Author Topic: Star Wars: The Last Jedi (SPOILERS)  (Read 58136 times)

Offline Emperorjones

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 14320
    • View Profile
Re: Star Wars: The Last Jedi (SPOILERS)
« Reply #240 on: January 05, 2018, 11:19:23 am »
I just thought about it, but perhaps the Chinese reaction should be a good gauge about how good this new round of Star Wars actually is. Without nostalgia, without the omnipresent branding, without the deep pop culture penetration that we all have been subjected to for decades now, the Chinese likely have not had much of that exposure to the Star Wars phenomenon and look at it and judge it like another US big blockbuster and/or space opera and if they are shrugging their shoulders for TLJ but are supporting Thor and Guardians of the Galaxy that could show that stripped of all the branding and prepackaged interest for Star Wars that the sequel characters and/or stories aren't that engaging.


Offline Emperorjones

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 14320
    • View Profile
Re: Star Wars: The Last Jedi (SPOILERS)
« Reply #242 on: January 06, 2018, 07:24:02 am »
http://www.weeklystandard.com/deconstructing-star-wars-and-the-last-jedi/article/2011020

Interesting conservative critique. I actually agree with a lot of this.


Offline Emperorjones

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 14320
    • View Profile
Re: Star Wars: The Last Jedi (SPOILERS)
« Reply #244 on: January 06, 2018, 01:44:57 pm »
You Tube commentary: Why Finn doesn't work:

! No longer available




Offline MindofShadow

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 3741
    • View Profile
    • Black Panther Fan Blog
Re: Star Wars: The Last Jedi (SPOILERS)
« Reply #248 on: January 10, 2018, 07:19:58 am »
Quote
ďIn this particular story, itís much more like the original trilogy, where with Snoke if you think about the actual scenes, if suddenly I had paused one of the scenes to give a 30 second monologue about who he was, it would have kind of stopped the scene in its tracks, I realized. Even though it could have been interesting, something that fans were interested in, as storytellers, we have to kind of serve what the scenes need to be. It was a tough thing, even though I knew some fans were interested in it I also knew it wasnít something that dramatically had a place in this movie. Hopefully it can be addressed elsewhere or even J.J. may address it in the next movie. But itís not something thatís particularly interesting to Rey, so we kind of had to follow through.


This is such bullsh*t.

You had time for Luke to milk an alien.

You had time for Porgs

You had time the way overly long casino garbage

you had time for a gag joke the start the movie that was 30 seconds too long.


You didn't have time for Luke to tell Rey who Snoke was? Rey couldn't have asked a simple "who is Snoke" and Luke answer?

Offline Emperorjones

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 14320
    • View Profile
Re: Star Wars: The Last Jedi (SPOILERS)
« Reply #249 on: January 10, 2018, 07:39:26 am »
I agree with you. Disney (Lucasfilm/Kathleen Kennedy) has shown through their Star Wars films so far that it really doesnít have an overarching vision for Star Wars. TFA was too much a copy of ANH and TLJ did incorporate influences from other SW films but also they gave Johnson a bit too much leeway to deconstruct things. Further, I heard there were big changes done with Rogue One and there was the switching of directors for Solo, which tells me there isnít a steady hand guiding this franchise. They havenít found a successful formula yet, and in part perhaps because Star Wars isnít really special for them. Itís just another franchise to make money off of. That being said, I do think Kennedy is infusing her Star Wars with a more pronounced feminism and a white liberal idea of diversity, but for the most part I donít think itís meshing well in the saga films because at the core there isnít much there.

And now that Johnson is starting to back track a little on what he did in the film and saying stuff like it might be addressed in the next film just reinforces that Disney is making this stuff up as they go along.

I get that Johnson as an artist has to do what he feels is right, but he also should realize that Star Wars isnít his personal thing, itís part of larger behemoth, and he needed to leave the franchise in a better position than he found it. Box office notwithstanding, the noticeable backlash, the weak fan scores on Rotten Tomatoes, the flurry of media articles discussing the backlash instead of all the coverage being about how awesome another installment of Star Wars is, has tarnished the brand.

I donít think Snoke needed to have a speech that halted things to announce who he is. Luke couldíve easily said that he was Plagueis or the first (Prime) Jedi. Or Rey couldíve discovered that in that cave scene instead of just seeing multiple versions of herself. Canto Bight couldíve been excised from the film entirely, and whatever points that Johnson wanted to make there about both sides being bad or war profiteering couldíve been done in a different way.

Johnson made some bad calls in this film and while he hasnít admitted that he is sweating a bit. If Abrams actually gives Snoke an identity, makes Reyís parents more central to the Star Wars saga, and features a more heroic Luke, I wonder how all the TLJ defenders will feel then?

Offline Vic Vega

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 4151
    • View Profile
Re: Star Wars: The Last Jedi (SPOILERS)
« Reply #250 on: January 10, 2018, 09:32:36 am »
Emperor Palpatine is even named as such in the first two Star Wars films let alone given a backstory.

He's just called "The Emperor" thruout the original trilogy and only actually shows up in the same movie
he got killed off in: Return of the Jedi.

If you wanted to know what Palpatine's name and backstory as a Senator, you had to read the novelization of Star Wars.

We didn't find out Palp's deal 'til decades later (unless it was fleshed out in books that I don't care about).

But the fandom is now angrily demanding stuff it didn't get the first time around, because they got so used to the Expanded Universe and the Wikis and the whatnot  that they forgot that nearly all that stuff they love so much was added after the fact years later and was never in most of the movies.

That was the main problem of the prequels, they spent hours answering questions that a general audience never asked and didn't care about.

I could have lived my entire life happily not knowing who built C-3PO or how the O.G. Jedi pick their candidates.

As some point Disney is going to have to make the same decision that Paramount made with Trek: there was decades of canon that only Trek fans care about but nobody else does.

So they kicked all the old continuity and let the Trek fans either like it or lump it.

Do you make Star Wars fans happy or do you make a modern movie audience happy? Maybe you can't do both. People aren't mad at this movie for a failure in craft, they are mad because their particular area of fandom isn't validated in some way.

The grumblers who bitched about the last movie got what they said wanted: surprises and a swift kick to the junk of the status quo.

The heads talking about Grey Jedi and Jolee Bindo and how the Jedi suck and "why is it always Skywalkers?" also got what they wanted.

Watching them all go "We didn't mean it like THIS!" makes me laugh, frankly.


« Last Edit: January 10, 2018, 09:38:55 am by Vic Vega »

Offline MindofShadow

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 3741
    • View Profile
    • Black Panther Fan Blog
Re: Star Wars: The Last Jedi (SPOILERS)
« Reply #251 on: January 10, 2018, 10:20:50 am »
Emperor Palpatine is even named as such in the first two Star Wars films let alone given a backstory.


I personally don't think this is a fair argument.

the difference is that the original trilogy was setting the rules of the universe. It had nothign to "fit" into.

From what you can gather from the OT (if I remember correctly) is that Emperor was he was "the boss," Vader's master. And we discovered really strong in the force/force lightning. And also strong enough to keep the walking death Vader as his subordinate.

His backstory was irrelevant to that.

I don't think the same applies to Snoke. Through 6 movies, a multi seasonal cartoon series, and other stuff... they already established a universe with certain rules. And if you want to throw out the cartoons as well (which is fine, even if they are canon, no normie is gonan watch them i suppose) the rules get even more strict.

The movies establish dark side users as sith. That there is always only 2... master and apprentice. And in the case in the movies, thats the Emperor and Vader.

What the new trilogy has done is go, "nope, more darkside users." And if you go JUST by the movies... there is 100% nothing differentiating these guys from Sith. I don't even know if there have been anything besides interviews that say they aren't sith (I don't follow novels and comics that closely). Hell, even Kylo i believe to Rey says something like "no more sith, no more jedi" during his kill the past speech.

I think that warrants at least a quick explanation on how someone as powerful as Snoke appeared. And an explanation on how he isn't a sith when they talk, walk, and act like sith. You are talking about a guy that not only recreated the new empire clones but also turned a skywalker/solo to the dark side right under Luke's noe. And Luke knew it.

Snoke is much more influential to the plot points of the new trilogy than the Emperor was to the OT

JMO though.

Offline Emperorjones

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 14320
    • View Profile
Re: Star Wars: The Last Jedi (SPOILERS)
« Reply #252 on: January 10, 2018, 02:40:18 pm »
Emperor Palpatine is even named as such in the first two Star Wars films let alone given a backstory.

He's just called "The Emperor" thruout the original trilogy and only actually shows up in the same movie
he got killed off in: Return of the Jedi.

If you wanted to know what Palpatine's name and backstory as a Senator, you had to read the novelization of Star Wars.

We didn't find out Palp's deal 'til decades later (unless it was fleshed out in books that I don't care about).

But the fandom is now angrily demanding stuff it didn't get the first time around, because they got so used to the Expanded Universe and the Wikis and the whatnot  that they forgot that nearly all that stuff they love so much was added after the fact years later and was never in most of the movies.

That was the main problem of the prequels, they spent hours answering questions that a general audience never asked and didn't care about.

I could have lived my entire life happily not knowing who built C-3PO or how the O.G. Jedi pick their candidates.

As some point Disney is going to have to make the same decision that Paramount made with Trek: there was decades of canon that only Trek fans care about but nobody else does.

So they kicked all the old continuity and let the Trek fans either like it or lump it.

Do you make Star Wars fans happy or do you make a modern movie audience happy? Maybe you can't do both. People aren't mad at this movie for a failure in craft, they are mad because their particular area of fandom isn't validated in some way.

The grumblers who bitched about the last movie got what they said wanted: surprises and a swift kick to the junk of the status quo.

The heads talking about Grey Jedi and Jolee Bindo and how the Jedi suck and "why is it always Skywalkers?" also got what they wanted.

Watching them all go "We didn't mean it like THIS!" makes me laugh, frankly.

First off, youíre making an assumption that a lot of the fans who have issues with the lack of info on Snoke read the EU books or comics. The number of EU fans are a small segment of Star Wars moviegoers. Admittedly, I am one of those people, but I canít say thatís everyone. TFA did make him this mysterious person that raised questions, as well as about Reyís parents. Her search for who she was, was a big part of both TFA and TLJ so I can see why people would feel unsatisfied about not getting those answers, or Johnson flippantly saying those answers donít matter.

I disagree with you about the crux of the issue with the prequels. It is a fair point that the prequels likely didnít meet with expectations, especially for old fans who had imagined what the Clone Wars might have been like before we actually saw them, but I see the general issues with the prequels as one of quality, not one of story. People were very excited aboud the Phantom Menace and even though there was less excitement for the other prequel films, both still made tons of money (the main argument being used to silence TLJ critics).

I think you present a very good take on the question facing aging franchises, but I also feel itís a false choice. I think you can honor the past and honor continuity (and canon Star Wars films have a lot less continuity than live-action Star Trek does) without crapping on the fans. If you can respect what came before and retain the spirit of the franchise I donít get why that has to be an either/or situation. And Disney/Lucasfilm has decided we are going to crap on the old fans to some extent. So if you do that, if you attack the root, and not bring them along by supporting it, the tree is going to fall. Disney has not removed the trappings of Star Wars-the First Order/Empire, The Rebellion/Resistance, TIE Fighters, X-Wings, The Force, lightsabers, but is that what makes Star Wars solely? Or is it the characters? Removing those old characters (and often in a disrespectful way) and then barely doing anything interesting with the tropes is a hollowing out of Star Wars.

Star Trek has also run into some problems, but even Discovery, which is getting hit by some fan backlash (some of from the anti-ďSJWĒ crowd, some from continuity hawks, some from people who donít like the new focus on war, violence, and some who donít like that the show is on CBS All Access) it still pays more respect to what came before. Each incarnation of Trek lets the old heroes remain heroes. It doesnít mean they are perfect, they arenít, but Trek has found a way to honor the past while moving forward far better than Star Wars has.

And thereís this disdain for nostalgia while also reaping tons of money from said nostalgia. Itís not the casual fans who are buying all the ancillary material, who will watch a Star Wars film multiple times, who will keep interest in the franchise going in the lean months between films or shows, and that goes for Star Trek or basically another other big franchise as well.

As for Snoke and the Emperor, youíve already mentioned the points I have that I feel undermine that argument. Itís hard to compare the first three films in a 40 year franchise to the eighth film. By this time we have seen Palpatineís backstory fleshed out a good deal in the prequels and in novels, comics, so why wouldnít fans expect that there was more to Snoke than what we got? Why try to do a clone of Palpatine in a sense? How original, fresh, and bold is that? Why recycle that, like they recycled so much in TFA? It just shows a lack of vision and creativity to push the story forward. And the EU does offer some ideas about how to create different villains or even how to handle the Empire post-ROTJ that didnít need to be dismissed, since TFA likely borrowed from it anyway.

I didn't care about Grey Jedi, though that's where the film was seemingly going with Rey and Kylo, so why not? That builds on the mythology in a more coherent way than we got in TLJ. Instead of just having it be about one of Kylo's needy mood shifts or Rey's insecurities about her parentage. Those can be driving it but at least the Grey Jedi thing provides something concrete to either hide their true motivations behind or to stand on.

I did want Rey's parents to be 'someone', the 'nobodies' thing isn't horrible, but it's not like we haven't see heroes from humble origins before in Star Wars. I did want Snoke to be Plagueis but I also liked the idea of the Prime Jedi as well. That would short hand tell me that this guy is a major deal and easily explain why he was able to build the First Order and bring Ben Solo to the dark side. Even Johnson provided some rationale about why Luke went into exile, so the idea of providing backstory and motivation isn't completely anathema to the new Star Wars. I do think the problems with TLJ also had an origin in the poorly thought out TFA. That did rely on nostalgia and solid film making, but there wasn't much there. And it's odd that J.J. Abrams, who wasn't a Trek fan really, honored Trek with his 2009 film in how they handled Spock and made him a more integral part of that film in passing the torch than how TFA and now TLJ handled it's original heroes. There are people who disliked the Abrams films, for a variety of reasons. (I wasn't the biggest fan of Into Darkness because of the use of Khan and how he was cast, to be honest), but the treatment of Spock Prime is something I haven't heard people complain about much. (Though I did think he was shoehorned into Into Darkness. And that film did him a bit of a disservice, but I digress.)

Offline Emperorjones

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 14320
    • View Profile
Re: Star Wars: The Last Jedi (SPOILERS)
« Reply #253 on: January 10, 2018, 02:58:00 pm »
Emperor Palpatine is even named as such in the first two Star Wars films let alone given a backstory.


I personally don't think this is a fair argument.

the difference is that the original trilogy was setting the rules of the universe. It had nothign to "fit" into.

From what you can gather from the OT (if I remember correctly) is that Emperor was he was "the boss," Vader's master. And we discovered really strong in the force/force lightning. And also strong enough to keep the walking death Vader as his subordinate.

His backstory was irrelevant to that.

I don't think the same applies to Snoke. Through 6 movies, a multi seasonal cartoon series, and other stuff... they already established a universe with certain rules. And if you want to throw out the cartoons as well (which is fine, even if they are canon, no normie is gonan watch them i suppose) the rules get even more strict.

The movies establish dark side users as sith. That there is always only 2... master and apprentice. And in the case in the movies, thats the Emperor and Vader.

What the new trilogy has done is go, "nope, more darkside users." And if you go JUST by the movies... there is 100% nothing differentiating these guys from Sith. I don't even know if there have been anything besides interviews that say they aren't sith (I don't follow novels and comics that closely). Hell, even Kylo i believe to Rey says something like "no more sith, no more jedi" during his kill the past speech.

I think that warrants at least a quick explanation on how someone as powerful as Snoke appeared. And an explanation on how he isn't a sith when they talk, walk, and act like sith. You are talking about a guy that not only recreated the new empire clones but also turned a skywalker/solo to the dark side right under Luke's noe. And Luke knew it.

Snoke is much more influential to the plot points of the new trilogy than the Emperor was to the OT

JMO though.

I pretty much agree. I also feel that Vader was put forward more as the main antagonist (though there is that confusion a bit about where Tarkin fits in in ANH where he can give Vader orders) in the original films. Ren is the main villain, but by the end of TFA we see that he isn't the most powerful villain by the end. TFA establishes that Ren is an apprentice of Snoke so that does raise questions about who Snoke is, and how he fits into the story. And Lucasfilm also added to that by saying Snoke was around during the original trilogy time, that he saw the rise and fall of the Empire, which adds more questions. To easily tie it into the whole saga Snoke could've been Plagueis or an Inquisitor from Rebels, which could also get more viewers for Rebels. They took Saw Gerrera from Clone Wars and put him in Rogue One and then also had him on Rebels. Disney could've created more of a synergy between the live-action and cartoons.

Let me add, that some fan service in the films might create new long-term fans. It could raise intriguing characters and questions that can be further fleshed out in novels and comics and the new fans can get into them that way, same as old fans can learn more about them. Old fans were new fans at some point and they just took the steps to learn more about whatever it was that intrigued them about the property in the first place. Hollowing out Star Wars pisses off some (not all) old fans while making Star Wars more like any other Hollywood blockbuster and doesnít insure audience loyalty going forward.

That being said, a leviathan like Star Wars should not fall into the habit of just passing off stuff that should be addressed in itís films to its vast ancillary products. Itís in a rare position to do that, but if they get into that habit I think it will weaken the films, which are the main drivers. Already this saturation of Star Wars, with a film every year, is something I felt was going to dilute the brand, in time anyway.

Can you find a way to work within continuity, build on it without seeing it as an obstacle? Sometimes it feels like the dismissing of continuity is more because people donít want to do the research. And it makes me wonder if they even really know what makes a particular franchise special, what made it popular? Itís more than putting a new coat of paint on something.

Sometimes some big deconstruction or rebooting of a franchise is welcome, like Battlestar Galactica. But that was possible because the original was a Ďfailedí one-season show, not counting the spin off Galatica 1980, yet it had enough of a name out there to be able to tweak some nostalgia. And it did that, eventually more as the show went on. Star Wars was going pretty strong-despite the dip due to the prequels-so it didnít need surgery. Even Star Trek, before 2009, was in trouble after Star Trek Nemesis and Enterprise. Unfortunately, Into Darkness eroded the interest generated by the 2009 film. TLJ could be the Into Darkness of the Trek universe, though that remains to be seen.

With TLJ there is grumbling about Luke among other things. But there were also story and character problems with TLJ. Itís a great looking film, but it did have story and character issues. The sequel characters, IMO, arenít that interesting, nor is the conflict thatís been presented, and I think that is also a problem. My own concerns would be lessened (though not erased) if they at least gave me characters I care about and a conflict better explained.

I mean, what is Reyís journey? What is Finnís purpose? Who is Poe? And itís not like you need two hours each to explain those questions. The original trilogy did it very well, giving you the essence of who Han, Luke, and Leia were without each needing a solo film (pun intended). Why did Ben turn to the dark side? Why did Luke feel he was beyond redemption? Just what hold does/did Snoke have on him? I have to wonder if the Lucasfilm people really even asked themselves any of these questions.
« Last Edit: January 10, 2018, 03:19:32 pm by Emperorjones »