Jay G.

It's a bit like a joke: if it has to be explained to you, it isn't going to be funny. Most of the explanations I've provided are ones that I intuitively thought while watching the film, and I stayed emotionally engaged in the story and characters. If, on the other hand, there were scenes that pulled you out of the film while viewing, where you didn't understand how they made sense as you watched them, you'll have a poor viewing experience, and later explanations, even if they make rational sense, are probably not going to fully dispel that initial disappointment and confusion.

It can come down to expectations and preconceptions. Yoda is a good example. In my mind, I've always envisioned Yoda as a bit of a prankster, with that "crazy hermit" act in ESB being not just a one-off thing, but emblematic of his character. For others, maybe they envisioned Yoda as always being serious and somber, with his "crazy hermit" act in ESB being a one-off thing he did under extraordinary circumstances. So I took Yoda in TLJ in stride, even joy, while others had it clash with how they've personally perceived Yoda for possibly decades. Neither reaction is necessarily "wrong," it's just based on a certain point of view.

It's not about which is "more divisive," but about what's on topic and civil. This thread is specifically for TLJ opinions, so differing opinions and discussion is the point. The Episode IX thread is supposed to be about Ep IX, but it was getting derailed by opinions about TLJ and discussions about those opinions, which are a better fit here. Closing the Ep IX thread until there's something to actually discuss about Ep IX, and not just TLJ discussion redux, is a reasonable step to keep that thread on topic.

Hokeyboy

I didn't say it was a home slice of sublime perspicacity; just funny. I think you might be taking it way too seriously.

Rival11

In all honesty, I thought people would have found my response funny because they somewhat know me but I guess not. I'm still just an unfunny nobody around these parts after all these years :-(

Rob V

Jay G, I've come to appreciate your take on this after 3900+ posts here... so I'd never dispel that your explanation could indeed be the most logical answer... that said, I look at the source of the material and don't try to over-think what they were trying to convey. Some sources are meant to be deep and meaningful but I never took SW to be that. I took it to be what it was intended - a space opera.
If a joke is made by my 10 year old son and I need it explained, shame on me... if it's told by a crazy person who is referencing material they seem to know nothing about, shame on them. I believe Rain tried to do something unique and thoughtful with a source that didn't need that... or maybe it did and I (and many others) didn't want that. I loved Rogue One because it didn't pretend to be anything than it was - a fun space movie with the right amount of homage to the core characters.

Abob Teff

Jay G.

I think this is the key: you didn't want what RJ was offering. It's impossible to say what a franchise "needs" to do, but Rian created the story he wanted to tell, and while it resonated with many, there's others that it didn't.


She doesn't "cheat death," she's holding onto life. The story about Darth Plagueis told in RotS is vague, but the bit about "manipulate midi-chlorians to create life" seems like something beyond what Leia likely did.

coli

You're the one with preconceived notions, as I just look at how Yoda acted in ESB/ROTJ and I firmly believe he was out of character in TLJ. The argument is that TLJ was a teaching moment for Luke so that is why Yoda acted sort of quirky/sarcastic, but he didn't act like that once in ESB when there was other teachable moments (after his initial meeting with Luke when he fools him that he wasn't Yoda). Think of the Cave scene and how Luke fails, Yoda doesn't act sarastic as he is very stoic, "Remember your failure at the cave....." Another teachable moment is when Luke fails to lift the X-Wing Fighter out of the swamp simply because he doesn't think he can do it before he tries. Yoda gives him this great speech (probably one of the best moments in the OT, IMO), and not once does he go to prankster mode before or after he lifts the X-Wing.

So it's not really about what I envisioned of Yoda, as I am just going by how his character acted in ESB/ROTJ, and the only time he goes into prankster mode is when Luke doesn't know who he is. I'll even go farther to say that Yoda scared the HELL out of me in 1980 when he finally decides to train him and Luke says he's not afraid, "You will be......" That was a haunting statement not knowing what was the come!

Draven

Jay G.

That's the key though, you believe he was out of character. That's your opinion, base on how you've viewed Yoda in the past. I fully acknowledge that I had preconceived notions about Yoda going into the film, but you did too. Your reaction is based on the opinions you formed about Yoda from the previous films, which were different than mine.

An interesting thought is that there's people that will see the Sequel Trilogy first, and then the other films, some watching the Original Trilogy next. Will they feel Yoda is out of character when he turns serious?

So you're saying he didn't act like that for other teachable moments, except the first teachable moment (which, ironically, is about preconceptions).

I think there's hints of Yoda's playfulness later one, like his "judge me by my size, do you?" comment, and his crack about his age in RotJ. But this is an old, defeated Yoda, forced into hiding and likely holding some guilt about the fall of the Jedi Order. Maybe death took some of that weight off his shoulders. And maybe the "crazy Yoda" act was exactly what was necessary to reach the defiant Luke in TLJ, instead of the young, eager to learn Luke of ESB.

You're going by how you envisioned Yoda based on how you interpreted his actions in the other films. You saw his "crazy Yoda" as entirely an act, something totally separate of who Yoda actually was. I saw it as one aspect of his multifaceted personality, one he pulls out when the situation is right, and lets slip through in other parts.

Michael Corvin

ST Yoda is far closer to OT Yoda than PT Yoda was. And that's a mouthful.

Yoda was quirky in both instances and serious when he needed to be in both. As a teacher you read the person and adjust your teaching method accordingly. A young brash Luke ready to rush into battle needs a stern teacher to keep him from doing something stupid. OT Luke is also [presumably] the last hope of the Jedi and Yoda's last chance at redeeming his failure at stopping Palpatine. So the situation requires a more serious tone.

In the ST, Luke is a legend who's been through it all and is still seemingly lost. He made a bad call and is torturing himself over it. He's been there, done that. Yoda is appearing more as a friend giving some advice than a teacher giving a lesson. Luke is a man / Jedi Master himself and can ignore Yoda if he wants. The situation should be lighter in tone, hence the friendly tone.

Also there's the whole, Yoda's been dead for four decades which might loosen a muppet up a little.

mewmartigan

I agree with this. In ESB it was teacher/student. In TLJ, Luke is a master and Yoda still has some advice to give but its as a friend and equal. He isn't training a young, headstrong kid anymore. I loved Yoda in TLJ. Not so much in the PT.

brayzie

Best way to put it.

jpcamb

I hate like hell to bump this thread but there is some good news regarding this film:
https://babylonbee.com/news/disney-ordered-to-pay-reparations-to-longtime-star-wars-fans?fbclid=IwAR0_NAhQKRlD-bDtEUIK3MrA05A6r7sJwOzVZkIYhTsQY707WweFLrU-qnw

Please note this is from 4/4 and not 4/1 so it is not a joke....

dex14

kefrank

I'm assuming from your wink that you realize that whole site is nothing but jokes all year long.

raven56706

this movie was one big joke. man, it had so much opportunity to build on a great franchise. Instead (my opinion) made the strongest fighter die due to jedi exhaustion

jpcamb

Correct. The article did make me laugh which is something I need in regard to this one so I thought I'd share even though I try not to look at this thread...

Jay G.

From the Ep IX thread:

This was in response to kefrank pointing out that the poll in this thread shows 82% giving it 3 stars or more, and 66% over 3 stars. So, per this poll, the people who dislike it are in a minority, although it's more like 18% didn't like it than Rob V's hyperbole of only 10%.

Again, saying anything definitively about the like/dislike ratios for this film are, at the least, highly debatable. However, the majority of polls that aren't likely to have been gamed by people deliberately trying to skew the score downward have shown the majority of people responded positively to it.

Does being in the minority make your opinion wrong? No, it's your opinion, and you shouldn't need to seek the approval of the masses to hold it. But it's best to be honest about these things. I hate the prequels, but I'm aware that they were incredibly popular and were generally well received. I vastly prefer the original cuts of the original trilogy to the SEs and later tweaked cuts George Lucas made, but I'm aware most people don't care that strongly about the differences.

Rob V

But it's 3/5 and 3.5/5... that's not saying much. If my kids came home with a 60% or 70%, I'd be disappointed.

Hell, I'd give it 2.5/5 simply because it did offer some cool scenes and Star Wars. It felt like a one-off story that completely derailed the franchise... a space chase of ineptitude between two tiny fleets that allegedly impact the ENTIRE universe. Then they "exhaust-kill" the franchise hero. Crazy.

I remember reading the synopsis of the movie at another forum about 2-days before it released wide. I thought there was NO WAY that was the plot. No way. It was.
I'm not expecting to change anybody's minds. I've said from day 1 that this movie is the most divisive of them all.

Jay G.

It's saying "I liked it," which means they didn't dislike it. So it means your original assertion of 50/50 like/dislike was wrong, and your claim that the dislikers aren't in the minority, at least in this poll, is wrong.

Now, you can argue your personal reaction, which is fine, but if you want to make statements about how many people agree with you, you need some numbers to back you up. All the credible numbers available, however, say that your opinion is in the minority.

And the prequels were plenty divisive. Anyone who thinks that TLJ is somehow especially divisive didn't discuss the prequels online as they were released.

kefrank

If your contention is that the people who rated the movie 3.5 stars disliked the movie overall, then I think we're going to have to accept that we're at an impasse. My general sense is that a 3.5 star rating is given when someone enjoys the movie while recognizing some problems with it. I did not think it unreasonable to suggest that ratings of 3 stars or below represent the people who disliked the movie (which was 33% of people that rated it in this thread). Honestly, I thought that was being conservative, because a rating of 3 stars could easily be interpreted as liking the movie overall, as well.

Jay G.

I've always taken the 5 star scale to be

1. Hated
2. Didn't Like
3. Liked
4. Really Liked
5. Loved

That's how this site uses it:
https://prometheus-unbound.org/about...rating-system/

Other sites seem similar:
https://www.vox.com/culture/2017/8/3...aggregate-mean
Metacritic scores on a 100 point scale where 60 and above is considered positive, and 60/100 is 3/5.

Draven

I've currently been reading a series of books that treat space travel as slow, weeks-long, hours to approach a planet, communication delayed by minutes - how it actually would be. I actually have no issues with the slow chase in this movie. Actually kind of a refreshing take on the WWII dogfighting we normally get. And the hyperspace through the ship is one of the best Star Wars movie moments ever.

Hokeyboy

You can't use the "school grades" analogy because, for most, anything below a B- is unacceptable. Which would mean anything under a 4 on a 5 scale.

Most reviewers or critics understand the ratings scale that Jay G. provided as valid. A film that gets a 3.5 out of 5, you could read as being 70% positive, 30% negative. Generally positive and liked but not without issues.

For me personally, 3 stars is "Ehh, OK. Nothing special". Completely average but ultimately unoffensive.

Here are my full descriptors:

- MASTERPIECE

- EXCELLENT

- REALLY GOOD

- GOOD

- EHH, NOTHING SPECIAL

- SUCKED

- REALLY SUCKED

- AWFUL

- GOD-AWFUL

- THIS IS A JOKE, RIGHT? RIGHT?!?!

- *** FULL PIGEON GENOCIDE ***

Trevor

For me:

3/5 is an average movie.

90% of all released movies are between 2.5 and 3.5. I don’t give out 1s and 5s very often.