It is currently Mon Feb 19, 2018 7:22 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1315 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Dec 23, 2017 12:07 am 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:44 am
Well I don’t know who that is, and I thought I knew Star wars reasonably well


Top
 Profile  
 

PostPosted: Sat Dec 23, 2017 12:18 am 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 10:44 pm
Feiereisel wrote:
Another thing I’ve been reckoning with when it comes to these new films is the way the story is being told as it compares to the previous trilogies. We’re arguably in a new mode of storytelling for the franchise, which affects the way we view the films, which informs our opinions of them in a way I haven’t really been able to fully consider. Unlike the previous trilogies, we’re only seeing part of the full picture; we’re out on a limb in an unusual way for STAR WARS, which is a bit frustrating, even for someone who is enjoying the movies.
That's the thing: you don't suddenly change how a series is written/presented. This creates for problems with continuity within said series, as we're now seeing. It should all feel part of the same fabric. This new trilogy feels more like 'Bizarro Star Wars' ('Marvel in Space' I've heard someone else say). :-#

Quote:
And speaking of the original trilogy, I don't think a revelation about Rey's bloodline would be any stupider than making Luke and Leia siblings in The Return of the Jedi after low-key (but still definitively) establishing Luke and Han as romantic rivals.
The sibling revelation was in fact the one element that Lucas retconned for the OT story. There was a separate sister character for whom Luke would end up searching, but as Lucas was wanting to wrap up this story in ROTJ, he simply dropped it and turned Leia into that sister.

RIP Film wrote:
I kind of think you're giving them too much credit, they're making this all up as they go along. Each movie sort of has their own chef doing their own thing, and you can see this not only in how some plot points from Force Awakens are ignored, but also thematically. Force Awakens is very conservative/nostalgic, and The Last Jedi's takeaway theme is the past gets in the way; it's also progressive to the point of taking huge liberties with the lore. How the third one will reconcile all of this both thematically and plotwise, will be very interesting, but my expectations aren't high.
So far Abrams has only said that it will tie all 3 trilogies together. We'll see how he manages to do that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 23, 2017 1:47 am 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:44 am
Lucas made it all up as he went along and kept and discarded ideas fairly freely. This is why the originals are not very cohesive especially regarding the love triangle of the three main characters or the rules and world building. None of the original trilogy was planned out as a well defined story, that’s an after-the-fact rationalization/well-promoted-myth on Lucas’ part, a self serving story he has never been able to be consistent on, as he’s said whatever was convenient at the time (twelve, nine, six episodes have all been mentioned).

I don’t think we should think of anything Star Wars as holy writ because the day to day slog of writing and creating the originals was hardly some birth of Athena moment. To think they are all one unit means you just blur out all the very significant and messy differences they have from one to two to three.

the two new films feel very Star Wars to me, and both manage to be better than four of the first six films.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 23, 2017 2:47 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT
movielocke wrote:
Well I don’t know who that is, and I thought I knew Star wars reasonably well
[Reveal] Spoiler:
Del Toro's character


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 23, 2017 3:25 am 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:44 am
Ahh interesting, reasonable too.

In some ways it reminds me of my sarcastic comment from before rogue one came out that the main character of that film was Rey’s mother because obviously there only being four-five women in the entire Star Wars galaxy up to that point in the chronology, clearly she had to be the one as no other women existed. ;)

Really tight theory based connections like that may be modestly satisfying on a puzzle solving level but I like it more when things like that are not very matchy-matchy.

...

One more thing about how fluid and not cohesive Lucas’ “vision” was, it had to be repeatedly pointed out to him that he couldn’t call it revenge of the Jedi since the Jedi ethos he outlined in the previous film would not include revenge.

Eventually Lucas folded to functionally continuity and lore people. But he didn’t really care, I’m not even sure how much he noticed how vile the Jedi plan for Luke was. If he did, perhaps he was not quite so wrongheadedly worshipful of samurai as I’ve often thought he was.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 23, 2017 12:30 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 10:44 pm
movielocke wrote:
the two new films feel very Star Wars to me, and both manage to be better than four of the first six films.

And to me (and a few others I've encountered) it feels more as though they're trying to turn it into 'Marvel in Space.' That certainly explains the somewhat jokier tone, the more contemporary-sounding dialogue, the diminishing of the fantasy aspect, etc. To each his own.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 23, 2017 1:31 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:58 am
Location: Chicago, IL
The Star Wars films have always had a pretty jokey tone, though. I don’t think this one was any more or less jokey.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 23, 2017 2:00 pm 

Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:53 pm
movielocke wrote:
Lucas made it all up as he went along and kept and discarded ideas fairly freely. This is why the originals are not very cohesive especially regarding the love triangle of the three main characters or the rules and world building. None of the original trilogy was planned out as a well defined story, that’s an after-the-fact rationalization/well-promoted-myth on Lucas’ part, a self serving story he has never been able to be consistent on, as he’s said whatever was convenient at the time (twelve, nine, six episodes have all been mentioned).
I don’t think we should think of anything Star Wars as holy writ because the day to day slog of writing and creating the originals was hardly some birth of Athena moment. To think they are all one unit means you just blur out all the very significant and messy differences they have from one to two to three.

I don't buy this argument. The originals were really swashbucklers that functioned on the level of parable, there was this Arthurian/fantasy vibe throughout that made such plot contrivances not stand out, they contributed to the core and emotional truth of the story which is what mattered. The newer ones have this modern self-reflective/reflexive tone that makes the similarities in plot looseness more jarring, the movies have become both more real and less real-- especially since they seem to be so self-aware, which is something both the older trilogies never had, to a fault.

I don't see SW as holy writ, far from it, they are like well done children's stories. My problems with this newer trilogy has more to do with the movie industry in total. They are green lighting these things before they even have a proper outline. Lucas had the pressure to do a sequel after the first movie was a hit, but no one said Disney had to start busting out one a year immediately after buying the property.


Last edited by RIP Film on Sat Dec 23, 2017 2:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 23, 2017 2:26 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 9:41 am
Brian C wrote:
The Star Wars films have always had a pretty jokey tone, though. I don’t think this one was any more or less jokey.


Absolutely. The tone and delivery of the jokes in THE LAST JEDI is a little more, I don’t know, energetic, but there is plenty of humor throughout the original trilogy, from the droids in particular.

I find the “Marvel-in-space” criticism to be a bit cheeky...more of a feedback loop of shared creative (and corporate) influences. It could be argued that Marvel’s (looser and looser) “trilogy” structuring and aggressive merchandising strategy draws from STAR WARS’ playbook. Indicting STAR WARS specifically to indict the industry at large is not wrong, but it certainly reduces THE LAST JEDI to a small piece of a much, much larger conversation, and in my opinion too-quickly overlooks some of the film’s more unique elements.

Also, just to clarify based on some of the quotes above, I don’t think Abrams and company have the series planned in scene-to-scene detail. I just suspect that there’s a clear idea of where it’s going and a broad theme of what it’s about, thematically speaking.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 23, 2017 2:50 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT
Poe's dressing down of Hux in the opening scene felt more like Spaceballs (or I don't know, The Office) than Star Wars humor.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 23, 2017 2:59 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 4:57 am
Location: East Coast, USA
I don't know that its an issue of The Last Jedi being more humorous than the other films, but rather that some of the humor feels very out of place and inappropriate.

I mean, the now infamous
[Reveal] Spoiler:
milking scene,
and the way it is shot and edited, the scene is clearly being played for laughs, when in the original films, something like that would have only been mildly amusing and viewed more as odd, instead of hilarious. For example, in Return of the Jedi, Jabba the Hutt isn't played for laughs, he's just an odd alien villain. The little sidekick thing he had was used for humor once or twice, but Jabba was just gross and lecherous. However, I feel like if Jabba showed up in the new trilogy, the filmmakers wouldn't be able to resist playing him for laughs.

And then there is the humor in The Last Jedi that is straight out of Spaceballs, like the excruciatingly bad
[Reveal] Spoiler:
Hux/Poe scene, which is especially bad because it happens so early on in the film. And the ironing scene, while brief, is just odd and out of place. And as for Rey asking Kylo to put a shirt on during one of their force connections, that again took me out of the film, and undercut the seriousness of the rest of the scene.


So, it isn't so much that the other films had less humor, it's just that they were written better in regards to humor.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 23, 2017 3:37 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:52 pm
Location: Canada
Brian C wrote:
The Star Wars films have always had a pretty jokey tone, though.
Not so much in the prequels, though, which was a source of criticism for those films.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 23, 2017 6:29 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 8:11 pm
swo17 wrote:
Poe's dressing down of Hux in the opening scene felt more like Spaceballs (or I don't know, The Office) than Star Wars humor.

I think the difference was the gags that seemed to exist solely for the sake of gags. The Poe/Hux scene at the opening was a good example- what was Poe really trying to accomplish with this? Maybe I'm missing something, but there wasn't any real reason for the delay- he just kind of nattered on for a bit before launching his assault. Johnson was trying to allude to Han on the radio during the prison escape in A New Hope, but the key difference is that the humor also served a functional purpose- Han was trying to calm the guards fears that something was amiss, he just did a poor job of it.

An even bigger problem is that the humor often pulls you out of what should be an otherwise tense situation. Once Hux has been established as a punchline, the viewer can't take him seriously anymore. And because he's the leader of the First Order, the sense of threat they posed is diminished because really, how competent can a group be that put him in charge? Likewise, all sense of urgency was removed from the slow spaceship chase as soon as you realized Finn had time to go gallivanting around the galaxy with his new Mary Sue. There was a lot to like in this movie, but I feel like too often, especially in the first half, that Johnson was actively working against the tone he was trying to achieve.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 23, 2017 6:39 pm 

Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2014 6:49 am
The delay was for a reason, I cant remember specifics, but the delay was used in order to charge something up (there were shots during the conversation of a screen showing charging bars increasing).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 23, 2017 11:14 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2017 7:08 pm
I'm a big JJ Abrams fan/defender, but if the plot twist discussed in the page-flip to this page happens, I will personally drive to the Bad Robot offices and set them on fire.

On the humor point, I laughed at the Poe/Hux routine at the beginning -- but felt bad about it, as the terminology in the routine felt very foreign to the Star Wars universe.
[Reveal] Spoiler:
Like, do they have phone calls, where terms like "I'll hold" have any meaning?
It's that sort of thing that can take you out of the fiction a bit. I had a similar reaction when a character said
[Reveal] Spoiler:
"Godspeed."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 24, 2017 2:28 am 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:44 am
jindianajonz wrote:
swo17 wrote:
Poe's dressing down of Hux in the opening scene felt more like Spaceballs (or I don't know, The Office) than Star Wars humor.

I think the difference was the gags that seemed to exist solely for the sake of gags. The Poe/Hux scene at the opening was a good example- what was Poe really trying to accomplish with this? Maybe I'm missing something, but there wasn't any real reason for the delay- he just kind of nattered on for a bit before launching his assault. Johnson was trying to allude to Han on the radio during the prison escape in A New Hope, but the key difference is that the humor also served a functional purpose- Han was trying to calm the guards fears that something was amiss, he just did a poor job of it.

An even bigger problem is that the humor often pulls you out of what should be an otherwise tense situation. Once Hux has been established as a punchline, the viewer can't take him seriously anymore. And because he's the leader of the First Order, the sense of threat they posed is diminished because really, how competent can a group be that put him in charge? Likewise, all sense of urgency was removed from the slow spaceship chase as soon as you realized Finn had time to go gallivanting around the galaxy with his new Mary Sue. There was a lot to like in this movie, but I feel like too often, especially in the first half, that Johnson was actively working against the tone he was trying to achieve.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
It’s creating an internal parallel to the various dilatory and distraction tactics the rebels use throughout the film. And it’s showing how unsuccessful poes methods are compared to Leia and holdo’s distract/deception plan, or compared to Luke using distraction and delay to completely neutralizing the only force user the first order has by playing to kylos vanity and self centered ness.

The film is three or four successive rear guard actions by badly outnumbered forces struggling for survival which is a deliberate structure employed to strong thematic effect but is also why the film is kind of a narrative downer for audiences, it’s about struggling to survive rather than fighting for victory, so the film’s climax is successful escape, not a victory like destroying an enemy superweapon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2017 1:24 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 11:26 pm
[Reveal] Spoiler:
Poe's jokey conversation with Hux is meant to get them to keep from firing on him long enough for his afterburners (or something) to charge up- it's intercut with some kind of a meter filling up on his dashboard. And while it makes Hux look stupid, it is also very directly recalling Han's incompetent attempt to calm the situation down over the intercom in the first movie.

I think a lot of the criticisms people (not just here) are making of this movie are based in how it undercuts institutions that we're attached to, how it makes the heroes look foolish and the villains look incompetent, and how none of the subplots really resolve in anyone accomplishing anything- almost everything anyone tries leads directly to failure, to a dead end. I think that's the point, though- as movielocke points out, this is a movie where any kind of survival is a victory, and the large apparent victories go nowhere (Snoke dies, a capital ship and a dreadnaught go down, etc etc, but the First Order does not appear to have lost any particularly significant force.) The bad guys aren't regal Shakespearian actors, they're doofuses or children with poor emotional control, and they fuck up constantly. I don't think that intrinsically means they can't be frightening, though- I think part of what makes Kylo Ren fascinating is that he is so out of control- we were told that losing control of one's emotions leads to the dark side, but Ren is the first time we actually see that convincingly portrayed.

That this breaks with the storytelling mode of other Star Wars movies is likewise productive- it's a movie in a series that was defined by mythmaking and black and white ethical lore which is very explicitly trying to break all that up, to make everyone fallible and to make the sense of what is good and what is evil more finely defined, by actions and by choices instead of by the color of one's helmet. The humor builds on this, too- it's made up largely of bathos, of things not working or of people looking stupid, and it means that these mythic characters never really get all that mythical- something Luke complains about, before giving himself a sendoff worthy of myth. It isn't an entirely successful movie- the whole casino/Benicio Del Toro subplot felt like kind of a nothing, though it's where I think the movie is trying to get a larger sense of its morality across- but it's interesting, and compelling throughout.

I also agree with movielocke about how annoying chosen-by-blood is as a trope, and this movie (assuming they don't do something stupid and undo it) says to hell with it. That powerful Skywalker blood, as Luke describes it, lead him to overconfidence in himself, it lead to Ben Solo, it lead to Snoke stupidly believing that he could snuff out Jedi-ism by killing Skywalker- all wrong. If it turns out Rey is secretly Obi-Wan's kid, or Palpatine's grand daughter, or the reincarnation of Yoda or whatever the hell, I'll be irritated, because Rey being who she is because that is who she is would be far more compelling- and nicely parallel Finn, who became a hero by making a choice.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2017 1:55 am 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:44 am
matrixschmatrix wrote:
[Reveal] Spoiler:
(Snoke dies, a capital ship and a dreadnaught go down, etc etc, but the First Order does not appear to have lost any particularly significant force.).


I love your whole post, but regarding this, I wonder just how much of the plot of he last Jedi is indicating the first order is on an all out blitzkrieg
[Reveal] Spoiler:
rushing to accomplish their goal because they know they don’t have the resources to survive anything long and drawn out.

The loss of star killer base followed by the dreadnaught results in snokes ship being forced into action. That suggests they’ve exhausted their supply lines and logistically have no choice but to put the flagship into battle.

This means they have almost certainly outrun or nearly outrun their supply lines have no logistical support whatsoever and while not in the dire straits that the resistance is in, they are not that far off from that point.

If so, it would be reminiscent of the wwii film where the Germans try a desperate smash and grab to steal a fuel supply depot because otherwise they no longer have fuel for their war machine. If so, the first order is in a really bad place because Kylo won’t care, and will only make he situation worse on himself by continuing to overextend and get hammered via attrition and logistics.

In this instance, the first order ultimately fails because they have no allies (they blew up so many planets no one will ally with them unless they have power, but they lost starkiller base) and the entire galaxy unites as a community against their dictatorial libertarianist fascism, and rather than exterminating others they are neutralized in a vat of their own hubris and psychotic baby boomer selfishness. :-D

***
Unrelated, but tie the prequels in, what if force ability was never hereditary before anakin skywalker, and this is why the Jedi call him the chosen one? Because he was the chosen one who could lead their Jedi order to eugenics paradise of total domination of the galaxy, they so obviously inherently deserve as being “benevolent” superior beings.

Snoke then would be one of the Jedi experiments in trying to breed for force ability via clones.

But instead the force balances out (Rey, Finn, others) as _the force awakens_ back to its natural state outside the bounds of eugenics.

The resolution then of the Star Wars sagas skywalker story becomes much more kobayashi, much less Kurosawa.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2017 4:25 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 11:26 pm
[Reveal] Spoiler:
It's an interesting thought, and would be more in line with what the tactical situation appeared to be in the last movie- where my impression was, these guys aren't the Imperial fleet, they're a warlord's faction, who only become a real threat because they happen upon a ridiculous superweapon. Here, the implications are that a.) Leia's little fleet is the entirety of the Republic's extant military, and b.) the First Order is both rich enough to be the only source of extreme wealth in the galaxy (which, like- I enjoyed the spirit of the casino scene, which is clearly more meant to be about the luxuries of ultrawealth built on exploitation in the real world, but where did the First Order get all this economic power?) but also militarily powerful enough that a head-on attack is never worthwhile. The last little coda of the movie did seem to be implying a ground-up resistance movement- but again, this would imply a level of control over systems that doesn't really make sense for what previously seemed to be basically highly successful terrorists.

That is a good point that the Skywalkers seem to be the only genetic force-inheritors- and really, from the text of this movie (and one of the characters in Rogue One, it seems as though the Jedi discipline isn't really all that necessary to impressive utilization of the force, such that one would assume force users would be popping up all over the place no matter what happened. One of the implications that I get is that the Jedi ideal of taking people from their families when very young is just a terrible idea- Ben and Anakin both lack the emotional maturity that Luke and Rey have, perhaps because they were too young to make their own choices when they began their training. Also, that's another parallel with Finn- a child who was taken, forced into a discipline, and rebelled against it, eventually killing his own master (only in his case, in the opposite direction.)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2017 12:08 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:44 am
[Reveal] Spoiler:
the supplies issue could be another secondary objective in Holdo’s plan. She effectively forced them to burn enormous amounts of fuel while holding their fleet in functionally a static position for x amount of time and muster out an excessive amount of ground troops, all of these can become enormous tactical advantages, particularly if you’re waiting on reinforcements or flanking maneuvers.

Also it was called starkiller base. The base sucked power from its sun and destroyed the solar system and weapon as a result. Even with a self replicating army of von nemann probes doing the construction, transforming a habitable planet (incredibly rare and functionally invaluable) into a weapon you can only fire a few times would still take decades. That amount of capital loss (losing twenty years of building up armaments in favor of a self destructing weapon) simply can’t be sustained by any army nor warlord.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2017 11:06 pm 
Not PETA approved
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Canada
I enjoyed The Last Jedi a lot, and enjoy thinking about it even more. I appreciated that, while The Force Awakens was a lark--fun, amiable, unburdened by seriousness--The Last Jedi is a heavier film, one built around the role of failure and how success is a deferred and contingent thing. As has been pointed out above, it's a film about plans not working--indeed, almost no larger plan works out, leading some of the plotting to seem purposeless to many viewers.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
It's true, the Finn subplot of the second act is the weakest part of the film. But it's not purposeless. Part of it of course is to introduce themes and subthemes that will be reintroduced and resolved within the main plot (the equivocation over good and evil as clear choices; the socioeconomic elements; the larger failures paired with small successes), and part of it is structural, allowing suspense to be generated by further delaying our return to the precipitous scenes with the fleet. But mainly it exists because, without it, the second act would take place solely within small locations and static scenes: a depopulated island and the compartments of ships. Finn's plot serves to open up the world, to provide colour and movement and a sense of life outside of the self-contained situations that are Luke/Rey's and Poe/Leia's scenes. It may be the weakest section, but without it the second act just would not work. You'd feel how static and empty it was. The flaws in Finn's subplot lie more in the execution than the conception. The casino, as a setting, is too blunt, its symbolism too crass, so that you can feel the mechanism working itself out. Plus the escape on horse(deer?)back is too cartoony. So, yeah, the subplot works overall, but a lot of the particulars don't come off.

That's all fine, though, because the other sections are strong enough to make up for it. I thought it was a bit daring how often expectations were undermined in ways that risked audience fulfillment but proved appropriate from the perspective of theme and character. I think for instance of Luke and Rey's relationship. We're primed for another Yoda/Luke relationship, with a reticent Luke eventually choosing to guide Rey and send her off much as he himself left Dagobah at the end of Empire: raw, but ready to become a true Jedi. What we get, tho', is a Luke who quits training Rey almost as soon as he starts, and they leave each other upon Luke not only admitting his past failures, but seeking further failures, even apocalypse. He see his personal failures as also cosmic failures. He's become a solipsist. Rey learns more about him than from him. This pays off, with Luke and Rey completing their arcs as a result of this interaction, but doing so independently of each other. What Rey learns of herself is that she is neither Luke nor Kylo Ken. Luke, as ever, learns his greatest lessons from an old ghost, in this case a crushing lesson with a glimmer of hope at its core: nothing hinged on him succeeding. His failures, his shortcomings, his personal defeats--all the things that doom a character in a drama--are there to make room for more important people who can learn from his failings and do better, be better. This is the opposite of what we learned in the original trilogy: that the ultimate fate of everything hung on the successes of a few important people. Here, Luke learns that the fate of the universe and the Jedi and the balance of good and evil does not rest with him, and to be content with a spotty record that others can learn from. Luke's arc is to relinquish his quest to remain the last jedi, letting everything live or perish with him. He has to close a cycle he had so long deferred, and repeat the Obi-Wan sacrifice that allows the future to escape. Like a forest fire that promotes new growth, and as Kylo Ren maintains, the past has to be burned away to allow the new to flourish. We can take this to be a statement of this new trilogy (no doubt ironically given who holds the reins): the old characters, arcs, and plots must be cycled through until they are exhausted, die off, and are replaced with something new. Star wars is being replayed until it dies and is reborn as something else. This'll undoubtedly go unfulfilled, and I have no doubt the final film will do whatever its makers feel like doing, but it's interesting to see it hinted at.

As ever, the most interesting character continues to be Kylo Ren. He is certainly the most complex, and there are a number of choices here that are unexpected. Killing Snoke is expected because it repeats the Vader arc, but unexpected in terms of when and how. Snoke doesn't quite get to amount to something as we'd been expecting; he's dispatched, and we have forgotten him instantly, so little does he actually matter. This, again, risks leaving the audience unfulfilled, but I think the choice acquits itself with how it allows something far more interesting and central to progress unmediated: the Rey/Kylo relationship. Again, the old is shattered to make way for the new. Indeed, I think the movie attempts to fix a mistake in Return of the Jedi, in which Vader is subordinated and his conflict with Luke reduced in favour of a less satisfying conflict between Luke and a figure of uncomplicated evil, the emperor. The Last Jedi rectifies this by offing the figure of uncomplicated evil not at the climax, but at the point where the climax begins. This leaves a complicated pairing between two characters who are similar, connected, in sympathy, perhaps knowing each other better than they know anyone else, and yet also opposing figures structuring a larger drama. And with the larger abstractions of good and evil shadowing the story either dispatched, as with Snoke, or deflated, as with Luke, the drama can finally proceed along less mystical and more human terms. Star Wars is coming out from under the weight of Lucas' mythology and metaphysics and becoming a human drama of characters, choices, and values. Once Snoke dies, the choices put to Kylo and Rey are not the go light or go dark variety of the Lucas films. The metaphysics dies immediately. Their choices are more recognizably dramatic and don't seem to hinge on whether either affirms good or evil in an abstract sense. Kylo refuses because he wants free of all the burdens of the past that torment him; Rey refuses because of her need to affirm all the connections she made once she left her isolation and unfulfilled waiting behind. They made their choices based on things that would still be true were there no dark/light side metaphysics at all. The movie abandons Lucas' vague and lumbering Manichaeism for regular dramatic motivation.


There are other things to talk about, but for me the interesting thing is summed by how the important, burning questions of The Force Awakens--who is Snoke, what is Rey's parentage--have unimportant answers. I like that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 28, 2017 12:44 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2017 7:08 pm
As for Finn's subplot:

[Reveal] Spoiler:
It is fairly purposeless in terms of the overall plot, but does carry weight thematically (in terms of picking a side based on principles vs. picking one based on immediate personal gain, which can be nebulous) and it tries to carry weight in terms of character. I didn't really buy the latter because the end of the film felt like it was trying to establish some romantic connection between Finn and Rose, and there was zero romantic heat between the two of them, and such a lack of such chemistry that I wonder if they had additional relationship-building scenes on the cutting room floor.

It was for me the least successful major element of the film, partially because it also includes Benicio del Toro's gratingly self-parodying performance, which didn't work for me in the least, and the useless return of Phasma. I also didn't particularly care for the milked walrus, the Caretakers, or BB-8 shooting coins at casino guards, but those were minor elements.


I have now seen the film for a second time; after a first viewing, I worried that I was trying to talk myself into liking it more than I really did or it justified, but, no, there's is just way too much good stuff in this movie for it to be disregarded. All the Rey/Ren/Snoke stuff continues to shine -- basically anything that has to do with The Force and its users -- and the climactic visual of
[Reveal] Spoiler:
Laura Dern's plot
might be the most stunning set of shots in any film of the franchise. I don't think it connects on every swing, but it's sure swinging for the fences in a way that's exciting after the relative safety of The Force Awakens (a movie I enjoy quite a bit and even more than this one, but I think something of a "restoration" was required and was very open to mixing things up in the subsequent episodes, which so far is in effect).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 28, 2017 10:30 am 
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 2:30 am
Location: Philadelphia via Chicago
Haldo’s final mission made me think of Attack of the Clones. Jango Fett’s seismic charges were a blast in the theater.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 30, 2017 11:36 pm 

Joined: Tue May 28, 2013 1:43 pm
According to an interview in Variety, John Williams is composing a single theme for Solo: A Star Wars Story.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 31, 2017 12:16 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2017 7:08 pm
Interesting as Williams had four movies to write a theme for Han Solo, and never did.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1315 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bdsweeney


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group




This site is not affiliated with The Criterion Collection