Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Milkfred E. Moore
Aug 27, 2006

'It's easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism.'

Zoran posted:

Certainly TLJ is far more about Luke than it is about Rey, Finn, Poe, or Rose.

Why are all the new heroes' names monosyllabic?

Like a lot of the things in the ST, it's a meme-level understanding of the source material.

Also, people are seriously deluded if they don't see that the outrage towards TLJ is at least in part driven by the fact that Han is dead, Luke is dead, and Carrie Fisher is dead. The ST was the last chance to get them on screen together and it never happened.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Irony Be My Shield
Jul 29, 2012

Yeah I think a lot of it is that people are upset about the past dying. And I am glad of it.

e: admittedly it was pretty hosed up that Rian Johnson ordered the death of Carrie Fisher.

Irony Be My Shield fucked around with this message at 01:07 on Jun 7, 2018

Bleck
Jan 7, 2014

No matter how one loves, there are always different aims. Love can take a great many forms, whatever the era.

Schwarzwald posted:

The flashbacks we got were like reading a wikipedia plot summery of a second film.

is this really a criticism someone is using in the context of a film series that famously keeps viewers up to speed with a several paragraph plot summary before each film

SuperMechagodzilla
Jun 9, 2007

NEWT REBORN

Maxwell Lord posted:

How will the energy distribution be handled in the communist utopia?

In a communist society, the means of production and distribution would be owned by the proletariat.

If that wasn’t meant as some kind of trick question, you might be confused because you’re thinking in terms of technology instead of socioeconomics. In that case, energy would simply be distributed over such as power lines.

It’s easy to be distracted by the tech bullshit in Star Trek, but the proletariat does not own the means of production.

Maxwell Lord posted:

Like it seems to me you're trying to steer everyone towards being fans of the Good and Virtuous Anti-Capitalist science fiction films instead, but there is apparently no utopian or truly escapist fiction in this category- no visions of a better world, just visions of our modern lovely world to be fought against.

There’s a ton to unpack in this post, but the primary issue is that your sole concern is escapism. Ideological critique of Star Wars is apparently just as much of a threat to your escapism as the toxic subhumans, even though it is precisely through ideological critique that we can combat racism.

Racism is an ideology, after all.

The toxies are trying to escape to the same place as you, because you have created an environment for them.

SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 01:36 on Jun 7, 2018

ruddiger
Jun 3, 2004

Sounds like we need some kind of Toxic Avenger for these trying times.

euphronius
Feb 18, 2009

Milky Moor posted:

Like a lot of the things in the ST, it's a meme-level understanding of the source material.

Also, people are seriously deluded if they don't see that the outrage towards TLJ is at least in part driven by the fact that Han is dead, Luke is dead, and Carrie Fisher is dead. The ST was the last chance to get them on screen together and it never happened.

I honestly think you may be the only person who cares or even thought of that.

Maxwell Lord
Dec 12, 2008

I am drowning.
There is no sign of land.
You are coming down with me, hand in unlovable hand.

And I hope you die.

I hope we both die.


:smith:

Grimey Drawer

SuperMechagodzilla posted:

In a communist society, the means of production and distribution would be owned by the proletariat.

If that wasn’t meant as some kind of trick question, you might be confused because you’re thinking in terms of technology instead of socioeconomics. In that case, energy would simply be distributed over such as power lines.

It’s easy to be distracted by the tech bullshit in Star Trek, but the proletariat does not own the means of production.

Where is this ever made explicit? What episode/movie/whatever says that?

quote:

There’s a ton to unpack in this post, but the primary issue is that your sole concern is escapism.

I think you're confusing the concept of utopianism/portraying a better world with pure escapism. By nature showing one's idea of a better society carries with it assumptions of what needs to change in ours, and for some reason we're just not seeing that from modern communists.

Political critique is fine but if the only good and pure art is that which shows communist ideals, I find it interesting that those ideals can apparently only be expressed through dystopias. That people cannot apparently imagine a world in which they are actually practiced (or at least cannot come up with interesting narratives in such a world.)

Edit: Like now you're trying to blame this on us for creating an environment that welcomes toxic people, but is the only alternative a strict program of grim dystopian visions? Would get boring after a bit.

Milkfred E. Moore
Aug 27, 2006

'It's easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism.'

euphronius posted:

I honestly think you may be the only person who cares or even thought of that.

Nope. I actually liked Luke's story.

garycoleisgod
Sep 27, 2004
Boo

Colonel Whitey posted:

It’s not analogous. TFA came out thirty years later, following entirely new characters with the old characters as side characters. It’s a new story that is loosely tied to the old trilogy. The original characters are not who we are following anymore, that kind of thinking needs to be reframed. You’re assuming a lot about what these new movies are supposed to be doing.

And I’m not saying it’s ok his story sucks because I don’t think it did suck. I’m saying it’s mistaken to say it’s Luke’s story. Its Ben’s story.

I find this view interesting because while you say it's the new characters stories, the way TLJ is structured makes that seem like its not the case, particularly with Rey actually. Like if the movie climaxed with the Throne Room scene maybe, but the climax is Luke and Kylo having their showdown while Rey is off to the side moving rocks.

It would be like if the Empire Strikes Back ended with Luke jerking off in the corner and Yoda showed up to battle Vader, or Yoda showing up in RotJ to battle the emperor, the structure seems all wrong.

It's just interesting that there has been all this talk about having a female protagonist, both from people for it and from chuds who scream about the SJW's or whatever, yet Rey's function in TLJ seems to be solely to motivate both Luke and Kylo so they can make their decisions and complete their character arcs. A female character existing just to help men on their journey isn't something new or progressive, she just has more screen-time than the normal girlfriend character, but seems to serve a similar function.

Waffles Inc.
Jan 20, 2005

Irony Be My Shield posted:

Yeah I think a lot of it is that people are upset about the past dying. And I am glad of it.

e: admittedly it was pretty hosed up that Rian Johnson ordered the death of Carrie Fisher.

Yes yes kill the past! Star Wars now has the *checks notes* small band of rebels lead by an untrained person with a laser sword from a desert planet fighting against an evil empire

Timby
Dec 23, 2006

Your mother!

Jedi Knight Luigi posted:

There is a rumor that Kathleen Kennedy will be leaving Lucasfilm in September.

I would take that with a huge grain of salt.

precision
May 7, 2006

by VideoGames

Harime Nui posted:

Woah, I'm pretty shocked how down Senpai is on this film. Whatever, I actually really liked it.

I loved the movie's frenetic editing, its cutting from action to action to action. Sure, Rogue One with its interstitial conference scenes has a very well-paced three act structure, but this movie actually extends its first act into 40 minutes of pure action, and that's great. There is the campfire scene, but nah---everything from the opening shot of the movie to the end of the train caper is one extended action sequence and it works beautifully.

The second half of the movie is somewhat rockier. The most interesting thing going on in the end is the idea of both Paul Bettany and Woody Harrelson's characters as alternate versions of Han---routes he could go down---if he joined Red Dawn to be with Qi'ra he would end up like Paul Bettany; if he remained alone he'd end up like Harrelson (but this point is confused....... Harrelson had a crew. And implicitly he didn't turn bad enough to sell Han out until they died).

Also: the action is clean. I never had a problem understanding what was going on. The film does tend towards monochromatic palettes, but I thought the action editing was all very clear.

Agree with all this, especially the action being clean. The monochrome color palette bothered me in the first 30 minutes but I got used to it, though I still don't think it was necessary or particularly good.

The MSJ
May 17, 2010

precision
May 7, 2006

by VideoGames
star wars fans are the absolute worst

AndyElusive
Jan 7, 2007


Some of the replies to this on Twitter make me kind of sad.

cuntman.net
Mar 1, 2013

i dont think luke pulling a lightsaber on ben is some great betrayal of his character or anything. he resisted the dark side in episode 6 but that doesnt mean its gone forever and can never influence him again. the temptation to take the easy solution is always going to be there

on the subject of luke i do think its kinda weird that hes all "haha you didnt kill me :smug:" and then he dies anyway. it kinda ruins the moment a bit

davidspackage
May 16, 2007

Nap Ghost
I think it's fantastic how TLJ flew in the face of expectation and blasted out the other end. There's definite problems with it, I think much of the stuck-on-a-slowly-being-chased-spaceship part of the movie is boring and pads out the movie's runtime with nothing being accomplished, but it's a challenging movie in a massive franchise and that rocks.

Jewel Repetition
Dec 24, 2012

Ask me about Briar Rose and Chicken Chaser.
On the home stretch in terms of not watching Solo

stev
Jan 22, 2013

Please be excited.



precision posted:

star wars fans are the absolute worst

Yeah, the last year or so (or I suppose everything from the second Ridley was cast) has just cemented how toxic the whole thing is. Burn it down.

galagazombie
Oct 31, 2011

A silly little mouse!

Steve2911 posted:

Yeah, the last year or so (or I suppose everything from the second Ridley was cast) has just cemented how toxic the whole thing is. Burn it down.

It's really not Star Wars fans. It's just people in general and the fact the internet has made being a garbage person on a massive scale easier than ever before conceived. "Normal" people are just as disgusting about being Football fans as fans of "nerd" hobbies.

clown shoes
Jul 17, 2004

Nothing but clowns down here.
Fandom in general is toxic. It'd OK to like something but it should never be your identity.

SuperMechagodzilla
Jun 9, 2007

NEWT REBORN

Maxwell Lord posted:

Where is this ever made explicit? What episode/movie/whatever says that?

The rhetoric of the series is consistently “postcapitalist” throughout (e.g. Paul Mason’s Postcapitalism: A Guide To Our Future). Characters infer that they are ‘beyond’ either 20th century capitalism or communism, but it’s repeatedly emphasized that the society of Star Trek just gradually emerged from capitalism after the US and its allies won the Cold War. Capitalism never went away; it just got weird because of the ‘revolutionary’ 3D printer technology, in a way that’s directly analogous to ‘the digital revolution’ (and associated rhetoric about the information society, knowledge economy, etc.).

Instead of eliminating private property, they talk about how the US and its allies gradually eliminated ‘the need for [personal] possessions’, which is an entirely different thing. They list this ‘need for possessions’ alongside hunger, undoubtedly referring to the 3D printer’s ability to produce objects - a technological solution.

Again: in a communist society, the characters would simply say that they abolished capitalism 200 years ago. Instead, they talk nebulously about a philosophy of not pursuing wealth.

Maxwell Lord posted:

Like now you're trying to blame this on us for creating an environment that welcomes toxic people, but is the only alternative a strict program of grim dystopian visions? Would get boring after a bit.

You’re unconcerned that the ideological universe of Star Wars is racist, because addressing racism is automatically ‘grimdark’. Thinking about such as droid slavery makes you unhappy, so you’ll just ignore it until such a time as artists start creating apolitical films where nothing bad happens.

So you’re stuck in a conundrum. You’ve already decided that blithely promoting racism is the price you’re willing to pay for entertainment, but you also want zero consequences.

Vintersorg
Mar 3, 2004

President of
the Brendan Fraser
Fan Club



Steve2911 posted:

Yeah, the last year or so (or I suppose everything from the second Ridley was cast) has just cemented how toxic the whole thing is. Burn it down.

It's "nerds" essentially. It's everywhere online, unfortunately. Hell in World of Warcraft there was posts saying they don't want pride celebrated in the game and to keep the gays out. These morons are emboldened with todays climate.

AndyElusive
Jan 7, 2007

Gays? In my World of Warcraft?


It's more likely than you think!

frugalmaster
Jun 7, 2018

by R. Guyovich
The problem with the new Star Wars films and it's shared by the Marvel Universe films is that good storytelling in a movie needs a understandable and good moral character arc. They were talking about this in the Jurassic World thread. About how the film does not have a moral character arc that makes sense.

We have the same issue with the Marvel Universe which initially tried to present a moral character arc for several key characters like Captain America and Iron-Man and had good success then abandoned them later on because they needed to keep pumping out more films with said characters and actors. This leads to the chockfest which is Avengers 3 which has no discernible moral character arc for it's protagonists and makes the antagonist look like a Hero as a result.

The problem with the new Star Wars film is they don't go anywhere new. People may try to say they are and yes they are more inclusive and that's a good thing. But in term of story they are defaulting back the norm. The moral character arcs of the new characters are not satisfying and really don't make a whole ton of sense. The Moral character arc of Luke being told purely in flashbacks is not convincing especially when people feel it's a betrayal to his original character. Whether it is or not I'll leave to others to analyze.

I think we really needed a different storyline. There are moral notes I like in the film. The concept of the New Republic using the same weapons as the Empire did and still being a corrupt entity and that causing the eventual rise of a new Empire is not bad. But it's extremely pessimistic and there really isn't given a ample reason for anyone in the film series to show any kind of hope.

The story - to move past Star Wars and put it in a new direction should of been as follows.

The democratization of the force. Bring about some kind of film mechanism that basically following the certain point in the film allows anyone to use the force. Make the movies a message about how the force being controlled in the hands of a few individuals is inherently wrong and the prophecy of bringing balance to the force through Anakin was actually about allowing all beings to use the force.

I imagine you could say originally the force was used by all beings but the precursors to the Jedi created some kind of ancient relic that prevented this from happening and limited it to certain individuals who had higher attunement (lol midichlorian count). The relic gets destroyed somehow. I think imagined as a trilogy this could be really interesting. You could have a period of time even where the force completely dissapears and no one is able to use it and the characters think that the force was destroyed. Only to be revealed in the final film it was only temporary and the force was actually spread to all beings.

This would of opened up the universe massively, taken the franchise in a new direction, and allowed them to really ignore the past films going into the future. And honestly it would of been really cool.

Maxwell Lord
Dec 12, 2008

I am drowning.
There is no sign of land.
You are coming down with me, hand in unlovable hand.

And I hope you die.

I hope we both die.


:smith:

Grimey Drawer

SuperMechagodzilla posted:


You’re unconcerned that the ideological universe of Star Wars is racist, because addressing racism is automatically ‘grimdark’. Thinking about such as droid slavery makes you unhappy, so you’ll just ignore it until such a time as artists start creating apolitical films where nothing bad happens.


You can be awfully holier-than-thou, you know that?

CelticPredator
Oct 11, 2013
🍀👽🆚🪖🏋

Maxwell Lord posted:

You can be awfully holier-than-thou, you know that?

My sweet summer child precious bean

Doronin
Nov 22, 2002

Don't be scared

frugalmaster posted:

The problem with the new Star Wars films and it's shared by the Marvel Universe films is that good storytelling in a movie needs a understandable and good moral character arc. They were talking about this in the Jurassic World thread. About how the film does not have a moral character arc that makes sense.

We have the same issue with the Marvel Universe which initially tried to present a moral character arc for several key characters like Captain America and Iron-Man and had good success then abandoned them later on because they needed to keep pumping out more films with said characters and actors. This leads to the chockfest which is Avengers 3 which has no discernible moral character arc for it's protagonists and makes the antagonist look like a Hero as a result.

The problem with the new Star Wars film is they don't go anywhere new. People may try to say they are and yes they are more inclusive and that's a good thing. But in term of story they are defaulting back the norm. The moral character arcs of the new characters are not satisfying and really don't make a whole ton of sense. The Moral character arc of Luke being told purely in flashbacks is not convincing especially when people feel it's a betrayal to his original character. Whether it is or not I'll leave to others to analyze.

I think we really needed a different storyline. There are moral notes I like in the film. The concept of the New Republic using the same weapons as the Empire did and still being a corrupt entity and that causing the eventual rise of a new Empire is not bad. But it's extremely pessimistic and there really isn't given a ample reason for anyone in the film series to show any kind of hope.


I can't recall if it was this thread or the spoiler thread, but I mentioned something similar. I'm not over-hyped with the new SW films simply because I can't convince myself they matter within the established universe we've come to know.

So the New Republic is gone. Wiped out in one big maneuver. It's not clear if the First Order actually controls anything at all. So what good did it do them to go chase down a tiny rear end fleet with minimal fighting power? Meanwhile, the Resistance is just sort of... what? Who are they representing now besides themselves?

I wish TLJ had gone in a direction of the Resistance and FO wrestling over control of key systems and needing to court and/or defend allies. Or something larger in scale with a passage of time. Which would have kept the stakes bigger. So instead of trying to recreate the beats of Empire, I'd have rather seen another stab at the beats from AotC done better (Trade Fed Separatists vs. Republic), only without a known manipulator in the middle using the war to consolidate power.

The single most obnoxious plot element to me, personally, is that they wrote it so literally the entire Republic, starfleet included, were all in one place at one time to be easily written off. So instead of defending a hard-fought democracy against a huge threat, we're back to unorganized rebels against an Empire-like entity with no clear-cut stakes in terms of galactic power/control.

Maxwell Lord
Dec 12, 2008

I am drowning.
There is no sign of land.
You are coming down with me, hand in unlovable hand.

And I hope you die.

I hope we both die.


:smith:

Grimey Drawer
I think that works, though, in that the FO, particularly now that Kylo's taken the reigns, is fixated on eliminating whatever resistance is left rather than getting on with ruling the galaxy. It makes the whole setup a bit more post-apoc than the OT, it's the last remnants of great powers fighting it out among the ruins.

Dishwasher
Dec 5, 2006

Congratulations on not getting fit in 2011!

Jeb! Repetition posted:

On the home stretch in terms of not watching Solo

You can do it! We believe in you. :unsmith:

Doronin
Nov 22, 2002

Don't be scared

Maxwell Lord posted:

I think that works, though, in that the FO, particularly now that Kylo's taken the reigns, is fixated on eliminating whatever resistance is left rather than getting on with ruling the galaxy. It makes the whole setup a bit more post-apoc than the OT, it's the last remnants of great powers fighting it out among the ruins.

I haven't actually thought of it that way. In that sense, it could have a great payoff where we learn neither side was right and everyone just goes back to self-rule. So you'd have PT - Republic overthrown. OT - Empire overthrown. ST - No more hegemonic power.

I could totally get behind that. That would add some weight to none of the Resistance allies coming to aid them, too.

AndyElusive
Jan 7, 2007

Watched TLJ again last night and man, I just can't hate it like some of you do.

I just love the Second Lesson that Luke tries to convey to Rey about The Force.

How it was a Jedi who trained Darth Vader and it was the Jedi that failed to stop Darth Sidious from rising in power and forming the Galactic Empire.

You can tell he's just so disenfranchised with the Jedi at this point. He sees his failure with Ben and the destruction of his own Temple as just another loving Jedi failure.

As the last surviving Jedi he just wants to end the goddamn cycle. It's an amazing but dour place to see Luke in.

Dishwasher
Dec 5, 2006

Congratulations on not getting fit in 2011!

Doronin posted:

I haven't actually thought of it that way. In that sense, it could have a great payoff where we learn neither side was right and everyone just goes back to self-rule. So you'd have PT - Republic overthrown. OT - Empire overthrown. ST - No more hegemonic power.

I could totally get behind that. That would add some weight to none of the Resistance allies coming to aid them, too.

This point also makes me look at things differently. Maybe the idea of both fleets engaged in a slow and ineffectual chase through empty open space while everyone else is out there trying to find a way to make money or survive starvation regardless of who wins it is a more important point that we'd think. Perhaps even supposed to look as pointless as it seemed to the audience. The same can be said for the Orders. Snoke and Luke failed just like their Jedi and Sith-based predecessors and the movie ends with a boy aware of his powers but 'not' setting out to dedicate his life to ascetic dark or light monks; he's just about to do his own thing. poo poo, we may not even see him again.

Star Wars was formed as a 'used' universe and instead of making it new and, poo poo, maybe freeing some goddamn child slaves (because gently caress me its goddamn 'child slaves') or something, people are fighting over leftovers and ruins. Right down to Princess Leia calling herself "Princess" with a destroyed planet and a fight for freedom to manage. It seems to be a bit of nitpicking and a sign of weird priorities even in a hero character.

Edit: Dammit guys, stop making rethink my TLJ misgivings. What the hell is this? A reasonable conversation or something?! :love:

Dishwasher fucked around with this message at 17:16 on Jun 7, 2018

Halloween Jack
Sep 12, 2003
I WILL CUT OFF BOTH OF MY ARMS BEFORE I VOTE FOR ANYONE THAT IS MORE POPULAR THAN BERNIE!!!!!
Here's my class-conscious Zizekian Christian review of TLJ: The throne room fight was worth the price of admission.

God, I'd love it if somebody did a bloody mid-budget action film with all that Bava production design in every scene. Scott Adkins plays Diabolik.

Maxwell Lord
Dec 12, 2008

I am drowning.
There is no sign of land.
You are coming down with me, hand in unlovable hand.

And I hope you die.

I hope we both die.


:smith:

Grimey Drawer
I think the Canto Bight sequence is revealing in that sense. In ESB, we see Bespin, which is a planet trying to get by in spite of the Empire- keep their profile low and not attract attention, and of course it doesn't work and they get taken over. Canto Bight doesn't even care who's in charge, they can make money selling weapons either way.

Angry Salami
Jul 27, 2013

Don't trust the skull.

AndyElusive posted:

As the last surviving Jedi he just wants to end the goddamn cycle. It's an amazing but dour place to see Luke in.

That's the fundamental theme of TLJ; you can't break the cycle. In the end, Luke has to admit he won't be the last Jedi, he fails to destroy the Jedi's texts, and we close on a child slave, inherently strong in the Force, dreaming of freedom and worshiping again the legend of the Jedi Knights. We're right back at the Phantom Menace, and nothing has changed.

It's an easy film to hate because it seems to hate itself and to hate Star Wars. It's a series of vaguely connected stories linked by a common theme - pointlessness, despair, and the inevitability of tyranny. Just keep your head down, and maybe you'll get out alive, like DJ.

frugalmaster
Jun 7, 2018

by R. Guyovich

AndyElusive posted:

Watched TLJ again last night and man, I just can't hate it like some of you do.

I just love the Second Lesson that Luke tries to convey to Rey about The Force.

How it was a Jedi who trained Darth Vader and it was the Jedi that failed to stop Darth Sidious from rising in power and forming the Galactic Empire.

You can tell he's just so disenfranchised with the Jedi at this point. He sees his failure with Ben and the destruction of his own Temple as just another loving Jedi failure.

As the last surviving Jedi he just wants to end the goddamn cycle. It's an amazing but dour place to see Luke in.

Luke isn't a real Jedi though. He wasn't trained extensively in the Jedi ways. He didn't grow up from the point of a child in the Jedi system. He's a psuedo-jedi or post-jedi. But he doesn't have the level of training or understanding of the Jedi system that a Jedi who was trained by the order does. So why would he know or understand all these things?

Angry Salami posted:

That's the fundamental theme of TLJ; you can't break the cycle. In the end, Luke has to admit he won't be the last Jedi, he fails to destroy the Jedi's texts, and we close on a child slave, inherently strong in the Force, dreaming of freedom and worshiping again the legend of the Jedi Knights. We're right back at the Phantom Menace, and nothing has changed.

It's an easy film to hate because it seems to hate itself and to hate Star Wars. It's a series of vaguely connected stories linked by a common theme - pointlessness, despair, and the inevitability of tyranny. Just keep your head down, and maybe you'll get out alive, like DJ.

Now you're just convincing me that's it's a really lovely film. It's an inherently nihilistic point of view. Almost as bad as Jurassic World's "We Killed Thousand of Park Spectators but it's ok because the protagonists survived" one :downs: .

Star Wars should be more Seven Samurai, less Come and See.

frugalmaster fucked around with this message at 18:01 on Jun 7, 2018

Waffles Inc.
Jan 20, 2005

Angry Salami posted:

That's the fundamental theme of TLJ; you can't break the cycle. In the end, Luke has to admit he won't be the last Jedi, he fails to destroy the Jedi's texts, and we close on a child slave, inherently strong in the Force, dreaming of freedom and worshiping again the legend of the Jedi Knights. We're right back at the Phantom Menace, and nothing has changed.

It's an easy film to hate because it seems to hate itself and to hate Star Wars. It's a series of vaguely connected stories linked by a common theme - pointlessness, despair, and the inevitability of tyranny. Just keep your head down, and maybe you'll get out alive, like DJ.

It doesn't hate Star Wars at all--its entire plot and narrative arc is to reset the series back to the Good Person with Laser Sword and X-Wings (+Millenium Falcon) v. Bad Person with Laser Sword and Tie Fighters

It acts as a de-facto retcon of ROTJ and TFA

Schwarzwald
Jul 27, 2004

Don't Blink

AndyElusive posted:

Watched TLJ again last night and man, I just can't hate it like some of you do.

I just love the Second Lesson that Luke tries to convey to Rey about The Force.

How it was a Jedi who trained Darth Vader and it was the Jedi that failed to stop Darth Sidious from rising in power and forming the Galactic Empire.

You can tell he's just so disenfranchised with the Jedi at this point. He sees his failure with Ben and the destruction of his own Temple as just another loving Jedi failure.

As the last surviving Jedi he just wants to end the goddamn cycle. It's an amazing but dour place to see Luke in.

That part is pretty great. What sucks is Luke backtracks on all of that in his confrontation with Ben/Kylo at the end.

This is part of a larger problem with the film. It seems to have a pretty steady vector for most of it's run time, showing how the old ways failed, and how the New Republic was shortsighted, and how the Resistance has misguided principles, and how all of these had rendered them collectively ineffectual. But it does a total 180 by the end.

"The Rebellion is reborn today. The war is just beginning. And I will not be the last Jedi."

This is after the movie spent two and a half hours explaining why those things were bad.

Angry Salami posted:

It's an easy film to hate because it seems to hate itself and to hate Star Wars. It's a series of vaguely connected stories linked by a common theme - pointlessness, despair, and the inevitability of tyranny. Just keep your head down, and maybe you'll get out alive, like DJ.

DJ is, bar none, the best character in the film.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Winifred Madgers
Feb 12, 2002

Maxwell Lord posted:

I think that works, though, in that the FO, particularly now that Kylo's taken the reigns, is fixated on eliminating whatever resistance is left rather than getting on with ruling the galaxy. It makes the whole setup a bit more post-apoc than the OT, it's the last remnants of great powers fighting it out among the ruins.

The Clone Wars already were the apocalypse, that's why the difference in wealth, opulence, and form vs. function between the two trilogies. Everything since then has been a small-stakes war of attrition in a trashed galaxy.

Edit: its like the War of the Ring vs. The Silmarillion.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply