Star Wars Episode VIII: The Last Jedi

[TordelBack]

Not dismissing your opinion, or saying your points are invalid, but I really think that once they decided to have the Big Three in it again,  I can't see how else it could have gone.

Either Han and Leia lived happily ever after, with a representative democracy and roguish Jedi kids,  or they didn't.
Either Luke successfully trained a new generation of balanced Jedi with none of the narrow monkish dogma and warlike tendencies of Yoda's gang, or he didn't.
If either of the former happened,  the new movies had to destroy all that to have any stakes at all.
If the latter,  then there was no happy ending.

The sequel trilogy chose a middle ground. The only other option was to move forward 50 or 100 years and let the old guard die in the beds off screen. And those films would never have been made,  because Disney wouldnt have taken the risk.

And while I'd rather they weren't involved at all,  I still don't see how Han, Leia and Luke's characters (and fates) are inconsistent with their established characters. [spoiler]In particular everything about Luke rang painfully true,  right down to that single petulant whine to Uncle Yoda. [/spoiler]

Spoilers added at TB request.

[SIP]

But I think that's only true where you are using the characters from that angle. Han Solo went back to his old smuggling ways, great, he could have dipped in and out of an adventure and been featured.....without what happened to him. Don't make him kylo's dad......he's then just "special guest star". We have a bit of fun, catch up with old Han, then han goes back to his life. Luke can feature in exactly the same way. Nothing dictates that he "trained a new generation of jedi" post return of the jedi. That's the way they chose to go in the film.  He could have just easily been living a quiet life and similarly been a character in the film who was involved and not pivotal.

They chose to write these characters in to the story in the negative way that they did. These characters are not significant to the overall story, we dont need them, the points of drama that they create, suchas han's death can easily be substituted. These are films about Rey and Kylo. They could so easily have been written in as fun sideline characters without the need for the misery , failure and death that was heaped upon them.

I would have enjoyed that. I do not enjoy the idea forced upon me that my heroes became miserable old failures, then swiftly despatched.  They deserved better than that, and so did I.

[SIP]

If it had gone that way......I'd be sitting here saying "that was good fun".....like I'd expect from a star wars film.

Instead I sit here thinking "what a messy and mostly boring and unimaginitive exercise in misery and depression that was".

That was missing the spirit of Star wars completely and i'm entirely serious when I say that I wish it didn't exist. I'm desperately hoping that JJ can somehow drag something out of the bag with episode 9 that reverses some of the tragic misrepresentation of the character of luke skywalker that the last jedi produced. I just can't understand how anyone could misread a character that badly.

When there are hour long YouTube montages of Mark Hamill saying exactly that......you know you've gone completely wrong.

[Jim_Campbell]

They deserved better than that, and so did I.

The sense of self-entitlement dripping from your posts is palpable. There were some movies you enjoyed when you were a kid. Then someone made some follow-up movies when you were a grown-up that you didn't like.

No one came round your house and took away your DVDs, no one strapped you into an ECT machine and shocked your childhood memories out of you. What actually happened was you saw some movies you didn't like. Your "paedophile Lando" comment suggests you should probably get a bit of perspective here.

[DrRocka]

D'you know I'm still waiting for the immortal words "Disney ruined my childhood"

[Professor Bear]

Not dismissing your opinion, or saying your points are invalid, but I really think that once they decided to have the Big Three in it again,  I can't see how else it could have gone.

Either Han and Leia lived happily ever after, with a representative democracy and roguish Jedi kids,  or they didn't.

There are literally dozens of stories that could have been told about these characters that weren't about their lives becoming abject failures or plots that required galaxy-threatening stakes, and Disney chose to remake A New Hope, so it's not like they can really claim they were averse to going down a path of least resistance.
That eldsters can't be the stars of franchises, only mentors or living examples of the follies of getting stuck in your ways, is arguably just as limited a lens for storytelling as dashing rogues marrying princesses and living happily ever after.  Nothing about these stories was inevitable or set in stone.

[SIP]

They deserved better than that, and so did I.

The sense of self-entitlement dripping from your posts is palpable. There were some movies you enjoyed when you were a kid. Then someone made some follow-up movies when you were a grown-up that you didn't like.

No one came round your house and took away your DVDs, no one strapped you into an ECT machine and shocked your childhood memories out of you. What actually happened was you saw some movies you didn't like. Your "paedophile Lando" comment suggests you should probably get a bit of perspective here.

I have perspective Jim.....I'm discussing a film on a website. I've had far bigger issues to deal with this weekend than a stupid film. I'm discussing here as a form of escapism, just as I used to enjoy these films as escapism.

In no way does me discussing my disappointment in the direction taken with something that has been a significant part of my life classify me as "self entitled". I'm sure you can defend the film if you wish without the need for personal criticism?

And clearly the Lando comment was a sarcastic shot fired due to the degradation of the other original trilogy characters in the new films. Please feel free to take it as such.

[Jim_Campbell]

In no way does me discussing my disappointment in the direction taken with something that has been a significant part of my life classify me as "self entitled". I'm sure you can defend the film if you wish without the need for personal criticism?

Talking about what you "deserve" is the text-book definition of self-entitlement. The only thing you "deserved" was to be entertained for two and a bit hours in return for the ticket price you paid. Given that you stated well in advance that you didn't expect to enjoy the film, you could have saved yourself the money.

And I'm not defending the film — I thought it was OK when I saw it, but the more distance I get from it, the less I like it. Given that I didn't like TFA much either, I'm not sure I'll bother with IX, and I'm OK with that.

[Big_Dave]

There are literally dozens of stories that could have been told about these characters that weren't about their lives becoming abject failures or plots that required galaxy-threatening stakes

star wars = ww2 / sequels = cold war
ewoks (communists) go from ally to enemy

rebels use empire science
to build thousands of bigger death stars

ewok stalin builds bigger catapults
& log traps 2 destroy them   threads/

[SIP]

It's well recorded on this notice board that I'd been looking forward to the film for 2 years......I did not think I wouldn't enjoy it before I went in to the cinema. The only time I started to feel anxious about the film was when Mark Hamill's well documented issues started to hit the Internet.  If luke skywalker himself thinks you've completely missed the essence of his character, then there is likely a problem.

It was only about a halfway through the film did I realise that I wasn't enjoying it at all.

I'm sort of not fine with it......I'm a complete star wars geek. I'm heavily invested in star wars, always have been....so I'm surely allowed to voice my extreme disappointment in something I've wanted to watch for 35 years? Star wars isn't a casual thing for me, it's been a fundamental part of my life since I was 4. So this stung a bit.

[TordelBack]

And I'm not taking that away from you at all, I don't think you're acting entitled, and I get where you're coming from. I was completely disgusted by the end of Revenge of the Sith, to the point that it put me off Star Wars completely for years, and I had been (and remain) a Prequel Apologist.

However, I cannot really imagine a "regular" Star Wars episode without a galaxy-scale threat (unless we're talking about TPM , of course...  ), never mind a new trilogy, and I cannot imagine any circumstances where Han, Luke and Leia wouldn't get involved in confronting that, until they were dead.  A film where Han turned his back on the plight of his friends/family would be a real betrayal of that character's journey.  And one where Luke did likewise... well, wasn't that many people's problem with this one?

Leave 'em out of it, or feature them and kill 'em.  Those were the only choices I can imagine.  I wish it had been the former, but then we wouldn't have had any films at all (yet) and I really enjoyed the two we got.

[TordelBack]

Picking up on Bear's solid points, I do agree that nothing was set in stone - but the overall direction taken by Disney was to re-use the 'good bits' of Star Wars (Rebels, Empire, likeable trainee Jedi on a hero's journey, wise but flawed mentors, the lure of the Dark Side, family tragedy and redemption) that we spent more than a decade bemoaning the absence of.  The destruction of the peace our heroes had won had to happen - it was only a question of whether it was decades or centuries later.  Financial sense won out over artistic creativity, and we got to watch our childhood heroes being broken: but their dreams reborn.

Incidentally, I am a late convert.  This is me the day after the Disney buy-out news:

As a fanboy myself, the most amusing thing about all this is how Star Wars fandom is going to deal with not having Lucas as a whipping boy any more.  Oh this is going to make those debates about his 'disregard for canon' seem as utterly trivial as they always were.

If anyone involved has any sense they'll chuck those legendary 'treatments' in the bin, hire Hamill for a force-ghost appearance only, skip ahead 200 years and tell a whole new story in the old setting.  Sadly the laws of the business mean that the next film will be wall-to-wall with reprises and heavy-handed knowing homages to the previous 6, with some Johnny Depp thrown in for luck. 

Obviously the prophecy wasn't clear, and Depp ended up in the Harry Potter Prequels instead.  Looks like 88.8% accuracy wasn't good enough.

[JOE SOAP]

I just can't understand how anyone could misread a character that badly.

When there are hour long YouTube montages of Mark Hamill saying exactly that......you know you've gone completely wrong.

Apart from a few quotes of him relating his initial reaction to reading the script, a lot of the content in those videos doesn't directly relate to The Last Jedi –half the time he's talking about The Force Awakens or something else– and are mostly a mash-up of edited facial reactions and him basically repeating statements about the film being not what you'd expect.

If luke skywalker himself thinks you've completely missed the essence of his character, then there is likely a problem.

But he had countered even his own initial misgivings.

"I've had trouble accepting what he saw for Luke, but again, I have to say, having seen the movie, I was wrong," – Mark Hamill, Dec 13, 2017

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OONALPqf3X8

[SIP]

No Joe, can't agree with you there, he has made a multitude of comments, mostly during the publicity TV and press interviews for the Last Jedi. He has been quite verbose in detailing that this is not the Luke Skywalker he knows, to the point that he was in constant disagreement with the director on set and that he eventually decided that he was actually playing a completely different character, who he referred to as "jake" Skywalker.

There are literally HOURS of him talking like this on every chat show, red carpet and press junket that he appeared at. The same negative comments over and over.

His negative commenting got to such a prolific level that I suspect, and it's pure speculation, but Disney must have given him a slap on the wrist. It would surely have been a contractual issue for Hamill to persist in his obvious negative attitude to the film, it's missteps with his character and his feeling that it was all only concerned with profiteering.

As I say, speculation.....but wouldn't seem like good business practice for Disney to let one of their employees continue to take shots at their upcoming product.

[TordelBack]

Well I adore Mark Hamill,  but even if his misgivings were as stated (and that wasn't my reading at all)  he is just the guy who played Luke in the movies, not Luke himself, or even the guys who wrote the lines. I can see why you might be shocked to see your old hero character from 30 years ago transformed to a reluctant mentor role,  or indeed momentarily giving in to fear - a scene he filmed three different ways, remember. But that's why one goal of fiction is character development, not character stasis: because it's interesting, and maybe surprising. Was Luke really only tempted by the Dark Side, and a violent solution, twice in his whole life?

Can I be curious,  and ask SIP what specifically he would have liked to see Luke do in the film?

EDIT: thanks for the spoiler tags,  Bolt!