[movie] Star Wars: The Last Jedi

1235

Comments

  • Purge
    Purge
    GT Member
    Yes, he is (according to Clone Wars). He just didn't make the reunion on Endor (IIRC). ;)
  • Rumpy
    Rumpy
    GT Member
    And likely because he never had a connection to Luke. I think they only appear to those who've had a direct connection to them. A random former badass Jedi wouldn't quite make as much sense.
  • Purge
    Purge
    GT Member
    ... plus there was no more room on the log. ;)
  • Purge
    Purge
    GT Member
    ... and he was busy recovering his daughter. I mean, he does have a specific set of talents..
  • Rumpy
    Rumpy
    GT Member
    He had a daughter?
  • Blackjack
    Blackjack
    GT Member
    Rian Johnson did a fun Q&A with the head of the Collider site at a special IMAX screening at IMAX HQ in California (it's about 1 hour). Afterward he apparently stayed until he'd signed posters and taken photos with everyone who attended. :)

    http://collider.com/rian-johnson-the-last-jedi-interview/

    As much as I liked the movie, for some reason it didn't trigger the "I need to run back and see this many times" desire in me. As I babbled earlier, I was spoiled by the AMC double feature crowd being so into it. 2nd show I saw, the audience seemed comatose. And maybe the movie's length just scared me off seeing it again.

  • Bullwinkle
    Bullwinkle
    GT Member
    I finally saw it again with my wife and daughter, and they loved it. Not surprising for my daughter, but my wife went in with pretty low expectations, and she came out very impressed. We also spent quite a bit of time talking about the movie afterward, which is a thing I love about TLJ.

    For myself, I enjoyed it even more than the first time, and a lot of the little nagging issues I had turned out to either be non-issues or not as big a bother as I'd thought. Two examples are the casino planet, which is nowhere near as long as it seemed the first time I watched it. I still think they missed the mark with it (they should have shown us the people being nasty instead of telling us, for example), but it seemed much more of a blip this time. And then there's Laura Dern.

    Her choice to not explain her plan became the biggest negative for me the longer I let the movie sit in my brain. It didn't seem like shutting out Poe was fair given his big victory in taking out a dreadnaught, whether he followed orders or not. And I didn't get why she seemed to not explain the plan to anyone. Well, watching this time, I'm not sure why I assumed she didn't tell anyone the plan. It's pretty clear that they all knew about it by the end, and the only one kept in the dark was Poe. And Poe may have taken out a big ship (and a large FO troop count), but compared to the losses the Resistance suffered, it wasn't worth it. There are a couple of scenes with Leia looking defeated, even before the FO tracks them, and in one, she's staring at a casualty screen. The losses are too severe, especially when we later discover that this small group at the end is literally all that's left of the Resistance. Poe absolutely deserved to be demoted and punished. I think Holdo's ego got in the way a bit, and maybe she didn't make the best choice in shutting out Poe, but it doesn't seem like the massive flaw it once did to me.
  • Isgrimnur
    Isgrimnur
    GT Member
    There was no part in that plan for him. The time for daring heroics in a starfighter had passed, and he'd already shown that he could barely be trusted with that.
  • EngineNo9
    EngineNo9
    GT Member edited February 8
    You can still not tell someone a plan while alleviating their anxiety by saying "we are aware of the issue and we have a plan". It's just terrible fucking leadership to completely leave somebody in the dark when they have massive concerns and it is affecting crew stability and confidence in leadership.
  • Bullwinkle
    Bullwinkle
    GT Member
    EngineNo9 wrote: »
    You can still not tell someone a plan while alleviating their anxiety by saying "we are aware of the issue and we have a plan". It's just terrible fucking leadership to completely leave somebody in the dark when they have massive concerns and it is affecting crew stability and confidence in leadership.

    She's not off the hook. She definitely made a mistake there (that's her ego in play).

    The movie should have done a better job of making the situation clearer, IMO, but all of this is in there.
  • rittchard
    rittchard
    GT Member
    Bullwinkle wrote: »
    EngineNo9 wrote: »
    You can still not tell someone a plan while alleviating their anxiety by saying "we are aware of the issue and we have a plan". It's just terrible fucking leadership to completely leave somebody in the dark when they have massive concerns and it is affecting crew stability and confidence in leadership.

    She's not off the hook. She definitely made a mistake there (that's her ego in play).

    The movie should have done a better job of making the situation clearer, IMO, but all of this is in there.

    Also you are forgetting that even though she was a lesbian, Poe was getting her hot and bothered. So it was totally messing up her judgment.

    But seriously, I'm a little surprised at the reactions. As Bull said, the guy blatantly defied orders, got a ton of people killed, and was thus demoted in the chain of command. At that point he lost his right to be included in any plans. Sure he took down the dreadknot but was it worth the cost? Just because the audience is made to view him as a "hero" doesn't alleviate this. OK, admittedly it was all a bit contrived to make you dislike Laura Dern at first, and then later let her "redeem" herself, but whatever. In the context of a military organization, it made perfect sense to me. And that's coming from a huge Poe fan.
  • Bullwinkle
    Bullwinkle
    GT Member
    I think the problem is that the losses are underplayed vs Poe's heroic triumph. You sort of have to read between the lines to understand just how not-worth-it Poe's actions actually were.
  • Rumpy
    Rumpy
    GT Member edited February 8
    The thing is, and this is something I've been starting to realize, is that there really isn't much in terms of character development for his character, or any of the new characters. They're making him be an equal to Luke in terms of his timeframe, but where Luke was both a Jedi and a pilot and held some weight, his character doesn't feel as weighty in comparison, so his big rant felt like it had come from nowhere. If Luke were to have done something similar, they'd at least give him the decency to listen to his concerns before threatening to demote him. And so that's why it feels like legitimately poor plotting. I don't think the movie or the trilogy itself isn't giving us near enough character development for us to make connections. The OT was way more character-based in comparison to this one which tends to feel more plot-based.

    I felt that we learned a lot more about Luke's journey than we ever did about any of the new characters, who at this point, almost feel like an afterthought. After the movie, I had a strange feeling that by the 2nd movie we hadn't learned a hell of a lot, compared to how Empire Strikes Back had laid out all the stakes. We knew where the characters were headed at this point. In terms of plotting of a trilogy, it's almost as if we've barely scratched the surface of what could possibly be told. And if by the 3rd movie we still haven't learned anything, I'm going to feel severely disappointed in the storytelling. Who are Poe, Rey and Finn really? No, I mean really. Beyond what we've been given, we don't know about them beyond their archetypes. Poe's a pilot, Rey's a jedi, Finn a former stormtrooper. But as people, we don't know them or where they're headed. They feel like pawns drawn into a rebellion, but don't know what they're fighting for. That's because I feel that they've treated them like secondary characters rather than main characters.
  • Purge
    Purge
    GT Member
    I concur, Rumpy. I was far more attached to Rey, Finn and Poe in the TFA. They were interesting and held some value.

    Their story was one of futility in this - and while that may be the intent it washes them into the background.
  • Bullwinkle
    Bullwinkle
    GT Member
    Poe actually does have a big character arc in TLJ, but I didn't catch it until the second viewing. It's tied up into what I was discussing before, too.

    He comes off what he sees as a big win, taking out the Dreadnaught, and not only doesn't understand why he's demoted or left out of the loop, he doubles down and once again goes against orders. The second time, however, there's no ignoring the loss of life. You can see it start to sink in as they head to Krait's surface. But faced with an approaching enemy, he defaults to what he does best: a daring assault against the odds. However, as he's watching pilots die around him and realizes the futility of what he's attempting (compared to wiping out what few pilots they have left), Poe finally has his full epiphany and calls off the attack on the space battering ram. Later, as we watch him scramble to come up with another plan (one in which they, gulp, retreat, no less), he evolves from being a hothead to being a leader.

    When the owl-nosed lady announces the clear line-of-command leader after Leia is out of commission earlier in the film, there's a moment where Poe clearly thinks it's going to be him, which is ridiculous, and he sort of sheepishly knows it as he sits back down. At the end of the movie, he's on his way to that being a possibility.
  • Purge
    Purge
    GT Member
    Yeah, I see that, but it requires either deep contemplation.

    Just like Jar-Jar isn't really that bad, but he stands out in TPM and is super annoying. ;)
  • Rumpy
    Rumpy
    GT Member
    Well, that's the thing. As characters they've been severely underdeveloped. I wish I could say we knew more about them after the end of TLJ, but we don't. All we really know is what they fed us via TFA.

    What are they fighting for? As viewers, I get the impression they don't really know, as that's reflected in the writing itself. I feel as if the writers don't really know where things are going, and it's a bit of a mess. And the stakes? There are none as far as I'm concerned. Oh, the Order is threatening, sure, but nothing beyond heavy posturing. You get the sense in the TFA crawl that they're a lot better organized than they are, but they're a shell of their former selves without Vader and Palpatine to guide them, a. By ESB, we knew full well the kind of threat the Empire was to them as a plan had been established. I was actually really pleased with how they handled Luke in this, but if there's one thing I was disappointed with, was just low-key the reaction to the threat was. A new threat is rising and he just shrugs. And that's ultimately how I feel about it too, because as a viewer, we're not really given much, are we? There are no stakes. None. They'll bring out the next big superweapon in the next movie and Ren will huff and puff and try to blow down the Rebellion, but to what end? There's no real story behind it. No grand plan has been established.

    Lucas introduced characters he knew he had to kill off in the OT, but at the same time, he was forging ahead with a unique saga. We're seeing this again here, the OT characters being killed off, but the difference is that they're relying on them too much and at the same time, they're not forging ahead enough to create characters with a sense of history of their own. And that's huge. There's no sense of time and place in this new trilogy. And when the OT characters are all gone, it won't really have much left. I find that pretty sad. It's going to have to do some heavy lifting in the next movie, and I fully predict a very convoluted story made to dazzle and distract from the fact that there isn't really much of one.

    I really hate the approach of Abram's box and what it's done to these movies. Many questions, no answers.
  • Bullwinkle
    Bullwinkle
    GT Member
    The First Order is only doing heavy posturing? They wiped out the near entirety of the Resistance in the span of however long it is between the two movies (which isn't long because Finn is just coming out of rehab and the second movie is the length of that chase).

    Also, Luke wasn't shrugging to the First Order, like they were nothing. He was hermitting because of what he had done to Ben and in creating Kylo Ren. Everything the First Order accomplishes has been done without his knowledge.

    And, again, they've accomplished a horrifying amount of destruction in a very short time. They essentially stopped the Resistance by killing everyone. The stakes are HUGE!

    Now, I will agree that TLJ went out of its way to not answer questions, leaving the next one to do a lot of heavy lifting, as you say, and time will tell if that weighs the next movie down too much or not (though it's not an ideal balance). If they pull it off (and I do have confidence in JJ), I suspect that a lot of the filling in of details will shed new light on the previous movies (which has already happened with TFA in light of TLJ, from what I hear).

    Now, I know that you'll say the original trilogy didn't have to wait for the third movie to flesh everything out, and that may be true to a degree, but I think there's a lot of rose tinted glasses wearing happening. We lose sight of the fact that most of us were very young when the original trilogy came out, and farmboy, rogue and princess were all we needed to know. The characters were really just archetypes then in a lot of ways, too, but we filled in the cracks as fanboys and fleshed them out in our minds.

    As for Jar Jar, he's annoying. Period. All the back twisting to say otherwise is adding stuff to the movie. I'm saying that the stuff I mentioned is in there. I agree that it should be a little more forward in the dialogue, but it's there and doesn't take much searching to see.

    I guess, in the end, I'm very strongly recommending that everyone take in a second viewing of TLJ. If you go in with an open mind, you may find that your complaints become less of a problem, like they did for me.
  • Rumpy
    Rumpy
    GT Member
    Don't get me wrong, I loved TLJ, maybe moreso than most who have criticisms for it, and I even loved Luke's treatment in it. I like it for what it is. But I also realize the trilogy has quite a different feel and focus to it than the OT, like being painted with broader strokes. I just feel it's far less character focused than it should be. I also don't feel they're nearly as well realized, which leads me to feel less urgency in the events of the franchise overall.

  • Purge
    Purge
    GT Member
    when you know there is a little bit of poop in the bottom of your chocolate muffin, you know to avoid it.

    So, the second time is way less unpleasant.
  • EngineNo9
    EngineNo9
    GT Member
    Purge wrote: »
    when you know there is a little bit of poop in the bottom of your chocolate muffin, you know to avoid it.

    So, the second time is way less unpleasant.

    :scream:
  • Bullwinkle
    Bullwinkle
    GT Member edited February 9
    Maybe you would find out that it wasn't poop at all, but carob. Not the greatest taste, but better than poop.
  • Rumpy
    Rumpy
    GT Member edited February 9
    Purge wrote: »
    when you know there is a little bit of poop in the bottom of your chocolate muffin, you know to avoid it.

    So, the second time is way less unpleasant.

    Second time??

    I think you'd avoid the bakery all-together and report it as a health-code violation at this point.... Doesn't sound like there should even be a second time ;)
  • rittchard
    rittchard
    GT Member
    I'd say people need to go back and rewatch the original trilogy as well, because the acting and dialog in many of the scenes is incredibly torturous for me to watch now. The "plotting" is decent but fairly simplistic, and I believe it was meant to be that way. I think I recall interviews where George Lucas says it's meant to be an adventure series for teenage boys or something to that effect.

    So honestly I am not remembering all sorts of grand character story arcs or development - I definitely agree with the "rose colored glasses" comment. As much as I loved the original series and the place it holds in my heart, evaluating it in today's terms, I think you will be surprised at how much is actually lacking. Take Han Solo. He's a rogue pilot who only wants money, then boom he falls in love with Princess Leia after a few days on a ship together. Then he gets frozen. Then boom he's back and he's a hero, hooray! Seriously, that's a major "character" arc?

    I do agree that this series isn't particularly "character based" but really neither was the original. It's just that the actors (particularly Carrie Fisher and Harrison Ford) were more charismatic, and there were less of them to follow so it was more focused on the core 3. The new series feels like much more of an ensemble, mostly due to the inclusion of the original cast and more focus on Kylo, so there are a lot more moving pieces plus the need to pay respect to the original core 3. The finale will be interesting as that will no longer be an excuse.
  • Rumpy
    Rumpy
    GT Member edited February 9
    Well, either way, I think there's a very different approach to both trilogies. If watching back to back, which is something that might need to be done after the 3rd one comes out, I think there will be quite a tonal difference, but it could just be due to a change in how moviemaking is approached these days.
  • rittchard
    rittchard
    GT Member
    Rumpy wrote: »
    Well, either way, I think there's a very different approach to both trilogies. If watching back to back, which is something that might need to be done after the 3rd one comes out, I think there will be quite a tonal difference, but it could just be due to a change in how moviemaking is approached these days.

    definitely agree with that. then of course there's the anomaly of the first trilogy to contend with too lol. It's got a really awkward mix of modern and old-school.

  • rittchard
    rittchard
    GT Member edited February 9
    Rumpy wrote: »
    Well, either way, I think there's a very different approach to both trilogies. If watching back to back, which is something that might need to be done after the 3rd one comes out, I think there will be quite a tonal difference, but it could just be due to a change in how moviemaking is approached these days.

    definitely agree with that. then of course there's the anomaly of the first trilogy to contend with too lol. It's got a really awkward mix of modern and old-school.

    The other interesting thing is after the first trilogy was complete, I kind of saw the entire series 1-6 in many ways as the story of Anakin Skywalker, from childhood to adulthood, hero to villain and redemption. The addition of 7-9 kind of deflates that symmetry, unless you say that Kylo is some form of re-incarnated Anakin.
  • Rumpy
    Rumpy
    GT Member
    rittchard wrote: »
    Rumpy wrote: »
    Well, either way, I think there's a very different approach to both trilogies. If watching back to back, which is something that might need to be done after the 3rd one comes out, I think there will be quite a tonal difference, but it could just be due to a change in how moviemaking is approached these days.

    definitely agree with that. then of course there's the anomaly of the first trilogy to contend with too lol. It's got a really awkward mix of modern and old-school.

    Yep, exactly. And consider for a moment the prequels back to back with the OT. I think tonally they fit pretty well, and that was because Lucas was consciously going for consistency. But I feel that's something lacking with the new OT. It's weird, but I find the new movies tend to feel a tad too modern. Maybe that's not the right word, but it's as if this new school has brought about a completely different lens void of that consistency. And I can't be the only one to have this feeling.
  • Purge
    Purge
    GT Member
    This muffin is delicious!
  • Bullwinkle
    Bullwinkle
    GT Member
    Rumpy wrote: »
    rittchard wrote: »
    Rumpy wrote: »
    Well, either way, I think there's a very different approach to both trilogies. If watching back to back, which is something that might need to be done after the 3rd one comes out, I think there will be quite a tonal difference, but it could just be due to a change in how moviemaking is approached these days.

    definitely agree with that. then of course there's the anomaly of the first trilogy to contend with too lol. It's got a really awkward mix of modern and old-school.

    Yep, exactly. And consider for a moment the prequels back to back with the OT. I think tonally they fit pretty well, and that was because Lucas was consciously going for consistency. But I feel that's something lacking with the new OT. It's weird, but I find the new movies tend to feel a tad too modern. Maybe that's not the right word, but it's as if this new school has brought about a completely different lens void of that consistency. And I can't be the only one to have this feeling.

    There is a tonal shift to the new movies, it's true. The color palette alone is paler. There's also a more somber feel to it, though that fits both the aging characters and the (so far) downbeat story.
Sign In or Register to comment.