Lets talk all things Star Wars

[Psab keel]

From a business perspective extra material like books etc makes perfect sense. And I think the books are great if that's what you're into.

But if the book explains things better than the movies then perhaps the script should have been thought out better.

Ultimately the movies are what they are, though I think it's reasonable to make observations about how I think they could have been better when the entire purpose of a discussion thread is to exchange ideas. If all we did was all agree on everything then this would be a blog.

 

[Inquisitor Peregrinus]

Back in the day all we knew about the Emperor was that he was supposed to be powerful, yet all we saw was seeing the future incorrectly, cool bit of lightning from his fingers, and getting thrown over a hand rail. Never struck me as a really badass or even mildly frightening character as a child back then

I was eight at the time (although an unusual eight), and I remember him being creepy... but more in a

kind of way. The lightning thing is pretty badass. And he ramped it up. At first he was playing with his food to make a point, but at the end, when it was hitting Vader, it was lighting up his skeleton through his armor, so he was firing for effect. I dunno -- maybe him dying, the fall of the Empire, the rise of the First Order, Snoke, Ben turning, and all of that has been "transpiring exactly as he had forseen". Serious long-game possibilities. I prefer to think he got attached to a particular timeline's outcome, and ignored the fact that "always in motion is the future". Or it really was an unforeseeable thing that in that moment Vader snapped out of it.

Ultimately the movies are what they are, though I think it's reasonable to make observations about how I think they could have been better when the entire purpose of a discussion thread is to exchange ideas. If all we did was all agree on everything then this would be a blog.

And, believe it or not, this is far more reasonale conversation than some of the stuff I've seen on the fixingmovies subreddit.

 

[Joek3rr]

The Empire would get funding from taxes of course. They're a government. An authoritarian government, but a government nonetheless. Same as the Republic and the Separatists; taxes and already established economies.

But the First Order? How are they capable of doing anything they're doing? The New Republic superseded the Empire from what I gather, so how could the First Order take the Empire's resources? Do they actually have subjects and how did they gain control over these subjects in the first place? This is why for me their existence came so jarringly out of nowhere and we deserved some type of explanation for what they are and how they developed.

I don't think the Roman to Holy Roman Empire analogy works because where does that leave the New Republic?



Sell me on it.



It is impressive from the Count (and I completely forgot about that whole chapter in ROTS), but it still begs the question, where did Snoke learn any of this? Count Dooku was a former Jedi, master to Qui-Gon, and eventual apprentice to Darth Sidious. We learned this from bits and pieces from the movies. If we didn't, it would be really odd having some random old man being able to shoot lightning out his fingers.... So, Snoke? What's his deal and how does he fit into any of this?

So where in the films did you learn about how the Empire got its money? Or are you just assuming?





Autocracy
au·toc·ra·cy
/ôˈtäkrəsē/
noun
a system of government by one person with absolute power.
synonyms: absolutism, absolute power, totalitarianism, dictatorship, despotism, tyranny, monocracy, autarchy; dystopia
a country, state, or society governed by one person with absolute power.
domineering rule or control.

fascism
fas·cism | \ ˈfa-ˌshi-zəm also ˈfa-ˌsi- \
Definition of fascism
1often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
2: a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control

There are many other Force religions in the Star Wars universe. Snoke could have learned from any number of them, or as old as he is. He could have worked it out on his own.

 

[ConvergencePro]

I never understood the issue with Snoke.

Back in the day all we knew about the Emperor was that he was supposed to be powerful, yet all we saw was seeing the future incorrectly, cool bit of lightning from his fingers, and getting thrown over a hand rail. Never struck me as a really badass or even mildly frightening character as a child back then

I think the point you're missing is that the reason the Emperor worked in the OT so well is the quality of the writing and character interaction. It's something I'm unfortunately seeing less and less in films. The art of subtlety to tell story which has sadly been further and further replaced by flashy lights and dangling keys

Empire inherently implies that there is an Emperor. Boom, Done, no need for a back story for the guy being in power.
In StarWars (ANH) the Emperor is shown right off the bat to be a totalitarian dictator with seemingly unequaled power having just dissolved what little remnants that apparently remained of the Republic and was funneling further resources into military power for control with the Death Star (obvious homages to Germany in the mid-late 30's). And that was before we even knew he was a force user. The film instead largely relies on Vader being the prominent evil threat for our hero's for us to build our idea of a villain, and one hell of a ruthless one at that

Fast forward to Empire Strikes Back and now we see Darth Vader, the most evil guy we know to date, a guy who has absolutely no qualms about brutally killing his own men, or even potentially sacrificing entire ships worth of his men in pursuit of a goal, now seemingly afraid or at the least incredibly subservient to the Emperor when he calls. The beautiful way this character interaction plays out lets the audience do the brain work because if Vader is this freaking dangerous and evil, then how goddamn bad has that Emperor guy got to be (the same can be said for how Vader interacts with Boba when compared to other characters. Also I massively prefer the original Emperors face because it's so hard to make out what he looks like that it helps add a element of mystery to him at the same time). Vader is later reveled to be incapable of beating the Emperor on his own, needing Luke along side him if he has any hope of overthrowing the Emperor which further implies a massive threat.

Then in ROTJ we get a much more subdued Vader, acting more akin to that of a defeated henchmen than our main villain, further implying a level of fear and inherent power to him as if he brutally punished Vader for his failure to capture Luke. Hell we don't even get our first real look at the Emperors whole face until Luke enters the freaking throne room 3/4 into the film and that's after the death of Yoda and him leaving a message not to underestimate the Emperor. The guy is at this point the living embodiment of pure calculating evil to the audience. ((This is why I'm convinced Lucas doesn't understand his own films because letting us see the emperors full face in ESB with the new edit ruins the mystery effect built into the beginning of ROTJ)

 

[Darth Fetty]

So where in the films did you learn about how the Empire got its money? Or are you just assuming?

I'm assuming it because the Empire was a government, and it was clearly presented as a government with governors, a senate, diplomats, and subjects. Autocracies are still governments that collect money and/or other resources from their subjects (or outsiders) in order to function. They can't conquer further territories without existing resources and support that normally comes from their citizens. Don't forget that many autocrats including Hitler had a large degree of public support too. Also, in the case of the Empire, it originated from the Galactic Republic, and there's no reason to believe it completely abandoned whatever economic system they had, which did involve trade and taxes as we saw from TPM.

So yeah, I think it's a safe assumption.

But what about the First Order? All we see and know of regarding the First Order is the military. That's it. Correct me if I'm wrong, but we haven't seen or heard of any other type of political leadership besides Snoke, which is probably a big reason why people ask, "What are they supposed to be?". To further complicate it, there is also the New Republic, which is supposedly this new government that superseded the Empire. We saw that they had a capitol, subjects, and at least some degree of public support. But again, does the First Order have any of this? Do they have subjects? Do they have anyone actually supporting them? Where do they get the money, weapons, soldiers, officers, ships, etc. especially if the New Republic is what superseded the Empire? The Empire had a senate that originally supported its creation with "thunderous applause", but what does the First Order have for support?

Maybe this will be addressed in The Mandolarian, but if so, it's a disjointed method of story-telling.

There are many other Force religions in the Star Wars universe. Snoke could have learned from any number of them, or as old as he is. He could have worked it out on his own.

But if there are, they're not exhibited in the movies. The prequels kept reenforcing this idea of Jedi versus Sith and that there can only be two Sith at a time. Yet the two Sith were destroyed at the end of ROTJ..... so where did Snoke come from as he's also clearly not a Jedi? It's jarring having a character like this introduced despite what was already established in previous movies.

And I'm in the camp that does not want to read these young adult style novels to understand the story in the movies. I tried one and had to quit since the author seemed to struggle completing a full sentence and could only write in clauses.

 

[Psab keel]

For me the confusion with the three factions really stemmed partly from the name Resistance itself and it's relationship to the New Republic. If the New Republic was the dominant power in the universe, then what was Leia resisting? Why would she still be heading up an army during peace time? Which begs the question as to why the New Republic doesn't have their own army to defend peace if they knew the First Order threatened everything they'd fought and died to defend? I mean Leia apparently does see the necessity but they don't? I don't get it. Why have the three distinct factions and not just have two? It gives less to explain and makes the story stronger in my mind by simplifying it.

It would have made more sense if the New Republic was the dominant yet benevolent power in the universe and the First Order was made up of the remains of the Empire that had refused to reacclimate peacefully into civilian life. So it was the power inverse of the OT. Cool reversal I think. Luke, Han, and Leia have spent the last 30 years rebuilding the government and Jedi Order in order to promote peace through diplomacy instead of force (unlike the tyrannical rule of the Empire) and when the First Order attacks the New Republic our trio sends our new heroes (in Rey, Finn, and Poe) to face off with this new immediate threat, rather than go on the front lines themselves due to age and wanting to find more diplomatic solutions for long term peace. This way our old heroes are able to be involved but eventually bow out of the story and pass the lightsaber as it were to the new generation to save the day. You could use the original trio as a means to give exposition on what has transpired in the last three decades and show how they have grown because they have transitioned from the freedom fighters of the past into the leaders of today.

I agree with a lot of the assessments of the Empire not needing much of an explanation in the OT. It was very clear in those films. The Empire ruled the galaxy with an iron fist and the Rebellion was there to try and overthrow them and reestablish a peaceful government. Very cut and dry.

Ultimately we got what we got, but I just think it could have been done better if the script was thought through more.

 

[sztriki]

So where in the films did you learn about how the Empire got its money? Or are you just assuming?

Autocracy
au·toc·ra·cy
/ôˈtäkrəsē/
noun
a system of government by one person with absolute power.
synonyms: absolutism, absolute power, totalitarianism, dictatorship, despotism, tyranny, monocracy, autarchy; dystopia
a country, state, or society governed by one person with absolute power.
domineering rule or control.

fascism
fas·cism | \ ˈfa-ˌshi-zəm also ˈfa-ˌsi- \
Definition of fascism
1often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
2: a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control

There are many other Force religions in the Star Wars universe. Snoke could have learned from any number of them, or as old as he is. He could have worked it out on his own.

What is it that you’re trying to say here? You’re talking about ideology, politics and movie imagery echoing history. None of these relate to the your question?

 

[Darth Fetty]

For me the confusion with the three factions really stemmed partly from the name Resistance itself and it's relationship to the New Republic. If the New Republic was the dominant power in the universe, then what was Leia resisting? Why would she still be heading up an army during peace time?

Yep, if you're the dominant power in the universe, then what exactly are you resisting? I'm guessing Disney wanted another underdog rebellion story even though the heroes can no longer be the underdogs or rebels since they're now on the side of the dominant power after having defeated the Empire. This is probably what led to the odd and confusing terminology like "Resistance".

Which begs the question as to why the New Republic doesn't have their own army to defend peace if they knew the First Order threatened everything they'd fought and died to defend? I mean Leia apparently does see the necessity but they don't? I don't get it.

This was also quite confusing. Is there anything in the movies that explains this? Or was the New Republic just absurdly inept? Why would a government not develop a military while this threatening force was growing? If they were this incompetent, they deserved to be obliterated by a giant sun weapon.

 

[tgtiw]

I think you guys are really hitting on the crux of the problem with the new trilogy, aside from the fact they entered into it without a mapped out story and allowed the individual directors to craft their own chapters.
The original trilogy was at its core, a political story. There was an established government that was consumed by its own corruption and a rebellion fighting to restore peace and justice. Pretty simple, and it reflected the political climate when the movies were made. The new trilogy has none of that. There are two sides the audience is presented with nomenclature that doesn't accurately represent their positions, and to be honest, doesn't make sense.

 

[Joek3rr]

I'm assuming it because the Empire was a government, and it was clearly presented as a government with governors, a senate, diplomats, and subjects. Autocracies are still governments that collect money and/or other resources from their subjects (or outsiders) in order to function. They can't conquer further territories without existing resources and support that normally comes from their citizens. Don't forget that many autocrats including Hitler had a large degree of public support too. Also, in the case of the Empire, it originated from the Galactic Republic, and there's no reason to believe it completely abandoned whatever economic system they had, which did involve trade and taxes as we saw from TPM.

So yeah, I think it's a safe assumption.

But what about the First Order? All we see and know of regarding the First Order is the military. That's it. Correct me if I'm wrong, but we haven't seen or heard of any other type of political leadership besides Snoke, which is probably a big reason why people ask, "What are they supposed to be?". To further complicate it, there is also the New Republic, which is supposedly this new government that superseded the Empire. We saw that they had a capitol, subjects, and at least some degree of public support. But again, does the First Order have any of this? Do they have subjects? Do they have anyone actually supporting them? Where do they get the money, weapons, soldiers, officers, ships, etc. especially if the New Republic is what superseded the Empire? The Empire had a senate that originally supported its creation with "thunderous applause", but what does the First Order have for support?

Maybe this will be addressed in The Mandolarian, but if so, it's a disjointed method of story-telling.



But if there are, they're not exhibited in the movies. The prequels kept reenforcing this idea of Jedi versus Sith and that there can only be two Sith at a time. Yet the two Sith were destroyed at the end of ROTJ..... so where did Snoke come from as he's also clearly not a Jedi? It's jarring having a character like this introduced despite what was already established in previous movies.

And I'm in the camp that does not want to read these young adult style novels to understand the story in the movies. I tried one and had to quit since the author seemed to struggle completing a full sentence and could only write in clauses.

So if you can make assumptions about the Empire. Why not the First Order? If we don't see any political figures then we could assume it's a military dictatorship.(which it is, remember the First Order was inspired by the what if the Nazi's had started over in Argentina) The New Republic is clearly a shell of its former self. We can assume this, because Coruscant isn't the Capitol anymore. And the Republic is decimated when the Hosnian system is destroyed. We can also assume the First Order has citizens. Just look at the number of Stormtroopers. And all the ships.

---------

Now what's really interesting about this. Is when we first meet the Emperor, he's using the Force. But he's never said to be a Sith. The whole Jedi vs Sith thing wasn't introduced until TPM. Prior to that Vader was referred as being a Jedi.

And why not introduce a Force user that's not a Jedi or Sith? The comics, TV shows, books, and games have them. So why not show that to the film audience now?

 

[Joek3rr]

What is it that you’re trying to say here? You’re talking about ideology, politics and movie imagery echoing history. None of these relate to the your question?

I was answering two different questions.

 

[Joek3rr]

For me the confusion with the three factions really stemmed partly from the name Resistance itself and it's relationship to the New Republic. If the New Republic was the dominant power in the universe, then what was Leia resisting? Why would she still be heading up an army during peace time? Which begs the question as to why the New Republic doesn't have their own army to defend peace if they knew the First Order threatened everything they'd fought and died to defend? I mean Leia apparently does see the necessity but they don't? I don't get it. Why have the three distinct factions and not just have two? It gives less to explain and makes the story stronger in my mind by simplifying it.

It would have made more sense if the New Republic was the dominant yet benevolent power in the universe and the First Order was made up of the remains of the Empire that had refused to reacclimate peacefully into civilian life. So it was the power inverse of the OT. Cool reversal I think. Luke, Han, and Leia have spent the last 30 years rebuilding the government and Jedi Order in order to promote peace through diplomacy instead of force (unlike the tyrannical rule of the Empire) and when the First Order attacks the New Republic our trio sends our new heroes (in Rey, Finn, and Poe) to face off with this new immediate threat, rather than go on the front lines themselves due to age and wanting to find more diplomatic solutions for long term peace. This way our old heroes are able to be involved but eventually bow out of the story and pass the lightsaber as it were to the new generation to save the day. You could use the original trio as a means to give exposition on what has transpired in the last three decades and show how they have grown because they have transitioned from the freedom fighters of the past into the leaders of today.

I agree with a lot of the assessments of the Empire not needing much of an explanation in the OT. It was very clear in those films. The Empire ruled the galaxy with an iron fist and the Rebellion was there to try and overthrow them and reestablish a peaceful government. Very cut and dry.

Ultimately we got what we got, but I just think it could have been done better if the script was thought through more.

They are Resisting the rise of the First Order.

It's quite simple the Empire surrendered at the Battle of Jakku. The New Republic didn't conquer the remain worlds, that had one time been Old Republic/Empire. They left the option open for them to join.

The New Republic is clearly a shell of its former self. The fact that they are completely decimated when the Hosnian system, the capitol(not Coruscant) speaks volumes. I don't know where the idea is coming from that the New Republic is some supreme power in the galaxy. And naturally they don't want to have a large military. They don't want to exchange one government with a large standing military for another one. A large standing military inhibits freedom, and would frighten other systems off from joining.

 

[Potroclo]

I think you guys are really hitting on the crux of the problem with the new trilogy, aside from the fact they entered into it without a mapped out story and allowed the individual directors to craft their own chapters.
The original trilogy was at its core, a political story. There was an established government that was consumed by its own corruption and a rebellion fighting to restore peace and justice. Pretty simple, and it reflected the political climate when the movies were made. The new trilogy has none of that. There are two sides the audience is presented with nomenclature that doesn't accurately represent their positions, and to be honest, doesn't make sense.

It does reflect the current political climate though

 

[Psab keel]

They are Resisting the rise of the First Order.

It's quite simple the Empire surrendered at the Battle of Jakku. The New Republic didn't conquer the remain worlds, that had one time been Old Republic/Empire. They left the option open for them to join.

The New Republic is clearly a shell of its former self. The fact that they are completely decimated when the Hosnian system, the capitol(not Coruscant) speaks volumes. I don't know where the idea is coming from that the New Republic is some supreme power in the galaxy. And naturally they don't want to have a large military. They don't want to exchange one government with a large standing military for another one. A large standing military inhibits freedom, and would frighten other systems off from joining.

See in your response lies the problem because I'm assuming that all of the information you gave me was from a book but wasn't in the finished cut of the film. It may have been hinted at, but it was so vague that none of it was clear enough for me to understand just by watching the movie. There are other issues I could discuss regarding a soverign power and the necessity of having an army to defend that sovereignty and how this relates to the GFFA but I won't digress into that because that's a whole other issue that's not too relevant to the story when the film never explored that at all.

The term Resistance still doesn't fit and was merely a way for J.J. to try and basically recreate the Rebellion. Is it really Resisting anything or is it just reactionary to the threat of the First Order? It should have been called the Reaction, but you can't call it that because that sounds ridiculous. If anything this further proves the disconnect between the ST and the OT and why comparisons trying to parallel the Empire with the First Order and the Rebellion with the Resistance are not exactly accurate because their relationship to each other is different.

Thematically I understand that these factions were supposed to be the natural progression of the war to preserve peace in the galaxy/ rule the galaxy in tyranny. But these ideas while on the surface seem similar to what came before, the specifics make them too dissimilar to make an accurate comparison and I stress this yet again, a little more back story establishing these factions and what happened in the 30 year gap between the end of ROTJ and TFA would have been helpful.

If J.J. wanted to explore the complex power dynamic that was taking place in the wake of the Empire's defeat, that would be one thing, but he clearly didn't . He was intent on trying to hamifistedly recreate the dynamic of the OT conflict which doesn't work 30 plus years later when the entire structure of the galaxy was shifted forever by the end of Return of the Jedi when the Alliance toppled the Empire.

In reality and in fiction there would be a convoluted power vaccum where the dominant powers are still being overthrown by the newly strengthened victor and the messy rebuilding process could have made for very interesting nuanced and deep storytelling. I'm not faulting JJ for wanting to skip all that and just have it be a fun adventure movie, but my opinion is that a more capable writer could have brought the story forward in a more meaningful way rather than just rehash everything. Which to me is the real tragedy of these new films because there was so much potential there had it been handled better.

This too plays into the nostalgia argument in that JJ's style is often used to evoke nostalgia to play on your emotions to get you to like his story, rather than developing deeper connections with the characters and plot. It's the reason why most of his movies don't have the lasting power of others and upon revisiting them they don't hold up as well because they are built on flash rather than substance.

I mean movies are entertainment as they should be, but when you are tasked with continuing what is arguably the most successful saga in film history then there is an expectation that they will be done justice, especially when you're bringing back the characters who people loved for 40 years.

I can't fault JJ completely and I'm sure he sincerely did what he thought was best for the story but I don't think he was the right person for the job at least from a writing perpective. As a director I think he's more than capable by knowing how to elicit certain emotional cues from the audience, but those often feel hollow upon repeat viewing because they are structured on a weak script.

 

[Joek3rr]

See in your response lies the problem because I'm assuming that all of the information you gave me was from a book but wasn't in the finished cut of the film. It may have been hinted at, but it was so vague that none of it was clear enough for me to understand just by watching the movie. There are other issues I could discuss regarding a soverign power and the necessity of having an army to defend that sovereignty and how this relates to the GFFA but I won't digress into that because that's a whole other issue that's not too relevant to the story when the film never explored that at all.

The term Resistance still doesn't fit and was merely a way for J.J. to try and basically recreate the Rebellion. Is it really Resisting anything or is it just reactionary to the threat of the First Order? It should have been called the Reaction, but you can't call it that because that sounds ridiculous. If anything this further proves the disconnect between the ST and the OT and why comparisons trying to parallel the Empire with the First Order and the Rebellion with the Resistance are not exactly accurate because their relationship to each other is different.

Thematically I understand that these factions were supposed to be the natural progression of the war to preserve peace in the galaxy/ rule the galaxy in tyranny. But these ideas while on the surface seem similar to what came before, the specifics make them too dissimilar to make an accurate comparison and I stress this yet again, a little more back story establishing these factions and what happened in the 30 year gap between the end of ROTJ and TFA would have been helpful.

If J.J. wanted to explore the complex power dynamic that was taking place in the wake of the Empire's defeat, that would be one thing, but he clearly didn't . He was intent on trying to hamifistedly recreate the dynamic of the OT conflict which doesn't work 30 plus years later when the entire structure of the galaxy was shifted forever by the end of Return of the Jedi when the Alliance toppled the Empire.

In reality and in fiction there would be a convoluted power vaccum where the dominant powers are still being overthrown by the newly strengthened victor and the messy rebuilding process could have made for very interesting nuanced and deep storytelling. I'm not faulting JJ for wanting to skip all that and just have it be a fun adventure movie, but my opinion is that a more capable writer could have brought the story forward in a more meaningful way rather than just rehash everything. Which to me is the real tragedy of these new films because there was so much potential there had it been handled better.

This too plays into the nostalgia argument in that JJ's style is often used to evoke nostalgia to play on your emotions to get you to like his story, rather than developing deeper connections with the characters and plot. It's the reason why most of his movies don't have the lasting power of others and upon revisiting them they don't hold up as well because they are built on flash rather than substance.

I mean movies are entertainment as they should be, but when you are tasked with continuing what is arguably the most successful saga in film history then there is an expectation that they will be done justice, especially when you're bringing back the characters who people loved for 40 years.

I can't fault JJ completely and I'm sure he sincerely did what he thought was best for the story but I don't think he was the right person for the job.

Some of it is in books. But actually a friend of mine and I kinda guessed a lot of this stuff over some fast food after TFA. The books just confirmed it.

I don't know if was intentional or not. But the political story of the ST mirrors the time between WW1 and WW2. After WW1 there was major disarmament by most countries. Standing armies are just plain expensive. And the great depression had come along. Most countries couldn't afford to keep them. Plus there was this hope that if no one really had an army, no one would want to fight. But then Hitler came along and started breaking treaties, and main European powers talked themselves into apathy. And that Hitler wasn't that much of a threat. Heck, there were certain British politicians, even with France being overrun, that were willing to kowtow if it meant staying out of another bloody war. I see Leia and her Resistance as being very similar to Winston Churchill, trying to rouse the politicians to stand up and fight.

 

[Darth Fetty]

So if you can make assumptions about the Empire. Why not the First Order? If we don't see any political figures then we could assume it's a military dictatorship.(which it is, remember the First Order was inspired by the what if the Nazi's had started over in Argentina) The New Republic is clearly a shell of its former self. We can assume this, because Coruscant isn't the Capitol anymore. And the Republic is decimated when the Hosnian system is destroyed. We can also assume the First Order has citizens. Just look at the number of Stormtroopers. And all the ships.

Here's why I can't make the same assumptions... The Galatic Empire is an empire. It has "empire" in its name. Again, we clearly know what it is in addition to the other details scattered around the films. It is a government, and we can assume it has many basic aspects of a government including citizens to support it (voluntarily or involuntarily).

But the First Order is what?

Empire = empire, Rebel Alliance = rebellion, Galactic Republic = republic, Sepratists = separatist movement, First Order = ???

Do we really know that it is a military dictatorship? (based on what's presented in the movies) Or is it a ridiculously well-funded rebellion fighting against the New Republic? If I remember correctly, I think Finn had some line about them taking children to train them as stormtroopers. It could also be some type of brainwashing cult of kidnappers or something. Maybe a well organized mercenary group with some secret ideological sponsors behind it? We don't know. There are too many open doors and too little context.

There was a beautiful simplicity in Rebellion vs. Empire, but now we have too many loosely defined factions with indiscernible motivations.

 

[Psab keel]

Some of it is in books. But actually a friend of mine and I kinda guessed a lot of this stuff over some fast food after TFA. The books just confirmed it.

I don't know if was intentional or not. But the political story of the ST mirrors the time between WW1 and WW2. After WW1 there was major disarmament by most countries. Standing armies are just plain expensive. And the great depression had come along. Most countries couldn't afford to keep them. Plus there was this hope that if no one really had an army, no one would want to fight. But then Hitler came along and started breaking treaties, and main European powers talked themselves into apathy. And that Hitler wasn't that much of a threat. Heck, there were certain British politicians, even with France being overrun, that were willing to kowtow if it meant staying out of another bloody war. I see Leia and her Resistance as being very similar to Winston Churchill, trying to rouse the politicians to stand up and fight.

You see that right there is a much more dynamic and interesting concept than what they gave us and the historical parallels to our history that make this fictional war so relatable to our understanding by subtext.

Your understanding of these new films seems to stem mostly from ancillary material and conclusions you made based on the vague premises presented in the film and not so much what is actually in the film itself. I don't fault you for that and honestly I would have much rather seen on film what you are talking about because it interests me far more than what they gave us.

It's also a credit to how a dedicated fan like you could come up with a FAR superior story than what these hack directors came up with. It also shows that despite the claims they make that they are fans, it's clear they don't understand it the way someone like you does.

 

[d_jedi1]

So one day I was doing some Google searching for how long Luke was supposed to be on Dagobah. I found a reddit thread where someone did the math, useing the speed of the Falcon's backup hyperdrive. They came to the conclusion that Luke was on Dagobah for 5 to 7 days. Which makes sense to me, cause I highly doubt the Falcon would have food for over year. But anywho....

I need to go do some digging but between the materials I've had in my library for years and a fairly recent clarification from Pablo Hidalgo, a MINIMUM of six months.
Also... what backup hyperdrive? Do you mean the regular sublight drive that at max speed hits .5 past lightspeed?

 

[Inquisitor Peregrinus]

One of the other things West Ends Games pulled out of, um... the æther. Because if their hyperdrive had failed, even at high percentages of the speed of light, the Falcon would still take years if not decades to reach any near stars, they gave it a backup hyperdrive so they could get there in hours or days, as it seemed to them that's how long the trip took and how long Luke was training. It was not based on anything in the movie or its script or novelization.

 

[sztriki]

I think you guys are really hitting on the crux of the problem with the new trilogy, aside from the fact they entered into it without a mapped out story and allowed the individual directors to craft their own chapters.
The original trilogy was at its core, a political story. There was an established government that was consumed by its own corruption and a rebellion fighting to restore peace and justice. Pretty simple, and it reflected the political climate when the movies were made. The new trilogy has none of that. There are two sides the audience is presented with nomenclature that doesn't accurately represent their positions, and to be honest, doesn't make sense.

I beg to differ here, I think the strength of SW is its simplicity that contemporary critics called banality. It’s a tale as old as time set in space with very basic political backdrop and that’s why it was a big hit in the time of political corruption, disillusionment over Vietnam etc. That’s another thing the prequels got wrong.
Totally agree on the first part re no plan and every director doing whatever they fancied.

So if you can make assumptions about the Empire. Why not the First Order?

Because we have no idea what the First Order is. Evil Galactic Empire. There, bamm, we know what that is. We don’t know of the First Order is just those couple of ships and few hundred Stormtroopers with their secret planet or if they actually rule a certain fraction of the galaxy, do they have systems that are loyal followers, etc.
OT kept it really simple: Empire that’s the government vs a band of Rebels. Visually very simple but telling too, Empire is slick, clean and regimented, Rebels are mish mash fleet, dirty ships, etc. First Order are visibly not underdogs cuz they look like they just got their army from the Apple shop, but there’s still a New Republic and apparently the First Order “rose” and not “carried on from the Empire”.

Now what's really interesting about this. Is when we first meet the Emperor, he's using the Force. But he's never said to be a Sith. The whole Jedi vs Sith thing wasn't introduced until TPM. Prior to that Vader was referred as being a Jedi.

And why not introduce a Force user that's not a Jedi or Sith? The comics, TV shows, books, and games have them. So why not show that to the film audience now?

Does anyone have an issue with Snoke not being a Sith? Genuine question.

I was answering two different questions.

Ah gotcha, sorry.

They are Resisting the rise of the First Order.

It's quite simple the Empire surrendered at the Battle of Jakku. The New Republic didn't conquer the remain worlds, that had one time been Old Republic/Empire. They left the option open for them to join.

Yea, add this to the opening crawl and we know what’s up. The story makes sense, it’s just that it’s not really told.

For the record I’m personally not nearly as bothered by the lack of exposition as I make it out.