Star Wars The Acolyte (tv series)
- Thread starter ghostryder
- Start date
- Status
modelcitizen
Sr Member
lol yeah we just went with it didn't have or need some erroneous "youtube star" to "Explained".
Bloop
Sr Member
I finished the 2nd episode. Still not sure about the series. A lot of it feels in the vein of all the animated series. The big fight scene in the 2nd ep felt like it was trying to be The Matrix - the fight choreo, the direction, even the score sounded the same at times (the dissonant horn cues in particular). I just read that Headland said all these "Force Fu" fights were "inspired" by The Matrix, and it's also why Carrie-Anne Moss is in it. I don't know if it fits the Star Wars style though. It feels more like fully ripping off the Wachowskis than just being the "inspiration." I mean, I loved the fights in The Matrix, and I think you can draw on them for a martial arts fight scene, but it feels too on the nose. There's a difference between inspiration and just plain copying. Though I think the idea of the Jedi being only defensive in these fights does work in the context of Star Wars, and it worked well in The Matrix. I still think full hand-to-hand combat from Jedi Knights doesn't fit in the Star Wars universe very well.
Last edited:
kalkamel
Master Member
On the deconstruction/'The Last Jedi' stuff -
We've all seen versions of this stunt before in other franchises. The new "Joker" movies made him the protagonist. They made Thomas Wayne into a villain.
And that was fun, right? But it's fun as a sidetrack episode. Not as the main track of the franchise. We don't want the studio to start making new Batman movies where Michael Keaton or Christian Bale are bad and Nicholson/Ledger are sympathetic.
Who wants to watch Indiana Jones lose his credentials because he's smashing up ancient temples and selling treasures to foreign museums? Who wants to watch Chief Brody getting an attack of PTSD and failing to protect Amity from a killer shark? Who wants to watch Max Rocketansky taking his neutral loner attitude too far and allowing a warlord to slaughter innocent people?
Who wants to see traumatized Luke Skywalker start killing teenagers at the first sign of bad vibes . . . err, wait, they literally did that and fans hated it.
This severe deconstruction stuff is for sidetracks. It's great for a Saturday Night Live skit. But it doesn't belong in the real mainline franchise. Not in a big dose.
Is Luke flawed? Is Yoda flawed?
Sure. Everyone is.
Should we explore those flaws?
Maybe. Carefully. With trepidation. It's gonna be a mixed bag at best. It's a fine line between "humanizing" versus tipping over into deconstruction.
I have zero faith in Kennedy & Headland to handle this stuff well. Their track record speaks for itself. They are remodeling George Lucas's old house, and they are knocking down walls without understanding which ones are load-bearing.
We've all seen versions of this stunt before in other franchises. The new "Joker" movies made him the protagonist. They made Thomas Wayne into a villain.
And that was fun, right? But it's fun as a sidetrack episode. Not as the main track of the franchise. We don't want the studio to start making new Batman movies where Michael Keaton or Christian Bale are bad and Nicholson/Ledger are sympathetic.
Who wants to watch Indiana Jones lose his credentials because he's smashing up ancient temples and selling treasures to foreign museums? Who wants to watch Chief Brody getting an attack of PTSD and failing to protect Amity from a killer shark? Who wants to watch Max Rocketansky taking his neutral loner attitude too far and allowing a warlord to slaughter innocent people?
Who wants to see traumatized Luke Skywalker start killing teenagers at the first sign of bad vibes . . . err, wait, they literally did that and fans hated it.
This severe deconstruction stuff is for sidetracks. It's great for a Saturday Night Live skit. But it doesn't belong in the real mainline franchise. Not in a big dose.
Is Luke flawed? Is Yoda flawed?
Sure. Everyone is.
Should we explore those flaws?
Maybe. Carefully. With trepidation. It's gonna be a mixed bag at best. It's a fine line between "humanizing" versus tipping over into deconstruction.
I have zero faith in Kennedy & Headland to handle this stuff well. Their track record speaks for itself. They are remodeling George Lucas's old house, and they are knocking down walls without understanding which ones are load-bearing.
Last edited:
Nope... My EXACT quote was
"You can look at all these events through the nostalgic eyes we all had when we were younger, but to do that, I personally would have to subscribe to truth being fluid & changeable based on a "Point of View". Now I don't watch those movies, hating these characters like it seems I'm being characterized as doing, but as an adult I can see what they did."
(Go back & check. I haven't edited the original post)
but hey, why let the TRUTH of what I said get in the way?
All points have been made loud & clear. I got it. Everyone's made their point & it went EXACTLY how I thought it would.
I also told someone that I wasn't going to waste my energy, but then did, so, we'll just chalk that up to another moment of weakness.
Y'all enjoy.
CadetTK2386
Sr Member
Except Luke Skywalker didn't start killing traumatized teenagers at the first sign of bad vibes.
The Last Jedi presents the same incident, the night the Temple fell, from 3 points of view, Luke's, Kylo's, and the the Truth, in the style of Rashomon.
-Luke's initial version is that he did nothing wrong.
-Kylo's version is what you describe, that Luke truly tried to kill him for no real reason or for the barest tiniest hint of growing darkness. Additionally, the picture every loves to use of "not my Luke" or "Scary Uncle" is from this version, from Kylo's point of view, which means it is not actually what happened or Luke looked like at this moment.
-Then we finally get the whole story when Rey confronts Luke:
Luke felt growing darkness all through his training, finally went out to take a deep dive in his head, and saw a vision of a terrible future of his friends and family and the Universe at large in terrible danger all because of Kylo, and for a brief, half second, panicked, tuned on his lightsaber, immediately realized he was overacting and this wasn't the right course, was going to shut down his lightsaber and and work this out in a better way, but by then Kylo had woken up, saw him, and also panicked and freaked out.
Luke had a bad vision and reacted impulsively, just like in Empire, and felt that his family and friends were threatened and felt the impulse to lash out, just like on the Death Star in Jedi went he "hulked out" on Vader and was swinging for the fences even when Vader had stumbled down to the ground. Except, this time Luke actually had caught himself before he acted, unlike on the Death Star where it took until he cut off Vader's hand.
I really didn't think the whole Same Story From Different Points of View thing was that complicated, but it does seem like a lot of folks on Social Media, and even here, really do seem to struggle with it, taking Kylo's version as the accurate and true version, and using Kylo's version of events and the associated imagery with it when talking about how the film sees and treats Luke. No, that's how Kylo sees and treats Luke.
CopperRevan
Master Member
Sorry, i was referring to your quote in the light of what you said to Psab, which was this:
"The beauty of it was that, as I got older & matured, so did the story. For a space fantasy, it was incredibly deep in areas, & as I grew, I was able to see the emotional struggles that the characters were going through. It was growing up WITH me, part of that was realizing that even my childhood heroes could be & were, human & capable of making mistakes in actions & judgement."
Here is what i said:
"I don't need the story to grow with me...the story is complete. You admitted to Psab that it grows with you as you grew, well you're admitted to truth being fluid for you so you have already subscribed to it. What I'm saying is the story is the story and it never changes... "
Putting your 2 statements together in my mind caused a contradiction, thus my response...I guess i could be confusing it? But surely i'm not trying to take you out of context and i clearly admitted we see things differently...then admitting to poking fun with the last scenario i made up concerning Owen...
Since you thought the conversation would go exactly like you thought it would, then why did you invite us to respond to you?
Here is what you asked:
"Well... I'm the one that brought up Yoda, & that was based solely on what's shown on the screen, so please enlighten me as to where I was wrong?"
I'm really confused...you invite a response, then we respond, you make your points, i try to get some clarity about what you are saying and then because we disagree you, you "wasted your energy" had a "moment of weakness"? In my opinion, you seem very disgruntled and angry. Sorry to cause that but if you don't want to have a discussion or response, don't ask for it then? If i totally agreed with you, would you still feel this way?
Anyways, I agree ...all points have been made loud and clear. Sorry if i was the one who confused things...it was like after 1Am, i can't even remember. Maybe we need a curfew...atleast, i do...lol
Last edited:
kalkamel
Master Member
The way i interpret that scene is kind of what a Cop would do. Cops don't draw their Guns just because, they have protocols they follow under certain circumstances. Its not just all or nothing.
Jodo
Master Member
“This is getting out of hand. Now there are two of them.”
CadetTK2386
Sr Member
I thought the same, and think this is the perfect analogy. The actual sentiment is more along the lines that a Jedi should not or does not draw their lightsaber unless they are willing or prepared to take a life, not that they are actually in some way required to kill someone every time they turn on their lightsaber.
That fact is that this quote of "A Jedi doesn’t draw her lightsaber unless she intends to kill,” that everyone is taking as Law is Mae saying that to Indara, Mae the primary antagonist at the moment who has an axe to grind against these four Jedi in particular, Mae who is not and was not trained as Jedi, unlike Osha, Mae who we are shown has a very negative perception of the Jedi. So, in her mind the idea that a Jedi should not resort to pulling out their lightsaber in a confrontation unless they are prepared or willing to take a life has been twisted to a Jedi does not take out their lightsaber unless they intend to or want to kill. Mae also might be goading, mocking, or taunting Indara about the event in the past that set all these events in motion.
As for Yord taking out his Lightsaber against the shop keeper, again it isn't a plot hole that he pulled it out in that scenario because, again, this rule of Jedi not taking out their lightsaber unless they intend to kill is from a line of dialogue from the antagonist who is trying to paint the Jedi as inept, corrupt, or wrong. In this case the Police Officer's Firearm analogy is very fitting. Anything even political or whatever aside, the fact is that Police Officers are human and some Officers are more wiling to unholster their service weapon faster than others, while some will rest their hands on it first, and some go their entire career without every unholstering their service weapon on Duty. There is a duty and responsibility with drawing their weapon, and some take it more serious than others.
Yord obviously subscribes to the theory of utilizing his service weapon to take control of a situation and establish his authority. He understands that his weapon can take a life and is prepared and willing to do so in the execution of his duty, and relies on others to also know and understand that, and as such uses that to take control of situations. That's his personality. Neither right or wrong, just how he carries out his job.
Last edited:
NakedMoleRat
Legendary Member
I did notice the scene where he uses the lightsaber to light up the cave. I don’t remember the sound of the blade while it was active. And it almost looked like an FX saber without much CG animation added.
Well said.
I agree 100%… I’ve never understood why people lose it over Luke having a momentary lapse, and correcting.
Also,
I did like how this scene was approached from all angles, it reminded me of this:
NakedMoleRat
Legendary Member
Except, her name was Schmi
- Status
Similar threads
