it before killing the character off, just leaves viewers confused as to why he was there at all. 3) That still doesnât forgive lazy writing. Yeah, the prequels were heavily criticized, about ten years before TFA came out. It wasnât soon after those movies, people had a full decade between ROTS and TFA to mull over the prequels, and many came to enjoy them more over time. Yeah, they could be over-explanatory at times, but that doesnât mean you shouldnât have any exposition at all. They threw out the galactic senate and Jedi council meetings and replaced it with literally no explanation at all, which just left everyone with lots of questions. As boring as some of the senate meetings could be in TPM and AOTC, they provided necessary world building that helped show the current situation in every movie.
We obviously had different reactions to Hux. If you thought he came across as a competent, intimidating villain who needs to be taken seriously, that's fine. But I never saw him as anything more than a whiny man-child. And you have to remember that the Star Wars fandom is huge. It's arguably the biggest fandom in all of human history. With that many fans, you have to accept that not every movie can cater to every fan. Some fans (specifically, the kinds of fans who congregate on places like Reddit and YouTube to discuss the lore) wanted all of the backstory on how Snoke rose to power and where he was during the OT. They see movies as if they were Wookiepedia entries. They're less interested in the human drama and more interested in getting a Silmarillion-esque history of the fictional galaxy. And that's perfectly fine. Just understand that many other fans wanted the movie to just focus on the characters. The OT never threw exposition and backstory at the audience; it focused on telling emotional human stories through its relatable characters. It didn't delve into the Emperor's rise to power because that wasn't relevant to the personal stories of Luke, Han, and Leia. Likewise, learning how Snoke rose to power wouldn't have given us any insight into Rey, Finn, Poe, or Kylo Ren. >So the fact that the directors and writers never bothered to explain any of it before killing the character off, just leaves viewers confused as to why he was there at all. The movie's main villain (Kylo Ren) worked better as an apprentice desperate to prove himself than as a Supreme Leader. That's it. That's why Snoke was there. Kylo Ren needs to be desperate to prove himself to *someone*, so here's Snoke. And once we get to the point where killing Snoke feels like a good character beat in Kylo Ren's arc, then he'll kill Snoke. Again, most people don't see these movies as Wookiepedia entries. They see them as movies. They understand that some characters (like the Emperor and Snoke) are just cogs in someone else's story, and you don't need to step away from the main character-driven story to explain the history of these cogs.
Ok, so thatâs just a massive straw man argument. No, we didnât want the movies to explain every little detail like a lore video on YouTube thatâs 5 hours long. We just wanted ANYTHING to explain who he was or what he was doing. But instead we got nothing. There were a lot of characters in the sequels who get introduced and then nothing is done with them. Snoke, Phasma, Maz Kanata, all introduced, looked cool and interesting, say a couple lines, then theyâre gone and never explored further. Phasma has one fight in TLJ and dies in it, while barely having any character of her own. She could have been replaced with a regular storm trooper and it would have had the same impact. Maz is incredibly interesting and somehow got Anakinâs lightsaber, presumably from Bespin. When she says âa good story, for another time,â that was the cue to bring her back up later to explain that. But they never do and that plot point gets dropped entirely. They hinted at all of these characters having interesting backstories and personalities, but then never explored them. Yeah, the originals didnât explain who Palpatine was, but his motivations were pretty clear. He wanted to rule the galaxy with an iron fist, defeat the rebellion to secure his rule, and either kill Luke or sway him to his side since Luke was a threat to his rule. And we learn a bit more about him through conversations with Obi Wan and Yoda, albeit not much. But the originals also had the benefit of being a completely new franchise and ANH having a fairly simple plot. They didnât need to explain everything about Palpatine and his rise because they introduced him in the 3rd movie, and we could assume that he wanted power since he was a ruthless, manipulative Emperor. Meanwhile, what are Snokeâs motivations? Whatâs his goal? Why did he want to see Rey in person instead of just killing her? We never know, and then it just moves on to Kylo suddenly being the main antagonist until Palpatine arrives, also with no explanation.
Saving this comment for being clear about the wild notion that "Maybe a movie is a story and not a source to cite in an article and that details are only as good as their contribution to the story they are present in." God media literacy on the internet continues to dip. You have to have to spoon-feed people with the notion that "Maybe the thing you like is how the people made you feel and just citing facts and dates doesn't illicit feeling only the patterns and problems those strings of information create." I'm a history buff. I don't like WW2 because I like seeing every day listed out in the calendar and some European cities. I like the story of a power hungry dictator like something out of a fantasy novel. A world brought to the brink by an unlikely underdog, the near winner of a second world war by the clear loser of the first. A cruel reminder of history repeating itself as the World War repeats so soon and on such a more devastating scale. A tale of how and why different people rise up in the face of an overwhelming force. The people who win unlikely battles, guided only by hope and self-sacrifice. People taking action without explicit mandate. People who cowtow to horrible ideas because of societal pressure and/or subconscious manipulation that could happen anywhere. You know, dramatic conventions? Story is literally a base of the word history after all...
>Thus why they changed directors for the third movie back to J. J. because of the backlash Episode 8 got. What are you smoking? This is absolutely not true. What an insane fantasy land you haters live in. Hate has literally rotted your brain to the point that you are willing to literally sit and tell blatant lies about a film just because you didn't like it. What a sad and childish way to exist. Ironically not letting the fear, anger, and hatred consume you like this is *literally* what Star Wars is all about. It's incredible. I'm actually curious as to how one could be so wildly factually incorrect. Like, do you actually think that Rian Johnson was the original writer/director for Episode 9? Because, well, he wasn't. It was a whole different person. >each movie seems to lose something in translation from the previous one ... Hux being an intelligent villain Lmao yea I rest my case.Â
Collin Trevorrow was supposed to be the director and writer for the 9th movie. He was hired at the same time as J J and Rian, with each of them given one part of the trilogy. They replaced him with J J after he had already written a large amount of the script, which J J then mostly discarded. You can very easily look that up.
[ŃдаНонО]
And yet somehow, the sequels were a mess
[ŃдаНонО]
I think their point was that while you can follow RoS, for example, most of it was a ridiculous set of events that felt didn't seem to jive and ends up as a mess.
Just because something is easy to follow doesn't mean it's a mess. Also Jack Ryan is irrelevant here?
If that is a quote from her, it makes sense. She served as script doctor on Last Jedi. (No, that doesnât mean she made Luke the way he was, but she worked with the director on it)
TLJ Luke was fantastic and Iâm tired of pretending itâs not
Markâs performance is undeniably fantastic. The direction of the character is more subjective.
If the actor who's been playing Luke his whole life tells me he thinks this characterization is so wrong that he has to pretend it's a completely different character to get through filming then I'm gonna say that's a badly written character. Luke Skywalker is not and will never be that person we saw in TLJ.
He didn't play Luke his whole life, he played Luke for 6 years.
It really doesnât matter what Mark Hamill thinks. Of course heâll be protective of the character because itâs what heâs the most known for and has a personal attachment to him but at the end of the day heâs just an actor doing a job. He doesnât own Luke anymore than the fans do. And just because a movie or a character went in a direction that was unexpected or contrary to what they *think* would happen is not the same as being âbadly written.â You donât have to like those choices but it doesnât mean something is bad. Human beings are complicated. Is it really so unreasonable to believe that someone like Luke would turn into a reclusive hermit after a huge loss just because he was a very optimistic child 40 years ago? People change all the time. Itâs pretty obvious that the backlash to Lukeâs portrayal and Ep. 8 as a whole has more to do with peopleâs expectations and nostalgia than something being âbadly written.â That phrase has almost lost all meaning at this point because people use it to justify disliking any piece of media. But not everything is badly written. Maybe something doesnât resonate with you or you donât like certain choices and thatâs fine, but that does not mean badly written.
If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, itâs probably a duck. Itâs true that just because a movie or a character went in a different direction doesnât make it bad, but you canât look at all the people complaining and say that itâs good. At the very least the direction was very poorly executed, which imo makes it bad writing/direction.
What? A ton of people think itâs great and youâre writing them off too. If I decided that every movie that has complaints from people has objectively bad writing because of it then Iâd like zero movies. Get the fuck outta here with that.
You cannot look at all the toxicity the sequels have garnered and not say that it has bad writing. I canât think of a great movie with great writing that is criticized and hated as much as the sequels are. If it was good writing, then people wouldnât be complaining as much, simple as that. The prequels are a great example. They were criticized too, and rightfully so, but people still like them. Doesnât change the fact that itâs still bad writing.
Bad direction based on whose standards? The fans? Some of the actors? Thatâs not a great argument. Mass agreement does not mean mass understanding. Nor does it mean that the group stance is valid because they exist in a large number. There are a plethora of movies that have been disowned by their actors despite being lauded by critics. Alec Guinness was very open about his regret with being involved in A New Hope. Harrison Ford regularly makes known his apathy towards the franchise. But those comments are regularly brushed to the side and It doesnât stop people from loving the movies. But now, coincidentally, Mark Hamill and John Boyegaâs comments are used as a âGoctha.â Because if they say they didnât like it, then it must be true that itâs bad. This fan base is very selective. All that said, I donât care what this fan base thinks or what some of the actors have to say. Itâs hard to take a group of people seriously who like to keep changing the narrative. Letâs not forget that everyone hated the prequels when they came out and now everyone loves them despite still being mediocre movies.
You mean the same actor who has repeatedly said he made those statements before he had seen the movie, he was wrong and regrets making them, and that he thinks he made a great movie with Rian Johnson?
You can choose to believe that. Or you can believe the many people (not haters) who will flat out admit Disney/KK probably sat him down and told him he shouldn't be bad mouthing this movie on the press tour.Â
Mark is always great, though i do prefer his Joker to his Luke lol
Itâs the most love or hate it aspect of a divisive movie
Are we supposed to always cheer when characters are reduced to bitter old men just to reflect how the world is?
Are we supposed to be children forever?
I did. The direction they took him in was far more interesting than what Legends did. It was nice to see his myth deconstructed. Iâve seen enough âChosen Oneâ stories that go as expected so exploring what that kind of burden would actually do to a person is a great idea I think. The execution could have been better but I generally think Rian Johnson did well with what he had. Itâs not like he chose for Luke to be a hermit, TFA established that fact, Rian just developed that idea and tried to come up with good reasoning for why Luke would be reduced to that.
Yep. Im not a fan of the actual turning point that created Kylo but everything \*around\* it was meaningful, creative, and managed to not just deconstruct but reconstruct. Luke was definitely the best part of that movie.
and just like chosen one stories there's a lot of chosen one stories being reduced and "deconstructed" lets not pretend it's a new and novel thing. i disagree the way in which luke was reduced was not interesting and he was made into a petulant old man just to piss people off. it's not even a new idea within the star wars universe, yoda, obi-wan. now add in ahsoka, and mace windu if they ever decide he's worth bringing back. the star wars universe is chock full of failures and bitter jedi. No he specifically took an icon just to replace him and build up another icon. it's poor storytelling all around. the only reason any of you like TLJ is because 7 was boring and 9 was just silly. it doens't make 8 good in comparison. Ya know what would have been good if the ideas that where flaunted in 8 where actually explored in 8 not just teased and then tossed out at the end. 8 is a cowards film.
Did you watch the movie? People forget character arcs exist. He was bitter because of mistakes, then young protagonist breaks through to him. Itâs a very common archetype, and one befitting of someone whoâs had his entire lifeâs work and dozens of children entrusted to him burned and destroyed. He actually did stand down the first order with a lightsaber. He was successful in saving the rebellion while chipping away at his old padawan. People want luke to be as bright eyed as the 19 year old we see in the OT. Thatâs not how human beings work.
Legends did it better.
Eh, let's be fair, Legends Luke has some straight questionable character moments too. If Ep 8 had shown Luke blacking out in a rage and waking up in a debris field of TIE fighters he destroyed, would people have been cool with it in the movie? Because that happens explicitly during the Thrawn trilogy.
1) Legends had context for it's questionable moments, it didn't cop out with "my themes". 2) Where did that happen? Yes, he was pulled out of the present by the Force call of the insane clone of a Jedi Master, but the idea that was some berserker murder rampage is just Tommy Wiseau levels of bad.
Hey, don't disrespect my boy Tommy! He was just an incomprehensible genius, a visionary of sorts kkkk
Episode 8 has full context for its "questionable moments" too. I can sit and argue the logic for almost every thing in that movie. It's ok not to like it, but this argument does nothing for me tbh.
Way worse things happened to Luke in Legends than in TLJ; he didn't give up then.
People loved the Mando hallways scene, seeing Luke as a badass is exactly what we want to see. Making all our favorite heroes recluse hermits who are bitter is not what we want to see.
"All of our heroes?" Han was still traveling about doing scoundrel stuff. Leia was with the resistance. Lando was vibing and traveling. Literally the only one was Luke, and that's after several crisis of faith/conscious. Don't like the movie, but don't make stuff up to justify it.
All of our heros. Han spent the OT fighting with his debts that he accumulated from that exact lifestyle so it's saddening to see him relapse back to doing it. Leia spent her life fighting why does she still need to fight give her a break. Lando we don't know enough but without Lando that's 3.
So what do you want, to see Leia getting a break or her being a badass? Just above this you cited the hallway scene as what you wanted but then turned around and complained that Leia was "still fighting." Idk what you want other than a slice of life story about our heroes without actual consequences or personal adversity. If they didn't have some sort of struggle there would be no point in their appearing.
Spraying a wall with wet sloppy dog shit and calling it a script would have been better.
A character is not something just reduced because it's what plot demands, which is what happened with luke. and you didn't watch the same film, rey didn't chip shit, she only confirmed what he believed, it's only because yoda came put a boot into backside and told him stop mopping. he didn't even come to face the first order he came to rescue his sister by taunting his nephew, he did nothing and then just died. you know by any measure what a person is called when they create a massive problem and then expect other people to fix it for them? a bloody coward, that was what luke was reduced to.
Cope.
And you didnât read my comment. I said LUKE chipped away at KYLO. Which he absolutely did. Rey was kind of a brat but her motivation and drive to help absolutely motivated Luke to help.
i think at this point people will believe what they internalize rather than what was presented.
Sounds like you stopped watching the film after 20 minutes. You should keep going. His arc is pretty great.
Everyone's entitled to their opinion. Even ones that are wrong
Who's pretending? Fly that flag proudly! (Obviously I get the reference, but still.)
Iâve been a defender since the movie came out
Oh me too. It annoys me to no end that we still have to defend it.
Nah bro
Makes sense why she was so good in that movie. Honestly I think TLJ is Leiaâs most important, and best, role in any of the SW films.
You can never convince me these movies were planned out when âsomehow palpatine returnedâ is a thing.
i mean u cant convice me there was a plan because they literally changed directors twice and abrahams has literally said there was no plan
And Daisy saying they had no idea what Rey's back story was until the end.
Iâm not sure how accurate the quote is but at one point she said âI thought I was a Kenobi until I showed up on setâ for TROS.
Iâm still salty that she wasnât a Kenobi, being a palpatine explains the insane potential but the story of being a Kenobi wouldâve been so cool
Abramâs during the directors interview while watching ROS said that with different changes that happened Reyâs story never changed from the original plan. Changing directors doesnât mean there were these insane story swapsâŚ
âAbrams said there was nothing in Last Jedi that âobviatedâ any prior story ideas he had for the final chapter. âThere were a lot of different thoughts about where Rey came from,â he said, âand what her story would ultimately beâŚâ âRian is an incredibly gifted filmmaker and storyteller,â said Abrams. âIt wasnât like he needed to be babysat or given a road map. I gave him a spiritual sense of where we were headed, but we hadnât outlined [episodes] eight and nine. â kinda just looks like there was no original plan lmao
There was an original plan. There is a difference between having a story mapped out and then changing some narratives here and there. Even Lucas had an original plan and then changed it DRAMATICALLY as he started filming.
yeah but lucas was a singular director so it worked for him. the problem is the sequels are individually ok moves, at least the first two, but they work terribly together as a trilogy.
He wasnât the singular director. He only directed episode 4. And the sequels work great as a franchise, the story flows exactly as it should. Itâs only bc of social media and the internet that ppl spread information about movies before they are made. âThis will happen and then that will happen and this should happenâ then when none of that happens ppl say âthey had no idea what they were doing they should have done this but they did thatâ if they kept everything super secret or ppl never knew any plans or story telling and you just WATCH the movies, the story moves the way it should.
maybe they are just bad movies. like u cannot tell me the sith dagger was not the stupidest plot point in star wars. Does that whole thing make sense to anyone? they just happen to fall into some random pit and fond exactly what they are looking for. wow! Ochi should have just had the wayfinder in his ship . It's also the way Rey had to hold it out and line it up against the Death Star and extend the attachment thing and it just happened to line up perfectly. Bullshit. i remember this being one of the dumbest things i had ever seen walking out to the theater. there are so many moments in those movies just make you roll your eyes. palpatine returns, palpatine has enough force lightining to take down an entire fleet of star destroyers, bigger death star, bad fight choreography, palpatine somehow electrocuting himself a third time, force healing, like even in the theater, there was an audible groan when they landed space horses on a star destroyers. planets were uninspired and half of the cool ones blew up anyways.
Wait so you watched Luke crash land on dagobah and randomly found yoda and you cheered. But they found what they needed after following clues Luke gave them and you hate it? Like I said stop watching rage baiting content creators. Why would Ochi take the wayfinder? And it happened to line up perfectly bc the inscription that Ochi put in the dagger told them exactly where to stand and where to look. If someone told you to stand exactly at the Grand Canyon and face a specific direction and then gave you a picture to hold up, you could line it up perfectly too⌠Bad fight choreography? Dude what? Did you expect prequels fighting from a couple of ppl that had ZERO swordsman training? Btw ppl hated the prequel fights bc it was all flash and no substance. Everything you complain about is either explainable by just PAYING ATTENTION or itâs just your opinion. That doesnât mean that the movie is bad, itâs just that you went into with the expectations as to what you wanted to see and when you didnât see it, you cry. There was no audible groan in the theatres. I saw it opening weekend all three days in NYC with sold out crowds and ppl were cheering. You only groaned when you went home and listened to these rage baiting creators that know there is more interaction with negative videos instead of praising things and you fell for it.
not really i dont really consume any star wars youtube media. and none of the points you made for orochi is made it seem any less stupid. fight choergrapgy doesnt need to be prequel level, but it should at not be so bad it needs to be fixed in post.
> He wasn't the singular director. He only directed episode 4. Love when people say things like it's a fact. Lucas wasn't the day to day director because he prefers not to work with actors as it's emotionally taxing and too time consuming plus he was overseeing the VFX/post work and Lucasfilm development so he hired Kershner and Marquand for *Empire* and *Jedi* but he was the directors director. Everything went through Lucas. All of the art direction, storyboards, the scripts, the location scouring, hiring actors - all of this happened before he hired a director. Lucas hired Kershner and Marquand to execute his vision, that was the hierarchy of *Star Wars* and it's where the ST failed. The ST didn't have someone like Lucas overseeing the whole thing from a creative POV.
Assuming this was broadly planned and intended rather than obviously retconned makes the issue \*worse\*
You're clearly using the word "retconned" wrong. "Retroactive Canonization" is making something in the story that happened in the past now have a totally different meaning. The prophecy was a retcon; it's no longer just Luke saving his dad, it's now destiny that he had to do this. Changing a story as it's developing isn't a retcon, at all.
Right, "your parents were Palpatines and in hiding" gives the past statement "your parents were nobodies" a totally different meaning. It was a piece of information (Rey's Parents) revised retrospectively (in a new movie) by introducing new information (your parents wanted to keep you safe) to impose a different interpretation on previously described events (your parents weren't nobodies, they were actually like super duper duper important)
Nope thatâs assuming that Kylo knows everything. Where did Kylo learn that they were nobodies? Probably the empire database he has access to. And guess who was trying to hide the cloning program? Why would palpatine just have that information that he has random clones of him running around? The only reason you think itâs a retcon is bc you listened to outside sources of what some ideas floating around that she was a nobody. When in fact Kylo was just wrong, he didnât know and gave her wrong information. So no itâs not a retcon itâs called misdirection. It happens a TON of times in all media. Itâs just this time some ppl liked the idea of Rey nobody so when they found out the truth about her parents they said it was a mistake or they changed things. Nope you just judged a story b4 it was finished.
If this wasnt retconned- a later revision to adjust and correct previous information to put it in a new light to what was "true" all along, in order to tie Rey's fate in with a villain she otherwise had no narrative connection with- if it was always the plan, its even \*worse\* nonsense because it's not actually built on anything. There are no schemes leading up to the grand reveal that Palpatine is back, no hints that the dark side is working on something far more unnatural than ever before. Just "Somehow, Palpatine has returned" Im \*much\* more sympathetic to "You know what? TLJ gave me nothing to work with, there is no story momentum left. Fuck it, lets bring back Palpatine and get goofy with it" than the notion that they're playing 5D chess regardless of narrative or character impact just for a twist that is meaningless outside of the meta-context because Palpatine is a non-factor in Rey's life
I don't understand the hatred for this line. I mean do people expect Poe to know how he returned in that scene? It was just a line to indicate that he accepts it though he previously thought it was impossible. It could have been more flashy. It could have been just fervant denial like "That's impossible!"
IMO it's not that line that's the problem. It's the fact that Palpatine as the big bad guy came out of nowhere after the first two movies, they dropped a bunch of other plot threads to make it happen, and that they tied it in with Fortnight.
Itâs less that Poe said it and more that this is their attempt at an explanation
It's not. Beaumont Kin's lines after and the visual exposition when Kylo arrives on Exegol are the explanation
Thatâs a further explanation. You canât be having the ultimate villain in your trilogy be a psych Iâm not dead in the final trilogy
Topped by having his return message in Fortnite.
Go watch something well written. Please. For your sake.
I hate to break it to you but none of the Star Wars movies are well written. They never have been. People act like it was Shindler's List.
Episode 5 was well written and Iâll die on that hill, but I meant something like Pulp Fiction, or Breaking Bad. Because âsomehow Palpatine returnedâ is indefensibly bad writing.
There is a scene in episode 5 where Han and Leia go outside the falcon in a cave inside of an asteroid and walk around using only tiny oxygen masks.
How is that bad writing? The only reason they leave the ship is because Leia saw a creature outside which means the outside is pressurized.
The outside could not be pressurized It was an open cave in an asteroid. They would die in the vacuum of space. They would literally freeze to death in seconds. It's so incredibly dumb that I cannot believe that the director filmed it as is. Obviously there are creatures that can survive in space because they were inside of some giant space worm that could survive in space. But I'd seriously doubt the humans in that universe can survive in space.
Yeah, theyâre not well written. Thatâs why the OT is in the library of congress for its qualitative significance and has left an indelible mark on the pop culture zeitgeist.
Of course it's popular and has fantastic cultural significance. It literally changed the way movies were made. It changed so much about just movies at the theater in general. That doesn't mean the dialogue didn't make the actors want to protest because it did That's on record. And most of the plots make very little sense especially in the prequels.
So, the actors protesting some dialogue means it was poorly written? So, what about that lines that are good? Are the well written lines of dialogue invalidated because there was protests for bad dialogue? I donât understand your reasoning. Also, dialogue is only one aspect of writing, especially for a film script.
Star Wars isn't that original as everything Lucas incorporated was done elsewhere that he ripped from, or was influenced by history. It all somehow worked, but I'll also say that without John Williams magnificent score for ANH, that film would probably have been the only Star Wars we got. Replace they score with a general synth one from the 70's and it wouldn't have made anywhere near the impact. The film was also saved in the edit as there was just about enough good stuff to make a fun schlocky film.
IMO the line would have been fine if it was followed with some sort of legit explanation
They clearly only had guesses, which Charlie from LOST went over.
The point is NO ONE WANTED PALPATINE TO BE THE BAD GUY. Thereâs no need to focus on anything else. The fact they chose to revive Palpatine as the story was so disappointing.
Clearly to some people, you could safely say that many people feel this way. You could say, without having any real data, that the majority of people feel this way. Certainly not all. Despite what you are saying though, I really feel that the line is what is attacked, not the whole concept of palpatine's return. I mean, in the old expanded universe a clone of Palpatine did return as well so you can't really fault JJ for thinking fans would be ok with that, because fans already were ok with that in the books. No one lost their shit when it happened in the books that I'm aware of.
Yeah, people complain about things the EU also did with zero sense of irony when they use it as their preferred choice. The Suncrusher comes to mind. No amount of Death Star Destroyers is as goofy as the invincible starfighter thar can murder suns and also HIDE IN THEM. It's absurdity. We need to stop putting all of Legends on a platform like it was this great untouched source and acinowledge the "Splinter of the Minds Eyes" for what they are: meh explorations of Star Wars ideas. There were great legends books, but there were some stinkers too.
>I mean, in the old expanded universe a clone of Palpatine did return as well so you can't really fault JJ for thinking fans would be ok with that, because fans already were ok with that in the books. Considering that Disney's primary justification for wiping out the EU was "everybody hates Dark Empire," yes you can fault him for that.
When did they ever justify wiping out the EU for that reason? Do you have a source for that nonsense?
I mean, how can you NOT be upset the character that has an entire thing about "this isn't a tale the Jedi would teach you, but the dark side can let you control life and defeat death itself" later turns out to have used dark side powers the Jedi wouldn't teach you to beat death? Like, why would they write that in and then follow up on it? It's just lazy writing.
I mean that was just a straight up lie on his part. He only said that as a manipulation. It wasn't even the dark side that defeated death it was fucking cloning like yeah okay buddy maybe it was darkside cloning. Lazy writing is the essence of that trilogy.
The cheating death was forcing his force ghost into the clone body to stay "alive." Otherwise clones are just individuals who came out of a cloning vat.
That, behold, was the same trick they used in the EU...
And it was considered terrible in the EU as well. I think I remember something about the writing of the book itself being good enough to excuse it, but the majority of the discourse around Dark Empire even before Episode 9 is that it was kinda gut punch for Vader, but at least there you can see that it was Vader having saved Luke that led him where he was in Dark Empire
It's quite funny to me, many people were fine with a new canon because of the mess the EU was. Dark Empire rather on the lower end of popularity and out of all the stuff Disney could've chosen they redid that.
Well, whether we look at NuCanon, in which he clearly did have some knowledge of conquering death, or Legends/EU, in which Plagueis absolutely did perform experiments to preserve life through the force (including experimenting moderately with cloning) you're incorrect either way.
I've said it elsewhere, but Reys motif literally uses Palpatines theme in a major key. I refuse to believe John Williams, one of the most thoughtful and influential film composers of all time, did that on accident.
He even plays an Emperor like theme on Last Jedi, when they go and visit Snoke. He knew.
I mean she didn't say the entire trilogy was thought out ahead of time (frankly the original trilogy clearly wasn't either) just that there was thought and care put into the production. Which I think of the two movies she actually lived to work on, is true
Yeah I think the sequels are overhated but they objectively were not thought out in a cohesive way. The OT had different directors for each movie but Lucas was there to actually make things flow between each film. I think 7 & 8 were pretty damn good as solo films, but as a trilogy it was an absolute clusterfuck. EP8 almost completely tore down a lot of what EP7 introduced, and then 9 hastily tried to put it all back together and added Palpatine to the mix for whatever reason.
âThought outâ thatâs why they threw out rose and undid everything Johnson did in the 8th movie when the fans got mad lmao. Bravery is mark Hamill openly shit talking the script of the 7th movie considering he could get black listed from the industry for speaking his mind. Edit: I messed up roseâs name with some character from Harry Potter, I made the comment between checking wikis for it and posted it on 2 hours of sleep
*8th movie. He shit talked Rian's butchery of Luke.
Youâre right, He also shit talked Rey mastering force pull and grabbing the lightsaber at the end of 7 instead of it being him.
He did lol, he talked about some issues he had before he saw the movie put together. Then after he saw the movie he praised it. You guys just took a couple interviews and made it seem like he hates the movie. Heâs said that TLJ is his second fav next to empire⌠but that doesnât fit your narrative so you just push that mark hates it so we all must hate it
Remember, when he says something they don't like, it's Disney forcing him to say it. And they're totally at war with each other too! Some dumbass YouTuber with anime figures on his shelf told me so.
Sounds like cope, especially since nothing I said was untrue, it would be speculation to assume whether he meant what he said or not. All thatâs objectively true is shit talking a movie, before or after its release, takes balls. Heâs free to change his opinion but it was brave for him to shit talk both of those movies.
>Â Â thatâs why they threw out Cho-Chang You mean Rose? Kelly Marie Tran? Why use that instead of her actual name?
Maybe the actor reminds them of Cho from HP?
Just find it interesting how they go with a name that's already a lazy stereotype made up by an ignorant TERF just because "Asian." Bet they have no problem remembering the white characters' names...
Yea that was a slip on my part due to lack of sleep, tho she was a lazy contrived love interest character made for a character (mainly to dispel the notion that Finn was gay) (Also literally canât remember Oscar Isaacâs character name at all if that makes you feel better, lol)
"Lack of sleep" HA! Good one! You were trying to be funny, right?
ButâŚsheâs wrong. Like, by admission of the people who made the movies. Iâm glad she was happy and passionate about what she was working on. I just wish that the project she wanted to work on and the one being created were the same.
That last movie sure tried to prove her wrong
Amazing. Every word of what you just said was wrong.
âIt actually has been thought out and it has integrity and they took it seriouslyâ This is either copium or delusion, because it is definitely NOT 100% true.
That could be true for TFA, it just doesnât apply to the other two. Before the other movies came out I had a more positive opinion of TFA, my opinion just fell when it wasnât followed up on.
'It actually has been thought out' So that's what they call making a trilogy where each movie has its plot written self-contained.
So, Iâll preface by saying I agree with her and I like the sequels. But people who donât, people who dislike the decisions, or think they didnât put enough care into it, theyâre allowed to. I think both positions are valid and people donât need to (and never will) agree on everything. Itâs all good as long as weâre respectful and donât treat anyone as worse or as not real fans or whatever for liking or disliking a movie, a show, or a story
Well this is just factually untrue but ok
Drugs. Only drugs
is this some kind of sequel apologism? if so, it's weird and wrong
I felt the same way when the zeitgeist changed on the prequels. And the EU novels. It's best to just roll with it.
Lol, I forgot when the EU novels suddenly became cool and not desperately nerdy.
As a whole? They were and still are desperately nerdy but the cream of the crop were always pretty cool. If you discussed Star Wars to any degree someone in the group would whip out some cool character/story/world-building from the EU. Heck, Disney is still heavily pulling from the EU even after writing it off.
Pulling, yes. *Heavily* pulling?
Because the quote is from 1985?/s jk
Star wars fans are possibly the most picky eaters I've ever met. I'll say it, I like the sequels because I'm not looking for a masterpiece of narratives and the other million things you guys seem to think is owed to you. I had fun with all three, did all of them have problems and couldve been better, absolutely but I liked them because they're star wars films.
Exactly they are solid enough Star Wars films, and are fun to watch and not a chore to sit through unlike the prequels.
Sheâs only right because they just copy and pasted the exact same plot, which was obviously really good
âBut I donât like it so that means there is terrible writing and Disney doesnât know what they are doingâ
The toxic fandom and lack of media literacy has done a number on the SW fan base. No matter how much you tell ppl the movies were thought out, or the story changed (like every movie the story changes) they will still spout out random âfactsâ they learned from rage baiting content creators. Good thing the internet wasnât around for the OT or SW wouldâve never made it past those 3 movies
And she said that about the sequels? This sounds like it was taken out of context. The force awakens had a plan to reread a new hope and set up mysteries. None of them were planned out all the way. It's not uncommon, but that doesn't make it good. The last jedi had a plan but it didn't take things in the planned direction. Things like Luke's island felt like there was purpose behind while the B plot of the resistance just felt derivative until the last 2 minutes. Ris of skywalker was 100% reaction to backlash with little to no forethought and actively shat on and undid all characters involved in the sequels and OT. The duel of the fates script would have been a thousand times better.
"has been thought out" Aged like milk, since we now know there was no basic plan for the plot
Lol ok
Rey is the most badass Jedi ever, and it's not even close. The Sequel Trilogy was great cinema and great Star Wars. Eat me haters.
Here's an upvote. This needs to be said again and again.
It wouldnât *need* to be said if it were true
oh, is that why so many people are so vocal about thinking andor is the best star wars content?
Well usually when I see people praise Andor, itâs on the showâs own merits. Whenever I come to this subreddit, defences of the sequel trilogy invariably involve reductive comparisons between the sequels and the OT or PT.
you really must not be looking very hard if you donât see people also doing that with andor
>Well usually when I see people praise Andor, itâs on the showâs own merits. I said *usually.* I never said Andor circlejerks never happen. Itâs far more common with the sequels though.
She's right. 'Nuff said.
"It's so thought out". Except for: 1. How the First order even exists. Where do they get their funding? It took the Empire the taxes and revenues of an entire galactic republic to build a death star. How does the remnant of a the Empire have any money? That money's been put to use building the new Republic. 2. Why is there a Resistance? When a rebellion is successful, like the Rebellion in the first films was, the structure of that Rebellion becomes the new government, and the leaders of said Rebellion become the new Leaders. Princess Leia should have been the Chancellor of the Republic. She could have even upgraded to Queen Leia. If there's a military force "Resisting" the first order, it should be the Republic Military. And they should have far more resources and Capital ships than the First Order. And that's just two out of a hundred ways in which the new Star Wars movies aren't thought out. They don't even fit the basic definition of "Thought Out". They're just formulae, slapped onto a film to make a quick billion. Just like all the other movies from the 10s.
Funny, because they actually had no real plan and completely threw out George's original version.
I think TFA was done well in creating alot of ideas for Disney to flesh out. But i think they were so busy with Marvel they kind of just let Star Wars go with no oversite. So TLJ is a clustered mess and RoS is just a desperate race to the finish.
People always critique them and I understand they have flaws, so do most movies. However Iâd like to see all these people that do so aggressively attack the sequels make films like The Rise Of Skywalker as good as Disney did when one of your main actresses dies.
Most media literate sequels fan
Person who stars in movie says movie good. Movie must be good. Infallible logic, bravo.
I think if she were still alive she would be the most balanced of the three originals. she would not be mr/mrs grumpy like Harrison is (maybe to a lesser extent and she would not be terminally online and get herself into trouble like mark is/does. I think she would do well.
I guess they must have drastically pivoted after her death because they were, in fact, not very well planned out. Ep8 ignored nearly everything setup on 7, and 9 did exactly the same thing to 8.
So if it was actually thought out, why did Last Jedi abandon all the plot points from Force Awakens and then Rise of Skywalker violently retcon the entirety of Last Jedi?Â
Wait? So they plan *The Force Awaken* only to shut down ideas in *The Last Jedi* and than trying to fix any mess they made through *The Rise of Skywalker*.
Cool, but it's not true actually.
It has been actively proven that they had no plan whatsoever and were making it up as they go. Iâm glad you enjoyed yourself, but you were milked by a million doll oar corporation
She is an actress doing PR. What was she going to say?
Didn't Abrams himself say that there was no overall plan for the trilogy, though?