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.

 Manchu wrote:
Yep, I think that’s the thing we can draw a line under. By contrast, the PT evoked a sense of shared suffering — probably because there was no sophisticated viral marketing campaign to shift the narrative from how bad the movies were to how bad the fans are. There was a certain innocence or at least transparency to the almost surreal problems with those movies. They were, at the end of the day, super glossy indy films. But they were assuredly Star Wars films, regardless of how bad they were and whether anyone liked them. The initial hurdle with these Disney films is, there’s nothing but the exchange of money for ownership to “prove” they are SW. So with TFA, Disney got JJ to reshoot ANH. And everything one superficially associated with SW was re-presented in a just slightly different way. This caused some groans but by and large the fans were on board and even eager for more. Then comes TLJ and the whole fragile, expensive thing snapped like a thin glass wire.

I saw the whole thing with Phantom Menace and other prequels. Reaction of the fanbase was exact same. Also they were just as cynical as Disney movies in getting the merchandise marketed and making tons of money (which they did). And the prequels borrowed tons of stuff from the OT and had the most pointless, stupid fan service moments imaginable so I don't know where the idea comes that they were 'more Star Wars' or 'less superficial'.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:

 gorgon wrote:
...speeder bikes were the original Canto Bight.

Hardly. The speeder bike chase makes sense in the context of the rest of the story, accomplishes the required plot goal of separating certain characters, and doesn't revolve around an ongoing competition to see who can be the stupidest character in the setting. And, most importantly, it doesn't take that long.

No. The speeder scene, for what it does, is long. Really long, and tedious. If they wanted to separate characters (I don't really see if it was necessary) then they could have done it in 10 seconds. The scene is there just to provide action because somebody thought that movie needed some at that point, and give merchandise range another toy to sell.

 Peregrine wrote:

Canto Bight drags on and on and on and on and the whole thing is utterly pointless. Finn and Mandatory Love Interest™ could have stayed on board the ship and things would have worked out better for everyone. Their entire plan depends on a ridiculous technobabble plot device handwaved out of nowhere, bounces from idiotic decision to idiotic decision with a side note of childish attempts at preaching a message, and ends up accomplishing absolutely nothing besides filling up a bunch of time. Replace the entire Canto Bight sequence with a brief clip of a First Order officer commenting "lol, those cloaks aren't good enough to hide from our sensors" and nothing of value is lost.

So in top of everything else, you'd give FO new type of super-sensor capable of seeing through the cloak? Talk about all the good toys being concentrated for one side.

Point of the Canto Bight subplot is threefold:
1. They need to show part of the galaxy which is unaligned - that not everyone is either Resistance or First Order, that there are places which this war doesn't touch, in fact most of the galaxy is probably unaffected by this conflict.
2. They needed one more increasingly desperate plan from Resistance, and they needed it to fail, to really drive home that they are screwed.
3. They needed to show that First Order were not merely completely incompetent fools who just happened to own more and bigger guns. All those cloak & dagger infiltration missions they do all the time in Star Wars stories are dangerous, one might get caught - hey, they were! By a routine security measure no less. How about that.

When I watched the whole subplot happen, I wasn't too excited about it, I was like "yawn, yet another daring infiltration and sabotage subplot, this is pretty ludicrous, why should this ever work out - whoa, it didn't! Well that makes sense actually. And that shady scoundrel they met in the jail wasn't too trustworthy, whadda shocker!" Basically the subplot brought viewer back to Earth: desperate stunts don't always work.

In a movie where everything was already going wrong for the resistance, the audience needed another moment of everything going wrong in order to bring them back to Earth, followed by a moment of heroic sacrifice is good, followed by everything is going wrong, heroic sacrifice is bad, heroic sacrifice is good as long as you're projecting yourself across the galaxy, by the way we actually have hope now there's only a dozen of us?

epronovost wrote:
In my opinion, that's what the movie was trying to present as central element. There are no easy answer to existential question. There are no easy solutions.

I think that's what the film wanted.

I don't think it did a good job.

The heroes are plainly heroic, the villains are plainly villainous, and asking a bunch of questions and just noting "answers are hard" while not actually giving any is a complete cop-out. A damn toddler can tell you answers are hard, in the way a toddler might realize they have no idea how to handle a situation and start crying. It's not some grand revelation to note that answers are hard.

That's the artistic merit of a high school hack who thinks they're more clever than they really are.

Backfire wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
Yep, I think that’s the thing we can draw a line under. By contrast, the PT evoked a sense of shared suffering — probably because there was no sophisticated viral marketing campaign to shift the narrative from how bad the movies were to how bad the fans are. There was a certain innocence or at least transparency to the almost surreal problems with those movies. They were, at the end of the day, super glossy indy films. But they were assuredly Star Wars films, regardless of how bad they were and whether anyone liked them. The initial hurdle with these Disney films is, there’s nothing but the exchange of money for ownership to “prove” they are SW. So with TFA, Disney got JJ to reshoot ANH. And everything one superficially associated with SW was re-presented in a just slightly different way. This caused some groans but by and large the fans were on board and even eager for more. Then comes TLJ and the whole fragile, expensive thing snapped like a thin glass wire.

I saw the whole thing with Phantom Menace and other prequels. Reaction of the fanbase was exact same. Also they were just as cynical as Disney movies in getting the merchandise marketed and making tons of money (which they did). And the prequels borrowed tons of stuff from the OT and had the most pointless, stupid fan service moments imaginable so I don't know where the idea comes that they were 'more Star Wars' or 'less superficial'.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:

 gorgon wrote:
...speeder bikes were the original Canto Bight.

Hardly. The speeder bike chase makes sense in the context of the rest of the story, accomplishes the required plot goal of separating certain characters, and doesn't revolve around an ongoing competition to see who can be the stupidest character in the setting. And, most importantly, it doesn't take that long.

No. The speeder scene, for what it does, is long. Really long, and tedious. If they wanted to separate characters (I don't really see if it was necessary) then they could have done it in 10 seconds. The scene is there just to provide action because somebody thought that movie needed some at that point, and give merchandise range another toy to sell.

 Peregrine wrote:

Canto Bight drags on and on and on and on and the whole thing is utterly pointless. Finn and Mandatory Love Interest™ could have stayed on board the ship and things would have worked out better for everyone. Their entire plan depends on a ridiculous technobabble plot device handwaved out of nowhere, bounces from idiotic decision to idiotic decision with a side note of childish attempts at preaching a message, and ends up accomplishing absolutely nothing besides filling up a bunch of time. Replace the entire Canto Bight sequence with a brief clip of a First Order officer commenting "lol, those cloaks aren't good enough to hide from our sensors" and nothing of value is lost.

So in top of everything else, you'd give FO new type of super-sensor capable of seeing through the cloak? Talk about all the good toys being concentrated for one side.

Point of the Canto Bight subplot is threefold:
1. They need to show part of the galaxy which is unaligned - that not everyone is either Resistance or First Order, that there are places which this war doesn't touch, in fact most of the galaxy is probably unaffected by this conflict.
2. They needed one more increasingly desperate plan from Resistance, and they needed it to fail, to really drive home that they are screwed.
3. They needed to show that First Order were not merely completely incompetent fools who just happened to own more and bigger guns. All those cloak & dagger infiltration missions they do all the time in Star Wars stories are dangerous, one might get caught - hey, they were! By a routine security measure no less. How about that.

When I watched the whole subplot happen, I wasn't too excited about it, I was like "yawn, yet another daring infiltration and sabotage subplot, this is pretty ludicrous, why should this ever work out - whoa, it didn't! Well that makes sense actually. And that shady scoundrel they met in the jail wasn't too trustworthy, whadda shocker!" Basically the subplot brought viewer back to Earth: desperate stunts don't always work.

Ever considered that the reaction might be because the not only is the TLJ a piece of festering gak but the prequals were also bad?

RJohnson was the idiot who gave the First Order all the shiny tech - but in another one of his idiot elements had to be told to turn on their own sensors

Casino World - defending this nonsesnse is impressivly brave

on your points:
1. No it just showed that one career criminal/arms dealer is neutral and that like people buy guns - wow they sure are edgy film makers,
Plus those on holiday at Casino world are not that bothered about a invasion of apparently everywhere.....likely cos half of the (like the viewers) are not really sure what is happening with this massive, instant invasion of the entire galaxy.

2. Really?? They spent a mostly tedious hour making sure that the rebels are completely and utterely screwed (mostly by their own stupdity) - and then had to do it again? Because?

3. Except it doesn't - it just underlines how incredably stupid the Rebels are - as you say - a basic procedure - but as the film hammers home every moment that no one has the mearest spark of intellegence - how does this help?

That's the artistic merit of a high school hack who thinks they're more clever than they really are.

sounds like a good description of the film makers - but I think its more like nursery school for them

I think the issue with casino world is that it enhanced an already existing problem in the new films;

Who fething cares? The Resistance and the First Order seem to care. The Republic presumably cared (though not enough to do anything about anything). But Casino world makes it feel like the rest of the universe doesn't care, and sees this presumably important conflict between good and evil as a trifle. It gets even dumber with the kids bit. The First Order isn't oppressing anyone on Casino world, rich douche bags are, so why is the Resistance resisting the First Order instead of the rich douche bags who are oppressing people? The films wants us to connect these two evils, even though there's no real connection between them and all brining it up does is beg the question who cares and what do they care about?

You don't make a movie where people constantly harp on and on about "hope" while constantly asking "who cares."

If we'd seen other planets in the galaxy first and firmly established the stakes in the central conflict of the films then casino world would be a great way to expand on the problems TLJ presents. Instead it just rams home how seemingly unimportant and infantile the Resistance's conflict with the First Order is.

 LordofHats wrote:
I think the issue with casino world is that it enhanced an already existing problem in the new films;
If we'd seen other planets in the galaxy first and firmly established the stakes in the central conflict of the films then casino world would be a great way to expand on the problems TLJ presents. Instead it just rams home how seemingly unimportant and infantile the Resistance's conflict with the First Order is.

I also thought it was weird in the first Disney star wars film how little geopolitical (galacto-political?) context they gave to set up the current conflict; who are the New Republic, what are their principal planets, what factions exist there etc.
It made the activation of the Super Death Star rather flat for me as I didn't even know which plant was destroyed or why it was important!

It's something that the prequels did very well, although it did mean they had to skip most the clone wars due to running out of screen time.

 Kroem wrote:
I also thought it was weird in the first Disney star wars film how little geopolitical (galacto-political?) context they gave to set up the current conflict; who are the New Republic, what are their principal planets, what factions exist there etc.

To be fair, the original SW movie didn't even show Alderon until it blew up. So we have ZERO idea of the stakes there either. We are only told it's important because it's Leia's homeworld
At least in TFA, we see the terror on the people's faces as they red beam comes to hit them.
The prequels kinda went too far in the other direction, showing TOO much "galacto-politics", which made for some kinda boring scenes.
If the sequel trilogy has failed at anything, it's that it had the opportunity to strike a balance between the two, but instead decided to double down on the OT trilogy's approach

-

Yea that's fair, I love all the political stuff but I can accept I'm an outlier in that regard! Just a little bit more context sprinkled around the swashbuckling space quest would have really upped the enjoyment for me.

I think that's why I enjoyed Rogue 1 so much, because the context had been so clearly established by other films I was 100% on board for the ride.

The PT was unquestionably “Star Wars” because George Lucas made it. The only claim Disney can make, by contrast, about why any of their movies are Star Wars movies is “we own it.” I’m not saying Lucas was less cynical. I am saying he wasn’t as clever about manipulating the narratives around his films.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@LoH — in re: Canto Bight — not only are the evil capitalists only vaguely connected to the FO, the movie makes clear that they are just as vaguely connected to the Resistance. DJ tells Finn, “don’t join” but the audience hears “don’t care.”


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Galef wrote:
To be fair, the original SW movie didn't even show Alderon until it blew up. So we have ZERO idea of the stakes there either. We are only told it's important because it's Leia's homeworld

It’s true we are never shown life on Alderaan but that is a matter of specific emotional rather than general political context. The point is not that it’s terrible that Alderaan specifically, as opposed to some other planet, was destroyed. The point was, the Empire callously snuffed out millions of lives because their home was conveniently located for making a point to the rest of the galaxy. All of this makes sense to the audience because the movie has already clearly and succinctly explained that the Empire is an autocratic regime that wants to replace democratic consent of the governed with rule by fear. The stakes couldn’t be more clear.

If the sequel trilogy has failed at anything, it's that it had the opportunity to strike a balance between the two, but instead decided to double down on the OT trilogy's approach

No, in contrast to the OT, the DT explains nothing about who any of the factions are or what they want.

Honestly, if they had just blown up Coruscant it would have been fine. The whole "migrating capital" thing that's not even remotely alluded to in the film makes the whole thing super confusing when it really doesn't have to be.

I believe that was Chandrilla. EDIT: Nope it was some place called “Hosnian Prime.”

Coruscant is still the capital of the Empire (not to be confused with the First Order).

Also the notion of a migrating capital was almost certainly an afterthought.

The thinking most likely went like this:

original Death Star big but Starkiller Base much bigger!

original Death Star blow up one planet but Starkiller Base blow up multiple planet!

“but why would they do that?”

>scene missing<

meanwhile, some novelist or comic book writer or visual guide editot has to answer questions like that

 Manchu wrote:
I believe that was Chandrilla. EDIT: Nope it was some place called “Hosnian Prime.”

Coruscant is still the capital of the Empire (not to be confused with the First Order).

Also the notion of a migrating capital was almost certainly an afterthought.

Its all what now?

Wierd how they thought none of this was worth mentioning but instead wasted half an hour of the film with a windows starfield screensave.

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
I believe that was Chandrilla. EDIT: Nope it was some place called “Hosnian Prime.”

Coruscant is still the capital of the Empire (not to be confused with the First Order).

Also the notion of a migrating capital was almost certainly an afterthought.

Its all what now?

Wierd how they thought none of this was worth mentioning but instead wasted half an hour of the film with a windows starfield screensave.

This should have come up in TFA, not TLJ.

But yeah, it's all in the execrable Aftermath book trilogy, a boring exercise in trying to create a post-Endor environment that could feasibly lead to the galaxy we see in TFA. If it wasn't for the genuinely amusing Sinjir Rath Velus, the gay, alcoholic ex Imperial 'Loyalty Officer' turned New Republic spy I'd have no memory of any of it.

 Riquende wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
I believe that was Chandrilla. EDIT: Nope it was some place called “Hosnian Prime.”

Coruscant is still the capital of the Empire (not to be confused with the First Order).

Also the notion of a migrating capital was almost certainly an afterthought.

Its all what now?

Wierd how they thought none of this was worth mentioning but instead wasted half an hour of the film with a windows starfield screensave.

This should have come up in TFA, not TLJ.

But yeah, it's all in the execrable Aftermath book trilogy, a boring exercise in trying to create a post-Endor environment that could feasibly lead to the galaxy we see in TFA. If it wasn't for the genuinely amusing Sinjir Rath Velus, the gay, alcoholic ex Imperial 'Loyalty Officer' turned New Republic spy I'd have no memory of any of it.

That character sounds so much more interesting than anyone in either TFA or TLJ

 Manchu wrote:
I believe that was Chandrilla. EDIT: Nope it was some place called “Hosnian Prime.”

Coruscant is still the capital of the Empire (not to be confused with the First Order).

Also the notion of a migrating capital was almost certainly an afterthought.

The thinking most likely went like this:

original Death Star big but Starkiller Base much bigger!

original Death Star blow up one planet but Starkiller Base blow up multiple planet!

“but why would they do that?”

>scene missing<

meanwhile, some novelist or comic book writer or visual guide editot has to answer questions like that

LoL you don’t say I have spent the last 4 years thinking coruscant got blown up along with some randoms.
Which does go to show the main issue with mouse SW in that it’s all glossy bollocks with no substance.

 Manchu wrote:
I believe that was Chandrilla. EDIT: Nope it was some place called “Hosnian Prime.”

Coruscant is still the capital of the Empire (not to be confused with the First Order).

Also the notion of a migrating capital was almost certainly an afterthought.

The thinking most likely went like this:

original Death Star big but Starkiller Base much bigger!

original Death Star blow up one planet but Starkiller Base blow up multiple planet!

“but why would they do that?”

>scene missing<

meanwhile, some novelist or comic book writer or visual guide editot has to answer questions like that

I wish that job had fallen to Diane Carey. Her novelization of the Star Trek Enterprise pilot episode is infamous for her calling out stupid things that happen because the story is stupid.

 Riquende wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
I believe that was Chandrilla. EDIT: Nope it was some place called “Hosnian Prime.”

Coruscant is still the capital of the Empire (not to be confused with the First Order).

Also the notion of a migrating capital was almost certainly an afterthought.

Its all what now?

Wierd how they thought none of this was worth mentioning but instead wasted half an hour of the film with a windows starfield screensave.

This should have come up in TFA, not TLJ.

But yeah, it's all in the execrable Aftermath book trilogy, a boring exercise in trying to create a post-Endor environment that could feasibly lead to the galaxy we see in TFA. If it wasn't for the genuinely amusing Sinjir Rath Velus, the gay, alcoholic ex Imperial 'Loyalty Officer' turned New Republic spy I'd have no memory of any of it.

Yeah I heard Aftermath was a little sub par, my favourite review said “imagine you get AAA director with no interest in SW to write a sequel with no oversight and nobody with any interest in SW seeing the script until half way through filming, now imagine the mad scramble to connect the old to the new no mater how tenuously by writing a few novels. That’s why Aftermath exists”

Backfire wrote:
I saw the whole thing with Phantom Menace and other prequels. Reaction of the fanbase was exact same.

That has not been my experience. Sure they both had the gnashing of teeth and tearing of cloth but the reasons and general tone of the reaction have been different. Just watching the discussion here the attitudes towards the PT and TLJ come across as different and this is just one little thread.

 Ahtman wrote:

Backfire wrote:
I saw the whole thing with Phantom Menace and other prequels. Reaction of the fanbase was exact same.

That has not been my experience. Sure they both had the gnashing of teeth and tearing of cloth but the reasons and general tone of the reaction have been different. Just watching the discussion here the attitudes towards the PT and TLJ come across as different and this is just one little thread.

For the prequels the only real redeeming bit is the emperor basically manipulating everybody. The characters are just poorly written and acted. Some of the fight scenes are also cool but at times there's too much crap going on at once. There's also too much CGI.

----------

As for TLJ one of the constant issues is trying to show "are they gonna do this or that" moments and at times either neither deciding (kylo ren maybe killing leia) or flipping several times for no reason (is luke going to sacrifice himself or not only to die via the force somehow). Another issue is the comedy is mostly out of place, the casino planet just was a waste of time and honestly it feels like the movie was oddly rushed even though it was super long. Had they had more time maybe they could've had left some stuff on the cutting room floor and had more meaningful decisions.

The main issues with TLJ have already been stated to death. Leia flying like a fairy god-mother back to the ship, constant re-hashing of the original trilogy but with slight twists (salt planet hoth), Holdo not telling the plan to her subordinates (not sure if they said a spy could be on the ship but said spy probably wouldn't wait around and be blown up), Luke dying obi-wan style vs kylo ren who is like vader to buy the rebels time to escape except it's actually a force projection but oh wait he still dies somehow, Rose preventing Finn from making a heroic sacrifice which should've led to everybody dying for a cringy af kiss scene and accidentally the holdo ship suicide which somehow doesn't murder off Finn and friends.

Oh and just so you know Holdo and Poe's bickering was supposed to be cut out of Empire Strikes Back where leia argues with Han solo and then kisses Luke and leads up to "I love you!" 'I know." You guys probably missed that but they tried to force a romance sub-plot with her and Poe before she suicided. Of course we never really got to know her so it lacked impact and i feel like most people missed it if they didn't see the Leia and Holdo "i like him." 'me too.' bit.

 Eldarain wrote:
It is really surprising to me how badly the last saga film hurt my enthusiasm for all things Star Wars.

I've been through disappointing films with the Prequels but this really cut deep. I think it was the themes of disdain for the existing fans and open contempt that really did it. It's one thing to make a bad movie but to create it and support it in a way where it feels like the existing fans aren't welcome was too much.

I've been immersing myself in the things I know I enjoy (old comics, video games, Clone Wars etc) which has helped but I'm still unsure if I'll even watch the future Disney films.

100% I feel like Rian Johnson just took a dump on everything that made Star Wars, Star Wars to me. I think Abrams did a good job with what he was given, then Johnson crapped on nearly everything Abrams tried to build up.

Abrams is going to have to really pull some unicorns out of his butt to save the saga. I heard that the Knights of Ren will be in the movie somehow and so that did actually get me a little excited. But I am NOT getting hyped for this next movie.

FWIW, Kylo mentions that Force projecting over a great distance will kill you in an offhand comment to Rey when they're first figuring out the mental link thing.

Well he says he knows Rey can’t be doing it because the effort would kill her. But someone is doing it. Snoke (not the most reliable source) says it was him, And the effort didn’t kill him.

 Manchu wrote:
Well he says he knows Rey can’t be doing it because the effort would kill her. But someone is doing it. Snoke (not the most reliable source) says it was him, And the effort didn’t kill him.

Although Snoke did not seem to be someone in particularly good health.

Would have been interesting to hear that story but feth that the Emperor is the real villain feth you Star Wars *rage*

I remember i used to watch a movie about Ewoks when i was like 5 years old. Now i want to know if this is the same movie you guys have mentioned here.


In this movie at some point is there a scene where they use a hang glider in a scene?

The Ewoks use a hang glider to drop stones on AT-ST in RotJ.

Ewoks also use hang gliders in the Ewoks live action movies and animated series.

 SickSix wrote:

100% I feel like Rian Johnson just took a dump on everything that made Star Wars, Star Wars to me. I think Abrams did a good job with what he was given, then Johnson crapped on nearly everything Abrams tried to build up.

Abrams is going to have to really pull some unicorns out of his butt to save the saga. I heard that the Knights of Ren will be in the movie somehow and so that did actually get me a little excited. But I am NOT getting hyped for this next movie.

I can only say that my disagreement is 180 degrees. I think Abrams is a good visual director with good grasp of timing but as a writer he is a total hack. He didn't "build up" anything in TFA. Snoke, for example, was chosen as a villain from a bunch of visual designs the studio had doodled up. Nothing deeper was designed for his character beyond "okay, this guy looks the best". I can only wholeheartedly support RJ's decisions to snuff him.
Bringing JJA in to do Star Wars was a mistake, and bringing him back to do Ep9 is yet bigger mistake. TFA was well-made but bland and emotionally flat. TLJ had bad and poorly executed scenes but it also had powerful and emotional moments and is thus much more interesting film.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Manchu wrote:
The PT was unquestionably “Star Wars” because George Lucas made it. The only claim Disney can make, by contrast, about why any of their movies are Star Wars movies is “we own it.” I’m not saying Lucas was less cynical. I am saying he wasn’t as clever about manipulating the narratives around his films.

Um, is that a compliment for Lucas, or dismissal?

Since Lucas gave permission to other people write Star Wars stories as long as they pay him (which Disney did, in spades...), I hardly see him as some sort of Canon Deity whose blessing and finishing touch is required for story to be "True Star Wars (tm)". Is Clone Wars not Star Wars? Admiral Thrawn, Mara Jade?
Have you read about what Lucas was planning for Episodes 7-9 himself? Would you have been excited, seriously?

 Manchu wrote:

No, in contrast to the OT, the DT explains nothing about who any of the factions are or what they want.

Yes, this is a major issue with DT. The backstory is IMO quite good in fact, but you don't see any of it in the movies and Resistance and First Order are just kind of floating in space, with no reference points to attach them to anything.

It's funny, when I first saw the trailer for TFA I thought that it was the New Republic that had built/ captured the Super Death Star and that the film would be a conflict between the hawks and doves within the New Republic over how to destroy the Imperial remnants. The New Order (and Kylo Ren) would emerge from extremest hawks who would try to force the New Republic's hand.

I kinda wish they had gone i that direction, what about you guys. Where would you have gone after the Battle of Endor with a new trilogy?

Defo not where the Old EU took us.

Some gems in there, but also an awful lot of absolute drivel.

From the new Canon, I like Mon Mothma's concept of demilitarising The Republic. The wars which started over Geonosis all those decades ago had to come to an end. The Galaxy was weary of it. And I think that works better than the Old EU's New Republic simply stealing the Imperial War Machine.

Some form of Imperial Remnant is essential. Of course it is. It's not Star Wars without them in some incarnation.

The Resistance kinda works as a concept - but perhaps could've done with better execution. After all, if Leia was a big time Senator, or even the leader of the New Republic? Where's the Rebellion aspect? Where's the derring do?

The Prequels (well, Clone Wars) got that about right. The Jedi were shown to be more or less a law unto themselves. Part of the military hierarchy, but not bound to it. Kinda like Space Marines, I guess. This allowed for more nefarious Cats Paw type missions (such as where we first meet Saw), and dark ops type stuff. So even though they were clearly The Good Guys, there was room for off the cuff adventure.

This is also where I find Rogue One and Rebels really got it right. They better highlighted just how small in number The Rebellion were, and in the early days how massively disjointed and disorganised. In fact, it's not really until Scariff/Yavin that it really all comes together. Before that, it was desperate, disparate cells - and they weren't necessarily pulling in the same direction.

And it really adds to the concept that The Death Star was The Empire's undoing. The Tarkin Initiative was good, in theory. Have The Biggest Stick, show you're not afraid to use it. Until The Empire makes an example (Alderran), and promptly has it's biggest and most expensive toy taken away by what, a couple of dozen Rebel Pilots with cajones so colossal it's a wonder they could fit into their ships.

That was the first clear act of defiance, and one so colossal, the wider image of The Empire as being undefeatable was eroded. That's when The Rebellion really started gathering pace.

Perhaps if Palpatine had held off for a bit. Let The Rebellion get a bit more uppity. Frame them for atrocities on certain planets, then hammer them? Who knows. It can also be argued he struck too soon after The Clone Wars. I mean, that was a massive war. And there was a lot of materiel left over. Ships, Ammo, Fuel, Weapons. All ready to be plundered in the name of defiance. Not to mention experienced Soldiers and Commanders.

I'd have left the Galaxy to get a bit softer, a bit weaker. Less fighty.

But hey. I'm going off at a tangent. Let's bring it back.

I'm not sure I could continue Star Wars and it still be Star Wars. See, with the setting up of the New Republic, there's room for political intrigue type stuff. Systems vying for primacy, Empire Loyalists looking to sabotage and infiltrate, possibly do a Palpatine themselves.

Could be cool movies/stories. But would they be Star Wars?. I don't think they would.

 Kroem wrote:
It's funny, when I first saw the trailer for TFA I thought that it was the New Republic that had built/ captured the Super Death Star and that the film would be a conflict between the hawks and doves within the New Republic over how to destroy the Imperial remnants. The New Order (and Kylo Ren) would emerge from extremest hawks who would try to force the New Republic's hand.

I kinda wish they had gone i that direction, what about you guys. Where would you have gone after the Battle of Endor with a new trilogy?

That would be a very interesting direction for the next film! We know the Resiste is now a couple dudes in a ship- so they're essentially finished. So take the Jedi and the remnants off to some section of the New Republic, which after someone massacring their capital and fleet should be ready and willing to fight the First Order. Perhaps Lando has formed a coalition of the ones who want to fight, and their new armada goes after the First Order. Without help, I don't know how they can explain the Resistance getting a fleet and pilots for any sort of space battles.

I used to take part in a Star Wars mud, that did the 'New Republic' era long before even Episode 3 came out.

How we typically did it was leaning into the swapped roles. - For example, having the Imperial Remnant nominally at peace with a 'fragile' New Republic but also sponsoring literal terrorism against them.

Including TFA elements, you could very well still have the First Order and Leia's force (Though The Resistance is a dumb name, and is still a dumb name in context of TFA).

No Starkiller Base, but you have various strikes. And you explicitly have the dialogue in the film of, "The Imperial Remnant does not condone the activities of the First Order." Straight up, 'fake news' the whole thing from the Remnant.

Then have Leia run off and deal with the problem herself. - And we need to see this. Not have it be in some sidebook.