|
Angry Salami posted:If he hadn't gone to Bespin, he'd never have learned Vader was his father, and would have carried on ignorantly following Obi-Wan and Yoda's plans. But going to bespin would’ve done nothing if Vader didn’t directly tell him. And even after saying it, Luke didn’t believe for quite some time.
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 06:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 07:33 |
|
Billzasilver posted:But going to bespin would’ve done nothing if Vader didn’t directly tell him. And even after saying it, Luke didn’t believe for quite some time. What.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 06:51
|
|
|
Angry Salami posted:If he hadn't gone to Bespin, he'd never have learned Vader was his father, and would have carried on ignorantly following Obi-Wan and Yoda's plans. luke's training was already moving towards empathizing with vader with or without knowledge of who his father was, and yoda even says that the plan was to reveal the info slowly. you also assume yoda wants luke to kill vader. i'm pretty sure he uses the word confront.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 08:46
|
|
|
Elfgames posted:luke's training was already moving towards empathizing with vader with or without knowledge of who his father was, and yoda even says that the plan was to reveal the info slowly. you also assume yoda wants luke to kill vader. i'm pretty sure he uses the word confront. Maybe. But right up until the end, Yoda was still insisting that falling to the Dark Side was irrevocable. "Forever will it dominate your destiny". And Obi-Wan was still insisting that Anakin Skywalker was gone forever. I don't think either of them ever really managed to look past Jedi dogma - and that's why it seems damned peculiar in TLJ to have Yoda in the role he's in, let alone having Rey end up with the Jedi texts in the end, when everything in that story is about overcoming the past.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 09:29
|
|
|
Angry Salami posted:Maybe. But right up until the end, Yoda was still insisting that falling to the Dark Side was irrevocable. "Forever will it dominate your destiny". And Obi-Wan was still insisting that Anakin Skywalker was gone forever. I don't think either of them ever really managed to look past Jedi dogma - and that's why it seems damned peculiar in TLJ to have Yoda in the role he's in, let alone having Rey end up with the Jedi texts in the end, when everything in that story is about overcoming the past. I mean going to bespin very easily could have led luke to the darkside
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 09:54
|
|
|
Teek posted:For all the talk about Disney not taking political tones with the series, I don't see people really addressing that they brought in Saw Gerrera and the Partisans as extreme measures freedom fighters. It's a dark and more realistic shadow to tie in to the previously morally pristine Rebellion. The Rebellion through Luke, Lando and Wedge killed hundreds of thousands of people, but none of those actions were ever painted as morally grey or evil. Disney actually took a risk and muddied the waters, which I think makes for a more complex and interesting take on the "good guys". What the hell is wrong with people. The Empire kills like three billion people in the first movie. The Rebellion is morally right. The impulse to insist that both sides must be equivalent says far more about you than it does about some movie.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 10:15
|
|
|
Elfgames posted:I mean going to bespin very easily could have led luke to the darkside You lack faith in Luke the person, and fear him. A Jedi trait. Luke would rather die than join the dark side.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 11:33
|
|
|
sassassin posted:You lack faith in Luke the person, and fear him. A Jedi trait. and?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 11:53
|
|
|
Going to bespin couldn't have led Luke to the darkside. You posted something false.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 11:57
|
|
|
Bongo Bill posted:It seems that learning to let go is what got them immortality in the first place. "Strike me down and I will become more powerful than you can ever imagine." Obi-Wan had no intention of letting go. His death is a weapon.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 12:18
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:What the hell is wrong with people. The Empire kills like three billion people in the first movie. The Rebellion is morally right. The impulse to insist that both sides must be equivalent says far more about you than it does about some movie. this isn't what they're trying to say but the point is dumb regardless the idea is that saw and his people are somehow extremists who are willing to do things the rebellion won't. but when do we see that? what do they even do in the movie? attack a supply caravan, killing a bunch of imperials? do some not-even-torture where they make a guy act like he's high to get some secrets out of him? only the latter is the least bit "bad" and even then it is played down to almost nothing. and after all that the movie takes great pains to separate saw from the rebellion, even though he is just another rebel but in dirtier clothing. the movie fails to make saw seem as dangerous or interesting as the people in the movie act like he is
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 13:27
|
|
|
Serf posted:this isn't what they're trying to say but the point is dumb regardless Saw's raid on the imperial supply convoy happens in a marketplace; an area populated by civilians. That's something we've never seen "our" rebels engage in. Even the Death Stars, space stations that logically would have civilian personnel (and canonically did back in Legends) on board, were still military targets. If you watch Rebels (the tv show), this distinction is made much more explicit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 13:39
|
|
|
jivjov posted:Saw's raid on the imperial supply convoy happens in a marketplace; an area populated by civilians. That's something we've never seen "our" rebels engage in. Even the Death Stars, space stations that logically would have civilian personnel (and canonically did back in Legends) on board, were still military targets. do we actually see the attack result in civilian casualties? i don't recall any rebels shooting through bystanders to kill stormtroopers or tossing grenades into crowds.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 13:42
|
|
|
Serf posted:do we actually see the attack result in civilian casualties? i don't recall any rebels shooting through bystanders to kill stormtroopers or tossing grenades into crowds. Jyn has to jump out and pull a little girl to safety. Presumably we're not going to see explicit civilian death on screen (for the same reason as Avengers not having it); but the reaction shots and implication is enough to communicate the concept.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 13:44
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:What the hell is wrong with people. The Empire kills like three billion people in the first movie. The Rebellion is morally right. The impulse to insist that both sides must be equivalent says far more about you than it does about some movie. The empire brought peace to the Galaxy. The rebels are terrorist trying to install thier own government.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 13:48
|
|
|
jivjov posted:Jyn has to jump out and pull a little girl to safety. maybe it was communicated better in an earlier version of the script or before the reshoots or something, because all that scene feels like to me is just another rebel operation. nothing new or interesting aside from a cool alien design
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 13:52
|
|
|
In what other rebel operation had we seen a civilian population at immediate risk of death? Serious question; because I can't think of one. You could maybe count the Ewoks? But the Empire chose that battlefield...the rebellion didn't have a whole lot of choice there.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 14:05
|
|
|
Elfgames posted:"rescuing" his friends was the wrong move though (luke rescued nobody and nearly got himself killed) yeah he learns from his mistake and that's good but he didn't need to make that mistake in the first place. If Luke hadn’t gone, R2 would not have been in the Falcon to fix the hyperdrive Luke and R2 absolutely, certainly saved them. The only reason they were in real danger is because they didn’t know their hyperdrive was not being fixed
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 14:06
|
|
Jivjov is right. The implication of that scene is that civilians were in the line of fire and maybe even killed. It's the same fight where Cassian kills some of Saw's men because they were about to kill Jyn. It's just a total clusterfuck.Serf posted:this isn't what they're trying to say but the point is dumb regardless Also, missing the point. The whole point of Saw in that film is that his do-or-die disregard for morality has turned him into a Darth Vader-analogue (but worse). And what's more, his resistance amounted to exactly nothing and the Empire still built their superweapon which they promptly use on his city. Everything dies and Saw suicides himself, seeing that his life's work was for nothing.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 14:33
|
|
|
jivjov posted:In what other rebel operation had we seen a civilian population at immediate risk of death? Serious question; because I can't think of one. You could maybe count the Ewoks? But the Empire chose that battlefield...the rebellion didn't have a whole lot of choice there. it would be pretty interesting to see civilians at risk in a star wars movie. Milky Moor posted:The whole point of Saw in that film is that his do-or-die disregard for morality has turned him into a Darth Vader-analogue (but worse). And what's more, his resistance amounted to exactly nothing and the Empire still built their superweapon which they promptly use on his city. Everything dies and Saw suicides himself, seeing that his life's work was for nothing. when exactly do we see him do-or-dying though? how is he a darth vader analogue aside from aesthetics? all he does in the movie is walk around, deliver a plot point, and die. it really feels like there was more planned for him but it was cut or changed and it was a huge waste of an actor as good as forest whitaker. really the only actually morally questionable thing in the movie is done by an outright agent of the rebellion: cassian kills his contact in cold blood to keep him from squealing on them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 14:46
|
|
|
Serf posted:it would be pretty interesting to see civilians at risk in a star wars movie. Specifically civilians at risk due to a rebel operation. Obviously civvies die a lot in Star Wars.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 14:48
|
|
|
jivjov posted:Specifically civilians at risk due to a rebel operation. Obviously civvies die a lot in Star Wars. off the top of my head, the attack on maz's bar in tfa carries with it a risk of random patrons getting killed by x-wing fire, and the raid on the imperial convoy in rogue 1. but neither result in any deaths. we never see anything morally questionable occur from it which isn't bad, depending on your point of view. if you interpret the imperials as still representing the american empire (not something i think disney wants you do do lol), then the idea that the people who fight them are ultimately always good and do no wrong certainly becomes more interesting
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 14:57
|
|
|
Serf posted:off the top of my head, the attack on maz's bar in tfa carries with it a risk of random patrons getting killed by x-wing fire, and the raid on the imperial convoy in rogue 1. but neither result in any deaths. we never see anything morally questionable occur from it Rebels, not the Resistance. Two different organizations.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 15:01
|
|
|
jivjov posted:Rebels, not the Resistance. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 15:04
|
|
|
What? I thought we were specifically discussing the Rebel Alliance?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 15:05
|
|
|
jivjov posted:What? I thought we were specifically discussing the Rebel Alliance? much like how starkiller base is the death star, the resistance are just the rebels because disney lacks originality hell, the death star even shows up in tlj but the subversion here is that its small and it doesn't get blown up
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 15:13
|
|
|
Serf posted:much like how starkiller base is the death star, the resistance are just the rebels because disney lacks originality No, Starkiller Base is a superweapon, but not all superweapons are Death Stars. I feel like I've had this exact conversation before.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 15:22
|
|
|
quote:off the top of my head, the attack on maz's bar in tfa carries with it a risk of random patrons getting killed by x-wing fire, and the raid on the imperial convoy in rogue 1. The First Order attacked Maz's bar; the X-wings were defending it. jivjov posted:No, Starkiller Base is a superweapon, but not all superweapons are Death Stars. I feel like I've had this exact conversation before. It's like poetry.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 15:32
|
|
|
i do like that the progression is death star that blows up planets and gets blown up because of a tiny weak point -> bigger death star that never gets to blow up planets and gets blown up because of a tiny weak point -> an even bigger death star that blows up multiple planets and gets blown up because of a tiny weak point -> a tiny death star that can't even blow up one planet but doesn't get blown up because of its tiny weak point
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 15:38
|
|
|
Billzasilver posted:Haha yeah I’ve watched episode 4 like 23 times in my life but I just don’t “get it” If 4 and 7 are the exact same to you, then yes, you don't get it. 7 is a simulacra of 4, an echo, a ravaging wolf, howling in response to the call of a loyal hound.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 15:53
|
|
|
porfiria posted:I saw them too many times as a kid to be able to tell, now. I think Harrison is good although he has nothing to do in Jedi. Hammill and Fisher are kind of not great, but I honestly think Hamill really gets the character and is sort of doing what he's supposed to do even if the execution is not always there. James Earl Jones transcends the medium even though he's not doing a ton (I saw an interview where he says he was originally giving the lines a bit more something and Lucas was like, "Uh, no flatter you're an rear end in a top hat robot). Blue Star posted:One of the issues i have with the Disney Star Wars films is that they'll raise interesting possibilities but don't follow through with them. quote:And in Last Jedi, certain characters mention how both the First Order and the Resistance get their weapons and equipment from the same contractors, and how galactic war profiteers are getting filthy rich. But...nothing is really done with this concept.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 15:59
|
|
|
jivjov posted:No, Starkiller Base is a superweapon, but not all superweapons are Death Stars. I feel like I've had this exact conversation before. For gods sake, stop being so literal.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 16:03
|
|
|
Serf posted:when exactly do we see him do-or-dying though? how is he a darth vader analogue aside from aesthetics? all he does in the movie is walk around, deliver a plot point, and die. it really feels like there was more planned for him but it was cut or changed and it was a huge waste of an actor as good as forest whitaker. I'm not going to go to bat too enthusiastically for Rogue One because the characters are flat and if the third act didn't deliver an incredible star war it would probably be outright reviled, but he does get a little more characterization than that, along with a morally gray thing: He's so deranged by paranoia he lets a mindrape octopous scramble a well-meaning defector's brain.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 16:05
|
|
|
Pac-Manioc Root posted:I'm not going to go to bat too enthusiastically for Rogue One because the characters are flat and if the third act didn't deliver an incredible star war it would probably be outright reviled, but he does get a little more characterization than that, along with a morally gray thing: He's so deranged by paranoia he lets a mindrape octopous scramble a well-meaning defector's brain. the consequences of which are so minimal they may as well not exist. he babbles for a few minutes of screentime, still manages to be effective at telling cassian what's up, and then seemingly recovers with no hard feelings. he still enthusiastically volunteers to go on the suicide mission and never complains about what saw did to him. i say this as someone who like rogue one
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 16:10
|
|
|
Cheesus posted:I believe there's a story that Hamill tells about Luke's reaction to finding his dead aunt and uncle's bodies. He wanted to portray it as pained, like most of us would and Lucas told him not to, his reasoning being that the muted reaction that ended up on film allowed the audience to insert their own emotions into the scene. Based on that story, it explains a lot to me about all of the actors' performances in all six of his movies. The major one I can think being over the top is Ian McDiarmid in ROTS and that seems like it would be intentional; Lucas didn't want the audience to emotionally identify/relate to a Sith lord. That's interesting but also doesn't line up with him going back to update the films with more emotional reactions, such as the infamous Vader "NOOOO!" during the throne room scene. I guess he changed his mind later?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 16:10
|
|
|
jivjov posted:No, Starkiller Base is a superweapon, but not all superweapons are Death Stars. I feel like I've had this exact conversation before. Starkiller base is Death Star 3 without the name. Bigger, badder, and destroys even more planets. It even has a hyperdrive.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 16:20
|
|
|
Folks this is JivJov's "thing" just leave it and move on lest we spend 2 pages with "It's a death star" "No. It's Starkiller Base" "It's a death star"
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 16:24
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:What the hell is wrong with people. The Empire kills like three billion people in the first movie. The Rebellion is morally right. The impulse to insist that both sides must be equivalent says far more about you than it does about some movie. What are you talking about? Way to completely misrepresent what I said. I said the films always represented the Rebellion as the good guys, which they are. Rogue One introduced a new element which did *not* paint them as the purely good team any longer. Whether Disney and Gareth Edwards communicated that well enough or not is your personal opinion, my original point was that Disney used the concept. A rebuttal to the notion they were being apolitical with the series. It's not ground breaking material, but it's also not the strictly Rebels="Good guys" and Empire="Bad guys" the original series went with. Teek fucked around with this message at 16:36 on Jan 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 16:28
|
|
|
The moral deficiencies of a person or group are not negated by their just opposition to an evil enemy. Especially not in a series so concerned with the status of characters' souls in preference to utilitarian ethics. The status of Saw's soul is communicated symbolically. He is paranoid, he employs monsters, he puts civilians in harm's way, and he's a very overt visual allusion to Darth Vader. He's contrasted with the more affluent members of the Rebel Alliance, who are criticized for lacking the stomach for risk, but who notably share a certain willingness to resort to ruthless tactics.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 16:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 07:33 |
|
|
Waffles Inc. posted:Folks this is JivJov's "thing" just leave it and move on lest we spend 2 pages with oh ok i dont hop in here to often its a death star
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 16:56
|
|