TLJ Star Wars: Episode VIII - The Last Jedi

Joined
Feb 2, 2007
Messages
9,130
Reaction score
157
I explained above why it was illogical in the specific scene under discussion.

Sure, expand - otherwise stagnate - but keep within the established boundaries so that what went before still makes sense and is not contradicted. It's about logic and respect.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Messages
7,211
Reaction score
1,213
Location
NJ
No, not to TLJ fans...just in general. If I counted all the toxic comments you’ve left over the month about this and that, we would need an accountant. It’s all good natured ribbing until someone loses an eye. Guess some can dish it out, but can’t take it. I weep for the future.
I'm flattered you have gone through a month of my posts to conclude I'm toxic (whatever that means)
Pretty sure it's been discussed before that TLJ Yoda was completely out of character.

He had no longer any need to be acting the fool because Luke now knows who he is and they have had serious interactions since ESB.

In-universe canon was also broken by the force ghost being able to call down lightning and interact with the physical plane - again, old news. If that was always a 'thing' then every Jedi ever killed during the events of Order 66, as well as before it and after it, could have easily clubbed together and dealt with Palpatine as soon as he claimed power.

I didn't mind the saber toss either. I laughed actually - because by that point in the film I personally had already concluded it was a complete shower.

If one is playing in the sandbox one should respect the owner's toys. Although daring to state such a thing makes one an '-ist' these days, because those who shout out such inanities have nothing else constructive to say with which they can back themselves up - therefore themselves becoming exactly what they decry.
For me the saber toss was what did it. That was the end. Sure the little Poe/Hux dialogue was ridiculous with the momma joke and having Finn look like a bumbling idiot coming out of that medical pod was just bad writing...but the saber toss was just so bad it was like a parody.

For what it's worth I would have been ok with Luke rejecting the lightsaber but there were much better ways to portray it without a silly over the shoulder toss. It just seemed so out of place. The scene could have kept a serious vibe and had him hand it back to her and walk away. Even just dropping it and walking away. You can't take the sweeping and epic shot that closed TFA and follow with Luke taking the lightsaber and flipping it over his shoulder. It was ****ing ridiculous.
 
Joined
Nov 24, 2008
Messages
2,658
Reaction score
573
Why can’t SW canon ever be expanded to include new Force abilities as yet unseen or written about???
That's kind of my feeling as well. Yoda summoning lighting didn't really bother me so much. Yoda is very powerful and is very knowledgeable and skilled in The Focrce. Much more so than his peers. I mean, he could deflect and even absorb force lightning with his bare hands whereas most others cannot and need to use a lightsaber to do it.
 
Joined
May 10, 2018
Messages
1,756
Reaction score
572
Yoda being able to weaponise lightening and destroy a physical, real world, object literally means that Force Ghosts are an undead army. So, why not simply appear next to Kylo, or Snoke, or whomever they wish and zap the little *****, thus ending any war in an instant and saving billions as a result.

This is why that idea in 'The Last Jedi' was so stupid. When those type of silly ideas are just thrown into a chapter of a particular yarn, just to have a "kewl" scene, it will enable the audience to beg the obvious questions about the affects and effects they have on the whole story.

Things like Yoda weaponising lightening or Holdo weaponising light speed have very real, problem causing, ripples throughout the internal logic of Star Wars and they exist because Johnson could only think in terms of what might look pretty, instead of thinking how it might damage the over all events of the series he was merely a part of for a brief period of time.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Messages
7,211
Reaction score
1,213
Location
NJ
Yoda being able to weaponise lightening and destroy a physical, real world, object literally means that Force Ghosts are an undead army. So, why not simply appear next to Kylo, or Snoke, or whomever they wish and zap the little *****, thus ending any war in an instant and saving billions as a result.

This is why that idea in 'The Last Jedi' was so stupid. When those type of silly ideas are just thrown into a chapter of a particular yarn, just to have a "kewl" scene, it will enable the audience to beg the obvious questions about the affects and effects they have on the whole story.

Things like Yoda weaponising lightening or Holdo weaponising light speed have very real, problem causing, ripples throughout the internal logic of Star Wars and they exist because Johnson could only think in terms of what might look pretty, instead of thinking how it might damage the over all events of the series he was merely a part of for a brief period of time.
What bothered me even more than Yoda and the lightning was the blatant inconsistencies with Luke projecting himself to Crait.

Apparently he could interact with a physical being (Leia) and hand her an invisible object (the dice). His hair, robe etc could be manipulated by the environment on Crait...but he couldn't manipulate the salt which was just Johnson trying to show us he is smarter than the audience (even though it was evident it was some sort of projection from the second he appeared from the shadows).

Then for some reason Leia just carelessly drops the dice like they had no sentimental value to her at all and they stay visible/tangible long enough for Kylo to find them...which was long after Luke had already passed.

WTF was going on with that movie?

Oh and the worst part... everything I just described was the best part of the movie!
 
Joined
May 10, 2018
Messages
1,756
Reaction score
572
What bothered me even more than Yoda and the lightning was the blatant inconsistencies with Luke projecting himself to Crait.

Apparently he could interact with a physical being (Leia) and hand her an invisible object (the dice). His hair, robe etc could be manipulated by the environment on Crait...but he couldn't manipulate the salt which was just Johnson trying to show us he is smarter than the audience (even though it was evident it was some sort of projection from the second he appeared from the shadows).
This is a perfect illustration of the negative repercussions of having ghosts interact with physical objects. If they can do this, then bring along a weapon and end the war by getting rid of the guys that most want it. If Luke can transport dice, he can transport something else that could be more useful.

With the scene in general, I kinda get what Johnson was trying to go for. But, it's just badly written and executed. Personally, for me, it would have been far, far better if Luke had actually shown up in person and kept Kylo off while Leia and her crew escaped. He can still sacrifice himself. But it wouldn't have been so awful. Luke Skywalker dying from using too much Force has to be one of the worst ideas I have ever seen in a Star Wars film.

WTF was going on with that movie?
WTF is going on indeed.

'The Last Jedi' is like a first draft or something. There appears to be no refinement at all going on. It's like Johnson finished writing on a Sunday afternoon and went "done" and just handed off the script to people who didn't bother checking it.

That, or it's actually worse and people did check it and approved! Seriously though, I still find it astonishing that that script got the green light.
 
Joined
Apr 13, 2006
Messages
8,483
Reaction score
769
Location
Glen Burnie, MD
I’ll have to run that “physical plane” topic past my neighbor’s nine year old son who is my SW barometer. I’m eternally grateful that Lucasfilm, past & present, and Disney combined aren’t so anal-retentive about SW canon, and the thermodynamics and metaphysics regarding the Force. Seriously, you happy few are gonna be so disappointed after tomorrow night. I’m frankly shocked you haven’t addressed the “pew-pew” of lasers in the vacuum of space. At the end of the day...the masses want to be entertained and forget their daily drudgery.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Messages
7,211
Reaction score
1,213
Location
NJ
I’ll have to run that “physical plane” topic past my neighbor’s nine year old son who is my SW barometer. I’m eternally grateful that Lucasfilm, past & present, and Disney combined aren’t so anal-retentive about SW canon, and the thermodynamics and metaphysics regarding the Force. Seriously, you happy few are gonna be so disappointed after tomorrow night. I’m frankly shocked you haven’t addressed the “pew-pew” of lasers in the vacuum of space. At the end of the day...the masses want to be entertained and forgot their daily drudgery.
That is where you are wrong. I'm going to be over the moon with happiness tomorrow because all indications point to TROS essentially erasing TLJ from existence

I'm not anti Disney. I adored TFA and Rogue One. I thought Solo was great just unnecessary. I'm anti TLJ. It wasn't just the worst Star Wars movie ever made - it's an all around bad movie.
 
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
32,589
Reaction score
1,182
Location
Oregon
It can. But even if it was new, as in Yoda just learnt how to do it prior to TLJ. It would mean he could simply put an end to the FO right then and there.

It's more about coming up with new powers when it's convenient, but forgetting you did when you really need them.
 

JVM

Joined
Dec 12, 2011
Messages
537
Reaction score
33
Location
Illinois, USA
During a recent podcast, _Swings. and Mrs._ Johnson issued some new comments,:

I think approaching any creative process with [making fandoms happy] would be a mistake that would lead to probably the exact opposite result. Even my experience as a fan, you know if I’m coming into something, even if it’s something that I think I want, if I see exactly what I think I want on the screen, it’s like ‘oh, okay,’ it might make me smile and make me feel neutral about the thing and I won’t really think about it afterwards, but that’s not really going to satisfy me.

[..]

I want to be shocked, I want to be surprised, I want to be thrown off-guard, I want to have things recontextualized, I want to be challenged as a fan when I sit down in the theater…What I’m aiming for every time I sit down in a theater is to have the experience [I had] with ‘Empire Strikes Back,’ something that’s emotionally resonant and feels like it connects up and makes sense and really gets to the heart of what this thing is and in a way that I never could have seen coming.
I respect what Johnson is trying to say here, and I can understand it -- of course, no film should be content to simply replay greatest hits moments and they need to have themes and challenges.

Still, Johnson treats these guidelines as hard absolutes and that's what undermines his execution repeatedly. He's on the record discussing the need for every scene to have challenges and conflict between characters, and there is barely a complete scene in the finished film without such action; as a result though, there's so little real warmth in the film. This is on the same matter; he is so predisposed to search for shock and awe that he sees anything 'fan service'-y as violating the principle - everything needs to be a twist. It is good to have conflict and it is good for characters to challenge each other, these are good things, but he elevates these principles - and his others - to such a point his films lose their ability to be more than the one thing.

I'm not completely surprised at this point though. These are fairly standard talking points older filmmakers, especially the anti-blockbuster types like Scorsese, will pass on around film school campuses. They are often intended more as loose guidelines, helpful to an inexperienced director, rather than so rigid as Johnson applies them. This is part of the same modern cinema concept that pushes the idea that art cinema, the only films worth seeing, need to be built around serious, heavy-handed themes and whatever doesn't serve those themes needs to be cut from the movie as superflous filler. This is a huge reason Last Jedi has such a passionate fanbase - it appeals to people who see those as the rules of cinema.

The reason for the divide itself though is that the Star Wars films have never been about following the rules of cinema, not even the most beloved original films. People today think of the original Star Wars as if it invented a genre when it was, by Lucas' own frequent admission, a tribute to classic science fiction serials blended with elements of ancient myth. Like Indiana Jones, both franchises were born through nostalgia for existing properties. (Yes, nostalgia is baked into the brand!) Existing outside the realm of fine cinema is part of their appeal to a passionate fanbase, and melting the series down to such is therefore inherently threatening to a degree - it takes away part of what makes it special.

I think one of the best comparisons, and one far bigger than Rian Johnson himself, is the use of character death. Fans complained for decades about how Lucas left all of the main heroes alive at the end of "Return of the Jedi", but that was part of the magic and myth of the original trilogy. It's part of that cheese, 'for kids' factor that made them so successful. We've seen a lot of death in the sequel trilogy - there's a lot to be said about the big ones, but even Admiral Ackbar, probably the most beloved secondary character, declared dead in background dialogue, to less gravity than Biggs. That's effective, gritty realism at work, but it's less like classic Star Wars.

That's why we're in the mess we are now - contemporary casual and critical audiences demand a lot more grit and realism in their franchise films, especially in terms of death and stakes, but these often end up underserving the ideas that devoted franchise fans are interested in, and altering the fundamental identity of the franchises in focus.

...


As for Yoda being able to summon lightning and Luke passing items through the Force, not elements that broke the film for me but certainly something I'm not fully wild about. The sequel trilogy has this odd way of introducing new force abilities, built into the narrative as if to surprise the viewer, and then using expanded universe material to argue they've been here the whole time, get over it. It's an odd contrast. We want you to be surprised, but not too surprised? I think it makes the issues seem more glaring than they are. I tthink an extra line or two of dialogue from Luke expressing shock at the ability would have done a LOT to fix this, and then when Luke exhibits the similar ability later you could see it as him having just learned it from Yoda, an ability that represents their strength in the Force, not something anyone was capable of all the time that never came up before. T

A lot of little things in this movie could be fixed with a line or two more of dialogue, really, or a different take.

...

As an unrelated note, having now seen Knives Out, I'd like to report that while I thoroughly enjoyed a lot of the film, it did help me understand Johnson better - the film was widely marketed as a new spin on the 'classic murder mystery' but it completely breaks formula around thirty minutes into the film and the rest plays more like a thriller. Like Last Jedi, It seems to market itself as a homage to a classic film, but it's very modern and contemporary. This is a much more forgivable thing to do for a non-franchise film, and in that situation, it's easier for me to walk away with "I liked Daniel Craig's character" and such. It's also better structured overall.

Still, it reinforced one of my key negative insights into Last Jedi - that Johnson has a very paternalistic understanding of women, where he chooses to follow a female protagonist, has all of his characters tell us how pure she is, yet still has her lead around and directed by male characters thoroughout the story anyway, as he sets up to pat himself on the back for what a progressive feminist he is. It's the worst of both worlds by a long shot though, especially with his heavy-handed style and approach, turning the film into a political statement for an ideology it doesn't even represent well, forcing people to argue about the political background of his decisions instead of the execution, which is where the fault lies.

All that said, both films made kind of clear that being kind of in-your-face and over-the-top is part of Johnson's directorial style. That's his approach to writing... and as I felt Knives Out proves, that style can work well enough when it's not being played within the confines of an existing franchise that has had a house style already established.

For me the saber toss was what did it. That was the end. Sure the little Poe/Hux dialogue was ridiculous with the momma joke and having Finn look like a bumbling idiot coming out of that medical pod was just bad writing...but the saber toss was just so bad it was like a parody.

For what it's worth I would have been ok with Luke rejecting the lightsaber but there were much better ways to portray it without a silly over the shoulder toss. It just seemed so out of place. The scene could have kept a serious vibe and had him hand it back to her and walk away. Even just dropping it and walking away. You can't take the sweeping and epic shot that closed TFA and follow with Luke taking the lightsaber and flipping it over his shoulder. It was ****ing ridiculous.
Yeah, this is the nail on the head for me. So much of what Johnson did was a reasonable idea but executed in such an over-the-top, in-your-face way, and his treatment of Luke Skywalker is central to this. It was pretty easy to expect that Luke would not immediately agree to help the resistance or to train Rey; three-act structure would never have allowed such an easy answer; and yet, he's so incredibly gruff and grouchy, as if it should have already been understood when he left behind a map to his location with trusted friends that he never wanted to meet another human being again. (Also, why was he wearing Jedi robes when she arrived if he usually wears that hermit getup?) The film goes beyond subverting expectations, which would have been valid, but to mocking those expectations.

It's not merely a question of whether or not Luke would/should have made different choices or been more idealized, but also how these choices were depicted, and it's not merely a question of conforming to expectations but how you choose to subvert them.
 
Joined
Aug 18, 2006
Messages
5,893
Reaction score
262
I think approaching any creative process with [making fandoms happy] would be a mistake that would lead to probably the exact opposite result. Even my experience as a fan, you know if I’m coming into something, even if it’s something that I think I want, if I see exactly what I think I want on the screen, it’s like ‘oh, okay,’ it might make me smile and make me feel neutral about the thing and I won’t really think about it afterwards, but that’s not really going to satisfy me.

[..]

I want to be shocked, I want to be surprised, I want to be thrown off-guard, I want to have things recontextualized, I want to be challenged as a fan when I sit down in the theater…What I’m aiming for every time I sit down in a theater is to have the experience [I had] with ‘Empire Strikes Back,’ something that’s emotionally resonant and feels like it connects up and makes sense and really gets to the heart of what this thing is and in a way that I never could have seen coming.
the problem with his approach to "subverting expectations" is, it only works once.

after you've seen the movie and you already know what's going to happen, then you actually come to "expect" his "subversion" on future viewings (*gasp*) so Rian's fetish for "shocking" people, loses it's charm on the very first viewing.

for example, when we watch TLJ for a second time, (if you can), then suddenly, Luke-throwing-the-lightsaber doesn't "shock" you AT ALL anymore... it just annoys you, as a fan. ie: it doesn't "subvert an expectation" anymore BECAUSE you've actually come to "Expect It" on repeat viewings (and THIS has that "exact opposite result" that Rian is rambling on about LOL).

and this is why Rian was probably just not a good choice for a SW movie: SW movies have near-infinite-rewatchability, you can watch them over and over and they just get better with age.... and yet.... by his own admissions, he was trying to make a movie that can ONLY have its "intended effect", on ONE single viewing (like an Agitha Christie murder mystery) -- after you've seen it ONE TIME, then every "suvbersion-of-expectation" is ACTUALLY "expected" on future viewings, so his entire gameplan is out the window.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 10, 2010
Messages
6,726
Reaction score
749
Location
Sacramento, CA
the problem with his approach to "subverting expectations" is, it only works once.

after you've seen the movie and you already know what's going to happen, then you actually come to "expect" his "subversion" on future viewings (*gasp*) so Rian's fetish for "shocking" people, loses it's charm on the very first viewing.

for example, when we watch TLJ for a second time, (if you can), then suddenly, Luke-throwing-the-lightsaber doesn't "shock" you AT ALL anymore... it just annoys you, as a fan. ie: it doesn't "subvert an expectation" anymore BECAUSE you've actually come to "Expect It" on repeat viewings (and THIS has that "exact opposite result" that Rian is rambling on about LOL).

and this is why Rian was probably just not a good choice for a SW movie: SW movies have near-infinite-rewatchability, you can watch them over and over and they just get better with age.... and yet.... by his own admissions, he was trying to make a movie that can ONLY have its "intended effect", on ONE single viewing (like an Agitha Christie murder mystery) -- after you've seen it ONE TIME, then every "suvbersion-of-expectation" is ACTUALLY "expected" on future viewings, so his entire gameplan is out the window.
Revisiting this thread because I watched his new movie Knives Out and I actually thoroughly enjoyed it. It's just kind of funny that you pointed out that his intended effect was similar to an Agatha Christie mystery and he essentially made just that with Knives out.
 
Joined
Jun 18, 2005
Messages
4,983
Reaction score
280
Location
North Carolina
My main issues are:

  Spoiler:  
1. Its breakneck pace. The movie never stops to breathe.

2. Hux's death. I felt like a lot more could've been done with the character instead of just having Pryde unceremoniously gun him down.

3. Too many new First Order characters. I don't mind Pryde, in fact I like him (although I wish he'd been the grand marshal alluded to in the Last Jedi Visual Dictionary; WTF is an allegiate general? Though to be fair, one could say the same thing about a grand moff), but Griss and the balding guy Kylo flings into the ceiling could've been Peavey and Datoo respectively. And what about Hux's aide Opan from The Last Jedi? And Mitaka? Pryde is honestly the only new officer we needed; the others could've been returning officers we all know to be alive or likely alive. Instead, Peavey, Datoo, Opan and Mitaka are all MIA with their fates unresolved.

4. Palpatine. Just... Palpatine. Back during The Force Awakens, I remember fan theories suggesting Snoke was Plagueis and I thought, please, God, no, don't connect the new villain back to an old one. While Snoke didn't end up being Plagueis, he may as well have been, being a lab-engineered Dark Side user made by Palpatine, who I'm disappointed to see return. Not everything needs to keep connecting back to the OT. .... That said, I liked how Palpatine was used (the BS of him having created Snoke aside - I feel this undermined Snoke's character).

5. No comeuppance for DJ. I admit this is realistic. It's a big universe and odds are they'd never encounter him again. Nor am I sure where he would've fit in. But still. Like the above mentioned First Order officers, it's annoying to have his fate left hanging.

6. The planet-killers on the Sith Star Destroyers. That kind of crap belongs in Legends/old EU stories. Starkiller Base was already enough of a Death Star ripoff, and the Dreadnought's ability to destroy the Resistance base on the surface of the planet in The Last Jedi was pushing it, but these things are beyond the pale. Now suddenly every ship in the bad guys' fleet has planet-destroying capabilities. It makes the two previous planet killers seem less special.

7. The aforementioned Sith fleet. Old-timey Star Destroyers almost completely unchanged aesthetically from the Imperial era. Fanservice, sez I.


Aside from that, I quite liked it. I found it more problematic than The Last Jedi, but nevertheless it was enjoyable. Dumb, loud and fun.
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
32,589
Reaction score
1,182
Location
Oregon
I’ll have to run that “physical plane” topic past my neighbor’s nine year old son who is my SW barometer. I’m eternally grateful that Lucasfilm, past & present, and Disney combined aren’t so anal-retentive about SW canon, and the thermodynamics and metaphysics regarding the Force. Seriously, you happy few are gonna be so disappointed after tomorrow night. I’m frankly shocked you haven’t addressed the “pew-pew” of lasers in the vacuum of space. At the end of the day...the masses want to be entertained and forget their daily drudgery.
Because doing this winds up making a movie that is unwatchable after initial viewing, or for the future when you're older. As it looks ridiculous and unintelligible when you're 35, not 5. Movies should have a longer shelf life, IMO, especially ones like this. They're not making Ice Pirates for crying out loud...


If people want a non thinking popkorn flick, fine. That's why we have movies like Starship Troopers etc.
And you're right people go to movie to forget daily crap. So why then, do we need so much of it interjected into said movie?

Other Filmmakers have make tongue-in-cheek movies before, but still held a bit of gravity to the concept.
 
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
1,741
Reaction score
88
Location
Sarlacc Pit of Carkoon
So um ah, just a thought I had.

I hear Luke was teaching Leia how to be a Jedi in flashbacks in TROS and Leia was teaching Rey.

So does that make Leia the "last" Jedi in TLJ?

I don't think I saw or heard anyone mention that before and wanted to check since I think everyone assumed it was Rey...and you know what they say when you assume something.

Thoughts?
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Messages
7,211
Reaction score
1,213
Location
NJ
So um ah, just a thought I had.

I hear Luke was teaching Leia how to be a Jedi in flashbacks in TROS and Leia was teaching Rey.

So does that make Leia the "last" Jedi in TLJ?

I don't think I saw or heard anyone mention that before and wanted to check since I think everyone assumed it was Rey...and you know what they say when you assume something.

Thoughts?
I think that TROS ignored most of TLJ (just like TLJ ignored most of TFA and the other 6 movies before it)
 
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
1,741
Reaction score
88
Location
Sarlacc Pit of Carkoon
I think that TROS ignored most of TLJ (just like TLJ ignored most of TFA and the other 6 movies before it)
From what I hear, there was retconning in TROS to a large degree. A huge issue for Di$ney $tar War$ that causes problems for all sides of fandom.

So are you thinking that Leia wasn't supposed to be a Jedi in TLJ? That Leia Poppins was 100% instinct, no force experience/training at all? If thats the case, I guess it's just item 151 on today's glitch list.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Messages
7,211
Reaction score
1,213
Location
NJ
From what I hear, there was retconning in TROS to a large degree. A huge issue for Di$ney $tar War$ that causes problems for all sides of fandom.

So are you thinking that Leia wasn't supposed to be a Jedi in TLJ? That Leia Poppins was 100% instinct, no force experience/training at all? If thats the case, I guess it's just item 151 on today's glitch list.
I don't think the intention was for Leia to be "the last Jedi"
 
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
1,741
Reaction score
88
Location
Sarlacc Pit of Carkoon
That's the problem. I think you're right, that wasn't the intent. But I do think she was supposed to be a Jedi, they just didnt think about it. Rey's supposed to be the last Jedi (even though she had no training up until that point)...but Leia did have training (I think that was also their intent), but they never put 2 and 2 together.

Writers brainstorming session:

Hey let's have Leia have force powers, she could have a back story that she trained with Luke that we can get to later.

Later brainstorming session:

Hey let's kill off Luke and that would make Rey the last Jedi!


I think it was clear that:

*Luke was the New Nope
*Palp was the Phantom Menace
*Rey was the Force Awakening

But it's not clear that Rey was the Last Jedi....she was supposed to be, but she actually isn't.
 
Joined
Feb 10, 2010
Messages
6,726
Reaction score
749
Location
Sacramento, CA
So if Force ghosts can interact with the real world....then Ben Kenobi is the biggest ******* ever. "If you choose to face Darth Vader you will do it alone, I cannot interfere." Can't or won't?? Seems to me like Ben could have just stepped in with a lightsaber of his own and they both could have taken on Vader at Bespin. Then both Ben and Yoda could have popped in for ROTJ to take down the Emperor.
 
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
1,741
Reaction score
88
Location
Sarlacc Pit of Carkoon
the opening scroll for TFA names the last jedi, by name.
So Luke is it? It's not Rey or Leia?

I get it now, like it was discussed before on these boards. Luke was the last Jedi, so they don't exist anymore after his passing. Now force users are known as Skywalkers, hence TROS.

So everything did die, no more Jedi, no more Sith. Except there still is the Force. As right as that may be, I think that is a terrible story.
 
Joined
May 10, 2018
Messages
1,756
Reaction score
572
So if Force ghosts can interact with the real world....then Ben Kenobi is the biggest ******* ever. "If you choose to face Darth Vader you will do it alone, I cannot interfere." Can't or won't?? Seems to me like Ben could have just stepped in with a lightsaber of his own and they both could have taken on Vader at Bespin. Then both Ben and Yoda could have popped in for ROTJ to take down the Emperor.
That's just one of the problems these sequels threw up 🤮 . Apparently now anyone can come back as a ghost. Han Solo, the simple tricks and nonsense guy, can appear to his son, despite never having tried to anything Force related ever. This means that there's nothing at all special about Qui Gon's discovery of being able to commune with the living through the Force after death. Sure, anyone can do it. It's easy! Kenobi's incredulous wonder at Yoda's reveal in the end of 'Revenge of the Sith' is now completely redundant. He instead should just say "Commune with the dead? Sure, that's nothing. I know a guy, Jimmy Scrambles, he does that all the time and he can't even spell Force."

But yeh, technically, the sequels have inferred that Obi-Wan, Anakin, Yoda, Qui Gon, Luke and whoever, are the most powerful entities in the galaxy. They can kill, but cannot be killed themselves because they are already dead. They are actually more powerful than any Jedi or Sith before or after them. In fact, there can never be another threat to peace in the GFFA again, because the heroes can just whistle up their Force Ghost army and put an end to things real fast. :ROFLMAO:

What an absolute disaster of a "story".

How anyone can even begin to defend this **** from a storytelling POV is absolutely beyond me. 😒
 
Joined
May 18, 2000
Messages
4,237
Reaction score
26
Location
Carbondale, IL
Han Solo, the simple tricks and nonsense guy, can appear to his son, despite never having tried to anything Force related ever.
Except Han wasn't a ghost. That was just a visual representation of what was going on in Kylo's mind. Some people do have "conversations" with loved ones who are gone in their head when trying to make huge decisions.
 
Joined
Aug 9, 2013
Messages
215
Reaction score
20
Location
Washington State
The past has been rewritten to appeal to today's less spiritual, more social "active" population. I think Disney would like to rename or erase Jedi, Sith, the Force in any future endeavors gradually making Star Wars not even a memory in the minds of the future.
 
Joined
May 10, 2018
Messages
1,756
Reaction score
572
Except Han wasn't a ghost. That was just a visual representation of what was going on in Kylo's mind. Some people do have "conversations" with loved ones who are gone in their head when trying to make huge decisions.
Well, in my defence, I haven't seen this junk yet, but I heard Solo was back as a Force Ghost.

Either way, it still sounds kinda dumb.
 
Joined
May 18, 2000
Messages
4,237
Reaction score
26
Location
Carbondale, IL
Well, in my defence, I haven't seen this junk yet, but I heard Solo was back as a Force Ghost.

Either way, it still sounds kinda dumb.
Thanks for calling me dumb by association in regards to this concept.

Maybe don’t comment on things (i.e. this movie) if you don’t have an actual idea what the hell you’re talking about.

And yes, this talking to lost loved ones idea is something that affects me majorly.
 

Utinniii

Moderator
Joined
Jan 2, 2015
Messages
5,106
Reaction score
543
Location
Canada
Well, in my defence, I haven't seen this junk yet, but I heard Solo was back as a Force Ghost.

Either way, it still sounds kinda dumb.
For someone that hasn't actually seen the movie, you sure have a lot to say.

An opinion formed without actually understanding the material has less merit than an informed opinion.

Your entire argument loses strength if you fail to understand simple facts that are stated in the film. Which brings us to "dumb". If you are going to throw that word around, be prepared to have it thrown back in your face when you say blatant errors. Just because you fail to understand something, that doesn't mean it is the cause of the dumbness.

I'm not calling you dumb by the way. There is no need for that level of discussion. It is pretty hard to find accord by insults. My tone is just a reflection of your presentation. Disagreement is possible without disparagement.

You are ignorant though by your own admission of not having watched the film. Your lack of respect also suggests you aren't here for a civil discussion. I'm not saying that is the case, but many will perceive that from your tone. Try finding common ground if you want people to respect you. (Notice this is more about your delivery than your content. Was that what you wanted addressed?

Perhaps you should watch TROS if you want people to take you seriously. Otherwise, people can dismiss you easily as just an ignorant whiner.

And if you have no intention of watching it, why waste your time discussing it?

Why would anyone want to hear (or even discuss for that matter) an uninformed opinion?
 
Joined
May 10, 2018
Messages
1,756
Reaction score
572
^

I am commenting on what I have heard so far. Not the movie in and of itself. I haven't made any comments on whether I like or dislike 'The Rise of Skywalker'. But, from what I have heard of it, on here and elsewhere, there sure sounds like there's an awful lot of crap in it.

My final judgement on whether this film is any use can be made if and when I see it.

However, I'll continue to comment on the stuff I hear about.

Where's the problem in that?
 
Joined
May 10, 2018
Messages
1,756
Reaction score
572
Thanks for calling me dumb by association in regards to this concept.

Maybe don’t comment on things (i.e. this movie) if you don’t have an actual idea what the hell you’re talking about.

And yes, this talking to lost loved ones idea is something that affects me majorly.
How is saying that Kylo Ren talking to Solo's ghost in his sounds kinda dumb, calling you dumb. That doesn't compute at all.

Nobody is calling you dumb.
 
Last edited:

Utinniii

Moderator
Joined
Jan 2, 2015
Messages
5,106
Reaction score
543
Location
Canada
^

I am commenting on what I have heard so far. Not the movie in and of itself. I haven't made any comments on whether I like or dislike 'The Rise of Skywalker'. But, from what I have heard of it, on here and elsewhere, there sure sounds like there's an awful lot of crap in it.

My final judgement on whether this film is any use can be made if and when I see it.

However, I'll continue to comment on the stuff I hear about.

Where's the problem in that?
It isn't a problem. All opinions are welcome. (There will be a personal choice though where discussion becomes droning, whining or spamming.)

It is a question of value. You are parroting second hand information that you have obviously gotten parts wrong.
Imagine how much you would want to discuss SW if the other person started out, "Luke was a Sith and the Force is evil". Does that sound fun for you? (Every sentence you wrote in post 1751 is wrong. It was a waste of time reading it. Had you actually seen the movie, you would realize how wrong it was.)

Words matter. You stated that "I haven't made any comments on whether I like or dislike 'The Rise of Skywalker", but you use words like crap, dumb, junk, and "threw up" in your last few posts. Many people will (wrongly or correctly) infer that you don't like, or really hate it.

People that have actually seen the movie have said the exact things you have. I respect what they say even if I might not agree.
I have no reason to respect anything that comes from ignorance though.

You also don't see the difference between calling someone dumb and calling someone dumb by association. The first is blatant while the second is only implied. Many of the fights that happen here start by someone making a broad assertion and then they are surprised when someone takes it personally. I'm not saying that is correct or fair at times, but it natural that it happens.

Say what you want. Be prepared though, that if you speak from ignorance, people will think you are ignorant. If your words are unkind, you will be treated the same way.
 
Joined
May 18, 2000
Messages
4,237
Reaction score
26
Location
Carbondale, IL
How is saying that Kylo Ren talking to Solo's ghost in his sounds kinda dumb, calling you dumb. That doesn't compute at all.

Nobody is calling you dumb.
Again, NOT HAN'S GHOST!

A representation of Han, in his mind, that he's talking to. Which people who have suffered loss actually have experience with in real life. Like me. So, by proxy, saying that Ben "talking" to Han is dumb, is the same as calling me dumb for asking my "mom's" advice.
 
Top