Star Wars : Rogue One - now in theaters - pg 12 (spoilers)

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Frazzled**

Galef wrote:
WOW!. What I posted was supposed to be evidence of Yoda's wisdom and trust in the Force.

Yet for some reason you guys interpreted it as evidence of his cowardice and hubris. Not what I meant....at....all.

Well before these statements were made we have Yoda fighting and losing against Palpatine. 20 years later he's hiding and an old fart about to die but there to train someone one last time.
In the interim period he could have been a leader in the resistance, hunted for a decade etc. etc.
Your statement takes all that away and just turns him into a dbag that makes Attack of the Clones Anakin look like a well adjusted teenage saint.

Now I'm sure that was based on EU or something, but it doesn't stop it form making Yoda change from the coolest puppet Jim Hensen ever made (Kermit remains a close second) to Star Wars history's greatest dbag.

EDIT: This is not meant as an attack on you. It is however a righteous attack on whatever BS fluff and wherever it came from. I sense a dark presence almost like a billions souls suddenly cried out at once and then were gone...I sense...Darth Lucas...

**Mr Morden**

Indeed - I think that's the rub - he went from being a interesting and fun character in ESB /ROTJ to the arrogant, foolish and finally cowardly figure in the prequel films.

I think many had assumed that he had not immediately fled at the first sign of danger and only been driven to hide after a bitter fight against the rising Empire?

**Galef**

Actually, if memory recalls, I took that from the conversation between Yoda and Obi-wan at the end of the Revenge of the Sith novelization....which is cannon.

Obi-wan suggested he train Luke and Yoda train Leia, in the traditional Jedi way of Master & Padawan.
Yoda noted that method of doing things failed and the Jedi had been blinded by their own arrogance.
Yoda saw that everything the Jedi had done up to that point was futile and it was because they trusted "the old way of things" rather than listen to the "Living Force" as Qui-gon has always done and subsequently prevented him from being on the council. Yoda realized that Qui-gon was right.

So Yoda basically said both of them would "be on stand-by" *IF* the Force decided that was the way to do it. Luke and Leia need to seek out the training, not be forced to train as thousands of force sensitive children had been for generations.

-

**Frazzled**

Galef wrote:
Actually, if memory recalls, I took that from the conversation between Yoda and Obi-wan at the end of the Revenge of the Sith novelization....which is cannon.

Obi-wan suggested he train Luke and Yoda train Leia, in the traditional Jedi way of Master & Padawan.
Yoda noted that method of doing things failed and the Jedi had been blinded by their own arrogance.
Yoda saw that everything the Jedi had done up to that point was futile and it was because they trusted "the old way of things" rather than listen to the "Living Force" as Qui-gon has always done and subsequently prevented him from being on the council. Yoda realized that Qui-gon was right.

So Yoda basically said both of them would "be on stand-by" *IF* the Force decided that was the way to do it. Luke and Leia need to seek out the training, not be forced to train as thousands of force sensitive children had been for generations.

-

But if one doesn't read the novelization...
They are still trying to hide the kids from Dad who's gone cray cray and killed a bunch of said kids. Logical and a long time story point from long before movies.

Of course in the original series Benny K didn't know about Leia being related at all.

I can definitely see why Disney went "whatevs" to the whole EU etc. thing and is just using what it wants for the movies.

**Galef**

Oh me too. Throwing out the EU stuff was a good idea because now they can take liberties with the story. And so far they have given quite a few nodes to the EU, which suggests the story writers have done their homework, which I appreciate.

Has anyone seen that Saw Guerrara is in Rebels now?

**Mr Morden**

Galef wrote:
Actually, if memory recalls, I took that from the conversation between Yoda and Obi-wan at the end of the Revenge of the Sith novelization....which is cannon.

Obi-wan suggested he train Luke and Yoda train Leia, in the traditional Jedi way of Master & Padawan.
Yoda noted that method of doing things failed and the Jedi had been blinded by their own arrogance.
Yoda saw that everything the Jedi had done up to that point was futile and it was because they trusted "the old way of things" rather than listen to the "Living Force" as Qui-gon has always done and subsequently prevented him from being on the council. Yoda realized that Qui-gon was right.

So Yoda basically said both of them would "be on stand-by" *IF* the Force decided that was the way to do it. Luke and Leia need to seek out the training, not be forced to train as thousands of force sensitive children had been for generations.
-

Sorry never read the books of those films.

Hmm - So Yoda concluded that the system was wrong - not that he had failed? It had worked for a thousand years but under his leadership it failed - why is it the system and not the leader who has failed. Why does he not ask that question of himself?

I didn't get the impression that training for force sensitive's was mandatory - yeah the Jedi were arrogant and propped up the System (including slavery) but is that just a long slide into relative decadence or perhaps the mismanagement of Yoda - just how long had he been Grand Master and how much of the issue with the Jedi Order are therefore his fault?

If he did fail and perhaps contribute to the decline of the Jedi, again running and hiding is not a good thing - its cowardice.

Now religious leaders can be a bit flaky and tend to change their own tenants to suit them and their current world view.....is this how Yoda works? Certainly appears to be in the prequel films.

**Frazzled**

Now religious leaders can be a bit flaky and tend to change their own tenants to suit them and their current world view.....is this how Yoda works? Certainly appears to be in the prequel films.

Remember, the prequel films didn't have any of this.

**Manchu**

When we only had the OT, there was already the issue of both Obi-Wan and Yoda being fundamentally wrong about the Force. Hence their bogus advice to Luke. Unlike his mentors, especially Obi-Wan, and even his own father, Luke refuses to indulge in the metaphor-turned-fantasy that Anakin and Vader are separate people. This is why he redeems his father rather than simply eradicating someone who is "twisted and evil, more machine than man now."

With the PT, Lucas tried to flesh this out a bit more. There is this prophecy about someone who will bring balance to the Force. The concept gets lost in the hurricane of nonsense that is the prequels. But the point is, the Jedi have this sterile (literally) view of the Force as a kind of purifying light - the Sith meanwhile view it as a weapon. The reality, which was supposed to be conveyed by Qui-Gon Jinn, is that the Force is a living thing rather than some kind of concept.

Luke doesn't quite figure that out but, even without reading retroactively, he understands that a human person is more complicated than "light side" and "dark side." As Luke insists, "there is still good in him." Contrast this to the behavior of Obi-Wan and Yoda in the prequels, who have zero insight into Anakin's turmoil despite being his foster family. No wonder Anakin fantasized about Padme for years, he was desperate for a human relationship. And no wonder it all blew up in his face, as he had no idea how to handle such a relationship given that he was raised by robotic morons.

**Mr Morden**

Frazzled wrote:
Now religious leaders can be a bit flaky and tend to change their own tenants to suit them and their current world view.....is this how Yoda works? Certainly appears to be in the prequel films.

Remember, the prequel films didn't have any of this.

I meant if you are the one in charge setting the rules and interpreting the tenants of a given Faith, then when it goes wrong saying hey its actually all a bad system and people should have been doing it another way, why did you all do it like that! is a bit flaky/hyprocritical and dodging the bullet that it might have been you who screwed t all up. Then fleeing and hiding and leaving what's left of the Jedi leaderless just piles on the cowardice points.

Now the character in ESB seems to be a remnant of a older, better time (aren't they always -I bet cavemen sat around saying it was all so much better in the good old days), managing to survive terrible events and in the last months of his life passing on his wisdom to a new hope against the darkness.

The Prequel crap changes that to: Yeah I sat here alone for a few decades, ignoring the screams of the dead and those who wished themselves dead, ensuring I was safe and well to hopefully train someone to do what I should be doing now.

**Manchu**

In ESB, we did not really know why Yoda was on Dagobah. Maybe he always lived there. It was only with Episode One that we found out that Yoda was living on the capital of the universe in charge of some powerful bureaucracy. In fact, we did not know anything about the role of the Jedi in the larger galaxy or about the Jedi themselves, really.

When I was a kid, I imagined the Jedi to be more like Arthurian knights (remember, Obi-Wan reminisces about he and Anakin fighting in the Clone Wars and that is functionally it) rather than Buddhist warrior monks.

**reds8n**

With you with regards to the knights thing.

I'd seen them as that or a kind of intergalactic Justice League/Avengers/similar -- and certainly small enough in numbers that they could easily be viewed as a myth.

Or like a gang of "lone Ranger" types.

anyway ;

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/01/rogue-one/512072/

We expect certain storytelling forms to pay special attention to setting. Historical fiction spends a great deal of energy in recreating the past. Fan fiction does something similar for its source material. Science fiction and fantasy fans expect world-building. Rogue One, a combination of all of these forms, does this very well on multiple levels. It is, after all, science fiction, and the Star Wars universe has long had a strong fantasy vibe.

Being a work by other creators in a beloved franchise built by others, the movie is very much like fan fiction. And given the way the movie’s setting and plot slot into a specific timeline within the Star Wars universe, it’s pretty close to a work of historical fiction. Accordingly, we get meticulous recreations of shots, dialogue, plot points, sound tracks, characters, spacecraft and various other technologies, and two actors, one dead, the other aged nearly a half-century past her original performance.

The technological aspect tugged at my mind. The presentation of a galactic empire’s tech and infrastructure was staunchly retro, even reactionary.

To explain: David Edelstein notes that the movie “rehashes the plots of about a thousand World War II and/or Western films in which a brave squadron—a Magnificent Seven, a Dirty Dozen, a Force Five—prepares to sacrifice itself in the name of a greater cause.” That’s because the technology looks and acts like it’s from WWII. We see switches, cables, heavy doors, grenades, machine guns (“blasters”), a staff, and sniper rifles, but no radiation weapons or gamma ray bursters. Stormtroopers drive a truck, rather than enjoying, say, a zero-gravity trawler. Spaceships are there, but act entirely as fighter and bomber aircraft, or as naval warships. We never worry about the vast distances between stars, time dilation, the enabling technology, artificial gravity, or really anything at all about space travel.

Similarly, computers are basically typewriters and radio receivers. The movie’s main plot point, the Death Star plans, are essentially physical, not digital. They are stored as a physical object in a gigantic file system, then mostly passed from hand to hand. When they briefly act electronically, it’s as a radio transmission, often with specialized radio operators complete with giant headsets. There are very few mobile devices, and they don’t matter.

There is a robot companion, yes, K-2SO, but in the style of many robot depictions he is in practice a skilled human being. In appearance he resembles something from early Soviet technology, hulking and either non-anthropomorphic or actively hostile. He’s dieselpunk, not post-cyberpunk.

Speaking of cyberpunk, in Rogue One there is no sign of the communications world after the internet. There aren’t any networks. Nobody hacks anything or checks anything online. Coding doesn’t appear to be a thing. There seem to be few networked sensors, as when attack after attack surprises enemies who only detect them visually (i.e., no radar, no distributed sensor arrays). Documents are unique, it seems, and hardly copied. This is true even of military documents—ironic, given that one of the key motivators for creating ARPANET was preserving those very things. Weirdly, communication satellites don’t seem to exist, or at least matter.

The movie is even more retro than this WWII level when it comes to media. There are no cameras or microphones. Nobody records, films, photographs, or surveils anyone else. When a hologram recording (in all ways a film strip) plays, nobody makes a copy. The one person who watched it simply remembers the gist, without bothering to shoot someone a copy or even write it down. In fact, there aren’t any media, either entertainment or news. You might expect a galaxy-spanning empire fighting an insurgency to have a serious propaganda effort under way. Instead it’s a semiliterate, nearly text-free realm.
(For comparison’s sake, consider the continuous stream of media populating Children of Men, now enjoying a 10-year anniversary. Newspapers, radio, television offer an ongoing stream of information about that world.)

Rogue One’s fierce techno-retro nature expresses itself in what we see of its world’s society and politics. Previous Star Wars movies described rebooted medieval and early modern sociopolitical structured lodged in interstellar space. Hence an emperor rules an empire, and senators work alongside aristocrats and feudal power arrangements. Unlike, say, Frank Herbert’s Dune universe, where changes in technology made older structures functional again, Star Wars just ignored any technological impact to copy and paste pulpy history onto the future.

Rogue One continues this, unsurprisingly, with some updates towards the 19th and 20th centuries. There’s the empire, of course, with its Lucas-born mix of Nazis and Ming the Merciless. Under its sway we see criminals, religious fanatics, and leftover warrior knights (Jedis, the Star Wars version of our world’s Teutonic Order). Family relations are also from the early 20th century, a classic nuclear family (only one child) anchoring the protagonist. Her gender roles are partly retro, too, as her mother matters far less than her father, and she risks her life and mission to save a child from a firefight.

Advanced technology has not extended lifespans or eased health problems. There are no signs of genetic engineering, medicine beyond 1950 (other than whatever the heck was involved in the heroine’s mentor’s outfit), or starvation alleviated by improved nutrition or even replicators. Cities are medieval/modern colonial in overcrowding and poor conditions. It is as if technology has been abstracted away from social life, or is arrogated to a powerful elite who otherwise keeps the populace in relative degradation. Perhaps the galaxy is run by a group of historical reenactors who insist everyone join their hobby in a kind of vast dystopia.

o why does Rogue One do this? Obviously it wants to hew to the original movies, mostly the first one and Empire Strikes Back, so the movie matches its technology with theirs. We get a nice echo of that late ’70s/early ’80s grungy technology vibe, as seen in, for example, Blade Runner and Alien. We don’t get screen-based keyboards, smartphone, or time dilation problems because the source material lacks them.

Beyond that formal reason, why would this fiercely retro approach appeal to today’s audience? And appeal it does, with box office above $64 million as of today, per IMDB.

We could ask them same question about similarly retro steampunk, as others have done. The answers include a desire to flee what some see as daunting techno-complexity in our present day, responding to feelings akin to Toffler’s famed future shock. But steampunk is a distinctly different era, anchored on Victorian Britain, not the 1930s, not dieselpunk. People like steampunk for many other reasons, including the fashions, and, I think, a strong sense of appropriated cultural smugness.

No, Rogue One turns to the Second World War because it wants that struggle’s cultural cachet. Evoking WWII sets the movie up for epochal struggles, a strong good versus evil theme, a seamy resistance plot, and especially massive amounts of sacrifice and death—the very opposite of steampunk. I wonder how this appeals to an America a decade and a half into the global war on terror. Was the studio hoping to tap into residual anxieties about distant enemies and the burdens of empire? Were they counting on war-weariness somehow fading away?

I suspect the pre-internet technology milieu engages two audiences. For younger people who’ve grown up with some degree of digital immersion this must appear to be an exciting alternate dimension. Rogue One is in this way akin to vinyl records and postcards. For older people (generalizing here) it’s nostalgia. Not only does it remind us of seeing the first movie back during the Carter administration, but is also recalls traces of the world we thought we once inhabited. The tangible tech, bereft of PowerPoint and sleek touch screens, reminds us of, say, shop class, working on cars, wiring up circuits. For both audiences Rogue One slyly connects with the maker movement.

Meanwhile, both audiences can enjoy the movie, then write about it on their smartphones as they leave the theater, checking Twitter and Facebook for friends’ opinions, and consulting Rotten Tomatoes for more reviews. Let’s see how this determined techno-nostalgia plays out in 2017’s popular culture.

**Manchu**

Well-written piece but surely overthinking it a bit, after all R1 has to be true to a fictional setting imagined in the mid 70s by someone purposefully evoking the 40s. Kennedy, Edwards, and all the Disneyites couldn't do much about it one way or the other. The author would have done better to follow up on the fan-fiction angle proposed early on. R1 is essentially big-budget fanfiction, just like Force Awakens.

**LordofHats**

Definitely going to agree that guy was overthinking it.

**H.B.M.C.**

Galef wrote:
Has anyone seen that Saw Guerrara is in Rebels now?

Voiced by Forest Whitaker no less.

**Jehan-reznor**

Frazzled wrote:
Galef wrote:
Actually, if memory recalls, I took that from the conversation between Yoda and Obi-wan at the end of the Revenge of the Sith novelization....which is cannon.

Obi-wan suggested he train Luke and Yoda train Leia, in the traditional Jedi way of Master & Padawan.
Yoda noted that method of doing things failed and the Jedi had been blinded by their own arrogance.
Yoda saw that everything the Jedi had done up to that point was futile and it was because they trusted "the old way of things" rather than listen to the "Living Force" as Qui-gon has always done and subsequently prevented him from being on the council. Yoda realized that Qui-gon was right.

So Yoda basically said both of them would "be on stand-by" *IF* the Force decided that was the way to do it. Luke and Leia need to seek out the training, not be forced to train as thousands of force sensitive children had been for generations.

-

But if one doesn't read the novelization...
They are still trying to hide the kids from Dad who's gone cray cray and killed a bunch of said kids. Logical and a long time story point from long before movies.

Of course in the original series Benny K didn't know about Leia being related at all.

I can definitely see why Disney went "whatevs" to the whole EU etc. thing and is just using what it wants for the movies.

Well now that they fixed some plot-holes with the Rogue One movie, maybe in a few years the'll make a movie that plays after the destruction of the jedi, where Yoda joins the rebellion and seeing them doing as many atrocities as the empire (and maybe losing a new contingent of jedi) makes him retire to the planet. Anyway the movies between the main Star wars movies could explore so much avenues like the rise of the master Sith spy Jar Jar Binks

**Breotan**

Frazzled wrote:
Of course in the original series Benny K didn't know about Leia being related at all.

All the retcons and fan service is ruining the franchise. It's nearly a Zena, Warrior Princess level of self satire already.

**El Torro**

Apologies if this has been discussed already, I'm wondering in what order people plan to view a Star Wars marathon.

I haven't done this since Episode 7 came out, though I've always viewed the films in Episode order, from 1 to 6 (and now 7 at the end I guess). Now that we have Rogue One the obvious place to put it is in between 3 and 4, at least for me.

The hatchet order was generally considered best before the Disney films started, for people viewing the films for the first time. So 4, 5, 2, 3, 6. Where does Rogue One fit into this?

A Star Wars marathon is going to be a mammoth task in a few years time, also trying to figure out where films like the Han Solo film fit into the viewing order.

**d-usa**

I would probably start with Rogue One. It doesn't give away any of the plot twists of the originals, so they stay intact in the order if you have never viewed them. That includes the "he's the father" in Episode 5 and "she's his sister" in Episode 3.

You could watch it after Episode 3 and still fit in the chronology of "stuff leading up to 4 and 5", but I think aestheticly it fits better with Episode 4 rather than following 3. And after the "he's the father, how did it happen" flashbacks I think it's better to jump straight to the finale of Episode 6.

**Compel**

Basically, I'd just treat Rogue One as "Star Wars: Episode IV: A New Hope: Extended Edition."

**Crazy_Carnifex**

Yeah, I'd say "Hatchet+" (because the two newest movies are added onto either end) is the best way to marathon the movies now.

Optional: Take a break between 2 and 3 to binge-watch the Clone Wars.

**Compel**

On a sidenote, I've never heard of it as the "Hatchet Order" before, I've always known it as the "Machete order."

**Peregrine**

IMO: 4, 5, 6, R1/7 if you still care. No need to suffer through the prequels, R1 and TFA work best as an optional "if we aren't sick of Star Wars" yet movie.

**El Torro**

d-usa wrote:
I would probably start with Rogue One. It doesn't give away any of the plot twists of the originals, so they stay intact in the order if you have never viewed them. That includes the "he's the father" in Episode 5 and "she's his sister" in Episode 3.

You could watch it after Episode 3 and still fit in the chronology of "stuff leading up to 4 and 5", but I think aestheticly it fits better with Episode 4 rather than following 3. And after the "he's the father, how did it happen" flashbacks I think it's better to jump straight to the finale of Episode 6.

I kind of thought the same, though it seems a bit wrong to not have Episode IV first. Still, Rogue One is a great film and shouldn't put people off watching the rest of the series (unlike the prequels).

Crazy_Carnifex wrote:
Yeah, I'd say "Hatchet+" (because the two newest movies are added onto either end) is the best way to marathon the movies now.

Optional: Take a break between 2 and 3 to binge-watch the Clone Wars.

Is Clone Wars worth it? I tried watching a couple of episodes some years ago and found it very tedious. We also have Rebels to make things even longer now.

Compel wrote:
On a sidenote, I've never heard of it as the "Hatchet Order" before, I've always known it as the "Machete order."

I was convinced it was called the hatchet order, though after some Googling it seems I may have made that name up

**Matt.Kingsley**

Crazy_Carnifex wrote:
Yeah, I'd say "Hatchet+" (because the two newest movies are added onto either end) is the best way to marathon the movies now.

Optional: Take a break between 2 and 3 to binge-watch the Clone Wars.

But then you get the issue of what order should you watch The Clone Wars in: Episodical or Chronological?

**Kid_Kyoto**

So how about:

4, 5, 1, 2, 3, 6, 7?

I never got the logic of omiting 1 (other than it is dire).

Oh and if you haven't see this...

http://io9.gizmodo.com/let-us-rejoice-that-someone-dubbed-the-entire-chinese-b-1790936814?utm

Someone took a Chinese bootleg of Episode 3, translated the Chinese back into English and then overdubbed the original dialogue with the butchered translation.

"We must help the bad decisions of the Presbyterian Church!"

It is awesome!

**Skymate**

I thought of something on my second screening of the film.
What if the 'Rebel base' on Dantooine Leia mentions in E4 is the Jedi covenant from the KOTOR games. What if the Rebels tried to use it as a base but gave up as it was haunted by Reven's ghost?

This is all just my own speculation and theorising

**LordofHats**

El Torro wrote:
Is Clone Wars worth it? I tried watching a couple of episodes some years ago and found it very tedious. We also have Rebels to make things even longer now.

Personally I would skip Clone Wars. It was a chore to find enjoyment from the series. It's rife with just plain bad story telling and that special flavor of "George Lucas shoe horned this in here just because he wanted to" that made the prequels such a chore.

I would however recommend Rebels, and in that regard watching Clone Wars first will pay off as Rebels does call back to it a number of times. Not so much that if you haven't seen Clone Wars you'll be missing out a lot, but there are several plot threads from that series that Rebels has carried on, picked up, and a number of twists I think are going to come that will make Clone Wars more relevant as Rebels develops.

**Matthew**

Eh, I don't see the point of putting ep 2 and 3 between 5 and 6, much better to do 2, 3, Han Solo movie, Rogue One, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9.

**Shadow Captain Edithae**

Skymate wrote:
I thought of something on my second screening of the film.
What if the 'Rebel base' on Dantooine Leia mentions in E4 is the Jedi covenant from the KOTOR games. What if the Rebels tried to use it as a base but gave up as it was haunted by Reven's ghost?

This is all just my own speculation and theorising

Jedi Ghosts, sure, but not Revan. Thats probably one of the last places he'd haunt.

**Mad Doc Grotsnik**

Yoda's motivations are explained really well (and without too much waffle) in Season 1 of Rebels.

Spoiler: