Yes that's what I figured. I still consider that an arbitrary canon due to George changing his own mind and contradicting himself so often. I mean I guess right now you can say that your particular head canon will be static since he literally can't change the Saga any more but imagine if he hadn't sold the company and instead made the *exact* same ST films that we got. By your own admission Palpatine dying in ROTJ suddenly wouldn't matter so much.
That's why I don't give any person or company control over changing established canon that I *really* like. And maybe George making the exact same ST would have been your tipping point where you go "um yeah that whole live-action George thing never mind," lol. Or do you think you would have accepted seeing little Men in Black aliens driving Luke and Anakin's bodies around "like cars" as he said he wanted to do?
Otherwise your criteria of "do I like it" and "does it ruin what came before" is pretty much 100% my criteria except that I hold George himself to the same standard. So loser kid Boba as a Jango copycat? GTFO, lol. Rogue One? You're in.
I have said before though that it'll be hard to accept SW that has no elements that are direct from George's mind but we haven't crossed that bridge yet since obviously RO and Solo were filling in backstory that he himself came up with and the ST was largely culled from his own 2012 ST notes as well as original circa 1982 ST ideas. So everything so far has gotten a pass with regard to his involvement. I did go back and forth on the ST obviously and if I hated TROS then like you I would have just discarded the whole thing.
You make a very valid point here that I can't refute. If GL himself brought Palps back, I'd have to accept it. I might still dislike the choice, and the film in general (as I do the PT movies), but I'd consider it canon. Lucas gets to make the rules, and I'd have to respect whichever direction he'd take the Skywalker Saga. Doesn't mean I'd be happy about it, but it's his world and I just get to watch it play out. In a way, it's a bit like real life: just because outcomes aren't what I'd always prefer doesn't make them any less real.
You're also right that I would absolutely HATE the microbiotic direction GL has alluded to. If it meant that it would turn Luke and Anakin (and everyone else) into mere vessels/puppets who were simply acting out some microbiotic "will of the Force" . . . I would've been deeply disappointed. But I wouldn't be able to deny that it would "count" as official for me. Again, it would just be like my reaction to things I disapprove of in the PT (Jango/Boba, whiny Anakin, Jar Jar, etc.), but even more disappointing.
See saying that doesn't make it so though. And once I scanned your list of TROS offenses and saw "Rey is able to pilot the water skimmer to the DSII" I thought good lord he's gone full Fandom Menace TLJ YouTuber. I mean if you can't see how that's no more outlandish than Princess Leia hopping onto an Imperial Speeder Bike, a vehicle she's never so much as sat on, and pilot it at 200 mph through a dense forest *better and faster than career military vehicle drivers* (she did overtake the scouts after all to allow Luke to jump onto the other speeder) compared to the many ways the Holdo maneuver breaks every past and future space battle without massive "out of movie" explanations then I can only assume that you're just blinded by your hatred of TROS not continuing the story the way you wanted it to. That's the only thing that can explain such massive double standards for me.
My point with Rey piloting the sea skimmer wasn't to isolate that instance specifically, but to put it in context of all of the other interrelated plot conveniences. I'll gladly stipulate that it is indeed comparable to Leia (and even a ****ing Ewok!) riding a speeder bike. On its own, it's not an objection worth raising. But I listed it among several similar plot conveniences to illustrate how absolutely riddled TROS is with those. Then I followed sometime later with an even longer list of nonsensical plot progressions. They vary from inconsequential to downright laughably reckless writing. If you take any one of them and isolate it, then there's no huge problem. But with TROS, it's the *sheer volume* of these instances of convenience and nonsense that becomes staggering.
It's a little like a house of cards (or a Jenga column). If you remove one piece here, and one piece there, you can do so and still have a viable structure. But the more pieces you need to pull apart, eventually the whole thing collapses. That was TROS for me. Too many instances of lazy conveniences, contrivances, and downright insultingly stupid elements. Each objection that may not matter on its own certainly matters in the totality of problems. The movie falls under its own weight.
When you cite the Holdo manuever to point out how you think I'm being inconsistent, you're projecting your own objection of it onto me. Don't do that.
I don't see it the same way as you do. The Holdo thing to me does not fall outside the bounds of plausibility. Even real-world physics/astrophysics makes it entirely plausible that a vessel the size of the Raddus could bisect the section of Snoke's Supremacy if contact happens at a speed similar to lightspeed (or faster). It also lines up perfectly with my interpretation of SW hyperspace being a series of accessible "wormhole lanes" that collapse spacetime in what is essentially another dimension.
The problem with it only exists because people ask, "why didn't anyone in the SW universe do that before?" Well, I have plenty of logic reasons why. And when I consider the technical factors that I just mentioned, everything combines into a perfectly believable example of a rare set of circumstances aligning to turn an unlikely tactical option in virtually any other scenario into a successful one in this case.
For you, it's a bothersome plot device that "broke" SW. For me, it's a creative expansion of a theoretical fantasy concept. For you, the fact that it wasn't done before means that it shouldn't be done at all. For me, the fact that it wasn't done before means that it would've been impractical in other scenarios. People talk about "blowing up Death Stars" with it. That's absurd. Do you know how precise the trajectory would have to be to cut through the relatively tiny core reactor? And how gigantic the ship would have to be to get through that much density (or shields too)? Bottom line: a problem for you . . . isn't one for me. But not because I'm conveniently dismissing it; I genuinely have no problem with it conceptually (though I can't stand the collateral damage to the other star destroyers - that was really dumb).
And I think that's the core of the matter right there and that it's really quite simple. In your mind Anakin alone had to kill Palpatine because of what George said in some DVD special features (since the PT itself never fully committed to or even explained the "Prophecy," hell Yoda and Mace weren't even sure if they even understood it) and therefore having the Emperor return and be destroyed by any other means is unforgivable. Okay fine. You have your dealbreakers and so do I. And if the sin of breaking head canon opens the "nitpick floodgates" well, eh, whatever.
By the way don't read too much into me saying that "you demand that the movies be such and such because of what George said in an interview" because I *do that all the time.* For decades I've been devouring those same interviews going back to early 80's American Cinematographer issues, morning show and late night television appearances, Star Wars Insider, you name it, to sift through all their original ideas and intentions in my quest to find "what could have been" the best possible continuation of the Saga after ESB.
And there are *definitely* flaws in TROS that I totally admit to chuckling about and then just letting go so it's not like I'm saying that it's a perfect movie or anything. An erratic opening act, unresolved plot points like Finn wanting to tell Rey something to the flip side where we have plot points that do get resolved that we never had a starting point for (Lando's daughter)! But I can easily forgive threads that are messy or incomplete with regard to Finn, Poe, Jannah, etc.
It's the Rey/Ben/Palps/Luke/Han/Leia stuff that are absolute grand slams for me and when you nail the main event with the main characters like that yeah it covers a multitude of sins just like who cares about ewoks when you've got Williams' score after Luke shouts "never!"
Again, it's not the individual flaws and problems with TROS, but the severity of a couple objections (the whole Palpatine/Anakin/Rey dynamic) and the mind-blowing volume of problems I kept running into. Obviously, this is purely subjective, so I'll move on.
See to me that's like saying that Vader didn't defeat Palpatine in ROTJ it was actually his mechanical arms that get the credit since those were the things that physically interacted with the Emperor as he was thrown over the side. It's like um you know the arms were useless without the guy they were attached to right?
You just cannot say with any accuracy that "Rey defeated Palpatine" as if she wasn't simply a vessel that channeled the full might of every single Jedi (who were present and directly involved in the fight) who ever lived. I get being put off by Anakin *not* getting full credit since it was a group effort but there's no way anyone can say that Rey gets the sole credit. Sure she gets credit for showing up and being brave (as Luke did before her) but it absolutely was not her power that won the day in the slightest. Nor was it her power that even allowed her to survive the day.
So glad you included this! You state that Rey "channeled the full might of every single Jedi" when she beat Palpatine. And you use that to counter my suggestion that she beat Palpatine by herself. You're similarly not even allowing for an alternate interpretation.
To me, Rey connected with the voices of past Jedi, and no differently than what she was trying to do at the beginning of the film. No differently than what Yoda did in the PT era (that's how he communed with Qui-Gon). It doesn't mean that she got an infusion of Jedi spirits into her.
They encouraged her; that's it! The way I see it, all she did was cross two lightsabers and let Palps stupidly kill himself.
What is it you think the Jedi were doing for her? She just stood there. Do you think they were channeling their collective energy into her lightsaber? And since that one lightsaber wasn't enough, their collective energy required her to cross a *second* Jedi-infused lightsaber!? That's ridiculous to me. I'm sorry, but it's just not something I can interpret the same way. Communing with voices is established canon. That's all Rey did. Killing Sheev was all her. I just don't see it the way you do. But you think that makes my view "wrong." And that's what the root of our disconnect is, IMO.
I do respect your opinion even if it's one I disagree with. I do find that your review for this particular film is uncharacteristically nitpicky in parts as well as inaccurate in how you have described certain aspects of the story but that's just my take on your take, lol.
Like you said I'm not the final word on any of this any more than the next guy.
I've been trying to be as accurate as possible when describing TROS plot beats. I regret that you see it differently. And again, the "nitpicky" has more to do with sheer volume. It was/is astounding just how many nonsensical occurrences stood out to me. I can't remember anything like it. No matter what, you liked it and I'm happy for you. I hated it, but don't need anyone else to. My criticisms will die down substantially in the near future. I'd rather post about SW things I actually enjoy.
If I didn't respect your commentary (with or without perceived nitpicks or inaccuracies) I wouldn't be responding at all.
That feeling is certainly mutual! I have a ton of respect for your intelligent and insightful opinion on all this stuff. I enjoy reading your take, and am grateful for the opportunity for having these discussions. Nothing wrong with differing points of view.
)?
