Star Wars: The Last Jedi (Post-release)

[jlee562]

When people describe this movie as being "bold" or "fresh", etc., I truly need someone to explain to me what the hell they are referring to. Every single thing about this movie was a poorly executed rehash of Empire and Jedi. Some scenes are even framed identically with nearly verbatim dialog. I truly don't understand what people see as original or bold here, with the exception of wasting Luke as a character. I really just think it's a case of the emperor having no clothes on, and some people are just marveling at the fine weave of his supposed robes. It's mystifying.

After reading a bunch of reactions here and elsewhere, I'm tending to believe that with this film in particular, one's reaction depends on what you bring with yourself going into it. And I know that's true to an extent for every movie ever made...

I can say for myself, that I'm in the opposite camp from you. I felt like I truly needed someone to explain to me why they felt Luke was wasted. Another thing that many folks have a problem with is the lightsaber toss. For me, I LOVED that moment, even if it caught me really off guard. It's the first way the the film shows you that it's going to subvert your expectations. Maybe if I had some more personal reverence for the Graflex, I might feel differently. The way in which Johnson subverts the audience's expectations is definitely something new in SW storytelling. JJ certainly didn't play into that, he did the opposite. He copped the narrative beats from ANH.

The silent moment after Admiral Holdo's hyperspace sacrifice is certainly not a cinematic device used in SW before.

I respect that the space-chase plot didn't work for some, but for me, the plot did work to build tension and put the Resistance in real peril (I mean, how many people are left, like 100, if that?), and that's not something that I feel has been really properly been done since ANH.

And as I said a few pages back, I really appreciate the approach Johnson took that mirrors the genre and stylistic mashup approach that Lucas used originally. IMHO this is a bolder directorial choice than consciously looking to build the same beats as JJ did with TFA. The Rashomon-style flashbacks impels the viewer to really examine the tension between Luke and Ben. Maybe you feel sympathy for Ben, who might have been murdered while he slept. Maybe you feel sympathy for Luke, who feels the burden of the galaxy on his shoulders. Although Kylo is ostensibly positioned as the antagonist, his arc in this movie makes his motivations for the trilogy much more clear. And this is coming from someone who was less than impressed with the Kylo Ren character in TFA. I think Adam Driver builds Kylo into a much more imposing villain in this movie, even if he is still brash and impulsive.

Question for you: how did you feel about TFA's balance of nostalgia and new-ness? Obviously a central problem for the new films (and new ST, etc) is making it "familiar enough" without it being a straight re-hash. I tend to think anything that anybody does is going to miss this mark for somebody.....

 

[CT1138]

Can Star Wars recover?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottm...worldwide-can-star-wars-recover/#657657e6146e

Yes.

Next question.

 

[doctorDWwho]

When people describe this movie as being "bold" or "fresh", etc., I truly need someone to explain to me what the hell they are referring to. Every single thing about this movie was a poorly executed rehash of Empire and Jedi. Some scenes are even framed identically with nearly verbatim dialog. I truly don't understand what people see as original or bold here, with the exception of wasting Luke as a character. I really just think it's a case of the emperor having no clothes on, and some people are just marveling at the fine weave of his supposed robes. It's mystifying.

Agreed, to a point. Rian Johnson set up a smoke screen of "new" and "wacky" elements to cover a story that was as much of a copy as TFA was.

 

[dascoyne]

All I'm going to add to this discussion is this: I've been on this ride before. I'm a 51 year old fan who saw the original film in theaters in 1977 and who actually likes the prequels (a lot). I've defended them plenty. I've heard every argument there is against them and, conversely, I've MADE every argument possible in support. And speaking from experience, all I can say to those defending TLJ is this: Good. Luck. It all sounds very familiar. Whether you're right or not isn't the issue. You can spend the next 20 years passionately pounding the keyboard trying to convince "the haters" that they're wrong and at best you may help move the needle slightly one way or the other. The backlash against this movie is real. I saw it in the theater where I sat, I heard it in the lobby walking out, I've heard it from friends, I've been reading about it, and seeing it in YouTube videos. Don't delude yourself in thinking it's not real or that it's just a few whiny loudmouths who "don't get it." It's not. What we're seeing doesn't happen if its just a few people or that all of them are being unreasonable. Believe me, I spent years thinking that eventually the hate against the PT would dissipate and eventually people would come to recognize that their initial opinions were too harsh. Not gonna happen. People's reactions get baked-in pretty quickly. Opinions can move back and forth slightly -- TFA has definitely lost support over the years -- but when people aren't happy it's a much steeper hill to climb to convince them that they're wrong than it is the other way around. It's usually a fool's errand. Trust me, from one fool to another. If you're committed to defending this film, go for it, but be prepared for decades of frustrating whack-a-mole. I'm not saying you need to change your opinion or that you need to start hating the movie. I'm not even saying you're wrong. Just know that this isn't going away. It's probably going to get worse. And you may be thinking, "Yeah, but my arguments are really good and the PT and TLJ are apples and oranges and I know in my heart..." Yeah, yeah, yeah. Been there. Hey, don't take my word for it. Do what you gotta do. But don't say I didn't warn you. Oh, and welcome to Hell.

I, too, am 51. I think that was the perfect age to have seen Star Wars in 1977.

There was nothing more disruptive to my childhood than RotJ and that's where you and I diverge. Today I'm not as bothered by inconsistencies in tone or concept because RotJ already set the precedent for corrupting Star Wars that still remains unparalleled. While much can be said about the new films they still have not been blasphemously awful as RotJ ... IMO.

The immutable truth is that different fans get different things out of Star Wars. What's meaningful to me isn't necessarily going to be meaningful to you or anybody else, for that matter, no matter what their age.

There’s really no point to arguing about how good or bad TLJ might be because it’s not a logical debate. I wouldn’t even bother to try and convince you to like TLJ. It makes no more sense than you trying convincing me that RotJ isn’t, by FAR, the worst insult to franchise - even today.

 

[Zuiun]

So I keep hearing that the first order couldn't catch up to the resistance ships because they are smaller and lighters.....but isn't everything in space suppose to be weightless so it shouldn't matter.

Weight is not the same as mass.

 

[JediMichael]

Weight is not the same as mass.

Yes, several have corrected me on this.

 

[DarthLee]

Weight is not the same as mass.

Remember... The Star Destroyer, never caught up to Tantive VI.... or did it?...hmmmm

 

[Zuiun]

Look at the speed of Star Destroyers in ANH or ESB. Literally chasing the Falcon in sublight speeds and keeping it on the run. So yeah, this slow speed chase in TLJ is absolutely ridiculous. Not to mention the fact that the Supremacy has tractor beams, ion cannons and probably 100 squadrons of TIE fighters.

Why do people keep insisting this was a SLOW speed chase? I've seen the film twice now and either I missed where someone in the film said all of the ships were traveling slowly... OR IT WASN'T THERE.

The factor was DISTANCE, not SPEED. The First Order explicitly says that the Resistance ships are out of effective range of their weapons. Also, being smaller and having less mass, the Resistance ships can continue to increase their distance until they run out of fuel.

The clear indication is that all ships involved are going as fast as they possibly can at sub-light.

Can we please end this "slow speed chase" nonsense?

- - - Updated - - -

Remember... The Star Destroyer, never caught up to Tantive VI.... or did it?...hmmmm

The Star Destroyer also damaged the Tantive's drive, slowing it down, before it caught up to it.

 

[CT1138]

Why do people keep insisting this was a SLOW speed chase? I've seen the film twice now and either I missed where someone in the film said all of the ships were traveling slowly... OR IT WASN'T THERE.

The factor was DISTANCE, not SPEED. The First Order explicitly says that the Resistance ships are out of effective range of their weapons. Also, being smaller and having less mass, the Resistance ships can continue to increase their distance until they run out of fuel.

The clear indication is that all ships involved are going as fast as they possibly can at sub-light.

Can we please end this "slow speed chase" nonsense?

This. There was nothing in space for the two ships to compare their velocity to. If we were to place, say a field of trees, beneath the ships, you'd see that they'd be going extremely fast.

 

[DarthLee]

Can we please end this "slow speed chase" nonsense?

- - - Updated - - -



The Star Destroyer also damaged the Tantive's drive, slowing it down, before it caught up to it.

Seemed like the same distance to me



Red alert

 

[Zuiun]

Remember... The Star Destroyer, never caught up to Tantive VI.... or did it?...hmmmm

You know, now that you brought up the opening of A New Hope... how, exactly, did the Star Destroyer find the Tantive IV? At the end of Rogue One, we see the Tantive jump to hyperspace. Hyperspace tracking is, presumably, not YET a thing. And why did the Tantive IV drop out of hyperspace anyway? Wouldn't the opening of A New Hope make more sense if hyperspace was never involved?

Why did people like Rogue One again?

 

[egosheep]

Why do people keep insisting this was a SLOW speed chase? I've seen the film twice now and either I missed where someone in the film said all of the ships were traveling slowly... OR IT WASN'T THERE.

The factor was DISTANCE, not SPEED. The First Order explicitly says that the Resistance ships are out of effective range of their weapons. Also, being smaller and having less mass, the Resistance ships can continue to increase their distance until they run out of fuel.

The clear indication is that all ships involved are going as fast as they possibly can at sub-light.

Can we please end this "slow speed chase" nonsense?

Sorry, but it's just poor writing. Even if the Mon Cal Cruiser could outrun the Supremacy, why would it be able to outrun the 3-4 other Star Destroyers in it's own class? And why wouldn't Hux be sending fighters, TIE bombers, and boarding shuttles? There's a crew of over 2 million people on Snoke's ship, why the hell are they holding back? Kylo blew up their fighters in their main hangar as well as their command bridge... and then they retreat? Why would losing a few squadrons of fighters matter to Hux or Snoke when you have the Resistance on the ropes and you have probably 30-40 squadrons at your disposal?

Honestly, are we really arguing that this Resistance cruiser, minus a bridge and hangar, is outclassing the biggest ship we have seen in 8 movies?

 

[CT1138]

Seemed like the same distance to me

View attachment 781436

Red alert

Except that the Supremacy and the Raddus are both far larger than either of those vehicles, so the perceived distance between them is larger. Where as the chase in ANH was probably a kilometer of two apart, the Supremacy and the Raddus were a couple hundred thousand kilometers apart at the least.

 

[DarthLee]

Why did people like Rogue One again?

One word.. "many Bothans died to bring us this information"..., that we really never figured out about

 

[Enigmatic]

One word.. "many Bothans died to bring us this information"..., that we really never figured out about

Wasn't the Bothan sacrifice in RoTJ?

 

[PantheraGem]

One word.. "many Bothans died to bring us this information"..., that we really never figured out about

Bothans.... 2nd Death Star. RotJ.

 

[Mr Webber]

If you try hard enough you can find a positive in even the worst situation.



Perfect for the Officer K blaster grip I`m about to start work on.

 

[Zuiun]

Sorry, but it's just poor writing. Even if the Mon Cal Cruiser could outrun the Supremacy, why would it be able to outrun the 3-4 other Star Destroyers in it's own class? And why wouldn't Hux be sending fighters, TIE bombers, and boarding shuttles? There's a crew of over 2 million people on Snoke's ship, why the hell are they holding back? Kylo blew up their fighters in their main hangar as well as their command bridge... and then they retreat? Why would losing a few squadrons of fighters matter to Hux or Snoke when you have the Resistance on the ropes and you have probably 30-40 squadrons at your disposal?

Why do you classify it as poor writing? I'm honestly curious.

The film tells us clearly what is going on: 1) The Resistance ships have enough fuel for one jump to hyperspace, which they can't do because they are being tracked. So they must try to buy time and outrun the First Order at sub-light speed. 2) The First Order came out of light speed too far away for the effective range of their heavy weapons. 3) The First Order *could* send TIE Fighters in, but the Resistance ships still have THEIR heavy weapons. 4) Holdo's plan was to buy time (and distance) to try to sneak smaller ships away to Crait and let the First Order believe they destroyed all of the Resistance ships.

Knowing that the Resistance literally can't go anywhere, the siege tactic of waiting them out actually makes logical sense. By all of the information the First Order has, they can destroy the Resistance with little to no casualties. This is VERY clear in the film.

I will grant you that, historically, the Empire / First Order mentality has not been to preserve individual troops, but even so, none of this scenario struck me as "poor writing." In my view, both sides had logical reasons for behaving the way they did. If you saw it differently, I'd like to know why.

 

[DarthLee]

Wasn't the Bothan sacrifice in RoTJ?

I thought the Bothans were smugglers that were relied on twice..for both Death Stars.. Rogue one didnt explain this too well...

But my bad... could be wrong

 

[CT1138]

Sorry, but it's just poor writing. Even if the Mon Cal Cruiser could outrun the Supremacy, why would it be able to outrun the 3-4 other Star Destroyers in it's own class? And why wouldn't Hux be sending fighters, TIE bombers, and boarding shuttles? There's a crew of over 2 million people on Snoke's ship, why the hell are they holding back? Kylo blew up their fighters in their main hangar as well as their command bridge... and then they retreat? Why would losing a few squadrons of fighters matter to Hux or Snoke when you have the Resistance on the ropes and you have probably 30-40 squadrons at your disposal?

Honestly, are we really arguing that this Resistance cruiser, minus a bridge and hangar, is outclassing the biggest ship we have seen in 8 movies?

Shhhhhh.... You'll be demoted for sure with that kind of tactical thinking.