*Bookmarked* (Destiny)

by INSANEdrive, ಥ_ಥ | f(ಠ‿↼)z | ᕕ( ᐛ )ᕗ| ¯\_(ツ)_/¯, Monday, July 06, 2020, 13:31 (1605 days ago) @ CruelLEGACEY

Luke’s part of the story only makes sense if we ignore who Luke Skywalker is in the original trilogy. If he were a new character invented for this movie, I wouldn’t have a problem with it. Mathew Stover nails post-RotJ Luke better than anyone in his novel “Luke Skywalker and the Shadows of Mindor”. (Tiny spoilers incoming). At the end of the novel, after Luke stops the antagonist without fighting him, the antagonist says “I knew the Jedi of old, and you are greater than any of them. Unlike them, you do not fear the dark.” That is not the Luke of TLJ. I’m all in for a story than shows the original hero continuing to grow or overcome his existing weaknesses. But TLJ didn’t do that. It invented a whole new character and called it Luke Skywalker.

Similar problem with Poe. His character in TLJ just isn’t the character that was introduced in TFA. He was already one of the most competent, capable, and trusted leaders of the resistance. RJ changed him into a hot-headed firebrand for the purposes of his plot. Finn just repeats his arch from the first film. He’s already shown that he was willing to dedicate himself and even sacrifice himself for the greater good of need be. Rey’s arch is horrible from any perspective. She starts the movie already knowing better than anyone else, and that’s her position by the end as well. She develops her skills a bit with Luke, but that’s all. There’s a reason JJ felt the need to show Rey training with Leia early in TRoS, even though she should have been well past all that by that point in the series. It’s because RJ totally skipped that part of her story. Similar issue with Kylo. He decides that he knows enough. In his own words, “forget the past... kill it if you have to”. That line is a great line to come from the villain in a Star Wars film, because it’s so anti-Star Wars. But Kylo isn’t exactly a villain, and the film itself seems to embody that message, rather than counter it.

Basically, I think TLJ is a great movie if I watch it as a stand-alone film. But as soon as I try to fit it into the larger Star Wars story, it becomes a train wreck. And I think that’s on purpose. RJ has basically said that he wanted to tell a story that flips a lot of expectations on their heads. The problem with subverting expectations are all costs is that sometimes expectations exist because we have an idea of who these characters are: RJ’s story is one where the heroes and villains of the past are discarded or tossed aside, with the exception of Leia and Holdo, while Holdo specifically displays very poor leadership while preaching about leadership. Still, at least that part of the plot shows the older generation trying to teach a lesson of real significance to the younger generation. Most of the film is about the youth deciding that they’re already better than their elders, and dismissing them (I didn’t even get into Rose lecturing Finn on how to be a hero, even though he’s already shown he has what it takes multiple times, including the very act he was about to commit before she interrupted him and told him that they need to win by protecting what they love, which is literally the exact thing he was about to do... ugh). It’s actually quite anti-Star Wars.

There it is. There it is. Have I mentioned how much I respectably envy your capacity to textually articulate? Quite a feat, as "envy" in any capacity is not really my modus operandi. I know what I see, but describing what I see in few words can be often... challenging. This above was what I was trying to describe in the past when I mentioned "middle of an arc".

I would like to note; I think your description details well why "The Last Jedi" has proven to be so decisive. It's, among its flaws, a good movie that also happens to be a LOUSY Starwars movie by fundamentally disrespecting everything Starwars while using aspects of Starwars. It's TWO THINGS! The Schrödinger's cat of Movies! Yet, that call on its quality we both just made doesn't matter. We could explain why again and again, and it won't mean a thing in the end, I think. All that matters is what a person brings with them when they watch. Since it's STARWARS, many will watch regardless how much they care for the franchise.

That's the trap. (Or at least one of them.)

In the past I asked (in an unsuccessful thread), "What Starwars meant to [fellow DBOers]". I've observed a spectrum in responses and I wondered if there were recognizable variables between those who speak of the movie in the spectrum of (to keep it simple) "bad", such as yours truly, or "good" such as Ragashingo. Is it Age? Or even the age a person is when introduced to the galaxy of Starwars? Is it the depth of Starwars Fandom? A Casual Starwars Fan Vs a Hardcore Starwars fan? Is it a literacy or stance towards Movies? Again serious or casual. Is the person there for the action, or for the story? ... so on. Variables.

I don't have an answer to my question, nor do I expect to due to a lack of a solid sample size (among other things). Yet, I can't help but say thanks for the help in streamlining the thoughts of this ol' hypothesis of mine.