Star Wars: The Last Jedi (2)

[Wor-Gar]

The Jedi purge continued years after Yoda went into exile:

Apparently its still going on.

 

[Khev]

Apparently its still going on.

 

[jye4ever]

 

[ajp4mgs]

The worst failure in Star Wars is Disney letting directors write fricking scripts one movie at a time in a trilogy. They had no road map as to where the story was going unless you call ripping off OT the road map.

Winging the script writing ina trilogy might be the worst thing Disney has done.

I've gone back and forth on the "winging it" approach to writing this trilogy. In general, I think it's a bad idea not to have a basic structure in place for how the whole story should play out. But, I also see the benefit of letting different people push the story in their own direction because it prevents something like the prequels where one person dominates the story and can't see his own flaws in time to fix them.

And for anyone who might want to suggest that the OT was all mapped out and pre-planned, please understand that it wasn't. We all know that Lucas didn't plan to have Leia as Luke's sister when he was writing ESB and having her kiss him like that (and more romance between the two in deleted scenes). In fact, ROTJ went in a TON of different directions - even right up until filming - because there was no actual set plan! And not just due to Lucas changing the ending because he was tired of making SW films. There's a great book titled, "The Making of Star Wars: The Return of the Jedi" that partly chronicles some of this.

But you don't even have to read the book (though it'd be worth it). There's an article that details some parts from the book, including how much "winging it" was going on during the writing and production of ROTJ. I'm begging any critics of the ST for making things up as they go to please read this. Please!! You'll see that what's happening with the ST is no less cohesive or well-planned than what was happening more than 35 years ago with the OT. Here's the link:

https://io9.gizmodo.com/10-things-you-probably-didnt-know-about-star-wars-ret-1383276948/1388764126

Lucas was "winging it" too. Key storylines and plots were created ,and changed, right up until filming and editing. If it's a problem now with the ST, why don't people think it was a problem back in the 80's when Lucas was making **** up as he went? Sure, he was the same dude writing all three parts (I get that), but that doesn't change the fact that there was no set plan in how the story would unfold and end. He was inventing so much of the story between films, and dramatically changing key plot elements as he went. How is that so different?

 

[Superman-Prime]

Lucas was "winging it" too. Key storylines and plots were created ,and changed, right up until filming and editing. If it's a problem now with the ST, why don't people think it was a problem back in the 80's when Lucas was making **** up as he went? Sure, he was the same dude writing all three parts (I get that), but that doesn't change the fact that there was no set plan in how the story would unfold and end. He was inventing so much of the story between films, and dramatically changing key plot elements as he went. How is that so different?

I think what is different is his was original and the directors now are winging it by just echoing what happened before it. It’s like plagiarism but really bad plagiarism where when you turn in a paper and the website where you printed it from is still on the bottom of the page.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ajp4mgs]

What was it about ROTJ that you guys are seeing that would have led to Luke planning to casually murder his nephew and then running away to hide from his responsibilities for ever after?

Since posting this question, you followed it up by posting that you'd like a serious answer. I wasn't the one you were addressing earlier today, but if you legitimately want a serious answer, I want to provide you with the best and most thorough one that I can. But first: do you not understand how loaded your question is with your own subjective interpretations that many people fundamentally disagree with? It would be like me (who hates the PT) asking PT fans: "What was it about the OT that you guys are seeing that would have suggested Anakin/Vader was just a whiny crybaby and lovesick loser who casually killed his wife for no apparent reason?" It might be a fair question to me, but it's so full of my own pre-conceived personal interpretations (that many PT fans would disagree with), that it wouldn't get a constructive response. If you set up the question with your own beliefs, and pose it to people who disagree with your interpretation, you're not often going to get a serious answer.

But, since I appreciate you for starting this thread after the first one got shut down, I'll give you my serious answer (that you won't like or agree with). As has been pointed out already, Luke did not plan to "casually murder his nephew." There's nothing casual about Luke's conflict in that moment. That's actually a key part of the story: Luke couldn't bring himself to end the life of a member of his family, even though he'd just seen that overwhelming darkness and corruption had already taken over his soul. Sound familiar? Luke saw a Ben Solo who was lost to the dark side - and any logical person would have understood that killing him in that hut would likely prevent another Vader from rising to commit evil atrocities all over the galaxy.

ROTJ taught us that Luke can be tempted to respond impulsively like that, but he reigns himself in before crossing the dark line. Luke is very much an impulsive character prone to emotional swings, and always has been.

And Luke didn't run away to hide. He wasn't afraid of getting beaten; and he wasn't being a coward. He felt responsible for Kylo. He felt frustrated that all of the good intentions of the Jedi (and himself) would all be for nothing (AGAIN!) because within their very own ranks, another Vader was being formed (and with Skywalker bloodlines . . . AGAIN!). If Luke hadn't developed Ben's Force abilities, would Ben have become Kylo? Probably not. So, why is it so hard for you to see that Luke would feel traumatized that instead of letting his sister raise her son, he took Ben into the Jedi religion . . . and led to his nephew's ruin? Why is it unreasonable to have Luke feel like the best way to end this cycle of Jedi/Sith is to pull out the roots and end it all by ending the Jedi?

Luke might even feel that his father could have just lived a quiet life on Tatooine if not taken to be trained as a Jedi. And harnessing/strengthening his Force abilities in Jedi training led to him being powerful enough to be a devastating tool of the Sith. And now Luke, in his hubris, ignored the dangers of it happening again to his nephew - as it had his father. Luke is left devastated because he himself had now "failed" like Obi-Wan had; but with Kylo in the place of Anakin. Same result; nothing learned, nothing avoided.

Much like Kenobi to Anakin, Luke would be to Kylo the root of his torment (insert Anakin's "I HATE YOU!!" scream here). That's something no one seems to bring up in these conversations about why Luke wouldn't think he could redeem his nephew as he strongly believed he could redeem his father. Because Luke wasn't a target of his father's rage and revenge; Kenobi was. Luke didn't "fail" with Anakin; Kenobi was the mentor who couldn't save him. So, Luke would be the least likely to be able to redeem Kylo, just as Kenobi would have been the least likely to redeem Anakin/Vader. A main theme of TLJ is about recognizing flaws and failures, and finding new (better) ways to move forward by learning from them.

 

[Python]

Why bother explaining thou? You don’t like it , others do...

Well yeah of course, let's just assume that this is the case, and that it's perfectly fine for people to like different things. Then we can just get on with the actual conversation rather than having to highlight this point. I haven't complained about people liking TLJ even though I really don't. My only complaint is certain people swiping aside people who didn't enjoy it and calling them "haters" constantly or suggesting they aren't intelligent enough to interpret it in the correct manner (as if their view is the correct one and that TLJ was some work of genius that was above us) Rather than actually engaging with them. All while hypocritically declaring that it's the people who don't like it whom forcefully apply their position and don't stop going on about it. I actually haven't posted too much in this thread, but I enjoy reading both sides when the points are constructive...



Speaking of which...

Since posting this question, you followed it up by posting that you'd like a serious answer. I wasn't the one you were addressing earlier today, but if you legitimately want a serious answer, I want to provide you with the best and most thorough one that I can. But first: do you not understand how loaded your question is with your own subjective interpretations that many people fundamentally disagree with? It would be like me (who hates the PT) asking PT fans: "What was it about the OT that you guys are seeing that would have suggested Anakin/Vader was just a whiny crybaby and lovesick loser who casually killed his wife for no apparent reason?" It might be a fair question to me, but it's so full of my own pre-conceived personal interpretations (that many PT fans would disagree with), that it wouldn't get a constructive response. If you set up the question with your own beliefs, and pose it to people who disagree with your interpretation, you're not often going to get a serious answer.

But, since I appreciate you for starting this thread after the first one got shut down, I'll give you my serious answer (that you won't like or agree with). As has been pointed out already, Luke did not plan to "casually murder his nephew." There's nothing casual about Luke's conflict in that moment. That's actually a key part of the story: Luke couldn't bring himself to end the life of a member of his family, even though he'd just seen that overwhelming darkness and corruption had already taken over his soul. Sound familiar? Luke saw a Ben Solo who was lost to the dark side - and any logical person would have understood that killing him in that hut would likely prevent another Vader from rising to commit evil atrocities all over the galaxy.

ROTJ taught us that Luke can be tempted to respond impulsively like that, but he reigns himself in before crossing the dark line. Luke is very much an impulsive character prone to emotional swings, and always has been.

And Luke didn't run away to hide. He wasn't afraid of getting beaten; and he wasn't being a coward. He felt responsible for Kylo. He felt frustrated that all of the good intentions of the Jedi (and himself) would all be for nothing (AGAIN!) because within their very own ranks, another Vader was being formed (and with Skywalker bloodlines . . . AGAIN!). If Luke hadn't developed Ben's Force abilities, would Ben have become Kylo? Probably not. So, why is it so hard for you to see that Luke would feel traumatized that instead of letting his sister raise her son, he took Ben into the Jedi religion . . . and led to his nephew's ruin? Why is it unreasonable to have Luke feel like the best way to end this cycle of Jedi/Sith is to pull out the roots and end it all by ending the Jedi?

Luke might even feel that his father could have just lived a quiet life on Tatooine if not taken to be trained as a Jedi. And harnessing/strengthening his Force abilities in Jedi training led to him being powerful enough to be a devastating tool of the Sith. And now Luke, in his hubris, ignored the dangers of it happening again to his nephew - as it had his father. Luke is left devastated because he himself had now "failed" like Obi-Wan had; but with Kylo in the place of Anakin. Same result; nothing learned, nothing avoided.

Much like Kenobi to Anakin, Luke would be to Kylo the root of his torment (insert Anakin's "I HATE YOU!!" scream here). That's something no one seems to bring up in these conversations about why Luke wouldn't think he could redeem his nephew as he strongly believed he could redeem his father. Because Luke wasn't a target of his father's rage and revenge; Kenobi was. Luke didn't "fail" with Anakin; Kenobi was the mentor who couldn't save him. So, Luke would be the least likely to be able to redeem Kylo, just as Kenobi would have been the least likely to redeem Anakin/Vader. A main theme of TLJ is about recognizing flaws and failures, and finding new (better) ways to move forward by learning from them.

I probably agree with more of that than you'd expect. And I appreciate the response. It's hard not to ask "loaded" questions seeing as so much of this is based on personal opinions and beliefs, your views also so it should be a fair expectation to expect a serious answer from those who have demonstrated a willing to do so. It wasn't my intention to trap anybody with that question. I'm genuinely trying to understand how people thought of Luke at the end of ROTJ as turning into the pessimistic hermit we saw in TLJ. I am a fan of the prequels. And while Anakins performance has grown on me in recent years (see this video for some of the reasons... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bL_PDgczHJc ) I did for many years consider Hayden the weak link. I'll also fully admit that much of the dialogue is not of a high standard. They are far from perfect as movies, in fact in many ways they could be much better but ultimately they are enjoyable to me and do fit in with the Star Wars universe. Although by the time he killed his wife, he arguably wasn't Anakin any longer, he was Vader. At the very least he was very confused and not fully in control of himself so it makes sense. Although I never did quite figure out why she actually died other than continuity....


I probably should have left out the word casually, it makes light of the situation and took your response in a wildly different direction focusing on that misused word in my question. I retract it. But while I agree with you entirely that Luke has always been very impulsive and emotional. Part of what we saw in the OT is him starting to realise that himself and being able to control it more. I have no doubt that he still would have had emotional outbursts as he aged, nobody is perfect. But planing to kill your nephew whom technically hasn't done anything wrong at that point, even going so far as igniting his saber as he sleeps is an extreme, surely you'll concede that? It just doesn't seem fitting with Luke's character, it does him a disservice even if he ultimately didn't act on it. The movie made little attempt to show that Luke even tried to help Kylo first. Something we'd probably all expect Luke to do.

Luke did literally run away and hide. this started in TFA of course, but the reason for him leaving could have easily been made worth wile. I imagine when TFA ended, we were all incredibly excited to see how Luke would react to Rey and why he had gone away. TLJ was hugely deflating for me in that regard which is one of the big contributing factors as to why I didn't enjoy it. In the words of Mark Hamill "He was the most optimistic character. And I said even if I did something ghastly like picking the wrong young student. I would re-double my efforts, I wouldn't just go off to an island for 30 years." Now you could say that Mark is just an actor hired to play a part, but he probably knows the character better than most, and I agree with him on this point. What I wouldn't give to be a fly on the wall as he and Lucas discuss this new direction as we know they have.

You're correct also about Luke being to Kylo, what Obi was to Anakin, all be it to a lesser degree, I mean Anakin had all of his limbs burned off and lost everything. But this is manufactured by the bad writing and that unconvincing moment where Luke acted out of character. It all just adds up to the movie going the wrong way for many. But even if we accept Lukes actions, he could have roped in Han and Leia for example. He could have held his hands up and admitted his mistake to Kylo which may have gone a long way to bringing him back. He could have done a thousand different things before resorting to running to a hidden Island and disconnecting himself from the force. Kylo was young and lost, Luke should have been the kind of person whom could have resolved this situation, and it could have been fun to see it all unfold.

Ultimately it comes down to whether people enjoyed this movie or not. Those who did are clearly interpreting it in a different manner to those who didn't. This is fine, but it's very clear that this movie has very much split the fan base more than any before it, and damaged the franchise in doing so going on the Solo box office (I haven't seen that yet either as I disliked TLJ so much) TLJ could likely have been done in a manner which pleased more people while being different. And it would have left you not having to justify and interpret so much of what we saw. I like when movies are brave enough to be different, RO did this and worked. But TLJ was different at the expense of established characters etc which it didn't have to be. And the reaction of Disney after it all blanket accusing people who didn't enjoy it of being sexist and racist etc rather than taking the criticism on board probably did just as much damage as the script itself.

 

[xipotec]

I've gone back and forth on the "winging it" approach to writing this trilogy. In general, I think it's a bad idea not to have a basic structure in place for how the whole story should play out. But, I also see the benefit of letting different people push the story in their own direction because it prevents something like the prequels where one person dominates the story and can't see his own flaws in time to fix them.

And for anyone who might want to suggest that the OT was all mapped out and pre-planned, please understand that it wasn't. We all know that Lucas didn't plan to have Leia as Luke's sister when he was writing ESB and having her kiss him like that (and more romance between the two in deleted scenes). In fact, ROTJ went in a TON of different directions - even right up until filming - because there was no actual set plan! And not just due to Lucas changing the ending because he was tired of making SW films. There's a great book titled, "The Making of Star Wars: The Return of the Jedi" that partly chronicles some of this.

But you don't even have to read the book (though it'd be worth it). There's an article that details some parts from the book, including how much "winging it" was going on during the writing and production of ROTJ. I'm begging any critics of the ST for making things up as they go to please read this. Please!! You'll see that what's happening with the ST is no less cohesive or well-planned than what was happening more than 35 years ago with the OT. Here's the link:

https://io9.gizmodo.com/10-things-you-probably-didnt-know-about-star-wars-ret-1383276948/1388764126

Lucas was "winging it" too. Key storylines and plots were created ,and changed, right up until filming and editing. If it's a problem now with the ST, why don't people think it was a problem back in the 80's when Lucas was making **** up as he went? Sure, he was the same dude writing all three parts (I get that), but that doesn't change the fact that there was no set plan in how the story would unfold and end. He was inventing so much of the story between films, and dramatically changing key plot elements as he went. How is that so different?

I know GL winged it. But Disney should NOT have. Not because the story came out at better or worse (I like ST) just because I think the story should be mapped out....at least the basic structure. Granted you can get some real good additions to the story with a fresh perspective, but having no clear direction now a days is a bad idea. KK doesn’t have one I am sure, but someone should be in charge to steer the ship in a general direction.


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

 

[Darth Snoopy]

Really good conversation to read in the last few pages.

 

[Khev]

I probably agree with more of that than you'd expect. And I appreciate the response. It's hard not to ask "loaded" questions seeing as so much of this is based on personal opinions and beliefs, your views also so it should be a fair expectation to expect a serious answer from those who have demonstrated a willing to do so. It wasn't my intention to trap anybody with that question. I'm genuinely trying to understand how people thought of Luke at the end of ROTJ as turning into the pessimistic hermit we saw in TLJ. I am a fan of the prequels. And while Anakins performance has grown on me in recent years (see this video for some of the reasons... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bL_PDgczHJc ) I did for many years consider Hayden the weak link. I'll also fully admit that much of the dialogue is not of a high standard. They are far from perfect as movies, in fact in many ways they could be much better but ultimately they are enjoyable to me and do fit in with the Star Wars universe. Although by the time he killed his wife, he arguably wasn't Anakin any longer, he was Vader. At the very least he was very confused and not fully in control of himself so it makes sense. Although I never did quite figure out why she actually died other than continuity....


I probably should have left out the word casually, it makes light of the situation and took your response in a wildly different direction focusing on that misused word in my question. I retract it.

Okay if you're really serious about having a respectful and open dialogue about the movie then I'm always game, regardless of whether anyone shares my opinions or not. Your comments in the quotes above definitely suggest that you are so here goes.

You asked before if I really think that TLJ Luke connects to the Luke that we saw in ROTJ.

And to that I genuinely say yes he absolutely does. Remember how we all became familiar with the characters of the OT and then the Saga went backwards and gave us the PT? Imagine if it did that but with the ST coming first and then the OT. I think that a lot of people would have had a much easier time linking TLJ Luke with OT Luke if the trilogies were told in reverse order (like OT then PT.) People would see him defying his master in ESB, rushing into battles (both hallucinatory and real), and then later pulling Vader moves by choking the Gamorrean Guards and then finally absolutely losing it and going into a full murder trance as he wailed on Vader at the end of ROTJ. I think each of those sequences would have been great "aha, now I see where that supposedly legendary character from TLJ gets his sometimes murderous impulses." I think a lot of people have simply been having a harder time seeing the connections because the OT came first and they've had decades to formulate their own embedded head-canon as to what Luke would have become.

"Ah but Khev his mistakes and shortcomings in the OT were overcome, he grew and moved past them." And to that I say "yes he did, and TLJ proves it." Because remember at the end of ROTJ when Vader was down for the count, totally unarmed (literally) and pitiful, and Luke was standing over him, breathing hard with a look of murder on his face, ready to move in for the kill when...the Emperor ****ed it all up by his stupid evil laugh. That allowed Luke to snap out of his trance and actually look at what he was about to do. Hearing Palpatine cackling behind him, saying "good, good..." made him go "wait a minute if that evil bastard is happy maybe I should rethink this" which of course he did and was able to come to the realization that he was at the precipice of possibly going over to the Dark Side for good. He refused and obviously emerged victorious, in both body and deed.

Now fast forward to TLJ. He's got the future destroyer of the galaxy right in front of him, as pitiful and helpless as Vader was and Luke is consumed with the knowledge of all the horrors that are to come. As he stated in the film he instinctually ignited his saber BUT, just like in ROTJ he was able to once again relent however this time *without* having to hear the obnoxious cackling of supreme evil reminding him of his moral compass. Also *without* Yoda or Obi-Wan's ghost showing up to say "No!" Remember in both TLJ and AOTC Yoda and Qui-Gon's ghosts made their presence known when Luke/Anakin were at major turning points. Luke when he was about to burn the tree and give up on Rey, and Anakin when he was about to go ballistic against the Sand People. Anakin ignored Qui-Gon's "Anakin nooooo!" and became a mass murderer.

TLJ Luke on the other hand was so not in danger of actually following through with his homicidal impulse that neither Yoda nor Obi-Wan showed up to stop him from killing young Ben. The reason? Because they knew that there was no danger in him actually doing it. Which shows a much more mature and in control Luke than who we saw at the end of ROTJ.

"But why would he have even had the thought in the first place? That wasn't very heroic." Well the reason he had the thought was because he's Luke! Luke was never the goody two-shoes that Obi-Wan was. Remember, when Obi-Wan needed to get past random Stormtroopers he'd control their minds or trick them into thinking they heard a random sound. But imagine if in TPM or AOTC there was a scene where Ewan McGregor had to enter a room and some guards got in his way and he literally started crushing their throats with his mind like Vader! It would have felt so wrong and inappropriate for the character. But we *never* thought that when Luke choked the Gamorrean Guards. Because Luke has always been a little bit off-kilter and susceptible to Dark Side temptation, just like his father. Being older didn't suddenly turn him into Old Ben, no he simply became "Old Luke." A wiser, more skilled and mature Luke to be sure, but still Luke and not Ben or Yoda.

 

[ajp4mgs]

I probably should have left out the word casually, it makes light of the situation and took your response in a wildly different direction focusing on that misused word in my question. I retract it. But while I agree with you entirely that Luke has always been very impulsive and emotional. Part of what we saw in the OT is him starting to realise that himself and being able to control it more. I have no doubt that he still would have had emotional outbursts as he aged, nobody is perfect. But planing to kill your nephew whom technically hasn't done anything wrong at that point, even going so far as igniting his saber as he sleeps is an extreme, surely you'll concede that? It just doesn't seem fitting with Luke's character, it does him a disservice even if he ultimately didn't act on it. The movie made little attempt to show that Luke even tried to help Kylo first. Something we'd probably all expect Luke to do.

Yes, the thought of killing his nephew in his sleep is extreme. But I still object to the characterization of "planning" to kill him. I see it as more impulsive, and along the lines of reactionary, rather than a deliberate plan. Luke walked into Ben's hut to probe his thoughts. As he explains in the film, he had sensed signs of darkness in Ben during his training. It was a concern that had been building. So, he sought a sleeping Ben in order to reach out with the Force to gain a clearer sense for what type of darkness lied within his nephew. What he found was much more than he expected or feared. Igniting the saber was an impulsive reaction to how far Ben's corruption had already gone - and all under Luke's nose! That would be more unsettling to Luke than I can properly imagine, yet the murderous thought was still only a fleeting consideration.

What Luke saw was glimpses of not only what Ben had already become, but more importantly, what he would go on to do in the future. You can analogize it to the oft-repeated philosophical question of whether one of Hitler's family members, if given a chance to go back in time, would have killed him before he could grow up to wreak havoc. Luke's Force abilities allowed him to see enough of Kylo's future to at least make him consider that same sort of scenario. But he felt ashamed that he'd even ignited the saber. The problem is that Ben saw it, and realized what Luke must have discovered about his embracing of the Dark Side. Ben's facade had been lifted; Luke had already seen Kylo Ren. At that very moment, the dynamic between the two changed forever.

So, yes, it was an extreme consideration. But it was in reaction to an extreme problem (a new Vader). Luke had been an extreme character in the OT. When he stood before Jabba in ROTJ - and the plan to that point had resulted in Han, Chewie, and Leia all imprisoned - Luke resorted to Force-pulling a blaster to fire upon Jabba when mind tricks wouldn't work. That was a great example of Luke's impulsiveness, and his misguided (and arguably extreme) solutions. What was he thinking!? The palace was full of Jabba loyalists . . . and most of them armed. Even if his blaster shot had connected, what then? Luke's answers, like it or not, sometimes came down to literally killing the problem. Death Star? Kill it. Vader in the cave? Kill him. Jabba not listening to reason? Kill him. Vader threatens Leia? Kill him. Luke is not a traditional Jedi, and never has been. He's guided by emotion, and often prone to impulse - even if extreme. Age and wisdom doesn't always temper that; sometimes you just fall back to your nature.

Luke's exile in the OT is a product of failure. I don't see it as changing his character to have him second-guess himself so much after what he perceives to be failing the Jedi, his family, and even the galaxy. He stayed optimistic in his quest to redeem Vader, but Anakin's turn hadn't been Luke's failure. I don't think OT Luke ever perceived himself as having let everybody down in a major way. So, he had no cause to take the steps he did in the ST. I don't view TLJ's version of Luke as a betrayal of his OT character; just an extension of it given radically different circumstances. But I know you disagree . . . and that's perfectly fine with me. Just simply differing interpretations.

Ultimately it comes down to whether people enjoyed this movie or not. Those who did are clearly interpreting it in a different manner to those who didn't. This is fine, but it's very clear that this movie has very much split the fan base more than any before it, and damaged the franchise in doing so going on the Solo box office (I haven't seen that yet either as I disliked TLJ so much) TLJ could likely have been done in a manner which pleased more people while being different. And it would have left you not having to justify and interpret so much of what we saw. I like when movies are brave enough to be different, RO did this and worked. But TLJ was different at the expense of established characters etc which it didn't have to be. And the reaction of Disney after it all blanket accusing people who didn't enjoy it of being sexist and racist etc rather than taking the criticism on board probably did just as much damage as the script itself.

One area that you and I agree on completely is the way people at LFL/Disney have handled criticism from the fans. It's been horrible! As far as I'm concerned, a clear way to demonstrate intellectual cowardice (and obnoxious arrogance) is to dismiss opposing points of view by marginalizing and labeling those who disagree with you. That's what many of the LFL/Disney mouthpieces have been doing; and I find it to be truly pathetic!

Python, I thank you for your great response post. I enjoyed reading it, and I thoroughly appreciate it. There's more that I'd like to address from it, but this reply has already been long-winded enough. You and I do indeed have dramatically different interpretations of TLJ, but that doesn't keep me from recognizing that you're a great Star Wars fan. These conversations are more enjoyable for me when there are differing opinions anyway (so long as the opinions are not dismissive or void of any substance). It's not my goal to change your mind; I just want to present my point of view in contrast to yours (and others). Thank you again for allowing me to do so, and for your keeping an open mind. Much appreciated.

 

[Prime Clone]

The guy who was willing to die to redeem mass murderer Darth Vader, the Dark Lord of the Sith. He didn't even think about it first. His first reaction was to murder his sister's son. RJ's compulsion to subvert expectations is what that was.

Shocking, yes. Inconceivable, no. It was an instinctive reaction that he instantly regretted - which is what many critics seem to gloss over.

Also, he was seeking to prevent future atrocities. With Vader, what was done was done.

I think a lot of people have simply been having a harder time seeing the connections because the OT came first

Same goes for some of the elements of the PT people have a problem with. Anakin building Threepio seems weird if you watch the OT first, but is totally fine if the episodes are viewed in sequential order.

Plus, this was a nice touch (though it works better if you watch the OT first!)

 

[Otomofan]

Why did Luke have his robot hand exposed all the time? The technology existed back in Empire for a lifelike flesh hand that even had pain receptors.

So even in flashbacks to the nephew murdering, Luke is running around with a naked robot hand.

What in the world is the reasoning behind this? To remind the audience of something we've known for damn near 40 years?

I just chalk it up to the general laziness of the filmmakers, as usual. They don't care about continuity nearly as much as any of us. They just wanted to show off the stupid CGI robot hand as much as they could, simply cause "they can."

 

[Prime Clone]

Since I can rationalise almost anything that appears in SW, I put it down to his wanting a constant reminder of what he could become if he strayed to the dark side. Maybe after having the flesh singed at the Pit of Carkoon he decided to just rip it all off.

You might be surprised how many of these things are actually deliberate choices rather than laziness. Yes, even with Lucas and the PT. It's a shame we rarely get to hear the filmmaker's rationale for some things.

 

[YoNoSe]

It’s definitely deliberate when it involves extea time/expense animating a robotic hand.

I never gave it much thought beyond the fact that replacing the skin would be vanity and Luke is beyond it.

 

[xipotec]

It’s definitely deliberate when it involves extea time/expense animating a robotic hand.

I never gave it much thought beyond the fact that replacing the skin would be vanity and Luke is beyond it.

The movie going general public are mot like us....

They need to be reminded all the time.


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

 

[ajp4mgs]

Same goes for some of the elements of the PT people have a problem with. Anakin building Threepio seems weird if you watch the OT first, but is totally fine if the episodes are viewed in sequential order.

Plus, this was a nice touch (though it works better if you watch the OT first!)

Well, okay then; I guess I should start embracing it now.

I've already gone ahead and changed some dialogue that can be re-dubbed when Disney puts out the next ESB Special Edition - to remind the audience that Anakin built C-3PO (and wouldn't have forgotten him):

 

[monkeyjedi]

Ok...

The one thing that keeps bugging me, almost more than anything else, and never seems to get mentioned in any of the rants anywhere for/against "The Last Jedi" is this...

Are we going to find out how Luke's lightsaber took 38 years to get from Bespin to Maz Kanata's secret dungeon or not????

 

[Khev]

Yeah Luke's wink to 3PO in TLJ links their history together in the OT but there's nothing in the OT that ever suggests that Vader had a history with the same droid, quite the opposite in fact.

 

[jye4ever]

Ok...

The one thing that keeps bugging me, almost more than anything else, and never seems to get mentioned in any of the rants anywhere for/against "The Last Jedi" is this...

Are we going to find out how Luke's lightsaber took 38 years to get from Bespin to Maz Kanata's secret dungeon or not????

The answer starts with an L and ends with an O.