Star Wars The Last Jedi Spoilerrific Discussion

[iamfanboy]

Plus Yavin was a gas giant, so it is entirely plausibe even if they fired on Yavin it wouldn't have done much to the moon on the far side.  Then you can just handwave in that recharging for the second shot would have taken longer than just orbiting into position to take one shot and be done with it.

See? Sometimes 'errors' that fanboys latch on to, which are REALLY about cinematography or the writer/director not being omniscient about everything in Star Wars, actually might have reasons in universe behind them.

So if someone wonders why an interstellar Force projection could be solid in some ways and not in others; if someone wonders how a hyperspace laser beam shot could be visible; if someone wonders why Lord Sidious was able to surprise and overpower a handful of Jedi Masters...

Remember. Sometimes 'errors' that fanboys latch on to, which are REALLY about cinematography or the writer/director not being omniscient about everything in Star Wars, actually might have reasons in universe behind them.

But it's still okay to be mad about Midichlorians. :D

[Skyth]

I think in Legends, it took 10 minutes to recharge a full power shot from the DS. 

But I am reminded of the old 'No Prize' from Marvel.  The whole point was to find something that was a contradiction in a comic and write an explanation of it, thus winning the 'No Prize'.

[Liam's Ghost]

A better question would be "Why didn't the Death Star bother with supporting ships, if not for close defense, then for locking down the system to ensure the Rebel leadership doesn't just... leave."

And "Why did the rebel leadership not just... leave, using their hail mary attack as cover?"

And "why did Leia go right back to the rebel base knowing full well her ship was being tracked?"

(personal theory, the leadership (Mon Mothma and her Rebel council) did leave off screen. Leia led the Death Star back to Yavin specifically to get it into position to attack it. And Tarkin was actually really really really stupid.)

[roosterboy]

And "why did Leia go right back to the rebel base knowing full well her ship was being tracked?"

To lure the Death Star to where the Rebel forces were so that they could use the plans to try and destroy it. Otherwise, it would be out there, merrily hunting down Rebel strongholds and blasting them to bits while the one Rebel group who could actually possibly do something about it twiddled their thumbs on Yavin 4 trying to track the Death Star's current location. Or something like that.

[Ruger]

A better question would be "Why didn't the Death Star bother with supporting ships, if not for close defense, then for locking down the system to ensure the Rebel leadership doesn't just... leave."

And "Why did the rebel leadership not just... leave, using their hail mary attack as cover?"

And "why did Leia go right back to the rebel base knowing full well her ship was being tracked?"

(personal theory, the leadership (Mon Mothma and her Rebel council) did leave off screen. Leia led the Death Star back to Yavin specifically to get it into position to attack it. And Tarkin was actually really really really stupid.)

Erm....if you read the short story "Contingency Plan" in From a Certain Point of View, this is exactly what Mon Mothma did in the canon...she left Base One just prior to the Death Star's attack, so that, should the defense fail, there would still be some leadership of the Rebellion left...

Also, as to earlier comments about blowing up Yavin the gas giant, if they did that, would not the moon be thrown out of orbit at thousands of miles an hour? Also, a gas giant, logically, should have a solid core to blast, so it's not a factor of not having anything to hit...

Ruger

[Kidd]

Kind of... I mean... at the end of the day someone really fallible who hasn't read every word of fiction ever written about Star Wars wrote the script

The more I think about it, the more I think this is the case. I'm actually reduced to jotting down notes and the terms "Lazy writing" keep cropping up... and it's not shorthand for "I didn't agree with this interpretation of Star Wars".

[Lazarus Jaguar]

I think in Legends, it took 10 minutes to recharge a full power shot from the DS. 

But I am reminded of the old 'No Prize' from Marvel.  The whole point was to find something that was a contradiction in a comic and write an explanation of it, thus winning the 'No Prize'.

I think I read in some book DS1 took some time, hours, to recharge.  It was a planet killer, so no need to rapid fire

DS2 could fire every 10 though.  It wasnt the planet killer terror weapon, it was a trap and intended to destroy the rebel fleet.  Different purposes, so different power set up

[Scotty]

The Death Star fired as quickly as it needed to, and trying to wring some tiny detail about its inner workings out of the rest of the context of the two movies is misguided at best.

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

A better question would be "Why didn't the Death Star bother with supporting ships, if not for close defense, then for locking down the system to ensure the Rebel leadership doesn't just... leave."

Because Tarkin was a seriously arrogant SOB who wanted to show off his new toy without risking the chance that anyone else might steal some of its glory.

[Skyth]

I think I read in some book DS1 took some time, hours, to recharge.  It was a planet killer, so no need to rapid fire

DS2 could fire every 10 though.  It wasnt the planet killer terror weapon, it was a trap and intended to destroy the rebel fleet.  Different purposes, so different power set up

From what I remember from the WEB Death Star sourcebook, the amount of recharge was dependant on the strength of the shot.  Killing cruisers used the lowest power thus fastest recharge.  Full power was required to destroy a planet.

[monbvol]

Erm....if you read the short story "Contingency Plan" in From a Certain Point of View, this is exactly what Mon Mothma did in the canon...she left Base One just prior to the Death Star's attack, so that, should the defense fail, there would still be some leadership of the Rebellion left...

Also, as to earlier comments about blowing up Yavin the gas giant, if they did that, would not the moon be thrown out of orbit at thousands of miles an hour? Also, a gas giant, logically, should have a solid core to blast, so it's not a factor of not having anything to hit...

Ruger

1.  Thousands of miles an hour is still pretty slow in space.

2.  Less about hitting something solid and more about the gas giant exploding with enough force to do much to the moon.  It is an unknown but the fact that the gas giant wasn't targeted can infer that it wouldn't.

[Daemion]

Also, as to earlier comments about blowing up Yavin the gas giant, if they did that, would not the moon be thrown out of orbit at thousands of miles an hour? Also, a gas giant, logically, should have a solid core to blast, so it's not a factor of not having anything to hit...

Ruger

Not necessarily. The breakup of the gas giant might be rapid, but still slow enough that there's enough matter to form a gravity well. The gas giant is already anything but solid. The damage from the abrupt expansion of its mass would have far more devastating effects, I think, before the moon's trajectory could have any ramifications.

[iamfanboy]

The point is that they DON'T blow up Yavin. Therefore there MUST be a reason that is not an option, and they have to circle around.

The same credit should be extended to other things in the Star Wars universe.

We're observing these fictional universes through a narrow window; OUR laws and rules and physics do not necessarily apply in THEIR universe. That Comic Book Guy whining about how "That's not the way it works" is the barbarian Theodotus describes in Caesar & Cleopatra, thinking that the customs of his tribe and island are the laws of nature... in another world.

You'd think that Battletech fans, of all people, with a setting that has magic metal armor that somehow gets stronger the more area it covers, impossible giant robots somehow kept upright by a pseudoscience helmet, ridiculous economics that should have the galaxy collapsing under its own stupidity, would be more in tune with this notion of "Well, it MUST work because it DOES work. So why DOES it work?"


It's just... frustrating to me. Someone complaining about Star Wars with, "Well, why didn't he deflect the lasers, that's so stupid," or "Why is the planet destroying beam visible from another planet entirely," is on the same level of someone complaining about Looney Tunes with, "Why didn't the hammer hitting Bugs Bunny kill him? Why did he just bounce up with a few broken teeth? It's dumb."

[Daemion]

Oh, I completely got you there. As a BT fan, there are things I can assume have an explanation in any story I watch that sometimes a hack writer and producer and director couldn't be bothered to come up with on their own.

It helps immerse me in an otherwise poorly written and executed story. There is a breaking point, though. 

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

Yeah, if there had been previous scenes of the Death Star blowing up gas giants to destroy orbiting moons and then it proceeded to not do so at Yavin, that would be a problem with the writing.  Without something like that there's no inconsistency and we can assume that there was a valid reason unless a future writer contradicts it.

[HobbesHurlbut]

From what I remember from the WEB Death Star sourcebook, the amount of recharge was dependant on the strength of the shot.  Killing cruisers used the lowest power thus fastest recharge.  Full power was required to destroy a planet.

Rogue One: "Single Reactor fire". This suggest the full power of its weapon require its entire set of reactors (which the single reactor line implied).

[Skyth]

Rogue One: "Single Reactor fire". This suggest the full power of its weapon require its entire set of reactors (which the single reactor line implied).

Yeah.  Probably along the same lines.  Oh...I meant to type WEG not WEB btw :) (IE the old West End Games Start Wars)

[Kidd]

Possibly the best Deleted Scene I've seen so far: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOcUL0FuKIQ

1) finally a useful cinematic purpose of the caretakers
2) genuine, not forced humour
3) offers a valid possible interpretation of the Balance philosophy and the folly of the Jedi Council
4) quite the best acting and emoting from both actors involved

The only flaw is that, as with every other scene, Rey learns nothing from the lesson.

[Kitsune413]

The more I think about it, the more I think this is the case. I'm actually reduced to jotting down notes and the terms "Lazy writing" keep cropping up... and it's not shorthand for "I didn't agree with this interpretation of Star Wars".

I don't think it's lazy writing. Keep in mind when I wrote that quote I'm talking about Episode 4. George Lucas just didn't think to blow the planet up instead of the Rebel base. He also didn't think about the fact that constant thrust in space equals an ever increasing velocity. Engines just look cool spitting fire.

If you've ever DM'd a pen and paper game you understand how it works. You roll out to tell a story for your people and have fun. After the fact you can usually rationalize your storytelling decisions or someone can. Your brain can link things together logically. But the answer is that when you did it you thought it was going to be cool while using the facts you knew to make sure it wasn't a glaring fault. But when I'm GMing for some Battletech stuff while I do actually do research to make sure the setting is as canon as possible for some game night stuff, during the game I'm not fact checking stuff.

If you liked the movie, or wanted to like the movie then motivated reasoning will get you through. You'll just be able to create a compelling logical argument to defend that point of view.

If you didn't like the movie or you didn't want to like the movie, then the opposite is true. You'll come up with some reason to not like the movie or argue that it was wrong.

A guy wrote the Last Jedi. Disney/LucasArts has a team of people that he talked to about if he could do things. The dude really likes Star Wars. So claiming that it's lazy writing is definitely far from the mark.

Possibly the best Deleted Scene I've seen so far: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOcUL0FuKIQ

1) finally a useful cinematic purpose of the caretakers
2) genuine, not forced humour
3) offers a valid possible interpretation of the Balance philosophy and the folly of the Jedi Council
4) quite the best acting and emoting from both actors involved

The only flaw is that, as with every other scene, Rey learns nothing from the lesson.

She learned and has always learned that as much as I personally like Taoism that the Jedi way is stupid. They aren't good guys or knights in shining armor. They aren't actually the Light Side. They're true neutral.

If you are Qui-Gon and you're just gonna do yourself some good guy stuff then youy're going to disagree with the Jedi High Council and they'll label you as a Gray Jedi.

[Kidd]

If you liked the movie, or wanted to like the movie then motivated reasoning will get you through. You'll just be able to create a compelling logical argument to defend that point of view.

If you didn't like the movie or you didn't want to like the movie, then the opposite is true. You'll come up with some reason to not like the movie or argue that it was wrong.

To carry this principle to its logical conclusion, all reviews being subjective, no movie can be judged by any objective standard and all movies are equally good/bad.

I don't believe that. There are definable reasons why some things are perceived good, and some are perceived bad, and it can be determined why.

A guy wrote the Last Jedi. Disney/LucasArts has a team of people that he talked to about if he could do things. The dude really likes Star Wars. So claiming that it's lazy writing is definitely far from the mark.

Ergo, by dint of there having been a lot of people involved, it can't have been lazy writing?

No. I call the writing lazy because the writers decided it wasn't worth their/studio's time to come up with plot, scenes, actions and dialogue based on established character motivation and are internally consistent with the rules of the universe... and decided to go with whatever they could think of that felt cool.

One can argue that it's not necessary because "bbbbut isn't it JUST SO COOL if ten thousand Jedi ghosts come back to fight the First Sith Order and like Kylo Ben, Maul and Palpatine took on Rey, Qui-Gon, Obi-Wan, Yoda and Anakin in this SUPER COOL epic melee deathmatch that teleport-hops across Tatooine, Naboo, Coruscant and the Force Dimension" and yes, some might consider that very cool.

But the Rule of Cool doesn't overcome the established rules of storytelling. The audience requires persuading, convincing. A storyteller needs to lead the audience from A to B to C to D, its in the heart of successful storytelling. When the audience asks why B didn't lead to C-1 instead, the chain is broken, suspension of disbelief is interrupted... and its not always because the audience are grognard fault-finding fanboys determined to hate the new movie. Sometimes it's because the writer didn't sell the idea well, sometimes it's because B doesn't in fact logically lead to C.

She learned and has always learned that as much as I personally like Taoism that the Jedi way is stupid. They aren't good guys or knights in shining armor. They aren't actually the Light Side. They're true neutral.

If you are Qui-Gon and you're just gonna do yourself some good guy stuff then youy're going to disagree with the Jedi High Council and they'll label you as a Gray Jedi.

For years fans have been saying the Jedi way is stupid because they got involved in mediating galactic conflict. Now fans are saying the Jedi way is stupid because they didn't. Interesting.

The building blocks of Rey's arc were there. TLJ showed early on that Rey has at least 3 interesting character flaws - she has a desire to know her parents, she is ignorant of the Force in general and the Dark Side in particular, she has no idea how to control her powers. So far so good. But after that... we know of course that Rey is still The Good Guy, resisting Kylo at the end of the movie. But TLJ never really explains how. Luke capitulates for no real good reason. The audience is basically told, "Look, Rey's GOOD alright? Here's a Cool Fight Scene. Settled."

In particular, I expected a lot more out of the Dark Hole. And just what Balance means is never really explained conclusively.

Kylo's path was also interesting. It might be said that he looked at Balance, and decided he might as well be on the winning side, like that quip: "Power corrupts, but absolute power is kinda neat." Why not? If the Cosmic Force is always in conflict with itself (then embodied in Luke and Snoke), just pick the side of personal ambition and self-service (Dark), and make your play for the top of the pile of bodies, rather than die for a futile cause.

But again... this wasn't very well explained in the movie. And that's also Lazy Writing.

[Kitsune413]

To carry this principle to its logical conclusion, all reviews being subjective, no movie can be judged by any objective standard and all movies are equally good/bad.

I mean... if logical conclusions means straw man argument sure.

I don't believe that. There are definable reasons why some things are perceived good, and some are perceived bad, and it can be determined why.

We are talking about the Last Jedi... The only movies in the Star Wars universe so far that you could argue are "Objectively Bad" is episode 1 and Return of the Jedi. Return of the Jedi is easy to argue that it isn't objectively bad. Episode 1 is harder but still... we aren't talking about the last airbender here...

Ergo, by dint of there having been a lot of people involved, it can't have been lazy writing?

No. I call the writing lazy because the writers decided it wasn't worth their/studio's time to come up with plot, scenes, actions and dialogue based on established character motivation and are internally consistent with the rules of the universe... and decided to go with whatever they could think of that felt cool.

If you're talking about Luke. I personally think they did fine. I don't find the Last Jedi's Luke Skywalker to be incongruent with the Luke Skywalker I observed through three movies. I do find some peoples expectations of Luke Skywalker to be pretty incongruent with the Luke Skywalker we know from three movies.

In particular, I expected a lot more out of the Dark Hole. And just what Balance means is never really explained conclusively.

The force is Taoism... Taoism is about being real comfortable with knowing you don't understand something.

I'm also not sure why you're holding Rian Johnson accountable for explaining how the Force works now? Like... this is the 10th Star Wars movie? And this is the guy you're upset with for not explaining how the force works?

From your explanation of what lazy writing is I'm confused about why you like Star Wars?

[Kitsune413]

For years fans have been saying the Jedi way is stupid because they got involved in mediating galactic conflict. Now fans are saying the Jedi way is stupid because they didn't. Interesting.

I wouldn't take my opinion to be a blanket statement of what fans believe. I've always been under the impression that the Jedi Order are inadvertently evil.

If your plan is to do whatever the Galactic Republic tells you to do, while being neutral, then as soon as the Galactic Republic is evil then you're evil too.

The Jedi order has never been a galactic force for good. It's one of the things that makes Anakin bad. He is frequently admonished for doing good guy stuff and ends up alienated.

I'm sure somewhere along the way someone in the Jedi Order pointed out that the Force is Powerful and that they shouldn't be galactic rulers. Which is fine, but when you're true neutral and you follow the orders of a government that swings from lawful neutral to chaotic neutral with evil actors you don't have a strong argument for being the good guys...

and it's the biggest recurrent argument in the series. I'm not sure I've seen an episode of Star Wars that didn't involve an argument over doing good guy stuff. A lot of Clone War episodes embellish the fact that they'll work for a corrupt or evil person and begrudgingly do whatever they say.

[iamfanboy]

My impressions of the Jedi Order, previous to the Clone Wars, is that they stood separate from the Republic but were ready to intervene if they were asked or if their Force powers called - sort of as roving judges/superheroes that didn't HAVE to answer to the Senate, but did so as a courtesy. It wasn't until the Clone Wars that they got more involved, which led to their downfall as orchestrated by good ol' Poppa Palpatine himself.

A more nuanced writer would have done more with that, perhaps having rebellious factions in the Jedi Order who thought - oh, never mind.


And man. Episode 1 or The Last Airbender. If you asked me to choose which of those two movies was MORE wrong about their respective universes, it's possible I'd die of old age before coming up with a definitive answer. TPM has multiple pieces of canonical information which are intentionally ignored by Star Wars writers for being so stupid. On the other hand, TLA has "Ung".

[Kitsune413]

But the midichlorians...

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

And man. Episode 1 or The Last Airbender. If you asked me to choose which of those two movies was MORE wrong about their respective universes, it's possible I'd die of old age before coming up with a definitive answer. TPM has multiple pieces of canonical information which are intentionally ignored by Star Wars writers for being so stupid. On the other hand, TLA has "Ung".

It's like testing the depth on two different manure pits by jumping in them and seeing how far you sink.

[Kitsune413]

So... Movie night? MST night?

[iamfanboy]

So... Movie night? MST night?

They're both available as Rifftrax, the descendant of MST3k, and they're both pretty good. True story: Today I tried to play The Last Airbender Rifftrax, inspired by this conversation, and the file is corrupted. Refused to play.

[Kidd]

I mean... if logical conclusions means straw man argument sure.

Then to say criticism of a film comes solely from motivated reasoning to dislike it is rather sweeping isn't it?

If you're talking about Luke.

I'm not talking about OT Luke vs ST Luke. I'm talking about Luke at the start of the movie vs. Luke in the middle. I don't think TLJ sold well his "conversion" from a reluctant Jedi Master to fully intervening at the end.

Same thing for Rey's arc. A little that way too for Kylo's and Finn and Rose's arc. Poe's arc was okay, but the Holdo dialogue... sounds like it was farmed out to some B-team to handle. Badly.

The force is Taoism... Taoism is about being real comfortable with knowing you don't understand something.

1) Disagree. 2) That has always been the Jedi way - to flow with the Force without knowing exactly why, whereas the Sith Way is to seek power and control.

Now TLJ comes in and says "bugger all that, the Jedi were wrong!" and on the strength of Luke's vehemence, I'm sold. Okay. Fine. Tell me why... but TLJ doesn't deliver on this point.

I'm also not sure why you're holding Rian Johnson accountable for explaining how the Force works now? Like... this is the 10th Star Wars movie? And this is the guy you're upset with for not explaining how the force works?

Yes. Because TLJ's hype was that it would explain what is meant by Balance. There IS established precedent for how the Force works, if we accept that ESB Yoda is right. If ESB Yoda is wrong - as TLJ first proposes - then what?

The scene with Luke explaining the Light Side of the Force was the best we've had in nearly 4 decades of Star Wars. Awesome. But the Dark Side was ignored. ESB Yoda says the Dark Side is control, anger, hatred, death. I expected all that coming out of Rey going into the Dark Hole. Got nothing that either advances the film's plot, Rey's arc, or the viewer understanding of the Force.

From your explanation of what lazy writing is I'm confused about why you like Star Wars?

Good question. I like Star Wars because it was once the best produced action scifi franchise to hit the silver screen. The idea of an Order of for-all-intents-and-purposes Paladins being good guys with a highly-developed moral philosophy and superpowers is interesting, coupled with the fact that they were betrayed and destroyed - the best stories are tragic. The hardware porn in SW thrills the number-crunching engineer inside me, just like BT does. The idea of 2 philosophies of life - of serene benevolence, or of impassioned selfishness - is truly thought-provoking and deserves better on-screen introspection.

The new Star Wars is struggling to deliver on this. So no... I'm beginning not to like Star Wars.

If your plan is to do whatever the Galactic Republic tells you to do, while being neutral, then as soon as the Galactic Republic is evil then you're evil too.

The Jedi order has never been a galactic force for good. It's one of the things that makes Anakin bad. He is frequently admonished for doing good guy stuff and ends up alienated.

"I killed them all, not just the men, but the women and children too!" Anakin has never been good. His role models were Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan who are themselves rebels in the Order. He took that and ran further with it into disaster. The Council made exceptions for him because he was the Chosen One, and his Force power was off the charts. But they didn't realise the path of the prophecy required their own destruction... but well, that's just how Fate rolls. That's what makes the Prequel Trilogy such an awesome tragedy.

and it's the biggest recurrent argument in the series. I'm not sure I've seen an episode of Star Wars that didn't involve an argument over doing good guy stuff. A lot of Clone War episodes embellish the fact that they'll work for a corrupt or evil person and begrudgingly do whatever they say.

Exactly. Because the Jedi Order IS in fact Lawful Good. A big part of their struggle during the Clone Wars was watching that Lawfulness turn against them, to force them into doing what they never wanted to, but were bound by the Republic's laws to do. That was the brilliance of Palpatine's plan - to bind them in a Catch-22 when they either had to renounce power and watch the Republic burn, or lose their moral high ground. Their fault was they chose the former and tried to save the Republic.

By the time they realised their mistakes it was too late. It's ironic, but Yoda did in a way realise the Order was too protocol-bound. He broke their Lawful Good philosophy to allow Anakin to run wild and allow Windu to attempt to remove Palpatine. The former led to their secret downfall, the latter to their public downfall. Both moves were forced, the former by Fate and the latter by Palpatine, leading inevitably to the tragedy of the Purge.

Now that is Damn Good Writing.

P.S. Yoda's final move was to come to terms with the fact that failure to immediately destroy Palpatine, and the sacrifice of the Order, WAS the way of the Force.

P.P.S. Luke's switch from dissuading Rey to teaching her could have come when Yoda or Obi-Wan appeared to tell him that it was acceptable to have his first apprentice betray him, and that he needed to flow with the Force and trust Rey as well. Another "search your feelings" lesson for Luke. But we didn't really get that. We got Luke "No I won't teach you because Jedi are bad!" and Rey "No I really am good!" and Luke "I don't care, go and be turned" and Rey "Oh all right I'll just go because I'm awesome anyway" and then Yoda shows up...

it's frustrating because I think I understand where the plot is going, but it just isn't explained well at all.

[Kitsune413]

Then to say criticism of a film comes solely from motivated reasoning to dislike it is rather sweeping isn't it?

I think that if the criticism was more objective I might be more inclined to think that people weren't just trying really hard to find reasons to dislike something.

When the primary criticism is, "That's lazy writing.", which I'm seeing a lot of so someone out there has written that it's lazy writing and other people have really latched onto it, on a movie written by a guy with a ton of different writing awards that was really excited about writing a Star Wars movie and writing more Star Wars movies then I think it rings a little hollow.

Last night I was talking with one of my "woke" friends about the movie and his argument was still primarily about gender roles. So I don't even feel like we can get into a deep dive of why people don't like this movie on some battletech forums man.

If it comes to the writing and we aren't talking about the specific scene where Rose rams Finn in a ship, or Captain Phasma kind of getting tossed aside in this movie I don't really see anything at all to the argument except someone desperately trying to not like something for maybe reasons they don't understand.

I'm not talking about OT Luke vs ST Luke. I'm talking about Luke at the start of the movie vs. Luke in the middle. I don't think TLJ sold well his "conversion" from a reluctant Jedi Master to fully intervening at the end.

It's still Luke Skywalker man. Dude still wants to do good. If you figure that Rey showed up and Luke was in the "Frozen" stage of not wanting to ever return to the galaxy, her having the Millenium Falcon, Chewbacca and telling him about Han dying immediately places him in the thawing phase.
 

Same thing for Rey's arc. A little that way too for Kylo's and Finn and Rose's arc. Poe's arc was okay, but the Holdo dialogue... sounds like it was farmed out to some B-team to handle. Badly.

Kylo's arc is pretty sick honestly. Rey's arc is fine. She goes on an adventure, but wants to go home because she's waiting for her parents. She gets over it. It's way more sophisticated than Luke's arc. We'll just have to agree that we can't disagree about this because we're on the battletech forums. People are expecting way more from Rey than they would expect from a male protagonist. In this same situation with a dude they'd be like, "Whoah. The force is so strong with that guy. Sick."

1) Disagree. 2) That has always been the Jedi way - to flow with the Force without knowing exactly why, whereas the Sith Way is to seek power and control.

Not sure what you're disagreeing with. You seem to be agreeing.

Now TLJ comes in and says "bugger all that, the Jedi were wrong!" and on the strength of Luke's vehemence, I'm sold. Okay. Fine. Tell me why... but TLJ doesn't deliver on this point.Yes. Because TLJ's hype was that it would explain what is meant by Balance. There IS established precedent for how the Force works, if we accept that ESB Yoda is right. If ESB Yoda is wrong - as TLJ first proposes - then what?

I think for a long time in multiple areas they've made it pretty clear the Jedi are wrong. Have you ever watched Star Wars rebels where they've got the alien Bendu? Or Knights of the old Republic, which is non-canon right now, but they've got that outside Empire that shows up and those dudes just don't believe or care in a light or a dark side at all? There is one force. The dark cave that Rey goes into is just like the dark place Luke goes where he fights Vader.

It's the force man. The enemy whenever you go into a darkside place is you. Unless you're a darkside force user. Then the enemy when you go into a Lightside place is you. In fact. I feel like TLJ's house of mirrors in the dark place makes things pretty clear.

The scene with Luke explaining the Light Side of the Force was the best we've had in nearly 4 decades of Star Wars. Awesome. But the Dark Side was ignored. ESB Yoda says the Dark Side is control, anger, hatred, death. I expected all that coming out of Rey going into the Dark Hole. Got nothing that either advances the film's plot, Rey's arc, or the viewer understanding of the Force.Good question. I like Star Wars because it was once the best produced action scifi franchise to hit the silver screen. The idea of an Order of for-all-intents-and-purposes Paladins being good guys with a highly-developed moral philosophy and superpowers is interesting, coupled with the fact that they were betrayed and destroyed - the best stories are tragic. The hardware porn in SW thrills the number-crunching engineer inside me, just like BT does. The idea of 2 philosophies of life - of serene benevolence, or of impassioned selfishness - is truly thought-provoking and deserves better on-screen introspection.

The darkside is fear too. You have to remember that the Jedi and the Sith are both constructs. They're both two factions that use the Force that have made preconceptions about something that just is. The Force is Taoism. It's not light or dark. Star Wars just has two separate ideological factions that have made decisions on something. Go back to Bendu... or like... anybody who has ever talked about the Force ever.

The Jedi Order is an ideology a group of people developed when interacting with the benevolent side of the force. The Sith order is an ideology a group of people developed when interacting with the selfish and malignant side of the force. But the force is both and you don't even have to choose.

"I killed them all, not just the men, but the women and children too!" Anakin has never been good.

Sorry. I was distracted by Anakin being a good guy through the clone wars, the first and second movie, and the sixth movie. The Clone Wars cartoon is a series about him being good despite orders. Not just from the Republic but from the Jedi Council.

His role models were Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan who are themselves rebels in the Order. He took that and ran further with it into disaster. The Council made exceptions for him because he was the Chosen One, and his Force power was off the charts. But they didn't realise the path of the prophecy required their own destruction... but well, that's just how Fate rolls. That's what makes the Prequel Trilogy such an awesome tragedy.

Yeah. Putting up with Anakin being a good guy is really hard on the Jedi Council. I agree.

Exactly. Because the Jedi Order IS in fact Lawful Good.

I'll meet you half way here. I'll agree that the Jedi Order is Lawful Neutral. They will follow the laws, even if they're atrocious.

By the time they realised their mistakes it was too late. It's ironic, but Yoda did in a way realise the Order was too protocol-bound. He broke their Lawful Good philosophy to allow Anakin to run wild and allow Windu to attempt to remove Palpatine. The former led to their secret downfall, the latter to their public downfall. Both moves were forced, the former by Fate and the latter by Palpatine, leading inevitably to the tragedy of the Purge.

Lawful neutral.

Now that is Damn Good Writing.

The Prequels?!?!

This kind of reverts to the very first point. You're judging the quality of writing on whether or not you like something. The Last Jedi isn't written badly just because you didn't like it. Like... Poe's rush on a Star Destroyer with a prank call is bad writing. Rose ramming Finn with a ship is bad writing. Like what if they just both died from the collision? (On the other hand, I'm sure she was down for that rather than seeing this dude get melted.) But other than those two situations the movie is written well. You just didn't like it.

Episode 2 and 3 both have scenes like that.. and Episode 1 is literally just those scenes strung together... but like... even though those two scenes are bad writing people could like them. Like, I bet a bunch of people love Poe prank calling a Star Destroyer and I'm sure a bunch of people love Rose ramming Finn so he can't melt himself. I'm personally offended if there is someone out there who is like, "I love the part where baby Anakin destroys the separatist fleet from in the hangar." I'm sure those people exist though.

P.P.S. Luke's switch from dissuading Rey to teaching her could have come when Yoda or Obi-Wan appeared to tell him that it was acceptable to have his first apprentice betray him, and that he needed to flow with the Force and trust Rey as well. Another "search your feelings" lesson for Luke. But we didn't really get that. We got Luke "No I won't teach you because Jedi are bad!" and Rey "No I really am good!" and Luke "I don't care, go and be turned" and Rey "Oh all right I'll just go because I'm awesome anyway" and then Yoda shows up...

it's frustrating because I think I understand where the plot is going, but it just isn't explained well at all.

First of all. Rey shows up and tells him his best friend got killed and that his Sister is probably next. So I'm not sure why you think he needed Ghostly intervention to decide to train her... and second... Yoda Ghost does show up... but also.. Luke is a nice guy. I'm not sure why you need a really drastic catalyst for him to stop being a jerk.

[iamfanboy]

Now that is Damn Good Writing.

So the prequels had potential. They COULD have been interesting stories. The first movie was Padme's story, and could have focused on exploring her character: a strong, honest politician who knows that sometimes you have to bend the rules but never, EVER break them - and how Palpatine manipulated her into the vote of no-confidence. The second movie could have been a cross between a film noir mystery (the clones! Where'd the clones come from? Who's the assassin?) and a forbidden romance. The third movie was the best of the prequels, and all it needed was less terrible dialogue.

But the first two movies failed as actual stories. I mean, let's follow Attack of the Clones. HOW does Palpatine plan to suddenly reveal the clone army without suspicion? Why, let the Jedi discover it! How does he do this? Why, by hiding the planet from the archives and sending the man who was the clone template as an assassin for the Jedi to follow, of course! How does he make sure that all of the pieces of the plan fall into place without a hitch? Uhh... the Force! The Plot Force!

There are three prequel scenes, which were cut, that ARE actually damn fine writing.

1) Attack of the Clones: Anakin and Padme have dinner with Padme's family. It's actually a beautiful, subtle little scene that does more to cement them being in a relationship than any amount of riding on badly CG'ed alien cows or "I hate sand".

2) Attack of the Clones: Padme refuses to sneak into the Separatist stronghold; instead she storms in, with Anakin at her back, and demands that Count Dooku surrender and release Obi-Wan immediately. It's the sort of mistake her character would make.

3) Revenge of the Sith: Padme on Alderaan, crying as she holds Leia. I shouldn't have to tell ANY Star Wars fan why this is important, but it showed, more than any amount of 'dying of heartbreak', just how much Anakin meant to Padme, and how far he went when he betrayed everything she believed in.

The fact that all these scenes were filmed and then cut (and in some cases, replaced by stupid CGI-fests!) cements how terrible the prequels were. There's a really great fan-cut of the initial three movies called Fall of the Jedi which, when you watch it, shows how much cruft and awful there was in the prequels - it cuts
more than 40 minutes from TPM and you lose nothing of value.


Now, I can say I had problems with The Last Jedi too. But compared to the prequels? The most you could say is "You could cut the mutiny/infiltration subplot and lose nothing."

It isn't the best Star Wars movie. In fact, of all the main movies currently out, I'd put it at #5, easy. But the prequels are 6, 7, and 8.