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.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

Actually, what they could have done is rehashed the Obi Wan vs Vader fight, except with Snoke and Luke. Luke dies heroically trying to save Rey, who gets overpowered by Snoke, Rey now has a reason to get stronger and Snoke is shown to be very powerful and dangerous. I mean, you'd think they would at least copy that formula, considering how much else they copied.

The downside with that is that it would have been much less interesting than what actually happened.

The whole point of killing Snoke off so unceremoniously was that he was completely unimportant to the story. We got what we needed from him - he was a dark-side force user who twisted Ben Solo to be his thrall and was the architect of the First Order. Beyond that, he's irrelevant, and having Ben step in and take over makes perfect sense... The scion of the Skywalker line was never going to be content with being second-fiddle. He either needed to turn, or take over.

Likewise, having Luke charge back into the galaxy with lightsaber ablaze might have been visually fun, but wouldn't have been as fun as the 'duel' with Kylo wound up being, and wouldn't have been right. I read a review this morning that got this point perfectly - Luke Skywalker is the guy who won the day in RotJ by throwing his lightsaber away. I have no words for just how much I love the ending of this movie as it is. My only disappointment is that we will presumably not have more Luke in the next movie. (I'm kind of hoping they decide to do a spin-off at some point to fill in some of the intervening years)

Ditto. Adding a new character was unnecessary, and putting Ackbar in her place would have been a worthy send off.

It wouldn't have worked with Ackbar... we wouldn't have believed that he was just running away without a plan, and more importantly I don't think Poe would have believed that Ackbar was just running away without a plan. Introducing an unknown who we could distrust was the only way that whole sequence could work.

 insaniak wrote:

Ditto. Adding a new character was unnecessary, and putting Ackbar in her place would have been a worthy send off.

It wouldn't have worked with Ackbar... we wouldn't have believed that he was just running away without a plan, and more importantly I don't think Poe would have believed that Ackbar was just running away without a plan. Introducing an unknown who we could distrust was the only way that whole sequence could work.

Is this supposed to make us want this less? Multiple [bad] sub-plots hinge off of the purple vice-admirals terrible leadership skills. Give Ackbar the job, and suddenly not only are we a lot more invested in the character, but the writers have to actually do their job properly.

I enjoyed Ren killing Snoke. The way he did it was genius, considering how skilled Snoke was demonstrated as being when it came to reading Ren's emotions/thoughts.

His usage of Rey as a distraction was masterful in order to remove the only person standing between him and his goal of controlling the First Order.

Also, the little hint that not all was as it seemed regarding Luke being at the rebel base was great, too. It was only when I thought back after leaving the cinema that it suddenly occurred to me: his lightsaber was blue when he was facing Kylo.

 Crazy_Carnifex wrote:

Is this supposed to make us want this less? Multiple [bad] sub-plots hinge off of the purple vice-admirals terrible leadership skills. Give Ackbar the job, and suddenly not only are we a lot more invested in the character, but the writers have to actually do their job properly.

You weren't supposed to be invested in Holdo... You were supposed to be invested in Poe. It achieved that, for me. They set up in the initial battle scene the fact that Poe is a bit too headstrong and makes rash decisions. Then they introduced Holdo, and led us to believe that this time Poe was completely justified in his actions... And then Leia walks in and just pulls the rug out from under him. If was awesome.

YMMV, obviously.

 insaniak wrote:

 Crazy_Carnifex wrote:

Is this supposed to make us want this less? Multiple [bad] sub-plots hinge off of the purple vice-admirals terrible leadership skills. Give Ackbar the job, and suddenly not only are we a lot more invested in the character, but the writers have to actually do their job properly.

You weren't supposed to be invested in Holdo... You were supposed to be invested in Poe. It achieved that, for me. They set up in the initial battle scene the fact that Poe is a bit too headstrong and makes rash decisions. Then they introduced Holdo, and led us to believe that this time Poe was completely justified in his actions... And then Leia walks in and just pulls the rug out from under him. If was awesome.

YMMV, obviously.

Not to mention that in the end, Poe's actions had some pretty bad consequences. If he hadn't sent Finn and Rose to get a hacker and board the FO ship, they wouldn't have been captured and DJ wouldn't have sold information about the cloaked transports to the FO. Poe's actions inadvertently cost the lives of a good chunk of the remaining resistance members.

 Formosa wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Look, how and why characters react to events or overcome obstacles is not important to the story. If we did things your way we'd slow the movie down with all kinds of character growth, dramatic escapes, interpersonal dynamics and derring do. That's just not what this film is about.

Can you imagine a movie like Die Hard having McLane and Gruber in the same room and then wasting our time showing us how they get out of the same room without killing each other?

So what your saying is a story does not need "character growth, dramatic escapes, interpersonal dynamics and derring do" and they never need to "react to events or overcome obstacles" Because that is not what the last jedi is about...

Wow, look if you are happy with not having any of the above to consider a film good, then fair enough, people like me want these things, as you know, it makes a good story, and not a series of set pieces that make little to no sense.

I thought the Die Hard part have away the sarcasm, unless...

Gasp!

Does this mean you've never seen Die Hard?

Evidently the follow on viewership rates are the lowest of any SW film, and have fallen fast than the rates for Justice League.

 Frazzled wrote:
Evidently the follow on viewership rates are the lowest of any SW film, and have fallen fast than the rates for Justice League.

Indeed. Despite the efforts of the critics (who, let's remember, get invited along to premieres and hobnob with the stars, all of which might stop if they give too many bad reviews) the moviegoing public are speaking vociferously on this. The RT score is legit and shows all is not well. The footfall of people coming to watch in the subsequent weeks from release are the worst for any SW film ever.

Whichever way you slice it this is an abject failure on multiple levels.

Mitochondria wrote:
To hell with Holdo.

That final ride should have belonged to Ackbar and Leia.

I greatly disagree with killing Ackbar as a sidenote.

Honestly, I don't understand why people feel so strongly about this. Ackbar wasn't a character, he was a generic "explain the mission" delivery service for the audience that had one meme-worthy line. He has no story, no development, nothing at all beyond that one line. What exactly is his great importance that he needs closure to his story and a major part in the movie?

(And no, I don't count the EU, most people haven't read any of it.)

 Frazzled wrote:
Evidently the follow on viewership rates are the lowest of any SW film, and have fallen fast than the rates for Justice League.

Part of that is probably due to being released during finals week and right before Christmas. It may crack the 1 billion mark, but Disney is simply not going to repeat the success of TFA anytime soon. That was the product of being the first actual sequel to RotJ.

Just out of curiosity using an online inflation calculator adjusted for 2017.

(WW totals for prequels)
TPM = 1.48 bil
AotC = 889.9 mil (even the lowest grossing film had a domestic total of 414mil~)
RotS = 1.07 bil

Can't really compare the OT in terms of WW totals, but this interesting.

ANH had just under 400mil domestic in 11 weeks. It ended up getting 800mil domestic in 29 weeks.
TESB got 422 mil domestic in 12 weeks.
ROTJ earned 600mil domestic in 22 weeks.
TFA earned 965mil!!! in 11 weeks. Even inflation adjusted it topped ANH's run.


I'm thinking if TLJ doesn't at least earn 500-600mil domestic some heads will roll.







Automatically Appended Next Post:

Riquende wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Evidently the follow on viewership rates are the lowest of any SW film, and have fallen fast than the rates for Justice League.

Indeed. Despite the efforts of the critics (who, let's remember, get invited along to premieres and hobnob with the stars, all of which might stop if they give too many bad reviews) the moviegoing public are speaking vociferously on this. The RT score is legit and shows all is not well. The footfall of people coming to watch in the subsequent weeks from release are the worst for any SW film ever.

Whichever way you slice it this is an abject failure on multiple levels.

People also post much more frequently if they have a negative opinion. Most people I've spoken to liked or enjoyed the film. I've only heard one or two people dislike it. One of them is the type of person who comes across as being negative about everything though...

It's far from a beloved film, but the outcry seems exaggerated.

Peregrine wrote:

Mitochondria wrote:
To hell with Holdo.

That final ride should have belonged to Ackbar and Leia.

I greatly disagree with killing Ackbar as a sidenote.

Honestly, I don't understand why people feel so strongly about this. Ackbar wasn't a character, he was a generic "explain the mission" delivery service for the audience that had one meme-worthy line. He has no story, no development, nothing at all beyond that one line. What exactly is his great importance that he needs closure to his story and a major part in the movie?

(And no, I don't count the EU, most people haven't read any of it.)

I'm pretty sure the vast majority of negative opinions are from people that read the EU. I doubt it could be proven either way, but that's my gut feeling.

 Peregrine wrote:

Mitochondria wrote:
To hell with Holdo.

That final ride should have belonged to Ackbar and Leia.

I greatly disagree with killing Ackbar as a sidenote.

Honestly, I don't understand why people feel so strongly about this. Ackbar wasn't a character, he was a generic "explain the mission" delivery service for the audience that had one meme-worthy line. He has no story, no development, nothing at all beyond that one line. What exactly is his great importance that he needs closure to his story and a major part in the movie?

(And no, I don't count the EU, most people haven't read any of it.)

Peregrine is right. Ackbar was only shown as a great military leader outside the OT, in the movies he is the calamari in chief and that's all. So as Lucas was fond of saying, if it's not in the movie it didn't happen (or did depending the side of the bed he used) On the other hand that cuts both ways and JJ Abrams or RJ saying that there are things not told in the movies that explain ridiculous plot inconsistencies doesn't count either. Leia had no reason to hug Rey before Chewy JJ cannot fix that in an interview after the movie, tho to be fair he said in that interview that it was a mistake.

M,

 insaniak wrote:

 Crazy_Carnifex wrote:

Is this supposed to make us want this less? Multiple [bad] sub-plots hinge off of the purple vice-admirals terrible leadership skills. Give Ackbar the job, and suddenly not only are we a lot more invested in the character, but the writers have to actually do their job properly.

You weren't supposed to be invested in Holdo... You were supposed to be invested in Poe. It achieved that, for me. They set up in the initial battle scene the fact that Poe is a bit too headstrong and makes rash decisions. Then they introduced Holdo, and led us to believe that this time Poe was completely justified in his actions... And then Leia walks in and just pulls the rug out from under him. If was awesome.

YMMV, obviously.

The problem of the Holdo-Poe communication problem is that it pretty much causes the destruction of the entire resistance. If Fin and Rose hadn't met the Del Toro's character, Holdo's plan could have succeeded.

While it's an interesting reversal of how impossible missions work in an adventure movie, it doesn't help me to sympathize with Poe. His rashness get's the bomber squadron wiped out. The second time, the whole effort of the new main cast backfires, not due to rashness, but by simply kept out of the loop by senior command. That is a one time payoff in terms of surprise, but pretty sour for the audience upon reflection.

 trexmeyer wrote:
I'm pretty sure the vast majority of negative opinions are from people that read the EU. I doubt it could be proven either way, but that's my gut feeling.

I'm pretty sure the vast majority of positive opinions are also from people that read the EU. This is a geek forum, most people here have probably read at least some of the EU.

But for the general population I suspect it's also true. Most of the people who haven't read any of the EU haven't done so because they're casual fans, or even people who don't consider themselves fans at all and just went to see the movie because it's the big one for the weekend. They're unlikely to have negative opinions because they're unlikely to care at all. Rey's origin doesn't make sense? Who cares, did you see how awesome that fight scene looked? Meanwhile the people who know enough about the IP to talk about things like story themes have probably been invested enough to read some EU stuff.

Yeah, I'm finding with all of the new stuff that I'm having to make a conscious effort to forget about the EU... But once you do that, everything works much better.

I feel the EU thing is a bit of a red herring.

EG, Rogue One is, without a doubt, my favourite Star Wars film (yes, even topping Empire), and that completely, without a doubt, overwrites not just one, but several competing EU storylines.

But my EU comment about that is typically, "oh, it'd have been nice if they had Kyle Katarn's name cropped up." Then, well, there was the ending and I'm like, "nope, glad Kyle wasn't part of that at all!"

It doesn't mean Kyle can't exist, but he had a different mission, that's all.

Additionally, when it comes to TLJ, I feel those complaining about the EU would also be complaining about TFA. Aside from the possibility of Snoke being revealed to be a Palpatine clone, say, or maybe something about Rey's parentage, there's not really much likely overlap even possible between the EU and what TLJ could have been.

Nah, I think the EU's a red herring, unless maybe there's the context of, "things could have been done better than this movie... And here's an example of it being done better in Star Wars without even needing to stray outside that setting.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:


Also, the little hint that not all was as it seemed regarding Luke being at the rebel base was great, too. It was only when I thought back after leaving the cinema that it suddenly occurred to me: his lightsaber was blue when he was facing Kylo.

And his beard/hair was brown not grey, and he didn't disturb the salt.

We had also just seen that same lightsaber get ripped in half.

 Compel wrote:
I feel the EU thing is a bit of a red herring.

EG, Rogue One is, without a doubt, my favourite Star Wars film (yes, even topping Empire), and that completely, without a doubt, overwrites not just one, but several competing EU storylines.

But my EU comment about that is typically, "oh, it'd have been nice if they had Kyle Katarn's name cropped up." Then, well, there was the ending and I'm like, "nope, glad Kyle wasn't part of that at all!"

It doesn't mean Kyle can't exist, but he had a different mission, that's all.

Additionally, when it comes to TLJ, I feel those complaining about the EU would also be complaining about TFA. Aside from the possibility of Snoke being revealed to be a Palpatine clone, say, or maybe something about Rey's parentage, there's not really much likely overlap even possible between the EU and what TLJ could have been.

Nah, I think the EU's a red herring, unless maybe there's the context of, "things could have been done better than this movie... And here's an example of it being done better in Star Wars without even needing to stray outside that setting.

That's my point. They're rewriting the EU. And the OT cast is fairly old so it can't be an immediate sequel.

By comparison it's like they jumped straight past the NJO era and into Jacen Solo becoming a Sith Lord. Which is odd because in many ways it seems like they're intentionally subverting a lot of the EU yet mimicking that concept. For example in Rogue One we see a darker side to the Rebellion and I don't recall that ever being shown in any of the wider read books.

That said when the TFA trailer hit I had a completely different story going off in my head then what they went with...I really wanted what turned out to be Ben Solo to have been something like a completely unrelated Dark Jedi/Sith Inquisitor (maybe even an actual Sith) leading a resurgence of an Imperial Remnant. Or even have a Sith Order emerge from the shadows that is not related to the Empire in any way but is simply interested in hunting down Jedi for now.

It could have been so much more interesting...

I caught it for a second time tonight and had originally missed a pretty significant line during the Snoke scene. He says "I warned my dark apprentice that as his powers grew so to would his light counterpart, I had assumed that to be Skywalker but I was mistaken".

It's almost a throw away line but it deals directly with elements in FA that people accused of being Mary Sue. It's mentioned several times in episodes 1-6 and other sources that the force is a self balancing entity, that both guides and manifests of it's own will. While Jedi can tap into the force and use to manipulate things, it is a separate entity of it's own and there's always duality to it, when the Jedi become too strong and dominant then the Sith in turn become strong, when the Jedi were reduced in number to a small handful so too were the dark ones leaving just Vader and the Emperor. (Despite his power Vader has a "weak" connection to the force due to the machine body)

Luke being the last Jedi prior to Rei seals himself off from the force in effect entirely removing the light side from that balance. Kylo is already quite powerful and under the sway of Snoke he is obsessed with taking on Vader's role and pushes to take on more and more dark power and there's nothing keeping things in check on the light side. In gamer terms lets say that Kylo levels up to 30, the force decides that things have swung too far and so the light also needs a level 30, it picks Rei as that champion/chosen one and begins guiding her and unbeknownst to Rei the force begins rapidly pumping her full of all that juicy force XP. She's leveling up at a massive pace but isn't really aware of her abilities or strength but the force is guiding her through the gaps and dangers just as both Luke and Anakin were steered towards their destiny. Luke was most effective when he surrendered all notions of self and just let go so that the force would guide his torpedo shot or deflect the blaster bolts, etc. Those aren't feats that Luke himself is doing but it's a force driven Zen state where he's surrendering control to the force and allowing the will of the force/universe, it happens to benefit Luke as a side effect but it's entirely the force pulling the strings of destiny at those moments.

Rei is like a blank slate where she's unaware she's being guided but in a lot of ways offers less resistance than Luke did, Luke is repeatedly shown doubting what the force is capable of and he can't take his reality blinders off and just open to feeling the force, Rei never really questions it because she doesn't have that deep mental barrier of disbelief. When Luke asks her what she knows of the force she knows something is inside her but has no clue what, but she has an innate grasp she can't explain which in an odd way is much much more than Luke knew when he started out. It's force manifest where Rei has less doubt and can fall into that Zen state naturally where others like Luke had to work harder for it because there were other Jedi (Obi-Wan and Yoda) who already had a large stash of light force points in their reserve. Kylo and Snoke have been running unchecked and rocking up some serious dark side over time, so by the time Rei comes along the surplus light side is ready burst at the seams and when it decides to channel it to her it's not a small trickle but a full on tidal wave.

I think that also may be why her experience with the dark side was so much different than Luke's there was a distinct pull where with Rei there's an over saturation of dark side in Snoke and Kylo and so it's not pulling her at the same strength as if needed more dark side conduits.

Light and Dark side balance is akin to the Law of Conservation of Ninjitsu http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ConservationOfNinjutsu

Where each side only gets 100 Force points when there's only one person on a side they can get a full 100 points but if you have 10 people on a side all sharing that same 100 points then you are looking at varied number of points but it's kept in check so that the total combination never exceeds 100. Certain major events might create a temporary surplus or deficit, eventually that side has to return back to 100 be it one absolutely one badass 100-point Jeid/Sith or 100 1-point Jedi/Sith.

I believe the studio has spent some marketing money to conjure up a kind of character on whom it can pin negative reaction to TLJ. This character is:

- 25-45 years old
- male
- white
- emtionally immature/disturbed
- misogynist
- racist
- "obsessed" with Star Wars
- deeply committed to now-defunct SW products

In the context of the wider social mood, this character is completely unsympathetic. Anything he might be able to say about the weaknesses of a film would be completely undermined by his immoral, childish, and generally pathetic demeanor. Looking down on him makes people feel better about themselves. Making fun of him doesn't make you a bully; it makes you a Good Person.

He was the same guy who said The Force Awakens was a disappointing remake. He was the same guy who said Rogue One was boring. Of course, all Good People know he just doesn't like women and non-whites. So there's no reason to wonder if he had a point about those movies. Right?

Funny how the only time this guy gets any news coverage is when a corporation doesn't want the public talking about the actual movie it produced and distributed.

I still can't believe that there was no one in the production or marketing who thought maybe one of the main themes of the film shouldn't be "throw your old Star Wars gak out and move on".

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
I still can't believe that there was no one in the production or marketing who thought maybe one of the main themes of the film shouldn't be "throw your old Star Wars gak out and move on".

Sorry, what?

 paulson games wrote:
I caught it for a second time tonight and had originally missed a pretty significant line during the Snoke scene. He says "I warned my dark apprentice that as his powers grew so to would his light counterpart, I had assumed that to be Skywalker but I was mistaken".

This is pretty obviously the answer. I mean, what was the very first thing we heard in the very first trailer for the new movies? There has been an awakening. And it's right there in the title of the first movie. Rey is powerful because the force has chosen her as its champion, not because of her own skills.

Sure, it's apparent that Rey doesn't need training or anything. I've never had a problem with her suddenly developing Force powers and using a lightsaber like some kind of prodigy because it's pretty clear that she is in fact a prodigy. What's missing is any explanation of why this is the case. Is that how the Force works? If so, that's completely new and it needs to be explained. Also, why her instead of any of trillions of other beings? is a legitimate question that requires an answer.

 insaniak wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
I still can't believe that there was no one in the production or marketing who thought maybe one of the main themes of the film shouldn't be "throw your old Star Wars gak out and move on".

Sorry, what?

. How many variations were there of "forget the past. It doesn't matter."? Luke throws his lightsaber away. There is no attempt to bridge the "modern" era to the past, and some antipathy towards anyone who would want to connect current events with those in the beloved trilogy. We are urged to forget the family dynamics of the past, the trapping of master and apprenticeship, the perceived innocence of the Rebellion, the very concept of a hotshot flyboy who can save the day. Throw it away for it doesn't fit in today's world.

 Luciferian wrote:
YOU are confusing nihilism and Nietzsche. Nietzsche's Ubermensch takes responsibility to assign value and meaning.

The Übermensch is a goal set by humans, for humans. Humans who give that goal meaning because it does not have an intrinsic one; it's just just an allegory for "People suck, and should be better."

Though, thinking on it, introductory Nietzsche isn't a bad read on Ben. He's been told for his whole life that he isn't normal, and then he gets destroyed by someone who is...kind of, maybe.

 Manchu wrote:
Sure, it's apparent that Rey doesn't need training or anything. I've never had a problem with her suddenly developing Force powers and using a lightsaber like some kind of prodigy because it's pretty clear that she is in fact a prodigy. What's missing is any explanation of why this is the case. Is that how the Force works? If so, that's completely new and it needs to be explained. Also, why her instead of any of trillions of other beings? is a legitimate question that requires an answer.

I think it's a fair question and we'll probably see an answer in the next movie. I think that a lot of people looking back fondly at the original movies tend to remember them as a whole and tend to forget that many of the answers took 3 full films to explore, Vader being Luke's father, Leia being his sister that's all stuff that wasn't resolved until Jedi. A lot of people were screaming Mary Sue simply because the answer to everything wasn't directly in front of their nose at launch, it's obvious that there's some sort of deeper connection as to why Rei was chosen, be it her parents, her innocence, purity of spirit, unbreakable inner hope, or something else. I have a good feeling that we'll see that revealed in the next film but too many people want instant understanding and immediate resolution of every plot point, I blame the ipad generation and their inabilty to follow anything for more than 5 seconds

Luke is introduced as a normal nobody raised by his aunt and uncle. We see that he is curious about his mysterious father. Before his adventure begins and before he demonstrates any aptitude for anything but whining, he meets Obi-Wan who explains to him, as well as us, that his father was a great pilot and a Jedi knight. Obi-Wan says Luke should come with him on an adventure and learn about the Force. Luke initially demures but upon confrontation with the murder of his foster parents by the Empire, he is motivated to follow the apparent destiny unfurling before him.

I didn't need to see ESB or RotJ to learn about why Luke was worth caring about in ANH. But Disney wants me to see three of three films before explaining why Rey is worth caring about? (if it's even explained then, which is far from certain.)

 Manchu wrote:
I didn't need to see ESB or RotJ to learn about why Luke was worth caring about in ANH. But Disney wants me to see three of three films before explaining why Rey is worth caring about? (if it's even explained then, which is far from certain.)

I think that's unfortunate fallout due to the nature of movies being planned with dedicated sequels. When New Hope released it was a singular film and while Lucas had an idea of what he wanted with his story direction it was done as a singular film, there's a distinct change in the story telling approach in Empire as they had decided that it was now a multi part series. IMO none of the prequels did the concise job the ANH did because it was all meant to be extended to the next film in the chain so it happened well before the DIsney rebranding was ever a factor.

I think a lot of the Marvel movies suffer from the planned sequel structure as well. I still enjoy them but they just don't feel as strong as their initial movies do. This marks film 9 in the Star Wars chain and I can't think of many franchises that are doing well even at half that pace, I'm honestly surprised that the SW films actually aren't considerably worse. They may have lost some steam but after 9 films most franchises would be completely bust.

I can't even begin to imagine what type of mess the 9th film would be like for Terminator/Aliens/Tremors etc.

Trouble is, this isn't just the natural process of a franchise wearing thinner. TFA was cynically designed to raise questions that it was not designed to answer, just like (for example) Prometheus. Unfortunately, one of those questions was Why should the audience care about the protagonist? Last go around, I was willing to wait for the next go around. Two thirds through, no, my goodwill is now exhausted. It's too late.