Jay G.

You're making a different argument now. You've gone from arguing about certain plot points' existence to arguing their execution. You've gone from "why is it even there?" to "well, it wasn't executed well." You've basically conceded the reasoning for their existence, but still don't like them, for... reasons.

As for me, I don't think a certain plot or character point being answered in the same movie it's brought up is necessarily a bad thing. Rey's conflict with the dark v. light wasn't answered "instantly," it took a good part of the film, and I actually don't think it was fully answered. Just because she didn't join Kylo in this film doesn't mean she can never be tempted by the dark side again. It's not an immunity.

Based on your statements, you seem to want every storyline to have a multiple-film arc, and anything that only spans one film is "instant" and/or "cut short." Personally, I'm fine with story arcs that span just one film; they can be developed well and have enough "intrigue" within one film.

She's not infallible. She fails several times in this film. She fails to convince Luke to come back to the fight, or to even actually train her. She fails to get the answers she wants from the cave. She fails to turn Kylo. So she's not perfect, she has flaws. But she doesn't need someone else rescuing her. That would diminish her role in this film, one where she's one of the central characters. She has to learn and grow from her mistakes, not have someone else come along and fix them for her, especially just to give that secondary character "something to do."

I think you, like Luke, miss the bigger picture here, and hopefully it's something expanded upon in the next film. Luke and the old Jedi have the "Light vs Dark" viewpoint of the Force, and so he's fearful that she so readily accepts the dark side in. But what if it's not supposed to be "light vs dark" but "light and dark"? What if one person could successfully harness both and find balance between them within themselves? I think this is what TLJ was hinting at.

I disagree. I think they've been used exactly as I expected them to be used, and used well. Anyone expecting these films to be about the further adventures of Han, Luke, and Leia were deluding themselves. They're supporting characters, just like Obi-Wan was in the OT, despite being a central character in the prequels. Each trilogy is about the next generation. This is a new trilogy, so this one is about the new generation, with the old cast as supporting characters.

Mike86

Regarding your statement about wanting arcs that span more than one film, this is a trilogy and not only that but part of a larger saga. Arcs tend to run throughout all the films to build a larger story while not needing to answer everything all at once.

I think that’s one of the biggest issues with this film. Johnson only seemed to care about his singular vision for his film. It doesn’t seem like he gave a damn about anything that came before and probably after. Kylo’s line about letting the past die and killing it if you have to seems to be how he approached this film. Like, it doesn’t matter what you thought, wanted, or expected because I’m tossing everything out the window and only focusing on my story.

He probably wasn’t the right choice to direct this if he wanted to break conventional expectations rather than going with things that were set in motion. While that works for some people and if it does that’s cool for you guys, but he had to have known it wouldn’t just blow over with everyone when you have a fanbase as passionate as the ones Star Wars has. Like I’ve said before he probably would have been better doing something not tied with the main saga as I think he’s got some talent as a director.

dex14

Jay G.

Just because it's part of a trilogy doesn't mean it can't have storylines that develop and resolve in one film. LOTR had Boromir's temptation, fall, and redemption all in the first film. Just because it didn't span multiple films doesn't mean it wasn't moving.

And this film has unresolved plot points and arcs that will need to be addressed in the next film. I don't think Rey's conflict with light vs dark is over just because she didn't join Kylo. And the Resistance needs to be rebuilt and The First Order defeated. There's plenty that will span all 3 films.

As for the "saga," I'm of the mind that each trilogy really stands on it's own, with some connecting threads, but this trilogy isn't intended to "wrap up" the previous two, those trilogies wrapped up themselves. However, looking at the Marvel "saga," they put plenty of independent storylines in many of their films, even if they all tie together and culminate in the Avengers movies every few years.

Draven

I can't believe I have to point this out again, but Rey was a trained and capable fighter before the Force. Of course she's better than Luke at actually fighting.

kefrank

The thing is, we fundamentally disagree that Johnson broke "conventional expectations" or somehow didn't go with "things that were set in motion". I've argued ad nauseum in this thread that Johnson did go with things that were set in motion in a very logical way - it just isn't what some fans expected or wanted, but no choice would have pleased everyone. I think the film has flaws, but this idea that Johnson threw a bunch of curveballs for the sake of it is one I will never agree with.

Mike86

She’s got her staff and presumably has used it to fight with, but we don’t see a ton of that really. She’s a scavenger at the start of The Force Awakens. All I was saying is that she gains a lot of abilities relatively quick. She’s basically a pro with a lightsaber by the end of The Force Awakens and has a reasonable amount of Force powers (she’s able to manipulate weaker minds and call out to the saber when it’s lodged in the snow).

Draven

She beats the shit out of two guys with her staff right at the beginning. There's a joke about it where Finn is running to save her and then is like "oh, she didn't need me". The idea that she wouldn't start far ahead of Luke in "fighting with a weapon" is silly.

And so what if she develops the abilities faster than Luke did? Maybe she's stronger in the Force than he is. Maybe she's more of a natural. Maybe the fact that she didn't start the movie whining about power converters gave her a leg up. Maybe Luke was just a bad student. We have literally one example of how quickly someone can learn how to use a lightsaber and the Force. Although Anakin was an ace pilot as a child.

This is my point about holding the movie to an unreasonable standard. If you are comparing Rey's Force abilities on the "Luke Scale", then why not compare everything else that's different about her?

Mike86

I don’t think I’m holding the movie to an unreasonable standard. I like Rey as a character overall I just find her a bit overpowered. She was kind of everything rolled into one pretty much instantly (I even forgot that she also happens to be a good pilot). I find her interesting regardless and I do like Daisy Ridley’s portrayal of her but they basically gave her everything right away. That’s on Abrams though and not this film.

TomOpus

This might be the best thing in this thread.

Josh-da-man

No, instead they just had start to develop feelings for the asshole who kidnapped her, tortured her, murdered the surrogate father she had just found, and nearly killed one of her friends.

Nice role model for all of those little girls cosplaying as Rey. It turns her into that trailer park woman on “Cops” with a black eye screaming “He’s a good man!” As the cops haul her husband away in cuffs.

tanman

Boromir wasn't the central character of the LotR. Rey is the central character in the ST.

You guys all have great points on both side. All I know is that it was genuinely shocking, in an awesome way, to see Rey and Kylo suddenly team up kill Snoke and his guard in the best scene of the movie but then for it to not go anywhere at all after that. They are back to being enemies, back to square one. It really took a lot of their intrigue away. Darth Vader is one of the best villains of all time from ANH. But they took him and elevated him to legendary status. Why is that? It's not because of his power or his cool suit but because he is a conflicted character. The fact that we suddenly find out he isn't just a mustache twirling evil villain. He has real depth and internal conflict. Same with Luke, he is constantly tempted by the dark side and in fact succumbs when he decides to strike down the emperor. Those same reasons are what makes Kylo and Rey so intriguing. They are both conflicted souls that don't just represent the light and the dark but have both sides constantly battling inside of themselves. TLJ does an excellent job of playing this right up until the point of after the team up. Then Kylo goes right back to being a one dimensional villain and Rey goes right back to being the hero with each resolving that conflict within themselves and for the rest of the movie they are played that way. Now I am holding out judgement until eps IX (and this is where an established plot map thought out BEFORE making these movies would have gone a long way in having faith in Lucasfilm). Because they very well could go back (somehow) to being complex conflicted characters. But within this movie the conflict is resolved and they go back to being purely dark and purely light. IMHO it would have been much better if that resolution of their character had happened in the third movie. Because where do they have to go from here? (again I'm reserving final judgement until the story is completed)

mcnabb

It is roughly the 1 year anniversary of the release of The Last Jedi, and I have changed my tune regarding the movie: I'm still not a big fan, but The Force Awakens is the real problem with this Trilogy and locked in many plot points that Rian Johnson had no way out. Many had brought this up in the past year, and I have come here to admit they were right (I know this is a rarity that someone admits they're wrong on the internet)

After thinking about it a million times, Rey had to be a nobody because every plausible option makes someone a deadbeat. If she is Luke's kid, then he's a deadbeat. If she is Leia's kid, it makes no sense because Leia or Han would have mentioned it in TFA? If she is Obiwan's grand-daughter, then you have to jump leaps and bounds that point A = point B = point C and it all ties together. Plus, Unkaar Platt was there when she was dropped off (referenced in the TFA flashback), why didn't she ever ask him in the movie?

Luke is a hermit who quit on his friends cause JJ wrote it that way. Luke quit on his friends in the TFA narrative, not the TLJ narrative. By writing that ending with Luke by himself, there was nothing that was ever going to undue that Luke bailed on Han/Leia when the First Order seized power in the galaxy.

Rey was a Mary Sue in TFA, so you can't blame her for lifting rocks in TLJ without any formal training. Rey used the Jedi Mind Trick in TFA, Rey beat Kylo in a Lightsaber Battle in TFA, there was never going to be any plausible explanation in TLJ that would be able to change it.

I could go on and on about how TFA dead end mystery boxes essentially ruined the Trilogy on a narrative level, but they have been discussed a zillion times. Yes, I bought into TFA at the time, and defended the movie saying that TLJ was the problem. My point of this post is that I was wrong, and the problem lies with TFA, and I have no faith that JJ will tie this Trilogy up on a Trilogy level, and on a Saga level (JJ has said he will tie all 9 movies together). I'm still not a big fan of TLJ, but it could only do so much with what JJ left after TFA. Many of my friends who watched Lost (I never watched the show) warned me about JJ Abrams and his unsolveable mystery boxes back in 2014 when he was hired for Episode 7, I should have listened to them more......

TGM

Hated TLJ but no problems with Rey's parents being a nobody.

Han's death at the hands of his apprentice should've prompted Luke to get on the Falcon in 10 seconds.

again, fine with this in TLJ. She's just really really strong in the Force, IMO.

TLJ is still terrible. Terrible plot. Terrible ending to Luke (although apparently not really). Ultimately terrible use of all the toys (Knights of Ren, Snoke, Captain Phasma, etc) JJ put in the sandbox for the next guy to play with.

I DO blame JJ and the overall creative team most for this debacle for not having at least a loose 3 movie trilogy arc in mind before starting this all. Rian was given the keys and apparently cart blanche to do what he wanted to do. His choices sucked, IMO, but the fact that on day 1 there wasn't a cohesive three movie storyboard laid out is almost unbelievable and absolutely inexcusable.

Mike86

As much as I dislike the Prequel Trilogy and a lot of decisions George Lucas made with those films I kind of am curious how his Sequel Trilogy would have been. As a trilogy the prequels told a far better story than what we’ve gotten so far. They were just poorly executed in so many ways.

Jay G.

Um... no. Keep in mind that the overall arc for the PT was established in the OT, GL was just filling in the blanks, except all the blank filling in he did was crap.

And while we don't know much about GL's ST plans, we do know he was going to double down on midichlorians:
http://collider.com/george-lucas-star-wars-plans/
GL thought the "whole story" of the saqa was about midichlorians and the Whills.

Mike86

Jay G.

Name something "decent" about the PT that hadn't been established in the OT and ancillary materials. The main story points had been set up at least a decade before GL sat down to actually write the prequel scripts, and his scripts were still mostly garbage. Late period GL couldn't write his way out of a paper bag even with a young GL handing him most of the story points. A late period GL writing the ST from scratch with no earlier established framework to even guide him would've likely been a trainwrec.

Do you think the ST would've been any different if he had kept Lucasfilm and made them himself? Do you think the storyline he wrote on his own and gave to Disney was any different?

Mike86

Jay G.

From the novelization for Star Wars (that came out before the movie):
Wikipedia mentions some of the background of the character established for ROTJ:
Now, the actual films don't depict most of this, but Palpatine's backstory was established during the creation of the OT, and released to the public via novelizations and other ancillary materials. Palpatine's backstory had already existed for over a decade when GL sat down to write the PT.

So your argument is basically "it probably would've been crap, but at least it was planned in advance." Personally, I'm fine with the story Disney/Lucasfilm have made up on the fly, and I don't think it's as haphazard as you do. Maybe my tune will change after Ep IX, but I liked where they went with TLJ, and whether that film's story was assembled on the fly or planned in advance make no difference for me. Even if I'm ultimately disappointed by Ep IX, I'm very doubtful, based on the evidence of the PT and what he's so far revealed for his plans for the ST, that Lucas could've done any better.

Mike86

You honestly are telling me you can’t name one good original character created for the prequels? I edited my post but will list them again. Guys like Mace Windu, Count Dooku, Darth Maul, General Greivous. All were at least interesting characters. Some deserved to be better fleshed out but are still memorable in their own right.

stvn1974

The Phantom Menace had the pod race and duel of fates.
Attack Of The Clones had the Yoda/Dooku fight scene
Revenge Of The Sith had the Obi Wan/Anakin and Yoda/Palpatine duels going back and forth

The Last Jedi has absolutely nothing going for it. The Prequels were good films executed poorly. The Last Jedi is just a bad film.

Jay G.

Mice Windu exists only so Obi-Wan can be guilted into training Anakin against the council's wishes. He's otherwise fairly bland with no characteristics to distinguish him from "generic Jedi." LIkewise, Darth Maul is a nice makeup design with a cool sword that is otherwise "generic villain." Count Dooku is most notable by who played him, and his fight with Yoda, not anything about the character itself. General Greivous at least had some characteristics like his odd cough and penchant for collecting lightsabers, but wasn't that fleshed out a character. I will grant that they're "memorable," but Jar Jar Binks is memorable. Being memorable doesn't make it a good character.

One or two scenes doesn't a good movie make, but TLJ had some really good scenes, like Rey & Kylo fighting Snoke's guards, and the striking hyperspace attack on The First Order's fleet. If we're talking about just individual scenes, those are as good as anything in the prequels.

Michael Corvin

Yeah, the PT had plenty of "cool looking" characters, but they all suffered the same fate as Boba Fett. They were designed to sell toys, and were horribly developed on screen.

LorenzoL