Star Wars


Agree largely. A creator’s interpretation of their own work is always interesting and how they intended something to be portrayed may sway me somewhat when reaching my own decisions. But I think people all interpret works of fiction in their own ways (just like they interpret real life actions and events in their own ways). And I think Lucas was always pretty open to that. It’s interesting that back when the EU was cannon he said that for him, he didn’t consider it as such. I remember a quote from him where he more or less said something along the lines of: that in his mind, Han and Leia went and lived happily ever after somewhere with a white picket fence. And yet the EU kept being written. He was fine letting other people have their EU as cannon and for him it wasn’t.

I like that. He didn’t put a stop to the EU or anything but he was happy with his own head cannon for the characters and to leave other people to accept the EU as they chose. It’s a nice approach that I appreciate. It’s the same logic I applied to the Cursed Child in the Harry Potter universe. If other people want to it to view it as cannon, groovy. But I think I’m just going to ignore it for now :smiley:


They’re doing something new with Star Wars. Whether that’s that’s an inherent betrayal of the genre or a refreshing example of taking the material seriously is in the eye of the beholder. I don’t think there’s any inconsistency between space opera and serious characterization, and thought they brought the two together brilliantly with Luke.

I’m glad they didn’t try with Finn. It wouldn’t have had anything close to the same impact–in part because I agree with you that the Finn plot was kind of a shambles in TLJ. The kindest thing I’ll say for it is that John Boyega brought good acting to a poor plot, and that it wasn’t bad enough to bring down the movie.

They’re absolutely portrayed in the film. They’re not spelled out explicitly, sure…but they’re pretty hard to miss. The alternative is to assume that Luke’s character makes no sense and has no continuity with RotJ. But why would we assume that when there’s a perfectly consistent reading of the character–of his almost-attack on Kylo and subsequent despair and withdrawal–clearly implied by the script and Hamill’s acting, that links up with character flaws set in the original trilogy?

I’m not sure how anything I’ve said is an ad hominem, let alone passive-aggressive. You’d said I hadn’t been giving any argument except my own insistence; I countered that you were closing your eyes to the arguments I’d been making, and recognized that I couldn’t ultimately do anything to change that. Sorry if that felt like a personal attack. It wasn’t intended as one.


I have a somewhat strange relationship with TLJ.

Taken separately on their own, I love nearly all the disparate elements of TLJ. The A-plot, Mark’s fantastic acting, the B-plot and the themes in it (well, except the TIME thing----it would’ve been better if they hadn’t tried to create a sense of urgency by putting the number of hours on it—more on that later), even the change in Luke’s character is something I found credible and true to a path he could’ve walked after the end of ROTJ. Hell, the ending they gave Luke was BRILLIANT.

But taken as a whole, the film fills me with bitterness and disappointment, and although I really did try not to let it be so, at this point it’s safe to say that it’s soured me off the franchise.

IX can still salvage my love for Star Wars if a miracle happens (might be hard, because apparently they had no plan in place for the sequel trilogy----a horrible slapdash method of planning out the sequels to the fandom with the highest fan involvement of all time, tbh, but not impossible), but my problems with TLJ ran a bit deeper than a few plot elements here and there. It’s just…I found it to be hypocritical, as a piece of the franchise. As a film it does fine. But as Star Wars, it very much wants to have all the cakes and eat it too.

For a film that tries very much to say that it’s a new (and better) kind of Star Wars than what Star Wars was, what it does, ultimately, is to reset things to the beginning of the franchise so Disney can play with the pieces of the old Star Wars game without worrying about continuation and also be able to claim it revitalized everything. We’re back to Empires and Rebels, even though the reason why the New Republic is gone in 2 days is flimsy at best. We’re back to the sole Jedi who can save the universe and train new Jedi. And I hate all the critics who say it democratized the Force…the Force was ALWAYS democratized, anyone could’ve had it, it’s just that not everyone could use it…and yet the circus hailed that piece of old canon like it’s new. The only thing that it freed us from Star Wars-wise is the continuation of Skywalkers----but it does that in the least interesting fashion ever, for a trilogy that’s supposed to be the family’s swan song—have the last Skywalker be manipulated into a problem child of a space Nazi because he was…influenced in the womb by a baddie. Oh, and life’s pressures, but almost every discussion about that seemed to agree that his life’s pressures weren’t enough to justify being a genocidal space Nazi by itself without that one niggling plot detail.

That’s right up there with the death-in-childbirth-in-an-age-of-spaceships plot in the PT, but I thought that was stupid then, and this is stupid now.

(I’m going to say here that I found Kylo to be an effective villain and an interesting character, but I do not find him particularly redeemable, and thought that Rey rejecting his offer to BURN IT ALL DOWN means that the series is actually interested in honoring the old and growing things from it rather than tearing the old apart to build the new—but I digress.)

I also have an issue with the idea that everything everyone’s built in the OT ultimately fell apart. Everything. That’s my problem. Everything. I could take Luke’s life being a failure (it was brilliant). Han’s marriage to Leia failing (it was quite foreseeable). Leia being forced to leave the Republic (it made sense). The Republic being destroyed. The Jedi school being the cause of the new problems plaguing the universe (if there’s anything the old EU taught us…). Nothing that anybody did managed to have a long-lasting positive impact, aside from the new things they do in Disney’s new trilogy. I can take one or two or even three of these things, but EVERYTHING? To me, that only reinforces the annoying trope Hollywood has that age is worthless, and that the old only exists to pave a path for the younger and dreamier, the newer and shinier. And that. That is not something you do to some of the most iconic pieces of film ever.

To me, its ending promises to honor the old. To reject Kylo’s offer and instead uphold the idea of taking the flame of the old saga and bringing it forward. I love that promise. I came out of the theater being filled with that promise. But as the months passed and it’s revealed that they had NO plans, that Solo came out to be what it is (it’s a decent film, but)-----it struck me as more and more cynical and hypocritical.

And after months of waffling, that’s what TLJ becomes to me, in the end. A cynical, hypocritical movie that wants to be----and is—a good movie on its own, but wears the franchise like a wolf wearing sheepskin. It’s a movie that wants to create urgency so much that it completely ignored the ramifications to its own integrity, or to the greater stories to come before it and after it. It wants its own identity so much that it’s willing to walk over the identity of everything else. It wants to be seen as a praiseworthy thing on its own so much that it ignores what was made before it, and what is to come after it. (I mean TFA with all its ignored ideas and IX, which only has two hours to rebuild everything enough to bring the trilogy to a positive close, what with TLJ leaving far fewer pieces to the heroes than ESB ever did.) It is a praiseworthy thing. But as part of the franchise? It’s selfish. It’s very, very selfish. A cynical clean slate-wiping of the setting that’s hypocritical enough to ask to be praised for being ‘something new’.

I don’t want anything to do with Star Wars after this, although I’d still watch IX, just to get some closure for the characters of the new cast, who I do love (yes, even Rose, I love Rose!)—and because I wanted to know what they would do with Leia.

I don’t think anyone should have to share my feelings on it. Certainly I have friends who both love TLJ unabashedly (for reasons that I totally understand even if I don’t share the feeling----I mean, it’s a good film! And some of them just likes angsty stuff…) and friends who hate it from the bottom of their being (for reasons that I don’t always get despite sharing some of the sentiment----I don’t find the B-plot to be that bad, except for the sheer carelessness displayed in plotting—and I certainly am not stuck on Rey being powerful with the Force). It’s just…my personal feelings on it.

And I honestly don’t want my feelings towards Star Wars to be like this, but after nearly a year of reading discussions and articles from both ends, I don’t think it’s going to change.


People already took it seriously. That’s why they disliked the movie so much. They left out the majority of Luke’s development and only hinted at it in flashbacks.

You’re glad they didn’t try with Finn because it wouldn’t have had as much impact because they wrote a crappy story for Finn… but… If they wrote a good story for Finn it wouldn’t have been crappy. I mean, I just quoted you saying that John Boyega is a good actor, so I assume you don’t believe he wouldn’t be able to handle it… so I’m having trouble seeing how this statement makes any sense.

We would assume that Luke’s character makes no sense because the “perfectly consistent reading” is based not on what actually occurs in the film, but what you speculate must have occurred outside of the events of the film in order for the events of the film to make any sense in universe. Also, because the rest of the film is equally shoddy in the writing. Rose’s insane climactic scene where she delivers a line about “protecting what we love” while the only thing protecting the resistance is destroyed behind them as a direct result of her actions… Holdo’s nonsensical pettiness and incompetence that is portrayed in a consistently positive light. The overall message the film seems to be delivering to blindly trust in authority figures, never take risks or make sacrifices for the greater good, and just hide and pray for a higher power to save you.

Anything can be argued to make sense with enough speculation and selective omission.


Nothing more to Palpy, we’ve seen his whole life already.


I’m not sure I’d be interested but we’ve never actually seen how he became a Sith lord have or learned how to use the force? At least not in the movies. Is it addressed in any of the books/comics that are still technically cannon?


Pre sith years


Post sith years

political career.

Power level ( cannon)

Non cannon power level though it’s technically sorta cannon


So yep, his backstory is covered. Thanks! That was a very comprehensive answer and I appreciate it :slight_smile:


Yeah if you’re interested in Palpatine’s early years and the secret behind the scenes work leading into the prequels, definitely give Darth Plagieus a read.


Here is how the character was created


Jedi Knights should smoke weed basically then none of this would have happened


Thanks! I am interested. His character definitely raises some questions if you just go off of the movies. Given the fact that, in a sense, he jump starts the entire plot, I definitely want to know more about him.


The video “A critique of Star Wars: The Last Jedi” by the user MauLer has some interesting points regarding the movie and shows just how little thought went into some descisons.

Personally I liked it when I saw it then the movie fell the more I actually thought about it. By the second time I saw it I started actively hating it. Mostly due to one thing. “Wasted potential”

I feel TLJ wastes the potential for a lot of its characters, sometimes just due to (what I view as incompetence or oversight of the director) or sometimes just to “subvert expectations”

Rose, Admiral Holdo, Rey and Hux all could of been so much more in this movie…

And don’t get me started on the first order being recycled non threatening villains.

I just hope the next one is shown a lot more forethought and care.


If you want a good review of this movie just watch plinkett review,


So, who here thinks there’a a real chance the prequel trilogy ends up better than the sequel trilogy? I’m by no means certain, but I can’t eliminate it entirely.


I legitimately enjoy the prequels (I see their flaws and acknowledge they are by nowhere near as good as the original). I think they had some solid story ideas that were often poorly implemented, and have a few outstanding moments. And yes, there’s some nostalgia there for me as well, not as much as the original trilogy but certainly some. So while the sequel trilogy might still pull it through with the third film, it’s going to be very hard for it to come back from the Last Jedi for me, so I’m fairly confident I will end up preferring the prequel trilogy, even though I really liked Force Awakens.


It’s funny, I find Awakens to be a more cohesive and ultimately entertaining film than TLJ…but would still call TLJ better. The reason being that it did try to innovate. It failed in many ways, but it tried. Awakens was fun at first, but in retrospect just felt soulless and bereft of newness. A corporate product, basically glorified fanfiction and rehashes galore. For all the terrible dialogue and ridiculous doings of the prequels, this was definitely never the case. Lucas was a nut, but not a lazy one.

The fact that TLJ did not put the series on very good footing does lead me to believe the prequels may retroactively benefit from their deeply flawed successors. Like how George W. Bush had his legacy boosted by the comparison between him and Trump.


I may have judged Awakens more gently due to my love of Rey. I really liked all the new characters to be honest. I almost wished they had set the sequel trilogy a few decades later even and left out the original characters. I feel like the parts that focused on them were the aspects I enjoyed the least. Awakens also ended with it feeling like it had somewhere forward to go that I was excited to see.

For TLJ I don’t know if I consider it better. It tries to innovate…but I feel like almost all of it fails. Is it better try and fail or not to try at all :-D? After all, “do or do not, there is no try” :wink:

For sure! Honestly if he had just had someone to help him fix some of the pacing of the story (Anakin needed a slower decent into Sith-hood instead of instantly choosing the dark side and then go straight into murdering children) and someone to re-work some of the dialog it would have gone a long way. Hayden Christensen might also have been the wrong choice. He can be a legitimately good actor. He was really good in Shattered Glass, but I’ve yet to see him in a role (granted I haven’t seen him in all that much) that made me go “oh yeah, that would have worked for Anakin”.
Also I think there’s a lot there, from a story perspective, about the jedi order playing into their own downfall that I think isn’t gone into very thoroughly and could have been explored more. Going into that a bit more thoroughly would have played well against Palpatine’s rise to power and slower corruption of Anakin.

Gosh I love Star Wars :smiley: it and and Harry Potter are the two fandoms I can talk about forever.




At 12:11 when you realize that Yoda has mastered the dark side and can now control lightning…!