Star Wars Episode VIII - The Last Jedi *spoilers from Post 2857*

david75

Hector Savage wrote: »

OK LOTS bought!
Was gonna get it for the kindle but got the proper book version - its always better !

ah Brillo!! It’s a deadly story. Vader and Palps kicking ass

Falthyron

Tony EH wrote: »

In fact, one of my criticisms of Star Wars, as a whole, is its reliance on nostalgia as a selling point. It was, in part, responsible for wrecking the prequels and the sequels hinge far too much on it as well.

I've said repeatedly that I want to see new stories and new characters. The Star Wars universe has to potential to be vast, but we keep getting the same family drama all the time.

This. This is precisely the point I have been making for years. When a franchise needs to lean on nostalgia then the franchise has lost its meaning. The OT was (and still is) considered to be an excellent example of trailblazing. It merged fantasy and sci-fi, it had spectacular special effects (for its time), iconic music that is easily recognisable now, it was the beginning of a career for one of the most famous faces in the film industry, and it can be considered to be one of the first and biggest 'blockbusters'.

To what end has TFA or TLJ changed or revolutionised film-making or the franchise of Star Wars? Is there something that stands out as particularly groundbreaking?

Some might say that the prequels weren't particularly groundbreaking, but then they did push boundaries in some areas. Clones was the first entirely digital film (iirc), ILM pushed the limits with CGI across all three films, the music of the prequels is certainly up there with some of the best, particularly Duel of the Fates and Across the Stars, and the worlds that we visited were a lot more diverse and interesting. Most of all though, they had their own stories to tell with limited call back to the OT. Obi-Wan and Yoda were the only connections, but they weren't the main characters, and they were very different characters to how we know them in the OT.

There was a fascination with learning more about Darth Maul (see the subsequent TV shows), but can anyone here tell me why we should get a Rose Tico centred episode or series of episodes in a TV show? Or Poe? Even Finn would be a stretch, but then again his backstory is pretty poor as it would just feature him in Stormtrooper training for his entire life. Not exactly riveting stuff.

And no, I shouldn't have to read books/comics to want to learn more about a character. When I saw Qui-Gon Jinn in TPM, I left the cinema wanting to know more about this wise Jedi who was willing to defy the council, how he met Obi-Wan, and (later) what his relationship was like with Dooku (as a padawan and as a Jedi Knight after training). I can't really think of anyone in the new franchise I have the same questions. Kylo, maybe? Snoke definitely, but that has been axed already.

I suppose, what I am trying to say is, nostalgia is not a justification for the creation of a film. "Lets make one, because wouldn't it be cool to see Luke again and have him talk with R2", is not a good enough reason for a film. Particularly Star Wars, which has been so fervently iconic about pushing boundaries and going in a new direction. The new trilogy appears to be plodding along 'trying' to shock us by teasing us with a new direction in trailers and marketing, but really, just providing nods to the older trilogies and keeping it relatively safe. One thing I will applaud Rian for though is smashing Jedi and Empire's arcs into TLJ, therefore denying JJ the chance to reboot Jedi through Episode IX.

david75

The last Jedi didn’t rely on nostalgia at all. I’d go as far as to say the complete lack of nostalgia overall was what’s shocked a lot of fans as it was within the same galaxy but constructed a totally different and new way using storytelling that was never done before in Star Wars.

TFA was a greatest hits mix tape of nostalgia from the ot right up front. It’s hitting you over the head with OT nostalgia (not just a new hope).

TLJ has a few elements from the OT but they’re for the main part very subtle up to almost buried. But for I think one moment (luke and R2) there isn’t anything openly nostalgic about it. And that moment works and feels earned when it could easily have been shoehorned in and obvious. It wasn’t.

Someone said ‘it’s a Rian Johnson film that just happens to be using Star Wars as background scenery.
That’s a bit harsh but it’s almost totally disconnected from the overbearing use of nostalgia we came to expect after TFA

david75

*nostalgia is not a bad thing either. Used well and sparingly it can be brilliant.

Tony EH

david75 wrote: »

The last Jedi didn’t rely on nostalgia at all.

The entire sequel trilogy is reliant on nostalgia David. 'Rogue One' as well.

Disney have yet to produce a film that isn't a slave to it.

Maybe Johnson's promised trilogy will be something completely fresh - but in a familiar universe? With no reference to Skywalkers, R2D2, C3PO, Boba Fett or whatnot.

david75

Been thinking about this a lot.

The last Jedi would have been the better film to open this trilogy with. It makes much more sense as an opener and you could almost do without TFA at all. It’s pretty self contained. And has that open ending for the rebellion story and Rey at least to be a better starting off point for a trilogy rather than a middle act.

What you reckon?

Falthyron

david75 wrote: »

The last Jedi didn’t rely on nostalgia at all. I’d go as far as to say the complete lack of nostalgia overall was what’s shocked a lot of fans as it was within the same galaxy but constructed a totally different and new way using storytelling that was never done before in Star Wars.

TFA was a greatest hits mix tape of nostalgia from the ot right up front. It’s hitting you over the head with OT nostalgia (not just a new hope).

TLJ has a few elements from the OT but they’re for the main part very subtle up to almost buried. But for I think one moment (luke and R2) there isn’t anything openly nostalgic about it. And that moment works and feels earned when it could easily have been shoehorned in and obvious. It wasn’t.

Someone said ‘it’s a Rian Johnson film that just happens to be using Star Wars as background scenery.
That’s a bit harsh but it’s almost totally disconnected from the overbearing use of nostalgia we came to expect after TFA

Incidents of nostalgia in TLJ, from my perspective:

Snoke's Throne Room: "Come girl. See your precious Resistance being destroyed"
Luke and R2, and Leia's message.
Yoda.
Learning Rey's parentage.
The X-Wing under the water.
Luke unwilling to teach Rey (different reasons, fair enough, but still similar to Yoda)
The betrayal by Benicio del Toro (actual betrayal versus Lando, but still)
Crait battle is very similar to Hoth - visually.
Uncertain end for one of the heroes (Han in ESB, Rose in TLJ).

All of these bear a strong resonance to the older films. Now, if you compare Attack of the Clones to TLJ (both being the middle film of either trilogy), TLJ features a lot more 'nostalgia' than AOTC. AOTC is a poor film, but at least it was doing something new. The only real shock to come out of TLJ is the fact that they killed Snoke so soon. And as I said in a previous post, I am glad Rian has combined elements of Empire and Jedi into TLJ, so JJ is now stuck and is forced to come up with a different template.

Tony EH

david75 wrote: »

Been thinking about this a lot.

The last Jedi would have been the better film to open this trilogy with. It makes much more sense as an opener and you could almost do without TFA at all. It’s pretty self contained. And has that open ending for the rebellion story and Rey at least to be a better starting off point for a trilogy rather than a middle act.

What you reckon?

That means eliminating Finn (which would be fine by me) as his "arc" is there simply to give him something to do, with a new (equally poor) character to give him somebody to talk to.

If TLJ is the first in the new trilogy, Finn makes even less sense than he does presently.

Plus, the whole story is a continuation of the events laid down in TFA - even if Johnson did his best to bin a lot of them.

It wouldn't work.

Falthyron

david75 wrote: »

Been thinking about this a lot.

The last Jedi would have been the better film to open this trilogy with. It makes much more sense as an opener and you could almost do without TFA at all. It’s pretty self contained. And has that open ending for the rebellion story and Rey at least to be a better starting off point for a trilogy rather than a middle act.

What you reckon?

I could get on board with this, but there would need to be major changes. I would also prefer to swap out Yoda with Luke. Rey goes on a journey of discovery to find her own answers and place in the world. Instead of tracking down Luke, she tracks down his movements. Where he went after Jedi, what he did, and what that can tell her about who she is and the Force. It culminates with her arriving on Ahch-To, discovering Luke's grave and the Jedi texts, before he appears as a Force Ghost to give her one last piece of information.

Minimal nostalgia, very different to Luke's journey in the OT, and makes Rey less of a natural hero and more of a hero through grit and determination.

david75

Tony EH wrote: »

The entire sequel trilogy is reliant on nostalgia David. 'Rogue One' as well.

Disney have yet to produce a film that isn't a slave to it.

Maybe Johnson's promised trilogy will be something completely fresh - but in a familiar universe? With no reference to Skywalkers, R2D2, C3PO, Boba Fett or whatnot.

Nuts and bolts stuff like stormtroopers and x wings and all that aren’t nostalgia. They’re in universe props that belong in that universe.

Rians new trilogy can’t use any of that if he’s going all the way back. He has to come up with an entirely new design language but one that works. I don’t envy him the task.

david75

Interesting tidbit. Snoke has more screen time in TLJ than the emperor has in the entire OT.

david75

Falthyron wrote: »

Incidents of nostalgia in TLJ, from my perspective:

Snoke's Throne Room: "Come girl. See your precious Resistance being destroyed"
Luke and R2, and Leia's message.
Yoda.
Learning Rey's parentage.
The X-Wing under the water.
Luke unwilling to teach Rey (different reasons, fair enough, but still similar to Yoda)
The betrayal by Benicio del Toro (actual betrayal versus Lando, but still)
Crait battle is very similar to Hoth - visually.
Uncertain end for one of the heroes (Han in ESB, Rose in TLJ).

All of these bear a strong resonance to the older films. Now, if you compare Attack of the Clones to TLJ (both being the middle film of either trilogy), TLJ features a lot more 'nostalgia' than AOTC. AOTC is a poor film, but at least it was doing something new. The only real shock to come out of TLJ is the fact that they killed Snoke so soon. And as I said in a previous post, I am glad Rian has combined elements of Empire and Jedi into TLJ, so JJ is now stuck and is forced to come up with a different template.

None of those things are nostalgic. They’re story beats up to story elements. None of them are bashing you over the head to remind you you’re watching Star Wars you have to love it! TFA did this a lot and it worked sometimes and didn’t other times when it was too much.

Falthyron

david75 wrote: »

None of those things are nostalgic. They’re story beats up to story elements. None of them are bashing you over the head to remind you you’re watching Star Wars you have to love it! TFA did this a lot and it worked sometimes and didn’t other times when it was too much.

When you saw Snoke guide Rey over to see the Resistance fleet being destroyed, you didn't think to yourself: "Hold on a minute... that's very similar to when the Emperor tells Luke to watch the Rebel fleet being destroyed".

Or when you saw the X-Wing under water, you didn't think to yourself: "Oooh, I wonder if Luke will lift it out of the water just like Yoda on Dagobah".

Or when the AT-ATs landed on Crait and started walking towards the Rebe...I mean Resistance base, you didn't think: "Oh, I have definitely seen walkers like these before on a planet that was very white also looking to get inside a base".

Come on... Its like Rian picked the best bits from Empire and Jedi and developed them to fit into his film. It wasn't necessary to show the X-Wing under the water, it was a pointless scene. It wasn't necessary to have all that fire power on Crait. Only one or two transports made it on to the planet. It wasn't necessary to have Rey see the Resistance Fleet being destroyed, he could have berated her over her parents, or taunted her inexperience, or sold her lies about how he is going to personally kill all her friends after he is finished with her.

david75

To be fair I think a lot of people would have been happier had he made TLJ a lot more like empire /ROTJ. Those things are just cleverly used and it’s odd cos I expected the war cry to be its just a remake of empire! I think we all expected that to some degree. Everything you mentioned is in there but what I’m saying is they’re used very subtley and not glaringly obvious GOING for the nostalgia payoff. Each one sets you up to think it’s gonna do that cos it happened in the ot but each time goes totally the other way than expected.

You assume luke is going to lift the x wing. He doesn’t. You assume Snoke is going to kill Or impression Rey. He gets killed. Etc etc

Falthyron

david75 wrote: »

To be fair I think a lot of people would have been happier had he made TLJ a lot more like empire /ROTJ. Those things are just cleverly used and it’s odd cos I expected the war cry to be its just a remake of empire! I think we all e ledger that to some degree. Everything you mentioned is in there but what I’m saying is they’re used very subtley and not glaringly obvious GOING for the nostalgia payoff. Each one sets you up to think it’s gonna do that cos it happened in the ot but each time goes totally the other way than expected.

You assume luke is going to lift the x wing. He doesn’t. You assume Snoke is going to kill Or impression Rey. He gets killed. Etc etc

Just like when the magician pulls something out of his hat, you expect a rabbit, but instead he pulls out a cat. Different, sure, but its still a magic hat trick. I'm tired of seeing different things being pulled out of the magic hat. How about he tries a completely new trick instead?

Mickeroo

I thought all those things but I wouldn't agree they were framed to be nostalgic in the film at all. The film was the opposite of nostalgic for the most part to the point it was one of the main themes of the film imo. Unlike TFA I thought the film did a good job of avoiding being a straight up rehash and relying on nostalgia to sell it.

david75

Falthyron wrote: »

Just like when the magician pulls something out of his hat, you expect a rabbit, but instead he pulls out a cat. Different, sure, but its still a magic hat trick. I'm tired of seeing different things being pulled out of the magic hat. How about he tries a completely new trick instead?

I was talking about this with a mate. JJ back for 9. Do we want him to go full on Star Wars for 9 to close it out or continue the weirder structure that Rians done.
He has a totally blank slate. So you want to see a new magic trick. Is 9 the place for that?
I think he has to go full Star Wars and stick the landing rather than continuing with what Rians done.

I’d say it’s both a blessing and a curse to have such an open field to play in

david75

Mickeroo wrote: »

I thought all those things but I wouldn't agree they were framed to be nostalgic in the film at all. The film was the opposite of nostalgic for the most part to the point it was one of the main themes of the film imo. Unlike TFA I thought the film did a good job of avoiding being a straight up rehash and relying on nostalgia to sell it.

Completely agree.

johnny_ultimate

The embrace of 'nostalgia' across TFA and TLJ could not be more different.

TFA is, for the most part, an effort to directly emulate the feel, tone and even story of A New Hope. It is a nostalgia-fest - a lovingly crafted one at times, and one that very occasionally looks to the past to move its story forward in a new way (mainly through Kylo). But mostly it is an uncritical attempt to make a Star Wars film like they used to.

TLJ is an entirely different beast. It looks to past in order to upset our expectations, to push characters in new directions, and often to enhance the story it is telling (Luke looking at the dual sunset as he fades away is a magnificently cinematic callback that brings a character's story full circle by visually referencing the past in an entirely new context). Johnson actively - and in the Yoda scene, borderline literally - addresses the dangers & risks of blind nostalgia, and that in some ways is the key subtext of the film. With a few minor exceptions, when it nods to the past it does so with purpose and to explicitly draw the viewer's attention to it - even Crait's general resemblance to Howth, for example, is utilised to deliver a cool visual surprise a few minutes later. The way it deals with Rey's parentage, to pick another example, nods to a familiar Star Wars twist in order to deliver an entirely different resolution.

It's one thing not liking how TLJ reflects or confronts Star Wars past. But I don't think the suggestion that it is lazily reliant on nostalgia is in any way, shape or form borne out through the film itself.

Falthyron

Mickeroo wrote: »

I thought all those things but I wouldn't agree they were framed to be nostalgic in the film at all. The film was the opposite of nostalgic for the most part to the point it was one of the main themes of the film imo. Unlike TFA I thought the film did a good job of avoiding being a straight up rehash and relying on nostalgia to sell it.

Surely anything that taps into your brain in such a way to give a positive response (particularly when it serves no purpose to the plot) is down to nostalgia. When you saw Luke's X-Wing under the water and your brain fired off memories of ESB (which, of course, is positive and good memories) it makes you look at whats infront of you in a more positive way as well - it acted as a reminder for 'good times'. Its fair to say, subtle, effective, and minimal use of nostalgia can be a welcomed addition to a film, but in most cases, the nostalgia flashbacks in TLJ serve little to no purpose to our appreciation of this film. This begs the question: if these incidents serve no purpose to the plot of the film, then why are they there?

johnny_ultimate

Falthyron wrote: »

The nostalgia flashbacks in TLJ serve little to no purpose to our appreciation of this film.

Could not disagree with a statement more.

Falthyron

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Could not disagree with a statement more.

You left out the preceding clause: 'in most cases' :P

What did seeing Luke's X-Wing do for the overall plot and development of the storyline on Ahch-To and the film in its entirety?

david75

Falthyron wrote: »

You left out the preceding clause: 'in most cases' :P

What did seeing Luke's X-Wing do for the overall plot and development of the storyline on Ahch-To and the film in its entirety?

It tells you how he got there, tells you he has the capability to leave the island and sets you up to think he’s gonna come and save the day. Two total misdirects but they both add to the story as it moves along. It’s not there to give you the feels.

david75

If we had seen him lift the ship out of the water and fly off we’d probably be complaining it was too much of a callback. Even though it was a twist on his failure to do it in Empire

Falthyron

david75 wrote: »

It tells you he has the capability to leave the island and sets you up to think he’s gonna come and save the day. Two total misdirects but they both add to the story as it moves along. It’s not there to give you the feels.

But Luke has no intention of ever leaving the island. We learn this from him later on. If we never learned of how he came to the island, it would not matter once we heard Luke say: "I will never leave this place", because we can presume he destroyed his ship or was simply dropped off on Ahch-To by some transport ship. It is superfluous to the plot.

Likewise with re-creating the Emperor's throne room in TLJ. It wasn't necessary to re-create the scene of Rey seeing the Resistance ships being destroyed. In fact, Snoke could have just told her and that would have been enough to fúck with her head. Or say something else! Anything, really. She has a short fuse, after all. Why does it have to be the same thing the Emperor did with Luke?

david75

Falthyron wrote: »

But Luke has no intention of ever leaving the island. We learn this from him later on. If we never learned of how he came to the island, it would not matter once we heard Luke say: "I will never leave this place", because we can presume he destroyed his ship or was simply dropped off on Ahch-To by some transport ship. It is superfluous to the plot.

Likewise with re-creating the Emperor's throne room in TLJ. It wasn't necessary to re-create the scene of Rey seeing the Resistance ships being destroyed. In fact, Snoke could have just told her and that would have been enough to fúck with her head. Or say something else! Anything, really. She has a short fuse, after all. Why does it have to be the same thing the Emperor did with Luke?

At no point sitting watching this film did anyone think luke wasn’t gonna come save the day. You know he’s going to. It’s a tiny detail but it does feed you to thinking he’s gonna do it.

As to Snoke and the throne room.. I don’t know what else you’d expect from that.
He was never gonna sit down and have tea with her. And it’s not at all like luke and the emperor. The emperor is trying to turn Luke and get him to destroy Vader in order to join him and have him as replacement for Vader.

Snoke has no interest in turning Rey. He wants the info out of her and then wants to kill her. We see him Torturing her.

Mickeroo

When he showed up on the salt planet i assumed he had traveled there in the X-Wing until the reveal that he was channeling or whatever you want to call it. I'm pretty sure that was the intention of them showing us it in the first place, a chekhov's gun type visual gag that results in the viewer expecting it to be used just to throw them off.

Falthyron

david75 wrote: »

As to Snoke and the throne room.. I don’t know what else you’d expect from that.
He was never gonna sit down and have tea with her. And it’s not at all like luke and the emperor. The emperor is trying to turn Luke and get him to destroy Vader in order to join him and have him as replacement for Vader.

You can't possibly think of any other way that entire scene could have played out differently, but still had the same outcome? Its impossible? It had to have Rey being taunted, tortured, seeing the Resistance fleet, defeated, and then Kylo saving her by killing Snoke. There is no other conceivable fashion for that scene to have played out than how it was portrayed in TLJ?

As for Snoke killing her, that was only decided later on in the scene. There is no indication of him just wanting to kill her at first. He wants to know where Skywalker is. After torturing her he gets the information, but then she sees the Fleet being destroyed and makes a move to kill Snoke. It was at this point he has to kill her because he says she is a Jedi (and presumably, like Luke, can't be turned). Much the same as the Emperor choosing to kill Luke when Luke says he won't kill his father because he is a Jedi.

david75

Falthyron wrote: »

You can't possibly think of any other way that entire scene could have played out differently, but still had the same outcome? Its impossible? It had to have Rey being taunted, tortured, seeing the Resistance fleet, defeated, and then Kylo saving her by killing Snoke. There is no other conceivable fashion for that scene to have played out than how it was portrayed in TLJ?

As for Snoke killing her, that was only decided later on in the scene. There is no indication of him just wanting to kill her at first. He wants to know where Skywalker is. After torturing her he gets the information, but then she sees the Fleet being destroyed and makes a move to kill Snoke. It was at this point he has to kill her because he says she is a Jedi (and presumably, like Luke, can't be turned). Much the same as the Emperor choosing to kill Luke when Luke says he won't kill his father because he is a Jedi.

He says he’s going to kill her in their very first scene together. He forces lifts her right up into his mush and tells her you’re going to give me Skywalker and then I’m going to kill you. The rest is almost window dressing. Nobody saw what was coming with kylo killing him and them teaming up and deadly kill spree


God I love that whole throne room sequence.

Falthyron

Mickeroo wrote: »

When he showed up on the salt planet i assumed he had traveled there in the X-Wing until the reveal that he was channeling or whatever you want to call it. I'm pretty sure that was the intention of them showing us it in the first place, a chekhov's gun type visual gag that results in the viewer expecting it to be used just to throw them off.

Really? You didn't notice how Luke looked younger, less grey hair, etc.? I knew there was some sort of a ploy going on, but wasn't too sure what exactly it was. Also, considering the nostalgic nature of this trilogy, I fully expected them to show the scene of him lifting the X-Wing out of the water if that was going to be his way of saving the Resistance.