Star Wars: The Last Jedi’

If asking for a decent story with compelling characters makes me a "hater" so be it

 

Agreed. As most people in this thread find several of the Disney Star wars characters compelling enough it must be a subjective thing. Except with Kylo Ren. The consensus on him is clear

 

What exactly is it, besides the fact that you hate the movies and think everyone involved in them is awful and stupid and bad, that makes you think that it was retconned, as opposed to a clarification?

 

I'm pretty pleased with the job Disney is doing. At LEAST the technology in the movies hearkens back to the late 70s early 80s. That's a cool thing about the new movies. They could be much worse.

 

If you say so. Mass consensus in favor of a flawed concept doesn't make said concept any less flawed

 

What about the hugely positive critical reaction?

 

Don't put words into my mouth. Calling out flaws in a particular character's story or in a film over all doesn't equal any of the accusations you just attempted to level at me. Trying to hold film directors & those under them to a standard of decency should not be a cause to be derided or otherwise slandered.

I would have said the same of films like Transformers, the new Star Treks etc.

 

Yes, but we're going in circles here. The point is that it is not objectively flawed.

Agreed. One big thing i love about the new movies and games is how everything settingwise looks. Great and classic Star Wars.

 

You didn't answer my question.
Also, you're not really trying to hold anyone to a standard... you're just attempting to destroy the movies with aggressive negativity.

 

You know what else in history has had positive critical reactions? Stalinist Russia, Hitler's Germany, the mass genocide of millions of Native Americans, the bombing of the twin towers, the continuing slave trade, etc etc. That may seem harsh but it does serve to prove that positive critical reactions don't always equal good things

I didn't see that as a question that needs answering. Since you want it I'll get my thinking cap out. Be right back

 

I really don't think that these things had positive critical reactions, at least not from the majority.
To be honest, bringing them up in a thread about a Star Wars movie is really weird.

I mean there must be some reason why you jumped to the conclusion that it was just something they made up to explain 'shit writing' as opposed to something that was planned but apparently wasn't clear to people in the audience. It seems pretty clear to me that Rey's force abilities experienced a significant boost after the mind probe... whereas before that point Kylo easily overpowered her and took her hostage.

In order to definitively prove that this was retconned and not intended, you need to find instances where it's contradicted earlier in the film, or find an interview or something where JJ admits it-- but you won't find either of these things.

Luke, Anakin, Rey and Kylo are skilled pilots-- in Rey, Anakin and Luke's cases, before they even know how to use the Force. Her ability to fight with a staff can be explained by her life as a slave as well as needing to be able to defend herself in a harsh environment... so she could already fight. These things aren't really the issue-- the issue is (I think) that she used Jedi mind tricks and then beat the wounded Kylo in a lightsaber duel... both of which can be explained by the mind probe unlocking those dormant abilities, as well as her 'absorption' of Kylo's abilities-- which isn't so much of a stretch considering she was also able to access deeply personal information about him after the probe.

 

Retcon: (In a film, television series, or other fictional work) A piece of new information that imposes a different interpretation on previously described events, typically used to facilitate a dramatic plot shift or account for an inconsistency.

Clarification: The action of making a statement or situation less confused or more comprehensible.

Now which of these does the act of explaining Rey's newfound force & lightsaber capabilities fall under? Let's begin by looking at clarification. Ready? Good.

Obviously the statement portion of the definition doesn't apply so let's skip to the situation. During the course of TFA Ms. Ridley's character found herself in two specific situations where said character was shown to have extremely implausible abilities given what was known of her thus far. First she instantly grasped how to mind trick the trooper who was guarding her. Second she suddenly became proficient enough with a saber ( having never before handled one let alone fought with one) to put Ren on his back foot & best him. Throughout the course of the film no explanation was given as to how she was able to perform these feats, those watching were meant to simply accept that it was so. No other force user, not even Anakin Skywalker himself, had been able to pick up these skills so completely or so quickly.

After the movie many fans began to complain about such unrealistic( to the Star Wars franchise) & unprecedented skills being tacked onto Rey without any explanation what so ever. So shortly after TLJ came out a comic was released o explain that Rey had learned these powers from Ren whilst he was probing her mind for information on Starkiller Base. Ehem this is getting too wordy so let me wrap it up nice & pretty for you. A retcon is often comprised of a clarification. Regardless of which term you choose the situation still applies to the other as well. Obviously good ol' Jar Jar Abrams had no initial idea how Rey came about these powers, he's never been known for being good at fleshing out characters anyway, but when the massive quantity of complaints due to his oversight began piling in he had to come up with something to appease the rabid fans breathing down his neck. Ok there you go hope that satisfies your question.

Also I still fail to see how calling out a film on it's poor writing, plot, & character development is not holding it to a standard but instead, as you say, just being negative.

 

So what was the interpretation of the mind probe scene before this explanation?
I don't think there was a definitive interpretation.

All of these things happened AFTER the mind probe. That's what I am telling you.

​

It doesn't.

You're just telling me what your theory is like I don't get it.
But there's nothing in the movie or any interviews or anything to suggest that it's true.
All of this is just you speculating about what his motives were... you aren't actually proving anything.

​

You're not holding it to a standard. In order to hold it to a standard, you need to HAVE a clearly defined, consistently applied standard to begin with. You need to have a sense of what makes a movie good, beyond meaningless comments like 'this was shit' or 'this was bad' or terms like 'Mary Sue' that you're slinging around because you picked it up from other hater threads on the same topic.

If you just hate it, fine... but stop pretending that it has 'shit writing' or is some purely cynical cash grab like you have special insights into the whole thing.

 

I admit that I had to turn both of the new Star Wars movies off before I could finish them I was so bored. Still better than the prequels. Not the case with Rogue One which was wonderful.

 

I'm not even sure they're better than the prequels. But overall I actually like the prequels a lot too

 

Revenge of the Sith only counts as one.

 

First off "mind probing" has been done to various extents of power several times throughout the series. Emperor Palpatine used it on Luke, Luke to a lesser degree used it on his Sister, Old Ben used it on Luke, the Jedi Council used it on their younglings, Anakin experienced it first hand from Yoda & Windu (also some cone headed Jedi but yeah). The storm troopers had it used on them multiple times. Their minds were exceptionally weak after all.
None of those times was mutual. If the Jedi had the capability to share instantaneous knowledge hell understanding like that why wouldn't they? It would've been a real damn fine way for ol' Ben to train Luke but no he resorted to a laser ball & visor. I get that it's a new concept but it screws the story all to hell. There wasn't a definitive interpretation in that moment's sense no however we could use the series internal movie logic to create a rather well defined interpretation, if if that movie logic were unbroken. So as you can see that makes your next point moot. I obviously already knew what happened after the probe. I keep up don't worry.

As to the whole speculation of his motives well just no. As you can clearly see I use movie logic as my standard. JJ ignored movie logic. That was his choice but to me & those like me who prefer our movies well done with a side of entertaining he just didn't try.

So to conclude I'm glad that you feel the need to ruffle your feathers, bare your teeth or whatever you want to call the rest of your reply. You do you but I for one see movies as art, or used to at least, and I never liked Picasso. Too much chaos for me. These newer films are like that. They ruin the masterpiece it could've been....should've been. I enjoy films of a more chaotic bent but they should really just be stand alone or specifically designed that way.


If you have other derogatory & presumptive remarks to throw my way go right ahead. Table's yours

 

Even with that one, Obi 1 Jnr spends the first half of the movie chasing after the sith cyborg for what ends up being no real reason as he is not the big baddie, then theres that stoopid bit at the end where Padme just ups and dies from "not having the will to live"

Palapatine turning into Camila Parker Bowles that part was cool, very satisfying seeing Hayden Christiansen get BBQ'ed.

The better of the three prequels

But still annoying in that that movie only one or two re-writes away from being a great movie

 

Padme lives in the Q2 "Fall of the Jedi" fan-edit (thus ensuring compatibility with Leah's later talk of having remembered her mother).

 

I'm considering buying this movie. The waiting list to borrow it form the library is a bit ridiculous.