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

Falthyron

J Mysterio wrote: »

I agree with the Professor's view.

Also, someone mentioned that they will probably square off Leia's fate in the opening crawl to IX, and that also seems likely.

Yeah, and as a Star Wars fan, I would be disheartened to see that. Leia heads off on some mission at the end of The Last Jedi and at the start of Episode IX it leads with "General Organa succumbed to her wounds after leading a daring raid on a First Order base in the hope of securing plans to Death Star 45"

I want to see Leia go out with a bang, that's the Leia who kicks ass and doesn't go down without a fight. Sticking her demise in a piece of text seems very not-Leia. Ah well, I guess we will have to wait and see what TLJ does with her character.

Sad Professor

Killing her in the crawl would be cheap, yeah, but so would having an extra come out at the end of 8 and say "Leia just died" or "omg Leia was on that ship that just rammed the fourth Death Star". There's only so much you can do with editing and a week's worth of pick-ups. I think to do Leia's death in 8 in a non-cheap way would require major changes to the story which I don't think anyone was prepared to make because, as I said, it would probably involve losing or manipulating parts of her final performance. Where as they could deal with the aftermath of Leia's death quite effectively in 9 if they wanted. I don't think we have to see her story resolved or her death on-screen. In fact, after Han's death and probably Luke's, I would be fine with Leia's happening off-screen between movies. However, my preference would be that Leia lives on and we just don't see her in 9 or they do an Oliver Reed on her for the final scene or something. But it depends on what the story requires.

david75

Semantics aside, Could be we're totally wrong and she was already set to die /does die in TLJ and that's the poignancy Rian is referring to. No changes necessary. Doubt Disney would use her passing for spin/pr. they wouldn't be that cheap. But han dying in 7 Leia dying in 8 and Luke dying in 9 sorta makes sense.

py2006

Would be great to see Luke avenging her death ...

david75

py2006 wrote: »

Would be great to see Luke avenging her death ...

Well there's the question. Rey comes to get him at Leias request. He refuses to go. That much we know. But he somehow ends up training Rey? so maybe Leia in danger and that motivates him to leave? Or she dies and he comes for revenge? Not being a Jedi anymore he can do that(it's likely he's taken the Barash vow. Jedi leaves the way of the Jedi but still obviously powerful in the force). . Or he just wants to make things right. It's all gone to sh!t after all and it's all his fault.

Tony EH

david75 wrote: »

But han dying in 7 Leia dying in 8 and Luke dying in 9 sorta makes sense.

This as always been my take on it. This new Disney trilogy is as much about getting rid of the old guard and ushering in new (and far, far, far less interesting) blood.

To me, I knew Solo was always going to die in 'The Force Awakens', because, frankly, Harrison Ford is an arsehole and would only do it if he was killed. He's always been a dick about the character anyway.

For the sequel, I reckoned either Luke or Leia would be off'd. Reading the guff online from the studio's, it was probably always going to be Leia, even before she died in real life. Thus giving Luke a motivation to leave Kerry.

Then Luke will be killed off in heroic fashion in the last film of the last trilogy, leaving Disney with their insipid replacements of Rey (Supergirl), Finn (Uncle Tomfoolery) and Poe (Mr. Nobody) to populate a future of meh Star Wars films.

homerun_homer

Tony EH wrote: »

This as always been my take on it. This new Disney trilogy is as much about getting rid of the old guard and ushering in new (and far, far, far less interesting) blood.

Far less interesting? You have to give Kylo Ren credit. In one movie he became possibly the most interesting Star Wars bad guy (as depicted in the movies, not EU). They did a far better job with his conflict between light and dark side in one movie than they did with Anakin over the other movies.

R777B

homerun_homer wrote: »

Far less interesting? You have to give Kylo Ren credit. In one movie he became possibly the most interesting Star Wars bad guy (as depicted in the movies, not EU). They did a far better job with his conflict between light and dark side in one movie than they did with Anakin over the other movies.

I couldn't agree more - even in *that* scene with Han, Kylo Ren became a much, much more interesting villain than any other villain in the films -hopefully Rian will be able to get even more of that internal conflict out.

In general with all of the new characters there is room for them to grow and develop, I have to disagree with the notion of them all being uninteresting.

Tony EH

homerun_homer wrote: »

Far less interesting? You have to give Kylo Ren credit. In one movie he became possibly the most interesting Star Wars bad guy (as depicted in the movies, not EU). They did a far better job with his conflict between light and dark side in one movie than they did with Anakin over the other movies.

I was talking about the main trinity of characters.

Kylo is ok, although not a patch on Vader for menace. He actually loses a lot when he took his mask off and he's just a guy. But, the whole reason for the mask in the first place was because 'The Force Awakens' needed a Darth Vader 2.0, just as everything else in the film is Star Wars 2.0.

Kylo Ren was probably the most interesting thing about the entire film, all told.

As for his struggle with which side he wants to go down, we still have absolutely no idea why he's even bothered with any side. He's as much of a blank slate a Rey. But, yes, Anakin's "struggle" and instant Sith affiliation was laughable.

But, then, the entire prequel trilogy was laughable.

homerun_homer

Tony EH wrote: »

Kylo is ok, although not a patch on Vader for menace. He actually loses a lot when he took his mask off and he's just a guy. But, the whole reason for the mask in the first place was because 'The Force Awakens' needed a Darth Vader 2.0, just as everything else in the film is Star Wars 2.0.

As for his struggle with which side he wants to go down, we still have absolutely no idea why he's even bothered with any side. He's as much of a blank slate a Rey. But, yes, Anakin's "struggle" and instant Sith affiliation was laughable.

I would see it as him wearing a mask as he is obsessed with Darth Vader and wants to chanel that same menace even though he has no reason to wear a mask, though DV needed it to keep him alive.

In terms of blank slates, when you look at IV in the context of just that film being released at that time by itself, there is as much blank slates on display there as in VII. Empire made the characters more interesting.

Tony EH

homerun_homer wrote: »

I would see it as him wearing a mask as he is obsessed with Darth Vader and wants to chanel that same menace even though he has no reason to wear a mask, though DV needed it to keep him alive.

Sure. That's the in-universe explanation.

The real world one is that the writers were shit scared of trying something new. So, they Darth Vader'd him, because there was a masked villain in the real Star Wars film.

In fairness to Adam Driver, he does a good job, despite all the shite about Emo whatnot.

homerun_homer wrote: »

In terms of blank slates, when you look at IV in the context of just that film being released at that time by itself, there is as much blank slates on display there as in VII. Empire made the characters more interesting.

Nah, I don't buy that. 'Star Wars' gives us solid characters for Luke, Han and Leia. We understand them much, much better than Rey or Poe. Finn, is probably the character that is given any kind of backstory. But, even then he's a wretched "comedy" character, that's completely unbelievable in the world/role he's supposed to inhabit.

True, though, 'The Empire Strikes Back' does build on the already solid foundations that 'Star Wars' established. That was largely because that was the direction that Kershner wanted to go in and the story allowed more intimacy to occur.

It remains to be seen whether 'The Last Jedi' can give Rey, Finn or Poe any room to explain just who the hell the actually are, or whether all of that info is going to be obscured within the pages of some mickey mouse comic book, or novel, that 3/4's of the audience won't read or even be aware of.

homerun_homer

Tony EH wrote: »

Sure. That's the in-universe explanation.

I'm not reading into that from anything but what I take from seeing the film. I don't think all things have to be spelled out, as I'm sure you'd agree.

Nah, I don't buy that. 'Star Wars' gives us solid characters for Luke, Han and Leia. We understand them much, much better than Rey or Poe.

Just be glad Rey didn't change up from English to American accent in VII, can you imagine the stick she'd get from it:pac:

bilston

BMMachine wrote: »

Those Han Solo and whatever stand alone films look awful though.

We will wait and see on the Han Solo film, but Rogue One is anything but awful. Personally I prefer it to The Force Awakens (which I still really enjoyed) as a stand alone film, although The Force Awakens opens up the Star Wars universe further and I'm looking forward to seeing where it goes in The Last Jedi.

Who or what is Snoke?
Why did Kylo Ren/Ben Solo turn to the dark side?
What's the craic with Luke?
And who is Rey? (Although I'll eat my hat if she isn't Luke's daughter)

Osmosis Jones

Tony EH wrote: »

Sure. That's the in-universe explanation.

The real world one is that the writers were shit scared of trying something new. So, they Darth Vader'd him, because there was a masked villain in the real Star Wars film.

Surely having the villain be a whiney brat who's trying to be intimidating is something new though. Kylo Ren was far more interesting in TFA than Vader in ANH.

david75

Vader is as one dimensional as they come. Both in ANH and in Empire. Menacing for sur but that's all. He only becomes remotely interesting when you see him consider himself and his son and his own role under the emperor in ROTJ.

It took 3 films to make him interesting. We should probably extend Rey etc the same grace. Having only seen the set up and start of their story.

Ps Tony. They never Vaderd Kylo. That's why he takes the helmet off and you get to see his internal conflict That accusation would be fair if he left in on throughout TFA and only reveals himself in TLJ. But then that would be a copy wouldn't it?

david75

'They are two halves of our protagonist'. That's interesting. Johnson does seem really excited about Kylo in particular and where he's taken him. Adam Driver has said it's totally unexpected. So I wonder ..

https://instagram.com/p/BY4hHOhA0zi/

david75

Rian Johnson says he will not direct Star Wars Episode 9, at promotion event in Japan. Also #JosephGordonLevitt plays the voice of an alien in #StarWars #TheLastJedi. Rian Johnson revealed.

Sad Professor

david75 wrote: »

Rian Johnson says he will not direct Star Wars Episode 9, at promotion event in Japan. Also #JosephGordonLevitt plays the voice of an alien in #StarWars #TheLastJedi. Rian Johnson revealed.

You can watch him answer this question in the video below from 2:25 onward. He choses his words very carefully. He says it was never part of the plan for him to direct 9 and that he's not currently thinking about it as his focus is on 8. This is exactly what he might say if he was in talks or believed he was a contender. If he wasn't interested either way he'd just say no.

I'm still hopeful.

Sad Professor

Vulture piece on what led to Trevorrow being dumped:

“During the making of Jurassic World, he focused a great deal of his creative energies on asserting his opinion,” the executive explains. “But because he had been personally hired by Spielberg, nobody could say, ‘You’re fired.’ Once that film went through the roof and he chose to do Henry, [Trevorrow] was unbearable. He had an egotistical point of view— and he was always asserting that.”

Then, during preproduction on Episode IX, Trevorrow’s relationship with Lucasfilm top brass became reportedly “unmanageable” over the course of “repeated stabs at multiple drafts” of the script.

“When the reviews for Book of Henry came out, there was immediately conjecture that Kathy was going to dump him because they weren’t thrilled with working with him anyway,” the executive continues. “He’s a difficult guy. He’s really, really, really confident. Let’s call it that.”

david75

Sad Professor wrote: »

You can watch him answer this question in the video below from 2:25 onward. He choses his words very carefully. He says it was never part of the plan for him to direct 9 and that he's not currently thinking about it as his focus is on 8. This is exactly what he might say if he was in talks or believed he was a contender. If he wasn't interested either way he'd just say no.

I'm still hopeful.

Great find thanks for that. Does sound like a very careful non answer.

It's mad the way everyone wants him for 9 without having seen 8.

But he's best placed out of anyone to know where these characters are and what their stories are and are about and probably the best man to take them forward.

Loads of halo effect going on too. He's so damn likeable we're all just wanting him on board cos he's just nice.

pixelburp

Huh, I'd actually forgotten Josh Trank got the heave-ho as well.

I wonder if this phase of firings might make Hollywood re-assess their brief love affair with hiring inexperienced indie directors; I can't claim to know the reasoning, but I've always presumed the idea is that you gain cred for hiring a darling of the indie circuit, while at the same time the newbie will be easier to control than any seasoned veteran who might have ideas about this whole movie-making thing. If that is the thinking, it definitely hasn't worked out

Wedwood

Not sure it's for this thread, but very interesting poll by Sky TV viewers on greatest sci fi movies. Of the original Star Wars trilogy, Return of The Jedi got the best score, followed by Empire Strikes Back, then Star Wars.

Looks like 'darker' has peaked and 'lighter' is back in vogue.

py2006

Sad Professor wrote: »

I'm still hopeful.

Wait till you see TLJ before you get hopes up about the director...

johnny_ultimate

Wedwood wrote: »

Not sure it's for this thread, but very interesting poll by Sky TV viewers on greatest sci fi movies. Of the original Star Wars trilogy, Return of The Jedi got the best score, followed by Empire Strikes Back, then Star Wars.

Looks like 'darker' has peaked and 'lighter' is back in vogue.

This is an objectively wrong result.

I am only semi-joking.

Tony EH

Wedwood wrote: »

Not sure it's for this thread, but very interesting poll by Sky TV viewers on greatest sci fi movies. Of the original Star Wars trilogy, Return of The Jedi got the best score, followed by Empire Strikes Back, then Star Wars.

Looks like 'darker' has peaked and 'lighter' is back in vogue.

Yeh, saw that. Found it remarkable, to say the least.

Tony EH

py2006 wrote: »

Wait till you see TLJ before you get hopes up about the director...

Agreed. 'The Last Jedi' could be a pile of shite. Nobody's seen it yet.

It's gas, over on Jedi Council Forums - a cesspool of gob****es at the best of times - they're nearly all saying he should get the gig by default. :rolleyes:

Sad Professor

py2006 wrote: »

Wait till you see TLJ before you get hopes up about the director...

Ideally that's exactly what I'd be doing, but I don't expect Disney to wait that long. If it is Johnson it will be a very positive sign. And if it isn't Johnson, I can't see anyone of the same calibre stepping into the role. And tbh if 8 sucks I'm not going to care about 9.

david75

Rian seems immensely pleased with himself. And not in an arrogant way. I think he's made a great film and he knows it

As to hiring indie directors over big names I wonder how much of it is about control and direction they want the story to go?

Johnson said he was told you saw where we left off. This is where we ultimately need to end up. You can do whatever you want in the middle to get us there.
That seems pretty open handed to me. I'd say the firing of Trevrow was more a personality clash than anything else. Reports seem to suggest as much.

Sad Professor

Re: indie directors, I think they are looking for the next Nolan. A director with a strong vision, who can get along with the studio and bring in the big bucks. But finding someone who checks all those boxes is difficult. Edwards got along with the studio but had a weak vision that required extensive reshoots to complete. Lord and Miller had a strong vision but couldn't get along with the studio. Trevorrow also couldn't get along with the studio and it's implied was an egomaniac with an inflated view of his own talent. Johnson by simple fact that he survived the production as the sole writer and director of the film and was allowed bring all his own people onboard clearly checked the first two boxes, but whether his film will prove a hit with fans and mainstream audiences remains to be seen.

Tony EH

I think I'd like to see a Christopher Nolan Star Wars film.