Star Wars Episode VIII: The Last Jedi

[The Enigmatic Dr X]

Similarly I was never thinking there was any mystery to Snoke. He's the chief bad guy, leader of the First Order.

By the time the original trilogy ended, if you go only what is in the films, we knew Absolutely fuck all about the back stories of the Emperor, Boba Fett, Yoda, or Chewbacca.

This misses the point for me, and highlights the sloppy writing here.

We don't need background. We need motivation and purpose. We knew the Emperor wanted to crush the rebellion and turn Luke. We know Boba Fett wanted to get Hans's bounty. We know Yoda was the last Jedi and reluctantly trained Luje. We know Chewie was loyal to Han.

How? As there were interactions to give this info over.

Note, too, that these characters affected the main characters. These minor characters were there for a reason, to develop plot and character development of the main cast.

Snoke? We're just to understand he's the bad guy. As you say, we know he's bad so why do we need to get any info?

Show, not tell, that's why. There is a development-critical relationship between Snoje and Ben Kenobi (I can't remember his bad guy name!). But it's off screen and done in a few sentences. That's okay for minor characters, but not good enough if you want pay off from Snoke 's demise.

[SIP]

Between the Kennedy and Gunn situations you do have to wonder where it will all end when the vilest shits on the internet seem to influence billion-dollar decisions. Imagine a world where Shapiro and Cernovitch (a man who probably belongs on a D Wing somewhere) are kingmakers of pop culture.

Internet ranters aside, I think it's fair to say that most people would fear for their job if they lost as much money for the shareholders as Kathleen Kennedy has this last 12 months.

[Colin YNWA]

I'm certainly no expert on such matters but I saw this from Screen Rant

If Kennedy wants to leave on her own accord, that's her prerogative, but it would be surprising if she was shown the door after overseeing three movies that collectively earned more than $4 billion globally.

Though there are of course rumours that they are looking to get her out as well.

Disney as a whole shares seem to have stagnated over the last couple of years but that's across a global company that has so many more strands than just Star Wars. I think assigning that to one person who has made a shed load of money for the company is possibly a sympton of your anger at the Star Wars franchise at the moment?

That said what THE HELL AM I DOING defending Disney executives!.... when did that start to happen???

[JOE SOAP]

Internet ranters aside, I think it's fair to say that most people would fear for their job if they lost as much money for the shareholders as Kathleen Kennedy has this last 12 months.

Not helped by shareholders expecting regular yearly releases that need to earn almost billion+ while Disney throws more billions into a massive Star Wars theme park that has put the expenditure on the franchise into debt. This is a corporation exploiting a franchise.

[TordelBack]

Kennedy lost them some dosh on Solo, a (good) movie that came out 6 months after the previous billion-dollar sequel on her watch, and 18 months after the billion-dollar spinoff before that. Far from a catalogue of failure!

A considerable proportion of online hatred directed against her is specifically focused on her gender, as it is on the new movies' characters. That alone is enough for me to raise an eyebrow over her supposed shortcomings.

[Professor Bear]

Kennedy has overall made a boatload of cash for Disney, flops are part and parcel of the movie biz and Solo will eventually make its money back and then some, but we're not talking about rational or good faith actors at this stage, we're talking about an incel campaign against women and non-whites and Disney is a brand-conscious entity that knows its way around negative PR.  The fear is that if Disney thinks it's in its interest to cut her loose to appease Nazis, it will.
LOL just realised Disney has form with Nazis, too.  Funny how things come back around.

Similarly I was never thinking there was any mystery to Snoke. He's the chief bad guy, leader of the First Order.

By the time the original trilogy ended, if you go only what is in the films, we knew Absolutely fuck all about the back stories of the Emperor, Boba Fett, Yoda, or Chewbacca.

This misses the point for me, and highlights the sloppy writing here.

Yeah, I don't understand why people seem to be struggling with the idea that someone might ask "where did Snoke come from?" in good faith, as it's a perfectly legitimate question.
The Emperor in the OT is a spurious example of why Snoke supposedly works because there wasn't any backstory to the Star Wars universe circa the OT beyond what characters dropped in dialogue here and there (some of which was open to interpretation, as it turned out), but circa episodes 7 and 8, there's four decades of backstory and replicating what was done in the OT - which Last Jedi did again and again and again - doesn't work because there just isn't the elbow room to jam in an ancient and incredibly powerful Sith lord that nobody has ever seen or heard of across 10 films and over a hundred episodes of confirmed-canon cartoons which feature - among other scenes - the Emperor specifically sniffing out powerful Sith to destroy, and Yoda visiting the Sith homeworld to discover that there definately isn't any other Sith but the ones we know of already.
You can argue that the movies shouldn't have to be beholden to some cartoon from 10 years ago, but they are, and this is by the makers' deliberate design.  The Sequels just don't exist in the vacuum that the OT did.

Anyway, if they'd said "yep, he's Plagius" that would have been the end of it: a Sith already mentioned in canon, who taught the Emperor how to shield himself from other Force users, and has a reason to stay out of sight between episodes 1-6.  Can't use him, though, because we've got to keep doing our tiresome rug-pulls.

[TordelBack]

Anyway, if they'd said "yep, he's Plagius" that would have been the end of it: a Sith already mentioned in canon, who taught the Emperor how to shield himself from other Force users, and has a reason to stay out of sight between episodes 1-6. 

Or better yet, Ezra Bridger.

I'm in two minds about Snoke. Another shadowy Sith emperor in TFA always seemed a mistake to me, so the idea that he was an irrelevance who existed only as a stepping stone, and an excuse for a really nifty surprise, doesn't bother me too much. I also think there's time to fill in his back story yet.

But I do take the point that we are in a different position that we were in the OT, and there is a need to explain how we got from there to here for his character to be remotely satisfying.

[Steve Green]

Kennedy lost them some dosh on Solo, a (good) movie that came out 6 months after the previous billion-dollar sequel on her watch, and 18 months after the billion-dollar spinoff before that. Far from a catalogue of failure!

A considerable proportion of online hatred directed against her is specifically focused on her gender, as it is on the new movies' characters. That alone is enough for me to raise an eyebrow over her supposed shortcomings.

True but you could also point out the number of directors that have been sacked/sidelined/replaced and the extra money spent on reshoots.

Maybe it was for the better, but it seems quite a high ratio of directors being replaced.

[TordelBack]

Maybe it was for the better, but it seems quite a high ratio of directors being replaced.

This is very true. But also I suspect it's quite a complex set of factors and players there.

[Professor Bear]

Firing/replacing directors and arranging necessary reshoots to improve the film is literally her job.

[SIP]

I'm not buying that it's all just Internet hatred directed at Kathleen Kennedy.  From my point of view she has shown an apathy towards star wars, produced inferior "product", dealt with the audience poorly, had some very turbulent productions, taken director replacement and re-shooting to impressive levels, and has seen the sales of Star wars merchandising fall. It's not just the films, star wars related income has fallen.

I won't miss her, I know some of you have enjoyed what Lucasfilm have done since Lucas departure, but on the whole for me it's been mostly disappointing or just plain awful.

More than happy for anyone else to take over, regardless of age, sexuality, gender, race or religion.....just as long as they are actually at least interested in Star wars.

[Steve Green]

Firing/replacing directors and arranging necessary reshoots to improve the film is literally her job.

Does it not call into question your judgement about hiring them in the first place though?

It's not just Lord and Miller and Edwards, it's also Trevorrow and Trank.

To an outsider, that seems like quite a lot.

[Professor Bear]

Or it looks like a difficult and thankless job.

Understand, I'm no Kennedy Stan - quite the opposite, as I've been terribly disappointed in almost everything to come out of the Disney acquisition, and the shutting down of Lucasarts given its critical reputation, the turnover of videogames, and their importance in marketing synergy for cinematic universe franchises and expanded universe properties like SW in particular seems like a financially irresponsible decision at best - but there's a disparity between the response to Kennedy's gamekeeping a notoriously temperamental franchise and its dreadful fanbase and other film executives such as Spielberg's handling of the increasingly-terrible Jurassic Park franchise, Kevin Feige's handling of creatives at Marvel Studios, and even Harvey Weinstein's handling of all those actresses he raped.  In general, heterococks seem to be getting a lot more leeway than the lady type, especially given the scale of the job she was given in turning an 8 billion dollar investment profitable in less than 5 years.  It is not a small task and anyone would have trouble wrangling it all, much as Lucas himself did even before theme parks and a once-yearly movie slate had to factor into things.

[Steve Green]

I have no real opinion either way, just pointing out how it might appear.

I'm increasingly bored of most things pop culture since it seems impossible to watch something without it being spoiled to death/come with increasing amounts of baggage.

5 years ago I would have been right down the cinema to watch Incredibles 2... now - I really can't be arsed.

Didn't mind the retread of TFA, didn't hate or love TLJ, never watched any of the TV stuff and didn't watch Solo.

Only recently caught up with the Marvel stuff (Infinity War aside), and didn't bother with WW or JL.

Seems half the time I'm watching something feels like out of obligation.

[SIP]

I similarly share a lot of that apathy now......the Internet seems intent on killing the joy in most things. And yes, I do appreciate the irony that I too am a part of that by discussing this here.

As for Kennedy, nobody will ever convince me that giving a film so important to get right as "The Last Jedi" to Rian Johnson, seemingly leaving him with free reign to do whatever he liked, with a constant background nagging murmur from its main star, was  ever a good decision. It feels like someone who just couldn't care less about the quality of the output.

And I don't agree with the opinion that star wars fans are a toxic bunch, I don't think that could be further from the truth. There's just a bunch of unpleasant vocal extreme fans who are making a lot of noise....they are a part of every fan following, including this one.