@Haru17 No, not really. If a character is serious in episode 7, but an absolute clown in episode 8 who can't tell mockery from honesty, that's not character development. That's just bad writing, or at least inconsistent writing compared to the previous installment(s).
@Haru17 That's just one example. But indeed, it's implied he's past of the main cast. The original trilogy had a bunch of them, and I don't remember their names (except for Tarkin who got a bigger role in Rogue One), but in the new trilogy? Yeah, it's Kylo, Hux, Snoke and a bunch of nameless troopers and commanders.
A lot of people have a LOT of issues with The Last Jedi (and rightfully so - Rian Johnson and Kathleen Kennedy made a pretty horrid Star Wars movie).
One thing that I saw people complaining about was the "string" GPS that they used to find the rebels once they went into hyperspace. People were saying that was a plothole in the franchise. But....Boba Fett used a tracking device to find the Millenium Falcon. Princess Leia even mentions in A New Hope that "They're tracking us, it can be the only reason for the ease of our escape." And Han says, "Not this ship, sister!" So, I don't see why people are all upset that they used some sort of GPS tracking device in The Last Jedi. Am I wrong in thinking this way???
The only reason I'm going back to see this a 2nd time is because Santa brought me a gift card to the movies so I can see it for free. Also, I fell asleep four times during my initial viewing, lol.
@bezerker99 Firstly, I'll just point out that these sorts of 'issues' don't particularly concern me, I don't watch Star Wars for the 'science' or pay much attention to those minor plot devices, so I don't have any issue with the lightspeed tracking in TLJ anyway.
But secondly, just to clear up your wonderings, when Boba Fett tracks the Falcon in TESB, the Falcon's hyperdrive isn't working, which is the whole reason they go to see Lando in Bespin - they can't get away from the Empire when they escape Hoth because the hyperdrive's not working, so they're forced to go into the asteroid field (against odds of 3,720 to 1), hide inside the space worm, hide on the back of the Star Destroyer, float away with the trash, limp to Lando's... that's the whole driver behind that arm of the film... broken hyperdrive.
In A New Hope, we don't actually see how they get to Yavin once they've escaped the Death Star.
You guys had me at blood and semen.
What better way to celebrate than firing something out of the pipe?
Count me in on the "TLJ was great" camp. Might even be my favorite film of the franchise. No other SW film has had such clear and direct theming since Empire. I knew it would be controversial from the moment I left the cinema, but I never thought the fanbase would hate it this much. I think it's unwarranted, obviously, and that the mythologization of the OT is becoming more toxic by the day.
And on a side note, I'm all for making the obvious fascist stand-in a punching bag, both verbally and physically. Star Wars is a mixed bag in terms of "don't make fascism look cool" (especially the prequels), it's refreshing to see characters like Hux treated like dinguses and not like something worthy of respect.
Might even be my favorite film of the franchise. No other SW film has had such clear and direct theming since Empire.
What exactly were the themes? The only ones I could notice seemed to be "Get rid of anything that's old" and also Poe's whole little "You should blindly trust authority figures because sometimes they have a plan." lesson. Oh and then there was that "Trying to be a hero and making an entirely legitimate sacrifice is bad" part with Finn at the end.
The greatest theme was - Milk your local creatures. Find one with prominent udders especially animals that flaunt them for your milking pleasure. Then enjoy that milk. Let it dribble and then cascade down your chin (bearded chin optional). Feel the unpasteurized milky pleasure soaking your face and clothing. Give a nearby training Jedi a "you think this milk is hot, young lady?" look. It will be hot too since it is straight from the animals glands.
@Dezzy The demitification of heroes (through their failures) is the main one. Runs through the movie with multiple characters, the obvious one being Luke. Finn and Rose's first encounter is a comedic early take on it. Kylo and Rey's relationship with Luke is another obvious one, both are disappointed in Luke, just like how Luke has lost his faith in the Jedi dogma. Rey's parentage is another exteme example. Finally, downplaying the "uniqueness" of Force users during the movie (especially with that kid at the very end) serves this theme as well.
The dangers of overconfidence is another one, as seen with Snoke's death, Poe's mutiny and Finn's attempted sacrifice (which would have achieved nothing). Luke's whole speech about the Jedi's hubris ties into this as well. Rey toying with the dark side might be setting up a continuation of this in the next episode, but I don't think it's developed enough in this movie to consider it a firm example of this theme.
And yes, then there's the "out with the old" one, which is downright overstated. Not a bad thing though, you need to overstate it if you're including something like this in a franchise as memetic as Star Wars.
@Dezzy The demitification of heroes (through their failures) is the main one. Runs through the movie with multiple characters, the obvious one being Luke. Finn and Rose's first encounter is a comedic early take on it. Kylo and Rey's relationship with Luke is another obvious one, both are disappointed in Luke, just like how Luke has lost his faith in the Jedi dogma. Rey's parentage is another exteme example. Finally, downplaying the "uniqueness" of Force users during the movie (especially with that kid at the very end) serves this theme as well.
Yeah I guess that's an accurate account of what they were doing. I just think those are mostly bad messages (especially for this genre) and they were also done terribly.
First of all, it's a fantasy space opera. You can't actually do it without heroes. Which they obviously couldn't and don't even try to. All they end up doing is ruining both Han and Luke and then trying to replace them with significantly inferior versions of the exact same characters in Rey and Poe.
Rey basically plays the same role as Luke but also happens to be the least realistic character in movie history and is so obviously the product of someone at Disney stipulating that they needed a female lead rather than being a character that was actually created by the imagination of a writer.
Then Poe plays the same role as Han but is less important. His wins aren't as big and his losses aren't as big either. So that message about over-confidence has already been done a lot better with Han in the original trilogy. Poe's at least a vaguely realistic person though.
Finn doesn't even come into that either because he never comes across as remotely important to anything that's happening and seems to just randomly jump between a serious action role and their new Jar Jar Binks.
@Dezzy I think these messages are fantastic for the genre precisely because the genre is entirely anchored in 80s blockbusters goodfeel that, while is still as charming as ever on rewatch, wouldn't really suit something produced in these times. The Force Awakens managed to capture a similar charm without falling into the trappings of the genre, The Last Jedi is just moving on even further from that. Which hey, I understand if it upsets some people, but avid fans should absolutely have seen this coming.
I'm not what I'd consider an avid Star Wars fan in the slightest. I do dip into supplementary material from time to time but, since Star Wars is a "visual" property for me, I tend to gravitate toward the series and (rarely) the videogames. The Last Jedi doesn't really introduce any new concepts to de-mystify the Jedi, all the tools for that were heavily established with the prequels through characters like Qui-Gon, Mace and Dooku.
And then there's the mythos included in The Clone Wars, and this dude:
Maybe I'm just assuming what you mean with 'bad messages', but since I've seen lots of people talking about how Luke losing faith on the order is unrealistic (as if Luke had ever been anything but an impulsive doofus), I just wanted to point out that Star Wars has been moving not-that-slowly toward a more gray interpretation of the Force since the 90s.
About the rest of your points, I'm just going to say I obviously disagree and leave it at that because I don't think they're that interesting to discuss, to be honest. I will say however that the whole "Finn's part is useless" is 100% the fanbase obsessing with event-driven narratives and disregarding the value of character-driven ones. Which The Last Jedi absolutely is, and that's why actual movie critics seem to like it more. It's just a much more interesting film, textually speaking.
As far as I can see, they're all character-driven narratives. So not sure what the difference is supposed to be. Saying it's a character-driven narrative says nothing about whether he's meaningful to the larger story or not. Rey's part is character-driven too. But despite being a terrible character, she's essential to the story. Finn isn't at all. You could easily remove him from the entire thing.
What is the reason you think the "professional" movie critics liked it though? It's very bizarre how little they represented the audience on this movie.
@Dezzy Not really. Take the whole scenario in Empire in which Han and the gang hide inside and asteroid only to be eaten by a giant spaceworm without them even realizing it. That entire scene doesn't move the plot forward at all, doesn't really grant the audience character moments that can lead to development later on and doesn't introduce any elements that might be plot-relevant either. That doesn't mean it's a bad scene: it's a scene that focuses entirely on world-building (or universe-building, I guess). Contrast it with the scene in which Han is put in carbonite sleep: it's a moment in which the heroes are at their lowest that moves the plot forward while developing both Han and Leia's characters significantly with just a couple of sentences. That's character-driven, the reason for that scene to exist is not only spectacle, but to showcase where the characters stand when confronted with this situation and how it affects them (and not just the plot) personally.
Something similar can be said about the scene during Phantom Menace in which the main cast plays cat-and-mouse with the three (IIRC) alien giantfish. From what I recall, that scene takes place pretty early in the movie, so at least that situation is useful to explore the dynamics between these newly introduced characters (Obi-Wan might as well be a new character, really) while also aiding the world-building of the series. Slightly more character-driven than the asteroid scene, but at the end of the day it's still an action sequence with no real relevance to the plot. Every Star Wars movie has at least one of these.
It's very easy to read through the lines when people say "the casino scene is useless because it doesn't advance the plot". That's not the real problem, the problem is that you don't care about the characters. The useful conversation stems from that, not from the false pretense of "every scene in Star Wars must move the plot forward".
About the critics: they don't partake in online discussions, they don't have preconceptions of what Star Wars has to be and they are looking for different elements to analyze in film (usually formal stuff related to how something's told) than the audience (which is more invested in the internal logic of the universe and what is told).
Yeah that's a useful distinction for the types of subplot but it's a bit fuzzy because you can easily have subplots that develop characters AND move the main story forward. That one in Empire doesn't happen to because once they leave the asteroids they're straight back to the same situation they'd just left. Whereas they could've chosen to have it so that they successfully escape during that scene, so it would've changed the main story as well.
Not sure about your stuff on critics. I bet they do have online discussions. And I also think the audience cares HOW something is told. Not sure what counts as "formal" in that context though. You talking about like cinematography or something like that? Cos yeah I don't think the hardcore fans care about that much compared to characters, lore, plot.
Nicely designed visual spectacles can easily get overwritten for hardcore fans by the ridiculous revelation that dead force ghosts can still use the force or lightspeed can be used as a weapon.
@Dezzy They could have done that, absolutely. My point, however, is that they didn't.
I'm just pointing out that, if people really feel the casino scene doesn't move the plot forward, they might want to give the entire series a rewatch and count the amount of scenes per movie that do nothing but introduce something cool-looking to flesh out the universe or, if you're jaded, to sell figurines. If we get strict enough, half of the Prequel's runtime goes down the trash (podracing, anyone?), and a good chunk of runtime of the originals too (lots of stuff at Jabba's Palace and Endor). And it's not like I don't enjoy these scenes, part of the appeal of Star Wars is the scale of its universe, but let's not be hypocritical and pretend the previous films didn't have similar issues to a greater or lesser extent.
Besides that, you get what I mean with "online discussions". Your average film critic (and by that I mean the ones that get paid for their opinions) wasn't on Reddit speculating about Rey's family bonds after watching The Force Awakens. And yes, with formal elements I mean stuff like cinematography, editing, pacing, theming and, more tangibly, the writing, performances and visual effects.
Edit:
dead force ghosts can still use the force
Not less believable in any way, shape or form than the existence of ghosts in the first place. And if you look hard enough, I'm sure there's precedent in the EU.
lightspeed can be used as a weapon
If anything, this is the one thing that makes hardish sci-fi sense in Star Wars, and not space stations blowing up in a huge fire explosion in the middle of space. Or laser swords. Or Basic. If you can accept that ships can move faster than light through wormholes, I'm sure there's room enough in that suspension of disbelief to accommodate the concept of FLT travel being destructive at short range.
Yeah no I agree on the first point. I didn't make that argument about the casino scene myself.
My point was just that Finn seems generally pointless. They could've cut him out of the movie entirely and had more time left over for developing other characters. I think having too many characters has been a problem for these new ones.
And yes the prequels were bad for that reason too. It annoys me more with these new ones because I cared about Han and Luke more than I cared about how good an explanation they gave for Vader. And I think the prequels also made up for Anakin being generally awful by having the emperor rising to power story being quite well done.
dead force ghosts can still use the force
Not less believable in any way, shape or form than the existence of ghosts in the first place. And if you look hard enough, I'm sure there's precedent in the EU.
lightspeed can be used as a weapon
If anything, this is the one thing that makes hardish sci-fi sense in Star Wars, and not space stations blowing up in a huge fire explosion in the middle of space. Or laser swords. Or Basic. If you can accept that ships can move faster than light through wormholes, I'm sure there's room enough in that suspension of disbelief to accommodate the concept of FLT travel being destructive at short range.
Not the point. It's fantasy made-up nonsense. Of course they could have it so it was possible within the never-explicitly-explained metaphysics of the universe.
The point was that both of these things would've been used constantly in earlier movies if they were possible.
@Dezzy If they cut Finn even just from before he leaves the fleet onward, DJ (Del Toro's character) wouldn't have an introduction (I believe he'll reappear on the next episode), Rose's backstory would feel entirely out of context, Finn wouldn't have a face-off with Phasma and, more importantly, the characters wouldn't have their own plan to go wrong, which needs to exist for the sake of theming and to drive home the point that no hero is infallible. Not one. Don't get me wrong, that whole subplot is easily the worst part of the movie due to how disconnected it feels, but that's entirely a failure of execution, not of concept. It's not the aberration some people make it out to be.
The point was that both of these things would've been used constantly in earlier movies if they were possible
There's a very thin line between "this is a plot hole" and "this is something the creators didn't bother to explain because suspension of disbelief presumes the audience will make the very small effort to fill in the gaps".
And just to clarify, with "force ghost" you're referring to Yoda lighting up the tree and not the shenanigans Luke pulled against Kylo's miniarmy, right? Because he very clearly wasn't dead yet at that time, he was just doing some astral projection stuff from one point of the galaxy to another. The effort is what killed him, it's implied by a line of Kylo to Rey.
Force ghost: as far as the new canon goes, there are only four Force ghosts (Qui-Gon, Obi-Wan, Yoda and Anakin. Probably Luke too). The only movie in which they could have intervened in a significant way is RotJ, and maybe they didn't have a good enough grasp of their own ethereal "bodies" to do anything, since they were recently deceased.
FTL nuking: hyperspace is a shaky concept that's either its own separate dimension or just moving through space very fast. Han implies the latter, the visuals imply the former. Assuming that once in hyperspace (the blue tunnel) you can't re-route until you're out, you'd have to predict where another ship (which also has FTL travel) is/is going to be and plan a crash without room for error. Remember that, as fast as FTL travel is, it's not instantaneous, and that deflector shields are a thing. Maybe it's just not a viable strategy for stationary targets with their shields up (say, a certain star of death), and it can only be used against targets on the offensive within a certain radius.
Probably the nerdiest paragraph I've ever written, but it's as good an in-universe explanation as any other. I like the simpler explanation better though: hyperdrive systems don't grow on trees and you need as many as you can for all your rebellion friends to escape unscathed from the massive military that's chasing them.
Take the whole scenario in Empire in which Han and the gang hide inside and asteroid only to be eaten by a giant spaceworm without them even realizing it. That entire scene doesn't move the plot forward at all, doesn't really grant the audience character moments that can lead to development later on and doesn't introduce any elements that might be plot-relevant either.
Some would argue that the development of Han and Leia's relationship inside the space worm does provide character moments that can be developed later on, given that this is where Han and Leia first kiss.
You guys had me at blood and semen.
What better way to celebrate than firing something out of the pipe?
Forums
Topic: Everything Star Wars discussion thread| How you doing, you old pirate?
Posts 661 to 680 of 1,108
Please login or sign up to reply to this topic