Spoilers Star Wars: The Last Jedi - Grading & Discussion
- Thread starter Commander Richard
- Start date
This makes no sense to me-it's ok not to show a person but perfectly fine to reboot them and ignore what came before? Versus completing their story, including the very real aspect that people don't live forever, except that Luke can?I understand but personally I would have prevered not to show the old characters.
Just mention that Luke is looking for new Jedi potentials.
And space should be big, so it's not strange not to see him or the others.
O well, maybe over a few years we get a reboot and everything starts over
When I saw the Finn and Rose subplot, I really enjoyed it. It felt like an interesting extension of Finn's character growth, of coming to terms with his desire to run constantly. More interestingly, he sees the fight from a different perspective, and how ugly the battle between the First Order and the Republic is.
I was actually making a joke, that is why I put a wink
at the end of the sentence.
Last edited:
In their defence, there have been plenty of equally silly statements put forth of late with a straight face, so I think one can be forgiven for not noticing the emote and just take it at face value.
I really don't think we'll have the final word on LTJ sentiment until we see what happens in Episode IX.
I'm not expecting the Rotten Tomatoes scores to shoot up dramatically, but it's possible that Episode IX will put the "hand everyone a dose of FAILURE! It's good for SOUL!" aspects of VIII in better context as well as make the tonal shift between VII and VIII somehow make sense.
I'm not expecting the Rotten Tomatoes scores to shoot up dramatically, but it's possible that Episode IX will put the "hand everyone a dose of FAILURE! It's good for SOUL!" aspects of VIII in better context as well as make the tonal shift between VII and VIII somehow make sense.
This isn't addressed at you Shaka Zulu per se, but I've seen arguments similar to yours before and I am responding to that point of view.
Why not adapt the Thrawn trilogy? That's no different than introducing all new characters to the masses like have been done in the sequels anyway. The issue I would have with adapting the novel trilogy is that the story is already out there and been told, yet that doesn't stop Hollywood from adapting tons of books already. Adapting the Thrawn trilogy, or other EU works, is no more a bad idea than what we've gotten so far in the sequels. And it would already excite a portion of the fanbase, like how Thrawn on Rebels likely excited some folks. And Disney Star Wars is not averse to also putting EU characters in live action, like Tag and Bink for the upcoming Solo anthology film.
Similarly, why not adapt New Frontier? Peter David already did the legwork, all CBS would have to do is translate it onscreen. It's already something of a proven concept. That doesn't mean that a Thrawn trilogy film or New Frontier show wouldn't have to do the work to also excite the vast majority of people who have never even heard of the stuff that they would be adapted from. Relying on the fanbase alone doesn't have a good track record of success (ex. Serenity).
I get why Disney (and CBS/Paramount for that matter) would want the freedom to tell the stories they want to tell, a fresh slate, though the sequels do have some EU things like the New Republic and also Ben Solo is similar to the EU's Jacen Solo, so it's not like the EU is being completely ignored here. They are just remixing some things, putting their own spin on some EU ideas.
I don't get the admonishment about fan ownership. I can't speak for everyone else, but I know I don't own Star Trek or Star Wars, yet that doesn't mean I can't want the franchise to take proven characters and ideas from other media and adapt them onscreen. What I feel this kind of argument is saying is that you shouldn't complain. That it's not for you. Well, if it's not for us, if it's not designed to get us (whoever that may be) to part with the money in our wallets then exactly who is it for? Aren't hardcore fans also part of the mass audience? And further, if you distance yourselves from the hardcore of any fanbase too far you might miss out on vacuuming up all the money they'll spend on the ancillary stuff (toys, comics, novels, video games, knick knacks, etc. It also might dampen enthusiasm on social media, which I do think Hollywood is looking at, or at least the genre media does sometimes to gauge what people are most excited to see). There's an old saying, "Dance with them that brung you," and Disney's hunger to get more fans, which makes sense, by not satisfying old fans (which I find inexplicable) might leave Disney's Star Wars...in time...dancing alone on the dance floor. I don't think old fans or nostalgia is something that has to be pitted against new fans. If you write good enough stories you can integrate those audiences together.
What I'm hearing from this kind of argument is that you should just accept whatever they offer and if you don't like it, just stop patronizing it, which is fine, though it also seems to suggest that you shouldn't say anything, wish for anything, or speculate. You should just accept it, all of it, and be happy they gave it to you.
And I think that takes something away from fan culture. Though I do feel that there are some corners in the media, and among fans themselves, that despise 'fan culture', which admittedly can be toxic at times, though I think some of this stems from one group of nerds thinking they are better than other groups of nerds. (Let me repeat I'm not talking about you personally. I've just been trying to put this into words for a while now because I've seen variations of this argument in relation to TLJ. And it's an argument that no one was using for DCEU films for example. Everyone was allowed to speak, to vent on those films pro and con, but for some reason, Star Wars seems to be this holy vessel for some that people dare not criticize, and if you do, then it's your fault, because how could Star Wars be anything else but perfect?
Last edited:
I was actually making a joke, that is why I put a wink
The problem is, I've seen arguments that a reboot would be preferred to the ST.
Partially, yes. I am glad that the franchises I enjoy are continuing, regardless of whether or not I think they are "good." I wish for things all the time, but often times I get told not to do so, or that what the production teams are doing are "wrong" and that the fans somehow know better.
Respectfully, I disagree. I don't think fans know better. I certainly would love to think that I do and certainly my mad ramblings across several boards would bear evidence to my willingness to speak my mind on the matter.
The larger frustration that I have is a tension of acceptance of offered material and a desire for different material. I didn't want to go in to TLJ wishing it was different-I wanted to engage it as it was presented. I didn't think it was perfect, but it was entertaining at a level that I was not expecting.
The reason I don't think the Thrawn trilogy will adapt well is because of the reaction to TLJ. There are already prebuilt expectations that cannot be fulfilled even though LFL has tried. They distance the material from the old EU and the comparisons get made (Jacen=Kylo?). They set it 30 years in the future and people complain of changes. They don't change things and complaints fume over Starkiller.
The larger point is that if this baggage comes with this ST and divorced of any books, imagine the backlash when something is cut out of the books, or added to.
Let me assure you, that Is not something I would preferred. Even though I dislike this trilogy, maybe I will like the next trilogy.
So far the only reboot I think Is great, are the new Rise of the planet of the apes trilogy
In their defence, there have been plenty of equally silly statements put forth of late with a straight face, so I think one can be forgiven for not noticing the emote and just take it at face value.
Then I will try to make my meaning better known the next time
Just imagine the shitstorm that would erupt if the wrong person was cast as Thrawn, or, heaven forbid, he wasn't blue
Don't be. I'm as much a fan, and have no issues with this very entertaining and well made movie, that actually dares to go beyond the cookiecutter Star Wars most fans need. I'm happy and satisfied.
Just because you're a fan, doesn't mean all fans think and feel like you.
I think by cookie cutter, he's referring to something like TFA that was very much meant to be a fan pleaser, coming close to being a remake of ANH.
For many of us, it was nice to see a movie that took a few more chances and did not go the way many expected.
Yeah, I never really saw the romance there either, they were just very close friends because they were the first friends both of them had.
This sums it up pretty well for me.
For me at least, the issue isn't when people don't like something, it's when they say things that I feel can prove isn't true, like the Canto Bight stuff serving no purpose. As has been proven several times, it did serve a purpose. You can dislike something all you want, but if you say something like that then I'm going to explain why that's wrong, or at least why I think it is.
There are at least three franchises that I know of that actually have adapted tie-in novels, Star Trek, Monk and Doctor Who. The TNG episode Where No Man Has Gone Before is a loose adaptation of the TOS novel The Wounded Sky, the Monk episodes Mr. Monk Can't See A Thing and Mr. Monk and the Badge are loose adaptations of the novels Mr. Monk Goes to the Firehouse, and Mr. Monk and the Blue Flu, and the Tenth Doctor Doctor Who two parter Human Nature/Family of Blood were an adaptation of the Seventh Doctor novel Human Nature.
Don't be. I'm as much a fan, and have no issues with this very entertaining and well made movie, that actually dares to go beyond the cookiecutter Star Wars most fans need. I'm happy and satisfied.
Just because you're a fan, doesn't mean all fans think and feel like you.
Then let me just refer you to the way Mark Hamill himself thinks and feels about it
I agree with Mark, fans that weren't there in 1977 to see it all get started might never really understand the older fan base that is with Mark on this one, and that's ok I am very happy a new generation of SW fans is here and enjoy it.
Then let me just refer you to the way Mark Hamill himself thinks and feels about it
I agree with Mark, fans that weren't there in 1977 to see it all get started might never really understand the older fan base that is with Mark on this one, and that's ok I am very happy a new generation of SW fans is here and enjoy it.
*Puts hand up*
I’ve been watching the original trilogy since I was probably a toddler. I’d certainly seen them all multiple times before the release of the prequels, Clone Wars, and whatnot.
What difference would it make if I’d done the same thing, but in 1977? Is watching The Holdiay Special between ANH and ESB really that important to the formative experience?
And this is also something Mark Hamill’s thinks:
And he managed to ‘think’ it without splicing together pieces of three different interviews, imagery from the movies themselves, and a Johnny Cash soundtrack.*
*I never knew it was possible to laugh during ‘Hurt.’ Then I heard it playing behind Luke moping and staring at the Binary Sunset. Don’t worry emo Luke, teenage-me used to sulk along with Trent Reznor lyrics too.
Last edited:
Just imagine the shitstorm that would erupt if the wrong person was cast as Thrawn, or, heaven forbid, he wasn't blue
Well, of course. Thrawn not being blue would be a fuckup of epic proportions!
Nice little video there. As Lucas would say, it's all in the editing.
Yea, his "perfect caricature" view reads like the ramblings of one who likes heavy handed (and childish) sociopolitical views stuffed into film, and not understanding the root problems at all. Its all nervous, finger-pointing talking points, nothing more..
Similar threads
- Sticky
- Poll
