• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

The Star Wars problem

Excuse me, but as I have now repeatedly pointed out, ANH includes a whole board room discussion scene about the political state of the galaxy.

It does not. It has a board room scene in which the relative threat of the Rebel Alliance is discussed and *very briefly* the implications of the Senate having just been dissolved.
None of this is given any meaningful context. We don't really know what the Empire really is, how important the Senate is, what the history of either of these things are, who this Emperor person is beyond the obvious, who are the "region governors", how many local systems there are, why there's a rebellion and in what sense are they an "Alliance" nor why the Imperial Starfleet (whatever that is!) thinks they're a real and present danger.

We're not told anything substantial here. You just think we are because we have 40 years of other stories from various sources to frame the significance behind the very little that is said. As presented, it's bare minimum storytelling at it's best. Nothing is superfluous or extraneous.
 
But this was the official continuation of RotJ. I think it's irresponsible to the saga to just not show us how the government and galaxy at large is getting along in relation to the prior governments of the films.
As i've said before, The Thrawn Trilogy did it to great success.

The fact that that aspect wasn't important to TFA isn't a point in your favor, it merely shows how wrong the focus of the movie was.
Well, it's also worth keeping in mind that the movie doesn't exist in a vacuum, and since one of the common complaints about the prequels was that they focused to much on politics, they probably tried to avoid that stuff as much as they could.
 
It's only unimportant because they made the wrong movie, is what i'm saying. They had a chance to the movie as large scale as the PT but also make it less "boring" than a Lucas film by shaking the camera around and having a cut every 0.5 seconds or whatever movies do now, but they didn't.
They made a tiny movie with tiny (or no) ambitions. In a way it's antithetical to SW as Lucas didn't want Han killed off because Han had already gone through his ordeal and RotJ was supposed to be our heroes' happy ending.

Now Han is dead, Luke's order got massacred and he went into hiding because he has to be the Yoda expy, and Fisher died so Leia has been written out of episode IX.
I completely disagree. Yes it is a small movie, but that is only because this is the beginning of the story, which is probably going to build in scale as we get to the end of IX.
It was also the first movie under Disney, without Lucas, and since the Prequels, which got a mixed reaction at best. I think it makes sense that they'd want to start off a bit smaller, instead of just dumping everything into one movie. They were basically just trying to ease people into this new version of the Star Wars universe.
 
It does not. It has a board room scene in which the relative threat of the Rebel Alliance is discussed and *very briefly* the implications of the Senate having just been dissolved.
None of this is given any meaningful context. We don't really know what the Empire really is, how important the Senate is, what the history of either of these things are, who this Emperor person is beyond the obvious, who are the "region governors", how many local systems there are, why there's a rebellion and in what sense are they an "Alliance" nor why the Imperial Starfleet (whatever that is!) thinks they're a real and present danger.

We're not told anything substantial here. You just think we are because we have 40 years of other stories from various sources to frame the significance behind the very little that is said. As presented, it's bare minimum storytelling at it's best. Nothing is superfluous or extraneous.
And yet it's still much more than TFA gives us.
 
Well, it's also worth keeping in mind that the movie doesn't exist in a vacuum, and since one of the common complaints about the prequels was that they focused to much on politics, they probably tried to avoid that stuff as much as they could.
The Star Wars universe should exist in a vacuum and mostly did when Lucas was making it. He made the prequels he wanted and didn't back down from the political aspects of TPM in the following films. Hell, AotC revolves around the decision to create or not to create a government backed militia.
 
It's only unimportant because they made the wrong movie, is what i'm saying. They had a chance to the movie as large scale as the PT but also make it less "boring" than a Lucas film by shaking the camera around and having a cut every 0.5 seconds or whatever movies do now, but they didn't.
They made a tiny movie with tiny (or no) ambitions. In a way it's antithetical to SW as Lucas didn't want Han killed off because Han had already gone through his ordeal and RotJ was supposed to be our heroes' happy ending.

Now Han is dead, Luke's order got massacred and he went into hiding because he has to be the Yoda expy, and Fisher died so Leia has been written out of episode IX.

And yet it's still much more than TFA gives us.
You're right. The franchise is doomed. :rolleyes:
 
You're right. The franchise is doomed. :rolleyes:
I'm glad you agree, and to illustrate exactly what is lost by hiring people like Colin Trevorrow I suggest you watch this video.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
What they did what make the movie about the characters, not the events around them. The PT is a story about the Fall of the Republic, the Destruction of the Jedi, and the turning of Anakin Skywalker. Its a three part series of events. It isn't so much about the character themselves, but about what happened around them. The events were predetermined by the OT, so they had to have them marked off at plot points even when they didn't quite makes sense. (they eventually expanded on the events to tell character stories in The Clone Wars cartoon series, which actually helps the characters make more sense)

The OT was about the characters and introducing the world to this universe through them. It wasn't about the events since those were not predetermined by a pre-existing set of films. The characters and the audience are learning about things at the same time.

Rogue One is an event film. It is about the event, not the characters. That's why a lot of people have a hard time remembering who the people were in the film. Its about the event.

The ST is still in production. We don't know were they are going to go with it yet. We have one finished film. A trailer for a second, and a theoretical release date for the third. What we've been given is a tale about the characters and how they interact with the universe that we, on some levels, already know. So it is more about the characters than the world building for Episode VII. The trailer for Episode VIII suggests that there will be more world building now that we know the characters. Now that the situation is different from what was expected. The situation in Episode VII was more or less what was expected, until Starkiller Base blows up the Republic capital planet's system from halfway across the galaxy. The aftermath of that will be where world building takes place. Before that the situation is "normal". We know what the Republic is...we saw that for the PT. We know the Resistance is like the Rebel Alliance because its Leia and they got X-wings. Check. The First Order is clearly some left overs from the Empire that are trying to make a move, with Leia getting in their way. Those are expected situations given what we know in the previous six films. Nothing radical is added to the mix that is not covered by the opening crawl or some dialog in the film. The aftermath of Starkiller Base is not presented yet because that should be in The Last Jedi, as that makes sense.

As for Han being dead, that's both Ford and Kasdan's, plot point they wanted back in Return of the Jedi. They probably wouldn't have gotten Ford back at all without that death. And it is likely that his death will have meaning in The Last Jedi. Luke's Jedi Order being massacred will be covered in The Last Jedi, now that we have Luke in the story again. Luke may not have gone all Yoda/exile. He was searching for the First Jedi Temple. It may well be that he's trying to find out why the Order keeps falling. What is wrong with the Jedi Order. Why must it end? Why does Luke seemingly want it to end? Is there more...something greater? As for Fisher's death, that was unforeseen, and cannot be blamed on the writers. What they do with Leia will be what they can do given what they could get from the actress before her death, and being respectful of her family.
 
Last edited:
What they did what make the movie about the characters, not the events around them. The PT is a story about the Fall of the Republic, the Destruction of the Jedi, and the turning of Anakin Skywalker. Its a three part series of events. It isn't so much about the character themselves, but about what happened around them. The events were predetermined by the OT, so they had to have them marked off at plot points even when they didn't quite makes sense. (they eventually expanded on the events to tell character stories in The Clone Wars cartoon series, which actually helps the characters make more sense)

The OT was about the characters and introducing the world to this universe through them. It wasn't about the events since those were not predetermined by a pre-existing set of films. The characters and the audience are learning about things at the same time.

The ST is still in production. We don't know were they are going to go with it yet. We have one finished film. A trailer for a second, and a theoretical release date for the third. What we've been given is a tale about the characters and how they interact with the universe that we, on some levels, already know. So it is more about the characters than the world building for Episode VII. The trailer for Episode VIII suggests that there will be more world building now that we know the characters. Now that the situation is different from what was expected. The situation in Episode VII was more or less what was expected, until Starkiller Base blows up the Republic capital planet's system from halfway across the galaxy. The aftermath of that will be where world building takes place. Before that the situation is "normal". We know what the Republic is...we saw that for the PT. We know the Resistance is like the Rebel Alliance because its Leia and they got X-wings. Check. The First Order is clearly some left overs from the Empire that are trying to make a move, with Leia getting in their way. Those are expected situations given what we know in the previous six films. Nothing radical is added to the mix that is not covered by the opening crawl or some dialog in the film. The aftermath of Starkiller Base is not presented yet because that should be in The Last Jedi, as that makes sense.

As for Han being dead, that's both Ford and Kasdan's, plot point they wanted back in Return of the Jedi. They probably would have gotten Ford back at all without that death. And it is likely that his death will have meaning in The Last Jedi. Luke's Jedi Order being massacred will be covered in The Last Jedi, now that we have Luke in the story again. Luke may not have gone all Yoda/exile. He was searching for the First Jedi Temple. It may well be that he's trying to find out why the Order keeps falling. What is wrong with the Jedi Order. Why must it end? Why does Luke seemingly want it to end? Is there more...something greater? As for Fisher's death, that was unforeseen, and cannot be blamed on the writers. What they do with Leia will be what they can do given what they could get from the actress before her death, and being respectful of her family.
TCW Anakin is inconsistent with PT Anakin. Giving him a padawan was a mistake because his TCW characterization is much more... stable, mature and collected (most of the time. There were occasions when the writers remembered who he was) than his PT character. He wouldn't have fallen the way he did if TCW Anakin was the one presented with the dame dilemma. He was a confident secure dude 95% of the time and would have been able to let go of Padme.

Genndywars got Anakin right (the Nelvanian arc is PT Anakin to a T), so I don't know what happened with TCW.

My personal theory is that the people who worked on TCW were OT fanboys and wanted to crowbar Anakin's personality into something more like they imagined before the PT came out.
 
Remember that Lucas still had his hand in TCW...a lot. If Anakin was out of line, he's have done something about it.

Giving Anakin a Padawan was George Lucas's idea.
 
Remember that Lucas still had his hand in TCW...a lot. If Anakin was out of line, he's have done something about it.

Giving Anakin a Padawan was George Lucas's idea.
Oh I know, but George was not the voice director or the script writer in TCW and those are what mangled Anakin in TCW.
 
I'm glad you agree, and to illustrate exactly what is lost by hiring people like Colin Trevorrow I suggest you watch this video.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
I'm guessing the sarcasm was lost. I don't agree. I found Jurassic World to be thoroughly entertaining, enjoyable, and interesting characters, for those that were fleshed out. Owen, Claire, and Masrani (yes, all off the top of my head) were all very engaging for me. I walked away from that film feeling incredibly entertained (shocking, I know) and as entertained as I had been with Jurassic Park, and more so than Lost World or 3.

Same thing with TFA. I walked away enthused, ready to see more, and engaged with the characters. In comparison, AOTC is the only PT film I walk away with that feeling, while TPM is a non-starter for me, and ROTS is effective in that it makes me want to immediately watch ANH.
 
I'm guessing the sarcasm was lost. I don't agree. I found Jurassic World to be thoroughly entertaining, enjoyable, and interesting characters, for those that were fleshed out. Owen, Claire, and Masrani (yes, all off the top of my head) were all very engaging for me. I walked away from that film feeling incredibly entertained (shocking, I know) and as entertained as I had been with Jurassic Park, and more so than Lost World or 3.

Same thing with TFA. I walked away enthused, ready to see more, and engaged with the characters. In comparison, AOTC is the only PT film I walk away with that feeling, while TPM is a non-starter for me, and ROTS is effective in that it makes me want to immediately watch ANH.

I have a funny feeling that you didn't watch the video.
I'm not talking about entertainment value, i'm talking about artistic merit.
 
Anakin's personality in TCW fits with how Obi-wan describes him to Luke, both in ANH and RoTJ. Also Yoda's brief description in ESB.
 
I have a funny feeling that you didn't watch the video.
I'm not talking about entertainment value, i'm talking about artistic merit.
As much as I appreciate the discussion on artistic merit, his suppositions were lost since I can remember Jurassic World, its characters, and themes better than he gives his audience credit for. So, I found his conclusions lacking.

ETA: Also, the audio quality is incredibly distracting.
 
Anakin's personality in TCW fits with how Obi-wan describes him to Luke, both in ANH and RoTJ. Also Yoda's brief description in ESB.
That's exactly what I mean. TCW Anakin feels like he was written by OT fanboys, not someone actually telling a story. Lucas told a tale of a man being unable to bend fate to his fears and desires, TCW just gives OT fans the badass Anakin they feel Lucas didn't.
 
PT Anakin didn't feel like a character, save for a few scenes. He felt like a plot device to move the plot forward, at the whim of fate, to become Darth Vader. Unfortunately, that is neither engaging, nor emotionally resonating for me.
 
As much as I appreciate the discussion on artistic merit, his suppositions were lost since I can remember Jurassic World, its characters, and themes better than he gives his audience credit for. So, I found his conclusions lacking.

ETA: Also, the audio quality is incredibly distracting.
Just like I can empathize with the PT characters more than those in TFA. I think we've arrived at the end of this conversation, as we must not be watching the same movies.
 
PT Anakin didn't feel like a character, save for a few scenes. He felt like a plot device to move the plot forward, at the whim of fate, to become Darth Vader. Unfortunately, that is neither engaging, nor emotionally resonating for me.
He was a character bound by fate, that was the point. He was not a character that seemed lacking in agency though. I did not guess after seeing RotS that he would have turned how he did. I think most people assumed it would be a more traditional "drunk on power" scenario, not an attempt to cheat the force/fate.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top