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.

On one hand, I hated The Last Jedi. Abysmal, embarrassing attempt at a film. On the other hand, it made The Force Awakens appear much better (a movie which I walked out of thinking "meh"). Sometimes you need something really awful to make you reconsider how you feel about other things.

Ignoring the piss-poor general script, wandering plot, and sub-par action scenes, the film didn't tell a story, didn't accomplish anything, and undid everything from the previous film in an almost infantile temper tantrum. While this likely didn't happen, it came off as the end result of a meeting between directors which ended poorly. "I disagree with Abrams, I'll show him!" ---- and the second director subsequently just undid everything he could possibly do (always a great idea mid-trilogy....literally a set of films intended to tell a single contiguous story...) as fast as possible.

In theatre and when doing cooperative writing, etc. one of the main premises is "never say no". It's not as black and white as it sounds, but it is a general rule to not undo, refuse, or go against something another actor has improvised - as it ruins whatever you're trying to cooperatively build. It puts the other actor in a serious bind, and can stop a skit/scene/act dead in its tracks. That's how I felt watching The Last Jedi. And that's not praise.

As with all films which are divisive, the worst result is the "I know better than you" crowd. Or the "Well, you just missed what it was really saying...a truth only a handful of us have seen.", etc. You liked The Last Jedi? Good for you - but don't pretend you're part of some Star Wars based illuminati organization which holds the keys to true enlightenment. That gak is insufferable.

 Easy E wrote:
I think the biggest "problem" for me was I wanted simple morality play narratives of good vs. evil and I got Nihilism instead.

In this movie, essentially "Nothing Mattered". It didn;t matter what you did, it just didn't matter.

Spoiler:

Blew up the Dreadnought.... but the enemy fleet is still on your tail!
Search for your parents..... They aren't important.
Killed Leia and Luke.... No you didn't Leia lived and Luke faded away on his own.
Destroyed the resistance.... except they escaped.
Defeated the Empire.... No, they came back
Force was re-balanced.... except it wasn't.
Destroyed the sacred texts.... No, wrong again!
Killed Snoke.... but no one actually cares.
Rescued the animals.... except you really didn't.
Found the master hacker..... except he ended up being unhelpful

Essentially every single element of the movie followed this exact same pattern of something happened! But it doesn't matter because of X.

This movie only succeeded on one level. It was Theatre of the Absurd. If that was the intention, then congrats. You win and I bow to your mastery of creating Star Seinfeld.

This bothered me more the first time I saw the movie than the second. The movie is clearly and very intentionally subverting expectations, but to a large degree that only has that effect when you're not expecting it. On rewatch, the only reason these things feel out of place is because I've come to expect Star Wars to conform to a pretty rigid formula. Seeing the potential of the series to break out of its rut and go a new direction is part of what's been bumping it up my rankings on repeated viewings.

To me there are obvious parallels between TLJ and TESB in the same way there are obvious parallels between ANH and TFA.

To look at the top line, the previous films finish on a high with the Rebellion have administered a serious defeat to the Empire. The next films start with the Rebellion unexpectedly under attack, and having to flee from the Imperial fleet, which they accomplish with some heroics and losses. There's even a mirror parallel element of the big ground battles occuring on deserted planets -- ice at the beginning of TESB and salt desert at the end of TLJ.

At the end of both films the Rebellion has suffered severe losses -- heroes dead, injured or captured -- and they have been kicked off their sanctuary planet and have to flee into deep space. Yet there is an element of hope in the final scene. In TESB Luke gets his hand back and they gaze at the galaxy. In TLJ the child slaves are quietly spreading the word of the Rebellion.

I can't see how this is meaningless or nihilistic. It's necessary for the heroes to suffer losses and defeats or there is no point in their heroics.

One thing that stands out between that is that at the end of ANH is that it's shown that people and planets are still willing to stand behind the Rebellion and help fight the Empire..

The Resistance is actively spurned and turned away by the remaining government, and many alien planets aren't willing to give them the time of day to help them. The First Order is apparently as large as the Empire now and many planets are coming under thrall to them almost willingly. It also seems to help that despite being humancentric the First Order tolerates aliens on a better basis then the Empire did given how many on Canto Blight were rich aliens who were willingly selling weaponry to the First Order and reaping the benefits.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
To me there are obvious parallels between TLJ and TESB in the same way there are obvious parallels between ANH and TFA.

To look at the top line, the previous films finish on a high with the Rebellion have administered a serious defeat to the Empire. The next films start with the Rebellion unexpectedly under attack, and having to flee from the Imperial fleet, which they accomplish with some heroics and losses. There's even a mirror parallel element of the big ground battles occuring on deserted planets -- ice at the beginning of TESB and salt desert at the end of TLJ.

At the end of both films the Rebellion has suffered severe losses -- heroes dead, injured or captured -- and they have been kicked off their sanctuary planet and have to flee into deep space. Yet there is an element of hope in the final scene. In TESB Luke gets his hand back and they gaze at the galaxy. In TLJ the child slaves are quietly spreading the word of the Rebellion.

I can't see how this is meaningless or nihilistic. It's necessary for the heroes to suffer losses and defeats or there is no point in their heroics.

I guess I didn't see the bunch of slave kids at the end, who are still slaves; very hopeful. I actually found it dpressing because it reminded me that the Rebels had the chance to help them, but instead rescued the horses.

Compared to the end of TESB where they are actively launching a rescue mission and have found the remanants of the rebel fleet. That is an active hope, as opposed to the slave kids passive hope.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
To me there are obvious parallels between TLJ and TESB in the same way there are obvious parallels between ANH and TFA.

To look at the top line, the previous films finish on a high with the Rebellion have administered a serious defeat to the Empire. The next films start with the Rebellion unexpectedly under attack, and having to flee from the Imperial fleet, which they accomplish with some heroics and losses. There's even a mirror parallel element of the big ground battles occuring on deserted planets -- ice at the beginning of TESB and salt desert at the end of TLJ.

At the end of both films the Rebellion has suffered severe losses -- heroes dead, injured or captured -- and they have been kicked off their sanctuary planet and have to flee into deep space. Yet there is an element of hope in the final scene. In TESB Luke gets his hand back and they gaze at the galaxy. In TLJ the child slaves are quietly spreading the word of the Rebellion.

I can't see how this is meaningless or nihilistic. It's necessary for the heroes to suffer losses and defeats or there is no point in their heroics.

There is also the whole issue that the First Order took over the entire known galaxy in a day - maybe two if you stretch stuff a bit. And apart from a single crappy ship full of misfits and total idiots - no one cared.

Compared with the whole Leia speech of "the more you tighten your grip...." and the fact that there are plenty of rebels - by the end of TLJ there are what 12 and one ship. and still no one else cares. Oh and three kids - somewhere.

They even do the whole "We call for help" and no one answers - not that no one shows up - out of an entire galaxy not a single person even replies.

Maybe that's because like in Hitchhikers they had got rid of the useless parts of their population http://hitchhikers.wikia.com/wiki/Golgafrincham

As bad as some of the EU was, and as bad as the Phantom Menace was, and to be fair, it's not that bad IMO

At least Lucas and Co back then cared about the product they were producing.

Poor execution, but their heart was in the right place.

TLJ in contrast is just one big middle finger to anybody who watches it.

Now and again, I do charity work that involves driving mentally disabled people to days out: bowling, pizza, cinema etc etc

Even when I know the film is going to be bad, it's better to watch the film than stay in the van.

I wished I had stayed in the van that day. Naturally, I couldn't say anything to them at the time, because they were over the moon.

But had I been there in other circumstances, I probably would have hurled something at the screen.

 LunarSol wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
I think the biggest "problem" for me was I wanted simple morality play narratives of good vs. evil and I got Nihilism instead.

In this movie, essentially "Nothing Mattered". It didn;t matter what you did, it just didn't matter.

Spoiler:

Blew up the Dreadnought.... but the enemy fleet is still on your tail!
Search for your parents..... They aren't important.
Killed Leia and Luke.... No you didn't Leia lived and Luke faded away on his own.
Destroyed the resistance.... except they escaped.
Defeated the Empire.... No, they came back
Force was re-balanced.... except it wasn't.
Destroyed the sacred texts.... No, wrong again!
Killed Snoke.... but no one actually cares.
Rescued the animals.... except you really didn't.
Found the master hacker..... except he ended up being unhelpful

Essentially every single element of the movie followed this exact same pattern of something happened! But it doesn't matter because of X.

This movie only succeeded on one level. It was Theatre of the Absurd. If that was the intention, then congrats. You win and I bow to your mastery of creating Star Seinfeld.

This bothered me more the first time I saw the movie than the second. The movie is clearly and very intentionally subverting expectations, but to a large degree that only has that effect when you're not expecting it. On rewatch, the only reason these things feel out of place is because I've come to expect Star Wars to conform to a pretty rigid formula. Seeing the potential of the series to break out of its rut and go a new direction is part of what's been bumping it up my rankings on repeated viewings.

Yes, to be fair I have only seen it once and have no real desire to see it or part 3 of the trilogy. I understand where it broke the rigid formula of Star Wars, and I agree this needed to be done. However, I do not like the method it used to pursue this goal for a simple reason. Nothing that happens in the future movies will matter.... because nothing that has happened in this movie or ANY Star Wars movie has mattered to the universe they are set in. If the stakes are irrelevant, I have no reason to watch anymore. If the darkness is defeated, another will simply rise to replace it. If the good is destroyed, more good will be brought forth. Characters will die pointlessly because they are ideaistically pursuing an idea (Either Imperial or Rebel) that is actually utterly pointless because no matter what ideal wins or loses, it will just coome back in the next generation. It is an endless cycle with no point and no catharsis. There is no Kantian progression or progress, only repetition of the same patterns for eternity. Boring and dull.

The Benicio Del Torro character pretty much summed up the nihilistic outlook of the movie perfectly in his dialogue and the nature of the Force as explained only reinforced it. Re-watch those bits and see if you come to a different conclusion. Perhaps Nihilism isn't the right word choice, but the movie basicaly is a big "F-U" as nothing you have spent time watching or thinking about means a damn to anything. This movie actively has contempt for the viewer..... :(

 Easy E wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
I think the biggest "problem" for me was I wanted simple morality play narratives of good vs. evil and I got Nihilism instead.

In this movie, essentially "Nothing Mattered". It didn;t matter what you did, it just didn't matter.

Spoiler:

Blew up the Dreadnought.... but the enemy fleet is still on your tail!
Search for your parents..... They aren't important.
Killed Leia and Luke.... No you didn't Leia lived and Luke faded away on his own.
Destroyed the resistance.... except they escaped.
Defeated the Empire.... No, they came back
Force was re-balanced.... except it wasn't.
Destroyed the sacred texts.... No, wrong again!
Killed Snoke.... but no one actually cares.
Rescued the animals.... except you really didn't.
Found the master hacker..... except he ended up being unhelpful

Essentially every single element of the movie followed this exact same pattern of something happened! But it doesn't matter because of X.

This movie only succeeded on one level. It was Theatre of the Absurd. If that was the intention, then congrats. You win and I bow to your mastery of creating Star Seinfeld.

This bothered me more the first time I saw the movie than the second. The movie is clearly and very intentionally subverting expectations, but to a large degree that only has that effect when you're not expecting it. On rewatch, the only reason these things feel out of place is because I've come to expect Star Wars to conform to a pretty rigid formula. Seeing the potential of the series to break out of its rut and go a new direction is part of what's been bumping it up my rankings on repeated viewings.

Yes, to be fair I have only seen it once and have no real desire to see it or part 3 of the trilogy. I understand where it broke the rigid formula of Star Wars, and I agree this needed to be done. However, I do not like the method it used to pursue this goal for a simple reason. Nothing that happens in the future movies will matter.... because nothing that has happened in this movie or ANY Star Wars movie has mattered to the universe they are set in. If the stakes are irrelevant, I have no reason to watch anymore. If the darkness is defeated, another will simply rise to replace it. If the good is destroyed, more good will be brought forth. Characters will die pointlessly because they are ideaistically pursuing an idea (Either Imperial or Rebel) that is actually utterly pointless because no matter what ideal wins or loses, it will just coome back in the next generation. It is an endless cycle with no point and no catharsis. There is no Kantian progression or progress, only repetition of the same patterns for eternity. Boring and dull.

The Benicio Del Torro character pretty much summed up the nihilistic outlook of the movie perfectly in his dialogue and the nature of the Force as explained only reinforced it. Re-watch those bits and see if you come to a different conclusion. Perhaps Nihilism isn't the right word choice, but the movie basicaly is a big "F-U" as nothing you have spent time watching or thinking about means a damn to anything. This movie actively has contempt for the viewer..... :(

Maybe it was the Directors view - it really doesn't matter what crap I produce - it will still sell as its Star Wars.

 Peregrine wrote:
Of course, and none of us have all of the numbers to do more than speculate.

Addressed here:

 Manchu wrote:
Now the obvious counterpoint is that Disney stands to make who knows what kind of money "in the long run" but there's really no substance there apart from a best case scenario assumption ... and the best case scenario played out for TFA but not for R1 or TLJ.

 Easy E wrote:
I actually found it dpressing because it reminded me that the Rebels had the chance to help them, but instead rescued the horses.

Literally made me LOL. It's even worse. The alien horses were not rescued; merely used as a distraction then left to be recaptured. The point of that scene almost seems to be that Rose is a shallow moron. Imagine the same character played by a man, maybe Randy Quaid or John C. Reilly.

 Easy E wrote:

Yes, to be fair I have only seen it once and have no real desire to see it or part 3 of the trilogy. I understand where it broke the rigid formula of Star Wars, and I agree this needed to be done. However, I do not like the method it used to pursue this goal for a simple reason. Nothing that happens in the future movies will matter.... because nothing that has happened in this movie or ANY Star Wars movie has mattered to the universe they are set in. If the stakes are irrelevant, I have no reason to watch anymore. If the darkness is defeated, another will simply rise to replace it. If the good is destroyed, more good will be brought forth. Characters will die pointlessly because they are ideaistically pursuing an idea (Either Imperial or Rebel) that is actually utterly pointless because no matter what ideal wins or loses, it will just coome back in the next generation. It is an endless cycle with no point and no catharsis. There is no Kantian progression or progress, only repetition of the same patterns for eternity. Boring and dull.

The Benicio Del Torro character pretty much summed up the nihilistic outlook of the movie perfectly in his dialogue and the nature of the Force as explained only reinforced it. Re-watch those bits and see if you come to a different conclusion. Perhaps Nihilism isn't the right word choice, but the movie basicaly is a big "F-U" as nothing you have spent time watching or thinking about means a damn to anything. This movie actively has contempt for the viewer..... :(

This is essentially where Star Wars has been stuck since..... '99? Probably sooner, but we had had a good break prior to the EU; but I hit full checked out nihilism when the Vong were introduced.

 LunarSol wrote:

 Easy E wrote:

Yes, to be fair I have only seen it once and have no real desire to see it or part 3 of the trilogy. I understand where it broke the rigid formula of Star Wars, and I agree this needed to be done. However, I do not like the method it used to pursue this goal for a simple reason. Nothing that happens in the future movies will matter.... because nothing that has happened in this movie or ANY Star Wars movie has mattered to the universe they are set in. If the stakes are irrelevant, I have no reason to watch anymore. If the darkness is defeated, another will simply rise to replace it. If the good is destroyed, more good will be brought forth. Characters will die pointlessly because they are ideaistically pursuing an idea (Either Imperial or Rebel) that is actually utterly pointless because no matter what ideal wins or loses, it will just coome back in the next generation. It is an endless cycle with no point and no catharsis. There is no Kantian progression or progress, only repetition of the same patterns for eternity. Boring and dull.

The Benicio Del Torro character pretty much summed up the nihilistic outlook of the movie perfectly in his dialogue and the nature of the Force as explained only reinforced it. Re-watch those bits and see if you come to a different conclusion. Perhaps Nihilism isn't the right word choice, but the movie basicaly is a big "F-U" as nothing you have spent time watching or thinking about means a damn to anything. This movie actively has contempt for the viewer..... :(

This is essentially where Star Wars has been stuck since..... '99? Probably sooner, but we had had a good break prior to the EU; but I hit full checked out nihilism when the Vong were introduced.

Yes, in the EU. A new mainstream trilogy is not the EU.

I only ever read the Dark Force Rising trilogy.

Right, I'm just saying that as long as the universe is focused on the Jedi/Sith conflict there's always going to be an emphasis of this. Even KotOR basically hard reset the first game for the sequel, had all the good guys dead again and the Sith conquering the galaxy.

I think part of the appeal for me with the way TLJ works is that for all the times I've seen this story play out, this is probably the first time where I've seen the Light and Dark treated as contemporaries to the point of almost being dual protagonists. It's probably the first time since "something something Dark Siiiiide" where I've actually saw potential in exploring it.

If Star Wars is perpetually trapped repeating this conflict, I'm just finding this particular iteration the most compelling since the original.

 LunarSol wrote:
this is probably the first time where I've seen the Light and Dark treated as contemporaries to the point of almost being dual protagonists.

That's a very strong point but it's actually an innovation of TFA rather than TLJ, plus it's something TLJ decisively squandered by the end of the film.

 LunarSol wrote:

If Star Wars is perpetually trapped repeating this conflict, I'm just finding this particular iteration the most compelling since the original.

I think we are in agreement. The cycle needs to be broken, as I am not super familiar with how the Force is handled out side of "Movie" Star Wars. There it was not a perpetual cycle of Good stamping out Evil, and then Vice-versa since the movies covered it for a specific time period and related to a specific Father/Son arc.

 Manchu wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:
this is probably the first time where I've seen the Light and Dark treated as contemporaries to the point of almost being dual protagonists.

That's a very strong point but it's actually an innovation of TFA rather than TLJ, plus it's something TLJ decisively squandered by the end of the film.

TFA definitely created the potential. It takes its time bringing that to bear (I didn't really appreciate what they were doing until the snowfight) but I think TLJ made it a reality. I don't consider it at all squandered and actually really like where they left it off, but it depends on where they take it going forward. If they just throw the two of them at each other in the end in a Rey vs Emperor Ren to free the galaxy, then, yes, at that point I will consider the potential squandered. The important thing to me though is that the movie ends with to a degree both characters rejecting former masters and being more or less free to build their side from scratch. It's almost in the exciting place the Jedi were at, post RotJ, but for both sides this time.

I'm really hoping they put a time skip in before the next film, because I really feel like TLJ gave them the canvas to write a conflict as interesting as the original. Unfortunately, the job of doing so is left to the guy who failed to establish the new setting in the first place. I personally find a lot of the backlash heartbreaking, because despite being please with TFA I'm sure the end result of the fan reaction to TLJ will cause them to squander the opportunity to craft a new and compelling status quo and instead go back to the more fan service laden style of the previous film.

TLJ already gave up on creating a new and compelling status quo. Kylo Ren gives a great monologue about doing something different. Then inexplicably does exactly the thing baddies do in SW movies. Same for Rey. Did Rian Johnson write this scene to show SW characters being unaware of how contrived their moral universe is?

 LunarSol wrote:
I personally find a lot of the backlash heartbreaking, because despite being please with TFA I'm sure the end result of the fan reaction to TLJ will cause them to squander the opportunity to craft a new and compelling status quo and instead go back to the more fan service laden style of the previous film.

Maybe. The path forward is...interesting. My big question is whether Disney will really call it quits with the 'main' SW films after episode 9.

I like both TFA and TLJ for very different reasons. But I certainly admit it's been a weird ride as the first and second parts of a trilogy, and that's what you can get with a director-driven approach, especially when they aren't playing nice. JJ handled Johnson a big turd sandwich in the form of very limited and restrictive story threads, complete with a cliffhanger needing resolution. Um...thanks? So I understand why Johnson said 'feth it' and took a wrecking ball to the thing. It was either that or continue telling JJ's very obvious story.

But where does that leave them with ep 9? It's wide-open...and maybe too open to wrap it up as a trilogy. Um...thanks? I wouldn't be shocked to see 10 coming right on its heels, OR an ending with less closure than expected, so that they can extend the story into spinoff films and into other mediums.

They can't be ready to discard the Rey character after episode 9. Makes no business sense, and it might not make a lot of story sense either.

 Manchu wrote:
TLJ already gave up on creating a new and compelling status quo. Kylo Ren gives a great monologue about doing something different. Then inexplicably does exactly the thing baddies do in SW movies. Same for Rey. Did Rian Johnson write this scene to show SW characters being unaware of how contrived their moral universe is?

I think thats trying to give the director far more credit than he deserves. Someone who actually wanted a challenge might have had Ren go on a different path but no he goes for "hey look i am evil"

 gorgon wrote:
JJ handled Johnson a big turd sandwich in the form of very limited and restrictive story threads, complete with a cliffhanger needing resolution.

This is so bizarre to me. We're talking episodes in a trilogy. So whoever the next director in line is shouldn't expect anything but to continue the story from the previous point. TFA's cliffhanger had me ready for more Star Wars. TLJ's whimper of an ending, which played like a Target toy commercial, made me feel nauseous about all things Star Wars. If TLJ is anything to go by then nothing that happens in TLJ even matters going forward, in which case there can be no argument that TLJ does a better job setting up Episode IX than TFA did for TLJ, even if you set aside that TLJ itself is nothing but turd sandwich.

After all these months, I think the only explanation is Rian Johnson hates Star Wars. I don't mean that in the normal, petty way, like as another way of saying TLJ is bad. I mean, he seems to hate that Star Wars is this fairly shallow, narrow thing. But his effort to "do something different" was not at all successful except in the most literal sense that it doesn't feel like a Star Wars movie, to the point where, because I know he has seen Star Wars before and as a writer is smart enough to understand what it is, I have to conclude that he hates it.

It would not surprise me at all if in an interview when he's 80 years old he says, look I just wanted to show people that there is not much going on with Star Wars.

 Mr Morden wrote:
I think thats trying to give the director far more credit than he deserves. Someone who actually wanted a challenge might have had Ren go on a different path but no he goes for "hey look i am evil"

I don't follow your point here, as I'm saying that Rian Johnson raised and then squandered the notion that Star Wars could do something other than light versus darkness. I mean, I think he's smart enough to know that's what he did and therefore it stands to reason that he intended it - in which case, it also stands to reason that he was making a point. Unless you think Kathleen Kennedy forced him at the last minute to rewrite a meaningful Rey/Ren teamup out of the movie in favor of "just more Star Wars."

I honestly don't thnk there was that much thought that went into the film.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
To me there are obvious parallels between TLJ and TESB in the same way there are obvious parallels between ANH and TFA.

To look at the top line, the previous films finish on a high with the Rebellion have administered a serious defeat to the Empire. The next films start with the Rebellion unexpectedly under attack, and having to flee from the Imperial fleet, which they accomplish with some heroics and losses. There's even a mirror parallel element of the big ground battles occuring on deserted planets -- ice at the beginning of TESB and salt desert at the end of TLJ.

At the end of both films the Rebellion has suffered severe losses -- heroes dead, injured or captured -- and they have been kicked off their sanctuary planet and have to flee into deep space. Yet there is an element of hope in the final scene. In TESB Luke gets his hand back and they gaze at the galaxy. In TLJ the child slaves are quietly spreading the word of the Rebellion.

I can't see how this is meaningless or nihilistic. It's necessary for the heroes to suffer losses and defeats or there is no point in their heroics.

At the end of ESB you finally see the Rebel Fleet, complete with capital ships. Helps you see that despite the losses suffered, the Rebellion is not a spent force yet.

During the course of TLJ, you go from having a Resistance Fleet complete with capital ships and thousands of crew members, fighter compliment, and ground troops down to cramming a couple dozen survivors onto the Millennium Falcon. The Resistance very much is a spent force a the end of the movie, and there's no real hope for them to accomplish anything on their own anymore.

I think that one of my key disappointments with the new trilogy is that I was hoping that it would take an MCU approach to the old EU (Take the best bits, but paint in broad strokes). So, say, the Thrawn Trilogy would get re-jigged to account for being set 30 years later in the timeline. Leia ends up as the leader of the New Republic, while her kids ends up shouldering a lot of her/Luke's arc,and "Mara Jade" is changed to be a first order scout/assassin. The First Order is powerful because it found Palpatines stash, etc.

Instead, we get one movie (TFA) that is a remake in all but name, one that is a pretty good backstory film (Rogue One), and one that seems to hate Star Wars, while still containing the major story beats of Empire (TLJ).

I have ZERO interest in more clones and tying everything back to palpatine again.

Move forward. Leave the old gak behind. Ignoring the EU is the best decision they made.

 Lance845 wrote:
I have ZERO interest in more clones and tying everything back to palpatine again.

Move forward. Leave the old gak behind. Ignoring the EU is the best decision they made.

It's not a great solution, I admit. However, my main thing is that it ties three loose ends up in one plot (Snoke ID, FO power, how the Resistance is supposed to succeed).

 Crazy_Carnifex wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
I have ZERO interest in more clones and tying everything back to palpatine again.

Move forward. Leave the old gak behind. Ignoring the EU is the best decision they made.

It's not a great solution, I admit. However, my main thing is that it ties three loose ends up in one plot (Snoke ID, FO power, how the Resistance is supposed to succeed).

Go back and watch episodes 4 5 and 6 again.

You have no idea who palpatine is, you have no idea how the empire came to power, and you have no idea how the rebel alliance is supposed to beat this endless massive war machine that can, by RotJ, clearly produce moon sized planet destroying space stations in fairly quick succession.

All of these questions are given a massive pass. Have always been given a massive pass. Why are they important now?

Did episodes 1 2 and 3 really make any of it better? Watching a bunch of politics and senate meetings and walking down endless cgi corridors that go to nowhere. Was Vaders character better BEFORE we got Anakins REAL crap story or after? Was it cooler to wonder what the clone wars might have been or did the clones wars getting explained as a massive army of Fett clones fighting robots over trade disputes really make the setting better?

You're looking for answers to questions that ultimately don't have answers that matter, and answering them in movie form tends to make the whole thing worse in effect.

The problem is that we very much need answers... How did we get here (TFA) from there (ROTJ)? Those questions are crucial.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
The problem is that we very much need answers... How did we get here (TFA) from there (ROTJ)? Those questions are crucial.

Disagree. It's not crucial.

SW was written, from the very beginning, to be like a flash gordon serial that played in theaters when George Lucas was a kid.

That means you walk in to a episode in a series with little or no context of whats going on with big action and adventure. It's why we started with Episode 4 (not originally called episode 4, or a new hope but just "Star Wars") which has an opening crawl to give you the only bits of information you need to know whats happening RIGHT NOW. It doesn't matter how they got there. All that matters is that you walk in during the thick of it and see the pulpy action in the space fantasy.

It's also why there is a time jump from the end of every movie to the beginning of the next. We don't need to know how we got from the rebels fleeing cloud city to the rescue op on tatooine. Or how we went from a medal award ceremony to the rebels fleeing from a battle they cannot win. How did Vader get saved from his Tie flying off into space out of control? "THESE QUESTIONS ARE CRUCIAL!"

Episode 7 is no different from episode 4. You are walking in to a random chapter in a sci fi adventure serial. Heres whats happening. Sit back and enjoy.

You thinking it's critical to know these things goes against the very nature of what SW is supposed to be.

There are two problems with the "old serial" explanation:

1) You can't just walk in because TFA breaks genre conventions. It sets up the rebellion against the evil empire, but then suddenly reverses the whole thing and says "but wait, the republic is still around and the evil empire isn't really in control" shortly before blowing up the republic capital. So what is the evil empire then? They clearly don't control the galaxy like you thought at the beginning of the movie, so why are they so scary? Why hasn't the existing government of the galaxy dealt with such an obvious military threat? Etc. Without the background material you don't really understand what's going on.

2) Unlike ANH a major part of TFA was nostalgia for the OT. Half the characters are returning, with story elements that depend on knowing the OT. Do you really think that TFA would have been anywhere near as big without that existing history of the Star Wars universe? Of course not. So if you're going to write the next chapter in the story you have to give a plausible explanation for how you get from "the story is over, the good guys win, every plot element is resolved" to "actually, the bad guys won/didn't win/whatever and everything sucks for all the old characters".

You don't have the same problem with things like the gap between ESB and ROTJ because everything at the start of ROTJ follows from what you expect after ESB. At the end of ESB they say "we've got a plan, we're going to rescue Han" and then at the start of ROTJ you see them doing exactly that. You don't need to explicitly witness all of the planning meetings for the rescue attempt because there's nothing surprising about the situation.

 Vulcan wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
To me there are obvious parallels between TLJ and TESB in the same way there are obvious parallels between ANH and TFA.

To look at the top line, the previous films finish on a high with the Rebellion have administered a serious defeat to the Empire. The next films start with the Rebellion unexpectedly under attack, and having to flee from the Imperial fleet, which they accomplish with some heroics and losses. There's even a mirror parallel element of the big ground battles occuring on deserted planets -- ice at the beginning of TESB and salt desert at the end of TLJ.

At the end of both films the Rebellion has suffered severe losses -- heroes dead, injured or captured -- and they have been kicked off their sanctuary planet and have to flee into deep space. Yet there is an element of hope in the final scene. In TESB Luke gets his hand back and they gaze at the galaxy. In TLJ the child slaves are quietly spreading the word of the Rebellion.

I can't see how this is meaningless or nihilistic. It's necessary for the heroes to suffer losses and defeats or there is no point in their heroics.

At the end of ESB you finally see the Rebel Fleet, complete with capital ships. Helps you see that despite the losses suffered, the Rebellion is not a spent force yet.

During the course of TLJ, you go from having a Resistance Fleet complete with capital ships and thousands of crew members, fighter compliment, and ground troops down to cramming a couple dozen survivors onto the Millennium Falcon. The Resistance very much is a spent force a the end of the movie, and there's no real hope for them to accomplish anything on their own anymore.

You've made a mechanistic interpretation of the situation. In every SW film the Rebellion is wildly out-gunned and out-numbered by the Empire.

The scene with the young slaves shows there is real hope.

These facts are why the Rebellion's triumph will be all the greater in the end.