Star Wars: The Last Jedi (Post-release)

What did you think of Star Wars: The Last Jedi?

  • It was great. Loved it. Don't miss it at the theaters.

    Votes: 154 26.6%
  • It was good. Liked it very much. Worth the theater visit.

    Votes: 135 23.4%
  • It was okay. Not too pleased with it. Could watch it at the cinema once or wait for home video.

    Votes: 117 20.2%
  • It was disappointing. Watch it on home video instead.

    Votes: 70 12.1%
  • It was bad. Don't waste your time with it.

    Votes: 102 17.6%

  • Total voters
    578
people who like TLJ don't care about legit criticisms. They love the movie BECAUSE it is broken.

Just realize, no matter how sincere and well you articulate any of TLJ's terrible plot holes, the people who liked it either: won't admit to it, claim they can't see it, or use an absurd non-comparisson to compare from another movie.

It's like trying to explain math to someone who has already decided math it dumb. You can waste your time explaining numbers, and values, and how it all works, but they don't care. They will act as if they objectively listened and made a decision, but their decision was made before you even tried to explain it.

Like explaining to someone in an abusive relationship that it is abusive, their common sense and logic goes out the window the harder you try.
 
people who like TLJ don't care about legit criticisms. They love the movie BECAUSE it is broken.

Just realize, no matter how sincere and well you articulate any of TLJ's terrible plot holes, the people who liked it either: won't admit to it, claim they can't see it, or use an absurd non-comparisson to compare from another movie.

It's like trying to explain math to someone who has already decided math it dumb. You can waste your time explaining numbers, and values, and how it all works, but they don't care. They will act as if they objectively listened and made a decision, but their decision was made before you even tried to explain it.

Like explaining to someone in an abusive relationship that it is abusive, their common sense and logic goes out the window the harder you try.

I will assume that you are making these generalizations based on my post immediately above, since you seem to reference the general structure of my post, etc., and then not only assume what my feelings are about the movie but then further denigrate what I have to say based on that.

Well here’s some news for you as to the dangers of assumptions, and the foolishness of engaging in the exact counterproductive generalizations that have been tossed against people who actually enjoyed the movie, as well as generalizations that have been tossed against people who didn’t enjoy it :

I’m actually not a fan of the film. I had the same excitement about it the first time I saw it as I have every single Star Wars movie that came out. But, like certain of them, such as TPM and AOTC, my feelings definitely cooled on further reflection, and after viewing it a few more times, it is probably in my bottom three of all of the films – right there at the bottom with the two I just mentioned. It was largely a wasted opportunity, and the entire middle section is just flat, lifeless and doesn’t serve a point.

So I guess your assumptions and reading of the tea leaves on my post go right out the window, and say more about you than anything about the topic I was discussing.

As far as what I was discussing, this is a discussion board. That’s what we do, we discuss. And I was discussing with @egosheep how we each took a different view of how certain language was used in the movie and whether it constituted a plot hole. Same as we’ve all been doing with various films at least as long as I’ve been on this board. Nothing more, nothing less.

M
 
OK, I’ll just be honest and admit I am not getting what your issue is here. At the beginning of the movie, all of them believe that tracking is impossible - but they admit that that is exactly what is happening to them. Therefore it is apparently new tech, and Class A. Finn surmises that it must operate like all other similar Class A tech and have a main breaker somewhere, and states that he can lead them to the location of the breaker. Just because he later uses the word tracker (and, as you point out, he appears to refer to the location of the tracker* once he’s on the ship) – how is that affected at all by the fact that he initially thought tracking was impossible?

My point is, if there's no issue with Finn saying it's impossible, then why do they delete that specific line in the book and comic, when the rest of the scene reads along with the movie, with stuff added if anything. I take your points about the breaker and I don't disagree, but on a basic level Finn says it's impossible, then leads them to the tracker. In two different retellings of the story, this line goes poof into the ether. My take is that this is a retcon. If it's not a retcon I guess it's a weird coincidence? If the line doesn't cause a problem, why did two authors cut it out of the script?
 
Holy.

well my one comment, since there have been many since, is there is no conspiracy. They wrote the novel on the script, If they change anything, it’s cuz the author did it, ran it passed his superior who probably gave it as much thought as “sure... it’s the novelizarion. Who cares”

So no, I didn’t read the novelization, the kids pop up book, the comic, the comics how Phasma escaped the garbage and then the fire, I don’t care. And neither does anyone else but the guys in marketing and the super fans.

Marketing “Hey can we make a mini toon where Rey and Kylo settle their differences with space-ball?”

Disney “Sure. I don’t care. Just make the money”

Super fans “Kylo threw with his right hand in that cartoon! Kylo holds his saber right handed! Disney is trying to be Lefty inclusive! It’s all a conspiracy!
 
@NeoRutty , Disney wants to make money !? ... of course they do , as most successful businesses would I imagine .

However , I believe that what @egosheep was discussing regarding the ret - conning of various pivotal aspects of what is a truly terrible film ... - if it isn’t so as some argue , then for whom is it being done ? ... surely monies to be made without the ‘ changes ‘ regardless !?

As for your question of “ Who cares ? “ , I for one ( along with many others ) certainly do , and will continue to do so .

Only wish that RJ had cared more about story continuity and legacy characters in a film trilogy than his own personal film making agenda & ambitions .


:cheersGed
 
My point is, if there's no issue with Finn saying it's impossible, then why do they delete that specific line in the book and comic, when the rest of the scene reads along with the movie, with stuff added if anything. I take your points about the breaker and I don't disagree, but on a basic level Finn says it's impossible, then leads them to the tracker. In two different retellings of the story, this line goes poof into the ether. My take is that this is a retcon. If it's not a retcon I guess it's a weird coincidence? If the line doesn't cause a problem, why did two authors cut it out of the script?
@egosheep - thanks for the explanation. My view is akin to that of @NeoRutty - after 40 years of SW novelizations and comics where authors have added lines beyond what was in the script, omitted others or shifted lines form one character to another, I just have a hard time ascribing any sinister - or merely even "face-saving" - motive to this particular change. (And I don't see this is fixing any "pivotal" plot point as @gedmac66 does.) But the fact remains that, until we have hard evidence one way or the other into why the change was made, your take on it is just as valid as mine, and vice versa.

My view is that, if LFL were really looking to ret-con plot holes, there are much bigger ones they would tackle first but didn't - so it seems a bit odd to think they'd focus their energies on such a comparatively trivial one. Some examples for me mainly revolve around Luke's "force projection":

1. Do Luke's force projections have mass or not? The film establishes that Luke's projection of himself has no mass or weight and cannot affect the environment around him - but the dice can be picked up and handled, even at the end when he is at his weakest/already dead? I get the "dramatic effect" of Kylo being able to pick up and ponder the dice - but it's still a huge hole in logic and plot, and zero attempt is made to reconcile it.

2. In the same vein - Luke's line to Kylo that "if you strike me down in anger, I will haunt you like your father." Luke is giving Kylo a choice, and explains the consequences to him. This could have been a pivotal point in the trilogy, as Kylo's decision - no matter which way he goes - will have impact on all that comes after. Kylo makes his choice and strikes Luke down.

We next see Luke, on the verge of death on Ach-to. My first take on the situation was that it was like The Matrix - "if you die in the Matrix, you die in real life" - and Kylo's act mortally wounded Luke through the Force, effectively the same as Kyle striking Luke down in anger in person. But, no - all three sources (film, novel and comic) make clear that Luke died because the effort exhausted him, meaning he was going to die no matter what happened (and sacrificing himself by exhausting all of his energies - not by letting Kylo kill him so Luke could "become powerful than you can possibly imagine" - was Luke's great "heroic act".) So what was the point of that speech to Kylo (or Luke's parting "see you around, kid") after Kylo attacks? Kylo didn't strike Luke down. If Luke is to reappear in another film - or, heck, even if the filmmakers wanted to show that "striking Luke down" further fractured Kylo's soul - this would be a prime candidate for ret-conning to make those points work.

M
 
In ANH didn't the Death Star track the Falcon through hyperspace back to Yavin IV? I realize Tarkin said it was a homing beacon. I suppose that could just mean that once the ship drops out of hyperspace it could be tracked then. So, does that not really count as tracking through hyperspace?
 
I will assume that you are making these generalizations based on my post immediately above, since you seem to reference the general structure of my post, etc., and then not only assume what my feelings are about the movie but then further denigrate what I have to say based on that.

Well here’s some news for you as to the dangers of assumptions, and the foolishness of engaging in the exact counterproductive generalizations that have been tossed against people who actually enjoyed the movie, as well as generalizations that have been tossed against people who didn’t enjoy it :

I’m actually not a fan of the film. I had the same excitement about it the first time I saw it as I have every single Star Wars movie that came out. But, like certain of them, such as TPM and AOTC, my feelings definitely cooled on further reflection, and after viewing it a few more times, it is probably in my bottom three of all of the films – right there at the bottom with the two I just mentioned. It was largely a wasted opportunity, and the entire middle section is just flat, lifeless and doesn’t serve a point.

So I guess your assumptions and reading of the tea leaves on my post go right out the window, and say more about you than anything about the topic I was discussing.

As far as what I was discussing, this is a discussion board. That’s what we do, we discuss. And I was discussing with @egosheep how we each took a different view of how certain language was used in the movie and whether it constituted a plot hole. Same as we’ve all been doing with various films at least as long as I’ve been on this board. Nothing more, nothing less.

M

Actually I am referring to this entire thread, which very clearly chronicles my claims. The people who love TLJ prove those claims.

I can show how the movie is clearly stupid.

The people who can't even agree with overwhelming evidence of defects in TLJ are the problem. You didn't like it? Gee, someone just posted a comic that clearly goes against the movie and you dig in. But that must be everyone else's issue. Rrrriiiigggghhht

It isn't all about you. ;)
 
In ANH didn't the Death Star track the Falcon through hyperspace back to Yavin IV? I realize Tarkin said it was a homing beacon. I suppose that could just mean that once the ship drops out of hyperspace it could be tracked then. So, does that not really count as tracking through hyperspace?

That's a good point. But I think you nailed the distinction - in ANH, it required a physical tracker being put on the ship, and then (one assumes) catching the "ping" of the beacon when the ship drops back out of lightspeed. TLJ implies a different mechanism of tracking any ship, homing beacon or not (though TLJ doesn't make clear where the tracking allows you to "see" them and pursue them while they are in hyperspace, or just to instantly locate them and jump to their location when they "pop out" of lightspeed. Actually, even ANH didn't clarify that either - maybe the beacon did allow you to see where the ship was at lightspeed as it moved, like an Imperial "Find My Phone".)

But the upshot is that "tracking through lightspeed is impossible" in TLJ must refer to "without a homing beacon attached", since the OT established that you could track when one was attached (ANH(), and that, absent a homing device, you "lost" a ship when it entered hyperspace (ESB).

M
 
The people who can't even agree with overwhelming evidence of defects in TLJ are the problem. You didn't like it? Gee, someone just posted a comic that clearly goes against the movie and you dig in. But that must be everyone else's issue. Rrrriiiigggghhht

LOL. So even if a person who didn't love TLJ wants to discuss a minor point in TLJ with another SW fan, that must mean they are "digging in" to prove it's a great movie - and, therefore, anyone who refuses to acknowledge each and every claimed defect in the film as proof it is "clearly stupid" is "closeting" their love for the film..

Should you ever decide to adopt an RPF title for your profile, I suggest "no fun at parties and conventions."

M
 
TLJ conspiracy theorists are going to be right up there with flat-Earthers and moon landing conspiracy theorists on the scale of the most ridiculous and most willing to believe any silly theory as long as it fits their narrative.
Well said! Some folks here are more willing to believe the absurd to fit their perspective with absolutely nothing to back it up... they even create new threads in an attempt to support their theories. It's unfortunate that this thread is overwhelmed with sort of nonsense.
 
LOL. So even if a person who didn't love TLJ wants to discuss a minor point in TLJ with another SW fan, that must mean they are "digging in" to prove it's a great movie - and, therefore, anyone who refuses to acknowledge each and every claimed defect in the film as proof it is "clearly stupid" is "closeting" their love for the film..

Should you ever decide to adopt an RPF title for your profile, I suggest "no fun at parties and conventions."

M

Hmmm, "no fun at parties" vs "gullible"...you proved my point. ;)
 
Well said! Some folks here are more willing to believe the absurd to fit their perspective with absolutely nothing to back it up... they even create new threads in an attempt to support their theories. It's unfortunate that this thread is overwhelmed with sort of nonsense.


It’s like looking in a mirror huh !?
 
@egosheep - thanks for the explanation. My view is akin to that of @NeoRutty - after 40 years of SW novelizations and comics where authors have added lines beyond what was in the script, omitted others or shifted lines form one character to another, I just have a hard time ascribing any sinister - or merely even "face-saving" - motive to this particular change. (And I don't see this is fixing any "pivotal" plot point as @gedmac66 does.) But the fact remains that, until we have hard evidence one way or the other into why the change was made, your take on it is just as valid as mine, and vice versa.

My view is that, if LFL were really looking to ret-con plot holes, there are much bigger ones they would tackle first but didn't - so it seems a bit odd to think they'd focus their energies on such a comparatively trivial one. Some examples for me mainly revolve around Luke's "force projection":

1. Do Luke's force projections have mass or not? The film establishes that Luke's projection of himself has no mass or weight and cannot affect the environment around him - but the dice can be picked up and handled, even at the end when he is at his weakest/already dead? I get the "dramatic effect" of Kylo being able to pick up and ponder the dice - but it's still a huge hole in logic and plot, and zero attempt is made to reconcile it.

2. In the same vein - Luke's line to Kylo that "if you strike me down in anger, I will haunt you like your father." Luke is giving Kylo a choice, and explains the consequences to him. This could have been a pivotal point in the trilogy, as Kylo's decision - no matter which way he goes - will have impact on all that comes after. Kylo makes his choice and strikes Luke down.

We next see Luke, on the verge of death on Ach-to. My first take on the situation was that it was like The Matrix - "if you die in the Matrix, you die in real life" - and Kylo's act mortally wounded Luke through the Force, effectively the same as Kyle striking Luke down in anger in person. But, no - all three sources (film, novel and comic) make clear that Luke died because the effort exhausted him, meaning he was going to die no matter what happened (and sacrificing himself by exhausting all of his energies - not by letting Kylo kill him so Luke could "become powerful than you can possibly imagine" - was Luke's great "heroic act".) So what was the point of that speech to Kylo (or Luke's parting "see you around, kid") after Kylo attacks? Kylo didn't strike Luke down. If Luke is to reappear in another film - or, heck, even if the filmmakers wanted to show that "striking Luke down" further fractured Kylo's soul - this would be a prime candidate for ret-conning to make those points work.

M


I’ve not read any of the EU novels nor comics , and the passages that @egosheep is referring to regarding Finns’ assertion of ‘ it’s impossible ‘ was not what I meant as a pivotal plot change / retcon attempt .
His post taken from the comic (?) showing Luke ‘ slipping ‘ after Rey’s unprovoked attack as opposed to recoiling from it , is .
It’s an absurd attempt to frame the Rey character in a better light in my opinion .
Again , if it’s not an attempt to retcon , then why change the original ( intentional - Luke’s a coward now ) situation ? , and for whose benefit ?

As I’d posted earlier ( possibly elsewhere ) , the way her character was written by RJ for TLJ turned my initial enjoyment of following her journey in TFA and beyond , into one of complete disgust at her self righteous behaviour and decisions in this one .

:cheersGed
 
Last edited:
TLJ conspiracy theorists are going to be right up there with flat-Earthers and moon landing conspiracy theorists on the scale of the most ridiculous and most willing to believe any silly theory as long as it fits their narrative.
Kinda sucks we get rid of one insufferable person and here pops up another. Glad to see there are no shortages of condescending elitists on the RPF. :lol
 
I’.
His post taken from the comic (?) showing Luke ‘ slipping ‘ after Rey’s unprovoked attack is . It’s an absurd attempt to frame the Rey character in a better light in my opinion.

How so? Just curious - I took it the other way (if I am understanding you correctly). In the film, one could come away with the impression that Luke Skywalker - greatest Jedi in the Galaxy - fell back because he was either afraid of Rey (or her lightsaber) or because she was besting him. I took the slip to indicate that no, Luke only fell back because he slipped, not because he was "outgunned". I thought it was an attempt to rehabilitiate Luke, not Rey. (That being said, regardless of the justification given in either medium - having Luke fall back (or having him fall and not immediately hop back up) was a mistake, no two ways about it. He's either being beaten by a neophyte, or he's clumsy and unaware of his surroundings - neither of which fits with the character we know.)

I
As I’d posted earlier ( possibly elsewhere ) , the way her character was written by RJ for TLJ made my initial enjoyment of following her journey in TFA and beyond , into one of complete disgust at her self righteous decisions .

While I don't know that my feelings rise to "complete disgust", you'll get no disagreement from me that much of the way Rey was written in TLJ frittered the goodwill I had for the character from TFA. But that's also true for other aspects of TLJ that should have capitalized on - but instead frittered away - some of the positive feelings I got from TFA. As stated in my earlier post, TLJ was ultimately a wasted opportunity IMO.

M
 
I've complained a lot about TLJ and RJ, but after months of internal chair-throwing, I thought it perhaps time to reboot my SW fandom. So, after long deciding I would never watch this film again, I bought it (used, at the video store, so as to not give Disney any "new" money for it), and decided to give it a go. I lost my job last week, and thought that watching it with a fresh perspective and priorities, would help ground my outlook on what, ultimately, is "just a movie".

This time around, now knowing exactly what to expect and focusing a bit more on details, and no longer in "Yeah, well, that wasn't great, but there's always the next scene..." mode, I have to say that I most assuredly do not enjoy this film. And despite all of the uninteresting plot points and odd takes on characters (IMO), it really came down to two things - the initial scenes with Hux that set the tone for both him and the film at large (which hints at the the fact that the film isn't taking ANYTHING seriously), and, upon close inspection - and the principal reason I wanted to watch it again - the fact that EVERY scene that could/should have some real weight to it, is undermined within seconds by a lightweight moment that makes made it impossible for me to stay engaged and presume that I was watching a film that contained anything of significance or urgency.

I'm talking EVERY SCENE. I mean, if your thing is all about creating unpredictably, the actual level of predictable gimmickry seems to create a movie that is almost unwatchable in terms of repeat viewings.

In short; all of the substantive things that I didn't enjoy, I probably could have got past...except for the fact I just didn't care; because due to the wavering in tone, it appeared no one involved, on-screen or off, cared either.
 
Last edited:
Not sure why the majority of posts in this thread have to be one extreme or the other.

Is it possible to like a movie while acknowledging that it has flaws?

Is it possible to dislike the same movie while finding some things about it that you do like?

Wouldn’t know it from these posts.

And for every “condescending elitist” seemingly defending the film, there’s someone who didn’t like it calling those who did either idiots (in so many words) or battered wives.

Is this really an enjoyable discussion for anyone? From where I’m sitting it seems like any internet debate, where two sides are firmly entrenched and each believes their argument to be far more persuasive than it ever really is. Do we hope to achieve anything beyond the airing of opinions, over and over?

”It’s bad!” “No, it’s good!” “No, it’s BAD!” “NO, it’s...” :sleep
 
@mkstewartesq , exactly !

It was the fact that the Rey character being what ? ... pissed off at Luke for not training her ..., not agreeing to return to aid the ‘ resistance ‘..., not caring enough ..., for attacking Ren unprovoked ( according to Ren’s version of events ) whom she believes over Luke’s !? ...

Out of all this confusion and anger that’s the reason she attacks with his own saber !? . In my eyes , it’s a pathetically played out plot point , and yes it left a sour taste in my mouth .

Ged
 
This thread is more than 3 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top