Star Wars: The Force Awakens (Post-release)

the song in ROTSt is called palatines teachings!.
and palatine was teaching about Plagueis ! .
which I said before but am ignored out of convenience


somewhat similar ?
bet if I tried to sell the theme music used for Snoke in TFA a few years back as original I would have been sued for plagiarism by lucasfilm lol


still waiting on why you argued with me about Hans death yet you predicted it earlier???

don't forget to ignore a third time because it is convenient.

and I had to leave in the middle of a discussion a few days ago and would like to finish by hearing your opinion on how we left it.

we see Kylo's hand NOT cut off supposedly after his fight with Rey which I agree on .

so I wondered if when Rey cut his saber I wonder if she damaged the crystal further which will force him to find another .
and you said you don't think she cut the saber at all .

how the hell did she disarm him then?
she swiped her saber and he was disarmed.
did he get frightened and drop it ?
I had to go before I could ask and get your opinion, or if I misunderstood you.

I dont understand what you are asking me to respond to regarding Han's death. I knew he died from the leaked spoilers.
 
It was canon by some measure but yeah a great deal of it wasn't that great. Some of it I liked, but a lot of it wasn't anything that special.

The books were considered to be canon, for the most part, at least everything from Heir to the Empire on was.However, it was always understood that George had final say over what was and wasn't canon and anything he came up, had he done Ep. VII would have superseded anything written in the EU.
 
The books were considered to be canon, for the most part, at least everything from Heir to the Empire on was.However, it was always understood that George had final say over what was and wasn't canon and anything he came up, had he done Ep. VII would have superseded anything written in the EU.

Yeah, but that got us into the various "levels" of canon, which was intensely stupid. G-canon, C-canon, S-canon, for chrissakes, just manage your damn story already!

It's murkier even than that. The new Marvel comic has one of the holocrons collected by a Hutt character mention "the Hundred-Year Darkness", which is from the EU as another term for what would later be known as the Second Great (Jedi) Schism. In the EU, those exiled/rage-quit fallen Jedi were the ones who found the Sith species, intermarried with them, and led to the Dark Lords of the Sith and the Sith Empire. Now the term is part of the canon, but the rest of it...? How far can we extrapolate, if at all? It's agonizing to have one bit of a story, but not know how much of the rest is still valid. *heh*

And that's just one example. They've peppered the new canon with a dropped name here, a mentioned reference there, a cameo appearance over there... but we can't take any more from it than just that specific datum until they include more. The general trend, though, is that they're working as fast as they can to organically include the good stuff, while quietly ignoring the... less-good stuff, from the distant past up through the end of ROTJ. It's only the stuff from that point on that's gone gone. Plus the lingering question of what that means for people, ships, etc., from that era that had activities that took place earlier in the EU -- notably Mara Jade. Thanks to Katie Lucas making Maul from Dathomir, now, instead of his old EU origin and training, those are now no longer Sith tattoos, so that's out. I think the Eyes of the Sith is still a thing, though. Which means, again, that Kylo and Snoke aren't Sith.

There might be some things we could glean from the films and Clone Wars, had George not been so sloppy with his writing (e.g., Palpatine -- no Darth whatever -- originally referred, repeatedly, to Luke's lightsaber being a Jedi weapon, didn't use one to try to execute him, and the descriptions George gave for the Emperor was that he was all shriveled up and sickly looking due to being devoured from the inside by the Dark Side... then he forgot all that in the Prequels, and now he's "Darth Sidious", carries a lightsaber, which he uses to fight, and his messed-up face is now due to Force lightning, even though Luke exhibited none of those signs after being hit by far more of said Force lightning...). Good stories, bad execution, by and large. Many contradictions introduced, which we the fans now have to rationalize or try to ignore. But it makes connecting the dots harder than it might otherwise have been.

Also, it hit me the other day... People have griped about George repeating himself all the way back to when Our Heroes had to "blow up another Death Star" all the way back in ROTJ. That, to me, was one of the bigger indications of George needing good writers working with him. He'd lifted the Death Star from the end of that story arc to put in Star Wars, since he had no expectation of ever making enough off Star Wars to warrant a sequel, let alone multiples. So when he got to that point, rather than come up with something new... he just used a bigger Death Star. Then he intentionally paralleled the original Star Wars story in TPM, saying in planning sessions "it's like a poem -- it rhymes". Now I realize what he was trying to say, if he were wise in the ways of music...

Star Wars is a canon. I don't mean that in the way we normally talk about canon on here. I mean it in the musical sense. Go listen to one of the most famous -- Pachelbel's Canon in D -- and you'll hear what I'm talking about. Or much of Vangelis' music. A canon takes a simple theme and then, through repetition, builds on it, making it more elaborate and adding something new each time. The Prequels handled this clumsily, but it's there. Now TFA is the newest repetition of the theme, with the familiar elements being incidental background against which the new is placed. Neither would work without the other. The new needed the context of the old, the old needed the novelty of the new, and they're interwoven.

Yet again, I agree that it couldashoulda been handled a little differently, as far as conveying crucial... need-to-know... information! But I assert even more strongly that if all you saw was the repeated theme from earlier in the saga, you're listening to a rock song and only hearing the bass line. I can't tell you how to watch it, but you're missing a lot that is actually there.

--Jonah

Or, put another way, if you think all blues (or jazz, or punk, or whatever) sounds the same...you ain't listening close enough.
 
If someone already posted this I apologize. I didnt see it, but I like this image a lot.
image.jpeg
 
It was canon by some measure but yeah a great deal of it wasn't that great. Some of it I liked, but a lot of it wasn't anything that special.
Again, I never paid attention to the books, comics or games.

But I remember when "splinter in the minds eye" came out and the official stance was that it was the only part of the EU that was canon. George claimed that only the movies were canon.

Did things change after that?

Sent from my SM-N910W8 using Tapatalk
 
As has been mentioned, there were different levels of canon. It was all canon but the movies and whatever GL said took precedence. Essentially the supplementary material such as the novels were canon unless George contradicted or overwrote them. It was a convoluted system. Splinter of the Mind's Eye was intended to be the sequel to ANH in the event it didn't do well and more movies weren't made.
 
Splinter of the Mind's Eye came out before anything else but the old Marvel comic and maybe the Archie Goodwin newspaper strip (I don't remember either of my local papers carrying it). It came out before there was an Expanded Universe. It was the sequel to Star Wars back when George thought a film sequel was out of the question. So Ithink you may be misremembering, astroboy...

--Jonah
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What I have heard is that Splinter of the Minds Eye was supposed to be a base for an inexpensive sequel, but then it turned out that Star Wars made very well ... and the rest is history.
 
The one line from that article that I think represents the really problematic "It's a mystery" thing is "Why would JJ Abrams hide Rey's parents' identity only to reveal that they're two nobodies?"

Folks, that question is pure meta. It operates from the presumption that the filmmakers are going to intentionally create a mystery to be solved by the audience and will gradually reveal more and more breadcrumbs that lead the audience to the conclusion. In short, it has nothing to do with the story itself. Nothing about the characters, nothing about the plot, it's entirely about this interaction between the filmmaker and the audience that's like a massive game of 20 Questions. And it SUCKS. Audiences do this to themselves, and too many filmmakers steer into it. It leads audiences to look for complex mysteries where none need exist, and it leads filmmakers and creators in general to believe that they must somehow prove themselves smarter than the audience by obfuscating the answer in a convoluted way, and none of this has anything to do with the story!!!!

So, here's a few reasons why Rey's parentage could be entirely ordinary (e.g., one or two of Luke's students), and why it would still make sense for that not to be revealed.

It's really, really simple.

Because this is a story about Rey's journey to discover her identity, and not about the audience "solving for X."

Ultimately, the identity of Rey's parents doesn't matter for the audience; it matters for purposes of what it reveals to Rey. So, sure, Rey could be a Kenobi, or a Skywalker, or a Kenobiwalker, or whatever, but none of that is necessary for the story to be good.

What's necessary for the story to be good is that the revelation of Rey's parentage has an effect on Rey, and that the effect spurs her to action or creates a change that must be addressed. It doesn't need to be an "OH SNAP!!!!" moment for the audience. Far, far too much emphasis these days is placed on making the audience say "OH SNAP!!!" and it usually happens at the expense of the story's integrity, because the creators are trying sooooo hard to make that happen, that they are willing to undermine other aspects of their story.

Rey can be a 1/4 Mandalorian Kenobiwalker, and aside from the fanservice overload that such a reveal would represent, it really wouldn't end up mattering unless it mattered to Rey.

Luke discovering that Vader was Anakin was a big deal, not just because audiences said "WHOA!!!" when they learned it, but because Luke then had to grapple with what this meant about him. Was he destined for evil? Must he kill his own father? Could his father be redeemed? Did this force Luke to rethink his attitude about Obi-Wan? Those were all the repercussions for Luke of that big reveal, and they pretty much all played out on screen in one form or another, and to meaningful effect. And all of that went well beyond the momentary "WHOA!!!" moment for the audience.
 
Yes, we've become so accustomed to this being a generational film about the Skywalker's, which isn't helped by the fact the KK said the Saga films would follow the Skywalker family, that we feel compelled to try and draw these connections. It's worth noting TFA has 3 Skywalker descendants in it without trying to include Rey.
 
I think the thing that drives me nuts about the parents mystery is that it seems like a created mystery for us. But not necessarily for her. Nothing in the movie told us that SHE didn't know who they were.

So this is more about JJ Nolan building hype, rather than a real mystery.

Sent from my SM-N910W8 using Tapatalk
 
People would probably flip out if we never found out who Rey's parents are (and I'm sure this won't happen) but I don't think we need to find out. I feel like they never really built up the mystery part of it, they just showed the flashback.

I think the important part is just that she was abandoned on a crappy planet and learned to fend for herself and the mystery has been built up by everyone else (obviously her force aptitude plays a big part in that). Now that we know how much of an impact this had on her, I feel like the film can just leave it as it is.

Also, assuming Rey the character doesn't know or remember who her parents were (although I'm sure she would judging by how old she seemed in the flashback) why should the audience get to find out? I don't think its important to the rest of the story.
 
Last edited:
This thread is more than 5 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