Results 61 to 90 of 425
Thread: General Star Wars Thread
-
2018-07-15, 08:35 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2009
- Location
- Perth, West Australia
- Gender
Re: General Star Wars Thread
The main problem with The Farce Awakens, indeed the entire Disney run, is that Disney has little to no idea how to pass the torch on - in the sense that it has no sense of how to tell a really generational story, which is, ultimately, what this is. To be fair, not a lot of studios do know how; The Godfather is one of the few that (maybe) passes the test, and James Bond as far as I remember has never overtly said on screen whether "James Bond" is an identity that successive men put on, or whether it's actually the same man in all 5,000-odd films.
But it isn't impossible provided you're prepared to embrace the entire concept and you have some clear vision. Take a look at YouTube Red's Cobra Kai series and tell me that isn't a series with much of the same soul if not the same heart as the first 2 movies. Insofar as it "has" to use the original cast, it's done so in ways that seem to satisfy both audiences who've seen the originals and those who're new to the franchise. It's a fantastic extension of the franchise. And it mostly achieves its plot twists by building on and building out from the original relationship dynamics in the first series - albeit its central device is basically taking Johnny Lawrence from the moment of his defeat in Karate Kid and plomping him down with attitudes basically unaltered in the present day, the "fish out of water" routine massaged into a family drama.
Anyway, back to the series. Somewhat duplicating Mightymosy's analysis, it seems to me that it wasn't unrecoverable even at the end of JJ Abrams' fanfilm of A New Hope. Particularly making it recoverable was that ... fortunately or unfortunately .. Rey's character wasn't cardboard, but plastic wrap: you could wrap her around anything, but you can see right through it and still looks like rubbish.
Luke to the audience (and yes, I know Darth Johnson's arrogant posturing that "We have to think about the story, not the fans." Well, here's what you get when you only think about your own personal story and not how it fits into the wider context.) was at the end of his character arc. He was a Jedi, like his father before him, tremendously strong with the Force, Yoda and Obi-Wan always around to advise him, per ROTJ. He's overcome his personal issues. He is, in a word, a consummate hero, a guy willing to literally risk death for even an unredeemable slime like his father.
(Now, you can always slipslide around and say "Oh, but people change as they get older." Not old guys, not in this series anyway, not one that's built on Campbellian archetypes which always move forward, not back. The examples we are left in-universe for old men and whether they've changed much in their lives are three: Obi-Wan, Yoda, and the Emperor. Not one of these guys shows any marked change across their movie lives: they're basically the same people across the prequel trilogy and into the original trilogy. No sudden rubberbanding back to the beginning of their character arcs, they stay more or less the same. This is even the case for Han Solo in Farce Awakens: he's still an irresponsible, self-centred swindler, just like he was through most of the run of the original series.
Even Darth Vader doesn't change until literally the last moment - and more importantly, once he makes changes in moments of high crisis on screen, he stays changed. He does his flip-flop to the Dark Side in ROTS, and he doesn't flip-flop back until the last minute in ROTJ. Therefore we are entitled to expect much the same from Luke, not because all characters must remain the same, but because if you're going to switch that expectation around on an audience, you need a very strong foundation upon which to do so. You cannot, cannot, get away with a single flashback in which Luke does his best Rodney Dangerfield impression and which is walked back by Luke weakly insisting that it was just a "momentary" temptation, as if the universe rested on the fact a husband took one look at Gigi Hadad's legs in passing.
And no, the "late King Arthur" archetype doesn't fit, either. The best recent retelling of the Arthur myth, Excalibur, portrays Arthur's fall onscreen, before us. It is not told in flashback, and the fatal flaw that leads Arthur into his fall - his adultery with his own sister/cousin - is not one that's planted anywhere in Luke's past during the OT, and insofar as he has a fatal flaw, it is quite convincingly overcome in the climax of ROTJ. That is the entire point of that scene, quite apart from Vader's redemption, no matter what Lucas says twenty years after the fact.)
With that massive digression aside, I think the question to be asked would be: why would such a hero refuse to come back in a scenario where the galaxy clearly needed him?
The only two realistic answers must be: cannot come back, or will not come back. We saw a dreadful example of "will not come back because I iz in Despair" which just regressed Luke's character back to whiny farmboy (right down to drinking alternatively-coloured milk, albeit Luke drinks from the source this time, not just from Aunt Beru's fridge).
"Cannot come back" seems to work best in the scenario where Luke has amnesia. The cause of this can be accidental or deliberate: maybe the First Order fried his brain, maybe he just fell and hit his head on a rock while looking for the first Jedi Temple. Either way, Luke is therefore given a reason to run away screaming when Yoda and/or Ben and/or his father try to appear to him; we're always afraid of ghosts. And then Rey arrives, and that scene of him taking the lightsaber suddenly sparks ... a memory ... You could even repurpose R2-D2's scene showing him Leia's hologram as the final, cathartic moment when he remembers who he is.
That said, I think better narrative choices are: will not come back because he knows the consequences if he does. That is, if you're going to make him a mythical archetype, make him Cassandra, not Arthur. In other words, make him a sort of Dr. Manhattan or a Leto Atreides II. Since one of the core Skywalker traits seems to be seeing things before they happen (something his father had from an early age), take this power up to 11: Luke's power as a Jedi has grown to the point where he's scanned most timelines and concluded, in despair, that the galaxy falls into darkness in any of them when he returns. Ache-Toe is the only place in the galaxy that he sees in the future as one where the galaxy has any hope.
So why is he surprised when Rey turns up? Because you use, for her, another archetype, one that hasn't been seen in the SW universe on screen as yet: make her, in essence, Rogue. An untrained, ignorant Rogue, who unconsciously draws off other Force users for her own latent Force abilities ... and who can amplify other Force users' powers as well. This then explains why she is able to bust into Kylo Ren's mind: because she siphoned his own Force powers and used them against him, albeit unconsciously. She doesn't know how to use this power properly, but one of its side-effects is that it renders her invisible to Force precognition. Don't make it that Luke can't be sensed in the Force, make it that Rey can't be seen with precognition. This changes everything for Luke, because suddenly here is a timeline that he has not already experienced. He finally has the one thing that's been denied him all these years: possibility, and the hope inherent in possibility. She is, for him, quite literally, a new hope.
And frankly they really should've just made Snoke into Darth Plagueis reborn ... except with some different ideas about the Dark Side, seeing it no longer as a force of evil, domination, but rather as a force of outright chaos. For chaos breeds adaptation, and adaptation spurs life; therefore the Dark Side protects life, ergo, absolute chaos is the finest expression of life. Ergo, Plagueis is now interested in absolute chaos, which Rey offers the chance to bring into action, because she can amplify his power.Last edited by Saintheart; 2018-07-15 at 08:41 AM.
-
2018-07-15, 08:57 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2006
- Gender
Re: General Star Wars Thread
Wait? Old guys don't change in Cambellian tales. Old Guys do nothing BUT Change and get jaded in Cambellian tales.
Arthur, Beowulf, Conan. Young heroes, become jaded old kings, or hermits all the time. It's one of the core tenants if you carry the story past a certain point. If you wanna follow the cambellian tone it's inevitable.
-
2018-07-15, 09:08 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2009
- Location
- Perth, West Australia
- Gender
Re: General Star Wars Thread
So as I understand your argument, you're saying that old guys do change in the Campbellian archetype, that this is a core, required element of the story past a certain point.
Whilst I could accept that statement in general, it doesn't remove the observation that in this series we do not expect to see large swings in core character behaviour unless there is a clear, on-screen choice the character makes in present time (as opposed to a flashback) which explains that swing. This is the pattern that we see in the Star Wars series. Leaving aside that Yoda and Obi-Wan's basic views do not appear to change on-screen across the entire PT and OT -- they still regard the Jedi as overall a good thing across both, there is no rejection of Jedi ideals or philosophy -- Yoda and Obi-Wan both make deliberate, on-screen decisions in present time to go into exile or retreat in the PT. Prior to that, in the OT, they were presented to us as hermits from the beginning, and did not radically change that behaviour across the entire series. Neither struck me as jaded, either.
This is why Luke's sudden shift in character in The Last Mudpie was badly done and inconsistent: first, with his own character; second, with the pattern we had been given on virtually all other "mentor" types in the story; third, with sheer dramatic presentation. Nobody bought Luke's flashback explanation because we were not given the opportunity as an audience to follow Luke's leadup to that choice, and it therefore did not convince us. Particularly so when the choice was not even characterised as a permanent change of behaviour, but rather a moment of temptation which was not followed through.Last edited by Saintheart; 2018-07-15 at 09:09 AM.
-
2018-07-15, 09:09 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2012
-
2018-07-15, 09:16 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2006
- Gender
Re: General Star Wars Thread
We don't see this with Yoda because we never saw a young Yoda. But This is exactly what Obiwan was before the retcon of him being on Tatooine to protect Luke. Obiwan in A New Hope was an old knight who was running from his past and through the message of Leia and the arrival of the son of his apprentice was inspired to take up the blade one last time.
It's only through later itterations that the motives for his being there were changed.
Also you say you won't buy any changes to his character without leadup. Well sorry the only way to do that would be for us to travel back in time and do about 10-20 films while he's younger and through his middle age.
If the films have to jump forward in time, then the characters have to jump forward in time, which means you have to skip over parts of their life. The only alternative is to have Luke be the exact same person that he was some 40 years ago. And that's not how people work.Last edited by Devonix; 2018-07-15 at 09:21 AM.
-
2018-07-15, 09:23 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2006
- Gender
-
2018-07-15, 09:24 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2007
-
2018-07-15, 09:31 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2015
Re: General Star Wars Thread
Arthur, Beowulf, and Conan may all become old and/or jaded, but what they don't do is stop being heroes. when push comes to show they put on the armor, strap on the sword, and go out and fight and die like the heroes they are (Conan managed to avoid the dying bit mostly because Howard managed to kick the bucket first). This is also what Obi-Wan does in ANH, with the particular Star Wars twist of becoming a Force Ghost.
That's the part that got left out of TLJ.
-
2018-07-15, 09:32 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2009
- Location
- Perth, West Australia
- Gender
Re: General Star Wars Thread
(1) So as I understand your argument as to Yoda, you are saying that because we did not see a young Yoda onscreen, we did not see him as a young, arrogant, inspired heroic character. Therefore by the time we first encounter him in the Prequel Trilogy, we are seeing him after he has become old and jaded and is a sort of 'late Arthur' figure. Therefore he fits the Campbellian archetype because he has changed from an idealist into a jaded figure by the time we first meet him.
I must say I have some difficulty agreeing with this proposal. Onscreen, which is the medium that ultimately counts, we meet Yoda in the PT seemingly at the height of his powers: implied as the head of, or the elder statesman of, the Jedi Council, a virtual king -- not a retreating, jaded figure. We only hear of him becoming old, weak, sick, in ROTJ. And given that he does become an exiled figure by the end of the prequel trilogy, I do not see how that supports your argument that Luke is therefore expected to become an old, jaded figure with quite contrary views to the character we had expected at the end of ROTJ. I do not see a scene in which Yoda's views change markedly, and again, it is what the audience expects to see from the film history behind it that would appear relevant.
(2) As to Obi-Wan, I understand your argument to be that Obi-Wan was running from his past, and only through later iterations that his motives changed; that is, that at the time of A New Hope Obi-Wan's motivations were to be a jaded old figure, who again fits the Campbellian archetype in that sense.
I would accept that George Lucas's ideas for the story changed as the series went along, in the same way that Luke and Leia being siblings was something of a retcon, and therefore that -- as a standalone film -- A New Hope does attempt to cleave quite closely to Campbellian archetypes. But to me this still does not deal with the fact that, by the time The Last Mudpie comes along, A New Hope is not the only film audiences had to draw on as a background. Had The Last Mudpie come along as a standalone film, or perhaps as a very late and very distant sequel to A New Hope, I think your argument would be stronger. As it is, by the time we see Rian Johnson's attempt at a story, it is against a mythos which does not hold entirely to Campbellian archetypes, even if that is the general theme. If you are arguing that Luke in The Last Mudpie obeys Campbellian archetypes, perhaps he might, if one squints at him - but that is not the only factor to consider, since the Star Wars mythos is one of its own, and in particular the expectations we have been given as an audience are different as well. Luke in the film fails because he's inconsistent with the entire context of the series, not just because he's a somewhat incompetent attempt at a Campbellian archetype at best.
Also you say you won't buy any changes to his character without leadup. Well sorry the only way to do that would be for us to travel back in time and do about 10-20 films while he's younger and through his middle age.
With respect, that is not my argument and would appear to be you resorting to hyperbole - leaving aside that George Lucas at least gave us the courtesy of three doing precisely that. I am saying that given the mythos that Rian Johnson had to work with large, about-face turns in character philosophy or outlook are not plausible or dramatically successful unless there is a buildup to the choice and we are permitted to experience that choice in present time along with the character. That is the pattern that seven Star Wars films had set up for audiences before we were subjected to Rian Johnson's ... vision. As I said further above, even Han Solo had not markedly changed between ROTJ and The Farce Awakens; even JJ Abrams was smart enough not to give us a Han Solo who had become a police officer or uptight military man.
I may or may not buy changes to a character without leadup. My point is that large swathes of audiences didn't buy it with Luke Skywalker in the last film, and it's precisely because the changes made didn't fit with how we expect characters to change in a Star Wars film, and the changes that were made were so massive they demanded a better foundation and better treatment than what we got.
If the films have to jump forward in time, then the characters have to jump forward in time, which means you have to skip over parts of their life. The only alternative is to have Luke be the exact same person that he was some 40 years ago. And that's not how people work.
It's not the audience's fault if Johnson chooses a method of storytelling that's too jarring to allow suspension of disbelief to remain. Write a different movie. Johnson's problem is quite nicely exemplified in that infamous interview most of us have seen, where Mark Hamill looks like he took a shiv in the soul when he says "I told Rian 'we have to think about the fans' and he replied 'No, we have to think about the story'." What Hamill was really saying was, you have to bear in mind the audience's expectations for the character. Johnson, it seems, did not, which is why Luke doesn't come across as plausible in this film.Last edited by Saintheart; 2018-07-15 at 09:47 AM.
-
2018-07-15, 09:37 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2006
- Gender
Re: General Star Wars Thread
This is exactly what Luke does. He becomes old and jaded offscreen like most of these heroes do. Because these things always happen offscreen or during a timeskip. And then when the camera or story pans back to them, just like it does to Luke in this story, they strap on the sword and go out like heroes. Just like Luke does here.
-
2018-07-15, 09:48 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2009
- Location
- Perth, West Australia
- Gender
Re: General Star Wars Thread
-
2018-07-15, 09:51 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2009
- Gender
Re: General Star Wars Thread
Boytoy of the -Fan-Club
What? It's not my fault we don't get a good-aligned female paragon of promiscuity!
I heard Blue is the color of irony on the internet.
I once fought against a dozen people defending a lady - until the mods took me down in the end.
Want to see my prison tatoo?
*Branded for double posting*
Sometimes, being bad feels so good.
-
2018-07-15, 10:18 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2008
- Gender
Re: General Star Wars Thread
Ackbar in the original films was a minor role and is visually just a costume anyway, I don't think recasting would be any issue. And the possibilities for what to do with him aren't limited to "put him in Holdo's role" or "kill him offscreen," there's also options such as "don't mention him in the film at all," or "use him, but in a minor role again."
It's just strange that they decided to take a character they could potentially have used at some point, that people for various reasons like (either the meme or those of us who were familiar with him in the EU novels), and just offhandedly mention that he died off-screen. It's just a pointless waste of potential. Which, honestly, is a fairly apt description of much of the sequel films in general.
You are definitely not, I've had that same thought from the moment I first saw it.Last edited by Zevox; 2018-07-15 at 10:22 AM.
Toph Pony avatar by Dirtytabs. Thanks!
"When I was ten, I read fairy tales in secret and would have been ashamed if I had been found doing so. Now that I am fifty, I read them openly. When I became a man, I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up." -C.S. Lewis
-
2018-07-15, 01:09 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2007
- Location
- Lemuria
- Gender
Re: General Star Wars Thread
Last edited by druid91; 2018-07-15 at 01:09 PM.
-
2018-07-15, 05:41 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2015
Re: General Star Wars Thread
They have the huge problems of:
1.Do they make a movie for the old Star Wars fans?
2.Do they make a generic movie to try and make new people fans?
And
1.Do they make a more classic type movie(rated R by today's low standards)
2.Do they make a super safe Kidz Moviez
And
1.If you are making a movie for a Star Wars fan over the age of 18...do you make an Adult Movie? Do you make an Adult Star Wars movie for the fans who are 30+ in age?
2.Do you stick to the Kidz Stuff...Star Wars is for Kidz
I would have gone with: He knew his time was over. He knew his destiny.
The Jedi fall, the Republic falls and the Empire is born, with the Sith in charge....with just a tiny warm coal of the Jedi left, and Hope: Luke and Leia.
Luke and Leia lead the Rebels and destroy the Empire and Sith. Leia then does her main part of her destiny and rebuilds and leads the Republic.
Luke is a bit lost as his most of his destiny was to defeat the Sith. So he does the only obvious thing he can think of to do: rebuild the Jedi. This is NOT his destiny, but he tries to do it anyway. He fails, even as he knew he would. He still has a bit of destiny left, a role to play, but not for a while. So he goes into exile. Until it is time.
-
2018-07-15, 07:45 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2015
Re: General Star Wars Thread
Luke's death is not remotely heroic. By the time Luke shows up the battle has been lost. The number of people Luke saves is puny. The damage he does to the first order is entirely limited to psyching-out Kylo Ren. He dies thereafter for no quantifiable reason and undercuts the limited symbolic impact he's had by doing so.
Luke's death in TLJ is meant to appear heroic - but it is not actually heroic. It's one of many cases in the film where things are said or appear in one way but are totally opposed to the actual events that occur.
Originally Posted by Saintheart
This two-stage exile scenario makes sense given that an absolutely passive and dysfunctional Republic is necessary to make any part of TLJ make sense. After all, the First Order nuked an entire freaking star system in TFA. Then had the weapon capable of doing this blown to bits. The Republic should be engaged in a massive retaliatory campaign all across the galaxy - but instead there's only a tiny resistance force under Leia's personal command and the Republic is so lacking in effort that they refuse to aid the resistance in their hour of greatest need.Last edited by Mechalich; 2018-07-15 at 07:58 PM.
-
2018-07-15, 08:02 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2015
Re: General Star Wars Thread
-
2018-07-15, 08:10 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2006
- Gender
Re: General Star Wars Thread
What does the amount of people saved have to do with how heroic an action is. Sacrificing your life to save a single person is just as heroic as sacrificing your life to save an entire city. To Me it was incredibly heroic. You may not have seen it as heroic but that's something completely subjective.
You can't say it's not heroic, just that it wasn't heroic to you. The action didn't resonate with you but it did with me and many other people.
-
2018-07-15, 08:44 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2008
- Gender
Re: General Star Wars Thread
Eh, I'd say some qualification is needed there. Luke's actions there are certainly heroic - he's finally stepped back up to help those in need, buying the Resistance the time they need to escape. It's a step toward redeeming himself for shutting everyone off and refusing to do anything at all earlier. The problem is that he then dies immediately thereafter for absolutely no apparent reason. While the actions preceding it were heroic, the death itself isn't heroic but rather just pointless.
Toph Pony avatar by Dirtytabs. Thanks!
"When I was ten, I read fairy tales in secret and would have been ashamed if I had been found doing so. Now that I am fifty, I read them openly. When I became a man, I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up." -C.S. Lewis
-
2018-07-15, 08:56 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2009
- Location
- Perth, West Australia
- Gender
Re: General Star Wars Thread
To which I'd reply (to the filmmakers, not to yourself - these are valid concerns): suck it up, princess. They spent the better part of 200 million on this weaponised cowpat, and they couldn't find one single film concept, one single script, out there that hit these needs? How much did Johnson collect for writing this film, as distinct from directing it?
And to which I'd also reply to the filmmakers: your existential angst is compelling, but how ever did Marvel manage to make maybe 15 films or so that are kiddie shows to a large extent but still pull in squillions of dollars, and without causing Grand-Canyon-width splits in the fanbase? Because they had a team that understood the overall context, understood the characters, and wrote accordingly. By the standard of primary-colours popcorn films, Infinity War is about as gripping and compelling a film as you could ask for in the present era, a film that somehow takes an undefined Big Bad whose power set should make him boring as bat dung and makes him sympathetic, makes him almost the protagonist of the film ... while still giving a good 10-20 distinct, named characters something to do and provide a real impact on the film's plot.
And that's in the midst of impaling Tony Stark on bits of metal, torturing Dr Strange, and ripping an axe through Thanos's chest, all of which earned the film a PG-13 rating. I doubt the film's rating would've made that much difference to a Star Wars film. Indeed that's one of the more unintelligent defences made of The Last Mudpie: lots of people turned up, ergo it must have been a success, hurr durr. I say lots of people turned up off the strength of the Star Wars name ... at least on the opening weekend. As the weeks went by? Not so much.
Better worldbuilding would certainly have helped. We have to balance that against the fact that the original films also didn't have much in the way of worldbuilding at least to start with, but what they did have was easier to grasp intuitively and was dealt with essentially in two lines of exposition: Obi-Wan talking about the Jedi Knights being the guardians of peace and justice in the Old Republic before the Dark Times, and Tarkin then indicating that the Senate had been disbanded, and that the regional governors now had direct control of their territories. That gave us enough to go on. But a capable screenwriter could have figured out how to do this in these films as well. One of the biggest problems is that -- as publicly admitted by Disney and the directors themselves -- there was no unified narrative planned between Abrams and Johnson. Indeed they dodged a large plot discontinuity courtesy of Mark Hamill: in JJ's original script, Luke would've been surrounded by floating rocks at the end of Farce Awakens. Johnson began with that scene still intact. It was Hamill who pointed out the problem.
This isn't to say that A New Hope and ESB began with a unified narrative, but at least you had the same guy, George Lucas, intimately involved with both, and therefore a more unified vision could be achieved.
KOTOR 2 is one game I actually never got the chance to play, and after I learned of how shoddily it had been finished, I never got around to bothering. I didn't deliberately rip off the Jedi Exile storyline proposing that, it was just what occurred to me as making things a bit more interesting ... or at least give Rey something to do of any significance in the story.Last edited by Saintheart; 2018-07-15 at 10:58 PM.
-
2018-07-15, 10:29 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2011
- Location
- Behind you!
- Gender
Re: General Star Wars Thread
This two-stage exile scenario makes sense given that an absolutely passive and dysfunctional Republic is necessary to make any part of TLJ make sense. After all, the First Order nuked an entire freaking star system in TFA. Then had the weapon capable of doing this blown to bits. The Republic should be engaged in a massive retaliatory campaign all across the galaxy - but instead there's only a tiny resistance force under Leia's personal command and the Republic is so lacking in effort that they refuse to aid the resistance in their hour of greatest need.Pokemon Mystery Dungeon D20: A system designed for adventuring in a Pokemon Mystery Dungeon world.
The Review/Analysis Thread: In-depth reviews of various games and RPG products.
The New/Redone Monsters Thread: Taking bad or bland monsters and making them more interesting and challenging.
Yu-Gi-Oh!: Realms of Myth: In the world of monsters, Winda and Wynn go on an "epic" journey to find the legendary Dark Magician.
Keys to the Contract: A crossover between Madoka and Kingdom Hearts.
-
2018-07-15, 10:47 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2013
- Location
- The Chi
- Gender
Re: General Star Wars Thread
I thought the New Republic was all centered around that one planet blown up and the fleet was in and around the star systems. But the wikia says otherwise. It was a rotating capital among the member planets.
Everyone just capitulated to the First Order after the destruction, which makes no sense since Starkiller base was immediately attacked and destroyed. You'd think the galaxy would have enough backbone not to immediately wilt to a power that shows itself extremely unprincipled at the same time it showed itself as vulnerable.The laws of physics are not crying in a corner, they are bawling in the forums.
Thanks to half-halfling for the avatar
-
2018-07-15, 10:52 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2006
- Gender
-
2018-07-16, 11:58 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2009
- Location
- Germany
Re: General Star Wars Thread
We are not standing on the shoulders of giants, but on very tall tower of other dwarves.
Spriggan's Den Heroic Fantasy Roleplaying
-
2018-07-16, 11:59 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2010
Re: General Star Wars Thread
So I rewatched the film on Netflix the other day, and I finally figured out what bothered me about it; this right here. Not this specific example, exactly, but the way the film tells us one thing but then shows us another. If you imagine the film as the film-makers intended, it's very different from the one we get.
For example, the whole Finn sacrificing himself thing. The film gives us a very clear message; we have to fight for the right reason. Okay, I could get behind that. But in the context of what just happened, it makes no sense. From their perspective, Rose just doomed the resistance. The base is cracked open, and they're all about to be slaughtered. It's a nice sentiment, but makes no sense given what the movie shows us (and don't get me started on whether Finn was sacrificing himself "correctly").
And the film does this over and over again. If you watch the movie the film-makers told us they were making, it's pretty good! The problem is the movie they made doesn't really sync with the movie they wanted to make. I think some of the people who really like it are seeing more of the movie were told about, rather than the movie that was actually filmed.I don't know about angels, but it's fear that gives men wings - Max Payne
-
2018-07-16, 06:10 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2006
- Gender
Re: General Star Wars Thread
I have something I'd like to propose.
Those who do not like the current direction of Starwars. What do you feel would be a good series of changes or proposed ideas going forward, that would not simply make the films better for you. What would be something that you would like. But not alienate those of us who like the current direction.
Same question for those who like the current direction, what would be some good ideas towards those who do not like the direction and help them enjoy without losing what we're loving.
Rogue One is my least favorite of the new films but it seems to be some people's favorite. Perhaps someone can explain why they like that direction. Is it the darker tone?
-
2018-07-16, 06:54 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2008
- Gender
Re: General Star Wars Thread
Well, they could have Grand Admiral Thrawn return from whever the space-whales dragged him off to in the Rebels finale and take over the First Order in a matter of days by easily outwitting their current sad leadership. (Only really sarcastic because I know there's no way they'd actually do that.)
Seriously, that's really hard to say, personally. At this point, I don't know that there's anything they could do with the next movie. Kylo Ren being set up as the main antagonist alone would be a huge detriment to my interest even if the film had other things going for it, and at this point I don't know what it could have going for it in my eyes given it has to build off of The Force Awakens and The Last Jedi, which don't provide a good foundation from where I'm standing.
After that though? Jump the timeline ahead a ways and do something different. The more they can dissociate things from how badly they messed up Luke's story and this whole sad rehash where the Resistance and First Order are just a repeat of the Rebellion and Empire less than a generation after that conflict happened, the better. And for heaven's sake, get villains that are actually competent and threatening next time.
Eh, darker or lighter tone doesn't really make a huge difference to me. For me personally, Rogue One is simply the film that fits best into Star Wars as I know it and was the most entertaining to watch. It wasn't flawless, but it was fun and didn't screw up anything too major, and I enjoyed the characters and action. Also, slight bonus points for focusing on a group of people who aren't Jedi, Sith, or (barring perhaps Chirrut) even force-sensitive, which was a nice change of pace.Toph Pony avatar by Dirtytabs. Thanks!
"When I was ten, I read fairy tales in secret and would have been ashamed if I had been found doing so. Now that I am fifty, I read them openly. When I became a man, I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up." -C.S. Lewis
-
2018-07-16, 07:34 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2015
Re: General Star Wars Thread
Not to mention that--from a logistical and storytelling metric--not all lives are equal in value. Absent any other information, saving thousands of lives is arguably better than saving one. However, saving the last surviving member of a MacGuffin bloodline who needs to live in order to seal the gates of hell is arguably more important and more heroic--under those particular circumstances--than saving a few thousand soldiers who would end up dying anyway (or living under the tyranny of whatever came out of said hell-gates.) Also, if saving that one life is actually substantially harder and more dangerous--i.e., because an adversary also realizes how important our MacGuffin man is and directs his resources accordingly--that also makes things a bit more heroic.
One of the few themes that's managed to remain consistent in the patchwork mess of canon works (even in Rebels) is the power of the spark of a movement. Luke only saved a few rebels, but he saved the last few rebels. It's possible that a new rebellion would have sprung up on its own, but it wouldn't necessarily hold the same values as the current one, which shares history and institutional knowledge not only with the (now gone) New Republic, but also with the original Rebal Alliance, which itself began with leaders of the original Republic. Also, let's not forget that nobody responded when the rebels called for help. Even if they had saved all their ships and crew, they was no uprising waiting to spring up around them--it would have been a very slow fight, as they slowly change hearts and minds every time achieve some small victory and every time they escape annihilation. Having the surviving rebels go to ground and work behind the scenes to convince people that rebellion is possible certainly won't be easier without a military force out there somewhere--especially since the people know exactly how you lost your fleet--but it's not that much harder, either. A fleet certainly has value as a recruiting tool, but not as much value as it has as a military asset, and so its loss is much less catastrophic if a quick military victory was never an option to begin with.
I am assuming that everyone who hasn't already joined the rebellion are too afraid to stand up to the First Order (at least, I'm hoping that this is the case and that they don't simply favor the space Nazis.) Having a rebel fleet operating openly against the First Order and surviving would be a good, narratively satisfying way to show that the First Order isn't all powerful, but it's not the only one. Having the surviving rebels scatter among the populace, reminding people what the Republic stood for, countering the propaganda as the First Order tries to consolidate power... that also has some great possibilities, as does what I'm predicting will happen, which is Rey using the Force to achieve some highly improbable, highly symbolic victory that suddenly makes everyone willing to fight.
-
2018-07-16, 07:45 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Location
- a nice pond
Re: General Star Wars Thread
-
2018-07-16, 07:46 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2009
- Location
- Birmingham, AL
- Gender
Re: General Star Wars Thread
I would love to know how the First Order got to be what it is. Original Star Wars, we're dropped into the middle. All we need to know it's Empire big, Rebels small. There no history there, so it can be whatever. They're established as being in control, so that's fine, because there's nothing contradicting that.
But the First Order? The New Republic rules the galaxy. They don't even know the existence of the FO. NR is the galactic government, they have all the money, all the planets, all the people.
How, then, does the FO have enough money to build a planet-sized superweapon with a barrel the size of the first Death Star? And all the warships? All the weaponry to make filthy rich all those people on Canto Bight? I legit want to know. That build-up sounds interesting.
Why was Finn the only one to rebel? They kidnap children, so why don't the others share the First Order as well? If they're brainwashed, why did it not take with Finn while it did with the others? What makes him so radically different? That also sounds like it could be really interesting.
Basically, they reset the stage but didn't tell us how it got to be that way. I want that story.Cuthalion's art is the prettiest art of all the art. Like my avatar.
Number of times Roland St. Jude has sworn revenge upon me: 2