Star Wars: The Last Jedi (Rian Johnson, 2017)

Discussions of specific films and franchises.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
tenia
Ask Me About My Bassoon
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#201 Post by tenia » Sun Apr 01, 2018 2:49 pm

Luke M wrote:The criticism I’ve seen on the internet has been dominated by people who really hate it and constantly want to let you know why, while the people who liked it only sorta enjoyed it.
In a way, it's not very re-assuring. Movies I love, I could go on and on about how and why I love them. Stuff I kind of enjoy ? I'll probably have forgotten about them next week.
But it's also a very human thing to do. The most vocal people are always the complaining ones. At least, this time, they were able to articulate why.
swo17 wrote:Fanboys--sometimes I wish I could just put my fist through the whole lot of them.
Honestly, it's a bit frustrating to see the fanboys being brought up all the time, as if you have to be a fanboy to dislike the movie or to find grounds for complaints. I like Star Wars, it's part of the movies I'm seeing since I'm a kid, but I probably am no fanboy, and I yet strongly disliked the movie, more than any SW movies before. And to me, the biggest issues were problems that weren't kicking in in the SW realm, but pace, story, twists, narrative choices, things really down to movie-making and that I could discuss about for other movies.
If it were issues like "Oh but really ? Han's dices ?!!" like some people brought up, I wouldn't be bothered by them, but I just found the movie extremely poorly constructed and with too little substance for its ambitions, making it look very pretentious. If it wasn't 2h31 but, say, 40 min shorter, maybe I would have been more accomodating with it, but not with this.
And none of this has to do with being a fanboy.

User avatar
movielocke
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:44 am

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#202 Post by movielocke » Sun Apr 01, 2018 3:26 pm

I still maintain that most of the problems with last Jedi originate in the sloppy and utterly thoughtless structure and writing of force awakens . Awakens is brilliant in its own way, but there was no three film goal in mind whatsoever for most of the Mileau and characters it invented.

For the most part I think Jedi is a long film because Johnson used the running time to clean up Abrams mess and reorientate the trilogy towards a climactic final film.

User avatar
Kirkinson
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 5:34 am
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#203 Post by Kirkinson » Sun Apr 01, 2018 4:03 pm

Tenia, I don't think anyone here is accusing everyone with a strong negative opinion of The Last Jedi (and certainly not everyone with thoughtful, measured criticisms) of being an angry fanboy. The problem is that the people who are angry fanboys have largely drowned out people who just didn't like it in a normal, healthy way. Consider this Twitter user and all the memes and accounts he is retweeting — these people are still, to this day, popping up in the replies to every tweet Rian Johnson makes, even if it has nothing to do with Star Wars. In the weeks following The Last Jedi's release, they were also constantly showing up in the replies to posts by critics who gave the movie a favorable review. They will still show up in replies to new articles about the movie. This hoard has made it exhausting to engage in reasonable arguments of substance about The Last Jedi on social media, or even occasionally in "real life" — I know a couple people who reacted to the movie like this, and they are the main reason I never wrote anything about my reaction here. Not because I feared the same kind of shrieking mess from this board, but because dealing with it elsewhere so exasperated me that I didn't have any energy left for a more reasonable discussion.

EDIT: I should maybe admit that my exasperation is also largely my own fault for choosing to spend hours arguing with unreasonable people about a Star Wars movie....
Last edited by Kirkinson on Sun Apr 01, 2018 4:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
tenia
Ask Me About My Bassoon
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#204 Post by tenia » Sun Apr 01, 2018 4:18 pm

I understand the feeling against obnoxious fanboys, but it feels that the response against them sometimes is quite simplistic too and makes it look as if most (if not all) the negative response was coming from or expressed as if coming from obsessive fanboys.
But I'm not saying it for here only, it's a general feeling I've read on many other discussion boards I'm reading. "Fanboy" is a word often coming very quickly in the discussion, most of the time thrown at attackers of the movie, as if they were obsessively nitpicking about details from TLJ and thus unable to just sit back, relax and enjoy the movie.
Considering, as I wrote, how some of the flaws I found in the movie seemed to me down to basic filmmaking and screenwriting, it can feel frustrating to be sent back to the "angry fanboy" cliché, even when you try and articulate reasons for your opinion and how they are actually quite outside elements from the franchise.
Kirkinson wrote:Consider this Twitter user and all the memes and accounts he is retweeting — these people are still, to this day, popping up in the replies to every tweet Rian Johnson makes, even if it has nothing to do with Star Wars.
I genuinely and honestly feel sad for people with so much free time on their hands wasting it on doing this and how unsanely obsessed they look.
movielocke wrote:I still maintain that most of the problems with last Jedi originate in the sloppy and utterly thoughtless structure and writing of force awakens . Awakens is brilliant in its own way, but there was no three film goal in mind whatsoever for most of the Mileau and characters it invented.
For the most part I think Jedi is a long film because Johnson used the running time to clean up Abrams mess and reorientate the trilogy towards a climactic final film.
I'm not sure. As I wrote at the time, the whole escapade of Poe and Rose on the casino planet felt like 90 minutes wasted for nothing, and I can't think it couldn't have done in a much shorter way.

McCrutchy
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 4:57 am
Location: East Coast, USA

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#205 Post by McCrutchy » Sun Apr 01, 2018 4:24 pm

movielocke wrote:I still maintain that most of the problems with last Jedi originate in the sloppy and utterly thoughtless structure and writing of force awakens . Awakens is brilliant in its own way, but there was no three film goal in mind whatsoever for most of the Mileau and characters it invented.

For the most part I think Jedi is a long film because Johnson used the running time to clean up Abrams mess and reorientate the trilogy towards a climactic final film.
That could be entirely true. For me, I rate The Force Awakens slightly better than The Last Jedi, but only because the 2015 film has Harrison Ford as Han Solo, and I always found Ford's character and performance more appealing than Luke Skywalker (which in turn, is why I will not see the Solo film, with--as I understand it--no Harrison Ford), and also because it was over thirty years since Ford, Hamill and Fisher, as Han, Luke and Leia, had shared a film together, so I forgave some sense of "ring rust" when it came to other aspects of the film. However, none of the new characters worked for me, and I think the big issue is that Abrams wanted to have his cake (make a movie with the original cast) and eat it, too (introduce several new characters at the same time), which resulted in too much character development falling by the wayside. And of course, this didn't happen with only the new characters, but also with Luke, who became a gimmick.

So, I could easily see Johnson with his work cut out for him right at the start, and perhaps that's why so little actually happens in The Last Jedi, because Johnson was just as busy, if not busier, trying to develop the new characters, as he was busy trying to advance the plot of the trilogy. Of course, I would say one of the major failures in the second film was to compound the situation by throwing Rose, Holdo and "DJ" into the mix, along with having to do the Luke Skywalker movie Abrams teased in the previous entry. And as much as I probably won't see it, I kind of feel like Abrams could turn Episode IX into this massive shitshow, which passive-aggressively ignores The Last Jedi as much as possible, and instead tries to be a spiritual sequel to The Force Awakens. For example, I could see Abrams using Luke as a major part of the film (especially with Carrie Fisher gone), and taking him in a much different direction, and I could also see characters introduced in The Last Jedi sidelined for much of the next film, too.

Of course, I'm assuming Kathleen Kennedy might have other ideas, and she may well try to force (heh) Abrams to simply tie everything in a bow and call it a day. On the other hand, she can't have had too many issues with either The Force Awakens or The Last Jedi, and let's not forget the shameful exploitation of the original film in Rogue One and whatever has happened/will happen with Solo, so right now, it just seems like a big, damn mess. I know one thing for sure, I don't envy J.J. Abrams, especially if Solo is a disappointment, and causes more negative fan reaction.

connor
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 2:03 pm

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#206 Post by connor » Sun Apr 01, 2018 4:40 pm

I don't understand the complaints about the casino planet. The whole point was to zoom out of this (fairly claustrophobic) back-and-forth between good guys and bad guys shooting each other in space and show what the galaxy-wide effect of this long civil war was -- the rise of a new, decadent elite living high on the hog and playing both sides against each other. It was all very WWII era, cinematically speaking, in a pretty clever way, especially the Del Toro character. And I thought it paid off at the very end quite beautifully with the little kids hearing of Luke's stand and looking to the skies. It did what Star Wars desperately needs at this point: it expanded the scope of the narrative (the opposite of Rogue One). This is also, of course, a pretty savvy business move if Disney wants to squeeze another few decades out of this IP.

Even besides all that stuff, I loved the look of it (shooting in Croatia was an excellent touch), and I enjoyed the kinda populist "smash up the richies' playground" aspect of it. A welcome new direction in Star Wars that's surprising but also feels true to the material (and the cinematic tradition its always drawn upon).

If you want to talk about useless second act diversions, let's talk about the awful Maz Kanata stuff from the Force Awakens. I was happy to see Rian Johnson close that chapter so swiftly.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#207 Post by knives » Sun Apr 01, 2018 8:41 pm

movielocke wrote:I still maintain that most of the problems with last Jedi originate in the sloppy and utterly thoughtless structure and writing of force awakens . Awakens is brilliant in its own way, but there was no three film goal in mind whatsoever for most of the Mileau and characters it invented.
Isn't that true of the original film as well though?

User avatar
Big Ben
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2016 12:54 pm
Location: Great Falls, Montana

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#208 Post by Big Ben » Sun Apr 01, 2018 9:27 pm

knives wrote:
movielocke wrote:I still maintain that most of the problems with last Jedi originate in the sloppy and utterly thoughtless structure and writing of force awakens . Awakens is brilliant in its own way, but there was no three film goal in mind whatsoever for most of the Mileau and characters it invented.
Isn't that true of the original film as well though?
One of the biggest elephants in the room for me regarding Star Wars is that it isn't exactly the greatest example of plot. It's important to remember that A New Hope only really came together because a great many people came together to help create a solid product. The film itself was practically saved in the editing room by Lucas' wife at the time so it's miraculous that Star Wars is a thing at all. While lots of Lucas' ideas were used, the Original Trilogy is really, to me, an example of Lucas' ideas under control (Especially moreso from the corporate side.). However a great deal of weird shit made it in. I don't think I've ever met an adult who thinks that the Ewoks were a narrative tour de force or that Slave Leia wasn't ridiculous. In fact Harrison Ford begged George Lucas to kill him off on more than one occasion but Lucas refused. Ford was so adamant about this the only reason Solo is frozen in Carbonite at the end of The Empire Strikes Back is because they were truly unsure if Ford would physically show up for the next film. Lucas refused to kill of any of the main characters because of toy sales (And things like the aforementioned Ewoks were created to sell them.). The idea that Star Wars is only just now flying by the seat of it's pants isn't exactly true.

Unrelated to the quotes but I feel it's very necessary to bring up the Prequels. A series of films that culminates with Padme dying of sadness while Anakin is severely mutilated and then very nearly burning alive. Even casting aside the very apparent ramifications there I seriously doubt many people left the theater thinking Lucas had made a Shakespearean epic. And then there's caricatures like this which appear to be very much influenced by Antisemitism. And don't even get me started on Jar Jar Binks. Who among us wants to talk about how poop jokes are great inclusions?

Star Wars has always been a centerpiece for bad decisions from both behind and in front of the camera. And it's always had ridiculous plot points. Star Wars was and will always be a cultural phenomenon but it's never not been smooth sailing getting here. I fully expect Star Wars to be both maligned and celebrated for years to come.

User avatar
MoonlitKnight
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 10:44 pm

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#209 Post by MoonlitKnight » Mon Apr 02, 2018 12:11 pm

McCrutchy wrote:Star Wars is probably still distinctive enough to be its own thing, even if the new films suffer from a bit too much present day tone and perspective.
... which is part of the problem. These new movies are missing that old-timey 'rich man's Buck Rogers' feel, also highlighted by some very contemporary-sounding lines, such as "That's what I'm talkin' about!" in TFA and that borderline Verizon parody/'your mama' joke between Poe and Hux at the beginning of TLJ. Perhaps the main disconnect between more casual/passing fans of these movies and so-called SW "fanboys" is that the latter care just as much about elements like world-building and the overall mythology/lore within the context of this universe as story, whereas most of the former clearly couldn't care less about those things. When you have an established pattern of giving audiences new environments/alien species/creatures/spacecraft/weaponry/etc. in each movie and also further expanding upon the universe and you're suddenly mostly seeing just OT stuff either bigger or with a new coat of paint (or both) and the universe is sort of getting shrunk down again, it's a rather jarring break in continuity, particularly since those finer details were more or less the things that truly make Star Wars Star Wars. It's kind of ironic that the only new movie that's even come close to that Star Wars-y feel is "Rogue One," a non-'core saga' movie.

There's also the problem of this new trilogy more or less negating everything that the OT characters set out to accomplish... which begs the question of how much of a purpose does the OT actually now serve in the overall saga? The focus of the first 6 movies was clear: the Skywalker family, the Force, the Jedi/Sith, and the galactic government. Now only the Force seems to be part of that narrative, with everything else in the process of being phased out (they haven't really even focused on the latter at all).

Of course, there are plenty of clumsy general story elements in this trilogy that also hampers it: the new characters barely even register (with the main protagonist being a by-definition 'Mary Sue'), the continued major lack of exposition between Episodes VI and VII, the fact that the First Order is not even remotely intimidating given how incompetent its leaders have been shown to be, Chewie now simply being Rey's chauffeur, etc.

User avatar
Luke M
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 9:21 pm

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#210 Post by Luke M » Mon Apr 02, 2018 3:37 pm

connor wrote:If you want to talk about useless second act diversions, let's talk about the awful Maz Kanata stuff from the Force Awakens. I was happy to see Rian Johnson close that chapter so swiftly.
I liked a lot of Johnson’s decisions. Ditching another cartoon super villain for Adam Driver was a fun turn and should pay off in the next movie. Maz Kanata was somewhat interesting but if you’re gonna sign a super talented and beautiful actress maybe put her on the screen? Luke’s personality should not have been a surprise to those who saw TFA’s ending. I also enjoyed the telepathic conversations which was hinted at in OT between Luke and Leia.

User avatar
cdnchris
Site Admin
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:45 pm
Location: Washington
Contact:

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#211 Post by cdnchris » Mon Apr 02, 2018 4:27 pm

Luke M wrote: I liked a lot of Johnson’s decisions. Ditching another cartoon super villain for Adam Driver was a fun turn and should pay off in the next movie.
SpoilerShow
If you're talking about eliminating Snoke so early (instead of waiting for the third entry) I thought that was a great little surprise. I have been more or less expecting these new films to follow a similar arc to the original trilogy and it was feeling like that with Rey going off to see Luke (ala Luke going to see Yoda) and such only to have Snoke killed off and the film then going a fairly different direction, at least based on what I was expecting.
I like the Star Wars films a lot, though I think I'm again more a passive one but I really enjoyed this one a great deal and was a bit stunned by some of the negative reactions (though was disgusted when I discovered that a lot of people/fan boys were more triggered over the idea that women could be heroes, and/or not white, like that's what they somehow focused on). Yes, I completely agree that the odd humour injections don't fit: the Poe/Hux thing at the beginning (which is something I would have expected from a Marvel movie), the running gag of Rey destroying bits of the little village piece by piece, and some of the one-liners are too self-conscious. But there are still some good bits like Luke tickling Rey's hand with the blade of grass and Yoda's "page turners they are not" line.

I have to also say I was really doubtful when I learned Driver was going to be the villain in these films initially. I was pleasantly surprised with what he did with the character in the first film but I'm really enjoying the development of this character and what he's bringing to these films. I stand corrected on my initial doubts. I also enjoyed the slight expansion of the universe, looking at how many are profiting on the conflict in these films and getting more a perspective from those outside the rebels or the First Order/Empire.

McCrutchy
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 4:57 am
Location: East Coast, USA

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#212 Post by McCrutchy » Mon Apr 02, 2018 6:57 pm

It's worth pointing out, though, that the Emperor wasn't really a "cartoon". I think the prequels might have had one or two actual CGI/cartoon villains, but (at least in Return of the Jedi) Palpatine is just McDarmind under some makeup, with a few 80s lightning bolt effects that make perfect sense for someone who has clearly aged out of lightsaber duels.

The CGI Snoke villain, which indeed is perhaps the most Marvel Cinematic Universe element in Disney's Star Wars films so far, was a grossly terrible idea (even the name "Snoke" is one of the most terrible I have come across in the franchise, which is saying a lot), anyway, and both The Force Awakens and The Last Jedi lost face by having some sort of proto-Gollum behind the scenes like that. Hell, if they'd just filmed Andy Serkis without motion capture, the man called Snoke would have probably been more convincing than the expensive CGI villain we got.


As for Snoke's appearance in The Last Jedi, that one scene was so long and extended, that
SpoilerShow
I saw what would happen coming from a mile away, and when you consider how both films have shoved the original trilogy characters out of the way of the new trilogy characters, it's really not surprising what Johnson has tentatively set up for Episode IX, with Kylo looking to be the main villain.


In fact, I think it would have been a lot more interesting to have had Luke show up in the last 30 minutes or so of The Force Awakens and kill Kylo/Ben to save Han. That would not only have paid off for people expecting to see Luke in a bog role in The Force Awakens, but it would also have provided for a really interesting dynamic between Han and Luke, with Leia caught in the middle. Rey could have chosen to go off with Han (and Leia), attempting to ignore her destiny with the Force and being a Jedi, and The Last Jedi could have been about Rey and Leia coming to grips with what they both must do to defeat a better super-villain than Supreme Leader Gollum, and maybe Leia is the one who eventually beings her back to Luke, which only complicates her relationship with Han further, and would have set up a really interesting Episode IX for all three characters (had Carrie Fisher not passed away, of course). Fatten things up with some short Hux/Phasma/Supreme Leader sidebars (and maybe some Finn/Poe sidebars, but these characters are a bit extraneous at times), as well as some Yoda, and more stuff with R2, 3PO and Chewie, and I think you could have two pretty good little films setting up a trilogy conclusion that eased away from the original trilogy actors/characters, and into new adventures with a small number of new characters that audiences can actually care about.

Somehow, though, Lucasfilm thought it was a good idea to throw a whole bunch of new characters into the films right away, and at the same time, push the original trilogy characters away, and not just Han, Luke and Leia, but also R2 (needlessly replaced with a high-tech bowling ball) 3PO and Chewie, who despite being physically portrayed by new actors, have still been reduced to virtual cameo appearances.

User avatar
movielocke
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:44 am

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#213 Post by movielocke » Mon Apr 02, 2018 8:09 pm

while the expansion into the economics of the war was interesting, on the other hand, in TFA, the first order blows up a dozen highly important planets (if they're the current seat of government), as well as an entire military force, in addition to the entire solar system around the base of Star Killer 1 being destroyed ( I did like in TFA how the weapon is eventually self destroying, in that it draws energy from the sun, but it is also getting colder and colder on the planet because it is depleting the sun).

Flat out, that is a TON of capital and also personnel that were destroyed, and should trigger a galaxy wide recession, a lot of those "gamblers" and elites at the gambling planets should have lost their shirts, plus if one side achieves total victory, like wiping out the entire New Republic armed forces and ruling caste, then there is no one left on the new republic side to keep buying war material or even pay outstanding contracts on current orders.

That means, for the idlers on the gambling planet, the victories of the First Order should have been triggering massive economic panic and pandemonium, rather than a continuation of business as usual.

On the other hand, the plot of TLJ is relatively time constrained, and there does not seem to be tremendous time lag between the two films, so perhaps the galactic markets haven't had time to react yet? But that makes no sense because Rey is the big time problem in these two films, she witnesses the destruction of Star Killer Base, which happens after the New Republic is destroyed, travels a circuituous route to find Luke, finds him, spends time not training, spends time training, leaves to rejoin the fight, rejoins the fight. Whereas back at the Resistance base, they evacuate, then fly slightly faster than the dreadnaught for a few days.

User avatar
who is bobby dylan
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:50 am

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#214 Post by who is bobby dylan » Tue Apr 03, 2018 12:09 am

A few thoughts from someone who really liked The Force Awakens and The Last Jedi.
I'm just honestly surprised that so many people see The Last Jedi as this daring, dark blockbuster. I didn't get that sense at all, and I found it to have an extremely noticeable corporate agenda, namely to extinguish the Skywalker-era narrative, and to advance several other new characters into potential other films.
If you can't understand why people like or respond to a film (regardless of your own feelings about it) that says more about your critical acumen, then it does the quality of the film. We all hate films others love and love films other people hate, but thinking critically about films, means setting aside our own personal reaction and trying to understand how a film works for its audience(s) not just ourselves. I really like The Last Jedi and The Force Awakens. I hate Rogue One. I have no problem though, understanding why some people dislike the first two and why some people like the later.

I don't see how any Star Wars film Disney could make, whether it continued, extinguished or ignored the Skywalker Saga could not in part be driven by a corporate agenda? If this alone constitutes a reason to dislike the film, then why not dislike the original films for 20th Century Fox's and Lucas Film's "corporate agenda" to make big budget youth films trading on the audiences nostalgia for pulp: serials, comic books, samurai films, and fantasy and science fiction magazines.
The criticism I’ve seen on the internet has been dominated by people who really hate it and constantly want to let you know why, while the people who liked it only sorta enjoyed it. No one’s going to make it the hill they die on against mobs of angry fan boys. You can see the hate almost everywhere even Wal-Mart reviews for the blu-ray (which by all technical merits is a top notch disc.) These people are going out of their way to tell anyone that’ll listen they think it’s bad.
I really liked it. I would rank Episodes 7 and 8 as of equality as films with Episodes 4 and 5 without apology.
I don't understand the complaints about the casino planet. The whole point was to zoom out of this (fairly claustrophobic) back-and-forth between good guys and bad guys shooting each other in space and show what the galaxy-wide effect of this long civil war was -- the rise of a new, decadent elite living high on the hog and playing both sides against each other. It was all very WWII era, cinematically speaking, in a pretty clever way, especially the Del Toro character.
Thank you for this distillation of the Canto Bight scene. I also enjoyed it and it has been super annoying to see people dismiss it without understanding or misunderstanding its function in the overall story.
... which is part of the problem. These new movies are missing that old-timey 'rich man's Buck Rogers' feel, also highlighted by some very contemporary-sounding lines, such as "That's what I'm talkin' about!" in TFA and that borderline Verizon parody/'your mama' joke between Poe and Hux at the beginning of TLJ.
It wouldn't make a lot of sense to ground new films made in the 2010s with the old timey feel of a Buck Rogers serial. First, virtually none of the audience has any connection to that material. Second, you have six Star Wars films to draw from instead that they have seen. Also, wasn't part of the massive appeal of the original trilogy in watching what were then, contemporary characters thrust into a weird futuristic, but medieval setting? Aren't the new movies doing the exact same thing, by thrusting what are now, contemporary characters into the setting of Star Wars?
Of course, there are plenty of clumsy general story elements in this trilogy that also hampers it: the new characters barely even register (with the main protagonist being a by-definition 'Mary Sue'), the continued major lack of exposition between Episodes VI and VII, the fact that the First Order is not even remotely intimidating given how incompetent its leaders have been shown to be, Chewie now simply being Rey's chauffeur, etc.
The new characters barely register for you. I think they register very well and that The Last Jedi does a tremendously good job of building them up as meaningful characters/putting them through their paces. Rey is a "Mary Sue" is sexist garbage started by a screen writer who has had to abandon twitter after multiple allegations of sexual misconduct. Invoking it as a criticism is not a good look. As for your comments about The First Order. One thing I really like about The Force Awakens and The Last Jedi are the different directions they have taken from the original trilogy. Darth Vader was an awesome concept, the most terrifying father figure in the galaxy, but as a character Anakin Skywalker sucks. As soon as the mask comes off in Return of the Jedi and for the entirety of the prequels he doesn't register. I think one of the major accomplishments of the new trilogy has been in creating a villain in Kylo Ren who is still (in fact more) interesting as a character when he takes his mask off than when he had it on.

McCrutchy
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 4:57 am
Location: East Coast, USA

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#215 Post by McCrutchy » Tue Apr 03, 2018 1:34 am

who is bobby dylan wrote:If you can't understand why people like or respond to a film (regardless of your own feelings about it) that says more about your critical acumen, then it does the quality of the film. We all hate films others love and love films other people hate, but thinking critically about films, means setting aside our own personal reaction and trying to understand how a film works for its audience(s) not just ourselves. I really like The Last Jedi and The Force Awakens. I hate Rogue One. I have no problem though, understanding why some people dislike the first two and why some people like the later.

I don't see how any Star Wars film Disney could make, whether it continued, extinguished or ignored the Skywalker Saga could not in part be driven by a corporate agenda? If this alone constitutes a reason to dislike the film, then why not dislike the original films for 20th Century Fox's and Lucas Film's "corporate agenda" to make big budget youth films trading on the audiences nostalgia for pulp: serials, comic books, samurai films, and fantasy and science fiction magazines.
You have fundamentally misunderstood what you quoted from my post. I never said I didn't understand why people didn't "like or respond" to The Last Jedi (or for that matter, any film). I'm well aware, as is, I would hope, any adult human being, that different people like different things. That portion of my post was about how certain people interpreted the film, not whether they liked it. Of course, I didn't like it very much, but that's no less valid a response than someone who liked it a lot.

And, as I pointed out, I fully expect these films to be driven by corporate agendas. What I don't expect is for a multi-billion dollar franchise film series to make that corporate agenda so obvious. As I explained above, as you watch The Last Jedi, it becomes all too obvious in certain scenes that some characters will live, while others will die. For example, one particular character new to The Last Jedi should have been killed about three or four times over, but managed to survive the entire film, and should be in Episode IX. An "evil" character basically asked to die in a scene which was structured so that they goaded one of the main characters into killing them, while in another scene, an older character simply "died" from exertion. This is far from the first time such things have happened in films, of course, but that doesn't excuse them happening so blatantly in a film which is supposed to be one of the major theatrical films of the decade.

User avatar
who is bobby dylan
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:50 am

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#216 Post by who is bobby dylan » Tue Apr 03, 2018 8:21 am

You have fundamentally misunderstood what you quoted from my post. I never said I didn't understand why people didn't "like or respond" to The Last Jedi (or for that matter, any film). I'm well aware, as is, I would hope, any adult human being, that different people like different things. That portion of my post was about how certain people interpreted the film, not whether they liked it. Of course, I didn't like it very much, but that's no less valid a response than someone who liked it a lot.
I don't think so. I don't think there is any reason to be surprised that some people liked The Last Jedi. Likewise, I don't think there is any reason to be surprised that some people disliked it. I think people's reasons for both reactions are rooted in the film and that it is not necessary to invent a conspiracy to explain them.
And, as I pointed out, I fully expect these films to be driven by corporate agendas. What I don't expect is for a multi-billion dollar franchise film series to make that corporate agenda so obvious. As I explained above, as you watch The Last Jedi, it becomes all too obvious in certain scenes that some characters will live, while others will die. For example, one particular character new to The Last Jedi should have been killed about three or four times over, but managed to survive the entire film, and should be in Episode IX. An "evil" character basically asked to die in a scene which was structured so that they goaded one of the main characters into killing them, while in another scene, an older character simply "died" from exertion. This is far from the first time such things have happened in films, of course, but that doesn't excuse them happening so blatantly in a film which is supposed to be one of the major theatrical films of the decade.
Kylo Ren makes the decision to kill Snoke in the elevator, before the "goading" takes place. Luke's death from using a force power is setup earlier in the film, when Kylo remarks that the use of certain force powers can kill people. As for Rose. By your own logic, Luke Skywalker should have died in Episode 4. A farm boy, hobby pilot, gets attacked by nomads, but survives, sneaks aboard the largest military installation in the galaxy, gets fired at by highly trained imperial soldiers (known for their marksmanship!) who never hit him, imperial pilots who never hit him, cannons that never hit him, while he manages to always hit his targets... with no training. Talk about blatant shaping of the story to serve a corporate agenda! Again, it's fine for you just not to like the film because it continues the story of Luke Skywalker at a place you don't like and kills off his mortal form. You don't need to couch that in it's a corporate conspiracy. There are numerous interviews with the writer/director Rian Johnson where he explains the story telling decisions he made and why he made them.
Last edited by who is bobby dylan on Tue Apr 03, 2018 9:41 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
tenia
Ask Me About My Bassoon
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#217 Post by tenia » Tue Apr 03, 2018 8:50 am

cdnchris wrote:
Luke M wrote: I liked a lot of Johnson’s decisions. Ditching another cartoon super villain for Adam Driver was a fun turn and should pay off in the next movie.
SpoilerShow
If you're talking about eliminating Snoke so early (instead of waiting for the third entry) I thought that was a great little surprise.
I didn't find this at all to be a surprise.
Actually, it felt like another easy choice for the movie.
SpoilerShow
A surprise would have been for Rey to turn to the Dark Side, but when plotting the different possibilities of the encounter in my head, the easiest one was for Kylo to kill Snoke, become the new leader, and fighting Rey. And duh, that's what happened.
And honestly, I like a lot Driver's Ren, which is the character I find the most interesting in this new trilogy, and he's certainly the most interesting thing in TLJ. He has a certain blankness in his expressions (or, mostly, lack of) that seems perfectly suiting, a way to create a character which looks internally conflicted. But this evolution felt very easy to me.
who is bobby dylan wrote:The new characters barely register for you. I think they register very well and that The Last Jedi does a tremendously good job of building them up as meaningful characters/putting them through their paces.
I'm not so sure. Finn always seems like a work-in-progress sidekick which might me more important but nope oh wait maybe well actually no. Rose is even worse and end up feeling mostly like a Manic Pixie Dream Girl to help Finn going through his obstacles and making the right decisions. The worse character probably is Poe, which is constantly shown as a thoughtless endangering daredevil, but by the end of TLJ, where does that put him ? Well, as the new loveable hero that is shown as the legitimate heir of the Resistance Leader role, and at no moment, the movie seems to register that maybe there is a lack of cause-effect reaction in between. But that's the movie whose whole premises are based on a leader not
In this regard, TFA felt actually better to me in placing the new characters, maybe because it wasn't so much developping them than presenting them, but in terms of evolution, TLJ felt mostly to me extremely self-indulgent in this regard.
connor wrote:I don't understand the complaints about the casino planet.
My main complaint with this would be that it's vastly overlong considering its payload, both narratively and thematically. It seemed like an awful lot of time spent around this by Finn and Rose, just for meeting this obviously untrustworthy character (which unfortunately erased for me the "different shades of grey" subtext) and for the usual "Rich people exploiting poor people" riff (which felt extremely ham-fisted). Finn and Rose's escape from the place also has strikingly subpar SFX.

User avatar
who is bobby dylan
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:50 am

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#218 Post by who is bobby dylan » Tue Apr 03, 2018 9:53 am

I'm not so sure. Finn always seems like a work-in-progress sidekick which might me more important but nope oh wait maybe well actually no. Rose is even worse and end up feeling mostly like a Manic Pixie Dream Girl to help Finn going through his obstacles and making the right decisions. The worse character probably is Poe, which is constantly shown as a thoughtless endangering daredevil, but by the end of TLJ, where does that put him ? Well, as the new loveable hero that is shown as the legitimate heir of the Resistance Leader role, and at no moment, the movie seems to register that maybe there is a lack of cause-effect reaction in between. But that's the movie whose whole premises are based on a leader not
In this regard, TFA felt actually better to me in placing the new characters, maybe because it wasn't so much developping them than presenting them, but in terms of evolution, TLJ felt mostly to me extremely self-indulgent in this regard.
You don't have to be sure. That said, Finn's journey is straight forward. He's an ordinary person, trying to decide what his place is in the rebellion. He starts the story with no attachment to the rebellion, but only to Rey. Through his journey with Rose, Manic Pixie Dream Girl, or heart and mind :wink: of the film he makes a choice to join the rebellion for ideological reasons and by implication the nature of the meaning of the rebellion is expanded based on how Finn, Rose, and the slave children relate to it.

As for Poe, part of the entire point of the movie is in registering that cause-effect reaction in between. Poe has his own plan for saving the rebellion. He is able to put that plan into action, only to see it fail completely, while Holdo's plan succeeds. Poe becomes worthy of leadership because he is willing to face his complete failure and learn from it. He modifies his actions in the final battle twice, from what they would have been at the start of the film because of this lesson and because he has learned from his failure (in the end) he does help lead the rebellion to safety. I like the idea that his character wasn't always a great leader, but had to learn to become one through the most unglamourous way possible.

User avatar
tenia
Ask Me About My Bassoon
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#219 Post by tenia » Tue Apr 03, 2018 10:21 am

who is bobby dylan wrote:Poe has his own plan for saving the rebellion. He is able to put that plan into action, only to see it fail completely, while Holdo's plan succeeds. Poe becomes worthy of leadership because he is willing to face his complete failure and learn from it.
What's fascinating in this is how much time the movie is willing to spend on something that fails and how all this is sent in motion by Holdo not telling her plan for seemingly no other reason than cinematic one, ie creating some kind of suspense (while the viewer probably guessed right away she wasn't going to have everyone killed by the end of the movie).
who is bobby dylan wrote:He modifies his actions in the final battle twice, from what they would have been at the start of the film because of this lesson and because he has learned from his failure (in the end) he does help lead the rebellion to safety. I like the idea that his character wasn't always a great leader, but had to learn to become one through the most unglamourous way possible.
My argument would be that the movie does a very poor job at showing this evolution. I don't especially recall thinking he changed his ways during the final battle. He seemed helpless and clueless, but fortunately, Luke comes to the rescue, but overall, it feels like a lot of time dedicated to a ham-fist subtext of “the youth isn’t always right and needs to know it can fail”. I'm not saying this isn't there. I'm saying it's not done in, IMO, a smooth way and that in the end, Poe's transition into a worthy leader who has learnt from his failure felt far from obvious (and actually I doubt he's consistently wiser by the end of the movie).

User avatar
Feiereisel
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 9:41 am

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#220 Post by Feiereisel » Tue Apr 03, 2018 11:55 am

I'd argue that "evolution" isn't necessarily the point of the film. Taken together, the murkiness of the characterization, unconventional retreat-based circumstances of the the Resistance/First Order plot, and foregrounding of small, smart victories as opposed to big, empty heroism are ways for Johnson to pry the characters loose from their archetypal paths and explore the more nuanced thematic territory that the predictable beats a more familiar narrative would not have accommodated. The presence of so many quiet moments in the film--in contrast to Abrams' more bombastic and excitable approach to The Force Awakens speaks to this. (Those differences also create a fascinating tension between the two films that enhances both.)

We're not watching Poe learn clear lessons from his mistakes and then tidily apply them in a big battle. The Last Jedi presents characters who are just beginning to process things in a new way following imperfect but consciousness-expanding experiences. This is true not just of Poe, but of almost every character in the movie. This varies by degrees depending on the character--Kylo, in claiming a definitive title, seems to come the further along than Finn, Rey, or Poe--but I think the repetition of it allows the shaggy plot of the film to cohere on a more holistic level.

That's why the stable-set coda is such a wonderful way to end the film. Its content encapsulates the theme of Johnson's film, helping the viewer understand his approach: the point isn't to have the characters starkly and completely change, it's to watch them grapple with and begin--begin!--to process through the realization that they aren't obligated to (or shouldn't) behave a certain way...even if that processing is simply stargazing while sweeping a stable.

EDIT: On a personal note, it's been a pleasure to read the clear-headed appraisals of the film that have been posted over the last few days. I also really appreciate the identification of the toxic, coded terminology that has been baked into the some internet criticism of the film. Acknowledging the nastiness of these flawed arguments--whether the terms are used pejoratively or not--is an essential part of elevating the discussion.
Last edited by Feiereisel on Tue Apr 03, 2018 12:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
who is bobby dylan
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:50 am

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#221 Post by who is bobby dylan » Tue Apr 03, 2018 12:08 pm

What's fascinating in this is how much time the movie is willing to spend on something that fails and how all this is sent in motion by Holdo not telling her plan for seemingly no other reason than cinematic one, ie creating some kind of suspense (while the viewer probably guessed right away she wasn't going to have everyone killed by the end of the movie).
Holdo does tell Poe her plan. When she tells him, he stages a mutiny and reveals the plan over the radio leading to its discovery by the First Order! Telling him the plan sooner wouldn't change the general thrust of this. Poe just would have staged the mutiny sooner. He's receptive to Holdo in the end because his own plan has failed and Leia has awoken from her coma.
My argument would be that the movie does a very poor job at showing this evolution. I don't especially recall thinking he changed his ways during the final battle. He seemed helpless and clueless, but fortunately, Luke comes to the rescue, but overall, it feels like a lot of time dedicated to a ham-fist subtext of “the youth isn’t always right and needs to know it can fail”. I'm not saying this isn't there. I'm saying it's not done in, IMO, a smooth way and that in the end, Poe's transition into a worthy leader who has learnt from his failure felt far from obvious (and actually I doubt he's consistently wiser by the end of the movie).
Poe correctly calls off the assault on the First Order's mini death star cannon. He correctly realizes that Luke is creating a diversion and rather than rallying for another attack (as Finn wants to do) they should try to escape. The rebellion is generally helpless at that point because (without the intervention of Luke) the First Order is on the verge of a military success. The subtext isn't that the youth isn't always right. Luke and Snoke are old and wrong as well. It's to learn from failure. Again, not every movie plays well for everyone. I thought all of this played out extremely well. You didn't. That's fine.
That's why the stable-set coda is such a wonderful way to end the film. Its content encapsulates the theme of Johnson's film, helping the viewer understand his approach: the point isn't to have the characters starkly and completely change, it's to watch them grapple with and begin--begin!--to process through the realization that they aren't obligated to (or shouldn't) behave a certain way...even if that processing is simply stargazing while sweeping a stable.
Just want to say that I like your post very much! What's interesting at the end of Episode 8 (for those of whom it worked) is the possibilities the story opens up, the characters are given experiences that they learn and grow from, but as you point out, it still takes pains not to set them in stone. The interesting question going forward is now that they have to rebuild the rebellion anew, how will they do that, how will these lessons inform that? It's exciting to wonder whether Episode 9 will be able to pay this very open setup off.
Last edited by who is bobby dylan on Tue Apr 03, 2018 1:43 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
MoonlitKnight
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 10:44 pm

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#222 Post by MoonlitKnight » Tue Apr 03, 2018 12:10 pm

who is bobby dylan wrote:Rey is a "Mary Sue" is sexist garbage started by a screen writer who has had to abandon twitter after multiple allegations of sexual misconduct. Invoking it as a criticism is not a good look.
Um, no, it's quite a valid criticism if you actually understand what a Mary Sue is and why it's generally considered bad/lazy writing (and that a male version is usually referred to as a 'Gary Stu')... and this video does a good job at breaking down why Rey is and why Luke and Anakin mostly aren't (though you could argue Anakin was a Mary Sue/Gary Stu in TPM, given he's set up as this Messiah-like character... but that changes in the next installment).

User avatar
Feiereisel
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 9:41 am

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#223 Post by Feiereisel » Tue Apr 03, 2018 12:19 pm

MoonlitKnight wrote:
who is bobby dylan wrote:Rey is a "Mary Sue" is sexist garbage started by a screen writer who has had to abandon twitter after multiple allegations of sexual misconduct. Invoking it as a criticism is not a good look.
Um, no, it's quite a valid criticism if you actually understand what a Mary Sue is and why it's generally considered bad/lazy writing (and that a male version is usually referred to as a 'Gary Stu')... and this video does a good job at breaking down why Rey is and why Luke and Anakin mostly aren't (though you could argue Anakin was a Mary Sue/Gary Stu in TPM, given he's set up as this Messiah-like character... but that changes in the next installment).
Why not simply call it bad writing, then? Or simply refer to Rey, or Anakin, or whoever, as an unrealized, underwritten, underwhelming character? The sexist implications of the gendered term "Mary Sue" are the issue, and simply creating a rhyming, male-specific term doesn't undo its problematic nature.

connor
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 2:03 pm

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#224 Post by connor » Tue Apr 03, 2018 12:32 pm

Watched this for the first time on blu-ray last night. That Yoda sequence is just as lovely as it was in theaters--the scene called for "wise old man" hookum and yet what Johnson wrote actually resonated as something more than the fortune cookie spiritualism I was expecting. I kinda thought it would lose its power after the initial shock/nostalgia factor faded, but no.

And that shot of Luke walking out of the flaming metal door to face down the walkers...More and more I think the real accomplishment of the movie was actually managing to make "Luke Skywalker" a genuinely interesting character. Didn't think it could be done, especially since Hamill isn't exactly the best performer. I suppose I'd rank him now as something like Leonard Nimoy: someone so typecast as one specific character for so long that he's able to embody and imbue that persona with depths and nuances no one else could. It's ironic that Hamill was so adamantly against Johnson's interpretation of the character.

connor
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 2:03 pm

Re: Star Wars Franchise (1977-∞)

#225 Post by connor » Tue Apr 03, 2018 12:34 pm

Feiereisel wrote:
MoonlitKnight wrote:
who is bobby dylan wrote:Rey is a "Mary Sue" is sexist garbage started by a screen writer who has had to abandon twitter after multiple allegations of sexual misconduct. Invoking it as a criticism is not a good look.
Um, no, it's quite a valid criticism if you actually understand what a Mary Sue is and why it's generally considered bad/lazy writing (and that a male version is usually referred to as a 'Gary Stu')... and this video does a good job at breaking down why Rey is and why Luke and Anakin mostly aren't (though you could argue Anakin was a Mary Sue/Gary Stu in TPM, given he's set up as this Messiah-like character... but that changes in the next installment).
Why not simply call it bad writing, then? Or simply refer to Rey, or Anakin, or whoever, as an unrealized, underwritten, underwhelming character? The sexist implications of the gendered term "Mary Sue" are the issue, and simply creating a rhyming, male-specific term doesn't undo its problematic nature.
The accusations of a bland, placeholder protagonist who's simply "really good at everything" for no other reason than to move the narrative along are more accurately leveled at Rogue One's Jyn Erso, a complete non-entity in a wildly overrated film.

Post Reply