Star Wars Saga (OT/PT/ST) Discussion Thread

[abake]

You do realize that just because you personally don't like it doesn't mean there wasn't a worthy narrative purpose, right?

In RJ's own words (I took this pic from the art book), here he explains what DJ's purpose was, and the larger reason for the Canto Bight excursion (which I myself am not a fan of, but can still recognize the narrative value).

View attachment 503303

BTW, Finn with the leaking bacta suit wasn't "during a mad escape for their lives." It was after Poe had docked in the hangar and the Resistance had presumably escaped for good after jumping to hyperspace.

You do realise your tone seems a bit condescending, right?

But it's all good, we've known each other for a while now

Of course, you're right, it's all my opinion. However, I'd argue that since so many people had problems with the movie, it's safe to assume that RJ's intentions did not come through as smoothly as he would've liked.
As for the moment of Finn's squirting, I stand corrected, yet the "joke" didn't work for me. Besides, calling that slow-motion, anti-climax of a chase a "mad scramble" for their lives was hyperbole anyway

 

[ajp4mgs]

Ooh I really like that take and you're right the rocks don't fall unlike when she's levitating with the boulders at the beginning of TROS trying to call the Jedi and "they're not with me" so she breaks concentration and the rocks immediately fall.



Nice catch ajp for that scene in TLJ ajp!

I can't believe I couldn't remember the opening scene.

Hey Khev, I don't know if you have the TLJ art book, so I snapped another pic from it because you're one of the only people here who accurately interpreted Luke's thought process (and where he was going wrong) before his talk with Yoda toward the end of the movie set him straight. This is RJ's explanation of it:

 

[ajp4mgs]

You do realise your tone seems a bit condescending, right?

But it's all good, we've known each other for a while now

Of course, you're right, it's all my opinion. However, I'd argue that since so many people had problems with the movie, it's safe to assume that RJ's intentions did not come through as smoothly as he would've liked.
As for the moment of Finn's squirting, I stand corrected, yet the "joke" didn't work for me. Besides, calling that slow-motion, anti-climax of a chase a "mad scramble" for their lives was hyperbole anyway

Didn't mean to be condescending. Sorry about that.

I just don't know sometimes how aware we are of the distinction between opinion and fact. Disliking TLJ is perfectly legit, and most here are aligned with you on it. But, using declarative statements about lack of narrative purpose seems to me a bit shortsighted considering the depth of narrative that others appreciated. One isn't right, and the other wrong. It's all opinion. Sometimes I just sense that opinion and fact seem to meld together for some.

 

[Khev]

I can't believe I couldn't remember the opening scene.

*And* that scene showed Rey after three years of training under Leia and book studies, far more than Luke ever got in the OT, and she *still* couldn't keep the boulders afloat after breaking concentration. I think you're totally right in that Luke was assisting novice Rey on Crait.

Hey Khev, I don't know if you have the TLJ art book, so I snapped another pic from it because you're one of the only people here who accurately interpreted Luke's thought process (and where he was going wrong) before his talk with Yoda toward the end of the movie set him straight. This is RJ's explanation of it:

View attachment 503304

"'Nope, toss this all away and start something new' is not really a valid choice, I think."--RJ

And yet for over three years many people have been parroting the false narrative that the entire theme of TLJ, RJ, KK, the entire ST, etc., is "let the past die, kill it if you have to," solely because the *bad guy* that we weren't supposed to listen to said it in a movie. Hopefully that's just willful intellectual dishonesty on the part of certain naysayers because I don't know what to say if it isn't, lol.

Thanks for posting that. The Art of TLJ was the one book I passed on and now I regret it. I'll try and track one down but finding a minty copy this many years later of such a large book could proof difficult.

 

[Khev]

Didn't mean to be condescending. Sorry about that.

I just don't know sometimes how aware we are of the distinction between opinion and fact. Disliking TLJ is perfectly legit, and most here are aligned with you on it. But, using declarative statements about lack of narrative purpose seems to me a bit shortsighted considering the depth of narrative that others appreciated. One isn't right, and the other wrong. It's all opinion. Sometimes I just sense that opinion and fact seem to meld together for some.

I'll echo that point as well. Not wanting tragedy to test a beloved hero or shake him to his core is perfectly valid. And I have no problem with anyone saying just that. As I've said before I simply didn't *want* bad stuff to happen on the Sulaco right after Ripley, Hicks, and Newt left LV-426. And for years that narrative choice was a stumbling block to me appreciating Alien 3. And I know a lot of people *still* don't like it to this day for that fact alone just as there are those who will never like TLJ or the ST because of the tragic events that occurred that the OT heroes had to react to. That's fine.

But then there's that other aspect of many people just showing that they outright didn't understand what transpired in the ST, don't *want* to understand, don't want to understand any precedent in SW that gives great credibility to what happened in the ST, and only want to camp out in the safespace of their little manufactured narratives. And I spent too much energy in the past even trying to reason with such individuals, lol.

 

[abake]

Didn't mean to be condescending. Sorry about that.

I just don't know sometimes how aware we are of the distinction between opinion and fact. Disliking TLJ is perfectly legit, and most here are aligned with you on it. But, using declarative statements about lack of narrative purpose seems to me a bit shortsighted considering the depth of narrative that others appreciated. One isn't right, and the other wrong. It's all opinion. Sometimes I just sense that opinion and fact seem to meld together for some.

By narrative I mean the telling of a story, how cohesive it is and how much sense the flow of it makes. With the examples I put forward I was trying to illustrate why I don't think RJ did a good job from a narrative point of view in TLJ.
What the themes and subtexts are is (IMHO) a different matter. Reading through the discussions here and in the old TLJ thread, I have come to appreciate a lot of the underlying themes and the (perceived) intent of the director; however, I cannot see how narratively TLJ can be perceived as good, as it fails in many many instances of what good storytelling (narrative, to me) should be like IMO.

As for fact vs. opinion on the subject of narrative, I'm not a writer or a student of literature and storytelling to be able to say with conviction that it is a fact that TLJ is a poorly written or directed movie, but from my understanding of storytelling, narrative and movies, it is, indeed, pretty poor. Some great acting, some great ideas, some nice visuals, but just not a good, cohesive story.

Unlike Knives Out, for one. At first I didn't like it very much, as I thought it was trying too hard to be smart, but on second viewing I really enjoyed it. That for me is a great example of great narrative and cohesive storytelling.

 

[ajp4mgs]

I'll echo that point as well. Not wanting tragedy to test a beloved hero or shake him to his core is perfectly valid. And I have no problem with anyone saying just that. As I've said before I simply didn't *want* bad stuff to happen on the Sulaco right after Ripley, Hicks, and Newt left LV-426. And for years that narrative choice was a stumbling block to me appreciating Alien 3. And I know a lot of people *still* don't like it to this day for that fact alone just as there are those who will never like TLJ or the ST because of the tragic events that occurred that the OT heroes had to react to. That's fine.

Yeah, I suppose that what we each individually want/need from sequels varies from viewer to viewer; and that can get in the way of appreciating things that are actually done well enough to enjoy. The way you've used Alien 3 as an analogy hits on a key aspect of that for me. No matter how much I liked Hicks (not so much Newt ), all I needed was for the decisions made with the Aliens supporting characters to end up taking Ripley to another worthwhile level of character development. It achieved that for me from the first viewing after I was able to see what the goal was for furthering and concluding her story.

In no way do I hold Alien 3 anywhere near the same level of greatness or value as the first two films, but I always at least found it a worthy enough extension (and wrap up) of Ripley's story. It had a story to tell, and layers to add. I still find some of the execution grossly lacking quality, but story and theme matter enough to me to be forgiving. Then again, I also enjoy Prometheus, so my opinion means nothing.

The ST is much the same, though. Is it the direction I wanted before 2015? Absolutely not. But once I realized that the OT characters weren't going to be used the way I wanted, all I needed was to be assured that their use had a constructive thematic purpose in extending the overall saga. These aren't *my* stories to tell, after all. And TLJ gave me that assurance. But for many others, it didn't. That might be due to how we each approach stories differently in terms of what we require from them.

But then there's that other aspect of many people just showing that they outright didn't understand what transpired in the ST, don't *want* to understand, don't want to understand any precedent in SW that gives great credibility to what happened in the ST, and only want to camp out in the safespace of their little manufactured narratives. And I spent too much energy in the past even trying to reason with such individuals, lol.

There's definitely a willful misleading of creator intent among some, and yes, it's frustrating. But there's also genuine belief in that narrative, so there's nothing we can do.

I'm just glad that as a fan for almost my entire life I have no reason to be as angry about the ST as plenty of others are. That's a great relief, and very gratifying. Like you, my desire to try to change people's minds has also been diminishing more and more. I'm just trying to focus more on enjoying the elements that I thought were not only worthwhile, but actually even outstanding.

By narrative I mean the telling of a story, how cohesive it is and how much sense the flow of it makes. With the examples I put forward I was trying to illustrate why I don't think RJ did a good job from a narrative point of view in TLJ.
What the themes and subtexts are is (IMHO) a different matter. Reading through the discussions here and in the old TLJ thread, I have come to appreciate a lot of the underlying themes and the (perceived) intent of the director; however, I cannot see how narratively TLJ can be perceived as good, as it fails in many many instances of what good storytelling (narrative, to me) should be like IMO.

As for fact vs. opinion on the subject of narrative, I'm not a writer or a student of literature and storytelling to be able to say with conviction that it is a fact that TLJ is a poorly written or directed movie, but from my understanding of storytelling, narrative and movies, it is, indeed, pretty poor. Some great acting, some great ideas, some nice visuals, but just not a good, cohesive story.

Unlike Knives Out, for one. At first I didn't like it very much, as I thought it was trying too hard to be smart, but on second viewing I really enjoyed it. That for me is a great example of great narrative and cohesive storytelling.

Understood. I regret that TLJ didn't connect with you and that you found the narrative flow logistically sloppy. I'm just glad that I came away with a different impression.

RJ is as big of a cinema buff as anyone I've ever been aware of. If his narratives (in the "flow" sense that you are referring to) suffer in seeming to lack proper direction, I think the root cause is his over-exuberance to incorporate as many nods to what he loves as possible. No film will ever be better proof of that than his Brothers Bloom movie. In that one, the dude was just exploding his love of so many films and genres onto the screen that the narrative became stuffed like an elephant into a pillow case. But I found TLJ, on the other hand, to be concise enough to breeze right by in a coherent and well-paced way.

Different strokes for different folks; I get that. Thank you for expounding on your point of view; I appreciate it.

 

[Khev]

I'm just glad that as a fan for almost my entire life I have no reason to be as angry about the ST as plenty of others are. That's a great relief, and very gratifying. Like you, my desire to try to change people's minds has also been diminishing more and more. I'm just trying to focus more on enjoying the elements that I thought were not only worthwhile, but actually even outstanding.

Well said. And with regard to TLJ in particular I just feel that the last three years has been the equivalent of the AT-AT's blasting away at Luke to no avail. Now once again, I'm not saying that anyone who dislikes or even hates the movie is inherently "wrong" for doing so, but to me the movie spectacularly stood its ground in the face of relentless fire from certain segments of the fanbase, from RJ's ill spoken tweets, from even my *own* criticisms, and just casually brushed them off its shoulder.

I even went full hater and watched that entire YouTube series where the guy absolutely eviscerates the *entire* film in 5-10 minute chunks. I don't think there's anything more that can be said against this movie at this point. And yet none of it matters. Sure I have my little complaints here and there. But even the stuff that I wish was done differently I still greatly respect because I know that it came from a guy who was a passionate SW fan, and passionate about all the *same* things I am passionate about, who greatly did his homework, and just did what he thought would make the "best" SW story. I always like seeing a filmmaker's uncompromised vision on screen, there's a certain purity to it. Maybe that's why TPM has been my favorite PT movie for so long. George was riding high off the OT and just went bonkers and put everything that he thought would be awesome in a new SW movie. Then came the backlash which resulted in the sidelining of Jar Jar, bringing in a Fett copycat, and all the other compromises to his vision that he made to "appease the fans."

I'm not saying that appeasing the fans is inherently bad, and certainly not inherently worse than crafting a story with creative checks and balances (as opposed to an army of compliant "yes" men) but nevertheless by the same token I *also* like seeing that uncompromised vision. It's just so pure but also raw and daring, *especially* in a Saga that you'd normally think would take the safest approach imaginable. And that's what the best SW (ANH and ESB) have always been for me. The only question then becomes well how *good* is that uncompromised vision, and with regard to ANH, ESB, and yes TLJ the overall package was good to great which is the best possible outcome as far as I'm concerned. And yes I realize that even ANH was compromised in certain ways hence Lucas' dissatisfaction with the theatrical cut but still, nothing like the "check all boxes" approach that moved away from pure artistic vision that we saw implemented to greater effect in AOTC, ROTS, and even TROS.

"Check all boxes" can be good (as I would argue TROS proved), but uncompromising vision that is *also* good is even better IMO. And then the worst is when vision is compromised and boxes are checked but *still* done poorly (**coughAOTC/ROTScough**.)

Understood. I regret that TLJ didn't connect with you and that you found the narrative flow logistically sloppy. I'm just glad that I came away with a different impression.

Yep, same. If we are in the minority then we really lucked out with being able to have such an appreciation for the continuation of the OT story.

 

[a-dev]

I'll echo that point as well. Not wanting tragedy to test a beloved hero or shake him to his core is perfectly valid. And I have no problem with anyone saying just that. As I've said before I simply didn't *want* bad stuff to happen on the Sulaco right after Ripley, Hicks, and Newt left LV-426. And for years that narrative choice was a stumbling block to me appreciating Alien 3. And I know a lot of people *still* don't like it to this day for that fact alone just as there are those who will never like TLJ or the ST because of the tragic events that occurred that the OT heroes had to react to. That's fine.

But then there's that other aspect of many people just showing that they outright didn't understand what transpired in the ST, don't *want* to understand, don't want to understand any precedent in SW that gives great credibility to what happened in the ST, and only want to camp out in the safespace of their little manufactured narratives. And I spent too much energy in the past even trying to reason with such individuals, lol.

Thank you.

Today I've been feeling like there's no point in me criticizing the ST based on things like ''Luke wouldn't have done this'' or ''he would have done that''. There's no point in me saying ''this sucked in TLJ'' or ''that sucked in TROS''.

The simple fact is, returning to my previous theme of 'desirability', I didn't want any of this. What I actually wanted post ROTJ - if anything at all - just wasn't possible anymore. And hadn't been possible since the end of the twentieth century

I said it the other day, the Zahn books were my post-ROTJ canon. I far prefer the old EU to Disney's new canon. It took seeing the Disney ST in full for me to realize just how much I regret that they relegated it all to ''Legends''.

I've also been mulling over a contradiction in my thinking - I've criticized the ST for being repetitious of the basic premise of Rebellion VS Empire and how that felt tacked-on and unnecessary given the overall Skywalker Saga context of Episodes I-VII. And yet the old EU largely dealt with the Empire as the continuing threat - so I wondered why did I not have a problem with that all those years ago when I read those books - for some reason the answer only occurred to me recently. The EU pre-dates the PT. It wasn't the Skywalker Saga back then. It was just the original 3 films and so there was nothing that further explorations of Rebels VS Empire felt 'asymmetric' to on the other side of the OT.

So what's the answer for me? Well, I still don't like what was presented in Disney's ST - just by default - for everything that it is not. Right from the off it couldn't be what I wanted it to be. So for me there's no ''Rian Johnson ruined it''. He did a perfectly fine job for all I care. And with TROS, JJ Abrams finished what he started in TFA perfectly - again, for all I care. You and Ajp make a point about people willfully misunderstanding the characters and decisions in the ST and I won't contend against that. My realization facilitates and justifies my general reluctance to engage in those debates anymore.

I'll just stick with the OT, Rogue One, Solo - any content (Feck they've got me using that word a lot now) I like that is beholden only to the OT and to the general backstory of the PT. My tolerance for PT references has much increased since Rogue One and Mandalorian - although I'd draw the line at a few things - for example I hope they never reference Anakin killing the younglings or Padme dying just because she lost the will to live - very specific things from the PT that I very specifically found terrible.

I hope Mandalorian finds a way not to specifically reference forward to the ST - although that's going to be difficult if there's further occasion to bring Luke into it or if it references Han Solo, Leia Organa and their 'child', singular. It's amazing - Ben Solo, he alone completely overwrites the old EU and confirms the existing ST. In Mandalorian's timeline I guess he would be imminent (if not already existing?). *shudders*

Will I end up writing off Mando if it becomes clear it is setting up the ST? I dunno. I dunno if I'm capable of saying ''well the first two seasons and the first 4 episodes of season 3 are canon but then it all abruptly ended!! Weird!''

Time will tell...or perhaps a World between Worlds will!

 

[Neal136]

*And* that scene showed Rey after three years of training under Leia and book studies, far more than Luke ever got in the OT, and she *still* couldn't keep the boulders afloat after breaking concentration.

To be fair, there's only (approximately) one year between TLJ and TROS.

 

[TurdFurgusonsHat]

it's safe to assume that RJ's intentions did not come through as smoothly as he would've liked.

Anybody being honest with themselves knows Johnson's intentions were subversive and meant to f#c! with the OT and it's longtime fans. It shows in the film and his laundry list of comments before and after. Anybody who claims otherwise is being disingenuous at best.

 

[The Buffinator]

Sorry Buff have to disagree there

When it comes to narrative story telling RJ is very talented

Only when it involves social media fan interactionsis does he turn into a big dummy lol

To be clear, when I said we were giving RJ too much credit I was referring specifically to Khev's observation that Luke was "levitating in order to achieve full sensory deprivation so that he could more fully concentrate on how his projection interacted with Crait". I wasn't dissing RJ's story telling abilities, just doubting he created that scene with the same thought in mind. In no way am I a RJ hater; he cast Ana in Knives Out, so that automatically puts him on my short list of favorite directors lol.

Yep. When it comes to lore he's much more well versed than the average fan who grew up with the PT.

Projection has been a part of SW for more than 40 years. We've seen it performed by both the dead:

And the living:

Yeah, I never had an issue with projection, Heck, wasn't Palpatine using it in Rebels when he was messing with Ezra? Some of the same folks who didn't like Luke using it seemed to conveniently overlook that fact.

 

[Khev]

To be fair, there's only (approximately) one year between TLJ and TROS.

Oh was that stated in the novelization or something? Either way it's still much more training than OT Luke received.

 

[Khev]

Thank you.

Sure.

Today I've been feeling like there's no point in me criticizing the ST based on things like ''Luke wouldn't have done this'' or ''he would have done that''. There's no point in me saying ''this sucked in TLJ'' or ''that sucked in TROS''.

I didn't want any of this.

Sorry, that line just immediately reminded me of that scene, lol.

What I actually wanted post ROTJ - if anything at all - just wasn't possible anymore. And hadn't been possible since the end of the twentieth century

I said it the other day, the Zahn books were my post-ROTJ canon. I far prefer the old EU to Disney's new canon. It took seeing the Disney ST in full for me to realize just how much I regret that they relegated it all to ''Legends''.

I've also been mulling over a contradiction in my thinking - I've criticized the ST for being repetitious of the basic premise of Rebellion VS Empire and how that felt tacked-on and unnecessary given the overall Skywalker Saga context of Episodes I-VII. And yet the old EU largely dealt with the Empire as the continuing threat - so I wondered why did I not have a problem with that all those years ago when I read those books - for some reason the answer only occurred to me recently. The EU pre-dates the PT. It wasn't the Skywalker Saga back then. It was just the original 3 films and so there was nothing that further explorations of Rebels VS Empire felt 'asymmetric' to on the other side of the OT.

That's interesting. Obviously I swear no allegiance to the PT so any breaking of PT/OT symmetry caused by the ST is a non-issue for me.

So for me there's no ''Rian Johnson ruined it''. He did a perfectly fine job for all I care. And with TROS, JJ Abrams finished what he started in TFA perfectly - again, for all I care.

I'll take it! Even with the "for all I care" disclaimers.

I'll just stick with the OT, Rogue One, Solo - any content (Feck they've got me using that word a lot now) I like that is beholden only to the OT and to the general backstory of the PT. My tolerance for PT references has much increased since Rogue One and Mandalorian - although I'd draw the line at a few things - for example I hope they never reference Anakin killing the younglings or Padme dying just because she lost the will to live - very specific things from the PT that I very specifically found terrible.

Part of me wants Mando to dive into the WBW Multiverse just so I can easily dismiss all the junk I don't like affiliated with that once and for all. Then I think the Saga for me will be:

Solo
RO
Theatrical OT
Mando Seasons 1 and 2 (since Din/Grogu's arc had a satsifying close and it seems to create an effective jumping off point--and new branch with The Book of Boba Fett.) Which brings me to:
The Book of Boba Fett
ST

And assuming TBOBF is good and self-contained and doesn't acknowledge multiverse crap itself that gives me a LOT of good to great SW, all live-action too. I'm fine with the "prequels" and "Clone Wars" existing as nothing more than little Season 1 Mando flashbacks and Ahsoka's one singular Season 2 appearance. Good for me.

I hope Mandalorian finds a way not to specifically reference forward to the ST - although that's going to be difficult if there's further occasion to bring Luke into it or if it references Han Solo, Leia Organa and their 'child', singular. It's amazing - Ben Solo, he alone completely overwrites the old EU and confirms the existing ST. In Mandalorian's timeline I guess he would be imminent (if not already existing?). *shudders*

Yeah, I remember revisiting Dark Empire a few years back and thinking "hey maybe this can still fit between the OT and ST" and then just a few issues in they were already referencing Leia's twins and I was all "crap, guess not," lol.

Will I end up writing off Mando if it becomes clear it is setting up the ST? I dunno. I dunno if I'm capable of saying ''well the first two seasons and the first 4 episodes of season 3 are canon but then it all abruptly ended!! Weird!''

Time will tell...or perhaps a World between Worlds will!

 

[jye4ever]

Khev and I after ajp made TLJ even better for us with his Luke/Rey/Rock revelation:

 

[Khev]

To be clear, when I said we were giving RJ too much credit I was referring specifically to Khev's observation that Luke was "levitating in order to achieve full sensory deprivation so that he could more fully concentrate on how his projection interacted with Crait". I wasn't dissing RJ's story telling abilities, just doubting he created that scene with the same thought in mind. In no way am I a RJ hater; he cast Ana in Knives Out, so that automatically puts him on my short list of favorite directors lol.

Of course the jerk had to be all "Here's Ana!!! Aaaaand a bunch of Ana's barf..." But either way Knives Out is a really fun flick even watching again when I know all the twists.

Yeah, I never had an issue with projection, Heck, wasn't Palpatine using it in Rebels when he was messing with Ezra? Some of the same folks who didn't like Luke using it seemed to conveniently overlook that fact.

Oh yeah, great point. Palps even changes his appearance for the projection doesn't he.

 

[Khev]

Khev and I after ajp made TLJ even better for us with his Luke/Rey/Rock revelation:

Totally.

Though you put the exclamation point on that one by calling out that a super well trained Rey *couldn't* keep the rocks floating.

 

[The Buffinator]

Khev and I after ajp made TLJ even better for us with his Luke/Rey/Rock revelation:

If I didn't know you'd lost a ton of weight due to your Covid battle I'd tell you it was time to log off the PC and go get some exercise.

Totally.

Though you put the exclamation point on that one by calling out that a super well trained Rey *couldn't* keep the rocks floating.

Yeah, due to a power outage I'm chiming in late, but ajp's lifting rocks observation & jye's follow up were both quite astute.

 

[Khev]

But I found TLJ, on the other hand, to be concise enough to breeze right by in a coherent and well-paced way.

Circling back to this, I just can't agree with this assessment enough. It boggles my mind that even with the bits I disagree with, and for a film with such a long running time and mired in controversy that watching it is indeed *such* a breeze. To steal an old soap opera title pretty much every moment is either bold or beautiful (or both), lol. It really is. There's just so much to appreciate or go "I wouldn't have done that RJ but damn, you kind of pulled it off." Every frame just oozes purpose and confidence. And that coupled with the adept performances, visuals, and aforementioned pacing just makes it, like you said, a breeze to both watch and enjoy.

 

[abake]

Yeah, I suppose that what we each individually want/need from sequels varies from viewer to viewer; and that can get in the way of appreciating things that are actually done well enough to enjoy. The way you've used Alien 3 as an analogy hits on a key aspect of that for me. No matter how much I liked Hicks (not so much Newt ), all I needed was for the decisions made with the Aliens supporting characters to end up taking Ripley to another worthwhile level of character development. It achieved that for me from the first viewing after I was able to see what the goal was for furthering and concluding her story.

In no way do I hold Alien 3 anywhere near the same level of greatness or value as the first two films, but I always at least found it a worthy enough extension (and wrap up) of Ripley's story. It had a story to tell, and layers to add. I still find some of the execution grossly lacking quality, but story and theme matter enough to me to be forgiving. Then again, I also enjoy Prometheus, so my opinion means nothing.

The ST is much the same, though. Is it the direction I wanted before 2015? Absolutely not. But once I realized that the OT characters weren't going to be used the way I wanted, all I needed was to be assured that their use had a constructive thematic purpose in extending the overall saga. These aren't *my* stories to tell, after all. And TLJ gave me that assurance. But for many others, it didn't. That might be due to how we each approach stories differently in terms of what we require from them.



There's definitely a willful misleading of creator intent among some, and yes, it's frustrating. But there's also genuine belief in that narrative, so there's nothing we can do.

I'm just glad that as a fan for almost my entire life I have no reason to be as angry about the ST as plenty of others are. That's a great relief, and very gratifying. Like you, my desire to try to change people's minds has also been diminishing more and more. I'm just trying to focus more on enjoying the elements that I thought were not only worthwhile, but actually even outstanding.



Understood. I regret that TLJ didn't connect with you and that you found the narrative flow logistically sloppy. I'm just glad that I came away with a different impression.

RJ is as big of a cinema buff as anyone I've ever been aware of. If his narratives (in the "flow" sense that you are referring to) suffer in seeming to lack proper direction, I think the root cause is his over-exuberance to incorporate as many nods to what he loves as possible. No film will ever be better proof of that than his Brothers Bloom movie. In that one, the dude was just exploding his love of so many films and genres onto the screen that the narrative became stuffed like an elephant into a pillow case. But I found TLJ, on the other hand, to be concise enough to breeze right by in a coherent and well-paced way.

Different strokes for different folks; I get that. Thank you for expounding on your point of view; I appreciate it.

My pleasure man, I love civilised discourse!