Star Wars: Episode IX - THE RISE OF SKYWALKER

[ajp4mgs]

Re: Star Wars: Episode IX - December 20, 2019

Boba Fett: Jango Fett is a fine character, and the fact that Boba Fett is a clone and acts like a boy while being a boy... well, I suppose there was no need to show where Boba Fett came from, but it certainly is an interesting background story: the son of a bounty hunter who saw his own father beheaded by the Jedi... talk about a guy with a grudge and with good reasons to like the Empire.

The mystery that surrounded Boba Fett, and had so much to do with why he was ever cool in the first place, got stripped away from his character. For no good reason other than to tie Boba Fett into the prequels and sell Jango Fett toys. A reason to like the Empire? The Empire who would be formed, in part, by using all those Fett clone brothers as disposable soldiers? Yeah, Boba Fett is a mere clone - one among a countless number of others who serve as blaster fodder. The PT didn't damage OT Boba Fett?

Obi Wan: He was always shown to be somewhat loose with his understanding of "the truth"... nothing new there. In fact, the portrayal of how he failed to understand and guide Anakin made the old man Ben so much more enjoyable and gave the character so much more depth. You finally understand his willingness to sacrifice himself in order to right a wrong.

The PT turned OT Kenobi into an idiot who seemingly forgot R2-D2 and C-3PO . . . despite spending years with Artoo, and plenty of time around Threepio. He also took baby Luke to the same farm that was connected to Anakin's mom (that was the best hiding place?). To compound that, he decided to hide there too so that if Vader found him in a quest for revenge, he'd be sure to find Luke as well. He also needed Yoda to "remind him" in the OT that Luke had a sister who would also be strong with the Force; and he was already a freakin' ghost Kenobi by then! The PT didn't damage OT Kenobi?

Yoda: again, we get to see how and why such a powerful Jedi Master could fail so utterly, and we understand the reasons for his exile. Hypocrite? I see him more as blinded by hubris and misguided. He became a fallible being, not just an old hermit.

That sure sounds A LOT like TLJ Luke to me. But, anyway, I'll stick with PT Yoda.

Yoda, who could sense danger in young Anakin but was oblivious to Dooku and Palpatine despite them both being right under his nose for extended time. And the high-flying, acrobatic, lightsaber-wielding Yoda who went to kill Palpatine decided to hide right afterward just because that first attempt didn't work. Did he somehow feel like trying again would be that much stupider in the near future? So he went to Dagobah for 20 years to, what, wait for baby Luke to grow up? . . . The Luke who Kenobi had to convince him to train in ESB. None of that changes Yoda for the worse at all?

So you didn't like Vader as a teenager, acting like most teenagers act... so what? Despite that, he became the badass super-villain!

That's precisely the problem! The character of Darth Vader commanded respect, and had a gravity and controlled dignity - not just by rank, but by core personality and presence. And the "teenager" excuse is a bit of a cop out; he was about 20 or so by ROTS - and still whiny and annoying. Most of the "formative" and angst-riddled years would be behind him by then. He was supposed to be a Jedi! And a great one! But there was no poise or solemnity like a Kenobi, a Mace, or a Qui-Gon had in spite of TEN YEARS of training.

At the very least, Anakin should have been written and portrayed to convey some semblance of the controlled, dignified, and impressive badass that was OT Vader. Instead, he was whiny and petulant - without any hint that he could become the man in the Vader suit years later. Again, he was essentially already a man in ROTS. There's such an illogical disconnect between the two versions that it's jarring. Do you really see a believable transition from the Christensen Anakin screaming "I HATE YOU!!" to the Vader we see in the OT in the intervening years?

To accept the prequels as canon, then OT Vader is instantly less of a cool character. He's just a guy who turned to the dark side because he wanted to save his wife (who, by the way, he killed shortly thereafter for some still-unclear reason). That's not damaging to OT Vader?

But with the ST... Han and Leia, two star-crossed lovers... they got divorced and couldn't raise their kid?

No, they chose to let Luke train Ben Solo to be a Jedi. I'm pretty sure Leia (and even Han) would have had an eye toward the future. The Skywalker bloodline was special, and Ben could help preserve (or restore) peace as a powerful Jedi after Luke and Leia would no longer be around to do it.

You're absolutely right that the ST didn't need to split Han and Leia, but it does add more weight to the impact of Ben's turning into Kylo. Their split could've come as a result of Snoke corrupting their son. Han wasn't a big fan of the Jedi to begin with. As Luke (in TLJ) describes taking Ben to be trained: "Han was . . . 'Han' about it."

Luke changed from the man who would die before striking down his defenseless father (a man known for being a mass-murderer and who tortured his own daughter) to the man who contemplated murdering his sleeping nephew on the suspicion that he would turn to the dark side?

There was no suspicion when Luke briefly ignited his lightsaber. He explicitly states that he saw at that moment that Ben had already been corrupted by Snoke. Too far gone to the dark side, by Luke's estimation. And Luke stood over his defenseless father with his lightsaber still lit before realizing what kind of dark act he might be about to commit in the name of erasing the evil threat of Vader. And, so too, he stood over Ben with a lit lightsaber before recognizing that his impulse was very wrong. He told Rey how ashamed he felt for even entertaining the thought.

I don't understand why this continues to be such a departure from OT Luke for so many people. He's always been impulsive. He has already been on the brink of killing, and crossing a line in the name of protecting others from a corrupted Skywalker. And in both cases, his impulsive reaction was overcome by a more reasoned and Jedi-like approach.

As Khev already mentioned in the post you were quoting, nothing from the OT has been erased by the ST. These are older versions of the heroes we knew, which means that their futures were always a mystery. What the PT did was take established history and characterization that was presented in the OT, and changed it for the worse in a number of ways. If you accept the PT, it's a lot harder (impossible, actually) to think of the OT characters in the same way as we did pre-PT. But the ST cannot re-write those OT characters and interactions. They will forever be valid and irrevocable unless there's some crazy OT flashback scene in Episode IX. That's a big difference between PT and ST in my view.

 

[YoNoSe]

Re: Star Wars: Episode IX - December 20, 2019

No no no. I hated TLJ cause it's the cinematic equivalent of a baby's diaper after eating Indian food.

Toucan Sam lady was just one small moment of brilliance in an otherwise garbage movie. How can anyone hate the nose lady? She's amazing. So artistic. The light...the shadow. It's the theme of the movie right there on her face. The light awakens....her nose arises to bring it back into darkness. It rhymes. It's poetry.

View attachment 421591
View attachment 421592
View attachment 421593

Does wookieepedia say what species she's supposed to be?

Hope she gets a bigger role in Ep 9.....maybe her and Rose can go on a side story together instead of Finn. Or better yet, she hears a tapping on the glass....it's Admiral Holdo in space, holding her breath, trying to get in. She shatters the glass with her nose and everyone rejoices. End credits.

Way to prove jye's point.

Let the fandom go...kill it if you have to...

 

[Prime Clone]

Re: Star Wars: Episode IX - December 20, 2019

Many of the above posts are about the PT spoiling the OT. The point I keep trying to make is, when the episodes are viewed chronologically, it doesn't matter that Ani made Threepio or Boba was a boy.

The OT is only tainted by the PT because you saw it first. Once the old-school OT fans die off it will no longer be an issue.

 

[evenflow]

Re: Star Wars: Episode IX - December 20, 2019

I know it's the accepted, default, fall-back position held by many PT critics, but that certain characters were "made lame" by the background stories seems to me mostly a matter of taste and understanding.

IMHO, taking as examples the characters you cited...

Anakin: an innocent boy born into slavery, whisked away from his mother, thrust into a religious order that is cold and distant, mentored by a young master with too little experience to control him and guide him, mistrusted and shunned by some of the superiors he looks up to, and who at the end succumbs to the emotions his mentors never taught him to control.
While some of the execution isn't that good, the background itself is far from lame. It actually has depth and heart.

C3PO: really, who cares? It's a damn robot... who cares about its background? Would it have been more interesting to show the factory he came from? Having him be the creation of Anakin is just another part of the cyclical themes of SW.

Boba Fett: Jango Fett is a fine character, and the fact that Boba Fett is a clone and acts like a boy while being a boy... well, I suppose there was no need to show where Boba Fett came from, but it certainly is an interesting background story: the son of a bounty hunter who saw his own father beheaded by the Jedi... talk about a guy with a grudge and with good reasons to like the Empire.

Obi Wan: He was always shown to be somewhat loose with his understanding of "the truth"... nothing new there. In fact, the portrayal of how he failed to understand and guide Anakin made the old man Ben so much more enjoyable and gave the character so much more depth. You finally understand his willingness to sacrifice himself in order to right a wrong.

Yoda: again, we get to see how and why such a powerful Jedi Master could fail so utterly, and we understand the reasons for his exile. Hypocrite? I see him more as blinded by hubris and misguided. He became a fallible being, not just an old hermit.



I suppose I'm more of the type of person who cares about where the characters go to, how they grow, who they become... I'm the kind of guy who doesn't care so much about where you came from, but where you're going.
So you didn't like Vader as a teenager, acting like most teenagers act... so what? Despite that, he became the badass super-villain!
But with the ST... Han and Leia, two star-crossed lovers... they got divorced and couldn't raise their kid? Luke changed from the man who would die before striking down his defenseless father (a man known for being a mass-murderer and who tortured his own daughter) to the man who contemplated murdering his sleeping nephew on the suspicion that he would turn to the dark side?

You see, finding out about an unsavory past doesn't change the present accomplishments, but destroying the future, well...

That is one of the main problems with the ST. These movies destroyed what was achieved with unimaginable sacrifice and heartbreak in the first six.
IMHO.

If I could rep you I would. Perfectly said.

 

[ajp4mgs]

Re: Star Wars: Episode IX - December 20, 2019

Many of the above posts are about the PT spoiling the OT. The point I keep trying to make is, when the episodes are viewed chronologically, it doesn't matter that Ani made Threepio or Boba was a boy.

The OT is only tainted by the PT because you saw it first. Once the old-school OT fans die off it will no longer be an issue.

How? How would watching 1-6 in chronological order make Kenobi's forgetfulness (of the droids in particular, but also to a lesser extent of Anakin as "when I first knew him, your father was already a great pilot" and of common sense about where best to hide Luke) less puzzling? How would the writing of Kenobi in the PT be more consistent with OT Kenobi by watching the movies in episodic order?

How does Anakin (as portrayed in the PT) make for a more credible evolution into the poised and commanding Vader if you watched III before watching IV, V, and VI?

How does Yoda's characterization become any more seamless and logical just by watching the films in order?

How does R2-D2 flying in AOTC make more sense when the movies are viewed in chronological order?

How do midichlorians help make better sense of how the Force is later explained to Luke if you were only to watch the OT after the PT?

Liking the prequels is perfectly fine, but overlooking their effect on, and changes to, the OT (regardless of chronological viewing or not) seems to ignore a lot of questionable oddities in the PT story-writing. And I wouldn't take any comfort in being told that "you just have to die for the PT to be good." I don't think older fans are "missing" a logical flow of the story/characters because we can't understand how it'd be to watch the movies in order.

 

[a-dev]

Re: Star Wars: Episode IX - December 20, 2019

The PT turned OT Kenobi into an idiot who seemingly forgot R2-D2 and C-3PO . . . despite spending years with Artoo, and plenty of time around Threepio. He also took baby Luke to the same farm that was connected to Anakin's mom (that was the best hiding place?). To compound that, he decided to hide there too so that if Vader found him in a quest for revenge, he'd be sure to find Luke as well. He also needed Yoda to "remind him" in the OT that Luke had a sister who would also be strong with the Force; and he was already a freakin' ghost Kenobi by then! The PT didn't damage OT Kenobi?

I dare say that this was already problematic even without the prequels though. Vader obviously knew of Tatooine, we didn't know he had lived there but it seemed clear he had at least been there for a time because Owen Lars knew Anakin to some degree - enough to remark on being afraid of how much Luke reminded him of him and to disapprove of Luke receiving the lightsaber. So, of all places, how did it make sense to leave Luke with the Lars on Tatooine? Was it 'hide him in plain sight' sort of logic? Pretty damn risky.

And they didn't even change his surname.....

Agreed overall though, I'm not a fan of the prequels.

 

[xipotec]

Re: Star Wars: Episode IX - December 20, 2019

The mystery that surrounded Boba Fett, and had so much to do with why he was ever cool in the first place, got stripped away from his character. For no good reason other than to tie Boba Fett into the prequels and sell Jango Fett toys. A reason to like the Empire? The Empire who would be formed, in part, by using all those Fett clone brothers as disposable soldiers? Yeah, Boba Fett is a mere clone - one among a countless number of others who serve as blaster fodder. The PT didn't damage OT Boba Fett?



The PT turned OT Kenobi into an idiot who seemingly forgot R2-D2 and C-3PO . . . despite spending years with Artoo, and plenty of time around Threepio. He also took baby Luke to the same farm that was connected to Anakin's mom (that was the best hiding place?). To compound that, he decided to hide there too so that if Vader found him in a quest for revenge, he'd be sure to find Luke as well. He also needed Yoda to "remind him" in the OT that Luke had a sister who would also be strong with the Force; and he was already a freakin' ghost Kenobi by then! The PT didn't damage OT Kenobi?



That sure sounds A LOT like TLJ Luke to me. But, anyway, I'll stick with PT Yoda.

Yoda, who could sense danger in young Anakin but was oblivious to Dooku and Palpatine despite them both being right under his nose for extended time. And the high-flying, acrobatic, lightsaber-wielding Yoda who went to kill Palpatine decided to hide right afterward just because that first attempt didn't work. Did he somehow feel like trying again would be that much stupider in the near future? So he went to Dagobah for 20 years to, what, wait for baby Luke to grow up? . . . The Luke who Kenobi had to convince him to train in ESB. None of that changes Yoda for the worse at all?



That's precisely the problem! The character of Darth Vader commanded respect, and had a gravity and controlled dignity - not just by rank, but by core personality and presence. And the "teenager" excuse is a bit of a cop out; he was about 20 or so by ROTS - and still whiny and annoying. Most of the "formative" and angst-riddled years would be behind him by then. He was supposed to be a Jedi! And a great one! But there was no poise or solemnity like a Kenobi, a Mace, or a Qui-Gon had in spite of TEN YEARS of training.

At the very least, Anakin should have been written and portrayed to convey some semblance of the controlled, dignified, and impressive badass that was OT Vader. Instead, he was whiny and petulant - without any hint that he could become the man in the Vader suit years later. Again, he was essentially already a man in ROTS. There's such an illogical disconnect between the two versions that it's jarring. Do you really see a believable transition from the Christensen Anakin screaming "I HATE YOU!!" to the Vader we see in the OT in the intervening years?

To accept the prequels as canon, then OT Vader is instantly less of a cool character. He's just a guy who turned to the dark side because he wanted to save his wife (who, by the way, he killed shortly thereafter for some still-unclear reason). That's not damaging to OT Vader?



No, they chose to let Luke train Ben Solo to be a Jedi. I'm pretty sure Leia (and even Han) would have had an eye toward the future. The Skywalker bloodline was special, and Ben could help preserve (or restore) peace as a powerful Jedi after Luke and Leia would no longer be around to do it.

You're absolutely right that the ST didn't need to split Han and Leia, but it does add more weight to the impact of Ben's turning into Kylo. Their split could've come as a result of Snoke corrupting their son. Han wasn't a big fan of the Jedi to begin with. As Luke (in TLJ) describes taking Ben to be trained: "Han was . . . 'Han' about it."



There was no suspicion when Luke briefly ignited his lightsaber. He explicitly states that he saw at that moment that Ben had already been corrupted by Snoke. Too far gone to the dark side, by Luke's estimation. And Luke stood over his defenseless father with his lightsaber still lit before realizing what kind of dark act he might be about to commit in the name of erasing the evil threat of Vader. And, so too, he stood over Ben with a lit lightsaber before recognizing that his impulse was very wrong. He told Rey how ashamed he felt for even entertaining the thought.

I don't understand why this continues to be such a departure from OT Luke for so many people. He's always been impulsive. He has already been on the brink of killing, and crossing a line in the name of protecting others from a corrupted Skywalker. And in both cases, his impulsive reaction was overcome by a more reasoned and Jedi-like approach.

As Khev already mentioned in the post you were quoting, nothing from the OT has been erased by the ST. These are older versions of the heroes we knew, which means that their futures were always a mystery. What the PT did was take established history and characterization that was presented in the OT, and changed it for the worse in a number of ways. If you accept the PT, it's a lot harder (impossible, actually) to think of the OT characters in the same way as we did pre-PT. But the ST cannot re-write those OT characters and interactions. They will forever be valid and irrevocable unless there's some crazy OT flashback scene in Episode IX. That's a big difference between PT and ST in my view.

Damn man....just ....damn....
Spot on.

Sent from the inside of a giant slug in outer space.....

 

[Khev]

Re: Star Wars: Episode IX - December 20, 2019

I did not go to WDW until I was 30, which was a couple of years before the Star Tours update. Watching the film for that ride, for the first time at that age, was mind-blowing.

It really was. I'd pay top dollar to have that original Star Tours footage on a blu-ray.

The mystery that surrounded Boba Fett, and had so much to do with why he was ever cool in the first place, got stripped away from his character. For no good reason other than to tie Boba Fett into the prequels and sell Jango Fett toys. A reason to like the Empire? The Empire who would be formed, in part, by using all those Fett clone brothers as disposable soldiers? Yeah, Boba Fett is a mere clone - one among a countless number of others who serve as blaster fodder. The PT didn't damage OT Boba Fett?

Damn ajp's on a roll tonight! Agreed on all points. No I definitely don't think that showing Fett as a lame daddy's boy kid with a "grudge against the Jedi and love for the Empire" made for a more interesting backstory. He was much cooler when he was just a merciless killer out for nothing but a quick buck and the thrill of the hunt. Softening him up by making him driven by childhood emotion makes him much weaker as a character IMO, yes even weaker than the undignified death given to him in ROTJ. I can at least write that off as a silly fluke without it defining the core of his character. I can't do that with what we saw in AOTC.

I can't even remember all the ways that the PT tainted the OT anymore because I deliberately try not to watch them and thankfully they are starting to fade. But Leia is another character brought down by the PT. Her speech in ROTJ about remembering that her real mother was "very beautiful, kind but sad" just makes her out to be either delusional or a liar as well.

In my mind there will just always be too much of a disconnect between Hayden Christensen and OT Vader for them ever to be remotely considered the same character. Ben Solo and Kylo Ren are easily believable as the same character. He sounds more badass with the mask on but having Adam Driver in both roles with overlapping mannerisms easily links both of his personas. Luke Skywalker himself was also a bit of a whiner when he was young like Hayden and guess what, Old Luke wasn't too far removed. He was clearly jaded and hardened by trauma but the impulsiveness and even whiny nature of his younger self still lingered.

But there is absolutely NOTHING that links Hayden's antics to the cold and calculated baritone of James Earl Jones or the poise of David Prowse. Nothing at all. They couldn't be more different and Anakin/Vader doesn't get a pass simply because the two versions of the character were played by different actors because both Ewan McGregor and Alden Ehrenreich did a great job playing younger versions of iconic characters that actually felt like they could be connected.

 

[Khev]

Re: Star Wars: Episode IX - December 20, 2019

There was no suspicion when Luke briefly ignited his lightsaber. He explicitly states that he saw at that moment that Ben had already been corrupted by Snoke. Too far gone to the dark side, by Luke's estimation. And Luke stood over his defenseless father with his lightsaber still lit before realizing what kind of dark act he might be about to commit in the name of erasing the evil threat of Vader. And, so too, he stood over Ben with a lit lightsaber before recognizing that his impulse was very wrong. He told Rey how ashamed he felt for even entertaining the thought.

I don't understand why this continues to be such a departure from OT Luke for so many people. He's always been impulsive. He has already been on the brink of killing, and crossing a line in the name of protecting others from a corrupted Skywalker. And in both cases, his impulsive reaction was overcome by a more reasoned and Jedi-like approach.

Due to Hamill's awesome performance in the scene of Ben's hut I find that it plays as if he was totally caught off guard by what he saw in Ben Solo and that the corrupting evil of Snoke that had saturated his being was so overpowering that it even threatened to influence Luke. Which would then also tie in with him freaking out when Rey lowered her guard against the Dark Side when she was sitting on that rock. In Ben's hut the evil inside Ben seemed to hit Luke like a wave and I kind of see it as his "Lady Galadriel moment" where she resisted the One Ring. She too went all dark and psycho for a second in the presence of evil temptation in its purest form to the point of briefly losing her composure as well before then congratulating herself for passing the test.

Now imagine if Aragorn or Boromir were watching her do that instead of Frodo. They might have been inclined to attack her on the spot as Ben did to Luke as well. That's my take on the scene with Luke anyway. Sure he felt guilt because he's Luke and is overly hard on himself but it was a classic resisting evil scene and even though it came on him to a degree that he was not anticipating he still stood his ground, knew the correct thing to do, and quickly shut off his lightsaber. That hardly makes him a loser or unheroic in my mind, quite the opposite in fact.

 

[Prime Clone]

Re: Star Wars: Episode IX - December 20, 2019

How? How would watching 1-6 in chronological order make Kenobi's forgetfulness (of the droids in particular, but also to a lesser extent of Anakin as "when I first knew him, your father was already a great pilot" and of common sense about where best to hide Luke) less puzzling? How would the writing of Kenobi in the PT be more consistent with OT Kenobi by watching the movies in episodic order?

How does Anakin (as portrayed in the PT) make for a more credible evolution into the poised and commanding Vader if you watched III before watching IV, V, and VI?

How does Yoda's characterization become any more seamless and logical just by watching the films in order?

How does R2-D2 flying in AOTC make more sense when the movies are viewed in chronological order?

How do midichlorians help make better sense of how the Force is later explained to Luke if you were only to watch the OT after the PT?

Liking the prequels is perfectly fine, but overlooking their effect on, and changes to, the OT (regardless of chronological viewing or not) seems to ignore a lot of questionable oddities in the PT story-writing. And I wouldn't take any comfort in being told that "you just have to die for the PT to be good." I don't think older fans are "missing" a logical flow of the story/characters because we can't understand how it'd be to watch the movies in order.

Well, most of all that stuff still works for me, so maybe I'm just wilfully ignorant.

• Who says Obi-Wan forgot the droids? He chose not to show he recognised them at that point. And he *didn't* ever own Artoo.
• Anakin already *was* a great pilot (of podracers, but still)
• Hiding Luke in plain sight makes perfect sense. My suspicions were confirmed in the new canon comics: Vader admits Tatooine is the one place he would never go back to. (He does later, though, and slaughters more Sandpeople!)
• A descent to the dark side, plus 20 years, is enough to explain Anakin's transformation into Vader for me. He was essentially a different person.
• I don't understand why Yoda isn't seamless?
• Artoo flew in the prequels, but wasn't in any situation that required it in the OT.
• Yes, midichlorians were never my favorite aspect of the PT, but they don't contradict the OT either. They just aren't brought up.

 

[Bravomite]

Re: Star Wars: Episode IX - December 20, 2019

There are a lot of really interesting posts going back and forth here between the merits of the PT vs. ST - keep it up guys makes for good reading and it's interesting to read posts from a differing view point.

I side more with Abake and Prime Clone. Whilst I saw the OT first and loved it, I grew up with the PT and as a kid / teenager (by the time of ROTS). So the things that offend people about the PT were either not obvious to me or did not matter to me at the time. I enjoyed the films, had the toys, used to recreate the lightsaber battles with my brothers (duel of fates was awesome), played the games and read the books. It just completely captured my imagination and the world building was fantastic.

I hear you all saying how much you disliked Jango and Boba in AOTC and that seeing their backstory ruined the mystique / cool factor of Boba in the OT. Whilst that might be the case for you it just wasn't for me. Jango was the highlight of AOTC for me and the video game providing his backstory (Star Wars Bounty Hunter) and supporting comics are still amongst my favourites. So much so that after I had seen AOTC I snuck out of my house with my pocket money and walked to the nearest town to a woolworths to buy a Jango figure - I just had to have one. I can't imagine the ST resonating that way with kids of today.

I also loved diving into the mythos of the mandalorians and understanding what made Boba such a driven individual - he wanted to emulate and respect his father but be better than him. He would never fall into the trap of aligning himself to a cause like Jango, he was smarter than that. He had a level of superiority about him, one that even Vader respected, because he was that good. Credits and the hunt were all that motivated him. Arguably ROTJ ruined Boba well before the PT came along anyway if you want to look at it that way (but hey I count the Bounty Hunter Wars trilogy as cannon so Boba got out of that Sarlaac pit and redeemed himself and his legacy).

I don't know how anyone can dismiss Yoda's character arc in the PT to OT but accept Luke's in the OT to ST - both guys end up in the same place?! Yoda retreats because he has failed. Vader turned and killed all of his students and Palpatine all but destroyed the Jedi under his watch. You know... sound a bit similar to the Luke, Kylo and Snokey situation?

Arguably Yoda's arc makes more sense (to me) because he came from a position of strength and power only to see it all crumble around him largely in fact due to his own hubris and belief in the superiority of the Jedi - that was on Yoda so no wonder he was shaken to the core took himself off into exile. Luke came from nothing, the galaxy was oppressed and he found out that just one young man and his friends could make all the difference just with a bit of hope, overcoming their set-backs and believing that there is good in people.

I still don't get why Luke (even after having the momentary lapse in judgement) did not think, hey we've been here before but we came back from it last time so let's just trust in our feelings and each other and stop the First Order in their tracks. I mean the FO were the minority 'rebels' of this situation after all and Luke and the Galactic Republic were in the position of strength! Nope... instead he runs off to the most 'unfindable place' in the galaxy (leaving a map... Khev I know I've read your explanation for this haha) to burn down a tree. Just doesn't fit with the Luke I know, I am still of the opinion that Rian needed to show more to explain Luke's change in attitude from what we knew before to the place he arrived at in TLJ.

OT Ben was always a manipulator of the facts and I don't think the PT changes that. I really enjoyed seeing the close bond between Obi-wan and Anakin in the PT and Clone Wars cartoon, for me it added a lot of weight and depth to Ben's lines to Luke in ANH. There is a really good youtube clip someone has put together of Ben telling Luke about his father and his pupil Darth Vader which is interspersed with clips from the PT as if Ben is ruminating on them. I found it quite powerful stuff haha.

The PT also has a unique visual flair to it that made it distinct to the OT but still believably fit within the same universe. Everything is shiny and opulent with an undercurrent of decadence and rot setting in beneath the surface. It just fits so well with the story of the fall of the republic and Jedi that George was telling. Then when you get to the time of the OT everything is dilapidated except for the Empire's forces which jives well with what we can imagine the Emperor got up to in the intervening years with the rise of the police state and heavy taxation and subjugation of the planetary systems controlled by the Empire.

The ST is mostly a stale recycled copycat look of the OT (with the exception of the strange Canto Bight scene). It just doesn't really make sense to me or visually tell a story of what happened in the intervening years between the OT and ST. The good guys won after ROTJ and the new new republic were in charge right? How come nothing changed? How come no rebuilding for the new world. Lazy New Republic or lazy LFL.

Just some of my musings on the subject hope you enjoy haha. Also just noticed it's my 1,000th post

 

[jye4ever]

Re: Star Wars: Episode IX - December 20, 2019

I am perfectly fine with SW fans hating the ST for all of those reasons mentioned but I will never accept the PT being used to knock down the ST.

The PT have no business being used to make something else look worse lol

It is because of those abominations that we find ourselves in the predicament that we are in today.

 

[Python]

Re: Star Wars: Episode IX - December 20, 2019

I know it's the accepted, default, fall-back position held by many PT critics, but that certain characters were "made lame" by the background stories seems to me mostly a matter of taste and understanding.

IMHO, taking as examples the characters you cited...

Anakin: an innocent boy born into slavery, whisked away from his mother, thrust into a religious order that is cold and distant, mentored by a young master with too little experience to control him and guide him, mistrusted and shunned by some of the superiors he looks up to, and who at the end succumbs to the emotions his mentors never taught him to control.
While some of the execution isn't that good, the background itself is far from lame. It actually has depth and heart.

C3PO: really, who cares? It's a damn robot... who cares about its background? Would it have been more interesting to show the factory he came from? Having him be the creation of Anakin is just another part of the cyclical themes of SW.

Boba Fett: Jango Fett is a fine character, and the fact that Boba Fett is a clone and acts like a boy while being a boy... well, I suppose there was no need to show where Boba Fett came from, but it certainly is an interesting background story: the son of a bounty hunter who saw his own father beheaded by the Jedi... talk about a guy with a grudge and with good reasons to like the Empire.

Obi Wan: He was always shown to be somewhat loose with his understanding of "the truth"... nothing new there. In fact, the portrayal of how he failed to understand and guide Anakin made the old man Ben so much more enjoyable and gave the character so much more depth. You finally understand his willingness to sacrifice himself in order to right a wrong.

Yoda: again, we get to see how and why such a powerful Jedi Master could fail so utterly, and we understand the reasons for his exile. Hypocrite? I see him more as blinded by hubris and misguided. He became a fallible being, not just an old hermit.



I suppose I'm more of the type of person who cares about where the characters go to, how they grow, who they become... I'm the kind of guy who doesn't care so much about where you came from, but where you're going.
So you didn't like Vader as a teenager, acting like most teenagers act... so what? Despite that, he became the badass super-villain!
But with the ST... Han and Leia, two star-crossed lovers... they got divorced and couldn't raise their kid? Luke changed from the man who would die before striking down his defenseless father (a man known for being a mass-murderer and who tortured his own daughter) to the man who contemplated murdering his sleeping nephew on the suspicion that he would turn to the dark side?

You see, finding out about an unsavory past doesn't change the present accomplishments, but destroying the future, well...

That is one of the main problems with the ST. These movies destroyed what was achieved with unimaginable sacrifice and heartbreak in the first six.
IMHO.

All of this...

 

[Khev]

Re: Star Wars: Episode IX - December 20, 2019

Just some of my musings on the subject hope you enjoy haha. Also just noticed it's my 1,000th post

Worst. 1000th post. Ever.

jk, lol. I always enjoy when you're prompted to weigh in Bravo.

Regarding "I don't care where characters come from I only care where they're going" yeah well that only applies if I actually *like* the characters. When the door of the Blockade Runner opened and Darth Vader stepped out I and the rest of the world were hanging on his every word desperately wanting to know what he was going to do next. He was a clean slate, awesome and full of mystery and possibilities. But I couldn't care less where the "Nooooooooooo" doofus at the end of ROTS was going so if the PT had been made first my OT anticipation would have been nil and I probably would have shaken my head when he showed up on Leia's ship going "oh brother this loser again."

So the PT was never so much about going backward per se it was all about changing so much of what made the OT characters cool so that both the OT itself becomes less cool and interesting and by extension the ST as well. But at least the ST and stand-alones have made a conscious effort to undo as much of the damage caused by the PT as possible and for the most part have succeeded in that regard.

 

[Mad Old Lu]

Re: Star Wars: Episode IX - December 20, 2019

Wow! Great conversation going here! ajp4mgs and Khev, you guys are my heroes! I completely agree all around.

Bravomite, I appreciate your POV and I thoroughly understand where you're coming from. I think watching the prequels at a young age (even into your 20s) went a long way. People are generally more open minded at those impressionable years. You're watching things you've never seen before and it's all new to you. Silly jokes land better. Character motivations are less important. Spectacle and action dazzle you more easily.

What bothers me is that people don't seem to realize this when judging the new sequels and therefore grade them much lower. Plot points, character behavior, jokes, themes, etc., that would have most assuredly gotten a pass when they were younger are now sticking points that are impossible to get past. Hey, I like bad movies and TV shows from my youth that I can look at now and acknowledge that they're not very good. But I realize I liked (and maybe still like) them because I was young when I first saw them.

I think the prequels are terrible. I can see that Lucas's broad brush strokes are ok. And I see that the art department (Doug Chiang and Ian McCaig especially) did a phenomenal job. And Natalie, Liam and Ewan did the best they could with what they had. But they are really poorly crafted storytelling. And that is what I personally can't get past. I can tolerate everything from a slow talk-y movie to a mindless action movie. But if the storytelling is poor, then I just can't get into it no matter how pretty it looks or how interested I am in its subject matter.

I've enjoyed the hell out of the sequels. I have pretty much zero problems with either of them. I loved Solo. RO is the only new SW movie I haven't liked (although I liked it the first time I watched it. Just haven't liked it the other 2 times I watched it). I'll be honest and say that it deeply saddens me that fans were so disgusted by TLJ. The level of anger towards the movie puts a dark cloud over the franchise. I'm also fearful about how the filmmakers are reacting to the backlash and what they will do to try and win them back. Since I like the direction they're going now, will they go in a way that I won't like, and I will end up as embittered as the TLJ haters are now?

I have faith in JJ that he will deliver at the very least a very exciting movie. Hopefully that will be enough for me.

 

[Mogli]

Re: Star Wars: Episode IX - December 20, 2019

The PT also has a unique visual flair to it that made it distinct to the OT but still believably fit within the same universe. Everything is shiny and opulent with an undercurrent of decadence and rot setting in beneath the surface. It just fits so well with the story of the fall of the republic and Jedi that George was telling. Then when you get to the time of the OT everything is dilapidated except for the Empire's forces which jives well with what we can imagine the Emperor got up to in the intervening years with the rise of the police state and heavy taxation and subjugation of the planetary systems controlled by the Empire.

The ST is mostly a stale recycled copycat look of the OT (with the exception of the strange Canto Bight scene). It just doesn't really make sense to me or visually tell a story of what happened in the intervening years between the OT and ST. The good guys won after ROTJ and the new new republic were in charge right? How come nothing changed? How come no rebuilding for the new world. Lazy New Republic or lazy LFL.

 

[ajp4mgs]

Re: Star Wars: Episode IX - December 20, 2019

I dare say that this was already problematic even without the prequels though. Vader obviously knew of Tatooine, we didn't know he had lived there but it seemed clear he had at least been there for a time because Owen Lars knew Anakin to some degree - enough to remark on being afraid of how much Luke reminded him of him and to disapprove of Luke receiving the lightsaber. So, of all places, how did it make sense to leave Luke with the Lars on Tatooine? Was it 'hide him in plain sight' sort of logic? Pretty damn risky.

And they didn't even change his surname.....

Agreed overall though, I'm not a fan of the prequels.

Very good points. Anakin was established by the OT as being on Tatooine at some point. But it wasn't until the PT that Kenobi himself was established as the one who actually brought Luke to Tatooine. The vague explanation we got in the OT came in ROTJ when ghost Kenobi tells Luke: "To protect you both from the Emperor, you were hidden from your father when you were born." That left open many possibilities. Luke could have been born on Tatooine. He also could have been brought there by someone else.

We were never told anything in the OT about Luke's mother; so, far all we knew, she could have moved away from Anakin when he started to turn evil. Out of the same fear, she may have kept her pregnancy a secret from Anakin before hiding herself from him. She could have turned the twins over to someone else (like pseudo adoption) and continued living the rest of her life in hiding (since the OT never said that Anakin killed her).

Not only was it the PT that established Kenobi bringing Luke to the Lars, but also that Luke was even born somewhere else in the first place. And it was the PT that added more lies that Obi-Wan told Luke. And the PT made Obi-Wan say "now let's see if we can't figure out what you are my little friend" about R2-D2 . . . even though R2 was a companion droid of his for years. The writing of PT Obi-Wan turned OT Obi-Wan into an even bigger liar and/or a senile fool. And there was no need to add those inconsistencies that just tainted OT Kenobi.

Well, most of all that stuff still works for me, so maybe I'm just wilfully ignorant.

• Who says Obi-Wan forgot the droids? He chose not to show he recognised them at that point. And he *didn't* ever own Artoo.
• Anakin already *was* a great pilot (of podracers, but still)
• Hiding Luke in plain sight makes perfect sense. My suspicions were confirmed in the new canon comics: Vader admits Tatooine is the one place he would never go back to. (He does later, though, and slaughters more Sandpeople!)
• A descent to the dark side, plus 20 years, is enough to explain Anakin's transformation into Vader for me. He was essentially a different person.
• I don't understand why Yoda isn't seamless?
• Artoo flew in the prequels, but wasn't in any situation that required it in the OT.
• Yes, midichlorians were never my favorite aspect of the PT, but they don't contradict the OT either. They just aren't brought up.

While I disagree with your interpretations/explanations of these points, we both know that if I were to present quotes and examples from the OT to back my point of view, we still wouldn't get any closer to agreeing on any of this. It would just keep a perpetual circle spinning. So I'll just add this instead with all sincerity: I credit you for your steadfast defense of the PT, especially because you do it with great civility. You're good people, Prime Clone, and a credit to this forum.

I don't know how anyone can dismiss Yoda's character arc in the PT to OT but accept Luke's in the OT to ST - both guys end up in the same place?! Yoda retreats because he has failed. Vader turned and killed all of his students and Palpatine all but destroyed the Jedi under his watch. You know... sound a bit similar to the Luke, Kylo and Snokey situation?

Arguably Yoda's arc makes more sense (to me) because he came from a position of strength and power only to see it all crumble around him largely in fact due to his own hubris and belief in the superiority of the Jedi - that was on Yoda so no wonder he was shaken to the core took himself off into exile. Luke came from nothing, the galaxy was oppressed and he found out that just one young man and his friends could make all the difference just with a bit of hope, overcoming their set-backs and believing that there is good in people.

First of all, congrats on the 1,000th post, Bravomite. It was a fantastic one that I really enjoyed reading!

I want to focus primarily on the Yoda part of your post that I'm quoting. For me, it's not Yoda's PT arc that's the problem - as I agree with you that it is similar to Luke's in the ST. It's about the logical inconsistencies when you connect it, or reconcile it, with the OT Yoda. Yoda is essentially the one (if I recall ROTS correctly) who decides that the twins should be separated for protection. So we have to ask why? If it were out of sympathy (or any emotional reason), both could have been sent away together to hopefully grow up with one another. It clearly wasn't about that; it was about preserving hope that new Jedi could potentially be formed due to that rich Skywalker bloodline. If we watch these Episodes in numerical order (you're welcome, Prime), all of this is great so far: Kenobi watches over Luke, Leia is watched by a family who is sympathetic to the Jedi, and Yoda goes to a safe place to be available to train one (or both) of the Skywalker kids when the time comes. So far, so great! But then . . .

If we keep watching in chronological order, when next we see Yoda, he has to be convinced by Kenobi that Luke is even worth training at all. Wait . . . what just happened here!? Wasn't Yoda's plan in ROTS to preserve hope by preserving the twins? Wasn't it a goal to keep them safe until they were old enough to be trained? What happened to the plan!? Why'd Kenobi wait 20 years - and only when Leia desperately needed help - before finally starting to catch Luke up to speed? And why did Yoda seem to forget his ROTS plan? Did he go crazy on Dagobah? Did he just get lazy and say, "Ah, **** it" to the whole hope in the twins thing?

The PT Yoda story makes the OT Yoda (established first for the audience) seem bizarrely disjointed. There's not much logical coherency between the two versions. Yoda's arc in the PT is perfectly fine on its own (the one similar to ST Luke's), and would be great if Yoda in the OT was an extension of that. But OT Yoda makes very little logical sense if you accept PT Yoda. Not just for the fact that it seems that Yoda forgot the whole baby Skywalker plan, but that he was a high-flying acrobatic wiz with a lightsaber just ~20 years (of his 900 total) before his ESB appearance as a fragile, cane-dependent, coughing old man who would die shortly thereafter. Did Dagobah's environment mess him up that bad? If so, what a stupid place to exile to in order to stay ready to train one (or both) Skywalkers. Bottom line: the differences between OT Yoda and PT Yoda are jarring. Fine on their own, but disjointed when you have to reconcile them together.

Just my opinion and interpretation, of course. Yoda is my favorite SW character, and easily one of my favorite fictional characters in general. As disjointed from the OT, and as sometimes silly, as PT Yoda is to me - I have to admit that if it wasn't for the PT, I probably would've never gotten to see Yoda on the big screen as a badass lightsaber-wielding Jedi more in his prime than the OT version. Even if silly and incongruous, that version of Yoda is something that part of me is glad I got to see.

 

[Khev]

Re: Star Wars: Episode IX - December 20, 2019

Artoo flew in the prequels, but wasn't in any situation that required it in the OT.

Dagobah swamp
Plunging off the edge of Jabba's sail barge

 

[Otomofan]

Re: Star Wars: Episode IX - December 20, 2019

Another thing I really hated about the prequels was how they messed with Vader and Obi Wan's age.

It's only 19 or 20 years from the end of Ep III to ANH.

Well, it's been around 20 years since they filmed Episode One. Shouldn't Ewan look just like Alec Guiness now?

 

[Darthrazz]

Re: Star Wars: Episode IX - December 20, 2019

Dagobah swamp
Plunging off the edge of Jabba's sail barge

The Jawa's stripped him on the Crawler of all the best gadgets before they sold him to Uncle Owen. Sounds good to me! lol