|
Spoilers for the film are in this thread, read at your own peril if you have not seen the movie. No more spoiler tags from page 20 |
On December 21 2017 19:52 Pandemona wrote:
I get what your trying to say that it's a good star wars movie because it didn't continue the "set in stone" rigidness of old star wars films, it tried to be different. But taking that as a rule for it being good isn't fair imo as it is not a good film to be on it's own either due to subpar script and awful acting from the start and poor storytelling.
Also what are the important bits did it focus on instead in your opinion because i can't remember anything important or we have different opinions on important bits in a film.
Like, character development, back stories, how they are dealing with issues. We saw R2D2 once in that film right, why didn't we get scenes where luke is trying to deal with stuff and talking to R2 so we can understand more of luke's mindset.
Rey could have also used Chewy in this regard too, or something similar.
Kylo Ren is kinda the only character who we learnt alot about him with ab it of development of understanding what happened to kinda take him to the dark side. But Snoke himself would been easy to put in 10 minutes of his backstory or something. To kill him off in a movie and as an audience we are supposed to be like wow he died wow, we need more of an understand of who he is, or you are just killing off a random character.
Quite easy to add filler to the sub stories for all characters from Poe to Leia what they were doing during the transition from being happily at peace to being run out of the galaxy and hunted by the First Order.
So much plot and character potential went wasted because he seemed to only focus on Kylo Ren and destroying the old Jedi vs Sith plot making it just a good vs evil story per se.
I am just trying to understand your point of view of why it is a good film to see if i missed anything. I am going to see episode 9 no matter what, i haven't watched TFA for a second time and probably won't until all 3 are out and watch them, this just made me sad at the end, first time ever for a film xD
I am not saying "it's good because it is different", I am saying it's good because it's a good star wars movie.
I agree with some of the points you are making btw. I wish there was no casino planet side plot, and more focus on Luke, Rey and Kylo. I think that the film had difficulty balancing so many "main characters" - Poe/luke/finn/rey/kylo/leia, but this was the material it had to work with. I actually thought that killing of Finn in his suicide defense would have been great since it would reduce the number of characters.
I think I made my point about Snoke dying - in essence, you knew just about as much as the Emperor when he died too. So I won't repeat this bit.
I also think that if you wanted to cover the backstory and side plots for all the characters, you'd have no space for the main plot. I thought Rey's acting was okay, but it looks like we'll subjectively disagree on this one.
What I think the film did great was:
For once, you had some emotional attachment to the nameless rebels. I felt sad seeing all of them die. Big change from random red shirts dying.
The Kylo Rey interactions were great, it made you guess whether Kylo would be redeemed, and in the end he ends up killing Snoke but still not redeemed, which is a great spin on the "redeem or no?" question.
The Kylo Rey fight was excellent, I'd say one of the best light sabre battles in the series.
I liked Luke's ruminations on the force and the legacy that he has left behind. To be honest it could not really be any other way - if his new Jedi order was burnt to the ground by his nephew, he could only be old and bitter, which is what Mark Hamil played him as.
Luke's death was fitting. Yeah, the projection was a bit of a cop out, but plot wise it was inevitable that something like this would happen - because if you had Kylo kill Luke then you would undermine Luke being one of the greatest Jedi, but if you had Luke kill Kylo then there would be no Episode 9.
Thematically, I really liked the idea that Rey is nobody, and that you don't need to be a Skywalker to save the galaxy. It's a great throw back to how Luke was just some farm boy, before all the nonsense about the chose one and some prophecy (that we still don't know the real meaning of).
And I kinda feel like that, actually, is what Star Wars is about. It's this thing that elevates all of us fans into this bigger universe. The last scene sort of encapsulates this feeling - you could be a stable boy with a broom, but you can still feel like you're holding a light saber and ready to save the universe.
I felt that TLJ really captured that sense of galactic adventure that star wars used to have, before it got a bit too burdened by the lore (which is also great, it just sometimes is too much).
|
|
|
You mean yoda jedi master, who has studied the force over hundreds of years and lfiting the x-wing (not luke he fails) is comparable to rey lifting pretty much the equivalent amount of rocks with seemingly no effort and no training, i disagree, the gap between skill is too much to perform the same tasks.
Im not saying that it requires 500 years or w/e amount of training to be abel to lift the x-wing but im sure it isnt some easily mastered skill.
The biggest interest for me (and like you say we all have different reasons for enjoy starwars, so ill just share mine)
the concept of the force being the balance in the universe and these two partys the jedi and the sith who make use of this power.
The jedi believe they have a more pure understanding of the force that its power is only borrowed and you can only really go with the flow of the force.
The sith also believe to have a deeper understanding of the force to unlock the powers that could be there through rage, and emotion and the essence of purpose to change ur fate,
Obviously neither are really complete in their understanding and arrogance is in both, they take these measures to the extreme, where the jedi arent meant to feel emotion and the sith try to use nothing but what they believe to be the strongest emotion which is hate and rage. The developemtn of the jedi and the sith is something i find really cool and i enjoy a lot of the EU to see how they came about.
The conflict between the two is just interesting because of the contrast and how they approach it, the rule 2 being a mindblowing idea when i read about it, and the latest quote from TLJ where luke tells the truth the jedi did become complacent in the height of their power. Thats cool, so when a being of the force comes into the third trilogy with the remenants of masterful sith skill, able to invade the mind of a force user ( remember 3 jedis trying to penerate the mind of a non-stupid non-force user), force lighting!!! (this significance cant be overlooked) Sidious never taught vader to use it, with dooku being the student to receive it and in the clonewars tv series it shows why sidious never teaches it to vader even in dooku's crappy hands its a powerful tool, and thus discards him for anakin.
Snoke and the emperor are the big bad guys like you said, and both just die with little explanation and back story. The difference being the setting.
The introduction of eps 4,5,6 have established the empire ruling over the universe its the being of the story, when you're writting a story ur begining can happened anywhere under any condition because that were you chose to tell it. So you have to accept the situation to follow the story. Snoke came after the conclusion of ep 6, and with previous knowledge of sidious and the sith. So when you have basically stated that the rule of 2 has culminated in sidious and vader (not to say there arent users of the force that will use it in a sith like manner to manipulate stuff to their own gain aka harnessing the power of rage to use the force) But snoke is suddenly in command of a new empire the first order, posses mastery of the dark side of the force that otherwise only the sith of the rule of 2 possess. This isnt a problem so far like i said its the start of a story section, its okay to have snoke but i find it not okay to brush aside the explaination of how it came to be. I dont believe starwars would be where it is now, if there wasnt the lore behind it, of the sith and the jedi. I love the lore of starwars and for me personally TLJ is messing up the lore.
What makes a starwars movie is the lore, if it doesnt have elements of the lore then it could be any other random sci-fi movie.
edit: just because we knew nothing about the emperor in ep6 doesnt make it a good reason to do it again its not like every thing in the ep6 is perfect writting, and the backstory of the emperor was so intriguing that theres like 10+ books and even more comics, tv shows on it.
|
On December 21 2017 20:23 Pandemona wrote:I get some of your points but i don't get how it is a star wars movie when he re writes what a star wars movie is. Jedi + Rebels vs Sith + First Order. He turns it into a girl we no nothing about being the last "Jedi" vs Kylo Ren which we think is just a bad guy because he is messed up but isn't really part of the First Order even though by the end of the film he is ordering them to kill Rey and co. So he kinda is xD Oh well, i just want Episode 9 to come out tomorrow  First i guess we have to deal with the impending doom that is going to be the Han Solo movie which is destined for utter failure by the seems of things.
I disagree that a star wars movie = Jedi and Rebels versus Sith and First Order. These have been big parts of the franchise, but that's not all of it.
Actually if you set aside all the knowledge you got from the Prequels and the EU and video games in the Original Trilogy, it was basically what you have now in the new movies. There is not much details on a grand jedi order. Force users are rare, and the war is fought and won by average joes. The word "sith" isn't even really used. Luke is a rando farm boy that turns out to have force powers, versus Vader who you know even less about.
|
On December 21 2017 20:12 levelping wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2017 19:52 Pandemona wrote:
I get what your trying to say that it's a good star wars movie because it didn't continue the "set in stone" rigidness of old star wars films, it tried to be different. But taking that as a rule for it being good isn't fair imo as it is not a good film to be on it's own either due to subpar script and awful acting from the start and poor storytelling.
Also what are the important bits did it focus on instead in your opinion because i can't remember anything important or we have different opinions on important bits in a film.
Like, character development, back stories, how they are dealing with issues. We saw R2D2 once in that film right, why didn't we get scenes where luke is trying to deal with stuff and talking to R2 so we can understand more of luke's mindset.
Rey could have also used Chewy in this regard too, or something similar.
Kylo Ren is kinda the only character who we learnt alot about him with ab it of development of understanding what happened to kinda take him to the dark side. But Snoke himself would been easy to put in 10 minutes of his backstory or something. To kill him off in a movie and as an audience we are supposed to be like wow he died wow, we need more of an understand of who he is, or you are just killing off a random character.
Quite easy to add filler to the sub stories for all characters from Poe to Leia what they were doing during the transition from being happily at peace to being run out of the galaxy and hunted by the First Order.
So much plot and character potential went wasted because he seemed to only focus on Kylo Ren and destroying the old Jedi vs Sith plot making it just a good vs evil story per se.
I am just trying to understand your point of view of why it is a good film to see if i missed anything. I am going to see episode 9 no matter what, i haven't watched TFA for a second time and probably won't until all 3 are out and watch them, this just made me sad at the end, first time ever for a film xD I liked Luke's ruminations on the force and the legacy that he has left behind. To be honest it could not really be any other way - if his new Jedi order was burnt to the ground by his nephew, he could only be old and bitter, which is what Mark Hamil played him as.
Mark hamil isnt happy with the way luke is portrayed...his interview says he did it out of the interigity as an actor who must follow the vision of the director...
secondly, i disagree that it makes sense, luke saw the good in vader. The person who has slaughtered so many people, the main focus of evil in the empire, no one sees good in him, no yoda, not obi-wan. LUKE does tho, and yet luke senses that ben is on the dark side (? which also isnt explained how if hes under luke tutor, and its not like kylo found his way to the dark side on his own due to luke but rather luke states it was snoke who had already turned his heart) and just runs over there to kill him, where he then realises his mistake where he felt shame for jumping to that conclusion of kylo falling to the dark side. Instead of finding kylo and believing in the good inside him he just mopes on an island.
On a side note, im definitely going to watch ep9, and all the smaller storys like the han solo movie and anything really they pump out because starwars lore is just cool.
|
On December 21 2017 20:30 Shock710 wrote:
You mean yoda jedi master, who has studied the force over hundreds of years and lfiting the x-wing (not luke he fails) is comparable to rey lifting pretty much the equivalent amount of rocks with seemingly no effort and no training, i disagree, the gap between skill is too much to perform the same tasks.
Im not saying that it requires 500 years or w/e amount of training to be abel to lift the x-wing but im sure it isnt some easily mastered skill.
The biggest interest for me (and like you say we all have different reasons for enjoy starwars, so ill just share mine)
the concept of the force being the balance in the universe and these two partys the jedi and the sith who make use of this power.
The jedi believe they have a more pure understanding of the force that its power is only borrowed and you can only really go with the flow of the force.
The sith also believe to have a deeper understanding of the force to unlock the powers that could be there through rage, and emotion and the essence of purpose to change ur fate,
Obviously neither are really complete in their understanding and arrogance is in both, they take these measures to the extreme, where the jedi arent meant to feel emotion and the sith try to use nothing but what they believe to be the strongest emotion which is hate and rage. The developemtn of the jedi and the sith is something i find really cool and i enjoy a lot of the EU to see how they came about.
The conflict between the two is just interesting because of the contrast and how they approach it, the rule 2 being a mindblowing idea when i read about it, and the latest quote from TLJ where luke tells the truth the jedi did become complacent in the height of their power. Thats cool, so when a being of the force comes into the third trilogy with the remenants of masterful sith skill, able to invade the mind of a force user ( remember 3 jedis trying to penerate the mind of a non-stupid non-force user), force lighting!!! (this significance cant be overlooked) Sidious never taught vader to use it, with dooku being the student to receive it and in the clonewars tv series it shows why sidious never teaches it to vader even in dooku's crappy hands its a powerful tool, and thus discards him for anakin.
Snoke and the emperor are the big bad guys like you said, and both just die with little explanation and back story. The difference being the setting.
The introduction of eps 4,5,6 have established the empire ruling over the universe its the being of the story, when you're writting a story ur begining can happened anywhere under any condition because that were you chose to tell it. So you have to accept the situation to follow the story. Snoke came after the conclusion of ep 6, and with previous knowledge of sidious and the sith. So when you have basically stated that the rule of 2 has culminated in sidious and vader (not to say there arent users of the force that will use it in a sith like manner to manipulate stuff to their own gain aka harnessing the power of rage to use the force) But snoke is suddenly in command of a new empire the first order, posses mastery of the dark side of the force that otherwise only the sith of the rule of 2 possess. This isnt a problem so far like i said its the start of a story section, its okay to have snoke but i find it not okay to brush aside the explaination of how it came to be. I dont believe starwars would be where it is now, if there wasnt the lore behind it, of the sith and the jedi. I love the lore of starwars and for me personally TLJ is messing up the lore.
What makes a starwars movie is the lore, if it doesnt have elements of the lore then it could be any other random sci-fi movie.
edit: just because we knew nothing about the emperor in ep6 doesnt make it a good reason to do it again its not like every thing in the ep6 is perfect writting, and the backstory of the emperor was so intriguing that theres like 10+ books and even more comics, tv shows on it.
Yeah see, I generally disagree that you can judge the quality of a character in a movie because there are books explaining how interesting he actually is. The emperor should just be see as what he was at the time. Sure the EU material is quite cool in revealing things about him, but I am sure that books are going to tell us who exactly is Snoke too, in time. So this comparison is unfair because the Emperor just has more non-movie backstory running around.
I don't see why Snoke must adhere to the rule of two. If the rule of two must be strictly applied, then it would be impossible for there to be more sith since both the Emperor and Vader died in ROTJ. You'd either need to have a second apprentice or second master during ROTJ that survived (breaking the rule), or some how in the gap between the trilogies Snoke independently discovered how to be a sith lord (which means you don't even need the rule of 2 anyway).
(short Nerd aside - I think the lore is that vader could not cast force lightning because he no longer had organic hands)
I also disagree that a star wars movie is about the lore. Lore is just the window dressing really, since it can be changed at any time. It's the spirit of the movies that is important.
|
On December 21 2017 20:39 Shock710 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2017 20:12 levelping wrote:On December 21 2017 19:52 Pandemona wrote:
I get what your trying to say that it's a good star wars movie because it didn't continue the "set in stone" rigidness of old star wars films, it tried to be different. But taking that as a rule for it being good isn't fair imo as it is not a good film to be on it's own either due to subpar script and awful acting from the start and poor storytelling.
Also what are the important bits did it focus on instead in your opinion because i can't remember anything important or we have different opinions on important bits in a film.
Like, character development, back stories, how they are dealing with issues. We saw R2D2 once in that film right, why didn't we get scenes where luke is trying to deal with stuff and talking to R2 so we can understand more of luke's mindset.
Rey could have also used Chewy in this regard too, or something similar.
Kylo Ren is kinda the only character who we learnt alot about him with ab it of development of understanding what happened to kinda take him to the dark side. But Snoke himself would been easy to put in 10 minutes of his backstory or something. To kill him off in a movie and as an audience we are supposed to be like wow he died wow, we need more of an understand of who he is, or you are just killing off a random character.
Quite easy to add filler to the sub stories for all characters from Poe to Leia what they were doing during the transition from being happily at peace to being run out of the galaxy and hunted by the First Order.
So much plot and character potential went wasted because he seemed to only focus on Kylo Ren and destroying the old Jedi vs Sith plot making it just a good vs evil story per se.
I am just trying to understand your point of view of why it is a good film to see if i missed anything. I am going to see episode 9 no matter what, i haven't watched TFA for a second time and probably won't until all 3 are out and watch them, this just made me sad at the end, first time ever for a film xD I liked Luke's ruminations on the force and the legacy that he has left behind. To be honest it could not really be any other way - if his new Jedi order was burnt to the ground by his nephew, he could only be old and bitter, which is what Mark Hamil played him as. Mark hamil isnt happy with the way luke is portrayed...his interview says he did it out of the interigity as an actor who must follow the vision of the director... secondly, i disagree that it makes sense, luke saw the good in vader. The person who has slaughtered so many people, the main focus of evil in the empire, no one sees good in him, no yoda, not obi-wan. LUKE does tho, and yet luke senses that ben is on the dark side (? which also isnt explained how if hes under luke tutor, and its not like kylo found his way to the dark side on his own due to luke but rather luke states it was snoke who had already turned his heart) and just runs over there to kill him, where he then realises his mistake where he felt shame for jumping to that conclusion of kylo falling to the dark side. Instead of finding kylo and believing in the good inside him he just mopes on an island.
I am not really sure if your take on Hamil is correct. Hamil has also given statements that he was initially not happy with Luke but in the end was convinced and got excited at the direction of the character ("I was quoted as saying to Rian that I fundamentally disagree with everything you decided about Luke, and it was inartfully phrased. What I was, was surprised at how he saw Luke. And it took me a while to get around to his way of thinking, but once I was there it was a thrilling experience. I hope it will be for the audience too.").
I can see where you are coming from - that Luke trying to kill Ben was a reversal for his character. It is definitely a change but at least for me, I think it was sufficiently explained - Luke wanted to kill him, realized his mistake immediately, and then had to pay the consequences of his choice. Luke has made really dumb decisions in the past (like in Empire), and so we know that Luke does not have perfect decision making.
Once the event happened, Luke saw his entire legacy literally go up in smoke, PLUS he had to live with the knowledge that he created a new vader from the son of his sister. I get that Luke did redeem Vader, but at the same time I can also see how what happened with Ben, and the personal knowledge that he himself had a personal role to play in the end of the Jedi Order, would have been pretty traumatic things to deal with. Luke as a character isn't meant to be perfect, and so I find it believable that he would choose the less perfect choice.
|
I'm generally pretty forgiving with most movies, but I hated TLJ. I found it to be tonally inconsistent with what I see as being Star Wars. I don't care if Rian wanted us to let go of the past themes and characters, he can let us say goodbye and move on without trashing what has come before; he has his own trilogy to tell the type of story he wants to, unencumbered by the past we all know and love.
Things I hated:
Subversion of expectation for the sake of it (made worse by virtue of the fact that there was so much subversion that some of it was not adequately replaced with anything interesting, and a lot of it is entirely pointless to the overall story). Rian, this is not 10 M. Night Shyamalan movie plots crammed into one Star Wars movie. Subversion loses its effect when used this way.
Characters wasted (Snoke, Finn, Phasma etc)
Characters destroyed in ways completely incongruent with what we've seen of them, Luke is the obvious example (and no you can't just hand wave this as 'head canon' as some of you seem so fond of doing, we're talking about things we've been demonstrated in the films, not something made up in our heads. Nothing shown in this movie sufficiently explains the shift and I don't accept the "It's years later, people change" - this is actually you creating some head canon)
Comedy was overused and used at the wrong times.
Rey remains the Mary Sue, and they wasted opportunity to consolidate and develop her character.
Inconsistencies in power of characters, e.g. Snoke so powerful in the force he can create Head-Skype, throw Rey about at will while managing other things etc, is killed by the turned sabre (which perhaps wouldn't be so bad if not for the fact that this occurs in a universe where Kylo was able to stop a blaster bolt by sensing it being fired and freezing it in place)
The useless, overly long casino island plot. And Poe after the first act...
The farcical, forced story and interaction between Finn and Rose... her sentiment for saving him was just so weak... I'll put aside whether it was even possible for her to actually catch up to and stop him in the scenario we were presented.
Yoda can interact with the physical world????
BB8 the terminator???
Super Leia - I even accept the science which says it's theoretically possible to survive in space for that period of time... Probably just not when you've just been blown to kingdom come... It was just so poorly done.
Laura Dern's (who I think I still have a childhood, Jurassic Park based crush on) character brought in for nothing of any lasting consequence, and used at the expense of someone like Admiral Ackbar who is tossed aside with a throw away line.
This movie was failed by so many things, I could literally write for hours... Anyway, credit where credit is due, Kylo was exceptionally well handled (except for how he killed Snoke), the film was beautiful and there were some incredible action set pieces
|
On December 21 2017 20:47 levelping wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2017 20:30 Shock710 wrote:
You mean yoda jedi master, who has studied the force over hundreds of years and lfiting the x-wing (not luke he fails) is comparable to rey lifting pretty much the equivalent amount of rocks with seemingly no effort and no training, i disagree, the gap between skill is too much to perform the same tasks.
Im not saying that it requires 500 years or w/e amount of training to be abel to lift the x-wing but im sure it isnt some easily mastered skill.
The biggest interest for me (and like you say we all have different reasons for enjoy starwars, so ill just share mine)
the concept of the force being the balance in the universe and these two partys the jedi and the sith who make use of this power.
The jedi believe they have a more pure understanding of the force that its power is only borrowed and you can only really go with the flow of the force.
The sith also believe to have a deeper understanding of the force to unlock the powers that could be there through rage, and emotion and the essence of purpose to change ur fate,
Obviously neither are really complete in their understanding and arrogance is in both, they take these measures to the extreme, where the jedi arent meant to feel emotion and the sith try to use nothing but what they believe to be the strongest emotion which is hate and rage. The developemtn of the jedi and the sith is something i find really cool and i enjoy a lot of the EU to see how they came about.
The conflict between the two is just interesting because of the contrast and how they approach it, the rule 2 being a mindblowing idea when i read about it, and the latest quote from TLJ where luke tells the truth the jedi did become complacent in the height of their power. Thats cool, so when a being of the force comes into the third trilogy with the remenants of masterful sith skill, able to invade the mind of a force user ( remember 3 jedis trying to penerate the mind of a non-stupid non-force user), force lighting!!! (this significance cant be overlooked) Sidious never taught vader to use it, with dooku being the student to receive it and in the clonewars tv series it shows why sidious never teaches it to vader even in dooku's crappy hands its a powerful tool, and thus discards him for anakin.
Snoke and the emperor are the big bad guys like you said, and both just die with little explanation and back story. The difference being the setting.
The introduction of eps 4,5,6 have established the empire ruling over the universe its the being of the story, when you're writting a story ur begining can happened anywhere under any condition because that were you chose to tell it. So you have to accept the situation to follow the story. Snoke came after the conclusion of ep 6, and with previous knowledge of sidious and the sith. So when you have basically stated that the rule of 2 has culminated in sidious and vader (not to say there arent users of the force that will use it in a sith like manner to manipulate stuff to their own gain aka harnessing the power of rage to use the force) But snoke is suddenly in command of a new empire the first order, posses mastery of the dark side of the force that otherwise only the sith of the rule of 2 possess. This isnt a problem so far like i said its the start of a story section, its okay to have snoke but i find it not okay to brush aside the explaination of how it came to be. I dont believe starwars would be where it is now, if there wasnt the lore behind it, of the sith and the jedi. I love the lore of starwars and for me personally TLJ is messing up the lore.
What makes a starwars movie is the lore, if it doesnt have elements of the lore then it could be any other random sci-fi movie.
edit: just because we knew nothing about the emperor in ep6 doesnt make it a good reason to do it again its not like every thing in the ep6 is perfect writting, and the backstory of the emperor was so intriguing that theres like 10+ books and even more comics, tv shows on it.
Yeah see, I generally disagree that you can judge the quality of a character in a movie because there are books explaining how interesting he actually is. The emperor should just be see as what he was at the time. Sure the EU material is quite cool in revealing things about him, but I am sure that books are going to tell us who exactly is Snoke too, in time. So this comparison is unfair because the Emperor just has more non-movie backstory running around. I don't see why Snoke must adhere to the rule of two. If the rule of two must be strictly applied, then it would be impossible for there to be more sith since both the Emperor and Vader died in ROTJ. You'd either need to have a second apprentice or second master during ROTJ that survived (breaking the rule), or some how in the gap between the trilogies Snoke independently discovered how to be a sith lord (which means you don't even need the rule of 2 anyway). (short Nerd aside - I think the lore is that vader could not cast force lightning because he no longer had organic hands) I also disagree that a star wars movie is about the lore. Lore is just the window dressing really, since it can be changed at any time. It's the spirit of the movies that is important.
The rule of 2 is just a master and apprentice, it doesnt mean there are no other users of the dark side. Think of it like this, darth bane kills all the sith leaving only him and his apprentice to start the rule of 2, where they both study the dark side of the force and he teaches her everything he knows till she can kill him with said improved knowledge and repeat down the line. But that doesnt mean that force sensitive users are now all automatically jedi, you can imagine and random kid on a planet discovering he has some form of the force and then without realising it using the dark side of the force to attack some slaver or w/e. But techniques like force lighting are kinda like a developed art theres alot of forms of how it perfoms in the EU but with sidious basically having the most control and power of it. That being said its speculated that the no hands thing/the lighitng will interfere with ur suit is just sidious excuse not to teach him rather than being the real reason, as you dont need hands to do any other force move plus you think that vader would see the force lighting and ask hey can i learn that?
But basically yeah dark side users can exist without the rule of 2 (hell if not how would they find apprentices) but the point is cultivating that student to all the secrets of the dark side that the rule of 2 has yield. So either snoke is an apprentice of dooku (he did try to take upon his own and overthrow sidious...didnt work obviously) or plagueis himself or some other good explanation. But for him to be a dark force user outside of the rule of 2 and arise to his current position and level of power doesnt seem right.
Btw what im trying to point out with the emperors backstory being filled by books was that while it was necessary to the fandom, it would have been nice to have some of it in the movie. Now with people knowing that, theres no reason to leave snokes story in books when you can tell it in the movie.
|
I don't know why everyone is harping about Rey having "non imporant" Parents and how this is supposed to be something earthshattering... I haven't read anyone that said he has a real Problem with that. Some tought it would be better if her Parents were important, some not, but I have no one seen hating on the Movie for this reason.
All the other things missing that were set up in TFA make this feel very strange as a Sequel and aside from some development for Kylo and maybe a bit for Poe there just wasn't much happening.
|
On December 21 2017 21:00 Shock710 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2017 20:47 levelping wrote:On December 21 2017 20:30 Shock710 wrote:
You mean yoda jedi master, who has studied the force over hundreds of years and lfiting the x-wing (not luke he fails) is comparable to rey lifting pretty much the equivalent amount of rocks with seemingly no effort and no training, i disagree, the gap between skill is too much to perform the same tasks.
Im not saying that it requires 500 years or w/e amount of training to be abel to lift the x-wing but im sure it isnt some easily mastered skill.
The biggest interest for me (and like you say we all have different reasons for enjoy starwars, so ill just share mine)
the concept of the force being the balance in the universe and these two partys the jedi and the sith who make use of this power.
The jedi believe they have a more pure understanding of the force that its power is only borrowed and you can only really go with the flow of the force.
The sith also believe to have a deeper understanding of the force to unlock the powers that could be there through rage, and emotion and the essence of purpose to change ur fate,
Obviously neither are really complete in their understanding and arrogance is in both, they take these measures to the extreme, where the jedi arent meant to feel emotion and the sith try to use nothing but what they believe to be the strongest emotion which is hate and rage. The developemtn of the jedi and the sith is something i find really cool and i enjoy a lot of the EU to see how they came about.
The conflict between the two is just interesting because of the contrast and how they approach it, the rule 2 being a mindblowing idea when i read about it, and the latest quote from TLJ where luke tells the truth the jedi did become complacent in the height of their power. Thats cool, so when a being of the force comes into the third trilogy with the remenants of masterful sith skill, able to invade the mind of a force user ( remember 3 jedis trying to penerate the mind of a non-stupid non-force user), force lighting!!! (this significance cant be overlooked) Sidious never taught vader to use it, with dooku being the student to receive it and in the clonewars tv series it shows why sidious never teaches it to vader even in dooku's crappy hands its a powerful tool, and thus discards him for anakin.
Snoke and the emperor are the big bad guys like you said, and both just die with little explanation and back story. The difference being the setting.
The introduction of eps 4,5,6 have established the empire ruling over the universe its the being of the story, when you're writting a story ur begining can happened anywhere under any condition because that were you chose to tell it. So you have to accept the situation to follow the story. Snoke came after the conclusion of ep 6, and with previous knowledge of sidious and the sith. So when you have basically stated that the rule of 2 has culminated in sidious and vader (not to say there arent users of the force that will use it in a sith like manner to manipulate stuff to their own gain aka harnessing the power of rage to use the force) But snoke is suddenly in command of a new empire the first order, posses mastery of the dark side of the force that otherwise only the sith of the rule of 2 possess. This isnt a problem so far like i said its the start of a story section, its okay to have snoke but i find it not okay to brush aside the explaination of how it came to be. I dont believe starwars would be where it is now, if there wasnt the lore behind it, of the sith and the jedi. I love the lore of starwars and for me personally TLJ is messing up the lore.
What makes a starwars movie is the lore, if it doesnt have elements of the lore then it could be any other random sci-fi movie.
edit: just because we knew nothing about the emperor in ep6 doesnt make it a good reason to do it again its not like every thing in the ep6 is perfect writting, and the backstory of the emperor was so intriguing that theres like 10+ books and even more comics, tv shows on it.
Yeah see, I generally disagree that you can judge the quality of a character in a movie because there are books explaining how interesting he actually is. The emperor should just be see as what he was at the time. Sure the EU material is quite cool in revealing things about him, but I am sure that books are going to tell us who exactly is Snoke too, in time. So this comparison is unfair because the Emperor just has more non-movie backstory running around. I don't see why Snoke must adhere to the rule of two. If the rule of two must be strictly applied, then it would be impossible for there to be more sith since both the Emperor and Vader died in ROTJ. You'd either need to have a second apprentice or second master during ROTJ that survived (breaking the rule), or some how in the gap between the trilogies Snoke independently discovered how to be a sith lord (which means you don't even need the rule of 2 anyway). (short Nerd aside - I think the lore is that vader could not cast force lightning because he no longer had organic hands) I also disagree that a star wars movie is about the lore. Lore is just the window dressing really, since it can be changed at any time. It's the spirit of the movies that is important. The rule of 2 is just a master and apprentice, it doesnt mean there are no other users of the dark side. Think of it like this, darth bane kills all the sith leaving only him and his apprentice to start the rule of 2, where they both study the dark side of the force and he teaches her everything he knows till she can kill him with said improved knowledge and repeat down the line. But that doesnt mean that force sensitive users are now all automatically jedi, you can imagine and random kid on a planet discovering he has some form of the force and then without realising it using the dark side of the force to attack some slaver or w/e. But techniques like force lighting are kinda like a developed art theres alot of forms of how it perfoms in the EU but with sidious basically having the most control and power of it. That being said its speculated that the no hands thing/the lighitng will interfere with ur suit is just sidious excuse not to teach him rather than being the real reason, as you dont need hands to do any other force move plus you think that vader would see the force lighting and ask hey can i learn that? But basically yeah dark side users can exist without the rule of 2 (hell if not how would they find apprentices) but the point is cultivating that student to all the secrets of the dark side that the rule of 2 has yield. So either snoke is an apprentice of dooku (he did try to take upon his own and overthrow sidious...didnt work obviously) or plagueis himself or some other good explanation. But for him to be a dark force user outside of the rule of 2 and arise to his current position and level of power doesnt seem right. Btw what im trying to point out with the emperors backstory being filled by books was that while it was necessary to the fandom, it would have been nice to have some of it in the movie. Now with people knowing that, theres no reason to leave snokes story in books when you can tell it in the movie.
My recollection is different (sorry lol too lazy to research this right now) - but the rule of two literally means there shall only be 2 sith at any given time.
As the last surviving sith of the war, Bane realized that the big groups of sith lead to infighting and weakness, and so he started the rule of 2 to eventually take revenge against the Jedi by stealth rather than force of arms.
Because the rule of 2 meant that Sith were super few in number, there have been a couple of eras where the Sith basically declared the rule of 2 as being over, so that they can build up their numbers again.
Edit - the rule of 2 meant master and apprentice, then it would be pretty similar to what the Jedi have (well except the apprentice is not suppose to kill the master).
|
On December 21 2017 21:09 Velr wrote:
I don't know why everyone is harping about Rey having "non imporant" Parents and how this is supposed to be something earthshattering... I haven't read anyone that said he has a real Problem with that. Some tought it would be better if her Parents were important, some not, but I have no one seen hating on the Movie for this reason.
All the other things missing that were set up in TFA make this feel very strange as a Sequel and aside from some development for Kylo and maybe a bit for Poe there just wasn't much happening.
I think that the complaint about Rey's parents is that it was set up as a mystery and some people find the answer (and the way the answer was delivered) to be pretty anti-climatic.
To be fair... Abrams was responsible for a similar problem in the Star Trek movies where there was the whole not Kahn, joking! it really is Kahn fiasco
|
On December 21 2017 21:14 levelping wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2017 21:00 Shock710 wrote:On December 21 2017 20:47 levelping wrote:On December 21 2017 20:30 Shock710 wrote:
You mean yoda jedi master, who has studied the force over hundreds of years and lfiting the x-wing (not luke he fails) is comparable to rey lifting pretty much the equivalent amount of rocks with seemingly no effort and no training, i disagree, the gap between skill is too much to perform the same tasks.
Im not saying that it requires 500 years or w/e amount of training to be abel to lift the x-wing but im sure it isnt some easily mastered skill.
The biggest interest for me (and like you say we all have different reasons for enjoy starwars, so ill just share mine)
the concept of the force being the balance in the universe and these two partys the jedi and the sith who make use of this power.
The jedi believe they have a more pure understanding of the force that its power is only borrowed and you can only really go with the flow of the force.
The sith also believe to have a deeper understanding of the force to unlock the powers that could be there through rage, and emotion and the essence of purpose to change ur fate,
Obviously neither are really complete in their understanding and arrogance is in both, they take these measures to the extreme, where the jedi arent meant to feel emotion and the sith try to use nothing but what they believe to be the strongest emotion which is hate and rage. The developemtn of the jedi and the sith is something i find really cool and i enjoy a lot of the EU to see how they came about.
The conflict between the two is just interesting because of the contrast and how they approach it, the rule 2 being a mindblowing idea when i read about it, and the latest quote from TLJ where luke tells the truth the jedi did become complacent in the height of their power. Thats cool, so when a being of the force comes into the third trilogy with the remenants of masterful sith skill, able to invade the mind of a force user ( remember 3 jedis trying to penerate the mind of a non-stupid non-force user), force lighting!!! (this significance cant be overlooked) Sidious never taught vader to use it, with dooku being the student to receive it and in the clonewars tv series it shows why sidious never teaches it to vader even in dooku's crappy hands its a powerful tool, and thus discards him for anakin.
Snoke and the emperor are the big bad guys like you said, and both just die with little explanation and back story. The difference being the setting.
The introduction of eps 4,5,6 have established the empire ruling over the universe its the being of the story, when you're writting a story ur begining can happened anywhere under any condition because that were you chose to tell it. So you have to accept the situation to follow the story. Snoke came after the conclusion of ep 6, and with previous knowledge of sidious and the sith. So when you have basically stated that the rule of 2 has culminated in sidious and vader (not to say there arent users of the force that will use it in a sith like manner to manipulate stuff to their own gain aka harnessing the power of rage to use the force) But snoke is suddenly in command of a new empire the first order, posses mastery of the dark side of the force that otherwise only the sith of the rule of 2 possess. This isnt a problem so far like i said its the start of a story section, its okay to have snoke but i find it not okay to brush aside the explaination of how it came to be. I dont believe starwars would be where it is now, if there wasnt the lore behind it, of the sith and the jedi. I love the lore of starwars and for me personally TLJ is messing up the lore.
What makes a starwars movie is the lore, if it doesnt have elements of the lore then it could be any other random sci-fi movie.
edit: just because we knew nothing about the emperor in ep6 doesnt make it a good reason to do it again its not like every thing in the ep6 is perfect writting, and the backstory of the emperor was so intriguing that theres like 10+ books and even more comics, tv shows on it.
Yeah see, I generally disagree that you can judge the quality of a character in a movie because there are books explaining how interesting he actually is. The emperor should just be see as what he was at the time. Sure the EU material is quite cool in revealing things about him, but I am sure that books are going to tell us who exactly is Snoke too, in time. So this comparison is unfair because the Emperor just has more non-movie backstory running around. I don't see why Snoke must adhere to the rule of two. If the rule of two must be strictly applied, then it would be impossible for there to be more sith since both the Emperor and Vader died in ROTJ. You'd either need to have a second apprentice or second master during ROTJ that survived (breaking the rule), or some how in the gap between the trilogies Snoke independently discovered how to be a sith lord (which means you don't even need the rule of 2 anyway). (short Nerd aside - I think the lore is that vader could not cast force lightning because he no longer had organic hands) I also disagree that a star wars movie is about the lore. Lore is just the window dressing really, since it can be changed at any time. It's the spirit of the movies that is important. The rule of 2 is just a master and apprentice, it doesnt mean there are no other users of the dark side. Think of it like this, darth bane kills all the sith leaving only him and his apprentice to start the rule of 2, where they both study the dark side of the force and he teaches her everything he knows till she can kill him with said improved knowledge and repeat down the line. But that doesnt mean that force sensitive users are now all automatically jedi, you can imagine and random kid on a planet discovering he has some form of the force and then without realising it using the dark side of the force to attack some slaver or w/e. But techniques like force lighting are kinda like a developed art theres alot of forms of how it perfoms in the EU but with sidious basically having the most control and power of it. That being said its speculated that the no hands thing/the lighitng will interfere with ur suit is just sidious excuse not to teach him rather than being the real reason, as you dont need hands to do any other force move plus you think that vader would see the force lighting and ask hey can i learn that? But basically yeah dark side users can exist without the rule of 2 (hell if not how would they find apprentices) but the point is cultivating that student to all the secrets of the dark side that the rule of 2 has yield. So either snoke is an apprentice of dooku (he did try to take upon his own and overthrow sidious...didnt work obviously) or plagueis himself or some other good explanation. But for him to be a dark force user outside of the rule of 2 and arise to his current position and level of power doesnt seem right. Btw what im trying to point out with the emperors backstory being filled by books was that while it was necessary to the fandom, it would have been nice to have some of it in the movie. Now with people knowing that, theres no reason to leave snokes story in books when you can tell it in the movie. My recollection is different (sorry lol too lazy to research this right now) - but the rule of two literally means there shall only be 2 sith at any given time. As the last surviving sith of the war, Bane realized that the big groups of sith lead to infighting and weakness, and so he started the rule of 2 to eventually take revenge against the Jedi by stealth rather than force of arms. Because the rule of 2 meant that Sith were super few in number, there have been a couple of eras where the Sith basically declared the rule of 2 as being over, so that they can build up their numbers again. Edit - the rule of 2 meant master and apprentice, then it would be pretty similar to what the Jedi have (well except the apprentice is not suppose to kill the master).
i dont see how what you're saying is different or conflicts with what i was saying, yeah theres only two sith at a time but theres dark force users in general or at least force users who are prone to the seduction of the dark side. otherwise after the student kills the master how does he take on a new student. The exception being that sidious under plageis wanted to live forever, and sidious not wanting to follow the rule of 2 where he is killed by his apprentice.
But the main reason isnt just because 2 sith can do more sneaky attacks but rather theres a focus on learning going on between the two so that they can eventually become strong without interference from the jedi.
edit: ventress, dooku and sidious being present at the same time (while not sith lords per se they were sith) as dooku realised sidious was never intending to follow the rule of 2 by training him to his pure potential and give him access to all the secrets, so he employed ventress under him so they would be able to kill sidious. aka 3 sith at one times (...they kinda had 4 with savage but w/e he was kinda a idiot with just raw emotion dark side)
edit: from the wiki
"a master to embody the power of the dark side of the Force, and an apprentice to crave it."
basically the apprentice gains enough power to kill the master, then finds a new apprentice to do the same to him until so each generation is pretty much stronger than the last with sidious being the final one.
|
On December 21 2017 11:44 thePunGun wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2017 05:52 riotjune wrote:
Saw it this morning, can't say I liked it.
Flynn and Rose kept failing and were entirely useless, you could've removed them from the movie and nothing would've changed. Same goes for Poe after his X-wing rampage from the opening act. Throne room fight was cool I guess.
Luke being a miserable old man who was supposed to be this legend just made me miserable. Got my hopes up during his stare down with the AT-ATs, was kinda disappointed. Thought the Kung Fu Panda showdown with the cannon boats near the end of the second movie was more climatic. Skywalker dies alone, he deserved better than this.
After decades of conflict (and waiting for sequels), we're back to where we started. The best thing about The Last Jedi is that Finn and Rose fail miserably, because this movie breaks all Star Wars rules. It's not some dumb luck plan saving our heroes, it's Luke, who steps in as their last hope.
That could have worked for me if it was executed better.
Here are the problems I have with it:
- There are no negative consequences for their failure. The net result of failing is they are in the exact same spot as if they never tried in the first place.
- Getting into and out of the failed plan took just as much unlikely luck as if they succeeded. They just happen to meet another code breaker in their cell capable of doing what they need, even though he could have broken himself out at any time?
- He takes their word that they can pay him, gives the temporary payment back because he is a good guy. Then he betrays them with information that we have no idea how or why he was given and for some reason the New Order pays him for that betrayal and lets him go even though he was the one who broke the rebels in...
- The rebels are taken from where they were captured to the hangar bays for no reason. An explosion some how makes everyone except for Finn and Rose to fall down or disappear around them just as they are about to be executed and they escape with no losses while all the New Order die.
Net result is that nothing changed from that whole plot line, and the individual things that needed to happen for that to be the case were just as unlikely as having the plan succeed.
|
Pretty sure there will be background material for Snoke that will come out in the future. From Episode VI to Phantom Menace, it has been 16 or so years gap that a lot of new material/lore had came out. Don't get why people are furious about Snoke having no background. Wonder if people during the 80's hated the film just because Palpatine has no background.
|
On December 21 2017 22:28 karazax wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2017 11:44 thePunGun wrote:On December 21 2017 05:52 riotjune wrote:
Saw it this morning, can't say I liked it.
Flynn and Rose kept failing and were entirely useless, you could've removed them from the movie and nothing would've changed. Same goes for Poe after his X-wing rampage from the opening act. Throne room fight was cool I guess.
Luke being a miserable old man who was supposed to be this legend just made me miserable. Got my hopes up during his stare down with the AT-ATs, was kinda disappointed. Thought the Kung Fu Panda showdown with the cannon boats near the end of the second movie was more climatic. Skywalker dies alone, he deserved better than this.
After decades of conflict (and waiting for sequels), we're back to where we started. The best thing about The Last Jedi is that Finn and Rose fail miserably, because this movie breaks all Star Wars rules. It's not some dumb luck plan saving our heroes, it's Luke, who steps in as their last hope. That could have worked for me if it was executed better. Here are the problems I have with it: - There are no negative consequences for their failure. The net result of failing is they are in the exact same spot as if they never tried in the first place.
- Getting into and out of the failed plan took just as much unlikely luck as if they succeeded. They just happen to meet another code breaker in their cell capable of doing what they need, even though he could have broken himself out at any time?
- He takes their word that they can pay him, gives the temporary payment back because he is a good guy. Then he betrays them with information that we have no idea how or why he was given and for some reason the New Order pays him for that betrayal and lets him go even though he was the one who broke the rebels in...
- The rebels are taken from where they were captured to the hangar bays for no reason. An explosion some how makes everyone except for Finn and Rose to fall down or disappear around them just as they are about to be executed and they escape with no losses while all the New Order die.
Net result is that nothing changed from that whole plot line, and the individual things that needed to happen for that to be the case were just as unlikely as having the plan succeed.
i just wanna say that he gets the information to betray them, because fin and poe are communicating in the ship to get there and for some reason fin has it on loud speaker so it broadcasts to the whole room. The camera actually pans to him after the conversation happens about the plan and he even looks up as a sign of interest (noticed it on my second watch through)
|
On December 21 2017 22:33 shin_toss wrote:
Pretty sure there will be background material for Snoke that will come out in the future. From Episode VI to Phantom Menace, it has been 16 or so years gap that a lot of new material/lore had came out. Don't get why people are furious about Snoke having no background. Wonder if people during the 80's hated the film just because Palpatine has no background.
The emperor wasn't inserted into an already existing story line with no explanation, which is a huge difference. And though I wasn't a fan of the prequels, they revolve around the emperor and how he came into power. His death also brought about the end of the trilogy and the Empire, it didn't happen as a side note in the middle of Empire Strikes Back.
The problem for me is having the biggest story line revolve around Ben Solo being corrupted by Snoke while he was being personally trained by Luke, with no explanation of how that happened, and having everything that was accomplished by Luke and the rebellion in the original trilogy wiped away as if it never happened with no explanation of how the First Order came into power.
Snoke is portrayed as so powerful he can connect minds of force users without them knowing he was responsible, implies he can read minds, throws Rey around like a rag doll and re-conquered the galaxy with the New Order. He was killed by an apprentice who has already been defeated by an untrained Rey, by basically tricking him. It just wasn't a satisfying story arc for me.
|
Finland964 Posts
On December 21 2017 23:08 karazax wrote:
The emperor wasn't inserted into an already existing story line with no explanation, which is a huge difference. And though I wasn't a fan of the prequels, they revolve around the emperor and how he came into power. His death also brought about the end of the trilogy and the Empire, it didn't happen as a side note in the middle of Empire Strikes Back.
But that's pretty much exactly what happened?
|
On December 21 2017 23:19 hexhaven wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2017 23:08 karazax wrote:
The emperor wasn't inserted into an already existing story line with no explanation, which is a huge difference. And though I wasn't a fan of the prequels, they revolve around the emperor and how he came into power. His death also brought about the end of the trilogy and the Empire, it didn't happen as a side note in the middle of Empire Strikes Back. But that's pretty much exactly what happened?
yeah but how is that a good story telling idea, i didnt watch ep6 in the cinema so i cant say for people at the time. But the question of the emperor and wtf he was only redeemed through the EU and the prequel explaination. But just because it happened doesnt mean it was a good move, its a stupid to expect books to fill in ur universe when you have the option to tell it. Ep6 isnt cinematic perfection, theres no need to mirror everything and be like "oh the OT had it so it must be good"
|
On December 21 2017 23:19 hexhaven wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2017 23:08 karazax wrote:
The emperor wasn't inserted into an already existing story line with no explanation, which is a huge difference. And though I wasn't a fan of the prequels, they revolve around the emperor and how he came into power. His death also brought about the end of the trilogy and the Empire, it didn't happen as a side note in the middle of Empire Strikes Back. But that's pretty much exactly what happened?
It's not what happened at all. There was no pre-existing story line for Star Wars with the original trilogy. With this trilogy the original trilogy is the pre-existing story line, but we are some how in a worse spot for the republic than in A New Hope with no explanation of how we got there.
The emperor's death and Vader's redemption was the conclusion of the original trilogy. If Palpatine died the first time we met him in person in the middle of Empire Strikes Back, then I would have had problems with that too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
