Star Wars: The Force Awakens Discussion (HERE THERE BE SPOILERS)

[Magellan]

Where did this come from? Can I use this other places? Pretty much perfectly sums up how I felt about the story of the movie.

My scatterbrained initial reactions:

My biggest complaint, even more so than than the rehashed story is Rey. I can't understand the praise. She sucks terribly. Incredibly boring Mary Sue. She's just the super best at everything. She can outfight Kylo without training, she can force pull the lightsaber without any training, she can mind control the stormtroopers without any training, she's a super duper pilot, oh and she even knows the Millenium Falcon better than the guy who practically rebuilt it over the course of his whole friggin' life. There's nothing this girl can't do! I can't even imagine why she needs to find Luke. She clearly is just about at his level after a couple of days away from Jakku.


All of the characters are really thin. The movie really spends no time establishing what makes these people tick. Finn doesn't feel like a Stormtrooper trained from birth to kill. He seems very average joe actually. On the plus side Boyega is likable enough. Poe is a total non-character. I guess he is the new Han but he has so little screen time he may as well not even be in the movie.

What is up with JJ and the idea that the whole universe can be seen just by looking up? Has the man never set foot outside and realized he can't see Neptune? Uranus? How does he think you can see other star systems? How does no one ever mention this too him? I demand answers!

The Starkiler wasn't just a retread. It was a silly, immature fanboyish retread. "Dude, like the Death Star was the size of a small moon, so let's make the new one planet sized!!!" I get it bigger is better. I can't wait for the one light year long Star Destroyer. Of course in a JJ Abrams universe that's actually about 4 miles.

Other thoughts

• Harrison Ford was surprisingly good actually. I haven't seen him do anything I liked in a long time but he wasn't bad at all.
• Carrie Fisher looked and sounded so different almost couldn't tell it was the same person.
• Anthony Daniels sounded so different they probably could have gotten a different voice actor and he would have sound more like C-3PO.
• Adam Driver was alright. He's no Vader but I do get that was the point. Unfortunately without the mask he does look a bit too dweeby to be menacing.
• Snoke is a goofy name better suited to Harry Potter than SW
• Maz should've been a puppet. Not just for old times sake. The CG just looked very obvious.
• Amazingly the First Order has actually trained their Stormtroopers to fight.
• Most of the FX were pretty good. I liked the practical stuff, and over all it did a good job capturing the original aesthetic.

All said and done it was, in my opinion, mediocre. OK if you will. I thought I would totally hate it given my feelings on Abrams' Star Trek films, and the spoilers I read before hand. It's a pale shadow of the original films, but actually it was better than the prequels. Lucas pretty much killed my childhood enthusiasm for Star Wars, but this is decent enough that I'm willing to hang in there and see what a different director can bring to it.

EDIT Another thing I didn't like(I know you say, enough already haha). The parallel between Han and Obi-Wan just doesn't work for me. They throw it in the dialog between Kylo and Rey as"He's like the father you didn't have" or something. Show us, don't tell. She and Finn don't even know the guy. They met him for a couple hours tops. Luke at least knew Obi-Wan. He had clearly met "old Ben" Kenobi before. Nothing about the interactions between the kids and Han Solo makes me feel like they got super close or anything.

 

[TRON JA307020]

I think maybe the real problem that davejames is having is that Anakin killed kids. I think that it took something away from the Darth Vader character for him. Darth Vader was cool as long as his chicking and killing were confined to rebel and imperial adults and combatants. The character could still be cool villain in davejames eyes.

Oh please. I have no trouble buying that Vader ultimately becomes someone who massacres children and entire families in his role as Palpatine's enforcer and right hand man.

I just don't buy it happening as quickly and out of nowhere as it seems to happen in ROTS. Or that all his time serving with the Jedi-- and watching them save and protect people and be generally good and honorable people-- could be so quickly and easily tossed aside as he commits himself to Palpatine and allows them all to be slaughtered.

And of course if you factor in the now canon TCW, where Anakin actually comes across even more mature and adult than the whiny kid in the movies, then that turn starts to feel even more abrupt and out of character.

It didn't happened quickly. Three years previous Anakin did his first dark act of killing a whole tribe of sand people including the children. He started on his road to the dark side in AOTC.

 

[dahj]

Uh well he kind of was a child killer in ep IV. Did you think there was only adults on Aldderan

I know people think of Vader as the default "bad guy" of Ep iV, but blowing up Alderaan was all Tarkin's idea.

 

[cooleddie74]

Since he didn't lift one cybernetic finger to prevent Tarkin from testing the weapon on Leia's homeworld he can definitely be considered an accessory to the crime of planetary genocide. You don't always have to come up with the idea or give the order to be guilty by association. But Episode IV does prove that the two Sith Lords weren't the only characters in that galaxy capable of something so horrific and on such a large scale that millions if not billions of lives would be destroyed by their actions.

 

[TRON JA307020]

Uh well he kind of was a child killer in ep IV. Did you think there was only adults on Aldderan

I know people think of Vader as the default "bad guy" of Ep iV, but blowing up Alderaan was all Tarkin's idea.

As Eddie said and I was alluding to Vader is an accessory. Tarkin ordered it but Vader was also following orders to find those plans for the Death Star Weakness. He even killed all the people on Leias ship to get them. Vader didn't want the Death Star destroyed he wanted it functional so Tarkin could keep using it. In Episode VII he was just as much a murderer as he was in Ep III.

 

[DWF]

I think maybe the real problem that davejames is having is that Anakin killed kids. I think that it took something away from the Darth Vader character for him. Darth Vader was cool as long as his chicking and killing were confined to rebel and imperial adults and combatants. The character could still be cool villain in davejames eyes.

Oh please. I have no trouble buying that Vader ultimately becomes someone who massacres children and entire families in his role as Palpatine's enforcer and right hand man.

I just don't buy it happening as quickly and out of nowhere as it seems to happen in ROTS. Or that all his time serving with the Jedi-- and watching them save and protect people and be generally good and honorable people-- could be so quickly and easily tossed aside as he commits himself to Palpatine and allows them all to be slaughtered.

And of course if you factor in the now canon TCW, where Anakin actually comes across even more mature and adult than the whiny kid in the movies, then that turn starts to feel even more abrupt and out of character.

Anakin's fall is telegraphed so far away you can see it in AOTC when he's talking to Padme about how the givernment is run. He's on a quest for power and even admits to Padme in EP. III that he wants more just being a Jedi and he knows he shouldn't. In the novel he can't sleep or eat properly which also screws with his decision making processes.

 

[Michael]

My biggest complaint, even more so than than the rehashed story is Rey. I can't understand the praise. She sucks terribly.

Wow, I had the exact opposite reaction to Rey and Daisy Ridley! She's easily the best thing that could have happened to Star Wars. Amazing charactar and an outstanding performance. A strong independant woman who kicks ass and doesn't need a man to do so. Her friendship with Finn (John Boyega almost equals Ridley in his superb performance) was one of the best things about the movie.

Incredibly boring Mary Sue.

No, she is not.

 

[TRON JA307020]

My biggest complaint, even more so than than the rehashed story is Rey. I can't understand the praise. She sucks terribly.

Wow, I had the exact opposite reaction to Rey and Daisy Ridley! She's easily the best thing that could have happened to Star Wars. Amazing charactar and an outstanding performance. A strong independant woman who kicks ass and doesn't need a man to do so. Her friendship with Finn (John Boyega almost equals Ridley in his superb performance) was one of the best things about the movie.

Incredibly boring Mary Sue.

No, she is not.

While I liked Rey I think they were trying a bit to hard to make her a independent women. Its not like shes the first one ever in movies. The feminists are acting like she is a anomaly in Star Wars. Look at Leia in Ep IV and V, VII or Padme in Ep I and II. Both strong independent women. Its funny how everyone is acting like Rey is new to Star Wars and women have always been ignored in the previous films. Ridiculous.

Mary Sue?

 

[{ Emilia }]

While I liked Rey I think they were trying a bit to hard to make her a independent women. Its not like shes the first one ever in movies. The feminists are acting like she is a anomaly in Star Wars. Look at Leia in Ep IV and V, VII or Padme in Ep I and II. Both strong independent women. Its funny how everyone is acting like Rey is new to Star Wars and women have always been ignored in the previous films. Ridiculous.

Before you go on to mansplain feminist issues any further here is an article that does a good job explaining why strong women can be either an archetype (Leia) or a fully-fledged character (Rey). And why Rey is a nice progress.

Click me.

I love when men tell me how I should feel about stuff like this. It always makes me giggle.

 

[Michael]

While I liked Rey I think they were trying a bit to hard to make her a independent women. Its not like shes the first one ever in movies. The feminists are acting like she is a anomaly in Star Wars. Look at Leia in Ep IV and V, VII or Padme in Ep I and II. Both strong independent women. Its funny how everyone is acting like Rey is new to Star Wars and women have always been ignored in the previous films. Ridiculous. Mary Sue?

And yet neither Leia nor Padmé are really the main characters in the respective movies they appear in. Looking at both more closely you will notice that their role is to complement a male character in the story.

So yes, Rey actually is a novelty in the Star Wars universe. But then again, why would she have to be a new thing to be awesome?

 

[Venardhi]

While I liked Rey I think they were trying a bit to hard to make her a independent women. Its not like shes the first one ever in movies. The feminists are acting like she is a anomaly in Star Wars. Look at Leia in Ep IV and V, VII or Padme in Ep I and II. Both strong independent women. Its funny how everyone is acting like Rey is new to Star Wars and women have always been ignored in the previous films. Ridiculous.

Before you go on to mansplain feminist issues any further here is an article that does a good job explaining why strong women can be either an archetype (Leia) or a fully-fledged character (Rey). And why Rey is a nice progress.

Click me.

I love when men tell me how I should feel about stuff like this. It always makes me giggle.

I don't disagree with you on this point, but your argument is far stronger without hurling such terms as "mansplain" at your opponent. Have an honest debate weighted on the merits of the truth you have to offer. Ideological dogma only muddies the waters.

 

[{ Emilia }]

That's easy to say for a man considering you're never the subject of mansplaining.

My post was meant in a pretty light-hearted manner, though which is why I mentioned the giggleing. I'm sorry if that didn't come across as planned.

In general I would strongly object to your claim that pointing out sexism and/or mansplaining is bringing ideology into a discussion. It's addressing a relevant concern in the argument.

 

[Venardhi]

Men "mansplain" to other men all the time. We just tend to call them "assholes" and "jackasses" instead of coming up with a gender-specific term for it. I know I've been guilty of it more than once and the "victim" of it more times than I can count.

 

[{ Emilia }]

Men "mansplain" to other men all the time. We just tend to call them "assholes" and "jackasses" instead of coming up with a gender-specific term for it.

Mansplaining doesn't mean what you think it means then. It is a gender-specific phenomenon that isn't the same as some know-it-all explaining stuff to another man.

Again, though: In this case it was meant in a light-hearted manner and I thought the giggle was obvious enough.

 

[BigJake]

Men "mansplain" to other men all the time.

Not real men.

Any-hoo, the claim that Princess Leia was inhabiting the same kind of role as Rey is totally silly on its face. That Atlantic article goes through some of the more detailed reasons, but just at a basic level: Rey is the chief protagonist of her movie. Leia never was. (And calling Padme a feminist character is just bizarre. Her occasionally getting to use a blaster doesn't make up for her spending an entire movie pitifully-simpering-while-preggo.)

 

[Venardhi]

From my understanding, it originated as a term describing the behavior of a man at a party trying to talk over the author of a heralded book about her own work because he had read about it (her book, not the subject itself) and was too full of his own ancillary knowledge on the subject to consider for an instant that someone else might be far more knowledgeable and perhaps he should shut the fuck up for a second and find that out.

Whatever secondary connotations the phrase has taken on or how such an act may be read into considering the rest of society, that original behavior is not gender-specific.

 

[Gov Kodos]

Men "mansplain" to other men all the time. We just tend to call them "assholes" and "jackasses" instead of coming up with a gender-specific term for it. I know I've been guilty of it more than once and the "victim" of it more times than I can count.

From my understanding, it originated as a term describing the behavior of a man at a party trying to talk over the author of a heralded book about her own work because he had read about it (her book, not the subject itself) and was too full of his own ancillary knowledge on the subject to consider for an instant that someone else might be far more knowledgeable and perhaps he should shut the fuck up for a second and find that out.

Whatever secondary connotations the phrase has taken on or how such an act may be read into considering the rest of society, that original behavior is not gender-specific.

Mansplaining, it is a thing as seen here.

 

[Venardhi]

Disagreement is not condescension.

 

[{ Emilia }]

Disagreement is not condescension.

Mansplaining is trying to explain something to a woman who has first-hand and theoretical experience with the issue even though the man clearly doesn't know what he's talking about.

That's pretty much what you did considering you clearly didn't even know that the concept is gender-specific.

So uh, yeah. You kinda were doing it. In fact, unlike Pubert's post, yours was a textbook example.

 

[Venardhi]

I both understand and disagree with the base concept of the term's common usage in recent times.