Star Wars:The Last Jedi (SPOILERS!!!!)

jrralls wrote:

It's completely within the characters of both Luke and Han that they are/could be total adrenaline junkies; they both ultimately choice to live a life of constant adventure, constant stress, and constant change. After the victory was won and they became parents/teachers it's completely plausible that they found the monotony of parenthood/coaching intolerable or boring or deeply unpleasant or psychologically taxing in a way they didn't find being shot at to be those things.

Ren also has an incredibly punchable face.

Being unable to solve that problem with violence might have been what pushed Han over the edge.

JeremyK wrote:

Even Mark Hamill doesn't like these movies version of Luke Skywalker.

That is unequivocally untrue.

I really do buy into the idea that Larry Kasdan and JJ Abrams wrote Rian Johnson into a corner. Luke is in exile after a horrible failure that basically created a new pseudo-Sith dark order? Why would he just run away from his friends and family and responsibilities? I find TLJ Luke to be a little frustrating, but I also can't think of a better way out of that box. It's what makes sense, given the events of TFA.

And it also allows Luke to have a nice redemption arc. That's really the thing for me - Johnson's choices are sometimes hard to swallow, but they give the characters some actual room to develop. There's not much of that in TFA.

Yes JJ is at fault, as usual. He's great at these big action moments or strong emotional scenes. But the logic between them and long term story arc, he's f*cking clueless, and always has been. See LOST, new Star Trek, etc.

JJ should be confined to directing and never allowed to write anything ever.

I think there are many, many writer/directors who fall into that trap.

karmajay wrote:
JeremyK wrote:

Even Mark Hamill doesn't like these movies version of Luke Skywalker.

That is unequivocally untrue.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...

It's kind of incredible to me that the Star Wars story team didn't outline the whole new trilogy before doing anything else. Just letting the writers figure it out as they go... I guess it's consistent with the way Lucas operated with the OT, but...yikes.

This is so interesting to me, and speaks to how 1) I think Hamill has done a great job throughout the years with identifying with the fans much more than other stars and 2) He internalized the vision of Luke that many fans have had. I think a lot of people have a vision of the character that doesn't mesh with the new version. I also think they may have needed to do a better job of describing the decent. Like showed him confronting Kylo again or have some intermediate step.

JeremyK wrote:
karmajay wrote:
JeremyK wrote:

Even Mark Hamill doesn't like these movies version of Luke Skywalker.

That is unequivocally untrue.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...

So? He didn't write or direct the character. Sean Connery dislike being James Bind, does that make his Bond movies bad (or justify it)? Harrison Ford and Carrie Fisher dislike RoJ, does that invalidate that movie too? Alec Guinness dislike Star Wars so much that he once told of a child for asking for an autograph OWK picture, does that invalidate OWK as a character?

Hamill even says in the same interview (though there are edited versions out there omitting this) that "It’s somebody else’s story…I came to really believe that Rian was the exact man they needed for this job."

Flintheart Glomgold wrote:
JeremyK wrote:
karmajay wrote:
JeremyK wrote:

Even Mark Hamill doesn't like these movies version of Luke Skywalker.

That is unequivocally untrue.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...

So? He didn't write or direct the character. Sean Connery dislike being James Bind, does that make his Bond movies bad (or justify it)? Harrison Ford and Carrie Fisher dislike RoJ, does that invalidate that movie too? Alec Guinness dislike Star Wars so much that he once told of a child for asking for an autograph OWK picture, does that invalidate OWK as a character?

Hamill even says in the same interview (though there are edited versions out there omitting this) that "It’s somebody else’s story…I came to really believe that Rian was the exact man they needed for this job."

So... I agree with him. I don't like how they handled his character or any of the original characters.

I understand why people are so defensive about this movie as a ton of truly horrid people have lashed out against the new movies for offensive and repulsive reasons and in pretty despicable ways. I'm not going to pretend to like something in order not to be lumped in with them though.

IMDB has got it around a 7.7 which ranks it on-par with Rogue One and slightly below Revenge of the Sith. It’s problematic but pretty average for newer Star Wars movies.

Eek. I'm sorry I started this tangent. I love both the new movies. I even really liked both Luke and Han's parts in them. I think I'd have liked them a tiny bit more if the OT characters weren't completely separated from eachother.

Reaper81 wrote:

IMDB has got it around a 7.7 which ranks it on-par with Rogue One and slightly below Revenge of the Sith. It’s problematic but pretty average for newer Star Wars movies.

lol. Revenge of the Sith is unwatchable trash, and this being ranked below that is ridiculous. I'm embarrassed for Star Wars fans.

billt721 wrote:

lol. Revenge of the Sith is unwatchable trash, and this being ranked below that is ridiculous. I'm embarrassed for Star Wars fans.

Sounds like someone is bitter they don't have the high ground....

Podunk wrote:

I really do buy into the idea that Larry Kasdan and JJ Abrams wrote Rian Johnson into a corner. Luke is in exile after a horrible failure that basically created a new pseudo-Sith dark order? Why would he just run away from his friends and family and responsibilities? I find TLJ Luke to be a little frustrating, but I also can't think of a better way out of that box. It's what makes sense, given the events of TFA.

And it also allows Luke to have a nice redemption arc. That's really the thing for me - Johnson's choices are sometimes hard to swallow, but they give the characters some actual room to develop. There's not much of that in TFA.

Yes. TFA is JJ doing his usual *mystery box!* schtick and basically passing a sh*t sandwich of nonsense to Johnson. And The Last Jedi is Johnson taking that sandwich and basically making the best possible character choice for all those mysteries. There's no choice for Rey's parents that would possibly work as well as the one that disappoints the character as much as it disappoints the fan-theorizing audience.

(Also, the egaliterian politics of a nobody from nowhere going toe to toe with the "mighty Skywalker blood" super appeals to me.)

And sure, I can understand people being disappointed TLJ doesn't make sense of the larger lore situation, but if my choice is between characters or lore, I'll take characters every time.

I know it's a bummer seeing our heroes as older and weaker, but why is it so hard to believe that Luke thinks he f*cked up so bad that he fell into a deep depression? Han too.

Jedi are not invincible. As powerful as he is, Luke feels too old and weak at his age to take on the entire first order (hence his “laser sword” statement which reminded me of Obi-Wan's “I’m getting too old for this” speech). But when he is needed most he transcends his physical frailty and does something no Jedi has ever done before.

It’s sad and sh*tty and 10 year old me hated it at first, but after some introspection and a second viewing it works brilliantly for me.

JeremyK wrote:

So... I agree with him. I don't like how they handled his character or any of the original characters.

I understand why people are so defensive about this movie as a ton of truly horrid people have lashed out against the new movies for offensive and repulsive reasons and in pretty despicable ways. I'm not going to pretend to like something in order not to be lumped in with them though.

I'm actually fine with that viewpoint. A lot of people are passing around that interview using it as justification that the entire thing is bunk as in "Hamill doesn't like it, therefore they broke Star Wars," etc - and that response is (IMHO) unjustifiable.

I love this movie and I don't feel I'm being defensive about my views. I'm fine if you don't like it - it doesn't make you less of a Star Wars fan in my mind - but if you feel you need to justify your dislike with silliness or (which no one has done here - to be clear) by pooping on my love for the movie then you are wrong.

Podunk wrote:

It's kind of incredible to me that the Star Wars story team didn't outline the whole new trilogy before doing anything else. Just letting the writers figure it out as they go... I guess it's consistent with the way Lucas operated with the OT, but...yikes.

But George actually started making A New Hope with a large, bloated, and half-baked script that he eventually had to cut down to the most basic elements just to get that film out. When it ended up being a big success, he went back to his old ideas and started cherry picking from them for the later films, including the prequels. So at least at some level he had a grander picture in mind, and had a rough plan or idea of where things should end up from place to place.

From how TLJ went, it's pretty clear that JJ was trying to set up the new Star Wars much like how you would set up a new TV series, which is to add interesting characters and a bunch of disparate plotlines that could be iterated on over dozens and dozens of episodes. But the reality is that films are much shorter than TV, and thus have less character progression and chances to figure out where everything is headed.

So now you get Rian Johnson, who has to figure out what to do with this flimsy premise with not a lot of time. One approach he could have had is to just continue doing what everyone was expecting, and play the script as straight as he could. But it's pretty clear that he didn't want to do that, because that would be boring and predictable, especially for the middle film of a trilogy.

So he swung the opposite direction. Making it up as he went along, he undercut every expectation, ignored every premise, and tried to cut down the film to as raw of an emotional core as he could find. Unfortunately a lot of it comes off as sloppy and directionless storytelling, but I get what he was going for, and I find it hard to fault him for what seems to be a sincere attempt at a nearly impossible problem

jamos5 wrote:

So he swung the opposite direction. Making it up as he went along, he undercut every expectation, ignored every premise, and tried to cut down the film to as raw of an emotional core as he could find. Unfortunately a lot of it comes off as sloppy and directionless storytelling, but I get what he was going for, and I find it hard to fault him for what seems to be a sincere attempt at a nearly impossible problem

I disagree that it was directionless or sloppy. Every scene had a purpose, either as setting up later scenes, world building, or just pure character growth.

While a bunch of scenes really didn't work that well(the casino, while it did a great deal of universe building, wasn't great, and I'm still confused about the dark side cave), there wasn't really that much extraneous cruft, which is pretty damned remarkable for a two and a half hour long movie. The most that could have been completely cut without any effect on the plot would be Chewie and the Porgs, which was maybe a minute or two out of the entire film.

I don't understand, what premises did he ignore? Rey's parentage, which was pretty well hinted at in Maz's speech ("they're never coming back")?

I agree about that cave! Seemed like a pretty chill and helpful cave. It did suck her in and all that, but it at least tried to answer her question and granted her the temporary power of one-woman snapping band

Yeah, the film is a bit too long for what it is...but none of that was extraneous. And every bit of it was doing stuff I wasn't expecting, particularly in the back half of the film.

Right after the cave is Rey and Kylo playing footsie in the hut before dad catches them (I like the V.O. in the cave where you're kind of like "who is she talking to" before you realize it's another Forcetime call) and from there 'til the end it's kind of non-stop greatness.

Iridium884 wrote:
billt721 wrote:

lol. Revenge of the Sith is unwatchable trash, and this being ranked below that is ridiculous. I'm embarrassed for Star Wars fans.

Sounds like someone is bitter they don't have the high ground....

I suppose I should clarify that the “it” I was referring to as problematic was the ranking.

RotS gave me two things I love. This gif:

IMAGE(https://thumbs.gfycat.com/GiantSlushyHornedtoad-small.gif)

Which is kind of horrifying when you imagine all your flesh burning inside of a metal exoskeleton.

And the best stupid meme ever:

IMAGE(http://cdn.smosh.com/sites/default/files/2017/05/prequel-meme-hello-there-kenobi-france.jpg)

cube wrote:

I'm still confused about the dark side cave

It makes perfect sense to me. Dark side caves show you your greatest fears. Rey wants parents. Father figures. Purpose. Destiny. And in the end, there's nothing but herself there to give her purpose. A nobody from nothing.

And no matter how much Kylo Ren tries to neg her, that's more than enough.

And given Luke's shame, it makes perfect sense the thing in the dark side cave is a mirror.

cube wrote:

I disagree that it was directionless or sloppy. Every scene had a purpose, either as setting up later scenes, world building, or just pure character growth.

While a bunch of scenes really didn't work that well(the casino, while it did a great deal of universe building, wasn't great, and I'm still confused about the dark side cave), there wasn't really that much extraneous cruft, which is pretty damned remarkable for a two and a half hour long movie. The most that could have been completely cut without any effect on the plot would be Chewie and the Porgs, which was maybe a minute or two out of the entire film.

I found the writing to be slopping in a couple ways. First, there were some serious plot holes and lapses of logic, like the 18-hour chase or Holdo being uncommunicative. Second, the fourth wall breaking humor, which often messed up the pacing and undercut any tension that had been building up, in addition to being just plain jarring. Examples of this are Poe's crank call and Luke throwing the Lightsaber over his shoulder.

In broad strokes the writing worked, but many of the little details were glossed over in service of the greater story.

Slumberland wrote:

I don't understand, what premises did he ignore? Rey's parentage, which was pretty well hinted at in Maz's speech ("they're never coming back")?

The film was pretty much all about ignoring or rejecting the premises made by the first film or even by the fans themselves. Take Snoke for example. The Force Awakens built him up to be a major player, but The Last Jedi killed him off quickly which went straight against that premise. Or take Luke, who explicitly in the previous film had left clues so that people would be able to find him when they needed him, but in this film he basically wants nothing to do with the rebellion and doesn't want to help anybody.

Or in the case of Rey's parentage, the previous film made her parentage seem a bit mysterious, which left the door open to speculation as to where she comes from. But in this film Kylo tells her that her parents are nobody, which again undercuts those expectations.

For as much as Hamill didn't like the way Luke was written, he absolutely killed his role. For me, his performance was the best of the new batch of movies, which is kinda astonishing given that his career has been much more defined by voice work than acting and, well, 'good performance' and Star Wars are words rarely used in the same sentence. So kudos to the writing and directing teams on TLJ, and Hamill himself of course.

jamos5 wrote:

Or take Luke, who explicitly in the previous film had left clues so that people would be able to find him when they needed him, but in this film he basically wants nothing to do with the rebellion and doesn't want to help anybody.

Did he leave clues? Someone having a map to where he ended up doesn't necessarily mean he was leaving that info around so that he could be found if needed, and he certainly never says anything directly about it.

Or in the case of Rey's parentage, the previous film made her parentage seem a bit mysterious, which left the door open to speculation as to where she comes from. But in this film Kylo tells her that her parents are nobody, which again undercuts those expectations.

Making her a nobody from nowhere was the perfect resolution to all the pointless fan speculation over something that wasn't even made a big deal of in TFA. I watched it again a few nights ago and as mentioned up-thread, Maz pretty much puts it to rest and the movie moves on. The Star Wars galaxy feels small enough without everyone being related to everyone else.

billt721 wrote:
jamos5 wrote:

Or take Luke, who explicitly in the previous film had left clues so that people would be able to find him when they needed him, but in this film he basically wants nothing to do with the rebellion and doesn't want to help anybody.

Did he leave clues? Someone having a map to where he ended up doesn't necessarily mean he was leaving that info around so that he could be found if needed, and he certainly never says anything directly about it.

The map was a MacGuffin in the purest sense. The completely unstated implication in TFA was that Luke left a trail with a tiny part of it going to that random dude on Jakku and the rest in R2-D2, but that was never confirmed by the movie itself.

For all intents and purposes, it could have been just a tourist map of Jedi temples that got accidentally broken in half when R2 tried to eject it while Luke was on holiday, the remaining half crashed R2, and Luke shipped R2 back to Leia because he couldn't get parts in the middle of nowhere, and there was a snafu with the shipping company so R2 just got left in the corner of that base and everyone forgot about him even though he's the real hero of the Rebellion, so Luke was then trapped on that island for years and got really bitter about it because everyone forgot he existed and he needed R2-D2 to plot hyperspace routes so he threw his X-Wing into the ocean.

Or something.

billt721 wrote:
jamos5 wrote:

Or take Luke, who explicitly in the previous film had left clues so that people would be able to find him when they needed him, but in this film he basically wants nothing to do with the rebellion and doesn't want to help anybody.

Did he leave clues? Someone having a map to where he ended up doesn't necessarily mean he was leaving that info around so that he could be found if needed, and he certainly never says anything directly about it.

Or in the case of Rey's parentage, the previous film made her parentage seem a bit mysterious, which left the door open to speculation as to where she comes from. But in this film Kylo tells her that her parents are nobody, which again undercuts those expectations.

Making her a nobody from nowhere was the perfect resolution to all the pointless fan speculation over something that wasn't even made a big deal of in TFA. I watched it again a few nights ago and as mentioned up-thread, Maz pretty much puts it to rest and the movie moves on. The Star Wars galaxy feels small enough without everyone being related to everyone else.

Yep I agree with you about Rey. I'm just pointing out why Rian Johnson felt the need to ignore fan speculation and premises from the first film.

And as for the map thing. I was going off the assumption of some internet arguments that I'd read, but I tried looking it up and there doesn't seem to be a lot of information about where that map came from. So I guess you can't attribute it directly to Luke himself.

Still, everyone's expectation coming out of the previous film was that Luke would be willing to join the fight, so that was another premise that Rian decided to reject.

see also previous references to the fact that JJ Abrams left the new guy exactly NOTHING to work with in terms of story-bible or plots to bring forward into the second film. Literally, nothing.