the last chronicler

I'd argue the character development in TLJ is far more important than the simple character introductory role of TFA. Finn learns from Canto Bight that for many one simply can't run away from the systematic corruption (to run from the 'machine' as he did) of the First Order, and that he has to fight for others to make things right. Rey learns her place in the universe is not part of someone else's journey but her own, going from accepting her role in the hero's journey with Luke in TFA to making her own journey and family with the Resistance. Kylo Ren decides to beleive his past in totality makes him weak, that he cannot gain his power from the Skywalker line and resolves to destroy it, fully detaching himself from the galaxy to maintain his self-denial and belief in his own exceptionalism. And Poe learns not to fight in terms of winning the battle but saving the lives and ideals the war is defending: to not be blinded by the imminent threat but see the larger picture. I think one reason TLJ seems conterintuitive for fans is in TFA the thesis of the heroes is in part given in Maz's speech about bringing back Luke, and the villains thesis statement is in Hux's hatred of disorder in the Republic. Neither opinion is given much authority or objective value in TLJ in terms of Luke's status or Hux's competence, but treating either opinion as if from a reliable narrator may be too forgiving and too narratively limiting for the trilogy as a whole. Of course, I do agree that TLJ subverts elements of a simple escapist interpretation of TFA but that is not against the traditions of Star Wars. In particular that is Yoda's ideology, and exalts the lessons of moral complexity learned from Vader's redemption. It also parallels the underdog post-Vietnam-War philosophy of A New Hope with the Empire as a metaphor criticizing the military industrial complex. I think if a film does not have a relevent and powerful emotional effect then it cannot be memorable, and TLJ has a good external conflict, a great emotional conflict, and a fantastic philosophical conflict that focuses on the importance of how the first step of revolution/rebellion is in one's mindset about the world/galaxy.

TLJ has some fantastic scenes (Tree, Showdown on Crait, Thrown Room already made, etc) that can actually be turned into sets even though people argue the film is absent of value, though not a vehicle based. I also like the yacht from Solo although I found the film's script kind of boring. But I think the fact that action figures aren't as popular as the 80s, that every Disney film so far is aesthetically copying from old designs (which is fine with me, in terms of narrative logic), and the films are designed around making a good or at least entertaining story appealing to Gen X OG fans and millennials rather than around a multitude of art designs like George Lucas did with the prequels to sell toys leaves the set options thin. Furthermore keeping fans from getting invested is the overpricing of all new Star Wars toys. I like the No Man Sky esque vehicles from that Resistance trailer though.

I guess my meaning in expressing this opinion to you is that hindsight is 20/20, and as someone who wrote a paper on TFA a few months after its release, in 2016, I predicted/understood most of the themes of the sequels seen in TLJ correctly, but I also appreciated the thoughtfulness and what I did not expect in Rian's writing. So, I see it like Holdo's speech about the flaw of only believing in the sun when you see it, in that we won't fully appreciate and be grateful of TLJ's themes until we can look back at it in the context of IX. I'm trying to present why this trilogy has artistic value, and possible value beyond the confines of the OT, thanks to TLJ. I'm showing why it is part of a larger journey rather than fan impressions that the film is the end of the journey.

I think the argument that TLJ is subversive for subversions sake as a theme feels subjective (and particular to fans rather than general audiences ) because it depends on ones sense/understanding of the status quo, but ultimately in a story that 'status quo' has to develop and change in order for the characters to learn and grow. I do not think the film was subversive for its own sake or acting solely to counter the franchise, but reemphasizes the sagas themes. Your reply is very thoughtful, and while I understand why people did not want this TLJ version of Luke I also look back at the OT and much of the contradiction and lack of development there is in his character, the biggest leap being ROTJ's darker confident Luke who is unlike the desperate figure at the end of Empire. What I like about TLJ is how it shows Luke's intuition, his instinct, fails his morality: to him his own failure is the biggest antagonism, and the ultimate negation of his redemption of Vader. He has become his own Vader and failed his own legacy in Ben. It is the lesson of the cave on Dagobah in effect, and in consequence we see his choice to take Jedi morality out of the battle: to choose inaction because he sees himself as imperfect, a failure of the ideal morality he represents. Luke has to relearn that it was never about his own intuition, but about his moral choices to protect those he cares about like his father, and seeing the good in him, that made Luke a hero. I've watched both sequel films back-to-back and they really tell the same arc: to restore peace and justice in the galaxy put into a state of fear and desperation. With the government destroyed by the FO and its only Resistance in isolation, Luke, by sacrificing himself defending the people, restores that power of peace and justice, the means to restore the Republic, by putting it back in the hands of the people: that "finding ones place in the universe"--the great metaphorical driving theme that underlies ANH--is ultimately about protecting each other through the Force that binds us together. The reason I'm stating that I want to counter criticism is not because I think I have some true opinion, but because a lot of the critisism that has become part of the popular discussion and used as foundational arguments against TLJ have misunderstandings or miss key details of the film's plot and narrative structure. It is not that I don't look at the film or any other with a critical mind, it is just that I think a lot of fans accentuate non-issues and ultimately fail to see the forest from the trees. They fail to look at the film's own journey.

I may have went to far. I appreciate when others express there opinion when it is not done in a manipulative and reductionist way, because it is really a microcosm of the cherrypicking of data that has plagued the discourse of TLJ, using any ambiguity critically as validation of negative responses, where there are so many qualifiers to RT audience scores that have little to do with regular viewers or the theatrical experience, and websites like imdb that are closer to the traditional online review discourse, and exit polls from the film tell a different broader story. If people are just cherrypicking and quoting to validate some absolute 'true opinion' (for which there is not in art) on a forum, than that becomes more about self-expression rather than the public discourse which I think is part of the ideal goal of a forum. We all have personal a opinion/experience, so I know I need to check my actions more carefully because this can't become personal character attacks which do not say anything about the subject matter: that instead it should be about being able to put our ideas out there. I just want to remind people that they carry the brunt of the responsibily for expressing their opinion and understanding. my appreciation of TLJ come from the fact it expresses themes and ideas that are incredible important and underrepresented in cinema. It expresses some of the most important ideas of any Star Wars films in terms of the nature of morality and perspective, as well as learning and change. It also is a perfect representation of the storytelling rule (Pixar's #1 writing rule) that we appreciate characters more for trying than succeeding, because that is how we experience learning and change, in those suble moments.

x105Black, taking everything I say and just saying 'Nope' is not critical thinking, it just shows you are lazy, reactionary, and lack the skills to validate your own opinion. You bring nothing to the table in this discussion. Selectively (mis)quoting my sarcasm (as well as taking my "true fans"/'true scotsman fallacy' statement to heart also showing the massiveness of your ego) further delegitimizes your method of discussion, and arguing BB-8 piloting a AT-ST was not as a purposeful joke when the OT did the exact same thing for laughs with Chewie and Ewoks shows your neccesity to distort reality to fit your narrative. That scene is completely different than the geniune bad written made fun of in scenes like Anakin talking about hating sand or Palpatine turning into a prune in RoTS. The jokes that are laughed at in TLJ (I was in the theatre) were actual jokes, and you can't argue against people's gut reaction to comedy and the critical love of TLJ for it dark boldness and humour. As well, without Snoke's death Kylo's arc would be incomplete, and we would not be able believe he was now in full control, but also feeling the complete loss of that control to his past, and willing to do everything to destroy Luke as representative of that past: thereby you could not have their showdown without dramatic weight and the fear Luke could be destroyed.

Man I wish I knew everyone with a different opinion than me was paid off. Takes a lot of guts to say your opinion is right because everyone else is part of a vast conspiracy and you are the only one with free thought. Of course, you have evidence that 200+ critics were paid off with papertrails from Disney and leaks from those critics who refused the bribe? Or maybe you know because Disney also paid off critics for Solo even though it still only got 70% approval, Wrinkle in Time, as well as Infinity War, Thor Ragnorok, and Guardians? They've got a whole departement for it for they need the infrastructure, because no review is real. Nothing is real. Luckily we have those 100,000 audience reviews from real and true fans from RT that--unlike the millions of people who paid to watch the film--show the truth that with 49% of them giving it a fresh tomato (above 6/10) and 51% saying it is rotten (reviews below 6/10) TLJ still ends up approximately an average 6/10 essentially, the same as the prequels despite the heroic efforts of these true fans to try to make it a 1/10. Of course, pay no attention to 700,000 imdb reviews that situate TLJ as a 7.3/10, comparable to Solo's imdb 7.1/10, because spammers on rotten tomatoes could never use an unregulated uncontrolled polling system to lower an avg TLJ review statistic by 10%... ...or maybe Star Wars as a fantasy series has always been full of plotholes (which TLJ really does not really have, feel free to suggest some for me to disprove) and goofy jokes with various degrees of audience response (most of TLJ's are fantastically timed and well thought out). And maybe people of various ages like SW and TLJ because of that. Again, its not like TLJ has entire scenes that are laughed at even though they are not jokes, like scenes in the prequels. And the deaths, even Snoke's surprising mid-trilogy demise, have emotional weight and narrative purpose for the characters, unlike deaths of those like Grievous who are just special effect showpieces.

I see, fair argument. The thing is most reviews loved the comedy and heaviness/boldness of TLJ and saw them as a highlight. Not every joke is for anyone as I find the Hux call scene just fun but not funny, but the audiences I saw TLJ with laughed out loud at the scene, and that's a gut reaction to comedy not some online argument. There are wide ranging jokes that are funny and are liked for their fun for sure, "I've seen your daily routine, you are not busy" is genuine well timed comedy that comes right after the fantastic 'nowhere' dialog, so to say the movie is not fun makes you seem like a curmudgeon or manipulating to validate your opinion, especially stating the prequels will be seen better when, unlike TLJ, most of their parts laughed at are not the jokes. I also think scene by scene you can compare TLJ and see how great the acting and drama is in comparison to the previous Star Wars films, whereas the prequels fall flat, and TFA is often only functional in it dialog TLJ is highlighted by great performances, especially from Mark Hamill. I'm excited for IX filming, but I'm concerned about JJ's inability to write satisfying endings, TFA being his best to date.

Now I think we are talking about the subjective nature of comedy. Personally I think there are lots of cheesy jokes in Star Wars ("I thought they smelled bad, on the outside") but most are not treated with as much hostility as TLJ's jokes because people can move on, or are just accepted as the 'canon' or part of the films style, especially if watching as a kid. Obviously the scene needs to happen otherwise Poe could not charge his engine, and the scene is not as long as people remember, plus SW has always had one foot in modernity ("I'll see you in hell!") as part of its style. Also critics do not usually re-watch or re-review movies actively, they usually base their reviews on the context of watching thousands of films in there lifetime and many a year and judge their experience. The idea that the effect which I think I'm seeing, in which a portion of the fanbase rationalizes negativity to turn a slim majority of online fans to view shock and change in TLJ as something one should feel bad about, would affect a group of critics who literally do not care that much is laughable. You have to remember ESB was not received positively by fans as well. The difference with TLJ is it is not just a good movie, it has something to say and a sense of authorship (reminds me of ANH in that way), and I think fans don't like that the movie has a stronger opinion than they do because they want to be the authority on the franchise.

I'm not saying it would be satisfactory to you, I'm saying to make a film that simple satisfies your expectations based on the original films is not telling a story because there is no change. If you want that satisfaction you just re-watch the originals. Also, what made the prequels bad was they had no drama or story, pointless comedy that was distracting was part of the consequence. It is interesting you jump back to the jokes, because there is a great article about fan expectations (Starting with Star Wars but speaking in broad terms) and toxicity that gets to the heart of the thing in fans living vicariously through their franchise, and how ultimately it comes down to that it is not uncommon for fans, in expressing their disgust with TLJ, reveal they feel personally not taken seriously because the franchise is not being taken 'seriously.' That the jokes are making fun of them when they clearly are not, revealing the truth of how they view the franchise are part them existentially. Ironically, TLJ is all about subverting those selfish experiences, up into the final shot the shows hope as an unknown hero in the child. Personally, I think the perspective stems from how we as kids take things more seriously, and most people see SW in that childlike innocence. I mean, you can see it with how kids took The Lego Movie as a drama. And can you really say Star Wars, the franchise whose original film opens with a joke, has an entire sequence devoted to accidentally parking in a giant space worm, a sea monster in a spaceships trash, munchkin aliens, C3PO worshipers, is a 'serious' franchise? I find it hard to believe that one can watch the Cantina in ANH and not see the same nature of irony and humor. I also in my first viewing responded with surprise to the comedy in the Poe/Hux scene, even Finn's leaky suit. But I also had the same reaction in TFA to Poe saying "its hard to hear you in that mask" and "you need to try a different interrogation technique," and Rey's mindtrick. But they stick less because they are not a funny or really add to the story. Furthermore, the Hux scene actually is part of the story, and shows his character in contrast to that early Kylo TFA moment, and reveals how his "no one can betray the FO" attitude applies in his first personal confrontation with the Resistance. The film is also about the nature of miscommunication and the moment sets up that theme. Also I would be completely fine with arguing this to the end of time, I enjoy the discussion and the ideas that come from it and I want it in public discussion. Although you haven't added to the argument anything I have not already heard, I've changed my opinion before on films so maybe you'll be able to find that one trick to blow up my entire rational (or should we learn the lesson from TLJ?). Ultimately, I think your reaction does not say much about the film itself, because in the test of time what a film is not is not remembered (Spoiler, most movies are not TLJ, not just the OT), what is remembered is what makes the film what it is. TLJ is fun and thoughtful, has resonant turning points, and has an climatic finale that pulls together all characters and plot-lines in a way that perfectly reflects its themes. I'm confident that will hold up better than any trivial reaction, and who knows, over time, all of TLJ's qualities (and those inconsistent with the OT) could be seen as better storytelling, superseding arguments for the OT's superiority to be considered the greater film. I mean, before fan negativity TLJ was (and still is with top critics) critically the most universally positively received Star Wars film, whereas ESB, as the best SW film, was actually negatively reviewed when it first came out, so TLJ has a head start.

I don't think we have the full story on what is happening with the Jedi and the future of the force, and I think that is part of the further plot threads in the final chapter. I'm a fan of destroying the dichotomy, but I feel grey always feels like just creating a third option out of Sith and Jedi beliefs making the old beliefs evil retroactively, or as some say say its like balancing helping a lady cross the street by pushing another into traffic. The problem is that TFA, by unfolding the plot through mystery, was less driven by suspense and more by the audiences lack of knowledge broken by revelations that assure fans they are watching 'good-old OT-style Star Wars.' The tension is created in the audiences minds by using mysteries to recreate familiar tropes. TLJ creates real suspense and conflict for the characters based on events that happened to them, and because suspense is about uncertainty it puts the audience on the same page as the characters in knowing how events will transpire . In contrast, in TFA there is no danger because mystery is just about revealing how characters will solve the problem, not if it will be resolved. TFA's Mystery works as narrative drive for fans because there is no uncertainty that the heroes won't find Luke (So much so the plot nearly forgets about it when the Republic is destroyed), only uncertainty in how they get there with surprises of nostalgia. Whereas TLJ removes that artificial safety net, making the future of the galaxy uncertain until the very last scene. The consequence is the film feels like it's destroying plot threads when in reality it is just actually playing the conflict out and telling the story, and one has to empathize with the characters in their own struggle rather than rely on the simple anticipation of Skywalker's return. Thereby, actual suspense which is at the core of storytelling is seen by some fans as negative because for them the tension is between whether they'll get the 'Star Wars they want' or not, rather than the actual story of the films. The film destroys any sense of plot assurances, confused by fans as story. I think a lot of fans distanced themselves mentally very early in TLJ as it placed them in dangerous uncertain waters, because you do not know how the story will end unlike TFA, Rogue One, and Solo which are simply mysteries restoring the franchise status-quo. To quote Rian Johnson's writing, fans--without a carrot on a stick with Luke--cut themselves of from 'the Force' per-se making it impossible to empathize with the TLJ journey, because they are not given a destination they know. Do you know what will happen in ESB by watching ANH? No. Now fans are uncomfortable with two years waiting in uncertainty and blame it on the movie, when that is exactly what it should do.

https://www.starwars.com/news/star-wars-episode-ix-cast-announced Here's the full main cast list. Personally I think TLJ was actively trying to create the most desperate hour for the characters, to create the second act antithesis to TFA's 'bring back SW' thesis, and that starving of the audience of cartharsis creates a lesson while also making the success in IX that much more sweet. I think TLJ needs the potential to be credited for that because if IX is good critics will say it is in spite of TLJ, and if it is bad it will be because of TLJ according to them. Also, I noticed that if Luke simply wanted to take himself out of the battle by going to Atch-To, knowing the danger of Kylo and Snoke he would have taken new apprentices to the first temple. Therefore we can deduce he did not want to train new Jedi putting us back to square one with TLJ Luke not wanting to train Rey Yoda-style anyhow, without the reasons Rian gives it becomes out of selfish cowardice instead of his moral beliefs. It makes the most sense for his motivation that Luke did not train more Jedi because he stopped believing in their neccesity and his own ability.

Well I also haven't seen them either, but looking at the TLJ scene tonally its closer too, and both seem to be inspired by, the ending of A Fistful of Dollars from the 1960s: the Clint Eastwood western which was also referenced and copied in Back to the Future Part III. Fistful of Dollars was also a remake of the Samurai film Yojimbo whose climax is a swordsman taking down multiple gunman. TLJ using the showdown trope in a way that is similar to a different movie is not that big of a deal, the creators of Breaking Bad for example openly admit the finale is inspired by the ending of the John Ford Western The Searchers, and they've taken from The Godfather films as well. EDIT: The whole ten minutes of Escape's ending is done quite differently from TLJ, the army shooting part is the closest and could be homage, but it's part of the reveal rather than the buildup like TLJ.

Han said Luke threw it all away. And Luke was conflicted when Rey arrived. As well, before TLJ there was no evidence of any Jedi knowledge left at the temple. Also, as we know from the OT Luke is not a big fan of lessons, and is skeptical about his own abilities. He looked over the books and found no answers, because the point of the film is the force is part of everything, not just some secret Jedi knowledge. If you argue that Luke found some Jedi info that would fix the problem of Kylo Ren that sounds more like the Wookiepedia article version of the movie rather than one about the struggle at hand. It does not improve the trilogy's core conflict or theme. Furthermore, Luke does realize he still has good to do, even if he can't redeem Kylo Ren himself. To be fair, Luke learning something at the temple that PREVENTED him from joining the fight was my first conclusion even before the film's title was released, but if Luke's motives in this film was what bothered you in the movie called The Last Jedi and whose infamous trailer line was "it is time for the Jedi to end," than TLJ never even had a chance to meet your expectations because you already invalidated the premise and disliked the film before it came out.

You are right that JJ didn't plan on Luke giving up the Jedi way and disconnecting from the Force, because George Lucas planned it before JJ even joined the writing team. The idea was hardcoded into the thinking for this trilogy, but JJ wanted to delay it and do a cool (Han Solo-like) action-packed nostagic journey to introduce the characters first. Frankly, the trilogy may have benefited from Rian directing the first film and ripping the bandaid off early even if it annoyed fans. If you want a bad story Rian did not need to do Luke the way he did, but it is the choice that holds together the entire conflict, and it is the right choice even if it does not feel good. Also, the film challenges the characters, not the fanbase because the film actually deeply reinforces the themes of Star Wars. If you felt challenged or subverted then congradulations you empathized with the characters vicariously, which means the conflict was true and powerful rather then pointless fluff. Also, the Force is controlled through instinct and Rey has a lot of that considering she had to survive alone on a planet. The whole of TFA is used to show her testing those instincts from flying the Falcon to timing the door close on the Rathtar (parrelling Luke using the Force to time the Death Star bombing in ANH). Furthermore, Luke was arguably less experienced than Rey in many aspects. Also if Luke wanted to train another Jedi than why did he isolate himself? Again that makes no sense. My expectation was he was going to be more sympathetic to her (connected to her plight through the Force like Obi-Wan to Alderaan), but I accepted that once you look at the whole story set up in TFA Luke's perspective is far more poignant and personal, and the TLJ fills in the last peice of puzzle of his failure with Kylo as a poetic counterpoint to his success with Vader. He failed Ben and cannot accept that failure, seeing that the ways of the Jedi did nothing to prevent it. Just as the Jedi could not prevent the fall of the Republic. Its the tragedy and conflict that holds the whole arc of this new saga together and gives it weight. But Luke has to learn that he hasn't destroyed everything he created and find hope again.

Luke was closed off from the Force and therefore the past Jedi, you watched the movie right? Anyways, all these are just fan rewrites to eliminate the conflict which makes the story, as in you literally destroy the story, the reason people go see a movie. Even saying Luke should have lived and Leia should have died fundamentally undercuts the narrative and themes of the film for the sake of fan peace of mind. I get that fans are upset that they lost closure because of the death of a real person causes trouble for a franchise, but seriously, to alter the scenes Carrie filmed for TLJ actually does a disservice to her as an actor as well as the filmmaker's work (yeah Rian Johnson). Besides, Leia's absence or death could drive the IX story, and therefore Kylo Ren, the same way Luke's disappearance does in TFA. Her role becomes symbolic, plus now Kylo goes from the haunting failure of the trio's legacy to being the last Skywalker, which could have dramatic narrative value. Personally, I think fans wanted a clear and safe map for this trilogy as soon as TFA ended with the Empire-type separation of the heroes, but TLJ continues the story and themes pretty naturally despite not being ESB, which I think upsets people who did not want the franchise to say something new but play within the previous box. TFA does that well, but like ANH it was meant to be light fare in response to an era of negativity, (TFA fixes the franchise, ANH was a response to the previous pessimistic decade in American society), but TLJ introduces a sense of authorship from Rian Johnson the matches the creative spirit of the original while depicting a genuine struggle like ESB. I think fans wanted the scope and Hollywood sheen of ESB which made it famous, but not a story with actually originality. In that case TFA is still the ESB successor you're looking for. On that note, it is insane to think JJ's Luke was different from Rian's. If that where true, why did Rey need to show up with the Skywalker saber, why was she holding it up to Luke? "Oh hey, thanks for bringing that lightsaber I lost 30 years ago, the one the represents my family's failure and ultimately the Jedi ideology (which could not stop my family's failure), but that does not matter, I was wondering what happened to it. Now where was I? Oh yeah missing for 5 years but now I can stab people with 2 lightsabers instead of one!" If he joined her, not only would in not follow any logic whatsoever, but if Luke agreed with Rey that her experiences in TFA of the struggles of the OT returning means the galaxy needs Luke again, then that would literally make them the same character. Rey just a stand-in for Luke's journey in TFA because Hamill was too old and too frozen iconically on that cliff edge to star. I can pretty much argue against all major TLJ complaints because they are strawman logic created after the fact to justify fans hating that they didn't get the film they wanted, complaints found and spread in discussion boards by people who saw the film once and had a negative or confusing response to a dense and layered (but straightforward) film. They missed some detail or were told some detail was missing that was not, then tried to blame their dislike on the story being haphazardly written rather than their ability to pay attention (innocent ignorance) and accepting the story they were given.

So I put in the time to watch TFA and TLJ back-to-back to see if my opinion changes, and discovered that its pretty shocking how many people like TFA over TLJ, in comparison its just a bunch of big action scenes sequences glued together by a very thinly written plot, the worst part being where chunks of the third act feel almost ad-libbed. But, there is almost nothing to complain about scene by scene in the movie because very little story happens, however I did not realize how fantastic Kylo Ren's development is in TLJ, he feels criminally underdevelopment in TFA. I did in the end however come out of the process appreciating both films equally. TFA has fantastic editing that works with JJ's camerawork, and the characters are engaging, but the film is so much lighter in comparison to TLJ which is an incredibly heavy film which intense personal journeys. While I did not come out of TLJ the first time with the experience of feeling like there was too much Star Wars or the franchise felt cut off by the film as others argued as a sign of its flaws, I did feel overwhelmed. I've also heard others say the film has a lot to process, because although the character development is set up well, close to the 2 hour mark where most SW films end TLJ plot gets really dense, with back-to-back character turns/developments that are complex but setup and justified, which ultimate build to the final act when Luke becomes the only hope. Consequentially I think the film could have given these moments more space because the director's thinking is really established all at once, but otherwise a lot of the character development is powerful and the writing is significantly better in TLJ over TFA, yet it works amazingly smoothly transitioning from TFA to TLJ. Of note is how Hux develops makes ense, as his first encounter with the Resistance directly is with Poe in TLJ and you see his ego crack. The films work well together, but as TLJ moves away from simple action sequences it becomes a whole new thing to the benefit of the story. Another element that became clear in rewatching TLJ by itself is that the Resistance was far more interesting, and its clear from the start and Holdo's speech that their escape plan is to use up all the fuel to get to Crait as closely as possible before switching to the escape ships, and with many defectors already such a fuel wasting plan that abandons the hyperspace-enabled fleet would certainly be kept on the down low to prevent an internal rebellion like Poe's. Since the First Order expects them to have no where to escape in the middle of space it mostly follows that they would not check for such an escape plan using ships without hyperspace with the fleet staying on course. So I feel most people discuss that scene ignoring that Finn and Roses and Poe's plan is to make them free to do risky hyperspace jump to the outer rim and hope they get to allies in time, whereas the Crait mission was less risky. Also, Disney is putting the spin-offs on hold: http://collider.com/star-wars-spinoffs-on-hold/?utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=collidersocial&utm_medium=social

I was going to pitch President Business had an evil, bald, Eastern European sounding boss who was controlling him from the shadows and destroyed most of Brickburg--because most of the Lego was taken by his human analog (banker, boss?) when Finn's dad/man upstairs lost his job and owed him money. Now President Business has to follow his will. It's not really thematic, but it is on the nose.

Yeah, the dust thing was what I first visualized.

Crazy. I remember mentioning to friends the next Lego movie should go all Mad Max as an expression of Finn abandoning his Lego as a teen. That was my dream Lego movie sequel and now whether for those reasons or general change of Finn's taste we're getting Lego Post-Apoc, whose crazy vehicles are perfect inspiration and style for Lego and the Master-Builder idea. Everything is awesome.

I just saw Solo, I might have to see it when it's on Netflix where I am, go back with a fresh mind but... it was boring, and it was mostly not enjoyable. Every scene felt weirdly contrived, characterization and tones changed in the middle of scenes, and so many of the scenes felt like rip offs of previous Star Wars films that do not work in the situations they are used in in this film. I liked the film once the goal became clear in the famous 'Run,' but before that it was just like someone said: "have them show up at a place that looks like something interesting will happen, and then have no tension, it's okay we will just have a lot of shooting and death." It felt like they read Rogue One and badly copied its formula, L3 a much weaker droid comedic foil. I was thinking the film would prove the Star Wars charm or comedy was defined by Kasdan's writing of banter, but the film was mostly one liner quibs that were inconsistently funny and added up to nothing but trailer filler. I can see the film's inherent appeal narratively that would make people like it but the storytellers gave no reason to feel invested in it. Also, while I personally had mixed feelings I think the film's lower than RO and usual Star Wars RT audience score shows that bombing has been a huge factor on a website where DC Universe films get high scores, and RO's critic and audience score somewhat naturally nearly match.

I'm not sure I'm correct about my assumptions either, and I think everyone has there own personal evaluations, but I do think the general mindset is not to have the status quo of Star Wars challenged. Personally, I think TFA is a weaker plotting of ANH, but it's B plot and heart was rebooting the themes and ideas of a franchise whose last fresh start was 16 years earlier in TPM but ultimately irrelevant. TFA in particular wants to bring back the literal finding-your-place-in-the-universe that is the story of ANH and Luke, rather than the 'oops now I'm a Jedi because I'm special' of TPM. TFA is Nostagic about the events of the OT the same way the OT was nostalgic about the Jedi and the Republic, which works since many who were in awe of the OT see it as a "Force" in their lives. In that sense, it is not poor recreation of ANH but a reflection on it, and with the fact it covers the themes of all 3 OT films (good within, inner darkness, reconciliation with the father and the darkness) and the struggle of these characters like Rey and Kylo to try and fit in the pre-existing world does give them a distinct evolution that is a engaging story. So to me much of TFA's rip offs are the surface nostalgia to get across new and old themes. That's why TLJ Luke as a character works, he carries the legacy of his fathers darkness and has to deal with the Skywalker's as the only legacy of the Jedi. He's someone beaten down by the irony of his existence. The trilogy is uncovering it's ideas first expressed in the repressive Kylo and Rey's acceptance of the force.

Solo proves that there is one thing Star Wars fans want more than a new safe nostalgic Star Wars film, and it's no new Star Wars film. The bipolar reaction and gatekeeping created by the fanatics that make up the base audience left willing to discuss the franchise in light of the mixed response for or against the prequels became a cynical audience more focused on establishing a 'true Star Wars' based on the stuff they like in specific movies rather than open to new ideas to expand the franchise, universe and viewership. Stuff like Canto Bight (which has more narrative attention and depth given than let's say Maz's castle or the 50s bar in clones) would have been received just as well and taken at face value like the Cantina or Bespin, if had TLJ been released in the 70s. Some don't want a Star Wars film that has a stronger and clearer opinion on Star Wars than them. George Lucas risked putting his political thoughts in the prequels, but the trilogy failed to have theme or driven characters changed by events, and that's why they feel more shallow than the classics: Lucas protecting the validity of his ideas undercutting the film's truthfulness and humanity. Rian Johnsons web was a complex play of themes from all the previous films to make a story about living with your mistakes, and a story that is not always delightful but sometimes uncomfortable or confusing and not about simple narratives. The film lets the irony and the insecurities of Star Wars exist, and that makes it a far more raw film that captures the wide emotions of original films but does not let it get defined by millennial-friendly coolness or grittiness of action-adventure which made TFA end so darkly. Both TFA and TLJ drove a fan hatred that's finally bubbled up, that of new film's that simply don't exist to calcify and validate previous films or the OT. Both films are internally coherent plots that are well-scripted and resolve what they establish (with TFA Luke an exception), thereby not undercutting there own narrative but introducing plot choices or twists that mainly create difficulty for the next film's plot. It is easy to say TLJ does not fit TFA, but both are visions that obscure OT plot threads and introduce their own, and both build on what it means for Kylo Ren as the Skywalker and Jedi legacy. Fans need to stop demanding films that are wooliepedia readouts and start realizing you can't compare the previous trilogies that have been filled in and justified by decades of media with new film's that are made with just as little context as the originals when they were first new. Empire especially is a perfect example of film that was not orinally intended as penultimate, and focuses on a very small sector of the universe before Return expanded the scope to resolve the war in one film. If fans tried to write ESB from ANH the same way they wanted TLJ from TFA, you could never have predicted the events of ESB because they are not that connected. Yoda, Lando could not exist, many force powers would not exist, Vader could not be Luke's father ("but Anakin as a Jedi is what makes Luke the hero!"). ESB starts in danger, Luke only uses a light saber in a fight in the end and his only life experience is playing with womp rats never having needed survival skills. Obi Wan ghost just sort of happens. Don't forget Luke's choice to save his friends and why it was wrong is skipped over thematically by RotJ. TLDR (not really , but sort of an important eureka summary): Fans liked TFA and assumed much about it sequels because they used the OT as a template for the morality and ideas of the new trilogy. "Why is Rey the protagonist/hero? Because she's like Luke! (Or negatively, she's just not Luke, she's weak (or female ewww) hasn't earned being the hero!) In VIII we'll get her with Luke, she'll be with Luke and they'll team up and fight evil and Luke will be back! Heck, she might even be Luke's daughter and this will all be about Luke, who is the only real Star Wars hero! And Kylo, he wants to be Vader, that's what makes him evil! Heck he'll even become Vader, Snoke might even be Darth Plagueis, the super-evil super-Emperor who created Darth Vader (Then he's a super-evil-dad like Anakin too!) and now he molded Kylo Ren, he's the Final Boss! Genius, it really is Star Wars(TM)!" So, Fans (or a specific subset) wanted the characters to play-act out the OT, playing dress-up to reenact like a school play their favorite parts and characters of the original films, because that is what they think makes the characters good or evil. Rian Johnson stripped all the window dressing away: Kylo Ren isn't evil because he wants to be Vader, he's evil because he wants to be somebody important, he wants to be alone and exceptional, and most importantly does not want to simply be himself: he was told the only way he could be special is to be alone. He wants to believe the world gave up on him so he can have the right to give up on it. Rey is the hero not because she is like Luke, but because she felt abandoned, and consequentially does not want anyone else to feel abandoned either. She is the heart and the light because she does not want Kylo Ren to feel abandoned either, and therefore is the best chance to save him. Rian Johnson gets to the soul of the characters and thereby finds the soul of the trilogy, and thereby the soul of Star Wars rather than using the classic trio as molds for some sort of Utopian ideal of humanity, he made a film about good and evil about the necessity and futility of needing people to lead and to give hope in society. The chosen one, Vader, Sith, Jedi, don't matter, they are just words given to actions of characters, they are the molds for the action figures. The "window dressing" is really just the medium for which moral choices travel within. If these ideas don't challenge our characters--or the audience--the idea that Kylo could be Vader or Rey could be Luke no longer matters: it is just plot stuffing. Plot and context (narrative structure) must always challenge our characters and get to the truth of their actions or it becomes simple window dressing, and in the case of the sequels if it does not challenge the audience to get new insights on this characters beyond the OT it is not a new story but a rehash. TFA used the OT as a mirror on the character's moral choices. TLJ's plot challenged the characters and got to the truth of their actions beyond the structures of the OT.

One thing I appreciated from TLJ is how it mirrors (Poetry...it rhymes?) TFA's scenes. In particular, a lot of the scenes are reversals (not subversions, these scenes are different and widen the narrative scope) The key one that Rian Johnson talked about himself but I noticed in the theater--and I feel was part of trying to make the film very hopeful in the end like ANH was (May I say, the way the ending scene in TLJ works emotionally is very similar to the medal ceremony in ANH.)--was Luke's confrontation with Kylo versus Han's. While Han's death was unheroic, I love how Luke essentially learns from Han from ANH here, and we get the emotional dice mourning sequence which is also an allusion to Han letting go of his cynicism to return to shoot down Vader and allow Luke to escape to destroy the Death Star. Luke has this same final act turnaround to allow the heroes to escape demise which works well narratively, but still has the surprise you need to make the scene powerful. Of course, Luke first had a spiritual return when the light-saber flew to Rey, but now we have the payoff. Then of course Snoke's death parallels the staging of Han's death, so we still have that gut reaction lingering when Kylo Ren shifts the saber towards Rey with a distance figure watching, that duel possibility of who Kylo Ren really wants dead. Both Rey and Kylo end up fighting with the world falling apart around them once more, this time against the system, but for opposite reasons. Actually, on that scene I really appreciate the way it was handled thematically, in comparison to the Emperor in ROTJ. The Emperor was always the more evil dad that could be killed in Vader's stead, and Snoke is that too, but how Kylo and Snoke are handled that becomes a complete illusion here. In TFA when 'giant Snoke' is first revealed to be a hologram it definitely crossed my that he was making himself into a bigger deal in a wizard of Oz sense, all Snoke and mirrors. Then, first I though a Wizard of Oz comparison for TLJ would not make sense, but then I realized that Snoke's illusion was not about his reality but about his self-agrandization. He goes from this big CGI monster of unlimited power to this mortal material thing, and the fact that he goes out booming his commands while the important detail goes unnoticed matches well with Toto pulling the curtain back. Not only his mortality revealed between that golden garb as he's sliced, but then the literal curtain burns down around Rey and Kylo Ren, the Red Guard almost its manifestation as they try to maintain the illusion. So the curtain burns down like the hologram fades for Snoke, and all that's left is the truth for Rey and Kylo's motivation. Also, one thought that keeps coming to mind and I'm not sure if this is too deep into lore, but the TLJ book apparently says Rey and the Skywalkers are part of the cosmic force, which was gone during the Empire. ( a plot pointed added when the prequels wanted the Jedi to loose their perception of what the Emperor was doing). I'm wondering if Snoke has something to do with that, and now that he's gone the larger force is completely free again? As if Snoke was a curtain of the living force distorting reality now gone or something. I don't know, I was never a fan of different types of Force or Midiclorians.

To me it seemed shocking that people found TLJ to be purposefully subversive for its own sake, to me this seems like a fan thing. A lot of fan theories including mine where based on world building rather than actual story content, and I think that shows a mindset that was offset from evaluating the content of the film itself. This is true especially considering most Star Wars worldbuilding from the films came from assimilating content with external media like books (or how about explaining the internal logic of having a lightsaber with its short beam instead of a gun?) rather than outright in-film continuity or logic, or included outright changing the story significantly like the Vader and Leia twist, Kenobi's master, or the Emperor design change after ESB. Besides maybe Rey/Kylo switching sides which had little narrative basis, the theories that did focus on world building would not have explained the rise of the FO more than learning from Rose they're mining out planets or supported by the war industry. The story was kept at a personal level Instead of crediting historical events to the powerful and those in authority, and made ideology and fallibility an important part of that story. I was pretty impressed with what TFA set up and wrote a paper about its themes and ideas a few months after it's release, and pretty much everything in TLJ followed my expectations in that sense. Rian took things farther than I expected, which shocked me in an enjoyable way, and is necessary for the last chapter to not to be overstuffed with resolution for every element of the new trilogy. To me, TFA's thesis was always "we need to bring back Star Wars,"--bring back Luke Skywalker--and set up that as the fundamental problem of the trilogy. Kylo was the perfect foil for that because he wanted to bring back Vader, in a sense, and follow the villains journey that the prequels established. The conflict was over which Skywalker was Star Wars, but through Rey the narrative with the most weight was that getting Anakin's saber was about more than being a Skywalker as Kylo was, it was about accepting who you are and connecting with the larger Force. TLJ does not subvert any of this without advancing Kylo and Rey's journey at a personal level that is more interesting and complex. TL carries on the questions of the previous trilogies and the problem of Vader in a way that makes perfect sense for the saga and what Luke has to deal with in terms of this duality. The thing is TLJ does take that thesis of bringing back Skywalker--the hero-- and shows the problem of it. This is what the second chapter should do, it's the anti-thesis, it questions the previous chapter before setting up the synthesis or resolution of the problem. How Can the Force Awaken if Luke is The Last Jedi? --(Spoiler?)--The Spark of Hope. To me TLJ is still in the dark part of the story, so Kylo is still driving the narrative. Ultimately, I think TLJ is the first film in the saga that really says something. There is such a large industry now a days on outsmarting films with 4 hour reviews on YouTube and so forth, which is literally the easiest thing to do, that the film undercuts its audience is considered upsetting. Rian Johnson ultimately made a film which engages and creates emotional reactions, (even if those emotions are discomfort sometimes, ha) and followers are not used to that stuff that isn't calculable with theories and speculation, and people think that any movie that creates a reaction is bad because they can't validate it in the context of the previous films. In reality the film brings up a lot of questions and ideas, and the way the film plays out retroactively shows how someone like Snoke could rise in the image of Emperor and power could be maintained inside the system. Of course I'm talking pretty abstractly because I'm too lazy to do spoilers or post my old content, but yeah. The film drags I a couple spots but overall it could be the best Star Wars film, although I kind of knew it would be too much for classic fans.