! There are people who accept Luke's complete reversal in character. That's fine. Some people have an easier time accepting such changes. Personally, I believe it takes more than a minute's worth of flashback scenes and a few lines of dialog to undo a complete arc of character development across three films.
! On the other hand, I eagerly await the One Piece sequel series to be released in 20 years. I will read on as Sabo is captured and sentenced to death by Marine Fleet Admiral Maroon Puppy while Pirate King Luffy mopes on Mount Corvo, too afraid to attempt a rescue. After all, it is better to fail without trying than to attempt a rescue and then fail due to his own weakness and incompetence. In the end, Sabo dies. Oh, and Luffy stretches his arm all the way over the Redline and dies of overexertion. It will be a bold new direction for the series from the visionary mangaka team of Tite Kubo and Hiro Mashima.
Star Wars Universe - Resurrection F
-
-
! Whereas this behaviour of Luke doesn't feel that out-of-character regarding his RotJ performance, it does, however, feel somewhat out-of-character if you consider the time which has passed. Isn't it somewhat implied that Luke did some Jedi stuff all over the decades - including mental training. Therefore it feels like some character regression, but regarding a non explicitly shown and only implied character development.
! Luke is considered a Jedi Master now, right? So that really implies some additional mental strength compared to back then in RotJ I'd say. Therefore it'd really have needed more than a brief scene where he snapped. Actually it would have needed a brief scene which also shows WHY he snapped. Like just more of a glimpse about what Snoke did to actually trigger this exact behaviour. -
Just watched the first episode of Netflix's Toys that Made Us, the Star Wars episode with Kenner.
I highly recommend it, great great show. -
"A plan"? You mean straight up lie or something?Because as far as I remember there was only the one plan.
I remember her having a plan which Poe ruined with his recklessness so I was talking about that plan that was ruined.
And Holdo did try to tell him that there was a plan, like, twice I think? Why are people so insistent on that she should have known that he was gonna mess up again and that when he does it's her fault somehow…
She mostly seems interested in making Poe understand that he doesn't get to question her but never has she given the impression of having a plan or really discuss it. She just tell him to wait and have hope.
Can't she have some faith in the people she works with?
Her first interaction with Poe is about how reckless he is. And not to long ago he disobeyed orders when he thought he knew better. Reassuring him that they have a solid plan and there is no need for recklessness seems like a good idea.
And how are everyone so sure that Poe would have gone with the jump-ship-plan if he had known about it and the base?
I don't know or care that he would have. But I think she should have told him to minimize the risk.
Me, I'm thinking he would have gone with his high-risk plan, that would have saved not only the rebels but also their cruiser. He have after all seen such plans succeed at least twice, starkiller base and the dreadnaught, and I'd wager a lot more times…
In which case I would be be fully mad at Poe for pure recklessness and loathe the poor purple lady that tried her best. Whereas in this case while I am glad that Poe reckless attitude did not pay of I can understand why he tried a long shot with the situation he tought he was in(dead for sure with a leadership without plan).
-
Hey guys. I've read quite a few articles recently that have seemed to reduce most of the arguments against this film and attempts at pointing out perceived flaws as rooted in subconscious and pure sexism/racism. Do you guys think this is accurate, or maybe even more so, do any of you think it has colored the debate and discussion in this forum thus far? I can post something a facebook friend posted as an example.
https://bittergertrude.com/2018/01/04/why-so-many-men-hate-the-last-jedi-but-cant-agree-on-why/
Personally, I do think that there's probably a decent chunk that falls under this, but I don't think it's a fair critique of… all the critique of this film.
-
She mostly seems interested in making Poe understand that he doesn't get to question her but never has she given the impression of having a plan or really discuss it. She just tell him to wait and have hope.
When he confronts her about it after all ships but the cruiser has been destroyed, she does imply that there is a plan. "Tell us that we have a plan, that there is hope," he asks and she responds with that there is hope, as you said, which then would imply that there is a plan.
Dunno where I got that she told him about it a second time though, my bad. ._.Her first interaction with Poe is about how reckless he is. And not to long ago he disobeyed orders when he thought he knew better. Reassuring him that they have a solid plan and there is no need for recklessness seems like a good idea.
Reassuring him is what she did, as I mentioned above. It didn't stick. And since he doesn't trust her enough to tell her his plan, why would he trust her reassurances?
I don't know or care that he would have. But I think she should have told him to minimize the risk.
Holdo would have cared though. Maybe she thought that he wouldn't like the plan and commit mutiny? Then not telling him would be to minimize the risk.
In which case I would be be fully mad at Poe for pure recklessness and loathe the poor purple lady that tried her best. Whereas in this case while I am glad that Poe reckless attitude did not pay of I can understand why he tried a long shot with the situation he tought he was in(dead for sure with a leadership without plan).
I'm guessing that that "loathe" should be "feel for", or the like?
Well, he was as wrong as you are. :PHey guys. I've read quite a few articles recently that have seemed to reduce most of the arguments against this film and attempts at pointing out perceived flaws as rooted in subconscious and pure sexism/racism. Do you guys think this is accurate, or maybe even more so, do any of you think it has colored the debate and discussion in this forum thus far? I can post something a facebook friend posted as an example.
https://bittergertrude.com/2018/01/04/why-so-many-men-hate-the-last-jedi-but-cant-agree-on-why/
Personally, I do think that there's probably a decent chunk that falls under this, but I don't think it's a fair critique of… all the critique of this film.
Hello! :)
I think it's accurate that at least a lot of the arguments against this film are rooted in sexism/racism. Most? Maybe. I'm sure it has coloured the debate to some extent. I haven't seen any outright sexism or racism here of course. But we all know that that stuff is pretty insidious. I'm rather certain it has affected my views of the film..
Of course it shouldn't be used as a counter point when someone is trying to point out some fault they perceive in the film. I could have used it a bunch when I defended Holdo, the fact that women in positions of power are judged harder is pretty well known and accepted. But it is only true in general so I would never accuse any single individual of sexism just because they unfairly, in my opinion, judged this one woman this one time.
Personally, the fact that a film, a freaking Star Wars film, can say so much on or about this have made it all the more enjoyable. Pretty sure I rank it above 5 now. :p8>5>7>4>6>1>3>2, truth.
-
Blalant racist and sexist "reviews" do exist, sadly.
But for the real criticism just compare the plausibility of the events that happen in Ep8 to Ep5. So contrived, obvious and hamfisted… I didn't saw Ep5 the first time and said; what?, wtf, why? like in Ep8. I said; woah, cool (he is the father).
-
Hey guys. I've read quite a few articles recently that have seemed to reduce most of the arguments against this film and attempts at pointing out perceived flaws as rooted in subconscious and pure sexism/racism. Do you guys think this is accurate, or maybe even more so, do any of you think it has colored the debate and discussion in this forum thus far? I can post something a facebook friend posted as an example.
Might be accurate in the first movie where I hated both Rey and The black stormtrooper. Rey for being a Mary Stue(mind overpowering Kylo, manipulating stormtrooper,and thee worst being the one Leia hugged why the hell is she the one Leia hugged) and Finn for being the usual black comic relief that was not necessary in this franchise and was not explain by his harsh military upbringing.
In Finn case I probably wouldn't have cared as much if he was just a white comic relief. So yeah maybe I am sexist/racist.
As far as last jedi go I mostly enjoyed Rey since they've partenered to someone else building an interesting connection and I only critizize a scene at the end that should have gone to another woman. And I don't really care for Finn I was much more bothered by her partner that brung nothing and make a weird move at the end.
I guess thinking purple lady handled Poe poorly is tainted by some unconscious sexism.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---When he confronts her about it after all ships but the cruiser has been destroyed, she does imply that there is a plan. "Tell us that we have a plan, that there is hope," he asks and she responds with that there is hope, as you said, which then would imply that there is a plan.
Dunno where I got that she told him about it a second time though, my bad.
Actually her quote seemed mostly to imply that even in the worst situation you should not give up hope. Basically never give up and considering how she doesn't do much to reassure him when he starts flipping out over the cargos being loaded I don't think I was being dense.Her words an action seemed more of someone trying to hide her powerlessness than someone with a secret. Of course both me and Poe were wrong but I never got the impression that she communicate clearly that she had a solid plan just that you should never give up.
Reassuring him is what she did, as I mentioned above. It didn't stick. And since he doesn't trust her enough to tell her his plan, why would he trust her reassurances?
I am not saying that it would have calmed him. Just that I think the situation could have been handled much better on her part and I am not sure why it was not aside from the plot. I don't even mind it much since I prefer Poe recklessness to have some consequences. Luke or Rose last move bothered me more. But I noticed what to me was a weird choice from the character.
! Holdo would have cared though. Maybe she thought that he wouldn't like the plan and commit mutiny? Then not telling him would be to minimize the risk.
So better let him believe no plan than a decent one? I have a hard time believing that was her thought process.I'm guessing that that "loathe" should be "feel for", or the like?
Well, he was as wrong as you are. :PYes.
-
Hey guys. I've read quite a few articles recently that have seemed to reduce most of the arguments against this film and attempts at pointing out perceived flaws as rooted in subconscious and pure sexism/racism. Do you guys think this is accurate, or maybe even more so, do any of you think it has colored the debate and discussion in this forum thus far? I can post something a facebook friend posted as an example.
https://bittergertrude.com/2018/01/04/why-so-many-men-hate-the-last-jedi-but-cant-agree-on-why/
Personally, I do think that there's probably a decent chunk that falls under this, but I don't think it's a fair critique of… all the critique of this film.
On one hand, I've seen blatantly racist/sexist beliefs in reviews, videos, and comments on YouTube, Rotten Tomatoes, and many other places. This does not include 2nd hand accounts in articles I've read, such as the case where the actress for Rose received hate tweets/messages.
On the other hand, I have seen just as much content devoted to praising and defending the film on the basis of its diversity, with little regard given to legitimate criticism. And if a criticism is acknowledged, it is often hand waved. The article you linked is a good example, although it is among the more hostile entries in this category that I've seen. By hostile, I mean it is more towards the "If you hate this movie, you are racist/sexist" line of thought than the more common "Diversity is a good thing. It is really too bad that people cannot get over race/sex and just enjoy the film".
I have also seen many, many, many articles, videos, reviews, comments, etc. that may come across as racist/sexist because they say things like "Social Justice Warriors ruined Star Wars". It should be noted that the Star Wars universe is diverse place, filled with thousands, if not millions, of species and races. However, some people see the articles defending the diversity in the films at the expense of legitimate criticism, they see J.J. Abrams called out for not including an important Asian character in The Force Awakens (despite already diversifying the cast with Rey, Finn, and Poe) followed by Rose appearing in The Last Jedi, they see Kathleen Kennedy wearing "The Force is Female" t-shirts, etc., and they cannot help but feel that 21st century politics have been blatantly forced into the Galaxy Far Far Away and the entire public narrative surrounding it. However, not everyone is capable of expressing these feelings politely, and some are obviously just jumping on the bandwagon as another way to criticize a very flawed film.
I don't know if it is fair to critique the critiques by attributing most of the perceived flaws to racism/sexism. While I did not follow the situation closely and I never saw the film, my understanding of the 2016 Ghostbusters situation is that while sexism and some racism was directed at the film, the narrative surrounding it made those negative attitudes out to be far more prevalent than they were, often at the expense of reasonable complaints. While I may be wrong about Ghostbusters (someone please correct me), I certainly believe that hindsight will show that is what we are seeing now with The Last Jedi.
Also, I feel I should state that if we remove all possible racist/sexist complaints and the resulting publicity around those issues by replacing all actors in the film with identical stick figures, almost all of my issues related to story, tone, pacing, characterization, in-series consistency, etc., remain.
-
There are definitely pro tlj critics and fans that simply wave any legit criticism against the movie away as racist or sexist, even if no such things were said. Of course there are idiots who say dumb things, but lumping all criticism against the movie under oh those people are just racist and sexist arguments is pathethic.
-
Hey guys. I've read quite a few articles recently that have seemed to reduce most of the arguments against this film and attempts at pointing out perceived flaws as rooted in subconscious and pure sexism/racism. Do you guys think this is accurate, or maybe even more so, do any of you think it has colored the debate and discussion in this forum thus far? I can post something a facebook friend posted as an example.
https://bittergertrude.com/2018/01/04/why-so-many-men-hate-the-last-jedi-but-cant-agree-on-why/
Personally, I do think that there's probably a decent chunk that falls under this, but I don't think it's a fair critique of… all the critique of this film.
It exists, and I would even agree that there's some of it going on subconciously where people who aren't raging mysogynists and/or Racists are having subtle biases affect them. Desa bsically admitted to this above.
It does feel like a LOT of criticisms thrown at a few of the characters here are things that had analogues in the Original Trilogy that got a pass there, but don't here, and some of them definitely seem to have at least a hint of sexism and/or racism peppering them.
Like:
At the very beginning of the Original Trilogy, one of the things Luke wanted to do was go to "The Academy" and learn to fight so he can join the Rebel like Biggs did. He's a farm boy with literally zero training. It's never mentioned he has any formal combat training or anything of the like. We just get the vague statement that, in his own words he's "Not such a bad pilot myself" and he also off-handedly mentions that he "used to bullzeye womp rats in his T-16 back home". That's it. Nothing else in his background shows he should be capable of being involved in an Aerial dogfight, yet he's the her of the Battle of Yavin. What little "training" he does get in the movie comes from Ben who doesn't teach him anything about piloting or aerial combat or anything. He only trains him a very little bit that we are shown to feel the force.
The Prequels get their fair share of deserved criticism, but one thing I almost never see brought up is Anakin's ability to Pod Race. The movie set itself up for this to be fair, but he flat out says no human beings can do it, but he can and Qui-Gon says it's because he's using the Force without realizing it.
That basically mirrors both aspects of the big complaint about Rey. That she's too good a fighter and being able to use the Force without formal training make her a "Mary Sue", however Rey has way more in the way of explanations for why she can do those things in this movie than either Luke or Anakin got in their respective first movies.
1 - Rey isn't some farmgirl with a loving family who has no reason to fight. When we first see her, she's alone and scavenging. She visibly carries a weapon on her in the form of her staff the first time you see her. This separates her from the other two, neither of which start out in a position where it makes sense that they are accomplished fighters. Whiny entitled farmboy and Slave Boy who, despite being a slave, still lives well enough with his mom to say things like "Yipee" and "That's so Wizard!" vs. Lone scavenger girl who has been on her own her entire life
2 - Rey never actually uses any real Force Powers in the first movie until Kylo Ren tries to invade her mind. He basically forces her into fight or flight mode and makes her strain to fight him off. Then when she realizes "Wait, I was able to fight back? Maz was right, I can use the force" She actually tries to use it, and we get exactly 2 major uses out of her. After a failed attempt, she Jedi Mind-tricks that stormtrooper, and she grabs the lightsaber. That's it.
Luke, meanwhile, got trained once by Obi-wan to simply use the force to anticipate where those Lazer blasts were coming from that droid in order to block them and… that's it. That's all we see him teach on-screen and Luke never mentions getting any more lessons from him. He gets trained in exactly zero other force powers as far as the audience is told. But, between then and when he actually goes to Yoda for training we see him make the shot that blows up the Death Star and force grab his lightsaber on Hoth despite it never being shown Ben taught him either of those things.
3 - The mechanical and piloting skills are telegraphed too. The Mechanical skills are simple, she's spent her life taking apart scrapped ships and the like to sell. It's not a stretch that she also in that process, learned to put them back together. She lives in the remains of an AT-ST Walker. She also says at one point she's been in the Falcon before while nobody was watching, just never turned it on before. Her being actually good at flying is the only thing here that's a little bit of a stretch, but again no more than anything Luke does in the first movie.
But despite all this, she gets labeled a "Mary Sue" while Luke and Anakin don't. It's hard to look at this and not see at least some element of sexism at play, however to play devil's advocate, it could also be nostalgia goggles. The same people might consider these flaws if Star Wars first came out today, but give them a pass because "Muh Childhood!"
On one hand, I've seen blatantly racist/sexist beliefs in reviews, videos, and comments on YouTube, Rotten Tomatoes, and many other places. This does not include 2nd hand accounts in articles I've read, such as the case where the actress for Rose received hate tweets/messages.
On the other hand, I have seen just as much content devoted to praising and defending the film on the basis of its diversity, with little regard given to legitimate criticism. And if a criticism is acknowledged, it is often hand waved. The article you linked is a good example, although it is among the more hostile entries in this category that I've seen. By hostile, I mean it is more towards the "If you hate this movie, you are racist/sexist" line of thought than the more common "Diversity is a good thing. It is really too bad that people cannot get over race/sex and just enjoy the film".
See, this is interesting to me because I just read the article and I don't get that vibe from it at all. She's just focussed on one thing. She's acknowledging that the sexist and racist voices exist, which you yourself did in your post above, and is focussing solely on them. At no point does she bring up any of the major legitimate criticisms of the film like Holdo not telling Poe her plan or Canto Bight being too long and probably in need of a bit of tightening up. She also barely mentions Luke at all, and one thing the more vocal angry people like to do is bash on Luke not being the perfect badass Jedi master they wanted him to be etc.
Regardless of whether or not you agree with those points (I disagree with most criticism of Luke in the film for example) those aren't criticisms that can be easily tied back to the Sexist assholes. If you remove Sexism, there are other reasons why a person might have felt those ways may it be genuine flaws in the film or nostalgia.
What she's basically doing is just saying "The sexist and racist assholes complaining about the movie for sexist and racist reasons exist" (which agian, you don't disagree with based on your post) "and here's my theory as to exactly why this movie triggered the racist/sexist assholes".
She basically sums this up at the end:
I don’t think every human who disliked The Last Jedi is an evil, evil misogynist. I do think that we have so deeply internalized sexist narrative tropes that we see them as “correct” and “good filmmaking” while seeing their absence as “flaws.” We read female characters differently than male characters, and we have internalized expectations for female character arcs. Instead of seeing this film for what it is, people are criticizing it for not conforming to the expectations they have of female characters. It’s fine to dislike something, but we should all spend a little more time thinking deeply about why before we charge onto the internet with “I’m fine with female-driven films, BUT . . .”
I don't exactly see anything hateful or attacking here that isn't directed specifically at the Racist/Sexist assholes.
I have also seen many, many, many articles, videos, reviews, comments, etc. that may come across as racist/sexist because they say things like "Social Justice Warriors ruined Star Wars". It should be noted that the Star Wars universe is diverse place, filled with thousands, if not millions, of species and races. However, some people see the articles defending the diversity in the films at the expense of legitimate criticism, they see J.J. Abrams called out for not including an important Asian character in The Force Awakens (despite already diversifying the cast with Rey, Finn, and Poe) followed by Rose appearing in The Last Jedi, they see Kathleen Kennedy wearing "The Force is Female" t-shirts, etc., and they cannot help but feel that 21st century politics have been blatantly forced into the Galaxy Far Far Away and the entire public narrative surrounding it. However, not everyone is capable of expressing these feelings politely, and some are obviously just jumping on the bandwagon as another way to criticize a very flawed film.
Ok, first: "Social Justice Warrior" is a snarl word at this point. Any actual use it had describing a certain kind of extremist progressive types no longer applies. Assholes use it online to describe any progressive voices who dare to share their opinions.
So when it comes up… yeah, it's not surprising that it comes off as racist or sexist because that's usually how it's used: To shut down anybody trying to talk about Racism or Sexism.
Second, I absolutely hate the "Keep politics out of my media" argument because... that's not really possible in many ways. If we're talking about Art as a form of expression, which film definitely is, then it's hard to keep the people involved from imparting their worldviews onto things.
Sometimes, when looking back at the media it becomes hard to see how, but politics or at least worldviews are at play in most of the media we consume whether you like it or not. Whenever people talk about "Keeping Politics out of Comics" for example, I can't help but facepalm considering stuff like Captain America's first issue being Punching Hitler BEFORE the US entered the war, earning the creators death threats from Nazi sympathizers and people who just didn't want to go to war again so soon after WWI, or Stan Lee insisting upon publishing an anti-drug issue despite the fact that the Comics Code Authority forbade it and he had to take the Comics Code seal off those issues for them to see print.
In film, Ghostbusters is dripping with 80s era conservative Reaganomics. The Ghostbusters are 3 entrepreneurs trying to start their small business and pull themselves up by their bootstraps with hard work and determination alone while the only human character who can be considered an antagonist of the film is a man representing the EPA who actually brings up some good points about the Ghostbusters' equipment being dangerous (unlicensed nuclear accelerator anyone?) but they undercut any point he had by portraying him as the biggest asshole they can because: Small Businesses good, regulation bad.
This is very against my own personal politics but I still love Ghostbusters, it's a classic.Also yes, Star Wars was political originally.
It was about the Vietnam War, which was still fresh in peoples' minds at the time.
@George Lucas:
It was really about the Vietnam War, and that was the period where [President Richard] Nixon was trying to run for a [second] term, which got me to thinking historically about how do democracies get turned into dictatorships?
The Prequels were an allegory for George Bush and the Patriot act. Specifically that they keep giving unchecked power to the government to stop an apparent threat and keep the people safe. Padme even has that ham-fisted line where she goes "So this is how liberty dies? To thunderous applause".
It may not have been handled super well, but it was still an attempt at commentary on the political landscape of the day it came out in.
It's just we look back and the world isn't like that anymore. The public's memory of the War in Vietnam has long-since faded and a lot of the post 9/11 issues have taken on new forms. How often does the news still talk about the Patriot act? So it's easy to look back at those movies NOW and see them as fairly apolitical but at the time they came out the experience would have been much like people are seeing in these new movies… even if the simple act of including women and PoC as major rules automatically counts as "Political" is eye-rolling to me. I get it. I'm not blind. I see how our political discourse has changed and how actual White Nationalists and straight up Nazis are now involved in our political discourse, so giving any parts to minority actors kinda IS political, I just hate it. I hate that simply putting a woman in a position of power for example automatically counts as "politics".
Like, I see a LOT of people calling Holdo SJW related. Like, her having Purple hair has something to do with tumblr?... But usually when I see "SJW" used in complaints about the movie, they're attached to Holdo... and I don't get it...
At no point in the movie does she say ANYTHING even vaguely "feministy". She never says she thinks Poe is bad at his job because he's a man, never mentions "The patriarchy", never says anything like "We're doing well because we women are running the ship now!" or anything like that... in fact, I think you could take Holdo's character and keep EVERYTHING she does EXACTLY the same. Same action, same dialog, same everything. Even keep the purple hair because why not... and just make her a guy... and it would still work. Not a SINGLE line in the movie would stop making sense. She's a character first, woman second. The movie does nothing to insist she's special because she's a woman...
Yet she's one of the major lightning rods for "Feminists ruining Star Wars" complaints?
I don't know if it is fair to critique the critiques by attributing most of the perceived flaws to racism/sexism. While I did not follow the situation closely and I never saw the film, my understanding of the 2016 Ghostbusters situation is that while sexism and some racism was directed at the film, the narrative surrounding it made those negative attitudes out to be far more prevalent than they were, often at the expense of reasonable complaints. While I may be wrong about Ghostbusters (someone please correct me), I certainly believe that hindsight will show that is what we are seeing now with The Last Jedi.
The problem with Ghostbusters was that the discussion of the film had just gotten so toxic all around that nobody wanted to bother.
Honestly, the movie got 74% on RT and I'd have to overall agree with that. It was actually solid and fun even if it wasn't the instant classic the original was… but that didn't stop an army of people who decided it was awful before it had even came out from decrying the film online and heavily pushing the narrative that it was a bad movie at best, feminist propaganda at words to the point that people were accusing Sony of paying off reviewers to get it that 74%.
Yes there was real sexism going on, no that doesn't mean all criticism was sexist, but that also doesn't mean the criticism was some kind of objective fact either. Ghostbusters 2016 is not some objectively bad movie that everyone is required to hate.... but that's how it felt like to be someone who liked it online.
You either hate the movie like the internet says you're supposed to, or you're an SJW Cuck who is defending the movie because: feminism instead of actually liking the movie.
This is one of those situations where "we need to look at both sides" is actually an apt statement.
If you're in the camp that dislikes one or both of these films but not for sexist and/or racist reasons, it definitely sucks to get lumped in with the legitimate assholes who exist in this discussion... however, it also really sucks when you are someone who genuinely enjoyed one or both of them who is having your opinion also dismissed as just "defending it because feminism"
-
Blalant racist and sexist "reviews" do exist, sadly.
But for the real criticism just compare the plausibility of the events that happen in Ep8 to Ep5. So contrived, obvious and hamfisted… I didn't saw Ep5 the first time and said; what?, wtf, why? like in Ep8. I said; woah, cool (he is the father).
How old were you when you first saw episode Empire, and how old are you now.
Because seriously. Vader being Luke's father is a complete nonsense twist that makes zero sense even after decades of retconning, only topped in what?!? factor by Leia somehow being his sister.
-
Speaking of contrived and hamfisted, I think the most contrived and hamfisted part of any episodes is the first part of Episode 6. Does anybody actually know what exactly Luke's plan was in order to deal with Jabba? Did he have any actual plan at all beyond going to him somehow and then just manipulate his mind? Seriously this whole first part of the movie just is a complete mess. Everything feels so contrived and totally random.
-
Speaking of contrived and hamfisted, I think the most contrived and hamfisted part of any episodes is the first part of Episode 6. Does anybody actually know what exactly Luke's plan was in order to deal with Jabba? Did he have any actual plan at all beyond going to him somehow and then just manipulate his mind? Seriously this whole first part of the movie just is a complete mess. Everything feels so contrived and totally random.
Might be related to the concept that the scene wasn't an organic part of the plot that was there for Story reasons, it was there because they didn't know if Harrison Ford would do another one after Empire so they wanted an excuse to get him out of the 3rd movie if they needed to.
When he agreed to come back, suddenly you need a scene where they GET him back.And yeah, there was basically no reason for the convoluted plan. Luke didn't have to put in any real effort to get an audience with Jabba, they could have easily just had him go in there, give Jabba his chance to give up Han peacefully/for money, and when Jabba refused, get all lightsabery on folks in there and be done with it.
The entire thing was overly complicated for no reason and makes very little sense if you think about it.
-
Speaking of contrived and hamfisted, I think the most contrived and hamfisted part of any episodes is the first part of Episode 6. Does anybody actually know what exactly Luke's plan was in order to deal with Jabba? Did he have any actual plan at all beyond going to him somehow and then just manipulate his mind? Seriously this whole first part of the movie just is a complete mess. Everything feels so contrived and totally random.
Honestly, this same sentiment applies to the entirety of The Force Awakens.
-
Yeah, to this day I have no clue if everything with infiltrating Jabba's palace was part of elaborate plan or if everyone was acting independently. But assuming it was all part of one big plan…
1. Have Lando infiltrate Jabba's palace and disguise himself as a guard
2. Send R2 and 3PO to deliver Luke's request for an audience and offer them as gifts (after which Luke is somehow informed that Jabba didn't accept his request)
3. Disguise Leia as a bounty hunter and turn in Chewbacca for his bounty
4. Leia frees Han from the carbonite, but then they both get inevitably captured
5. Luke finally arrives and goes to town on Jabba's crew and for some reason he let R2 hold onto his lightsaber -
Yeah, to this day I have no clue if everything with infiltrating Jabba's palace was part of elaborate plan or if everyone was acting independently. But assuming it was all part of one big plan…
I think the broad plan was "get in, find Han, get out. We'll sneak in backup bit by bit so it's not too suspicious." Luke going in at the end wasn't the plan all along, but the last resort if none of the early steps work, because Luke going in will probably mean there's going to be a fight.
Lando scopes the place for the layout and Han's location and schedules. He got there, and then passed along the message "yeah, there's no way I can manage to sneakily do this on my own." So they send in help bit by bit.
R2 is there to do security hacking and hide Luke's lightsaber, if needed. Because obviously if Luke went there weapon in hand it'd be frisked and taken away or put everyone on edge. So R2 carrying the lightsaber was to sneak it in, and be "in case". Not "when", but "in case."
3P0 is just there to be the big obvious distraction he always is, and to provide actual speaking dialogue. He's mostly to get R2 in place.
"Have everyone get actually captured rather than fake captured and then taken outside to be fed to a monster" was probably NOT planned.
-
But narrative-wise everything else besides an elaborate plan doesn't make any sense at that point of the story. What was needed was to show some character growth for Luke. That he no longer is someone who just rushes blindly without too much thought into the scene - just like he did at the end of Empire.
-
Didn't get to see the film until just recently. With an enormous franchise film such as this, there's bound to be unreasonable expectations.
I had expectations of my own, based initially on what TFA set up and what the trailers told about TLJ. I thought quite a bit about how the Luke-Rey scene would continue in TLJ, trying to keep my expectations in check. No single word/words could possibly topple what one envisions in one's mind, but with a two-year wait and the ending of TFA your fantasy does run amuck. But comedy?
I keep hearing that it "subverts expecations", used as a positive. I wasn't expecting comedy, yes. My expectation was subverted. But it didn't make me chuckle; I felt nothing. A person shows up on your island with your lightsaber, the first person you've seen in years (?), and you just toss the lightsaber and walk past her? In that moment I didn't even feel a slight interest to know why he did that. It was just a waste of time.
And that's the whole movie to me. A director/writer giving people stuff to do because they are the main character's, and they must do something.
Finn's visiting a completely uninteresting planet, goofing around even more so than in TFA.
Captain Plasma, why is she still even a thing …
Speed 3, but this time in space.
There are films that have bad guys - who seem like the main villains - who are then removed, unexpectedly, and it works. But when you have a Sith, with a scarred face, who's good in the way of the force, who's able to use force lighting, who's the leader of the new Empire ... you do expect slightly more information to be filled in. In most films you wouldn't care, but those things I mentioned in themselves already tell a story, but an incomplete story. When Palpatine was first introduced, I had no reason to question where he came from and how he was able to do force lighting because I knew too little of the force and the backstory of this universe.
When TFA come out I was baffled how the New Order had become so powerful (not the economics but from a repetition point of view) but with TLJ we are back at square 1. I've read briefly about what's told in the books and comic books and so on, about their rise to power, and that's all fine and well, but from a creative point of view its just plain boring.
I've seen people mention Knight of Ren. I think at this point I don't give a damn. If Rey is able to hold her own with what I presume to be professionally trained swordsmen, and hold her own against Kylo Ren in a force pull battle, really what can these Knights really do to impress me?
And that mirror scene was also a waste of time.
-
[HIDE]See, this is interesting to me because I just read the article and I don't get that vibe from it at all. She's just focussed on one thing. She's acknowledging that the sexist and racist voices exist, which you yourself did in your post above, and is focussing solely on them. At no point does she bring up any of the major legitimate criticisms of the film like Holdo not telling Poe her plan or Canto Bight being too long and probably in need of a bit of tightening up. She also barely mentions Luke at all, and one thing the more vocal angry people like to do is bash on Luke not being the perfect badass Jedi master they wanted him to be etc.
Regardless of whether or not you agree with those points (I disagree with most criticism of Luke in the film for example) those aren't criticisms that can be easily tied back to the Sexist assholes. If you remove Sexism, there are other reasons why a person might have felt those ways may it be genuine flaws in the film or nostalgia.
What she's basically doing is just saying "The sexist and racist assholes complaining about the movie for sexist and racist reasons exist" (which agian, you don't disagree with based on your post) "and here's my theory as to exactly why this movie triggered the racist/sexist assholes".
She basically sums this up at the end:
I don't exactly see anything hateful or attacking here that isn't directed specifically at the Racist/Sexist assholes.
[/HIDE]Perhaps "attacking" is the wrong word. "Self-assuredly dismissive" might be better.
A couple of examples:
MORE ROSE TICO. Because she wasn’t shown through Finn’s point of view, the subplot didn’t then become about Finn trying to “win” her, making it feel pointless to people who see a male/female pairing and expect that dynamic. Instead of seeing it as “buddies race against the clock while facing impossible odds,” a very common trope even just in Star Wars films alone (GET THAT SHIELD DOWN), they saw it as a pointless diversion. If Rose had been a male character, this subplot would have gone as unremarked as every other time it’s been used in decades of filmmaking. Because she’s a woman who isn’t presented as an event in the life of a man, she’s everything from a flaw in the filmmaking to an affront to fragile masculinity.
She does not explicitly refer to Canto Bight, however that is clearly the subplot she is talking about when she discusses the “buddies race against the clock while facing impossible odds” subplot. Canto Bight is widely considered pointless because it could have been written out easily enough, it extends the runtime a solid half hour, it interrupts more interesting parts of the film, etc. The article instead presents this criticism as being due to gender biases.
VICE ADMIRAL HOLDO. There’s nothing particularly unusual about this character, the way she’s used, or her sacrifice apart from her gender. “Why is this random character suddenly in charge? Do we trust them?” could be the plot description of thousands of Hollywood films, but when the character is a woman, it’s suddenly a flaw in the filmmaking. “Why is Holdo’s sacrifice seen as brave and Finn’s seen as foolhardy?” The parallel sacrifice to Holdo is Luke, not Finn. Luke sacrifices himself to allow what’s left of the Resistance to escape, just as Holdo sacrificed herself earlier to stop the First Order from picking off Resistance shuttles one by one, allowing the survivors to escape. The parallel sacrifice to Finn is Poe sacrificing the entire Resistance bomber fleet. Both Poe and Finn ignore orders from women to stand down and escape in favor of chasing glorious, but pyrrhic, victories.
The "Why is this random character in charge?" question applies because we are in an established franchise with characters that fulfill her role (General Leia and Admiral Ackbar) who are suddenly/clumsily written off to make way for a contextless new character. Fine in a standalone film or new franchise, but a perfectly valid criticism for an established franchise. Also, "Do we trust them?". Admiral Holdo is portrayed as being in conflict with our point of view protagonist Poe Dameron. Of course people will question whether to trust her. Once again, she says these are perceived flaws becuse Holdo is a woman.
She also portrays criticism towards Holdo's sacrifice as being due to her gender. The most common complaint I've heard for it is that it completely breaks hyperspace. She tries justifying it by comparing it to Luke's sacrifice, which is very controversial as well. As for Finn and Poe… Finn's sacrifice should not be considered foolish. No one knew Luke would show up to buy time for the rebels to escape. Finn's sacrifice is only foolish in hindsight knowing that Luke shows up. Poe sacrificing the bomber fleet is actually valid in hindsight. Had the bombers not destroyed the dreadnought, the vessel would have followed them through hyperspace and its superlasers may well have been in range and the rebels would have been doomed. Here, she is drawing attention to Admiral Holdo's gender in what should otherwise be a discussion about whether or not the writing makes sense.
[HIDE]
Ok, first: "Social Justice Warrior" is a snarl word at this point. Any actual use it had describing a certain kind of extremist progressive types no longer applies. Assholes use it online to describe any progressive voices who dare to share their opinions.So when it comes up… yeah, it's not surprising that it comes off as racist or sexist because that's usually how it's used: To shut down anybody trying to talk about Racism or Sexism.
Second, I absolutely hate the "Keep politics out of my media" argument because... that's not really possible in many ways. If we're talking about Art as a form of expression, which film definitely is, then it's hard to keep the people involved from imparting their worldviews onto things.
Sometimes, when looking back at the media it becomes hard to see how, but politics or at least worldviews are at play in most of the media we consume whether you like it or not. Whenever people talk about "Keeping Politics out of Comics" for example, I can't help but facepalm considering stuff like Captain America's first issue being Punching Hitler BEFORE the US entered the war, earning the creators death threats from Nazi sympathizers and people who just didn't want to go to war again so soon after WWI, or Stan Lee insisting upon publishing an anti-drug issue despite the fact that the Comics Code Authority forbade it and he had to take the Comics Code seal off those issues for them to see print.
In film, Ghostbusters is dripping with 80s era conservative Reaganomics. The Ghostbusters are 3 entrepreneurs trying to start their small business and pull themselves up by their bootstraps with hard work and determination alone while the only human character who can be considered an antagonist of the film is a man representing the EPA who actually brings up some good points about the Ghostbusters' equipment being dangerous (unlicensed nuclear accelerator anyone?) but they undercut any point he had by portraying him as the biggest asshole they can because: Small Businesses good, regulation bad.
This is very against my own personal politics but I still love Ghostbusters, it's a classic.Also yes, Star Wars was political originally.
It was about the Vietnam War, which was still fresh in peoples' minds at the time.
The Prequels were an allegory for George Bush and the Patriot act. Specifically that they keep giving unchecked power to the government to stop an apparent threat and keep the people safe. Padme even has that ham-fisted line where she goes "So this is how liberty dies? To thunderous applause".
It may not have been handled super well, but it was still an attempt at commentary on the political landscape of the day it came out in.
It's just we look back and the world isn't like that anymore. The public's memory of the War in Vietnam has long-since faded and a lot of the post 9/11 issues have taken on new forms. How often does the news still talk about the Patriot act? So it's easy to look back at those movies NOW and see them as fairly apolitical but at the time they came out the experience would have been much like people are seeing in these new movies... even if the simple act of including women and PoC as major rules automatically counts as "Political" is eye-rolling to me. I get it. I'm not blind. I see how our political discourse has changed and how actual White Nationalists and straight up Nazis are now involved in our political discourse, so giving any parts to minority actors kinda IS political, I just hate it. I hate that simply putting a woman in a position of power for example automatically counts as "politics".[/HIDE]
I will admit I have not really considered the political context when the Star Wars films were released, or really films in general. That's a good call on Ghostbusters. I haven't seen it since I was in elementary/middle school (and only then because it had ghosts), so that's interesting to think about. As for Star Wars, the only one I even vaguely remember the release for is Revenge of the Sith when I was 11. I'm aware of the Vietnam connections surrounding the original trilogy, so maybe there was more controversy when the films were released. However, I can only use hindsight, and it seems to me that the Rebels vs. Empire story could easily reflect World War II, the American Revolution, or a number of other conflicts. For the prequels, I was aware of some of the post 9/11 and Patriot Act rhetoric used in them, but I once again cannot comment on controversy. I'm sure there are historical situations that are analogous to the political situation in the prequels outside of the United States in 2005 (for fictional parallels, I've always felt Legend of the Galactic Heroes was thematically similar to the prequels in many ways), but I am not historically aware enough to point them out.
As for the new films, the politics just seem off to me. If I had to say, I feel like the first two trilogies contain the politics of the time but in a way that can be easily generalized, and the characters themselves reflected the fictional world they lived in. Even if, for example, Billy Dee Williams and Samual L. Jackson were hired in explicit attempts to diversify the series, I've always felt their characters worked within the context of Star Wars. Now, the politics of the Star Wars galaxy are somewhat of a mess, and it feels like the characters are more a reflection of real world politics than Star Wars politics. This film feels very 2017 for me. I don't know. Perhaps I'm just experiencing whiplash from being unaware of political critcism of the films to suddenly seeing the world flooded with it due to the fact that everyone and their dog can comment/discuss/complain/scream about it online.
This is one of those situations where "we need to look at both sides" is actually an apt statement.
If you're in the camp that dislikes one or both of these films but not for sexist and/or racist reasons, it definitely sucks to get lumped in with the legitimate assholes who exist in this discussion… however, it also really sucks when you are someone who genuinely enjoyed one or both of them who is having your opinion also dismissed as just "defending it because feminism"
Unfortunately, this is often forgotten by both sides of the argument.
[HIDE]It exists, and I would even agree that there's some of it going on subconciously where people who aren't raging mysogynists and/or Racists are having subtle biases affect them. Desa bsically admitted to this above.
It does feel like a LOT of criticisms thrown at a few of the characters here are things that had analogues in the Original Trilogy that got a pass there, but don't here, and some of them definitely seem to have at least a hint of sexism and/or racism peppering them.
Like:
At the very beginning of the Original Trilogy, one of the things Luke wanted to do was go to "The Academy" and learn to fight so he can join the Rebel like Biggs did. He's a farm boy with literally zero training. It's never mentioned he has any formal combat training or anything of the like. We just get the vague statement that, in his own words he's "Not such a bad pilot myself" and he also off-handedly mentions that he "used to bullzeye womp rats in his T-16 back home". That's it. Nothing else in his background shows he should be capable of being involved in an Aerial dogfight, yet he's the her of the Battle of Yavin. What little "training" he does get in the movie comes from Ben who doesn't teach him anything about piloting or aerial combat or anything. He only trains him a very little bit that we are shown to feel the force.The Prequels get their fair share of deserved criticism, but one thing I almost never see brought up is Anakin's ability to Pod Race. The movie set itself up for this to be fair, but he flat out says no human beings can do it, but he can and Qui-Gon says it's because he's using the Force without realizing it.
That basically mirrors both aspects of the big complaint about Rey. That she's too good a fighter and being able to use the Force without formal training make her a "Mary Sue", however Rey has way more in the way of explanations for why she can do those things in this movie than either Luke or Anakin got in their respective first movies.
1 - Rey isn't some farmgirl with a loving family who has no reason to fight. When we first see her, she's alone and scavenging. She visibly carries a weapon on her in the form of her staff the first time you see her. This separates her from the other two, neither of which start out in a position where it makes sense that they are accomplished fighters. Whiny entitled farmboy and Slave Boy who, despite being a slave, still lives well enough with his mom to say things like "Yipee" and "That's so Wizard!" vs. Lone scavenger girl who has been on her own her entire life
2 - Rey never actually uses any real Force Powers in the first movie until Kylo Ren tries to invade her mind. He basically forces her into fight or flight mode and makes her strain to fight him off. Then when she realizes "Wait, I was able to fight back? Maz was right, I can use the force" She actually tries to use it, and we get exactly 2 major uses out of her. After a failed attempt, she Jedi Mind-tricks that stormtrooper, and she grabs the lightsaber. That's it.
Luke, meanwhile, got trained once by Obi-wan to simply use the force to anticipate where those Lazer blasts were coming from that droid in order to block them and… that's it. That's all we see him teach on-screen and Luke never mentions getting any more lessons from him. He gets trained in exactly zero other force powers as far as the audience is told. But, between then and when he actually goes to Yoda for training we see him make the shot that blows up the Death Star and force grab his lightsaber on Hoth despite it never being shown Ben taught him either of those things.
3 - The mechanical and piloting skills are telegraphed too. The Mechanical skills are simple, she's spent her life taking apart scrapped ships and the like to sell. It's not a stretch that she also in that process, learned to put them back together. She lives in the remains of an AT-ST Walker. She also says at one point she's been in the Falcon before while nobody was watching, just never turned it on before. Her being actually good at flying is the only thing here that's a little bit of a stretch, but again no more than anything Luke does in the first movie.
But despite all this, she gets labeled a "Mary Sue" while Luke and Anakin don't. It's hard to look at this and not see at least some element of sexism at play, however to play devil's advocate, it could also be nostalgia goggles. The same people might consider these flaws if Star Wars first came out today, but give them a pass because "Muh Childhood!"[/HIDE]
I know this was not originally directed at me, but I feel you are misrepresenting both Anakin and Luke.
For Anakin, the dinner scene in The Phantom Menace does a good job of establishing his abilities regarding podracing. Humans cannot typically podrace because their reflexes cannot keep up like those of weird alien species. However, Anakin has force-enhanced reflexes that he can use to keep up, and this is a fairly consistent ability for all force users in Star Wars. Shmi Skywalker explicitly states Watto has made Anakin podrace in the past, so he has experience in it, and one of Anakin's friends later says that Anakin has never won a race. As a result, Anakin's ability to podrace is firmly established by the film. Anakin also has decent mehcanical abilities because that is his actual job. I have no desire to defend Anakin in The Phantom Menace beyond that.
For Luke, you are giving him way, way, way too much credit. Luke's entire resume at the start of Star Wars is "A whiney farmboy who developed decent flying abilities as a hobby." Flying is the only ability Luke has, and it is mentioned at least three times before he is seen in an X-Wing. Even then, Han calls out his inexperience on the Millenium Falcon, he is nearly shot down twice in his X-wing, and he nearly crashes into the Death Star on a strafing run. He may be competent, but he is not amazing. The fact that he is in the dogfight at all can be attributed to either the rebellion needing all available pilots or one of the few instances of main character powers that actually works in his favor. He is also incompetent as a fighter, as shown by the tusken raider, the cantina scene, and the mess on the Death Star. As for the force, his entire lesson with Obi-Wan consists of him learning to trust the force enough to know where to move his lightsaber and block the shots by the drone. This is the exact same ability demonstrated during the trench run where he trusts the force to know the exact moment he needs to fire the torpedoes.
-
There's something I really don't get about the fan reaction to this movie: why do most people seem to accept the fact that they were even able to abandon and later rejoin the space chase at will?
General complaints about that part of the movie:
1.) Even if X-Wings are faster than the main ship, both have hyperdrives. It should take an unreasonably long amount of time to catch up to the fleet, and they'd probably be too late.
2.) The ONLY PERSON IN THE UNIVERSE WHO CAN HELP THEM just happens to be on a planet that they're randomly cruising by.
3.) The entire phone call scene makes no sense. How do phone calls even work in hyperspace? Who was chasing Maz and why? How did she even know about THE ONLY PERSON IN THE UNIVERSE WHO CAN HELP THEM?
4.) The entire casino scene.
5.) Why did they decide to leave without him? There was a great opportunity for Finn to use the force and save the day, but they looked like idiots instead.
-
The chase scene is very dumb, but they're not in hyperspace for it. So a ship with a hyperdrive can leave and return with no problem.
-
5.) Why did they decide to leave without him? There was a great opportunity for Finn to use the force and save the day, but they looked like idiots instead.
Despite rampant speculation, there has been zero actual indication that Finn is force sensitive. He held a lightsaber once. Doesn't make him a jedi.
Who was chasing Maz and why? How did she even know about THE ONLY PERSON IN THE UNIVERSE WHO CAN HELP THEM?
She was established as a person that has a lot of contacts and gets into a lot of situations. We actually don't need specifics as to what kind of trouble she was in (though I'm sure some books will be happy to flesh that out.)
As for the other stuff, coincidences run strong in the franchise. Like Luke somehow getting tangled up with Leia's scheme that brings him into meeting up with his father in a great big universe.
I just assume Maz went "Oh hey, you're in that general area, I know a guy nearby that can help you out."
rather than
"I know one guy but you have to go to where he is."She picked a contact to match their area, and it's entirely possible if they'd been in a different system she would have recommended someone else. He obviously wasn't he ONLY qualified hacker, the gang met another equally qualified guy within ten feet of him.
-
The chase scene is very dumb, but they're not in hyperspace for it. So a ship with a hyperdrive can leave and return with no problem.
Which is in itself a huge plothole because the first order should be able to use a multitude of its small ships to go in hyperspace close enough to the last of the rebels to down them for good.
-
I finally saw Star Wars. I love it. I haven't taken the time to read back several pages yet, but why do so many people hate this movie? Is it just because they're whining about all the women and other races? Or are they just nitpicking?
All I know is that I want BB-8 for my droid/familiar. Nobody can have a problem with BB-8.
-
I finally saw Star Wars. I love it. I haven't taken the time to read back several pages yet, but why do so many people hate this movie? Is it just because they're whining about all the women and other races? Or are they just nitpicking?
All I know is that I want BB-8 for my droid/familiar. Nobody can have a problem with BB-8.
Racism and Sexism… could potentially be part of it... but a lot of the right wing criticism refers to unwarranted excessive feminist and anti-male and anti-right wing political propaganda seen to be in the movie. Look around the internet to see what they mean, most of it comes down to 3 things: "Holdo is an annoying feminist caricature who is portrayed as being in the right despite having fucked everything up", "Kylo is toxic masculinity personificated", "Finn and Rose are forced diversity hires and their sub-plot reflects it (in that it's pointless)".
In addition:
Superman Leia.
Luke's character is criticised for "not acting like Luke would"
The old "Rei is a Mary Sue" (though not as bad in this as she was in TFA)
It breaks the concept of Hyperspace with the Holdo sacrifice scene
Holdo should've logically told unstable and prone to overreacting Poe the plan, would've saved 30 minutes of movie and the TFO wouldn't have killed almost everyone.
Kanto Bite was ultimately pointless and had forced politics that are completely unrelated to the movie's central themes.
They changed the way people can use the force, messing with continuity (why has nobody done this before).
No backstory for Snoke and he's underwhelmingly already dead.
It undoes or willfully ignores half the setups of TFA (Rei's parents, snoke's scars, Vader's helmet, The knights of ren).
Rose saving and then kissing Finn at the end of the movie, dooming the rebels in the process, is seen as really really counterproductive, not to mention they have no chemistry or romantic foreshadowing (and her speech to justify it is cheesy and nonsensical)
The humour is seen as offputting, cheesy, or prone to damaging the tension and drama (it feels like a disney marvel movie)
People have questioned why all ships seemingly go at the same speed and can't catch up to the resistance in the third act.
It's very similar plot-wise to The Empire Strikes back.
-
Racism and Sexism… could potentially be part of it... but a lot of the right wing criticism refers to unwarranted excessive feminist and anti-male and anti-right wing political propaganda seen to be in the movie. Look around the internet to see what they mean, most of it comes down to 3 things: "Holdo is an annoying feminist caricature who is portrayed as being in the right despite having fucked everything up", "Kylo is toxic masculinity personificated", "Finn and Rose are forced diversity hires and their sub-plot reflects it (in that it's pointless)".
Huh. Holdo didn't really do anything for me since we had no real character basis for her, but I didn't feel like she fucked everything up. She had her purpose that she thought was right. Didn't work the way she wanted, but would have a male leader been similarly seen as fucking everything up?
Kylo I actually didn't see as toxic masculinity, feminist that I am. I saw him as a kid who was losing to the dark side, which I think was the point.
And Finn/Rose were NOT forced, they were some badly needed diversity.
In addition:
Superman Leia.
Bullshit, she's just as much jedi heritage as Luke.
Luke's character is criticised for "not acting like Luke would"
I need to re-watch the first trilogy to get a better grip on Luke's character, since it's been a loooong time since I've seen them.
The old "Rei is a Mary Sue" (though not as bad in this as she was in TFA)
Shades of Mary Sue, but I thought her character came out in the end.
It breaks the concept of Hyperspace with the Holdo sacrifice scene
Another thing I need to re-watch the movies for.
Holdo should've logically told unstable and prone to overreacting Poe the plan, would've saved 30 minutes of movie and the TFO wouldn't have killed almost everyone.
Didn't understand that.
Kanto Bite was ultimately pointless and had forced politics that are completely unrelated to the movie's central themes.
I'm annoyed that he didn't get to do anything in particular, but I think he was a good example of "conflict." Inner and outer.
They changed the way people can use the force, messing with continuity (why has nobody done this before).
I don't remember the full continuity. I didn't see anything that changed it, but I'm not a 100% Star Wars nut.
No backstory for Snoke and he's underwhelmingly already dead.
THAT was a disappointment. I loved Kylo Ren's development, but what a waste of Andy Serkis.
It undoes or willfully ignores half the setups of TFA (Rei's parents, snoke's scars, Vader's helmet, The knights of ren).
Did I care about Snoke's scars or the knights of ren or vader's helmet? Not really. Rei's parents at least I was hoping for not something old like, "she's a princess!"
Rose saving and then kissing Finn at the end of the movie, dooming the rebels in the process, is seen as really really counterproductive, not to mention they have no chemistry or romantic foreshadowing (and her speech to justify it is cheesy and nonsensical)
Agreed. Not everything needs a romance, and I was glad Rey and Finn never had one. But I was mostly just hoping Rose wouldn't die because I didn't want the Asian to die again.
The humour is seen as offputting, cheesy, or prone to damaging the tension and drama (it feels like a disney marvel movie)
I liked the humor, it kept it from being to much of a downer.
People have questioned why all ships seemingly go at the same speed and can't catch up to the resistance in the third act.
I can agree with that, but I can also ignore it for the sake of drama.
It's very similar plot-wise to The Empire Strikes back.
Again, I need to re-watch the trilogy.
-
Bullshit, she's just as much jedi heritage as Luke.
Whether or not she can use the force wasn't the problem. The problem was whether anyone could use the force like that, surviving the void of outer space. Especially someone with 0 jedi training.
Again, these aren't really my opinions, I was just giving you a rundown of all the criticisms I've seen online, legitimate or illegitimate as they may be.
Oh, that reminds me of another one, people were annoyed that they increased the amount fo human diversity, while massively reducing the amount of highly intelligent alien diversity shown in the movie. They even killed Ackbar off right at the start :(
-
Whether or not she can use the force wasn't the problem. The problem was whether anyone could use the force like that, surviving the void of outer space. Especially someone with 0 jedi training.
Again, these aren't really my opinions, I was just giving you a rundown of all the criticisms I've seen online, legitimate or illegitimate as they may be.
Oh, that reminds me of another one, people were annoyed that they increased the amount fo human diversity, while massively reducing the amount of highly intelligent alien diversity shown in the movie. They even killed Ackbar off right at the start :(
lol. Not saying they were your arguments, just giving my responses.
Yeah, we could have used more intelligent aliens, and they didn't have to kill Ackbar. We got plenty of droids (more C-3P0!), but little aliens. Shame.
-
Among those that find superman Leia as a distractingly stupid moment. Sure, the Jedi have magic force shenanigans going on, but the stupidity of being blasted into the vacuum of space and then casually flying back to the ship was too much.
Particularly mind-boggling in the context of how easily other actual Jedi masters/Sith lords died.
And yea, doesn't help that the rest of the movie was hard to really take seriously. If anything, I'm surprised so many people that hate prequels liked this one, but I guess it's just a different strokes for different folks sort of thing.
-
Aside from the VEEEEERRRRRRYYYYY big exception of Jar-Jar, I didn't despise the prequels like others did. I just thought, "meh." And "meh" is not something you want from Star Wars.
I do think I liked TFA better than this one though.
-
I finally saw Star Wars. I love it. I haven't taken the time to read back several pages yet, but why do so many people hate this movie?
Because it wasn't what they expected.
-
Finally saw 8 and wasn't so impressed.
Dunno. Just, meh.I think coming off it I can identify a few issues.
-Lacked a sense of script structure, very little "three act" going on. So it felt kind of messy.
-Connected to that is the pacing was off, very little down time, which they screwed themselves with on the whole "our fleet is running out of fuel and can't run" thing. The whole movie kind of plot wise ended up revolving around one escape sequence if you think about it and that's just…. it made it feel both overly busy and hyped up, and also small in scale, at the same time.
-I don't care what the internet thinks, I don't care about Poe, I didn't after the last one, and I don't still. He's fine, but he's just like, some guy. He was WAY overplayed here. And Finn by contrast felt less used than he should be. There was too little Finn.
-One of the strong suits of 7 was the character chemistry with Rey and Finn, and that was almost entirely absent here.So meh.
Having said that, a lot of the criticisms people have been throwing around are laughable bullshit. Like the idea that this betrayed Star Wars fans or something... what?? -
Because it wasn't what they expected.
Surprised no enterprising indiviual has copyrighted that and threw it on some Star Wars merchandise.
-
Hey guys. I've read quite a few articles recently that have seemed to reduce most of the arguments against this film and attempts at pointing out perceived flaws as rooted in subconscious and pure sexism/racism. Do you guys think this is accurate, or maybe even more so, do any of you think it has colored the debate and discussion in this forum thus far? I can post something a facebook friend posted as an example.
https://bittergertrude.com/2018/01/04/why-so-many-men-hate-the-last-jedi-but-cant-agree-on-why/
Personally, I do think that there's probably a decent chunk that falls under this, but I don't think it's a fair critique of… all the critique of this film.
It's really easy picking out and sniping the still existent Rey hating gamergate style idiots from the crowd without making a dumb article premise like this lol.
Rey owns, and had the movie actually adhered more to a three act structure and steadier pacing it probably would have actually focused more on her. Like cutting down on fucking Poe hotshot ace Baby Solo scenes for instance for more Rey stuff.Also Poe is white? I thought? I dunno, am I racist for not liking him by accident? But I mean come on, that's a white guy. Like maybe if you live in fucking Iowa he's exotic looking but lol.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
I guess the complaints about "betrayal" is Luke having conflicts and being unhappy and bitter, and fucking up on things, and uh..... GOOD.
Even as a kid I fucking despised all that after ROTJ EU stuff for being so ridiculously goody-two shoes. Like it became a goddamn Saturday Morning cartoon show of Luke and pals busting the imperial/sith of the week. Like the three mains just waltzed along glowing happily while some stupid villain rushed at them and bounced off. -
Jedi had SUCH a neat and tidy super happy ending I'm glad real life kicked them around a little.
Han and Leia not staying together especially fixed some things for me.
I do kinda wish Poe had stayed dead like they originally intended. I just don't see the appeal beyond gay shipping him with Finn and… that was kind of entirely the audience's invention. That was never going to make it into the actual films, and once you take that subtext out Poe has nothing going on. He was created to be the guy that inspired Finn, that Finn replaced. Who then... sort of survived randomly.
And yeh, Finn and Rey had all the chemistry and bonding in the first film so its weird they had like zero scenes together in this one.
The movie didn't do much for me, but there was nothing in there to make me hate it or feel betrayed. But its biggest mistake probably was splitting the cast the way it did. Yeah, Empire sent Luke off, but the entire rest of the cast stayed together.
-
I love Rey and Finn; I just wish they were in better films.
but why do so many people hate this movie?
I didn't hate it, I just didn't like it. It, like The Force Awakens, feels like nothing so much as the old EU but with even more of the worse elements of the latter.
Random sequences from the original films with the serial numbers filed off, different authors arbitrarily throwing out other people's material that they don't want to deal with, characters inexplicably being idiots about things, introducing characters just to kill them off and expecting us to have emotional connections with them, long sequences that go nowhere and could have been dealt with in a much simpler fashion, and so on. The bigger problem here is that, unlike The Courtship of Princess Leia or The Crystal Star (which were outright awful), these problems aren't one-offs but a pretty good sign of the overall trend of the franchise.
@Monkey:
-One of the strong suits of 7 was the character chemistry with Rey and Finn, and that was almost entirely absent here.
Can't get in the way of that Rey-Ren ship you know.
-
-
Love Bob .
-
I actually really like how Poe was handled in this film. I like the idea that he's the kid who grew up admiring his rebel parents, and just wants to be a hero like them. His arc is him learning not to just be the hero pilot, but be the leader that will protect his fleet and maintain the Republic. Just from the opening crawl of FA he's referred to as Leia's "most trusted pilot" or something along those lines. But his relationship with her in this movie and his character arc was definitely one of the better parts of the film for me.
Upon rewatching a few times, I really can't defend the casino stuff at all. It just does nothing for me. I really do like this movie, and it still ranks as one of my favorite SW films. However, this part of completely takes me out of the tension established with the other two stories. It does make it feel, as others have said, like multiple episodes of a SW show rather than a cohesive film narrative.
I have nothing against Rose's character. I genuinely liked Finn in TFA. But their detour was such a detour with no payoff, at least from my perspective. The only entertaining aspect of it for me was the good 30 seconds or so that Rose and Finn were actually in the casino. I would have been absolutely fine if it was them simply meeting the codebreaker guy and then dealing with the trouble on the First Order's ship. Maybe actually give Phasm….I mean shiny new action figure something to do with that screentime.
Ultimately the point of their detour is to get somebody with a certain skill because if they don't, the Resistance will be crushed. They go there, eventually leave with someone with the skills they need. Obviously they get fucked over, but the point is they did what they needed to do which tied into the other plot lines. Now the only point that really matters is they went there, got a guy with the skills they needed, and were betrayed. All of those story beats could have been met without that boring chase scene and PSA about animals. It's not a bad message, just completely mishandled in my opinion. Yes, freeing the creatures gave them a chance to escape and cause chaos. But ultimately, they're captured. So again, those story beats could have been met without the entire chase.
I'm not harping on it for the sake of "well they could have got those things done without wasting time on this". I disliked it because on top of that, it was boring. I have no investment in that whole aspect of the film. Tensions are high at this point. Having Rose bitch about how the First Order sympathizers are bad people and them going to create chaos on the planet is just time wasted that could be spent on things we're already invested in. If it was going to be a quick cool casino scene, kind of reminiscent of the cantina scene, it would have been fine. Have them go there, find their guy, only for the First Order to discover them all, kill their codebreaker, and arrest Finn and Rose, leading to the DJ stuff.
-
Thing is with lightspeed collissions or even hyperspace (witch is multiple times faster) is that they have unimaginable kinetic energy, single proton particle hitting earths atmosphere at sub-lightspeed can light up entire mid night sky. Single X-wing starfighter can annihilate entire world with hyperspace impact. Infact in Force awakens where millenium falcon went to Starkiller through hyperspace is a good example, if they would just hit planet instead stopping right before it they hit it then impact would shattered entire Starkiller base.
Death star? Why such effort building them when single freighter or millenium falcon type ship can hyperspace into Coruscant killing every single being in 0,5 seconds regardless they live in opposite side of planet, even at 99% of speed of light energy of impact can wipe out any world under single second. Entire interstellar civilization of Star wars universe can be wiped out in less of a week if bunch of cargo shippers get drunk and want to go out of a bang.
I was under the impression it wasn't up to full speed
-
Honestly, I don't even care how much narrative weight the casino plot had, that shot of Finn and Rose riding the space horse on the beach made it for me.
-
Moviebob is always good at nailing down a point and seeing the bigger picture.
Shame his twitter attitude is, disappointing.
-
I saw the movie again today. Now, when I first saw the movie I was left feeling kinda conflicted, really loving certain parts but being a bit iffy on others. Watching it again, I feel like some of my criticisms against it were probably somewhat blown out of proportion. While the movie definitely does have flaws (the entire Canto Bight sequence, the plot between Poe and Holdo being a rather frustrating case of everyone acting a bit too stupid for it to be believable, Snoke being a complete waste of a character), I think I can now say that it is, overall, pretty damn good.
It also made me realize, I had previously thought that this was kind of an ESB situation where we kind of need another movie to follow up on this one in order for it to truly work, but looking at it again… No, not really. While the movie obviously ends with the bad guys still out there, it still felt like a complete movie, and I feel that even if Episode IX ends up completely sucking, that will not retroactively make this movie any less good. -
Despite rampant speculation, there has been zero actual indication that Finn is force sensitive. He held a lightsaber once. Doesn't make him a jedi.
I'm aware of that, but it still would have been a cool plot twist that could've given his character greater depth and added meaning to an otherwise boring scene.
I just assume Maz went "Oh hey, you're in that general area, I know a guy nearby that can help you out."
rather than
"I know one guy but you have to go to where he is."She picked a contact to match their area, and it's entirely possible if they'd been in a different system she would have recommended someone else. He obviously wasn't he ONLY qualified hacker, the gang met another equally qualified guy within ten feet of him.
I thought I remembered her saying something like "this is the only man in the galaxy who can help you", but maybe I was wrong.
-
Saw this movie yesterday. I wanted to wait for the digital release, but the insane people kinda egged me on to actually watch this on the big screen.
It was okay. I guess if I had to single out some big flaw is that this and the former movie really feel like watching a marvel movie with a star wars paint job. The old trilogy being good and the new one bad, this one is just kinda there, making money for disney. It doesn't piss you off, it just very by the books; rebels, evil empire, cocky pilots, mouthy droids and ancient orders of good and evil. Maybe it's dumb to except more from something that was always like that, but I still think it could've been a little more ambitious.
Something like Kotor 2 maybe, with a Kreia-like character that challenges the foundation of the whole belief system or some sort neutral, more pragmatic and/or utilitarian view on the force, shake it up a little.
What I really liked though is the last scene with Luke looking and the rising sun, that was damn beautiful. -
Saw the latest movie without seeing the 7th. I enjoyed the Luke and Rey part of the story. The parts with Kylo and Rey were pretty good too. The rest was decent I guess.
-
-
@Monkey:
…..what?? Why would you do this.
I've never been interested in the movies, though I got a bit into the EU after playing KOTOR. This was a case where my friend asked me to come along due to him wanting someone he knew in a group he wasn't that familiar with.
-