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.

His reasoning is flawed. While I see the merits of his decision, I think he has cut too much fat from the steak. He also really, really sucks at finding solutions for simple problems. Why the hell would Snoke need to monologue to Rey? There are a dozen ways to add crucial background without clunky exposition...and it's not like one of the characters was asking another character for some instruction or anything....

I just saw the movie. I am very divided about it. On pure technical point of view. It's a beautiful movie, with awesome sets and environments, exceptional special effect and beautifully framed. On that I think The Last Jedi stands head and shoulder above Marvel and DC movies in term of grandeur.

I loved the scenes involving Luke, Rey, Ren and Snoke. I wished there would have been more of it. There was space and time to do more world building, focus more on what it feels to be a Jedi. These four actors were doing a great job, the ambiance was awesome. My gib takeaway from this movie are probably the confrontation with Snoke in his throne room. Well paced, clever twist and great fight (probably one of the best in Star Wars). Luke sacrifice at the end was great to. It was inspiring and I especially loved his snarky last words. Finally, the very last scene in the movie with the kids re-telling the story cemented the whole thing.

The big problem with that movie though, is that there was about an hour and a half of completly pointless stuff surrounding a character that should maybe have been kept a asleep for the entire episode. I liked Finn in the VII, he was funny and had a certain drive. I could see his character arc of transforming from a cowardly deserter to a fearless resistance leader happen. It sort of happenned in this movie, but it felt flat due to the general aimless nature of his action. His confrontation with Phasma should have been his reckonning. She is to him what Ren is to Rey afterall. The only problem is that there was no build up for their confrontation, which lasted 30 seconds ended in a sucker punch and a Disney death and phasma herself, firmly established herself as the New Bobba Fett: cool, but ultimatly just a footnote. (I did laugh though when her armor actually provided some protection against blaster shots. It was about time for armor to do something in Star Wars).

I guess I will need some time and maybe another viewing to trully make my mind on it.

 Gordon Shumway wrote:
Here's an interview with Johnson where he explains why he didn't give any backstory to Snoke. http://ew.com/movies/2017/12/17/star-wars-last-jedi-spoilers-snoke-killed-theories/2

Ah. So out less than a week and the director has to explain what the film meant.
Good job.
And I'm starting to see that a lot of the rationalizing in this thread is coming from the director's mouth, not from what people saw in the film...

I'm also amused at the related article on why Yoda HAD to come back and pause the movie to give his exposition. It's a nice conjunction with why it would be wrong to have exposition from Snoke.

Bobtheinquisitor wrote:Also, subvert the dominant SW paradigm.

Oh, I definitely disagree with that. In the other related article to the above (Luke's Destiny: http://ew.com/movies/2017/12/16/the-last-jedi-spoilers-rian-johnson-mark-hamill-luke-skywalker-revelations/2/
Johnson is very clear that the SW paradigm is still there:

“There are so many little details,” added producer Ram Bergman. “The first time you watch the movie, it’s a little bit overwhelming. But the second time you’re more relaxed, and you can start picking up so many details Rian planted throughout.”

“These movies are engineered to be watched over and over again,” Johnson said.

Seems to me he has the paradigm down to science. He just skimped on the art.

And 'failure is the best teacher' is very ingrained in the OT. Luke's training is a very model of learning by failure. Han screws up all the time (failure to fast talk, failure to repair, or failure to pick locks, to pick one important instance from each film)
Your #2 is pretty much the message of the prequels- TPM- dueling pointless to the overall battle, AotC- screw the coliseum spectacle, bring on the army, RotS- treachery and planning triumph over everything, especially individual heroes.
This isn't the last 20 years were wrong or subversion. These are the same elements jammed together inexpertly and presented in a clumsy fashion.

 Totalwar1402 wrote:
Not to mention that it would be impossible to keep the build up a secret if they've were strip mining worlds and killing entire planetary populations for target practice as Rose tells it.

Palaptine managed to create an entire army (the clones) in secret. Lots of Senators wouldn't take Amidala at her word when she said Naboo had been invaded, even though she was backed up by the two Jedi Valorum sent to negotiate with the Trade Federation. Tarkin made a point about saying Dantooine was too remote to effectively demonstrate the Death Star, and the Death Star itself was pretty much a secret.

It doesn't seem hard to hide things in the Star Wars galaxy.

Voss wrote:

 Gordon Shumway wrote:
Here's an interview with Johnson where he explains why he didn't give any backstory to Snoke. http://ew.com/movies/2017/12/17/star-wars-last-jedi-spoilers-snoke-killed-theories/2

Ah. So out less than a week and the director has to explain what the film meant.
Good job.
And I'm starting to see that a lot of the rationalizing in this thread is coming from the director's mouth, not from what people saw in the film...

30 secs would kill it...HAH! There would have been plenty places they could have added MORE than 30 sec without killing it. Director HAS to know he can do it without having him explain stuff for Rey for 30 secs right? I mean he's supposed to be the professional right?

Lazy that it is. Just carbon copying original trilogy with scenes reproduced in new order.

 dogma wrote:

 Totalwar1402 wrote:
Not to mention that it would be impossible to keep the build up a secret if they've were strip mining worlds and killing entire planetary populations for target practice as Rose tells it.

Palaptine managed to create an entire army (the clones) in secret. Lots of Senators wouldn't take Amidala at her word when she said Naboo had been invaded, even though she was backed up by the two Jedi Valorum sent to negotiate with the Trade Federation. Tarkin made a point about saying Dantooine was too remote to effectively demonstrate the Death Star, and the Death Star itself was pretty much a secret.

It doesn't seem hard to hide things in the Star Wars galaxy.

Because they were on an isolated planet that was hidden from the prying eyes of the Jedi and had been making clones for years. Its like "how did Revan get his massive fleet? Oh yeah, he had a Star Forge". In both cases a clear and reasonably okay explanation is given especially since we're only told that a million clone units are being trained.

Naboo and Dantooine represent single worlds in the galaxy. What Rose alludes to is a vast industrial operation that essentially built a fleet more larger and powerful than that of the whole Galactic Empire. Per BF2 Project Ressurection (which is Canon) they confirm the FO has "enough ships to reconquer the galaxy". Its much harder to suspend disbelief in this case. Hiding a single battle station like the Death Star made sense and you're forgetting that in both cases they found out about the Death Star. They didn't learn of Starkiller base until it fired.

This is especialy true when it appears like the FO purchased its arsenal from corporate interests inside the galaxy who were also selling to the Republic. Wouldn't people notice the vast armada being built above Kuat and the Core Worlds?


On a related point. One of the main complaints I had about Episode 7 was "why is the Resistance on its own, shouldn't the entire galaxy unite against First Order because they are evil Nazis led by a Dark Lord?" I mean the Imperials are basically Orcs and aren't exactly subtle about their intentions. Its not like, I dunno, the Helghast, where they use propaganda and manipulate their own people into supporting the military. They really are just evil for the sake of being evil. So if they are going to start using their conquered subjects for target practice as Rose said why is the reaction of the whole galaxy to not rise up against the First Order?

To me this is a deeply cynical opinion for Rian Johnson to make. JJ had the excuse that he had destroyed the only military that could conceivably fight. The insinuation being that people do HATE the FO and want to fight but just don't have any ships at the minute. But in Ep8 we are told that no they do have some forces in the Outer Rim who could join them. But they don't. Why? The FO are obviously going to kill everyone in the galaxy anyway, especially if you were associated with the previous rebellion and republic; which is A LOT of people. For example, we know that worlds like Mon Cala and Mandalore rebelled against the Empire. Isn't it natural to expect the FO to begin a war of annihilation and genocide against them as revenge? Won't the Wookies be enslaved again along with all the rest of the non human species? Basically they don't have a choice in fighting the FO. They aren't going to be able to sit this one out.

I get that the galaxy rising up is, almost certainly, going to happen in the next film. But that just makes this twist feel even more insincere on RJ part and an attempt to push a cynical opinion that does not make any sense given the FO implicit intentions to kill anyone who opposed them and the Empire before them. If they want to kill every former Alliance member, and their families and their worlds that is A TON of people they want to murder. That's before you consider people objecting to having their democracy destroyed by an external invader which is itself morally bankrupt and a criminal regime.


On a related point. I get Star Wars is a family film. But I think all the Imperial fanboyism is really muddying the waters. The Empire/FO is simply not a normal government trying to maintain some sort of empire like Rome or Britain. Which is how most of our heroes react towards the Empire with generic statements about freedom and democracy. When has a character really dressed down the First Order as an evil regime that nobody supports and morally bankrupt? Rose gives an offhand line and that's about it in two films. Theres no moral condemnation.

* The FO crimes are given scarce mention and aren't highlighted. Po Dameron simply has a funny little exchange when he is talking to a man who has killed more people than Hitler. You never get the impression that people actually really hate the FO the same way a Russian in WW2 would hate the Nazis. Its all just a fun adventure in which those rascal rebels are running rings around the Empire like kids with teachers in the playground.

* Attention is not brought to the fact most of the FO are indoctrinated slave soldiers or mercenaries like Phasma. Meaning the FO only represents a few hundred officers. This isn't even a popular movement like the Helghast in Killzone. Why does nobody call them out on this?

* Its intent to commit genocide and enslave all non-humans is not made clear. When they blow up the Hosnian System no character shows any serious moral disdain or anger at this action. They simply worry about the Resistance base being blown up.

* The FO is morally bankrupt. It does not have the excuse of nationalism since it enslaves humans and treats them like animals. They don't have historical grievances like the Helghast in Killzone. This is purely a diabolical scheme of a right wing junta who want ultimate power.

* There is no attempt to qualify that the New Republic was a force for good in the galaxy, represented democracy and destroying it was a calamitous act. Its simply done to show off Starkiller Bases threat to the Resistance and then never brought up again.

* Rian Johnson reserves almost all of his moral criticism for some War Profiteering capitalists. He also has a character, with a serious face, tell us that the First Order is basically the same as the Resistance. I do not care if this man is satin himself, that is conflating the Federation from Star Trek with the Borg. You should not be implying that most people are apathetic to the FO crimes by having this "common man" give us the "word of the street" and be used as an explanation why people don't come to help the Resistance later on.

Not addressing these things really distorts the conflict and makes it feel as if the FO is some kind of force for Order and stability and actually has some basis of support. As if we should take Hux seriously in his ridiculous speech where he lies through his teeth. That people must want the Empire back. That those who oppose them are actually a small minority of idealists and not the military wing of a popular struggle to destroy an illegitimate junta that the galaxy overwhelmingly rejects as a criminal enterprise.

Again this is very much a case where context matters. I mean I see more than enough videos on Youtube of people insisting "oh the Empire is actually a force for good." "Imperials actually thought they were doing the right thing" etc etc. We and the filmmakers are so fixated on how cool the Empire/FO is that we lose sight of the fact they really are evil incarnate and a sci fi version of the most evil regime in world history.

Yeah, good post.

As bad as the prequels were, everything made sense (mitichlorians aside )

It was logical, it was rational. and it tied into the story arc The first film discovers Anakin, the second film is the clones, and the third film is becoming Vader, end of the Jedi etc etc

A seamless fit.

This new trilogy is a mess, there's too much in it to be abandoned at this stage, and the third film will take us straight back to the end of ROTJ. Plus ca change.

People should complain, otherwise, the next trilogy will go down this same route. Disney don't care about stories - it's the balance sheet they look at first.

A fleet large enough to conquer the Galaxy....

Well, seriously, how large does that really need to be? The New Republic doesn't have a standing military anything like the size of the Empire, or even the Clone Army.

Do you need many, many guns, or just enough guns that no one system can stand against you? I mean, that Dreadnought was pretty nasty, no? Is it important that you can take all systems all at once, or just eff up a couple so badly that everyone else capitulates?

There's more to conquering than simply fighting!

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
A fleet large enough to conquer the Galaxy....

Well, seriously, how large does that really need to be? The New Republic doesn't have a standing military anything like the size of the Empire, or even the Clone Army.

Do you need many, many guns, or just enough guns that no one system can stand against you? I mean, that Dreadnought was pretty nasty, no? Is it important that you can take all systems all at once, or just eff up a couple so badly that everyone else capitulates?

There's more to conquering than simply fighting!

Well a glance on Wookiepedia says that in canon there are 3.2 million inhabited worlds in the Star Wars galaxy. Some of which are Coruscant level planets and 1500 of which are full of teched out Mandalorians who in canon are very pro rebellion.

Hosnian Prime should have played out like Pearl Harbour. Yes the FO has a big military, yes they have a decisive first strike. But as soon as Fonder, Kuat, Mon Cala and the Core Worlds start mobilizing and churning out ships. As soon as local militia armies and smaller entities like the Mandalorian Sector unite against them the FO won't be able to sustain any kind of attrition battle. Eventually you would have a Battle of Midway situation and they don't have a territory or industrial base to replace their losses. As pointed out to us, the Stormtroopers take a lifetime to train and nobody volunteers to join them. Every ship and soldier they lose cannot be replaced in the short term, whereas the opposition in theory is everyone else in the galaxy. I mean Kylo Ren pretty much says he is trying to kill the Star Wars galaxy and anyone who opposes him, this is not a diplomatic man....

Its not reasonable to suggest that they can zerg rush the galaxy in order to force the plot to become a 2nd Galactic Civil War. They really would have to occupy all 3.2 million worlds and police all the sector traffic. Theres nothing wrong with the good guys being a State like the Republic, that is not inconsistent with a populist message or them being the underdogs. Think Britain during the Blitz.

You don't capitulate if your opponent plans to exterminate and enslave you. You don't capitulate if you were part of the rebellion and are likely going to be executed along with your whole family. You don't capitulate if you lost friends and loved ones to the last Empire. This is like saying Israel would capitulate if a Second Nazi Germany came storming in. Again the FO is not like the Roman Empire, its not simply about creating a stable political block that puts a certain group in charge. It is evil incarnate and would be viewed as such by people in the Star Wars universe.

The FO does not have any political legitimacy. It has no interest in making the sort of compromises and alliances that successful Empires make. In fact with Kylo Ren at the helm it is almost certainly going to crash and burn for precisely this reason. Even Hux is clearly a fanatical Nazi. These are not enlightened absolutist monarchs. Even Hitler and Stalin relied upon mobilizing popular support or at least a segment of the population. The fact the FO relies on slaves to fill most of its army is suggestive of how ineffective it is at mobilizing such support. So people will fight this regime as they have no reason to follow this regime.

But TLJ takes place more or less straight after TFA.

Simply put, Fondor et al haven't had the time.

And this is why I'm looking forward to Episode IX. There's a lot I want to know, but I wouldn't put money on how it all pans out.

With the loss of a Dreadnought, Snoke and Snoke's Ship, the FO have been shown to be vulnerable... And as you say, with Kylo 'Unstable' Ren in charge, who knows how this is going to end up? As much as he's a liability, he's also incredibly dangerous, as he's not as tied to sound, accepted military tactics.

Voss wrote:

 Gordon Shumway wrote:
Here's an interview with Johnson where he explains why he didn't give any backstory to Snoke. http://ew.com/movies/2017/12/17/star-wars-last-jedi-spoilers-snoke-killed-theories/2

Ah. So out less than a week and the director has to explain what the film meant.
Good job.
And I'm starting to see that a lot of the rationalizing in this thread is coming from the director's mouth, not from what people saw in the film...

I'm also amused at the related article on why Yoda HAD to come back and pause the movie to give his exposition. It's a nice conjunction with why it would be wrong to have exposition from Snoke.

Bobtheinquisitor wrote:Also, subvert the dominant SW paradigm.

Oh, I definitely disagree with that. In the other related article to the above (Luke's Destiny: http://ew.com/movies/2017/12/16/the-last-jedi-spoilers-rian-johnson-mark-hamill-luke-skywalker-revelations/2/
Johnson is very clear that the SW paradigm is still there:

“There are so many little details,” added producer Ram Bergman. “The first time you watch the movie, it’s a little bit overwhelming. But the second time you’re more relaxed, and you can start picking up so many details Rian planted throughout.”

“These movies are engineered to be watched over and over again,” Johnson said.

Seems to me he has the paradigm down to science. He just skimped on the art.

And 'failure is the best teacher' is very ingrained in the OT. Luke's training is a very model of learning by failure. Han screws up all the time (failure to fast talk, failure to repair, or failure to pick locks, to pick one important instance from each film)
Your #2 is pretty much the message of the prequels- TPM- dueling pointless to the overall battle, AotC- screw the coliseum spectacle, bring on the army, RotS- treachery and planning triumph over everything, especially individual heroes.
This isn't the last 20 years were wrong or subversion. These are the same elements jammed together inexpertly and presented in a clumsy fashion.

Interesting. The article says the same thing i came up with on my own. Good. Move forward.

 Manchu wrote:
@LunarSol - exactly right RE: Snoke v. Palpatine ... also, Snoke is the key to why Luke was tempted to murder Ben ... and yet no explanation of how Luke's or Ben's relationship to Snoke.

That was what I was disappointed in. Luke says "Snoke already had him in his control" or something similar. How? How did he know Snoke at that point? Why did he make the decision to "give up" and kill his nephew when he fought so hard to save his own father who had clearly gone WAY down the dark side path. What had Kylo done to make Luke give up on him, if anything? It's like they ignored everything Luke stood for and had done before.

What a disappointment.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
But TLJ takes place more or less straight after TFA.

Simply put, Fondor et al haven't had the time.

And this is why I'm looking forward to Episode IX. There's a lot I want to know, but I wouldn't put money on how it all pans out.

With the loss of a Dreadnought, Snoke and Snoke's Ship, the FO have been shown to be vulnerable... And as you say, with Kylo 'Unstable' Ren in charge, who knows how this is going to end up? As much as he's a liability, he's also incredibly dangerous, as he's not as tied to sound, accepted military tactics.

Yes but we have had two films in which its been made very clear the good guys only ever had 1 Cruiser and two escort vessels whereas the First Order has "limitless resources" and an armada vaster and more powerful than the Galactic Empire ever had. It would be jarring to suddenly change gears into a Clone Wars style war between two powerful galaxy spanning nation states. The set up seems to be that Po will convince those wayward allies in the Outer Rim to join them so we can get a small fleet like we have at Endor. So I think they have firmly decided to make this war the 2nd Galactic Civil War. In fact it would not surprise me if the name for this conflict becomes that.

Which I think is counter intuitive. If you want to stress that "the common people rise up" then why is it only a small band of Resistance fighters are involved in that struggle? Its a fundamental contradiction. When you look at historical examples of popular revolution the fact is that they tend to form big powerful nation states to destroy those trying to put them down. In Canon they avoid this in the OT by having all of that occur post Battle of Endor when essentially the New Republic WRECKS the Empire. So I suspect that's where we are going here as well.

I also think it means the conflict has to remain small scale. We're probably never going to see the sort of vast space and land battles that we saw in the prequel trilogy. Not because the FO doesn't have those numbers, but because the opposition is being deliberately kept so small that the FO never deploys its full strength on screen. I mean look at how much ordinance and vehicles were stored in one compartment of that Mega Star Destroyer compared to the force they use on Krait? You could never do a Battle of Geonosis or Kashyyk for example. Its a very limiting conflict.

The same can be said of Force Users. Because there is no full New Jedi Order (yet) it means we can't have lots of red lightsaber wielding guys like the Sii...Knights of Ren. Doing away with the New Jedi Order gives something for Rey to achieve (at the expense of Luke) but this limits the conflict. You can't have a Geonosis or something like the Old Republic trailer in the Jedi Temple. Not because there aren't lots of Knight of Ren but because we don't have enough Jedi.

It'd be the 3rd Galactic Civil War though, given the Clone Wars was much the same

As for The Resistance, we're also seeing a Galaxy exhausted not just by war, but by oppression.

Clone Wars raged for 5 years, billions died. The Empire is founded, and begins crushing opposition. Then the Rebellion properly kicks off, leading to more loss of life and ever more draconian behaviour. Emperor falls, and the war continues for a while whilst the Imperial Remnant is driven out.

The New Republic comes in, and isn't interested in having much of a War machine, however naïve that might sound.

The wider Galaxy likely enjoyed the break of not being forced to choose sides for the first time in 30odd years.

edit, I'm way behind the conversation

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
It'd be the 3rd Galactic Civil War though, given the Clone Wars was much the same

As for The Resistance, we're also seeing a Galaxy exhausted not just by war, but by oppression.

Clone Wars raged for 5 years, billions died. The Empire is founded, and begins crushing opposition. Then the Rebellion properly kicks off, leading to more loss of life and ever more draconian behaviour. Emperor falls, and the war continues for a while whilst the Imperial Remnant is driven out.

The New Republic comes in, and isn't interested in having much of a War machine, however naïve that might sound.

The wider Galaxy likely enjoyed the break of not being forced to choose sides for the first time in 30odd years.

I am referring to the nature of the conflict. The Clone Wars is typified by these colossal battles with lots of Jedi leading legions of clones against the vast droid armies led by various lightsaber wielding baddies. The Galactic Civil War is typified by a small band of resistance fighters against the might of the Empire with the Jedi being basically extinct whilst shadowy wielders of the Dark Side work from the shadows. Both have obvious pro's and cons as settings.

Galactic Civil War:

Pro

- Goods guys are the little guys so its easier to root for them.

- Lends sense of drama and mystery to the Jedi and Sith because theres so few of them.

- Its easier to sympathize with a popular rebellion than a fictional country.

- It requires less explanation. Rebels vs Empire. The very names lets you now whats going on and what the conflict relates to. Describing why two nations are at war is more complicated and requires more elaboration.

Con

- It limits the scale of battles. Hence why an Empire which has millions of Stormtroopers only ever uses a few hundred of them in a given scene. Or fleet battles only consist of 30 or so ships a side.

- This pushes the battle to the fringes of the galaxy rather than on worlds like Coruscant. Almost all the OT takes place on desolate worlds. Which means you can't have that Battle of Stalingrad type scenario where the stakes are clear cut.

- Less Jedi and Sith.

So I feel like the New Trilogy is trying to copy a setting that has a lot of problems. Its part of the reason why KotoR was so popular. Lets have loads of Jedi, Sith and Mandalorians running around. Especially because we have already seen the Galactic Civil War and the Return of the Jedi. I don't think rehashing both of those ideas is that compelling and the negatives start to outweigh the pro's. Would it have been more interesting if the New Jedi Order was in place and the New Republic continued as a body after Hosnian Prime? Personally I think they would have helped differentiate the story and allowed for grander set piece scenes.

If they have enjoyed 30 years of peace and prosperity of the New Republic and voted for pacifist disarmament why would their reaction to a Nazi regime be one of submission? They broke the terms of a incredibly generous peace. Every Imperial above a certain rank should have been imprisoned and executed. They are the aggressor and the ones trying to bring chaos into the galaxy; not the Republic. The reaction should be one of utter outrage and anger. They have killed more people than Hitler did when he invaded the Soviet Union. If people can get behind Stalin when they're being slaughtered I am sure they can get behind the Resistance. These people are barbarians whose existence means nothing but oppression and misery for the galaxy. I mean at the end of this I do not see any vestige of the Empire surviving, certainly not a formal peace treaty. The people who support the First Order have clearly given up their humanity and killing them is justice.

Yeah I second that. I want to see Darth Revan on the big screen.

Thats one of the reasons why I like Kylo Ren and his Knights of Ren (aesthetically). They give a strong Darth Revan and Old Sith vibe with their outfits and masks.

Was it an enjoyable watch? Yes
Was it thought provoking? Clearly as this thread alone jumped several pages since release

I would argue that those 2 things alone make for a "good" if not "great" movie.

Did it feel like a SW movie? Debatable, but I am firmly in the "yes" column for this.

The biggest thing to remember is that there is 1 more movie left to tie up loose ends and give real resolution.
The problem with people complaining that it's too different and took the movie in an "undesired" direction is that those same people would be whining right not that it turned out exactly as they wanted it as they would claim it was too predicable/boring/unoriginal

I appreciate this new trilogy for being the perfect blend of OT nostalgia and Prequel originality.
I am reserving final judgment on TLJ until EpIX, but as of now, I enjoyed the film and look forward to repeat viewings.



Edit: Side note question: Does anyone remember what young Ben's blue lightsaber looked like in the flashback? My memory is playing tricks with me as I can swear it looks just like Anakins.
Could Luke have found his old lightsaber and gifted it to Ben? Then after his turn, Luke gave it to Maz for safe keeping? or Maz found it after Luke discarded it?
It might add more weigh to Han recognizing the lightsaber in TFA and later Kylo saying "That lightsaber, it belongs to me"

-

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Yeah I second that. I want to see Darth Revan on the big screen.

Thats one of the reasons why I like Kylo Ren and his Knights of Ren (aesthetically). They give a strong Darth Revan and Old Sith vibe with their outfits and masks.

You're right. But JJ Abrams in an interview basically said that "the Sith were a prequel thing" in response to confused fans asking why the guys with red lightsabers in black aren't Sith. I mean I must admit I still do not get that since they haven't explained what Snoke and Ren actually are. You can't repeatedly insist they aren't Sith yet not explain what they actually are.

My gut feeling is that this is a slow attempt to dismantle and remove the Sith from canon. To isolate them as simply something very specific to Palpatines back story and not the dark reflection of the Jedi; the ancient antagonist of the Jedi and this constant presence which the Old Republic setting heavily relies on. Its the only reason you would adamantly insist that guys in black who have red lightsabers aren't Sith is because they are trying to destroy this aspect of the canon and a common consensus among the fans. Which thankfully they have failed to do.

For example the visual dictionary says that the Sith began with Darth Bane, no qualification that its those who follow the Rule of 1 so this would remove most of the Old Republic setting, and that the Sith were destroyed by a prophecy involving Darth Vader.

I asked this further up but I didn't get an answer. Why does Kylo Ren tell Rey that its time for the Sith to end? It was just a bizarre statement. It reminded me of ToR when Vitiate condemns the Sith Empire as weak and a failure. But the Sith are long gone when Kylo says this. It felt like they wanted to make a statement about Snokes way being destroyed but they never established what Snoke was so decided "forget it just have him say an end to the Sith and people will get the general gist that hes trying to kill Star Wars"

 kronk wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
@LunarSol - exactly right RE: Snoke v. Palpatine ... also, Snoke is the key to why Luke was tempted to murder Ben ... and yet no explanation of how Luke's or Ben's relationship to Snoke.

That was what I was disappointed in. Luke says "Snoke already had him in his control" or something similar. How? How did he know Snoke at that point? Why did he make the decision to "give up" and kill his nephew when he fought so hard to save his own father who had clearly gone WAY down the dark side path. What had Kylo done to make Luke give up on him, if anything? It's like they ignored everything Luke stood for and had done before.

What a disappointment.

I agree that was my question, but I am curious if some of the Snoke assumption is the benefit of hindsight. Did Luke know at the time that Snoke had him under his control or did he just see the monster Ben would become and figure out it was Snoke later?

In general, "under control of a Sith Lord" seems to be a thing the series tosses around but never properly explores (thanks prequels). Vader speaks to serving Palpatine in a similar way in RotJ.

 LunarSol wrote:

 kronk wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
@LunarSol - exactly right RE: Snoke v. Palpatine ... also, Snoke is the key to why Luke was tempted to murder Ben ... and yet no explanation of how Luke's or Ben's relationship to Snoke.

That was what I was disappointed in. Luke says "Snoke already had him in his control" or something similar. How? How did he know Snoke at that point? Why did he make the decision to "give up" and kill his nephew when he fought so hard to save his own father who had clearly gone WAY down the dark side path. What had Kylo done to make Luke give up on him, if anything? It's like they ignored everything Luke stood for and had done before.

What a disappointment.

I agree that was my question, but I am curious if some of the Snoke assumption is the benefit of hindsight. Did Luke know at the time that Snoke had him under his control or did he just see the monster Ben would become and figure out it was Snoke later?

I agree that Luke probably didn't know it was Snoke until afterwards, but I do not think it "betrays" what Luke stood for in the OT at all. Luke was an idealist who heard of what a good man is father WAS and tried to bring him back.
It is entirely believable that an older Luke, with more experience, would be more cautious and have a moment of doubt about a young kid who has yet to prove he is "good" in the first place. Especially if he did not know Snoke existed until afterwards. The "Darkness" he saw in Ben could have been Snoke pulling strings and Luke only found out afterwards.
Remember that it was a moment of weakness in Luke, not a full commitment to the deed itself. RotJ was full of Luke's moments of weakness, even full on using the darkside to defeat Vader, then to immediately turn away from it, which not even Vader thought possible, and probably allowed Vader to do the same moments later.

No. The moment Luke turned away from killing Ben is true to his very core as a character. If you can't see that, you don't know SW at all.

-

Luke says he saw the darkness within him and looked into the future to see the monster he would become. Reacting poorly to visions from the Force is also pretty true to his character.

 LunarSol wrote:
Luke says he saw the darkness within him and looked into the future to see the monster he would become. Reacting poorly to visions from the Force is also pretty true to his character.

See I had no sympathy for Kylo over that. He must have been pretty evil for Luke to have considered doing that and his reaction "I am going to murder everyone in the Jedi Temple, ESPECIALLY the younglings, join an army of Nazis and destroy everything my family worked to restore!". This is an extreme over reaction.

The only reason given for his slide into the dark side is that his immense power made him feel as if he had a right to control and dominion over others. Luke was as right to consider killing him as Mace Windu was in trying to kill the Emperor and I felt it was very close in spirit to that idea.

I mean really, Rey buys his sob story about how "horrible master Skywalker saw I was a monster and tried to kill me." Sure, Rey does come to that realization by the end of the film with that 1000 yard stare at the falcon.

I mean when you have him basically say that he wants the Jedi, Sith, Rebels and Empire to end that's all but saying you want to destroy Star Wars. When you have a character saying things like that its probably a "subtle" cue we aren't supposed to like them. Especially when Rey is like "no Master Skywalker the Jedi weren't failures." its all about Hope (Rey - Learn from mistakes with a New Jedi Order) vs Cynisism (Ren - Kill Star Wars). I must admit I am surprised people think the intent is for RJ to destroy the original mythology; that couldn't be further from what he does as I see it.

 Totalwar1402 wrote:

Because they were on an isolated planet that was hidden from the prying eyes of the Jedi and had been making clones for years.

But they could be hidden, even over the course of years, in spite of being commissioned by a member of the Jedi council.

 Totalwar1402 wrote:

What Rose alludes to is a vast industrial operation that essentially built a fleet more larger and powerful than that of the whole Galactic Empire.

Rose is an unreliable narrator. She was emotionally compromised by the death of her sister, and before that was tapped to prevent potential deserters from using the escape pods on the Raddus.

She is, as they say, pot committed to The Resistance.

 Totalwar1402 wrote:

This is especialy true when it appears like the FO purchased its arsenal from corporate interests inside the galaxy who were also selling to the Republic. Wouldn't people notice the vast armada being built above Kuat and the Core Worlds?

KDY had been building Star Destroyers, or something like them, for a long time; building some more wouldn't raise an eyebrow.

To draw an IRL comparison: Do you notice if Boeing builds a few more planes?

 dogma wrote:

 Totalwar1402 wrote:

This is especialy true when it appears like the FO purchased its arsenal from corporate interests inside the galaxy who were also selling to the Republic. Wouldn't people notice the vast armada being built above Kuat and the Core Worlds?

KDY had been building Star Destroyers, or something like them, for a long time; building some more wouldn't raise an eyebrow.

To draw an IRL comparison: Do you notice if Boeing builds a few more planes?

Given that everyone was supposed to have disarmed everything, selling battleships would appear to be suspicious.

 Crazy_Carnifex wrote:

 dogma wrote:

 Totalwar1402 wrote:

This is especialy true when it appears like the FO purchased its arsenal from corporate interests inside the galaxy who were also selling to the Republic. Wouldn't people notice the vast armada being built above Kuat and the Core Worlds?

KDY had been building Star Destroyers, or something like them, for a long time; building some more wouldn't raise an eyebrow.

To draw an IRL comparison: Do you notice if Boeing builds a few more planes?

Given that everyone was supposed to have disarmed everything, selling battleships would appear to be suspicious.

The Republic didn't disarm everything, they down sized their military. The Empire was supposed to disarm. Then I'm sure that independent systems are still allowed to provide for their own defense, since the Republic certainly wont protect them.

But the fact the Supremacy was built and no one batted an eye, maybe, just maybe, no one really cared who rules.

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

But the fact the Supremacy was built and no one batted an eye, maybe, just maybe, no one really cared who rules.

Knowing about "the casino" going in, I was actually kind of hoping that the Supremacy was some kind of giant luxury yacht and maybe we were going to see some of the private citizens of the FO or something that live on this giant flying city.

 Gordon Shumway wrote:
Here's an interview with Johnson where he explains why he didn't give any backstory to Snoke. http://ew.com/movies/2017/12/17/star-wars-last-jedi-spoilers-snoke-killed-theories/2

Who cares what this clown thinks.

Lando should have been the Casino owner. Or, at least, in there gambling and/or cheating to get some fat cat's money.

Another missed opportunity!

You're saying Lando is an arms dealer now? That is the only way he could afford to gamble.


(Insert Passenger 57 reference.)