Star Wars Episode IX: The Rise of Skywalker

[Kellorion]

So why are the knights of ren important again?
Why doesnt the republic ever help again?
why didnt the rebel friends in the last one show and help again?
Why is the Emperor back?
Why was Snoke important again?

WTF IS THIS SHIT?!?!

[Shadowferal]

"WTF IS THIS SHIT??!!"

Words I uttered after seeing TLJ.
After which I said "Never again."

[George Costanza]

I am honestly more excited for star wars battlefront 2s content than this movie.

Even if said content is just Coop (basically shooter pve with 4 players) for new trilogy maps

[Shadowferal]

It's just a bit odd you feel the need to repeat yourself for months on end... if you don't want to see the film and don't care for the trilogy good on you. That's your opinion and nobody is forcing you to see the next film. What's the point of crying about it for a solid year though? Just move on and find things you enjoy to discuss. It's entertainment, if you're not entertained move the fuck on.

I've repeated this..and so have plenty of others.
And you've have repeated the same thing in response...

I'm sure we'll do this dance again.

[Gorsameth]

So why are the knights of ren important again?
Why doesnt the republic ever help again?
why didnt the rebel friends in the last one show and help again?
Why is the Emperor back?
Why was Snoke important again?

WTF IS THIS SHIT?!?!

The Republic doesn't help because the new trilogy starts by blowing up the Republic using a Super Duper Deathstar so that the story can be reset ready for a scene by scene reshoot of ANH.

Why is the Emperor back? A desperate attempt to get old fans to like the new movies.

Snoke isn't important because there is no cohesive thread running through the 3 movies so 2nd movie just ignore everything the first movie set up and killed him with no explanation to free up Kaylo.

[Ragedaug]

what he thinks is irrelevant he didn't write luke originally he didn't write the EU luke he didn't write the new canon luke movie or eu. he was payed to play a roll and he did it what he thinks about that roll or how the character developed when he wasn't playing it doesn't matter at all.

I mean...yeah, he just gave his opinion on the character. And sure, he didn't create "Luke", so you really got me on that one. But as the guy who just so happened to play that character for 10 years, I would say his opinion for "who Luke is" counts for more than anyone else on the planet not named, "George Lucas".

You want to say Mark Hamill is full of crap and doesn't have the first idea of "who Luke is"...I mean, OK. You do you. I just don't think we'll see eye to eye on this one.

- - - Updated - - -

It's just a bit odd you feel the need to repeat yourself for months on end... if you don't want to see the film and don't care for the trilogy good on you. That's your opinion and nobody is forcing you to see the next film. What's the point of crying about it for a solid year though? Just move on and find things you enjoy to discuss. It's entertainment, if you're not entertained move the fuck on.

Probably because it's cathartic. Sometimes when you are really disappointed in something you had an unreasonable amount of hope in, it just helps to talk about it.

- - - Updated - - -

So why are the knights of ren important again?
Why doesnt the republic ever help again?
why didnt the rebel friends in the last one show and help again?
Why is the Emperor back?
Why was Snoke important again?

WTF IS THIS SHIT?!?!

I keep asking myself that same question regarding the two main subplots of TLJ. Seems like you can completely remove all the scenes from Luke's hermit world and the Casino planet, and it wouldn't change the main plot at all.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

I mean...yeah, he just gave his opinion on the character. And sure, he didn't create "Luke", so you really got me on that one. But as the guy who just so happened to play that character for 10 years, I would say his opinion for "who Luke is" counts for more than anyone else on the planet not named, "George Lucas".

You want to say Mark Hamill is full of crap and doesn't have the first idea of "who Luke is"...I mean, OK. You do you. I just don't think we'll see eye to eye on this one.

- - - Updated - - -



Probably because it's cathartic. Sometimes when you are really disappointed in something you had an unreasonable amount of hope in, it just helps to talk about it.

the actual writers who worked on luke in the EU and the new cannon matter more then Hamill as they get to actually develop and take the characters places while hamil just gets a check to play the role some one else write.

[Larrytheinternetguy]

It's just a bit odd you feel the need to repeat yourself for months on end... if you don't want to see the film and don't care for the trilogy good on you. That's your opinion and nobody is forcing you to see the next film. What's the point of crying about it for a solid year though? Just move on and find things you enjoy to discuss. It's entertainment, if you're not entertained move the fuck on.

ALOT of us agree though, Your already a WoW player. When exactly is it time to grow up? Those movies are for young teens and it looks like Fathers arent so interested to take their boys to the new movies anyways what with Toy sales.

[Chinese Bootlickers]

UNF

[Ragedaug]

the actual writers who worked on luke in the EU and the new cannon matter more then Hamill as they get to actually develop and take the characters places while hamil just gets a check to play the role some one else write.

Sure, the writers of the ret-conned Luke know the ret-conned Luke more than Mark Hamill does. Mark knows the original Luke and knows the ret-conned Luke isn't the same character. I don't see how you are disproving anything I said.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Sure, the writers of the ret-conned Luke know the ret-conned Luke more than Mark Hamill does. Mark knows the original Luke and knows the ret-conned Luke isn't the same character. I don't see how you are disproving anything I said.

didn't say they know him better but they matter more, as far as knowing him goes its likely any one who has read any extended material knows him better then hamill amusing he hasn't

you also keep using the world retcon but it doesn't apply at all nothing about past luke was changed him developing a way you don't like isn't even slightly a retcon.

[s_bushido]

Sure, the writers of the ret-conned Luke know the ret-conned Luke more than Mark Hamill does. Mark knows the original Luke and knows the ret-conned Luke isn't the same character. I don't see how you are disproving anything I said.

Getting old and having your outlook on life change because of the experiences you gather over the years is not a "retcon." Obviously.

[Ragedaug]

Getting old and having your outlook on life change because of the experiences you gather over the years is not a "retcon." Obviously.

I would agree with that. But to be specific, we're talking about having a character do the complete opposite of what they did before and having their outlook be completely opposite of what it was before.

If you want to say, "stuff happened that caused him to act like a completely different person", in the middle of a story, then you have to explain to your audience how it happened. You don't just get to make your characters act like completely different people from chapter to chapter with the excuse of "there was character growth when you wasn't looking".

"didn't that character save all the puppies in the first chapter?"
- "yeah, he loved puppies".
"Then why would you have him kill all the puppies in the 2nd chapter?"
- "it's called character development duh! people change, 'cause of their experiences!!"


The whole entire point of character development is to show it. So the audience can experience it with the character. You don't do it off screen. What's the point of the story if there's no journey? If it's off screen, there's nothing developing. It's just character change. Which is the problem I've been talking about this whole time.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

I would agree with that. But to be specific, we're talking about having a character do the complete opposite of what they did before and having their outlook be completely opposite of what it was before.

If you want to say, "stuff happened that caused him to act like a completely different person", in the middle of a story, then you have to explain to your audience how it happened. You don't just get to make your characters act like completely different people from chapter to chapter with the excuse of "there was character growth when you wasn't looking".

"didn't that character save all the puppies in the first chapter?"
- "yeah, he loved puppies".
"Then why would you have him kill all the puppies in the 2nd chapter?"
- "it's called character development duh! people change, 'cause of their experiences!!"


The whole entire point of character development is to show it. So the audience can experience it with the character. You don't do it off screen. What's the point of the story if there's no journey? If it's off screen, there's nothing developing. It's just character change. Which is the problem I've been talking about this whole time.

Luke never makes any puppy murdering flip. Through out the OT he struggles with the dark side giving in a few times before pulling back. He does the same thing later in life with kylo but instead of it leading to him starting a fight or beating up his dad it leads to kylo turning to the dark instead and Luke is filled with the guilt of that. All of this is shown in movie and all of it lines up with luke from the OT.

[Endus]

I would agree with that. But to be specific, we're talking about having a character do the complete opposite of what they did before and having their outlook be completely opposite of what it was before.

If you want to say, "stuff happened that caused him to act like a completely different person", in the middle of a story, then you have to explain to your audience how it happened. You don't just get to make your characters act like completely different people from chapter to chapter with the excuse of "there was character growth when you wasn't looking".

"didn't that character save all the puppies in the first chapter?"
- "yeah, he loved puppies".
"Then why would you have him kill all the puppies in the 2nd chapter?"
- "it's called character development duh! people change, 'cause of their experiences!!"


The whole entire point of character development is to show it. So the audience can experience it with the character. You don't do it off screen. What's the point of the story if there's no journey? If it's off screen, there's nothing developing. It's just character change. Which is the problem I've been talking about this whole time.

It would help if you did more than cherry-pick out a single quote from Hamill.

Here's some later statements, in reference to what he meant in that quote and how he sees this;

https://www.joe.ie/movies-tv/mark-ha...st-jedi-620610

"I really lowered my guard there because that's the kind of comment that you keep internal in the rehearsal process. It shouldn't be public and when I said it, it was still before I saw the film. I was still struggling with how the director was taking my character. I said to Rian 'a Jedi never gives up.' Even if I picked the next Hitler (Kylo Ren), it would be a shock but I certainly wouldn't cut off the telepathic connection that I have with my sister (Leia) and all these things....but I'm old school George Lucas Star Wars. This (The Last Jedi) is the next generation, it's not Luke's story anymore.

Rian is so capable, such a really wonderful person and such a good writer and such a good director. I thought that as long as I get these (criticisms) off my chest, I'll take his hand and follow him anywhere. It's better that I expressed these concerns because as long as he knew that this is how I felt, I figured 'let's try and make it work as best as we can' and we did."

https://www.themarysue.com/mark-hami...jedi-feelings/

"I regret voicing my doubts & insecurities in public.Creative differences are a common element of any project but usually remain private. All I wanted was to make good movie. I got more than that- @rianjohnson made an all-time GREAT one!"

and;

"I’ve had trouble accepting what [Johnson] saw for Luke, but again, I mean, I have to say, having seen the movie, I was wrong … I think being pushed out of your comfort zone is a good thing because if I was just another benevolent Jedi training young padawans, we’ve seen it! … It’s not the Luke from the original trilogy, it’s the Luke from the new generation."

Hamill was talking about his initial confusion and uncertainty. But he's acknowledged he was wrong, and that the The Last Jedi was a great film. That's the full context, here.

[Gurluas]

It would help if you did more than cherry-pick out a single quote from Hamill.

Here's some later statements, in reference to what he meant in that quote and how he sees this;

https://www.joe.ie/movies-tv/mark-ha...st-jedi-620610

"I really lowered my guard there because that's the kind of comment that you keep internal in the rehearsal process. It shouldn't be public and when I said it, it was still before I saw the film. I was still struggling with how the director was taking my character. I said to Rian 'a Jedi never gives up.' Even if I picked the next Hitler (Kylo Ren), it would be a shock but I certainly wouldn't cut off the telepathic connection that I have with my sister (Leia) and all these things....but I'm old school George Lucas Star Wars. This (The Last Jedi) is the next generation, it's not Luke's story anymore.

Rian is so capable, such a really wonderful person and such a good writer and such a good director. I thought that as long as I get these (criticisms) off my chest, I'll take his hand and follow him anywhere. It's better that I expressed these concerns because as long as he knew that this is how I felt, I figured 'let's try and make it work as best as we can' and we did."

https://www.themarysue.com/mark-hami...jedi-feelings/

"I regret voicing my doubts & insecurities in public.Creative differences are a common element of any project but usually remain private. All I wanted was to make good movie. I got more than that- @rianjohnson made an all-time GREAT one!"

and;

"I’ve had trouble accepting what [Johnson] saw for Luke, but again, I mean, I have to say, having seen the movie, I was wrong … I think being pushed out of your comfort zone is a good thing because if I was just another benevolent Jedi training young padawans, we’ve seen it! … It’s not the Luke from the original trilogy, it’s the Luke from the new generation."

Hamill was talking about his initial confusion and uncertainty. But he's acknowledged he was wrong, and that the The Last Jedi was a great film. That's the full context, here.

That's called paying lip service. Everyone recognizes that TLJ is a bad movie now, even the media.
Heck I read it was used as an example of bad screenwriting:
https://boundingintocomics.com/2019/...screenwriting/

[exochaft]

The whole entire point of character development is to show it. So the audience can experience it with the character. You don't do it off screen. What's the point of the story if there's no journey? If it's off screen, there's nothing developing. It's just character change. Which is the problem I've been talking about this whole time.

I think a decent example actually exists in the prequels when it comes to Anakin, as the young Anakin in the first movie is completely different from the older Anakin in the RotS. However, we didn't just jump to from the beginning to the end with just a flashback, it took 3 movies to build up what caused Anakin to turn. When it comes to Luke in TLJ, the setup is so brief and counter to everything we've seen of Luke in prior movies that it makes for a very jarring and non-believable experience. Luke going from saving his father from the Dark side while confronting the Emperor to being scared that a relative has strong force powers and wanting to kill him is just a bridge too far for many. In some respects, this "progression" of Luke is actually a regression to his pre-training mentality in TESB, as the Luke in RotJ is portrayed as one that has finally confronted his weakness and finally overcomes it.

Now, I'm not saying you couldn't go from "hero" Luke to crotchety old man Luke in this story, the execution just has to be WAY better and believable if you want to tear down 3 movie's worth of character building of Luke (doesn't help he's basically a no-show in TFA with no development). If anything, they should've spent way more time going into what happened with Luke to lead up to his current state in TLJ versus injecting scenes like Canto Bight and sub-par Space Balls quality joke scenes. Going from a champion of redemption to killing someone out of fear is not a quick fall, unless it's accidental. There are so many ways this could've been tackled, such as a string of failures over time weighing down on Luke to erode his mental state, training accident with Kylo causing Kylo to lose trust and have Luke doubt himself, Luke refusing to train Kylo if he's so concerned about his power and Kylo doesn't take well to it, the list is endless. Unfortunately, the version we got felt a helluva lot more like the emphasis was "we're going to subvert expectations with Luke!" versus focusing on crafting a narrative that's entertaining and/or believable surrounding Luke without the viewer having to constantly jump to many conclusions. Again, I'm fine if Luke falls, I just think the execution in TLJ was terrible and could've been so much better.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

That's called paying lip service. Everyone recognizes that TLJ is a bad movie now, even the media.
Heck I read it was used as an example of bad screenwriting:
https://boundingintocomics.com/2019/...screenwriting/

Your link is literally abunch if angry tweets from a fan without any actual substance. Said tweets contain things like “the phantom menace had a cool saber fight why doesn’t this one” as well as “every one in Hollywood hates it but they fear Disney” when tons of people have said they hate it even film makers.

I really fear for any one this guy is teaching if he’s using his fan nerd rage as the material.

- - - Updated - - -

I think a decent example actually exists in the prequels when it comes to Anakin, as the young Anakin in the first movie is completely different from the older Anakin in the RotS. However, we didn't just jump to from the beginning to the end with just a flashback, it took 3 movies to build up what caused Anakin to turn. When it comes to Luke in TLJ, the setup is so brief and counter to everything we've seen of Luke in prior movies that it makes for a very jarring and non-believable experience. Luke going from saving his father from the Dark side while confronting the Emperor to being scared that a relative has strong force powers and wanting to kill him is just a bridge too far for many. In some respects, this "progression" of Luke is actually a regression to his pre-training mentality in TESB, as the Luke in RotJ is portrayed as one that has finally confronted his weakness and finally overcomes it.

If you really think this then you just weren't paying attention to return. Luke post training still struggles with the dark side this is shown multiple times in return and twice in just the fight with Vader/confronting the emperor. There was no regression to pre return Luke as your idea of post empire Luke has never existed.

What happens with kylo is exactly like what happens with Vader, Luke becomes over whelmed/gives into the dark side before pulling back from it and realizing it was a mistake. He does the same thing when the emperor says his freinds will die and again when Vader says Mabye leia will join him instead and in both cases he stays with the dark side longer then the split second he had with kylo.

[Budong]

That's called paying lip service. Everyone recognizes that TLJ is a bad movie now, even the media.
Heck I read it was used as an example of bad screenwriting:
https://boundingintocomics.com/2019/...screenwriting/

You can take everything Star Wars related out of TLJ and replace it with new science fiction related content and it's still an objectively bad film.

[Endus]

That's called paying lip service.

See, this is how the game works.

When Hamill says something you agree with, it's the Gospel! HE HATH SPOKEN. All shall bow down before the Hamill, for His word be law!

When he says something you don't agree with, it's "just lip service".

What you're doing is explicitly cherry-picking datum that support you, and excluding those which do not. It's a fundamentally dishonest way to approach discussion.